Does Anybody Else Have Clear Body Experiences?

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
This is the "necrophiliac tendencies" that need to be explained away? She 'ogles' him and then gets enraged and ferocious and compassionately destroys Mara's army? Perhaps she was a bit upset about how things had gone down.

He may have understated or skipped something.

The direction of the mantra indicates a wrathful rite.

This is the kind of thing I have a feeling exists for Lakshmi as well, in somewhat similar form, taking into account her power. I don't know that it exists, but somehow, there needs to be some counterpart for her in the cemeteries and so forth of pre-11th century texts.

I am not sure of its age however the Panjara fits in according to the description of Dolpopa's successor:

From the age of eight he mastered the Vajrapanjara Tantra and the Samputa Tantra, which are the two explanatory tantras of the Hevajra system.

Namostute is said to come from Padma Purana which...accumulated...from 4th to 10th centuries.

Practitioners say thousands of years and she is Mahamaya or Nirguna Mahalakshmi Devi Mahamaya:






Kolhapur Mahalakshmi or Amba Bai temple is from the 7th century:






Those, we could say, at least have the ability to slaughter or to be of a violent or terrifying nature.

Durga is Mahalakshmi when combined to destroy Mahishasura.

Correspondingly, the Buddhist War Chariot goddess is:

Mahamaya Vijayavahini


It is more violent and more Blood than it is Cemetery, but at least that much can be shown as an old part of her.

a lot of layers that when they were all applied I was asleep and dreaming.

"Layers" seems to be one of the few ways to describe...some of the things that keep happening...doesn't it?

[Old Student]

He may have understated or skipped something.

The direction of the mantra indicates a wrathful rite.

The stories of Indic gods and goddesses who either go nuts from grief or go nuts because they were insulted, go on a rampage and destroy something are legion. Everybody's constantly having a lover or consort die, rampaging around like a drunk elephant until one of their buddies tricks them into calming down again. Or somebody insults them and the decide to end humanity, the universe or something of that sort, and somebody else makes a career of suckling them, lying down so they accidentally step on them, tricking them, ripping their loved ones to bits and strewing them all over the planet or some such thing. This one is in the middle of having a good time, and her consort takes off to paranirvana in the middle of it, leaving her with his spirit going in her vagina and out her eyeballs. Anybody else might have slaughtered an army or two if they'd been in her position.

So to me it seems perfectly logical and par for the course.

Namostute is said to come from Padma Purana which...accumulated...from 4th to 10th centuries.

? isn't Namostute just a 'all praise be to you' phrase at the end of a mantra?

The Padma Purana link is awesome, Thank you.

Durga is Mahalakshmi when combined to destroy Mahishasura.

Correspondingly, the Buddhist War Chariot goddess is:

Mahamaya Vijayavahini

What is the distance between Mahalakshmi and Tripura-Sundari then?

a lot of layers that when they were all applied I was asleep and dreaming.

"Layers" seems to be one of the few ways to describe...some of the things that keep happening...doesn't it?

When coming the other way, bringing a dream into my shaking, the dream always seemed more like a screen, maybe like a 21st century 3D version of a thangka. When going into the dream (I've still only done it once, so we're talking about the same one), it was like 'sheets' of transition state, but since transition state is liquid, it was like sheets of liquid layering over each other, not a curtain, door, or barrier like I think I expected. Here is the dream:

As I did the [second dream yoga] exercise, I could feel the feeling that I associate with the transition state beginning, but unlike what usually happens, it began ‘layering’ over my bliss and turned viewpoint inside. The best description I can think of is that layer after layer flowed over my consciousness with a ‘feeling’ and even somewhat a ‘sight’ of those walls of water that people buy as a calmness ornament – sheets of ‘transition state’ which I have described before as being like a blissful liquid, flowed over my consciousness, but instead of each washing away the previous or displacing the original state, they made layers until there were many of the ‘curtains’ I have described before when carrying a dream into shaking, and as this proceeded, each layer had different ‘worlds’ or activities and events happening in them, they were transparent enough to see each one clearly and if I focused on any it would look just like waking reality in that particular world.

I was growing in size and ‘dissipating’ in solidness, becoming a huge figure like a megalith, like the statues formerly at Bamiyan, but a megalith made of greenish grey mist, so not very ‘lith’. Simultaneously, I was very aware that I had passed a threshold and was now dreaming. I was elated, I even thought to myself, “I am lucid dreaming now.” I moved my very misty hands a little and watched the ripples through what was essentially the center of my mega body. My mind emptied at the prospect of moving around consciously in this dream world, the bliss that had been there as I had gone through the transition state was now filling every ripple in the mist. The fact that I had moved was causing some activity on the ground in front of me, I began to notice that people were gathering to see their statue move. I emptied and became ‘screens’ of visions that those looking at me saw and interpreted as they saw fit, I became less and less ‘corporeal’ until I was just a space in which visions were playing out in a kind of holographic way such that three dimensionally each possible angle at which ‘I’ was viewed was a different scene. I could feel each of these ‘worlds’ as having been the liquid layers previously, and I just stood swirling and layering and filling with the transition liquid and with bliss and then awoke, at 5:30am, still in exactly the position I had begun the exercise in, and very stiff as a result.

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
This one is in the middle of having a good time, and her consort takes off to paranirvana in the middle of it, leaving her with his spirit going in her vagina and out her eyeballs. Anybody else might have slaughtered an army or two if they'd been in her position.

Indeed. Again almost all of these fights and curses are metaphorical. On the simplest note, when it talks about something minor like such-and-such slew another on the battlefield, it means one star sets when another one rises.

Here, we have at least some reason to consider the star and asterism, Citra, along with its physiological role which is something like the upper tip of the Susumna which connects the head centers to the Brahmarandra.

? isn't Namostute just a 'all praise be to you' phrase at the end of a mantra?

Yes, except without further qualification, it usually means Mahalakshmi Stotram.

As for tracking it down inside a Maha Purana, I don't know, I did not see a chapter given yet.


The general notes I have for a type of combined Puranic and Shakta phases of creation says:


Shakti (Power) is the Matrikas (Mothers who Protect Time Cycles)

Adi Parashakti (bindu or zero feminine, Param Prakriti) manifests via her Trinity (Tripura Sundari or Prakriti) firstly as Sati--Dakshayani, the pre-cosmic trinity, then Parvati (Durga) as a material trinity.

First form, as Sati-Dakshayani, Vidya Shakti, she is the mother of Pancha Brahma, and the Ten Wisdoms (Mahavidyas). Daksha invoked Adi Parashakti to become his daughter; she said yes, but when you insult me, I return to celestial form and disown you. Before long, this happened, then Sati burned herself and got scattered all over the place, forming the Shakti Pithas or stone temples. The next phases of creation are:

Tarakamaya, war between the Devas and Asuras.

Second form (Parvati) as Yogeshvari (Durga-Parvati, Mahalakshmi, Material Shakti) vs. Andhaka the Serpent

Second form vs. Mahish Asura the Buffalo

Second Deva War or creation of man.

Earthly war of Titans




Buddha referred to the Sapta Matrikas (or Mothers; originally the Pleiades) as Raksha. They are Wrathful Protectors. Lower Protectors such as Lokapala and Dikapala guard the Ten Directions, and specific locations, but the Mothers protect Time.

In Nepal, northwest is given to Durga Mahalakshmi or Yogeshvari, from whom the Matrikas emerged; Shiva formed her to defeat Mahish Asura while the devas were subjugated by asuras. Also called Narasimhi or Chamunda (Praytangira) in India, as Adi Parasakti, she was formed by Shiva to calm Narasimha after he slaughtered Hiranyakashipu. Mahish was the son of Rambha and Shyamala (Yamini) in buffalo form.

She was discovered nameless by sages Angiras and Pratyangira and demanded a name (i. e., Pratyangira). Through her, one reaches the highest attainment, the lotus feet of Sri Lalitha Tripura Sundari. Her Trinity (Tripura Sundari) is Parvati, Mahalakshmi, Sarasvati (Shiva used these to manifest Durga Mahalakshmi). Also called Ashta (Eight) Lakshmi.


And so it is pretty specifically saying that Mahalakshmi is "not" Lakshmi as in simple good fortune, beauty, consort of Visnu.

What is the distance between Mahalakshmi and Tripura-Sundari then?

Mahalakshmi = Adi Shakti = Durga or Parameswari

Tripura is her I think you could say with respect to the planes of form.


We wind up having a hybrid from multiple systems, and so for example we find that there was a Syamala and Yamini interpreted as the same. And yet the name Tripura Sundari is pretty much pushed to the side despite having both direct and synonymous inclusions of most, if not all, of the Mahavidyas.



In the same manner, although Ganesh has thirty-two or more forms, these come from certain arrangements, and it could probably be said that certain ones are emphasized and then probably subsumed under Maha Ganapati.

One of his categories is that some of his forms are avatars or incarnations. In Ganesa Purana, there are Four with Dhumraketu being in the future like Kalki. But in Mudgala Purana there are eight and Dhumra has manifested, here again as the eighth/final/cumulative aspect similar to Mahalakshmi as the Eighth Matrika.


From a list expanded to twelve forms:

Dhumra means smoke. Smoke is the initial state of materialisation. It is the transitory state between the solid manifest (sagun) and the unmanifest (nirgun) states. Thus, one who possesses such a smoky complexion is Dhumravarna. According to the principle that ‘where there is smoke there is fire’, Ganapati also possesses the fire element [embers (angar)].

These Embers are the occult name of Mars, Angarasa.



We have a lot of pot-bellied Yaksas which have multiple meanings, from Vase Breath to Candali to the Dharmakaya, and it is probably also the main form of Ganesh that has been Buddhistically harnessed as Vinayaka:


Lambodar is derived from the words lamba (large) and udar (belly). Saint Eknath has explained the meaning of this word as, The entire animate and inanimate creation dwells within You. Hence You are called Lambodar. – Shri Eknathi Bhagvat 1:3

According to the Ganapatitantra, Deity Shiva played the Damaru (a small hour glass shaped drum). Shri Ganesh grasped the knowledge of the Vedas through the deep sound of the Damaru. He learnt dancing by watching the Tandav dance everyday and music from the sound of the anklets of Deity Parvati. Since He imbibed such varied knowledge, that is digested it, He developed a large belly.

Lambodara also involves the Vishnu Avatar Mohini.

It is perhaps combined with the Vinayak form. From doing Ganapati Hrdaya, there is a section where it seems to use eight specific names or forms, including Dhumra, Lambodara, and Ekadantaya, but it seems to stop short of fully inheriting the Mudgala Purana version.

From within Buddhism, one would not really say, well, go do the whole Ganapati or Mahavidya system as it stands, but there is supposed to be a principle of common origin and keeping the best/most useful parts. In other words without stopping anyone from Ganesh twenty-nine, it just may not have been seen as important enough to retain.

it was like sheets of liquid layering over each other, not a curtain, door, or barrier like I think I expected.

Along these lines, I did not get those kind of sheets, although Ganapati did give me something that felt liquidish, a bit more like meat paste the way our tantras say that Meat is really an emulsion stuffed in an elephant suit, etc.

In standard symbolism, White Elephant Meat is Pandara.

Inner Offerings brief article:






Again, half of the Inverted Stupa as the main foundry of Eka Rasa.


The sheets I felt were closer to Karma family and would probably be called Silk, although gossamer or feathery might be closer. Nice, but not something I can reproduce at will, yet.

When I looked into Meat, the main takeaways are that is is actually mixed in Vasudhara's Khay--Yogurt, and it has many variations of applications. Sometimes, everything is simply mixed in one cup. To slow it down, we are using Three Cups which are the Tri-kaya and Three Voids, and the meat goes in one of them and functions mostly as Wrathful Upaya.



According to basic Ekarasa or "One Taste", Nectars swirl counterclockwise and are the first Four Joys, Head, Throat, Heart, Navel; Meats swirl clockwise, and ascend, the second Four Joys of Navel, Heart, Throat, Head. This again is like a corkscrew or drill; the goal of the first set is Sahaja, then the rest are all Sahaja; and here, counter-rotation = reversal, same as torque.


If I do not just run with information off one source as to why Pandara is elephant meat, Akhu Gyatso's Guhyasamaja commentary reverses the polarity:


The wind-element at the base [of the entire artifice] stands for the ten primary and
secondary ‘winds’. The fire stands for ‘inner heat’; the tri-pod, ‘appearance’, ‘increased
appearance’ and ‘attainment’. The skull represents the ‘union’ and the pristine cognition of
bliss and emptiness; the five ‘meats’, the five male Buddhas; while the five ‘nectars’
represent the five female Buddhas.


In Father Tantra (Guhyasamaja, Vajrabhairava) the meats are male; most Mother tantra makes them female.

In Varuni Puja, the meats are male Buddhas, the skandhas; the female nectars are elements and delusions. Meat or Khay is the Upaya or Method, or, the emphasis in Father Tantra.

Khay is handled by a wrathful deity, and it, the Upaya or Method, is sahaja-sukhabhanda, Co-natal or Together-born Great Bliss bond. It can employ Hevajra or Bhairava, although a female is also allowed. Certain Hindu views on Bhairavi coincide with Varuni and at least "Va" syllable for amrita:

Ananda Bhairavi is defined as Sudha Devi, which is Nectar, Ambrosia, Ganges. She is Tejas and Tapas, without Himsa (injury or killing), only Ananda (Bliss). In Madya (wine) one gets drunk with the knowledge the knowledge that you are the supreme power; Matsya (fish) you are the jeeva floating in the paramatma; Mamsa (meat) you can offer yourself to Her; Mudra are her gestures and Maithuna (union) is the spiritual level using inner consciousness. Her released energy is Sundari.

She incarnates:

A Yogini is a student of Tantra, or an aspirant. A Bhairavi is one who has succeeded. The name "Bhairavi" means "Terror," or "awe-inspiring," so the one who has achieved the state of Bhairavi, is beyond the fear of death, and therefore awesome.

The meat is our "self", at least the aggregated one, and so you need a terrible Krodha Kali or someone really disturbing. They stir it up clockwise. There are different ways to do so:


In the Guhyasamaja , Hevajra, and Yamantaka Tantras the
syllables of the five nectars and five meats are derived from
their Sanskrit names. These are as follows: Vi for faeces (vit);
Ma for marrow or 'meat' ( mamsa ); Shu for semen ( shukra ) or
white bodhichitta ; Ra for blood ( rakta ); and Mu for urine
(mutra). The five great meats are similarly marked: Go or Ga
for the white cow (go); Ku or Shva for the yellow dog (kukkura, shvan ); Ha
for the red elephant (hastin); Shva for the yellow horse ( ashva ); and Na
for the blue man (nara).

So, hang on. Doesn't even match the colors in the picture. You should understand a certain approach and use it consistently.


Here is one such example of Yamantaka substance generation:

From the east comes BHRUM which is the seed syllable of Vairochana. From BHRUM becomes bull flesh and on top of that is the letter GO. All the meats that one visualises arise from seed syllables. Although they appear in the form of meats, you need to constantly remember that they are the seed syllables of the 5 Dhyani Buddhas. The letters above each type of meat (e.g. the letter GO stands above the bull flesh) are the first letter of the word for each meat. From the south comes AM the seed syllable of Ratnasambhava which becomes the flesh of a dog; from the west comes JRIM the seed syllable of Amitabha and becomes the flesh of an elephant; from the north comes KHAM (Amogasiddhi) becomes horse meat; in the centre there is a blue HUM (Akshobya) which becomes human flesh. Generating the 5 nectars: From LAM comes faeces; from MAM comes blood, from PAM comes white bodhicitta and from TAM comes bone marrow and VAM comes urine.

That format is Akshobya-centered, has Mamaki with Ratnasambhava, and ends by returning Vam to the center, which would pertain to a Vajra Family deity. The format is Vam centered, Charchika is a Bhairavi, and her Cam symbol is for the same Sahaja Sukha Bandha as the whole meat mixture is intended to be.



The meats begin as stuffed skin suits and get mixed into an emulsion with awareness of letting go of skandhas.

From the east comes BHRUM which is the seed syllable of Vairochana. From BHRUM becomes bull flesh and on top of that is the letter GO. All the meats that one visualises arise from seed syllables. Although they appear in the form of meats, you need to constantly remember that they are the seed syllables of the 5 Dhyani Buddhas. The letters above each type of meat (e.g. the letter GO stands above the bull flesh as mentioned above) are the first letter of the word for each meat. Go or Ga for the white cow (go). From the south comes AM the seed syllable of Ratnasambhava which becomes the flesh of a dog; Ku or Shva for the yellow dog (kukkura, shvan); from the west comes JRIM the seed syllable of Amitabha and becomes the flesh of an elephant, Ha for the red elephant (hastin); from the north comes KHAM (Amogasiddhi) becomes horse meat, Shva for the yellow horse ( ashva ); in the centre there is a blue HUM (Akshobya) which becomes human flesh, and Na for the blue man (nara).


We at first want to learn a method or means, Upaya, in the knowledge that increasing this echoes by the Sister classes increasing Bliss. Generally speaking the Father Tantra Increases Bliss by way of stimulation and response.

And so that is from Yamantaka, which begets Buddhist Mahalakshmi. Even if I do not attempt a full Yamantaka rite, one can train this significant underlying instruction in another way, just to Varuni--Khandaroha or an Ista Devata.

Jrim--Amitabha or Ha--Hastin is Red Elephant here. Same Family as Pandara, different or opposite action. This melts and boils Samjna Skandha. The skandha is the habit of a psychological "layer", whereas the Prajna or Wisdom is the opposite of Delusion related to the habit, the purity or not of Fire.

It is not a hard and fast rule in all tantra, but, for the purposes of Generation Stage, it seems apropos to have female = liquid and male = meat.

You make soma, liquid, and meat mixtures and combine all of this into the fourth Ah-arisen cup being the Fourth Void or Prabhasvara--not on its own plane, so much as our interface, driver, or gate to it. And so it looks like Ekarasa theory would say it is a good idea to train at this level and have Vetali or someone appropriate test the nectar you generate.



Pithesvari's syllable system is the same as that used by Yamari when he made the meat or Khay and of Vajrasattva pursuing Mahasukha related to All Families.

To use the fleshy goo, Varuni can scoop some of the meat into her mega cocktail, and Ghasmari can gobble the remainder.




Here are some Camunda-esque devis handling meat for Sri:

[shaberon]

I tried to find a discrepancy wherein Tibetan Shentongpas refuted Ratnakarasanti's point pertaining to the Other-dependent or Paratantra retaining a type of existence.

I am not actually sure they were aware he made any distinction they did not hold.

The Tibetan texts however do not seem to portray descriptions of Buddha vs. Bodhisattva in order to conclude that when in a world system, Buddha is perceiving some kind of object, so the Paratantra must continue to exist and he is thereby under a slight error.


Here, even for me it is difficult to find why the reviewer of Ratnakarasanti would take what is possibly one minor point and thereby say Ratnakarasanti's Nirakara is much different or in disagreement with Tibetan Shentong.


Taranatha really seems to be distinguishing the totally false behavior of Paratantra through an ordinary mind, versus what he calls the Paratantra's ongoing existence:


the dependent as
[mental] substance


So he certainly is well off from trying to say Paratantra goes to a complete vacuum collapse. He may, in fact, be saying that from the view of absorption in Paramartha, there is no Other-dependent, but he just does not seem to address the question that Buddha can be in Paramartha and in the Mundane world simultaneously. He does seem to agree that on the Path that the Parantantra will continue in purified states.


His main point is the ideological threat of Shentong which is in replacing a totally empty Dharmadhatu:

In a way typical of the gzan ston tradition, the presentation of the perfect nature is then
combined with the tathagatagarbha theory of the Ratnagotravibhaga on
the grounds of an equation of purified suchness with the state of the
Tathagata in MSA IX.37. Finally, Taranatha comes to the conclusion
that distinguishing all phenomena on the basis of the three natures
amounts to the same as differentiating such phenomena under the aspect
of consciousness on the level of apparent truth, and the aspect of wisdom
on the level of the ultimate truth.


Here, Apparent = Laukika or Mundane, Ultimate = Lokottara or Transcendent.

Again, this is why Shentong and Jonang are relatively minor in Tibet, evidently this Ekayana or RGV view does not suit the majority view.



Other points:

One has to bear in mind that the root text, which does not make much use of the
trisvabhava terms, equates the perceived object with the imagined
nature, false imagining [Vikalpa] with the dependent nature, and the absence of
duality, or emptiness, with the perfect nature (cf. M A V 1.5).


Taranatha starts by explaining that false imagining - being consciousness
which takes the form of a perceived object and perceiving subject - only
exists on the level of apparent truth. Duality, however, does not exist at
all, since it is a pure mental creation. Thus apparent truth is free of the
two extremes of nihilism and eternalism. The first extreme is avoided by
asserting false imagining on the level of apparent truth, the second by
negating the existence of the object-subject duality.
Emptiness, equated by Taranatha with wisdom, really exists as the
true nature of phenomena in false imagining. In a state where mental
stains still prevail, false imagining also exists in relation to the true
nature of phenomena or emptiness. It is to be understood, however, that
false imagining exists only as something (ultimately) unreal (bden med
kyi ho bor yod pa). Being consciousness which consists of accidental
stains, it must be given up eventually.

The imagined [nature] is [like] the sky etc., [like] all non-entities. [It consists of]
all object-appearances such as: visible forms appearing to the [false] imagining,
[all] relations between names and things, [which arise by] clinging to names as
things and mistaking things for names, and [every] object grasped by a superimposing
intellect - outside and inside, extremes and middle, big and small, good
and bad, space and time.

The dependent [nature] is mere consciousness, which appears as the subject-object
relationship, because it appears by being dependent on something else, viz.
the habitual imprints of ignorance.

The perfect [nature] is self-awareness, clarity in its own right, free from all mental
fabrications. It is synonymous with the true nature of phenomena, the sphere of
qualities (dharmadhatu), suchness and ultimate truth.



Neither the imagined nor the dependent exist in reality: they are both deceptive
appearances, apparent truths and false. They need to be distinguished,
however, in terms of their respective features: The imagined does not
even exist on the level of apparent truth, whereas the dependent does.
The imagined exists as mere imputation, the dependent as mental
substance.


In the MAVT's presentation of three types of
emptiness (MAV III.6cd), Sthiramati says that the dependent nature is
not completely non-existent. It exists in the way it is perceived by pure
"mundane wisdom" (laukikajnana), namely wisdom acquired after
meditation.

It is only Taranatha's combination of these Yogacara elements with the tathagatagarbha
of the Ratnagotravibhaga that fully underpins gzan ston.


Interesting for us is Taranatha's final summary of the three natures.
He starts off by saying that the imagined nature is usually differentiated
into the imagined of the perceived object and the imagined of the
perceiving subject. The dependent is distinguished into impure and pure,
and the perfect into an unchangeable perfect nature and the perfect
nature constituted by unmistaken perception. In fact, the imagined
nature is only the perceived object, whereas the real perfect nature is the
unchangeable one. The perfect nature constituted by unmistaken perception
is included under the pure dependent nature. The imagined nature
of the perceiving subject is by nature the same as the dependent. Upon
careful analysis, therefore, the dependent must be included under the
imagined, and since its true nature is the perfect, all phenomena are
included under the imagined and the perfect.

The consciousness of visible form etc. does not really exist; its
true nature, however, does.


Even though there are fundamentally different interpretations in the Tibetan
traditions regarding the Ratnagotravibhaga, one can say without a doubt
that the ultimate is not self-empty (ran ston) but endowed with inseparable
supreme qualities

RGV 1.155: sunya agantukair dhatuh savinirbhagalaksanaih I asunyo 'nuttarair
dharmair avinirbhagalaksanaih I 'The Buddha element is empty of accidental
[stains], whose mark is that they can be separated. It is not empty of the supreme
qualities, whose mark is that they cannot be separated [from the Buddha
element]."



The Third Karmapa Ran byun rdo rje (1284-1339) had earlier enunciated
a similar position in his rNam par ses pa dan ye ses 'byed pa'i
bstan bcos, which represents his understanding of the Yogacara works
attributed to Maitreya. Unlike the Jonangpas, however, he does not
present dharmadhatu as wisdom when describing the transformation of
the eight types of consciousness into the four kinds of wisdoms in accordance
with the Yogacara works. Only in his final summary does Ran
byun rdo rje indicate his understanding of the dharmadhatu as one of the
five ever-present wisdoms in a gzan ston sense. In fact, it was Dol po
pa who started to use this terminology freely according to his gzan ston
interpretation of the Buddhist literature. In other words, Dol po pa and
later Taranatha took dharmadhatu or emptiness in the Yogacara works
as a kind of wisdom, and therefore felt free to call it that, a license
against which other schools reacted strongly.



I am not sure H. H. 3rd Karmapa, either, has taken the time to refute a point which he may not know Ratnakarasanti made:

Having enunciated the transformation into four kinds of wisdom and three kayas
(dharmakaya, sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya), he explains these three kayas
of transformed consciousness as the svabhavikakaya, which rests in the dharmadhatu.
In his final summary, Ran byun rdo rje says: "The actualization of the
own-being of the five wisdoms and four kayas is Buddha-[hood]. Endowed with
the stains of the mind, intellect and consciousness, it is the alayavijnana. Free
from stains, it is called the essence of the victorious one".




also, as Sthiramati states in his introduction to the Triṃśikābhāṣya, one
of the main objectives of the Triṃśikā is to help those who do not correctly
understand cittamātra, due to their attachment to the supposed reality of
persons and phenomena, to fully realize the actuality of personal and phenomenal identitylessness in order to accomplish the true fruition of the teaching
of cittamātra.

In general, Sthiramati explains that demonstrating that phenomena do not exist permanently (that is, as having an intrinsic nature of their own) means to avoid the extreme of superimposition, while to say that
they are “mere cognizance” serves to avoid the extreme of utter denial. Thus,
there is also a difference in Yogācāra texts between mind, consciousness,
and cognizance on the one hand, and “mere mind,” and so on on the other
hand. mind or consciousness stands for the delusive activity of mental construction itself as well as the fictional reality it constructs, while “mere mind” and so on denote the realization that this supposed reality is not ultimately
real, but only the plethora of one’s own ongoing mental chatter. Thus, on the
path, what appears as one’s personal projected universe of the false duality
of subject and object is first reduced to seeing the projector of this illusory
world—one’s very own mind, called “false imagination,” “cittamātra,” or “the
other-dependent nature.” Then, once the “bare structure” of the latter without the overlay of delusional fictions (the imaginary nature) is seen, the truth of cittamātra is realized, since to realize the true nature of false imagination
or the other-dependent nature as always being free from such overlay is called
the attainment of the perfect nature, which is nothing but the nonconceptual
wisdom of seeing the ultimate essence of the other-dependent nature. This is
also the attainment of suchness, the dharmadhātu, and so on as the final true
realization of cittamātra.



I may be missing the point of contention that would separate them from Ratnakarasanti's Nirakara. They said something to the effect that:

Ratnākaraśānti follows the Madhyāntavibhāga model of the three natures differentiates him...even moreso from others gZhan-stong writers like Dol-po-pa (who hold ’od gsal to be ultimate while emphasizing the ekayāna system and the Kālacakra framework).


The Od is not other than the Parinispanna and I cannot yet see their difference in the Tri-svabhava.

[shaberon]

As a couple of grand yardsticks, the 84000 and Digital Sanskrit sites are similar but work a bit differently.

Now the first is a bunch of mostly shill links to the entire Tibetan canon, however, in a few cases it may show something interesting such as Dakarnava "in progress".

I perhaps had different expectations of it because it says Tibetan, but, where they can, they also use Sanskrit. However, from this standpoint, the relatively brief page of publications is slightly awkward due to the links using translated titles.

Among them, we can find that Pramardani is aimed at the Four Kings, and Mantranusarani more at evil minds and their vampire abilities. So the things that are on it are somewhat pliable to our knowledge of the Sanskrit versions.

There is a "Mother of Avalokiteshvara Dharani", who is not named, and is presumed to be understood as "Tara", but if so, also as pisaci--vampire--gauri as within the dharani itself:

tadyathā | ili mili | cili mili | kuntule kuntule kuntule | śire śiśire viśire | vīrāyai gauri gāndhāri drāmiṭe mātaṅgi pukkasi kaṣṭaya māṃ | caṇḍāli huttu mālini hūṁ | dhu dhu mālini | cile mile | gṛhṇa saumyadarśani | kuru candra­mukhi | laghu­mānayante ārya­dakṣiṇa­bhuje | sarvavidyānām prasādhane | sarva­vidyānām īśvari svāhā ||



Most of the library has limited Sanskrit, except for Samputa which has both, and even better they have got
Manjushri Mulakalpa in English and Sanskrit.

This is a bit of a redux since I did not realize you could find it.

Although their work is quite good it does not reflect all prior research. Most of the main texts are in Nepal, but, its antiquity is much greater, having for instance been salvaged from a Hindu temple near southernmost India. And by analysis it is said to have some of the only mention of certain Persian kings or history from ca. 4th century.

So they think it may have first been "compiled" around the eighth century, but, it almost certainly came from the older Mantrayana of the south. And, we keep finding it as a source of almost any name we look up, and so we can show that, for example, Bhrkuti is at least old enough to have been recorded here.


According to the translators its magnitude is such that:

The MMK has been likened to an encyclopedia of knowledge, and the description of the audience is one of the many types of valuable information found in the MMK. The list of attendees, which includes more than 1,300 names, was possibly intended to serve as a “Who’s Who” of Buddhism, and illustrates the extent and structure of the Buddhist pantheon. The deities are listed in groups according to a hierarchical order, while the list of the Buddhist saṅgha in attendance blends the traditional with the historical in its inclusion of the names of many beings that regularly featured in Buddhist literature prior to the MMK. Its other “encyclopedic” content includes astrology (with lists and descriptions of personified astrological categories); geography; types of languages and their geographical distribution; history (presented, in the narrative context of the MMK, as prophecy), including lists of kings and accounts of historical events that emphasize the history of the Buddhist religion; types of persons based on medical categories; types of dreams; and many other subjects. Much of its main ritual content is also presented in encyclopedic format, as is seen in the descriptions of hundreds upon hundreds of different mudrā gestures, mantras, and other ritual elements arranged into categories. This encyclopedic character of the MMK is reflected in the size of the glossary accompanying this translation, which includes more than 2,000 entries.


Usnisa deities are particularly exalted.

However, when it comes to its esoteric content, the MMK itself clearly states:


“This Dharma treasury of the tathāgatas is extremely occult, as it depends in every respect on mantras. It must not be taught to those who have not received the samaya from the master, or those who do not understand the samaya. Why is this? This is because it is secret. It is an occult teaching; it is a teaching [arising from] omniscience. No beings should ever reject or take it lightly” (54.­5 ).


It surprisingly has not a single commentary.

Due to design, the Sanskrit is in one drop-down cell, but all the English is individual chapters.

So I certainly have never seen this, and half of it is going to be improper Hybrid Sanskrit, but, if I more or less asked Bhrkuti to get me here, does she have something to say?

Yes.

Now this is a Kriya tantra but it does have the clear intent of Samyaksambodhi.

So what it lacks in terms of a Pitha system with channels, etc., it probably more than makes up for with its sheer volume of "stuff".


So, a few times, her name is probably really just an adjective applied to something else, but, as what looks to be properly her, she pops up quite a few times.

She more or less spans the whole book.

By sifting her selections, we will find out something about her character, or about the scenes or patterns that MMK is built on, or both.


Close to the beginning, after what looks like a section for Vajrapani is one for Abja (Lotus) Kula, which is, a, very weird, Avalokiteshvara. As well as select standard epithets, he is also Naksatra Raja. He then seems to produce his Queen by samadhi, and she is:

tārā sutārā naṭī bhṛkuṭī • anantaṭī lokaṭī bhūmiprāpaṭī vimalaṭī sitā śvetā mahā­śvetā pāṇḍaravāsinī lokavāsinī vimalavāsinī • abjavāsinī daśa­bala­vāsinī yaśovatī bhogavatī mahā­bhogavatī • ulūkā • alūkā • amalāntakarī vimalāntakarī samantāntakarī {B11r} duḥkhāntakarī bhūtāntakarī śriyā mahā­śriyā stupaśriyā • anantaśriyā lokaśriyā vikhyātaśriyā lokamātā samanta­mātā buddhamātā bhaginī bhāgīrathī surathī rathavatī nāgadantā damanī bhūtavatī • amitā • āvalī bhogāvalī • ākarṣaṇī • adbhutā raśmī surasā suravatī pramodā dyutivatī taṭī samanta­taṭī jyotsnā somā somāvatī māyūrī mahā­māyūrī dhanavatī dhanandadā suravatī lokavatī • arciṣmatī bṛhannalā bṛhantā sughoṣā sunandā vasudā lakṣmī lakṣmīvatī rogāntikā sarvavyādhicikitsanī • asamā devī khyātikarī vaśakarī kṣiprakarī kṣemadā maṅgalā maṅgalāvahā candrā sucandrā candrāvatī ceti // 1.50 //



followed by what look like Pisacis or Gauris from Lotus Sutra and King Dhrtarastra:

ap1.­51
etaiś cānyaiś ca vidyārājñibhiḥ parṇaśavarī-jāṅgulī-mānasī-pramukhair {S11} ananta­nirhāra­dharma­dhātu­gagana­svabhāvaiḥ sattva­caryāvikurvitādhiṣṭhānasañjanitamānasaiḥ dūtadūtī ceṭaceṭī kiṅkarakiṅkarī yakṣayakṣī rākṣasarākṣasīṃ piśācapiśācī abjakulasamayānupraveśamantravicāribhiḥ yena taṃ śuddhāvāsaṃ deva­bhavanaṃ {B11v} śuddhasattvanivastaṃ tena pratyaṣṭhāt / pratiṣṭhitāś ca bhagavataḥ śākyamuneḥ pūjākarmaṇodyuktamānasā abhūvan sthitavantaḥ // 1.51 //


So Bhrkuti of 1.50 is associated with Lakshmi, Mayuri, and also Dasa Bala, which is highly in league with having Mayuri in a role with Powder of Kumari, which is also Vimala, an aspect of Katyayani and Parasol. Here you can actually find Amala and Vimala which are debatably terms for the "Ninth and Eighth Consciousnesses", but, as can be observed, in a certain sense this is simply the "Future".


Not much further along in 1.56 is Vajrabhrkuti following Vajrapani, with also Mamaki, Rupini, Vajrakamini, Vajrasrnkhala, Vajramusti, etc., and so this perhaps is Blue Bhrkuti of Tara verse fourteen.


next:


tasyāpi dakṣiṇato bhagavatī pāṇḍaravāsinī padmahastā dakṣiṇena hastena bhagavantaṃ {B38r} śākya­muniṃ vandamānā padmāsanopaniṣaṇṇā jaṭāmakuṭadhāriṇī śvetapaṭṭa vastranivastā paṭṭāṃśukottarāsaṅginī kṛṣṇabhasmatrimuṇḍī kṛtā / evaṃ tārā bhṛkuṭī svakasvakāsaneryāpathe susthitā kāryā / upariṣṭāc ca teṣāṃ bhagavatī prajñāpāramitā tathāgatalocanā • uṣṇīṣarājā ca kāryāḥ // 2.140 //



bhṛkuṭī caiva + + + mahāśriyā yaśasvinī /
sitākhyāḥ sarvamantrās tu catuḥkumāryā mahodadhau // 30.13 //




There appears to be a bridge between families:

madhye padmakule siddhir yugānte vajrakulasya tu /
praṇidhānavaśāt kecit mantrā siddhyanti sarvadā // 32.35 //

ap32.­36
avalokiteśo mañjuśrī tārā bhṛkuṭī ca yakṣarāṭ /
sarve māṇicarā yakṣā sidhyante sarvakālataḥ // 32.36 //

ap32.­37
rāgiṇo ye ca mantrādyā prayuktā sarvadaivataiḥ /
sidhyante kaliyuge kāle laukikā ye sucihnitāḥ // 32.37 //



evaṃ padmakule padmamudreṇa sahitā / mantraṃ bhavati / oṁ jiḥ jiḥ jināṅgabhṛdbhayabhedine svāhā / eṣa mantraḥ • avalokiteśvarasya bodhi­sattvasya padmamudrayā saṃyuktaṃ sarvakarmikaṃ bhavati / anena japtena sarvaṃ padmakulaṃ japtaṃ bhavati / anena siddhena sarvaṃ padmakulaṃ siddhaṃ bhavati // 37.98 //

ap37.­99
paṇḍaravāsinyā vā mahāvidyayā / mantraṃ cātra bhavati / oṁ kaṭe vikaṭe nikaṭe kaṭaṅkaṭe kaṭavikaṭakaṭaṅkaṭe svāhā / mudreṇaiva yojayet padmamudreṇa vā sarvakarmikā bhavati / rakṣā ca kartavyā sarvaśmaśānagatena // 37.99 //

ap37.­100
evaṃ tārā bhrukuṭī candrā hayagrīvasyeti vidyārājasannipātaparivarte vā ye kathitāḥ sarvam asaṅkhyaṃ cā padmakulaṃ prayoktavyam mudrāmantraiś ca kalpavistaraiḥ // 37.100 //





Lotus Family and Usnisa mantra:


vijayoṣṇīṣamantrādyāṃ padmapāṇiṃ salokitam /
avalokitanāthaṃ ca bhṛkuṭī tārāṃ yaśasvinīm // 50.14 //

ap50.­15
devīṃ ca sitavāsinyāṃ mahāśvetā yaśovatīm /
vidyāṃ bhogavatīṃ cāpi hayagrīvaś ca mantrarāṭ // 50.15 //

ap50.­16
ete hy abjakule mantrā pradhānā jinaniḥsṛtā /
ekākṣaraś cakravartī vā mantrāṇām adhipatiṃ prabhum // 50.16 /



similar:

tārāṃ ca bhṛkuṭīṃ caiva tathā paṇḍaravāsinīm /
mahāśvetāṃ tathā vidyāṃ māmakyāṃ kuliśodbhavām // 52.130 // {V449}

ap52.­131
uṣṇīṣaprabhavāṃ sarvāṃ locanāṃ caiva devatām /
sarvāṃ tathāgatīṃ vidyāṃ mañjughoṣaṃ ca dhīmatam // 52.131 //

ap52.­132
mahā­sthāmaṃ samantaṃ ca tathā padma­dharaṃ prabhum /
mayāpi loke yakṣeśaṃ bodhi­sattvaṃ maharddhikam // 52.132 //





dharmacakre tathā ramye mahābodhivane tathā /
yatrāsau bhagavān śāntiṃ niropadhiṃ ca praviṣṭavān /
tatra sādhyau • imau mantrau tārā bhṛkuṭī ca devatā // 53.812 //

ap53.­810
samudrākūle tathā nityaṃ visphūrjyāṃ saritāvare /
gaṅgātīre tu sarvatra sādhanīyābjasambhavā // 53.813 //

ap53.­811
yo 'sau bodhi­sattvas tu candranāmātha viśrutaḥ /
sa vai tāram iti proktā vidyārājñī maharddhikā // 53.814 //

ap53.­812
strīrūpadhāriṇī bhūtvā devī viceruḥ sarvato jagataḥ /
sattvānāṃ hitakāmyārthaṃ karuṇārdreṇa cetasā // 53.815 //

ap53.­813
sahāṃ ca loka­dhātusthāṃ strī•ākhyam iti vartate /
maharddhiko bodhi­sattvas tu daśabhūmyānantaraprabhuḥ // 53.816 /



Commensurately, it does mention Sitatapatra a few times, in parts unclear if it may be the similarly-named male, but, she seems to be related to Usnisa Vijaya, and, is in this apparent gloss of the Families:


sitātapatraṃ mukhyena maṇḍale tu samālikhet /
buddhānāṃ dharmacakraṃ vai padmaṃ padmakule tathā // 38.18 //

ap38.­19
vajraṃ vajrakule proktaṃ gajaṃ gajakulodbhave /
tathā maṇikule kumbhaṃ niyujyāt sarvamaṇḍale // 38.19 //

ap38.­20
divyāryau ca kulau mukhyau śrī­vatsa­svastikau likhet /
ālikhed yakṣakule śreṣṭhe phalaṃ phalajasambhavam // 38.20 //


It lacks a Karma Family, yet, because that one is busy being a Yaksa.


It also has Mayuri in what looks like a Moonlight to Gold samadhi:

āryaprajñāpāramitā•āryacandrapradīpasamādhi•āryadaśabhūmika•āryasuvarṇaprabhāsottama•āryamahā­māyūrī •āryaratnaketudhāraṇīm / {S110} eṣām anyatamānyatamaṃ vācayed yugamātrasūryapramāṇatālam /

There seems to also be a sequence of gaining yellow or gold or kanaka from the yaksas, and, in a few spots, it gives us members of some of the classes or kingdoms.


Maha Yaksis:

sulocanā subhrū sukeśā susvarā sumatī vasumatī citrākṣī pūrāṃśā guhyakā suguhyakā mekhalā sumekhalā padmoccā • abhayā • abhayadā jayā vijayā revatikā keśinī keśāntā • anilā manoharā manovatī kusumāvatī kusuma­pura­vāsinī piṅgalā hārītī vīramatī vīrā suvīrā sughorā ghoravatī surasundarī {B21r} surasā guhyottarī vaṭavāsinī • aśokā • andhārasundarī • ālokasundarī prabhāvatī • atiśayavatī rūpavatī surūpā {S21} • asitā saumyā kāṇā menā nandinī • upanandinī lokottarā ceti // 1.100 //


Maha Pisacis:

maṇḍitikā pāṃsupiśācī raudrapiśācī • ulkāpiśācī jvālāpiśācī bhasmodgirā piśitāśinī durdharā bhrāmarī mohanī tarjanī rohiṇikā govāhiṇikā lokāntikā bhasmāntikā pīluvatī bahulavatī bahulā durdāntā • elā cihnitikā dhūmāntikā dhūmā sudhūmā ceti // 1.102 //


Maha Mataras:

brahmāṇī māheśvarī vaiṣṇavī {B21v} kaumārī cāmuṇḍā vārāhī • aindrī yāmyā • āgneyā vaivasvatī lokāntakarī vāruṇī • aiśānī vāyavyā paraprāṇaharā mukhamaṇḍitikā śakunī mahā­śakunī pūtanā kaṭapūtanā skandā ceti // 1.104 //


Some pisacis have a smoky tika which is similar to how the dakini of Kashmir was described.


Yet even this mammoth tome can only manage to say "Viraj" three times:

anena vartmanā gacchan mantrarūpeṇa dehinām /
nirvāṇapuram āpnoti śāntanirjarasampadam /
aśokaṃ virajaṃ kṣemaṃ bodhiniṣṭhaṃ sadāśivam // 15.217 //


In Shiva terms, Viraj is Ardhanarisvar.




It comes up again with what looks like a Vicitra or Variegated Karma Family entity such as Dombi leading to Nisprapanca:


atha ca punar vicitrakarmajanito 'yaṃ lokasanniveśadeśaveṣoparataḥ śivaṃ nirjarasampadam aśokaviraja karma lokasiddhim apekṣate vimalam mārgavinirmuktam aṣṭāṅgopetasuśītalam / karma eva kurute karma nānyaṃ karmāpekṣate // 17.5 //

ap17.­6
karmākarmavinirmukto niḥprapañcaḥ sa tiṣṭhati /
tridhā yānapravṛttas tu nānyaṃ śāntim ajāyate // 17.6 //



Then again with what looks like the Skandha of that Family, Samsara, which itself pertains to Bhranta:

saṃsāracārake ruddho na ca mukto 'smi karmabhiḥ /
buddhatvaṃ virajaṃ śāntaṃ nirvāṇam acyutaṃ padam // 24.29 //

ap24.­30
samyaksambodhir labdho me cirakālābhilāṣitam /
prāpto 'smi vidhinā karmair yuktimanto 'dhunā svayam // 24.30 //

ap24.­31
prāptaḥ svāyambhuvaṃ jñānaṃ jinaiḥ pūrvadarśitam /
na taṃ paśyāmi taṃ sthānaṃ bahirmārgeṇa labhyate // 24.31 //

ap24.­32
bhrāntaḥ saṃsārakāntāre bodhikāraṇadurlabhām /
na ca prāpto mayā jñānaṃ yādṛśo 'yaṃ svayambhuvaḥ // 24.32 //



This early text has a familiar face:

namaḥ samanta­buddhānām apratihatagati pracāriṇām /
tadyathā / {B31r} oṁ śrīḥ // 2.65 //

ap2.­66
eṣā vidyā mahā­lakṣmī lokanāthais tu deśitā /
mudrā sampuṭayā yuktā mahā­rājyapradāyikā // 2.66 //



Stupa is a frequent item, evidently as the crown of Jambudvipa, however the closest it comes to a deity seems to be:

tenāpi sādhitā mantrā devī stūpamahāśriyā /
tenāpi kāritā śāstuḥ kārā sumahatī tadā /
stūpair alaṅkṛtā sarvā samudrāntā vasundharā // 53.388 /


Dharmacakra has or is followed by the other pisacis:

anyonyāsaktāṅgulimuṣṭiṃ kṛtvā madhyamāṅgulisthāne tayos tṛtīyaparvabhāge madhyakuñcite tarjany†onya† sa eṣā dharmacakramudrā / mantraṃ cātra bhavati / oṁ chinda bhinda hana daha dīptacakra hūṁ / dharmacakra // 37.88 //

ap37.­89
vāmapādamuktaka dakṣiṇajānubhūmisthaṃ vāmena pṛṣṭhataḥ prasārite prahārahastena dakṣiṇenāhuṅkṛtena sāvaṣṭambhaḥ / eṣā aparājitamudrā / mantraṃ cātra bhavati / oṁ hulu hulu caṇḍāli mātaṅgi svāhā / aparājitā dharmacakrāparājitamantraḥ / ebhir eva mudraiḥ saṃyuktaiḥ sarvakarmikā bhavati / saṃkṣepataḥ sarvaduḥkhāni chindati / yathā yathā prayujyate tathā tathā sarvakarmāṇi kurvanti // 37.89 //


Comparatively to other tantras, this places Yamantaka as the main Krodha Raja, slayer of death, etc; Vajrabhairava is in a list of descendants that passes through Amrtakundalin. It has Maha Ganapati twice.

So it is fairly replete with things that are familiar to us in other ways.

Lotus Sutra and Parasol Sutra are probably older and it seems to be drawing from these.

[Old Student]

Indeed. Again almost all of these fights and curses are metaphorical. On the simplest note, when it talks about something minor like such-and-such slew another on the battlefield, it means one star sets when another one rises.

Of course it's metaphorical, it's meant to teach something, but,...

Daksha invoked Adi Parashakti to become his daughter; she said yes, but when you insult me, I return to celestial form and disown you. Before long, this happened, then Sati burned herself and got scattered all over the place, forming the Shakti Pithas or stone temples.

...there they go again. You left out the part that the reason Sati was scattered all over the place is because her husband, Shiva, went so nutso over her corpse that he let loose on the countryside in epic destruction until people appealed to Vishnu to do something so Vishnu tore up the corpse and scattered it all over the place. Like I was saying.

Shiva formed her to defeat Mahish Asura while the devas were subjugated by asuras.

In Bengal, the Shakta believe that she was formed by many gods, and that each gave her a power, resulting in an arm, until she had ten arms, with which to become Mahishasuramardini, the demon destroyer.

Through her, one reaches the highest attainment, the lotus feet of Sri Lalitha Tripura .Sundari. Her Trinity (Tripura Sundari) is Parvati, Mahalakshmi, Sarasvati...

This is what I meant by wanting to know what the old ones, the cemetery ones were. Tripura is originally local to Assam. Some authors believe Vajrayana style tantra and cemetery tantra originated in the same place, in the East, some think possibly Kamarupa Kingdom, or Assam or Bengal. The originals were supplanted by various suppressions. The obvious case is Janguli, who became Manasa when the Sena came to power, a Hindu goddess, Manasa possibly being a Kannara word that the Sena would not question.

My current guess is an uttara/adi/supreme devi called Tripura-Sundari, and three below her, from her, called Tara, Janguli, and Matangi, as well as others, all cemetery tantrika, and all Vajrayana. But the position of Mahalakshmi is the one I'm unsure about. Those are for Bengal area/ former Pala kingdom. I think a Kali of some form being mostly 'time' and not 'black' was in Sumatra, I think that maybe Kurukulla was in Kashmir. All presumed to predate the cluster around Padmasambhava, not to mention the Naropa/Niguma/Sukhasiddhi etc. crowd.

But it's a guess. It isn't something that will be written down, it's probably well hidden when Vajrayana went underground in India at the collapse of the Pala and everybody was given a different name and put in nice dresses in clean temples.

The sheets I felt were closer to Karma family and would probably be called Silk, although gossamer or feathery might be closer. Nice, but not something I can reproduce at will, yet.

Silk might be the right thickness for my liquid sheets, maybe. But definitely different. Gossamer or feathery would blow in the wind and these wouldn't.

It is not a hard and fast rule in all tantra, but, for the purposes of Generation Stage, it seems apropos to have female = liquid and male = meat.

That's the other thing. A lot of the prospective 'originals' have a lot to do with milk in some form, which better fits Mahalakshmi than maybe Matangi, depending.

[Old Student]

The dependent [nature] is mere consciousness, which appears as the subject-object
relationship, because it appears by being dependent on something else, viz.
the habitual imprints of ignorance.

The perfect [nature] is self-awareness, clarity in its own right, free from all mental
fabrications. It is synonymous with the true nature of phenomena, the sphere of
qualities (dharmadhatu), suchness and ultimate truth.



Neither the imagined nor the dependent exist in reality: they are both deceptive
appearances, apparent truths and false. They need to be distinguished,
however, in terms of their respective features: The imagined does not
even exist on the level of apparent truth, whereas the dependent does.
The imagined exists as mere imputation, the dependent as mental
substance.

This makes some sense, there is differentiation between the types of illusory 'things'. Non-dual is what seems to be the final extinction, though, not 'emptiness' which is another dependent, if you will.

I may be missing the point of contention that would separate them from Ratnakarasanti's Nirakara. They said something to the effect that:

Ratnākaraśānti follows the Madhyāntavibhāga model of the three natures differentiates him...even more so from others gZhan-stong writers like Dol-po-pa (who hold ’od gsal to be ultimate while emphasizing the ekayāna system and the Kālacakra framework).

Does Ratnakarasanti believe the three natures are the same nature? Ekayana believe the three paths are the same path.

[Old Student]

Although their work is quite good it does not reflect all prior research. Most of the main texts are in Nepal, but, its antiquity is much greater, having for instance been salvaged from a Hindu temple near southernmost India. And by analysis it is said to have some of the only mention of certain Persian kings or history from ca. 4th century.

So they think it may have first been "compiled" around the eighth century, but, it almost certainly came from the older Mantrayana of the south. And, we keep finding it as a source of almost any name we look up, and so we can show that, for example, Bhrkuti is at least old enough to have been recorded here.

Why does it mention Persian kings?


Close to the beginning, after what looks like a section for Vajrapani is one for Abja (Lotus) Kula, which is, a, very weird, Avalokiteshvara. As well as select standard epithets, he is also Naksatra Raja. He then seems to produce his Queen by samadhi, and she is:

tārā sutārā naṭī bhṛkuṭī • anantaṭī lokaṭī bhūmiprāpaṭī vimalaṭī sitā śvetā mahā­śvetā pāṇḍaravāsinī lokavāsinī vimalavāsinī • abjavāsinī daśa­bala­vāsinī yaśovatī bhogavatī mahā­bhogavatī • ulūkā • alūkā • amalāntakarī vimalāntakarī samantāntakarī {B11r} duḥkhāntakarī bhūtāntakarī śriyā mahā­śriyā stupaśriyā • anantaśriyā lokaśriyā vikhyātaśriyā lokamātā samanta­mātā buddhamātā bhaginī bhāgīrathī surathī rathavatī nāgadantā damanī bhūtavatī • amitā • āvalī bhogāvalī • ākarṣaṇī • adbhutā raśmī surasā suravatī pramodā dyutivatī taṭī samanta­taṭī jyotsnā somā somāvatī māyūrī mahā­māyūrī dhanavatī dhanandadā suravatī lokavatī • arciṣmatī bṛhannalā bṛhantā sughoṣā sunandā vasudā lakṣmī lakṣmīvatī rogāntikā sarvavyādhicikitsanī • asamā devī khyātikarī vaśakarī kṣiprakarī kṣemadā maṅgalā maṅgalāvahā candrā sucandrā candrāvatī ceti // 1.50 //

Yikes! Even the term "everywoman" seems tame. Are these adjectival, in that they build a concept of a goddess that is like each of these, or is it that she is all of these or the power which projects each?

Comparatively to other tantras, this places Yamantaka as the main Krodha Raja, slayer of death, etc; Vajrabhairava is in a list of descendants that passes through Amrtakundalin. It has Maha Ganapati twice.

So it is fairly replete with things that are familiar to us in other ways.

Lotus Sutra and Parasol Sutra are probably older and it seems to be drawing from these.

Lotus Sutra is considered still Mahayana, though, isn't it?

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
...there they go again. You left out the part that the reason Sati was scattered all over the place is because her husband, Shiva, went so nutso over her corpse that he let loose on the countryside in epic destruction until people appealed to Vishnu to do something so Vishnu tore up the corpse and scattered it all over the place. Like I was saying.

Well, again, different versions. Usually it was said that Shiva was weeping and so Visnu blasted the body with the Chakra so he would snap out of it.

Another excludes Visnu and I think says the body was burning and just fell apart as he walked all over India.

Either way equates to aspects of Devi becoming part of the earth, itself.

This "level" of Prajapatis, Aditis, and Ditis, is perhaps the most important factor in the Indian pantheon, or the groups most worthy of attanetion.

In Bengal, the Shakta believe that she was formed by many gods, and that each gave her a power, resulting in an arm, until she had ten arms, with which to become Mahishasuramardini, the demon destroyer.

Yes, it may have been Shiva's initiative, but this one is certainly a combination, and not the shakti of a single god.

This is what I meant by wanting to know what the old ones, the cemetery ones were. Tripura is originally local to Assam. Some authors believe Vajrayana style tantra and cemetery tantra originated in the same place, in the East, some think possibly Kamarupa Kingdom, or Assam or Bengal. The originals were supplanted by various suppressions. The obvious case is Janguli, who became Manasa when the Sena came to power, a Hindu goddess, Manasa possibly being a Kannara word that the Sena would not question.

It would be a question of what qualifies as tantra or cemetery.

Now among the Kirats, it does seem fair to say there was an Ugra Tara who took blood sacrifices, until eventually the teaching came around that it should only be symbolic, and then you are left with a similar Assamese Ugra Tara like the one we still have.

"Tantra" I would think would have to be the name of a mantra plus a visualization, and, there is probably a lot of weight in the concept of it being done well before any of it was written down.

On the other hand, just from Upanishads alone, I can generate enough energy to induce an altered state that will *force* me to see various lights, which is what I have personally done.


"Cemetery" could be the physical location or image thereof, but what makes it Vajrayana is to correspond to the Asta Vijnana of Yogacara. Kali is the most evident Smasana Vasini, since when I have no idea.


Manasa may have been a particular embodiment or incarnation, but, she was originally up there with Daksha and the Prajapatis:

Mānasādevī (मानसादेवी).—A devī born of the mind of Kaśyapa Prajāpati. She is known as Jaratkāru also.

Her Maha Mantra specifically calls her Jaratkarvyai, so, it has this understanding.


Lakshmi Narasimhi is a Ghora:






Oddly, in Bangalore, Smasana Kali's cemetery was actually called Lakshmipuram.

But the position of Mahalakshmi is the one I'm unsure about.

Mahalakshmi is Brahman and Not Brahman.

Then she is Adi Shakti as well, then not only manifests the Tri-shakti, but then later tells them to switch husbands.

Her "region" in this form is Maharastra or around Bombay.

That first line is seen by us as the most ostentatious Hindu attempt to iterate the Catuskoti in spiritual terms, in her teaching she has not only swept away any varieties of shakti, she overwhelmed the male deity and there is nothing left but her to define in terms of Nirguna and Sadguna, as well as whatever is "outside" of that...


Matangi is probably one of the oldest things as it is in Dattatreya tradition which is presumed to go back 8-9,000 years.

Mahalakshmi worships Bhairava according to Abhinavaguta; and it is Pradhanika Rahasya used after Durga Saptasati which places her in the Adi Shakti role, that part I think is the same as Lakshmi Tantra.

On that page are all kinds of arguments; it is possible to interpret/associate Mahalakshmi as the same as Tripura Sundari, according to Devi Mandir:


The eighth Mahavidya is Tripurasundari, also known as Kamala. A form of Mahalakshmi,

which doesn't make sense because Kamala and Tripura are usually listed separately.

But then you can find versions that have no Kamala.

So even that is not necessarily one, exact set, which is why in the Buddhist studies or otherwise, it is really helpful to include the source.


One could dispense with personal names by calling it Prakriti:

The Prādhānika Rahasya (प्राधानिक रहस्य, “The Secret Relating to Primary Matter,” or “The Preeminent Secret”) takes as its point of departure the Brahmāstuti’s phrase “differentiating into the threefold qualities of everything”. In considering how the singular ultimate reality assumes the multiple forms of the phenomenal universe, the Prādhānika Rahasya first describes the differentiation of the guṇas as taking place within the Devī herself and remaining at the unmanifest (avyākṛta) stage.

You have told me about the different incarnations of Chandika,
Oh great among Brahmins , it is only proper that you tell me,
About the basic nature of the Goddess who is behind these.

Candi Path or Devi Mahatmya says Mahalakshmi is Parameswari, and has both Mahamaya and Mahavidya kicking along.

"Caṇḍikā is "the Goddess of Truth and Justice who came to Earth for the establishment of Dharma ," from the adjective caṇḍa, "fierce, violent, cruel for evil forces not for good forces ." The epithet has no precedent in Vedic literature and is first found in a late insertion to the Mahabharata, where Chaṇḍa and Chaṇḍī appear as epithets.

This is estimated ca. 400-600 as part of Markendya Purana.

Silk might be the right thickness for my liquid sheets, maybe. But definitely different. Gossamer or feathery would blow in the wind and these wouldn't.

Yes, the thing I felt was aerial, like gauze, and actually feels like stitching together stuff inside me, which, from a yoga view, feels blown apart. Pretty sure it was of a different nature than what you are doing, was sort of a painless needle pulling a bunch of handkerchiefs through.

That's the other thing. A lot of the prospective 'originals' have a lot to do with milk in some form, which better fits Mahalakshmi than maybe Matangi, depending.

Yes, she later sends out Lakshmi from the Ocean of Milk.

Lakshmi, Varuni, and Kaustabha, among more recognizable items. Again this story has multiple versions with different lists, but those are pretty universal.

Matangi is the Minister of Tripura Sundari, i. e., the way Tripura speaks into the world of form, another meaning of Parrot.

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
This makes some sense, there is differentiation between the types of illusory 'things'. Non-dual is what seems to be the final extinction, though, not 'emptiness' which is another dependent, if you will.

Emptiness or purification I look at as almost synonymous, although the first is perhaps more like one's total self juxtaposed the cosmos, whereas the second is relative to individual thoughts that may arise from moment to moment.


We are not Adwaitees, and so our subject or description thereof is almost always called:


Advaya (अद्वय):—I. [tatpurusha compound] n.

(-yam) 1) Not duality, unity.

2) The identity of Brahman (n.) and the Universe or of the divine essence and the human soul; the real truth.

In Mahāvyutpatti advayam (Tibetan gñis su med pa, non-duality) is listed among paramārtha-paryāyāḥ, synonyms for the true doctrine; advayasaṃjñā udapāsi Mahāvastu i.237.14, consciousness of non-duality arose in him (so that he resolved to become a Buddha).

Advaya (अद्वय) refers to “non-duality”, According to Vajrayāna or Tibetan Buddhism.—The Bodhi mind (bodhicitta) is of the nature of Śūnya and the deity is a manifestation of Śūnya and, therefore, both have the same origin. But to realise that the two are the same requires perfect knowledge. Continuous meditation and austerities enable the worshipper to shed the veil of ignorance which makes one thing appear as two. The Bodhi mind is further called Karuṇā (compassion) and the ultimate reality as Śūnyatā, and when the two commingle, it is called Advaya or non-duality.

As copper leaves its dirty colour (and become gold) when it comes in contact with the magic tincture (of alchemy), even so, the body leaves off its attachment, hatred, etc. when it comes in contact with the tincture of Advaya. This Advaya is a form of cognition where the Bodhi mind (bodhicitta) commingles with Śūnya and becomes one with it. To symbolize this principle Vajrayāna brought in the conception of the Yab-yum form of deities in which the deity appears locked in close embrace with his Śakti or the female counterpart.


"Final" perhaps only has one meaning, Final Samadhi.

From Rangjung Yeshe Wiki:

Adamantine, Concentration called (Vajropamo nama samadhih, rdo rje lta bu zhes bya ba'i ting nge 'dzin). The concentration in which Liberation or the Enlightenment of a Buddha is attained. Called 'destroyer of hostile forces' (para-sainya-pramardin) since it eliminates the last obstructions.


The Nyingma recollect Mipham as having it, although this would show Vajrapamo as a quality or caliber and not Final:

At the age of fifteen, he came across an ancient text of the Svarodaya that deeply inspired him. In consequence, he went on a retreat, meditating on Manjushri, the Bodhisattva of Wisdom, for over a year, at the hermitage of Ju-nyung. In conjunction with his meditations, while in retreat, he effected certain alchemical operations for the production of a "pill" (ril-bu'I las-sbyor), with the result that he succeeded in awakening certain of his dormant psychic faculties. After that, it is said that he was able to master any subject of study with the least possible effort. From that point on he demonstrated not only a phenomenal memory, but the exceptional ability to comprehend any book placed before him, merely by flipping through its content at high speed.

When he was seventeen, Mipham Namgyal travelled to Golok, which is in the far northeastern region of Tibet, towards the Chinese border. This move began a life of travel for him.

At the age of eighteen he went on a pilgrimage to central Tibet and visited all the holy places of Padmasambhava. From about this time he acquired renown amongst his peers as a mathematical (sa-ris) prodigy — someone who, when presented with even the most difficult of numerical equations, was capable of giving correct answers almost instantly. Thanks to his maternal uncle's support, he attended the monastic college of Ganden for a month of intense learning. Following that, he travelled to several devotional places in the region of Lhodrak Karchur, where his spiritual sensitivity was brought to an extreme pitch. At one point, while caught up in an act of devotion, he was so carried away that all ordinary appearances dissolved completely and he found himself absorbed into the supreme vajrapamo-samadhi of bliss and emptiness. This is said to be the moment that initial enlightenment dawned for him. He also came to the intuitive realization of himself as White Manjusri. These facts, however, he kept secret and, out of pure humility, did not reveal during his lifetime, except to a few of his most intimate disciples.


Vajrapamo is also compared to the most formless dhyana.

Parasainya is a name of Baghalamukhi. By correspondence, Pramardani of the Pancha Raksa is nearly the same. So this is like saying the wrathful side, something is stopped or destroyed, whereas Vajra Pamo if "female deity or heroine" inherits directly from pre-Buddhist Bhutanese Shamanism.

Does Ratnakarasanti believe the three natures are the same nature? Ekayana believe the three paths are the same path.

No, I think he said virtually the same thing, Parikalpita is not real to begin with, Paratantra is real with respect to Laukika, Mundane, or Conventional Truth, but only Ultimate Truth or Paramartha or Parinispanna is absolutely real.

Whatever Vasubandhu put in the original was a lot more difficult to read.



Ekayana says the Buddha Nature is available to the Mahayana, the Hinayana, and the Sravaka, or perhaps more importantly that we should act as if it is so. And this would still be the impulse of 84000--a path for any minor nadi that peaked in you first.



Going back to the abstract of the thesis, this point that the guy suggests deviates Ratnakarasanti from Shentong is mainly the slightly-erroneous Paratantra experienced by Buddhas in Pure Mundane Consciousness:


Ratnākaraśānti’s Sāratamā sought to replace his teacher’s Yogācāra-Mādhyamika framework with a causal explanation of Prajñāpāramitā through redefining the term Prajñāpāramitā as the path to awakening, rather than its goal. By unpacking that causal explanation in light of his broader system, the thesis demonstrates the way that Ratnākaraśānti’s own version of Nirākāravādin-Yogācāra-Mādhyamika refutes cognitive images (ākāra) as unreal ultimately, but claims they are still perceived by buddhas out of compassion. This conclusion debunks the long-standing theory that Ratnākaraśānti was an Indian proponent of the controversial Tibetan gZhan-stong despite later gZhan-stong propon-ents’ attempts to claim him as their own.


Again I am not yet sure that either Taranatha or H. H. Rangjung Dorje even addressed this point. But so far they seem to be saying that Paratantra still has a minor existence even when Parikalpita is purified.

I am not sure this one point would constitute a different school.

I do not know if it is in the Sutras or Tantras or if it was just the logical conclusion from heavily examining the Three Natures.

When he says that Prajnaparamita is accessible as the Path, this is about the same as Ekayana, rather than positioning Buddhahood as an inconceivable goal, it is Bodhisattvahood in the present moment.

That is perhaps a much bigger "change of schools" from other presentations, versus what he calls trivial or needless quarrels within the branches that are practicing Prajnaparamita.

If the minor point is about what a Buddha "is", and, we are really more interested in "how he got there", then Ratnakarasanti is probably more relevant than he is a "non-proponent" or would have opposed Dolpopa, etc.

Because we do accept Svasamvedana and the value of Complete Manifest Buddha, this, at least, prevents the error of permanent dissolution into completely-still nirvana, and since that makes an Image, it would seem to require Paratantra, which is described generally as Luminosity and non-local realization of Suchness when done properly, which again is much like the tantric Second Void.

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
Why does it mention Persian kings?

I do not know why.

I got that tidbit a couple years ago just trying to get any general information about MMK, and I think it came from a guy who was just looking for history and found it there.

Are these adjectival, in that they build a concept of a goddess that is like each of these, or is it that she is all of these or the power which projects each?

I think that one may be like a 108 Names, since, unquestionably, Bhrkuti is a Nirmanakaya of Pandaravasini.

Wisdom Library seems to think names like Sutara and Nati are each audience members.

The translation says:

He [Sakyamuni] dwelt with these and with other vidyārājas, headed by Abjoṣṇīṣa, who had attained the samādhis arising from the infinite accomplishment, the Cloud of Dharma, and who were surrounded by many hundreds of thousands of millions of vidyās and many vidyārājñīs created through the form-samādhi of the lord of the world. These vidyārājñīs were...

Tara, Bhrkuti, etc.

These and other vidyārājñīs, headed by Parṇaśavarī, Jāṅgulī, and Mānasī, whose accomplishment is limitless, who have the nature of the space of the sphere of phenomena, and whose mental states arise due to the presence of the bodhisattva conduct and marvels‍—the dūtas and dūtīs, ceṭas and ceṭīs, kiṃkaras and kiṃkarīs, yakṣas and yakṣiṇīs, rākṣasas and rākṣasīs, and piśācas and piśācīs who have taken the samaya vows of the Lotus family and perform the mantra practice‍—also dwelt in the gods’ realm of the Pure Abode inhabited by pure beings. Staying there, they remained wholly preoccupied with acts of worship of Lord Śākyamuni.


So, no, it is not a rosary as such, they are a "they".

Vajrapani summons his own retinue, which includes Vajrabhrkuti, Vajrashrnkhala, etc.

Lotus Sutra is considered still Mahayana, though, isn't it?

Yes, Lotus or Saddharmapundarika, Sat Dharma White Lotus.

Thought to have been completed ca. 150.

According to Wiki:

This Lotus Sūtra is known for its extensive instruction on the concept and usage of skillful means – (Sanskrit: upāya, Japanese: hōben), the seventh paramita or perfection of a Bodhisattva – mostly in the form of parables. The many 'skillful' or 'expedient' means and the "three vehicles" are revealed to all be part of the One Vehicle (Ekayāna), which is also the Bodhisattva path. This is also one of the first sutras to use the term Mahāyāna, or "Great Vehicle".

The One Vehicle doctrine defines the enlightenment of a Buddha (anuttara samyak sambhodi) as the ultimative goal and the sutra predicts that all those who hear the Dharma will eventually achieve this goal.

Although the term buddha-nature (buddhadhatu) is not mentioned once in the Lotus Sutra, Japanese scholars Hajime Nakamura and Akira Hirakawa suggest that the concept is implicitly present in the text. Vasubandhu (fl. 4th to 5th century CE), an influential scholar monk from Ghandara, interpreted the Lotus Sutra as a teaching of buddha-nature and later commentaries tended to adopt this view.

Another key concept introduced by the Lotus Sūtra is the idea of the eternal Buddha, who achieved enlightenment innumerable eons ago, but remains in the world to help teach beings the Dharma time and again. The life span of this primordial Buddha is beyond imagination, his biography and his apparent death are portrayed as skillful means to teach sentient beings.

Crucially, not only are there multiple Buddhas in this view, but an infinite stream of Buddhas extending infinitely in space in the ten directions and through unquantifiable eons of time.


I do not know much about it, except Dhrtarastra gives a dharani using Pisacis--Gauris including Janguli.

This is the oldest written way I have been able to track them down that I know of.

But that is a mirror of one of the Pancha Raksa being about Four Kings and the next about pisacis.

If there were 600 years between Lotus Sutra and MMK each saying "Janguli" one time, could it be that there is more to it than this scant written evidence?

Well, there might have been, considering she did not come from this book to begin with. She may not be from a book whatsoever, but, instead, entering them.

Surangama Sutra has no written record anywhere near that old, but it is the presence of Matangi which suggests it may be based on something older than it looks. In it, the Buddha also comments that the Śūraṅgama Samādhi additionally goes under several other names, specifically Prajñāpāramitā ("Perfection of Wisdom"), the Vajra Samādhi ("Diamond Samadhi"), the Siṃhanāda Samādhi ("Lion's Roar Samādhi"), and the Buddhasvabhāva ("Buddha-nature").

Here, you have Lion's Roar, whereas the highest class of Samadhi is called Lion's Sport.

On a Sutra basis, Parasol is fist-in-glove with Prajnaparamita.

Does Lotus Sutra have a Buddha Svabhava?

[Old Student]

Now among the Kirats, it does seem fair to say there was an Ugra Tara who took blood sacrifices, until eventually the teaching came around that it should only be symbolic, and then you are left with a similar Assamese Ugra Tara like the one we still have.

They still do blood sacrifices at Tarapith.

My feeling (still a feeling but there seems to be some Indian support for it) is that these were the blood and cemetery deities when they were in early Pala era Vajrayana, where they split between a kind of High and Low tantra, and when the Sena came in as the Buddhist world collapsed, many went into being Hindu goddesses, some with name changes. Some of the Low tantra survived, but the High tantra was more amenable to political power so it was more popular where it went from there, and there were also all the reform movements after the collapse. This guy is not totally an expert, but the gist of what he says is not completely wrong, and he espouses the kind of high and low view, with the "Siddhas" of the origins of tantra being of low caste, and Buddhist.

Dr. Suniti Bhushan Qanungo, who wrote the comprehensive 2 volume History of Chittagong, also espouses a Buddhist substrate converted over to Hinduism rather than the handed down notion that all originated from Hinduism and only ever went to Buddhism not from it. (His books are on Scribd).

It would be a question of what qualifies as tantra or cemetery.

It's more of what qualifies as old. The feeling here is that what we see for tantra or for Vajrayana now is like one of those kitch paintings that sits over the stove for years until the neighbor's kid knocks it off the wall trying to steal a cookie and you discover there's another painting underneath by a Dutch Master.

"Cemetery" could be the physical location or image thereof, but what makes it Vajrayana is to correspond to the Asta Vijnana of Yogacara. Kali is the most evident Smasana Vasini, since when I have no idea.

Cemetery is at least half of all of the original Buddhism, what makes it Tantra and eventually Vajrayana was probably shakti originally and visualization later.

On that page are all kinds of arguments; it is possible to interpret/associate Mahalakshmi as the same as Tripura Sundari, according to Devi Mandir:

That works, but leaves open what a triumvirate of shakti deities looks like before the Buddhist collapse.

Candi Path or Devi Mahatmya says Mahalakshmi is Parameswari, and has both Mahamaya and Mahavidya kicking along.

This would be the same Candi Path recited during Durgapuja?

Yes, the thing I felt was aerial, like gauze, and actually feels like stitching together stuff inside me, which, from a yoga view, feels blown apart. Pretty sure it was of a different nature than what you are doing, was sort of a painless needle pulling a bunch of handkerchiefs through.

That sounds interesting.

Matangi is the Minister of Tripura Sundari, i. e., the way Tripura speaks into the world of form, another meaning of Parrot.

My feeling that Matangi is one of the old ones is from identifying her in one of my shakings. But in a role that all of the myths ascribe to Tara.

[Old Student]

Advaya (अद्वय) refers to “non-duality”

A-dvaya is literally "non-duality".

para-sainya-pramardin

Literally,
para 'other'
sainya 'army' or 'battalion'
pramardin --> mardin 'destroyer' from marda 'to destroy'

So this is like saying the wrathful side, something is stopped or destroyed, whereas Vajra Pamo if "female deity or heroine" inherits directly from pre-Buddhist Bhutanese Shamanism.

This looks like a mixture of Sanskrit and local, or BHS (Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit). I can't find 'pamo' except as the Bhutanese meaning you have. Very interesting, in light of the 'old' Vajrayana I was talking about.

The Srivijayan kings were Vajrayana, they were benefactors at Nalanda and elsewhere. They asserted control of the Nagas as part of their coronations -- (this is why I'm mentioning it) they had to envision the Nagas as snakes with lightning bolts on their hoods. It was visiting there (Suvarnadvipa) that Atish Dipankar was initiated into Kalachakra. Rounding out the thought, when Anawrahta ordered the reforms of Buddhism in Pagan following the Buddhist Collapse, they brought in Theravada from Sri Lanka and ordered the Ari priests killed, and books burned, save four. Kalachakra was among them. That was the conversion point for Southeast Asia becoming Theravadin.

I am not sure this one point would constitute a different school.

It would depend on whether they saw it as important. The original division between Hinayana and Mahayana in terms of behavior that split them into schools that did not teach each other's path, was that naturally dead meat (not killed) was considered impure by Hinayana but not by Mahayana. Until then, your guru decided which one you would espouse based on your personality.







(as in Mahisasuramardini (female) demon destroyer, a name of Durga)

[Old Student]

These vidyārājñīs were...

Tara, Bhrkuti, etc.

Ah, okay. There's a lot of that in the Avatamsaka but since Cleary translates every name, it's impossible to see it as a list like that.

If there were 600 years between Lotus Sutra and MMK each saying "Janguli" one time, could it be that there is more to it than this scant written evidence?

Well, there might have been, considering she did not come from this book to begin with. She may not be from a book whatsoever, but, instead, entering them.

She is almost certainly from Jangula (pronounced Jongul in Bengali) Jungle.

Surangama Sutra has no written record anywhere near that old, but it is the presence of Matangi which suggests it may be based on something older than it looks. In it, the Buddha also comments that the Śūraṅgama Samādhi additionally goes under several other names, specifically Prajñāpāramitā ("Perfection of Wisdom"), the Vajra Samādhi ("Diamond Samadhi"), the Siṃhanāda Samādhi ("Lion's Roar Samādhi"), and the Buddhasvabhāva ("Buddha-nature").

Vajra Samadhi? As in Vajrapamo Samadhi maybe?

[shaberon]

I think I went over the same issue before, what might be a non-Kali early cemetery goddess.


I have got the Sutras mistaken because the Gauris spell in Lotus Sutra is in
Chapter XXI with different names. Janguli is not there.


Being a major Sutra, it was translated as early as 1884 supervised by the same Max Muller that Koothoomi says "what have you done to our philosophy".

We are able to get a note that there were slightly different formats and then adding the following:

Gauri, Kandalika, Matangi are known
from elsewhere as epithets of Durga; Pukkasi and Vrishali denote
nearly the same as Kandali and Matangi.


Vrsali is low caste, but I do not see it defined as a Yogini even in MMK.

As to the other comparison, Candali is used in Vajramrita Tantra; with the ending -ka it is Durga, and with the prefix Ucchista it is Sumukhi Matangi.

note:

Vedic caṇḍāla) a man of a certain low tribe, one of the low classes, an outcaste; grouped with others under nīcā kulā (low born clans) as caṇḍālā nesādā veṇā rathakārā pukkusā at A. I, 107=II. 85=Pug. 51. As caṇḍāla-pukkusā with the four recognized grades of society (see jāti & khattiya) at A. I, 162.—Vin. IV, 6; M. II, 152; S. V, 168 sq. (°vaṃsa).



So, just as a word, candali and pukkasi are pretty close for who knows how long.

I am not sure when "candali" may have first been applied to a person of magic or yogic ability, or been considered an entity, let alone a tantric Gauri.

As to the other, one can find attribution as some kind of presence in Nepal:


A shrine dedicated to the protectress of the Lhudrup Tsek charnel ground, Pukkasi, is built into the Jarung Kashor Stupa’s northern wall. Ganachakra feast-offerings and pujas are frequently held at this shrine. Pukkasi is also considered by locals to be Hariti or Ajima, a wild, much-feared yakshini who was reputed to devour children—until she was tamed by the Buddha and became a protector of the Dharma. The most famous shrine to Hariti in Kathmandu is located next to the Swayambhu Stupa.


In Lotus Sutra, Hariti is called a Raksasi, but after that, usually a Yakshi. In Maha Mayuri Sutra, Candali is a Raksasi 243.34.

There is a Candalini in the Tantrasara of Abhinavagupta. But there isn't anything that seems to grab the proper name as having anything to do with any cemetery or any Hindu practice before this, other than how or where it means Durga.

Caṇḍālikā (चण्डालिका).—f.

(-kā) 1. A common lute. 2. A name of the goddess Durga. 3. A plant. E. caṇḍāla, and ikan affix; or caṇḍa a demon, &c. ālī a line or troop, and kan affix; hence also caṇḍālikā.

in the German we can find:

kiṃnarī [Medinīkoṣa k. 188.] = kandarā [Hemacandra’s Anekārthasaṃgraha 4, 12.]


So she, perhaps, is a Kimnari in whatever reference that is, and, similar to the next name, Gandhari.



It has also been said that Parnasabari "is called" Pukkasi.

Pukkasi does, for whatever reason, also mean "indigo", and is usually blue.

There is a Tibetan Offering to Matrika Pukkasi of Lhudrup Tsek, which must have been written in the twentieth century.


Why exactly a name like this would be bundled with Gauri makes little sense. Gauri may be Ganga's sister, or:

1c) The wife of Virāja;1 son, Sudhāma.2

1) Vāyu-purāṇa 28. 12.
2) Brahmāṇḍa-purāṇa II. 11. 14.


or:

Gauri (गौरि, “the fair one”):—Another name for Vāruṇī, the elder of two wifes of Varuṇa, who is the presiding deity of the invisible world and represents the inner reality of things. Vāruṇī is known as the Goddess of liquor. She is also known as Gauri.

or:

Gaurī (गौरी): Gaurī or Dākshāyani is the Goddess of marital felicity and longevity; she is worshipped particularly by ladies to seek the long life of their husbands. An aspect of Devi, Dākshāyani is the consort of Shiva.

or others which all have to do with brilliant, fair, melodious, etc., until you get to Buddhism and then she and they are violent.

It seems to have no precursor or any corresponding meaning. Gandhari arguably does since she cursed Krishna and is thereby more or less personally responsible for the Kali Yug.



The Gauris are a rather strange group. Arguably it has Durga and Parvati in Pisaci form. Again to say it means an evil mind which drains life force from others is a good idea, because, to us, it means we are that mind killing everything around us and we are trying to flip the polarity there.

Nepal has Eight Ajimas in the claim that Newar society was originally matriarchal, and these were the most respected deities then.

Ajima means "Grandmother mother" and connotes one's female ancestors, or, at least those of a Newar subject to Shakta.


There is a Hindu reflection of Pukkasi:

The Saiva Mahaganapatividya includes a long mantra invoking Ucchusma and the female consorts of Canda (Candali), Matanga (Matangi), and the goddesses Pukkasi and Camundi.

This is completely current:

Initiation in Kadi Panchadashi Vidya along with Sri Bala Sundari & Sri Maha Ganapati Vidya ..
After initiation, 9 levels of practice in Sri Vidya Mantra Sadhana, Mudra Vidhi, Sri Yantra Puja, and Pancha Makara Sadhana will be taught gradually in sequence. Initiation will be given in Kaula path in Kashmir Krama lineage of Tripurasundari which was carried by likes of Sri Abhinavagupta, writer of Tantraloka .



Much like Buddhist Vajrasattva, Mahaganapati is a Mahavidya that must be done before other Vidyas. In one version, his consort is Siddhalakshmi.


Pukkasi mantra in Chakrasamvara.



According to myth, Hārītī was originally a rākṣasī of Rajgir at the same time that Gautama Buddha also lived there.

Because she is in Lotus Sutra, she is revered in Japan, and her figurine was found at Peiping.

First century Buddhist Gandharan Hariti with Hamsa--Goose at The Met:










It has been argued that when Buddhism reached Gandahar or Bactria, it promoted this converted Hariti, who was still considered an ogress there.

Near the end of a long Hariti slide show, she is called Abhirati, which is Akshobhya's Pure Land. It also has a very old Yakshi Asvamukhi.

I just see her in Twenty-one in the list of Raksasis including Kesini, Acala, and Kunti, who is actually considered the chieftess. However it says "Hariti with her children" so the Sutra knows who she is.

That one protects your head by making an enemy's head explode into seven pieces.

At the age of this Sutra, you already have the principle of converted Raksasis, and if so that is because Buddha did it. Given the location, it is perhaps possible to say that Hariti "at home" was not affected, but it was her local aspects, Ajima and Pukkasi.


My memory was half right, there is a version with more chapters which tells us Heavenly King Upholder of the Nation, a leader of Gandharvas, pronounces the following spell, a protection dharani:

agane gane ghori gandhari chandali matangi janguli vrunasi agasti.

Heavenly King Upholder of the Nation is actually Dhritarashtra. According to the Kumarajiva translation of the Lotus Sutra, it is Dhritarashtra who offers dharanis in chapter twenty-six for the benefit of the teachers of the Lotus Sutra. So he is the main spell caster there. In Mahabharata, he and Gandhari are the parents of a hundred Kauravas. And he is generally considered the leader of Gandharvas.


In that version, Janguli over-wrote Pukkasi.

This is to say it is a Nama Mantra where probably "agane gane" are the only words not names.

The Pukkasi prayer says she was tamed by Heruka and that she is a Vajrayogini and Yumchen ma and has many forms, a retinue of thousands, and is fit for Bali, Tsok, and Inner Offering.

Pukkasi and Hariti both continue in the tantras but in different ways. And the Nyingma Gauris are almost the same as Dakini Jala's, except they have changed one to Smasani (Sarma changes two, to Sabari and Dombi). So Pukkasi is present in that litany of Cemeteries which explains itself:


བདག་མེད་རྡོ་རྗེ་ཧེ་རུ་ཀས། །

dakmé dorjé heruké

When the heruka of the view of selflessness

གཟུང་འཛིན་རུ་ཏྲ་བསྒྲལ་བའི་ཚེ། །

zungdzin rudra dralwé tsé

Liberated the rudra of duality

ཚོགས་བརྒྱད་དག་པའི་དུར་ཁྲོད་བྱུང་། །

tsok gyé dakpé durtrö jung

The eight pure consciousnesses arose as charnel grounds.



I am not aware that there is any kind of a written suggestion anything like this prior to Lotus Sutra, and we are left with something like:

Buddha--Hariti--Sutra

Heruka--Pukkasi--Tantra

And it is hard to say about the Newari Ajima or Bhutanese Pamo.

[Old Student]

As to the other comparison, Candali is used in Vajramrita Tantra; with the ending -ka it is Durga, and with the prefix Ucchista it is Sumukhi Matangi.

note:

Vedic caṇḍāla) a man of a certain low tribe, one of the low classes, an outcaste; grouped with others under nīcā kulā (low born clans) as caṇḍālā nesādā veṇā rathakārā pukkusā at A. I, 107=II. 85=Pug. 51. As caṇḍāla-pukkusā with the four recognized grades of society (see jāti & khattiya) at A. I, 162.—Vin. IV, 6; M. II, 152; S. V, 168 sq. (°vaṃsa).

So, just as a word, candali and pukkasi are pretty close for who knows how long.

I am not sure when "candali" may have first been applied to a person of magic or yogic ability, or been considered an entity, let alone a tantric Gauri.

Several things to note:

1) The difference (technical) between candali and candalika is that the former is a noun and the latter an adjective which may be used as a noun (see below quote, where they define 'Chandalika' as 'The Wretched' using an English adjective as a noun identically.

2) Candalika is also the word used for a woman who renounces society and lives in hermitage. That in itself, if some of those women were tantrikas as well, may have given rise to the notion of a candalika having magical powers, cf. the number of European stories as well about female hermits being 'witches' who cast spells.

In Chandalika, Tagore interfaces Love's manifold forms creating a conflict verging on violence. The characters' names - Prakriti, Mother and Ananda - are unmistakable symbols unraveling the action of the play. Prakriti (lit. 'Nature,' 'innate human nature') catalyzes the conflict. In Vedic cosmology Prakriti is the female principle (Purusha being the male), one of the two elements of life. Mother, with her power of casting spell, is the primordial Earth. Appropriately, she is called Maya ('Illusion') in the Bengali version of the play. She is "matter" overpowering the "spirit" personified by monk Ananda ('Bliss,' 'Joy') who was also a close disciple of the historical Buddha. Ananda is also a component of the Vedic cosmic principle, Satchitananda (the Absolute): Sat (Truth) Chit (Consciousness), Ananda (Bliss). The conflict between the two spells - material and spiritual--and Prakriti's resultant remorse at the end of the play aptly underscores the literal meaning of the title "Chandalika" (lit. 'The wretched,' also a term for the lowly untouchables.)

Not sure I can agree with one of the derivations -- I looked and candala as a root is different than canda (which is fierce or violent), candalika comes from candala or candali, but have trouble seeing it come from canda or candi. The lute is yet another of the sitar like instruments, and probably accounts for the connection to the kinnara.

I do remember you going extensively into the Gauri. This does seem like a 'lead' to me, and one also wonders if they had any patronage to the Pala-era city of Gaura.

Janguli is kind of a given. She disappears when the Pala are overthrown, and the same locales that worshiped her begin worshiping Manasa.

It has been argued that when Buddhism reached Gandahar or Bactria, it promoted this converted Hariti, who was still considered an ogress there.

This is because she was already in Bactria probably, being Persian and Greco/Roman in origin (or more probably Bactrian). She archaeologically comes to Buddhism via the Kushan, whose art and artifacts are frequently labeled Gandharan because of Purushpur, which is close to Gandhara but was Kushan during Kanishka (in fact was called Kanishkapur then).

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
They still do blood sacrifices at Tarapith.

Yes, probably still in Nepal too. Not everybody agreed to a symbolic version.

with the "Siddhas" of the origins of tantra being of low caste, and Buddhist.

Many were, others were not. Yes I think that is part of the deal, from a spiritual perspective none are excluded due to caste. Buddha's personal objection to Hindu practices was mainly over Karma Kanda, the hundred of routines and acts of ritual cleanliness one is supposed to do, constantly, I suppose.

...a Buddhist substrate converted over to Hinduism rather than the handed down notion that all originated from Hinduism and only ever went to Buddhism not from it.

Probably a cross-current. Even so, there is the claim that the good and true parts of Hinduism were delivered by Manjushri.

I don't know if he really did or didn't, but I think we could say there are aspects of Buddhist practice which are not present in Hinduism. Then perhaps more likely that at least a bit of Hinduism is a copy, such as Tara crowned by Akshobhya, even if those were originally Hindu terms, the combination and its meaning is Buddhist.

It's more of what qualifies as old. The feeling here is that what we see for tantra or for Vajrayana now is like one of those kitch paintings that sits over the stove for years until the neighbor's kid knocks it off the wall trying to steal a cookie and you discover there's another painting underneath by a Dutch Master.

Haha, that's...oddly similar to things that actually happen.

Kali is such a widespread name there is almost no way to track it, but, one of the definitions tells us:

Although sometimes presented as dark and violent, her earliest incarnation as a figure of annihilation of evil forces still has some influence.

In other words, it was just Durga or Candi "related to Time".


Cemetery, per se, is nothing new:

Śmaśāna (श्मशान) is the name of the ‘burial mound’ in which the bones of the dead man were laid to rest (cf. Anagniidagdha). It is mentioned in the Atharvaveda, and often later.

Atharva Veda may be the oldest source of weird things.


But if we look for sources of it being someone or something to do:

Śmaśāna (श्मशान) refers to one who “resides in the cremation ground”, and is used by Satī to describe Śiva, according to the Śivapurāṇa 2.2.29.

Sounds old, claims to come from a 100,00+ verse original, and attempts to trace it to the tenth century do not withstand carbon dating.

There is Tumburu with Matrikas in Yoga Vasistha, evidently by Valmiki, which would make it rather old, as an attribution, as it can only be said the author was Vasistha. It involves Rama, in fact is set prior to the Ramayana events, probably has Upanishadic inspiration, but "the surviving text mentions Vijnanavada and Madhyamika schools of Buddhism by name, suggesting that the corresponding sections were composed after those schools were established, or about 5th-century."

Cemetery is at least half of all of the original Buddhism, what makes it Tantra and eventually Vajrayana was probably shakti originally and visualization later.

I am unaware of how it takes place in original or Pali canon Buddhism.

Asta Vijnana is part of the Mahayana Sutras, ca. year 300.

According to Gareth Sparham,

The ālaya-vijñāna doctrine arose on the Indian subcontinent about one thousand years before Tsong kha pa. It gained its place in a distinctly Yogācāra system over a period of some three hundred years stretching from 100 to 400 C.E., culminating in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, a short text by Asaṅga (circa 350), setting out a systematic presentation of the ālaya-vijñāna doctrine developed over the previous centuries. It is the doctrine found in this text in particular that Tsong kha pa, in his Ocean of Eloquence, treats as having been revealed in toto by the Buddha and transmitted to suffering humanity through the Yogācāra founding saints (Tib. shing rta srol byed): Maitreya[-nātha], Asaṅga, and Vasubandhu.

Six consciousnesses and Klesha or karmic tendencies are in the Pali:

The Theravāda theory of the bhavaṅga may also be a forerunner of the ālāyavijñana theory. Vasubandhu cites the bhavaṅgavijñāna of the Sinhalese school (Tāmraparṇīyanikāya) as a forerunner of the ālāyavijñāna.

This would be the same Candi Path recited during Durgapuja?

Yes, same one, says Mahalakshmi is behind them all, with Mahasarasvati and Mahakali in her trinity.

I doubt they mention that at Navadurga, etc., but that is what it says. And this added part was "probably" fifth or sixth century.

My feeling that Matangi is one of the old ones is from identifying her in one of my shakings. But in a role that all of the myths ascribe to Tara.

They are pretty similar, and Matangi has several forms, but none of them are Ghoras, she may be low-class but yet is Raja Rajeshwari, which some claim is Kali.

Matangi is often named as the ninth Mahavidya. A list contained within the prose of the Mundamala equates Vishnu's ten avatars with the ten Mahavidyas. The Buddha is equated to Matangi.

There is a pretty strong tendency to call Buddha an avatar of Visnu, which is not accepted by any Buddhists that I know of, and we can only suggest the ninth was Mohini.

Mataṅga (मतङ्ग).—A preceptor. He was the guru of Śabarī. (Araṇya Kāṇḍa, Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa)

A son of Matanga, and a sage; his wife Siddhimatī gave birth to Laghuśyāmā or Mātaṅgī.

He was a Brahmin but son of a candala.

It is the same one as in Buddhism, but here, we might ask again if "Buddhist Ramayana" refers to the historical epoch, wheras original Ramayana was in Treta Yuga:

Matanga. The Bodhisatta born as a candala. See the Matanga Jataka.

2. Matanga. A Pacceka Buddha (M.iii.70; ApA.i.107). He was the last of the Pacceka Buddhas and lived near Rajagaha. At the last birth of the Bodhisatta the devas, on their way to do him honour, saw Matanga and told him, “Sir, the Buddha has appeared in the world.” Matanga heard this as he was issuing from a trance, and, going to Mount Mahapapata where Pacceka Buddhas die, he passed away.


I view Ramayana as cyclic, one occurence at a million or so years of age, then one around 5,000 B. C. E., and then again shortly before Buddha.

Without necessarily agreeing to that, we could say, yes, Matanga and Matangi are in the Jataka Tales, not as inventions, but as something already known.

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
I can't find 'pamo' except as the Bhutanese meaning you have. Very interesting, in light of the 'old' Vajrayana I was talking about.

Yes, sounds close. Usually this is translated as Pig Head Samadhi, because Vajravarahi is a Pamo, and she is retrofitted by interpretation.

It would depend on whether they saw it as important. The original division between Hinayana and Mahayana in terms of behavior that split them into schools that did not teach each other's path, was that naturally dead meat (not killed) was considered impure by Hinayana but not by Mahayana. Until then, your guru decided which one you would espouse based on your personality.

Bhutan has this problem to this day, they cannot fish their own rivers, so Indians do it and bring the caught fish back across the border.

In glancing through Taranatha and H. H. Rangjung Dorje, I have not yet found that they are even aware of the point about Buddha operating under "slight error" because Paratantra never really leaves the objective world. They may talk around it and miss by simply claiming Buddha to be perfect, but, unless they specifically saw Ratnakarasanti's work, there is no way they could be aware of such a question. And so if he was hardly carried forward in Tibet, they probably did not.

It is, I suppose, important to the Geluks that one not accept Ekayana? The counter-point would be if they were just power-grabbing for royal support, they said whatever they had to, and swept Jonang mostly to Mongolia.

Both Ratnakarasanti and the Shentongs maintain that Yogacara and Madhyamika are mostly correct, with certain slight errors, which is a needless argument, to which they place a bridge.

Anything that says the mind constantly has images, is incorrect, and anything that would teach direct entry into a permanent imageless state is not Buddhism. I think it is important that both are provisionally true, and, furthermore, Ekayana is the most important thing of all. Yes, it is also a value judgement, because the definition of "true" is not really a "fact", so much as something that is useful and reliable and of enduring moral quality.

My understanding of "Hinayana" is that it is individual, whereas "Mahayana" really rebukes the Pratyeka Buddha utterly. As to whether that started over a piece of meat, maybe so.

It is probably still true that a traditional Guru assigns most of your practices, but, from having scanned the material, there is such a thing as a Jewel Candidate, i. e. that one who basically just has an interest in samadhi, and since we have so many sources about that now, many of us are. And so I think we are in a different playing field from the times when "there was no one to understand it"...what would happen if I go to Seattle and tell the elders "I am versed in Vajra Tara as well as the philosophy of her author, Ratnakarasanti"?

They might check me out as if I was one of those westerners trying to project "Kundalini Yoga" or "Jesus" all over everything, and, when that fails to happen, they might look at it favorably.

No one in the medieval era could have done that.

[shaberon]

Posted by Old Student (here)
Not sure I can agree with one of the derivations -- I looked and candala as a root is different than canda (which is fierce or violent), candalika comes from candala or candali, but have trouble seeing it come from canda or candi. The lute is yet another of the sitar like instruments, and probably accounts for the connection to the kinnara.

I might tend to agree with you more than Tagore on this.

However, in the "word play" of sadhanas, it is also acceptable as Canda plus Ali, giving you something like Wrathful Vowels.

I misrepresented Matangi, which is really spelled Ucchista Candalini.

As far as it all being epithets of Prakriti, I hope that is sound, since, in terms of age, we can say we are doing a "modified Samkhya", which is probably the first recording of any yoga doctrine.

I do remember you going extensively into the Gauri. This does seem like a 'lead' to me, and one also wonders if they had any patronage to the Pala-era city of Gaura.

At one point in time, I was confused, and thought it just meant "the Mamos", but that was probably from excessive Tibetan headbanging. The proper translation is Kyeurim or Kye rim "Generation Stage".

Gauris are a ring-pass-not in any Buddhist tantra, they are the Cemetery Goddesses, except it is a major conversion to inner experience, i. e. if someone becomes sensitive to them, you are going to know it. If it is a concept or a Kriya deity, it is definitely not them.

Because Gauri is in an ancient Pisaci mantra, this is the class or form of being that they are. Parnasabari is not usually counted as a Gauri, but Sabari is. So, there are some Pisacis which can act as Yidams, e. g. Parnasabari and Janguli, whereas the Pisacis called Gauris are Grounds or the components of one's own-being. The function of Pisaci is crucial and I bet a lot of people already understand it, if put to them in simple English terms. Sort of like many might agree there is such a thing as Prana, although this does not make them Adepts in the daily use of it.

This is because she was already in Bactria probably, being Persian and Greco/Roman in origin (or more probably Bactrian). She archaeologically comes to Buddhism via the Kushan, whose art and artifacts are frequently labeled Gandharan because of Purushpur, which is close to Gandhara but was Kushan during Kanishka (in fact was called Kanishkapur then).

I am glad someone can mentally track some of the details like this.

Yes Hariti is not likely Indian in origin, but, probably is named from a common Avestan and Indic root, "har", which perhaps helps her assimilate better than "Tyche" as some have suggested.

In terms of sadhanas, she has to do with the domain of Kubera and the Yakshas, so, she is tangential to Vasudhara.

Pukkasi is called a Gauri and is revered in close to the same terms as Ekajati and the Wrathful Reflex of Akasagarbha Bodhisattva.

So if you understand this balance of the Queen of Space and her Mamo hordes, it is the same principle with any Gauris. Do it right and you're fine, if not, bad things will happen very quickly, like wildfire.


From the Dakini Jala Gauris, only a few are directly cemetery-related, such as Pukkasi and Vetali, and so it is this with the roughly-contemporaneous STTS, ca. 6th century which belts out all things Cemetery and Mahesvara--Rudra, which is why the cemeteries are said to be sacred, his severed pieces.

There could have been cemetery yoga way before this, but, that seems like it was a new teaching about making violent Shiva into his own Pithas.

Then, Raudra Krama makes sense, oh, "I am reversing my prana in some fiery way that exposes anything that may just be in seed form in my subconscious...and it will pass through some dead things which are actually part of myself, which, being burned, begins Generation Stage, called Gauris".

This is around the same time Ajanta was built and Hariti is noticeable there.

Since Dakini Jala seems to be more of a compilation of existing practices, rather than the book that started it all, and there is, at the very least, a foreshadowing in Lotus Sutra, and, Ajima must be older than that, there is strong indication of a trend that just kept getting more refined.

What perhaps is even more predominant in Herukabhidhana is Vama Chara, the whole section about finding and identifying kinds of women keeps saying you are doing some Vama stuff. In some places, some of the "five Ms" is literal, but actually the meat we are talking about exists in your mind. It seems to me when it says women it means either or both. One can actually get yoga from a sex act, but, if I wanted to cripple my subtle body, I would give it alcohol. I would probably try an entheogenic Soma, otherwise, if I used a real one, it would be totally fake.


The reason I admire Dakini Jala is not because it was Chakrasamvara before that name was used, but it actually is supposed to be about Moods and the way it portrays Gauris is incredibly similar to this.

It is different from the impression I get from Tibetan materials saying Heruka means "blood drinker"...well it does not exactly say this in most of what I have seen, it has more to do with cause and effect or Hetu Phala and is validly the name of Yoga of the entire Generation Stage. All of their recorded Gauris that I have seen are completely violent, if not intended as the most graphic forms conceivable.

Then, I am told Mahalakshmi is "behind this" or is Parameswari to Heruka who is Parameswara, reinforced by Mahamaya being called...Mahamaya...which turns out to be true in the commentaries.

Together with that, Moods are significant to Picuva Marici and other Yidams and the way Vajra Rosary works. This seems to be something else that did not much carry forward in Tibet, until, in modern times, it may have gotten a few peoples' attention.

Whether there was a Saivite Heruka first, I am not sure, but there probably was a word heruka:

4) [plural] Name of a class of heretics, [cf. Lexicographers, esp. such as amarasiṃha, halāyudha, hemacandra, etc.]

5) Herukā (हेरुका):—[from heruka] f. a species of plant, [Atharva-veda Paddh.]


And if it was a "word", I can, so to speak, convert "word" to whatever I want, especially by breaking it into syllables. There are, I believe, four ways of interpreting words, only one of which is the dictionary definition, syllables and legends being two more.

"I" am not any good at converting "words", so, I rely on the testimony of Tilo and others who used them before me and showed us their stability and effectiveness.


The other aspect is there was a Peaceful Cemetery, Sitabani, which is regarded as an important tantric dissemination center, such as to Garab Dorje. I do not even know any names of the other peaceful ones, but, from what I can tell, this was probably the most important one of them all, almost like an outdoor Nalanda.

[Old Student]

Many were, others were not. Yes I think that is part of the deal, from a spiritual perspective none are excluded due to caste.

The point, though, is that the Siddha tradition gave religious authority to those who could attain some communion in the shakti sense. The Keeneys and other anthropologists have been through this one quite a bit. If the method of becoming spiritually powerful is available to all and it is individual predilection that decides who rises to the top, this is incompatible with worldly power. When a religion becomes worldly powerful, there are forces within it that prefer a dogmatic approach where if you check all the boxes you become the head priest, because otherwise people from the 'out' group can just as easily inherit the power as those they believe 'deserve' it. Shakti and tantra (using them as stand-ins for the religion that has direct encounters with spiritual power and visions) are never permanently compatible with secular power.

Kali is such a widespread name there is almost no way to track it, but, one of the definitions tells us:

Although sometimes presented as dark and violent, her earliest incarnation as a figure of annihilation of evil forces still has some influence.

In other words, it was just Durga or Candi "related to Time".

Interesting.

Śmaśāna (श्मशान) is the name of the ‘burial mound’ in which the bones of the dead man were laid to rest (cf. Anagniidagdha). It is mentioned in the Atharvaveda, and often later.

Atharva Veda may be the oldest source of weird things.


But if we look for sources of it being someone or something to do:

Śmaśāna (श्मशान) refers to one who “resides in the cremation ground”, and is used by Satī to describe Śiva, according to the Śivapurāṇa 2.2.29.

This is also a thread worth pulling. Current practice throughout the Buddhist world and especially in India, not just for Buddhists, is cremation. But when did it become mandatory? Certainly, in Tibet, the original practice was so-called sky burial (similar to the Parsees use of the Towers of Silence). One can tell because it's still practiced in places and because they were known as "cannibals" in early texts describing them from the outside. So were the Yenesei Kyrgyz, for the same reason.

It would seem this was once the practice in at least Eastern India at one point. Buddhists from the Vajrayana strain cremated saintly people looking for the 'pills', relics that were supposed to be powerful, left behind in the ashes. At some point, cremation became common. But look at the thangkas. A kartrika is a flaying knife. Not a necessary implement for vegetarians and people who cremate the dead. But there it is.

The ālaya-vijñāna doctrine arose on the Indian subcontinent about one thousand years before Tsong kha pa...

I'm not totally sanguine with the notion that Theravada has the antiquity its practitioners believe it does. Certainly the Southeast Asian version is completely an import from Sri Lanka by Anawrahta in a very conscious manner at about the same time that the Tibetans were importing via Atish Dipankar. As for the religion at that time in Sri Lanka, they claim a direct line from the early Hinayana schools, but it isn't at all clear. Certainly in Khotan in the 9th and 10th century, one still got a choice between Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, as documented by language learning texts found at Dunhuang.

There is a pretty strong tendency to call Buddha an avatar of Visnu, which is not accepted by any Buddhists that I know of, and we can only suggest the ninth was Mohini.

I've heard that one too. It's benign, usually. The Catholic Church canonized Kongzi (Confucius), so technically, he's Saint Confucius. Natural tendency to absorb the best of other religions (not sure Confucianism is 'the best' but the guy was okay).

Without necessarily agreeing to that, we could say, yes, Matanga and Matangi are in the Jataka Tales, not as inventions, but as something already known.

Good to know.