Adesh Sham,


“So where are the titles of those who revealed Tantra before there were books?”

How do you know what was there before there were books? Why the first fire-maker is not named in the list of scientists?


“Where are the degrees of those who taught Tantra before there were schools?”

Before there were schools (places to learn systematically) the matter of experience and rendering were many and they did not know how to call that ‘one truth’. So they did not call it Tantra. They might have called it something else for you to find it without records!
So, there were no sustaining proofs to make a process a ‘science’ which needs to be coded and kept for later generations under the particular name given to it to define its boundaries. When practices that later endowed TANTRA (Shivamukhadhriti) did not find a total system that can include all their faiths and discoveries, they did not know about what we call Tantra established by system-management processes that include in the subject described and prescribed as Tantra Shastra. So there was no question of degrees because the teachers and their students did not have anything as the basis of their findings that they can assert or reject. So they are called ‘heretics’ or ‘tirthikas’. Tirthikas fought with the First Classicists of Tantra compilers till Tantra got all coded as completed research that was required for the follow-up systems. This is a historical fact that Tantra has only been coded in the Buddhist canons of Tantra under Swayambhunatha the founder of Navanatha system. Many think that “nava” means nine but it comes to the meaning of “neo”. They were called neo-s in that period of time because the term Natha or Lord already existed with the tirthikas even. Tirthikas followed Adinatha tradition.
Now you decide who gave the degree of Adinatha to Rishava (His historical name)?
I think that the later follow-up system managers called Him so. It is good to know, that what you call “traditional” and I call Classic in the system of Tantra, defines a person’s qualities and perfections according to the name given to him or her. Many teachers break this rule and call their disciples as they choose any name they like without following the name-coding system known as ‘namakaranam’ (see the first chapter of Bala-Tripurasundari of Srikula).
A ‘name-holder’ in such traditional cases should have the guts together with the lineage responsibility to prove him/her-self befitted in such name/title and should be ready for any test and challenge in the ‘traditional’ Tantra systems of India. Suppose you or your Guru called you “Shambhalnath”. You should remain prepared for Tantrik systematic challenges in the ‘traditional’ ways in India, to claim so in the Classic world of Tantra.
If you cannot prove your name by the five-elemental tests of the different Tantra societies, you can be prosecuted even in the traditional Tantra courts of India. Even Supreme Court of India recognises this under "cult or clan rules". The Tantric judges sometimes are also found to have legal authorities that the general administrative system do not interfere!

"What degrees did the adiguru of Tantra have?"

Who is the Adiguru, if you think that there is no record (shastra) that important to come under the same realities that denotes Truth?

What degrees did Goraknath have?

Gorakhnath’s degree is his name, “Conservator of cows.” This is the sarcastic name giev to him by his own Guru Matsyendranath after he offended the Guru in not realising His Avadhuta-nature free from all do-don’ts. Gorakhnath was primarily a cow-boy initiated by Matsyendranath and trained by Jalandharanath. Gorakhnath could not prove his superiority over Matsyendranath and His order followed by Jalandharanath and Kanhanath in the ‘great convocation feast’ of Matsyendranath. Guru Matsyendranath cut out the cartilage of the ears of Goraksha and put big ear-rings that feets the cows and named him Goraksha because according to the Guru he was no better than just a cow-boy in the ,lineage of the Nathas. In the sections of Matsyendra Samhita and lineage code-scriptures Gorakhnath has been marked as the starter of the Darshaninatha order which means a ‘looks like’ Natha or exoteric Natha, a punishment oriented order-name by Guru Matsyendranath only. Thus Gorashnath was prohibited in the lineage-traditions of the Aghoranathas which means ‘beyond illusion’. The Gorasknathis thus by Natha law got the right to teach only the Tirthikas and not Aghora-realm. Traditions change many times from the roots but Classical orders do not go beyond the boundaries of the Rules and Regulations of Tantra. Today in Neapal the Gorakhnathis have claimed domination over Aghornathis under Hindu supportive rules. Baba Ramnath Aghori was first the Mohant of the total Gorakshnath order and discovered this truth through the oldest Natha scriptures still rotting captivated in the royal library of Kathmandu. He changed the orders through citations from order-texts and claimed Himself to be an ‘Aghori’. For 217 years He ruled this stricture of Tantra order along 3 generations of the kings of Nepal until King Virendra disobeyed the order caught by Hindu politics and offended the Master to be cursed a kill by his own son. That happened later in History!



“In my opinion, and from the Tantrics I know and respect, truth and wisdom is worth a crore times a list of titles and initiations.”

In the textual opinions a Tantrika's truth and wisdom is marked firstly by his/her name and title codes and secondly open to any challenge in debates along the line of Tantra-nyaya or logic system. See Koulakrampodesha Avisheka patala. The final test of truth and wisdom of a Tantrika is TIME and history.



“How do we know truth and wisdom?”

By the power of equanimity of brain and heart both through the sectioned devises of analyzing the experiences and experiencing the analysis. “Prajna-karuna-vinishchayeti”.



It is always simple and rings true in our hearts when the play of Maya is swept from our eyes.”

Maya can be created by heart also through the psychological process of self-hypnosis caused by over-subjective manner of choice to Truth that a science do not agree with. Many Oshoites say the same and can not prove to others what they claim. That is the harm of ‘Neo-Tantra’! Maya is the blindness itself that designs the truth according to choice. There is no choice but Truth in a science. Remember Tantra is Vijnanavada (science-order) and not Bhavavada (heart-felt order).


“And here's a simple truth: There is no unitary "thing" that is Tantra. Therefore, in spite of degrees and titles and books that make the claim, Tantra says nothing. Nobody speaks for all of Tantra. Some people may have the right to speak for one path or one tradition of Tantra. Blessings on them!...................................................... and find unity in diversity rather than pointing out diversity within unity.”

How self-contradictory!

“Of course, I don't know you and it's possible that Hindi or another Indian language is your first language and you do not understand the difference between "a traditional world" and "the traditional world." I don't know.”

I clearly understand what means to be "a traditional world" and "the traditional world." I just don’t like the “tradition” word and use the “classical”. A tradition is that which is followed. That which is followed and copied may not carry realisation nd turn to a craft rather than a fine-art that follow the rules of classicism. I agree that there can be innumerable traditions and lineages but if any of them do not tally with the codes of Shastras on their common grounds, they are not classical. A science can claim perfection through proofs while a philosophy can turn in terms of different heart-feelings.



“I've seen practitioners of dakshinachara Tantra denounce practitioners of vamachara Tantra. I've seen attacks go the other way. I've seen Traditional Tantrics denounce Neo-Tantrics and I've seen attacks go the other way. I've seen people attach "colors" to different Tantric traditions and then attack practitioners of other colors of Tantra. I don't consider any of those denunciations to be valid. They are mere effects of Maya and the attacker's raga klesha and asimta klesha.”

Dakshinachara and Vamachara with “traditionalists” may contradict because their importance of choise and ignorance about Tantra. Both are sections of the same subject matter in chronological practices known as kramasadhana. Tantra is kramasadhana, sectioned chronological practices. Dakshinachara is known as utpannakrama or primary practice while Vamachara is described as sampannakrama or accomplishing practice.



“Perhaps it's just because of my conditioning in my country of birth. When someone says, "You can't," my first response is "Why not?" If someone says "you must," my first response is "Why?" And when dogmatists and religionists say that their's is the only way, I seek other ways, perhaps just to be contrary and find unity in diversity rather than pointing out diversity within unity.”

Conditionings close many ways and open many others that may differ from a science. Thus it brings challenges and oppositions as you have described. Interesting! But at the same time you are attacking what you think “dogmatic” by your choice of logic of opposition that others may recognise as dogmas also. “I seek other ways, perhaps just to be contrary and find unity in diversity rather than pointing out diversity within unity.” --This view-point is partial and is a product “egotism” in my understanding. This is known as virodha which explains “They are mere effects of Maya and the attacker's raga klesha and asimta klesha.”



“I seek other ways, perhaps just to be contrary and find unity in diversity rather than pointing out diversity within unity.”

Shivasutra says:

“Bhutasandhaana-bhutaprithaktva-vishvasamghattah”

--- The Universe is both the unity and diversity of the elements.
Thus neither the unity in diversity nor diversity in unity is the only Universal reality.

“Can't we all just get along?”

We are in the way…………………………..

Love.