Best book on Tantra?

[John Zen]

Any Bums have some experience with Tantra? Even if not, have any good book recommendations?

 

The topic has sparked my interest. I'm concerned with understanding exactly what it's about. That is, what is the purpose? What are the methods? What are the outcomes of practice?

 

Namaste

 

JZ

[RongzomFan]

have any good book recommendations?

 

 

The Cakrasamvara Tantra by David B. Gray

 

By the way, do you mean real tantra or western sexual tantra?

 

As an Indian, I actually really do know what real tantra is.

Edited January 26, 2011 by alwayson

[John Zen]

What is the difference?

[RongzomFan]

What is the difference?

 

 

How are they the same? My local Hindu priests talk about tantra all the time, and they definitely don't mean anything sexual. Even academically speaking, tantra does not equal sex.

[RiverSnake]

I believe the word tantra refers to "presence" or "meditation". So tantric sex means aware or meditative sex.

 

-A book i enjoyed was Tantric Sex by Diane Richardson

 

http://www.amazon.com/Tantric-Sex-Men-Making-Meditation/dp/1594773114/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296079940&sr=1-4

[Trunk]

I'm concerned with understanding exactly what it's about. That is, what is the purpose?

The wisdom of emptiness and bliss conjoined.

The fundamental is the rooting of Emptiness and Light within the central channel (sushumna), more specifically in the "deep-centers", the bindus, where the central channel intersects the major chakras.

 

There are various methods in support of that fundamental, including breathing, deity yoga, and specific use of mantra.

 

The Cakrasamvara Tantra by David B. Gray

Interesting! Thank you!

(link added)

[Ulises]

I love these two books by Daniel Odier

http://www.danielodier.com/ENGLISH/entree_e.html

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Yoga-Spandakarika-Sacred-Origins-Tantra/dp/1594770514

 

http://www.amazon.com/Desire-Tantric-Awakening-Daniel-Odier/dp/0892818581/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296083888&sr=1-1

 

 

...and this is a gorgeous, juicy translation - a labour of love (the fruit of 40 years of intimacy with the text through experiencing it trough practice) - of one of the foundational tantras:

http://www.lorinroche.com/page13/page13.html

 

***

 

I cannot resist - a mischievous smile on my face - to put this fragment from the intro to the Spandakarika:

 

"When in 1975 I met the yogini Lalita Devi - who would become my

master and who would transmit to me the teachings of the Pratyabhijna

and Spanda of the Kashmiri Shaivism stream - I took it a step further

and grasped the impact of the Kashmiri siddhas on Tibetan Buddhism,

which, by the way, "Buddhafies" the siddhas to such a degree that

Alain Danielou would go on to write that "Tibetan Buddhism is

Shaivism in disguise."

One of the most striking examples is Saraha's

'Queen Doha', which includes the following stanzas:

 

A [saivite] yogi in whom a [pseudoexistential] pristine

awareness [allegedly imparted to him by Siva himself] has

come about, [and hence] in whom there is no fear,

will, whilst wearing the insignia of Siva [as a charm], look for

a woman born in the outskirts.

. . . Taking in her qualities he will [reciprocate by] offering his

pristine awareness,

Reverberating within the intensity of immediate experience,

and,

For the time being, he will take this pristine awareness -

heightened in its sensibility through Being's genuineness

[operating in it], approximating in flavor,

[being's nothingness replete with everything in highest

perfection] - as the Mahamudra experience.

 

Scholars with Buddhist tendencies, uncomfortable with this pas-

sage, have it follow, or replace it with, similar verses - sometimes in

parentheses, it is true - removing the allusion to Shaivism, just as they

often delete, purely and simply, all allusion to Saraha's master, who was

a Shaivite yogini.

 

It seems that in seventh- and eighth-century Kashmir, and even in

later centuries, there reigned a great freedom of spirit and that the yogis

and yoginis, when it was a matter of realizing the ultimate, hardly wor-

ried about the etiquette of the masters or about their belonging to one

group or another. The great Abhinavagupta himself had many masters,

some of whom were not Shaivite.

What I am proposing here is to rediscover this opening of mind by

presenting the texts of Ch'an, Dzogchen, and the Mahamudras -

Chinese, Tibetan, and Kashmiri - texts that only mystical experience can bring together."

Edited January 27, 2011 by Ulises

[Eric23]

Agree with Ulises on Daniel Odier. I learned a great deal from his books. He also wrote Tantric Quest, a nice intro in an easy to read format. There was a similar post in the Book sub-section and somebody recommended The Teacup and the Skullcup by Chogyam Trungpa. I'm getting a lot from it, however it's deep and probably not introduction material. He comes from a Tibetan buddhist/tantra linage.

 

It seems as I seek stillness, these teachings are starting to resonate with more ah ha moments.

[Vajrahridaya]

I love these two books by Daniel Odier

http://www.danielodier.com/ENGLISH/entree_e.html

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Yoga-Spandakarika-Sacred-Origins-Tantra/dp/1594770514

 

http://www.amazon.com/Desire-Tantric-Awakening-Daniel-Odier/dp/0892818581/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296083888&sr=1-1

 

 

...and this is a gorgeous, juicy translation - a labour of love (the fruit of 40 years of intimacy with the text through experiencing it trough practice) - of one of the foundational tantras:

http://www.lorinroche.com/page13/page13.html

 

***

 

I cannot resist - a mischievous smile on my face - to put this fragment from the intro to the Spandakarika:

 

"When in 1975 I met the yogini Lalita Devi - who would become my

master and who would transmit to me the teachings of the Pratyabhijna

and Spanda of the Kashmiri Shaivism stream - I took it a step further

and grasped the impact of the Kashmiri siddhas on Tibetan Buddhism,

which, by the way, "Buddhafies" the siddhas to such a degree that

Alain Danielou would go on to write that "Tibetan Buddhism is

Shaivism in disguise."

One of the most striking examples is Saraha's

'Queen Doha', which includes the following stanzas:

 

A [saivite] yogi in whom a [pseudoexistential] pristine

awareness [allegedly imparted to him by Siva himself] has

come about, [and hence] in whom there is no fear,

will, whilst wearing the insignia of Siva [as a charm], look for

a woman born in the outskirts.

. . . Taking in her qualities he will [reciprocate by] offering his

pristine awareness,

Reverberating within the intensity of immediate experience,

and,

For the time being, he will take this pristine awareness -

heightened in its sensibility through Being's genuineness

[operating in it], approximating in flavor,

[being's nothingness replete with everything in highest

perfection] - as the Mahamudra experience.

 

Scholars with Buddhist tendencies, uncomfortable with this pas-

sage, have it follow, or replace it with, similar verses - sometimes in

parentheses, it is true - removing the allusion to Shaivism, just as they

often delete, purely and simply, all allusion to Saraha's master, who was

a Shaivite yogini.

 

It seems that in seventh- and eighth-century Kashmir, and even in

later centuries, there reigned a great freedom of spirit and that the yogis

and yoginis, when it was a matter of realizing the ultimate, hardly wor-

ried about the etiquette of the masters or about their belonging to one

group or another. The great Abhinavagupta himself had many masters,

some of whom were not Shaivite.

What I am proposing here is to rediscover this opening of mind by

presenting the texts of Ch'an, Dzogchen, and the Mahamudras -

Chinese, Tibetan, and Kashmiri - texts that only mystical experience can bring together."

 

Vajrayana is older than Hindu Tantra and is in fact more likely the influencer on Shaivism.

 

If you actually knew anything about Vajrayana Ulisis, you would understand how far more complete of a path it is, and how it's history is far more in depth and older. Dzogchen which isn't Tantra, as well as Vajrayana which is Tantra, influenced early Shaivism. There is no way that Vajrayana is Shaivism in disguise. I used to believe as you did, thinking I was so right siting much of the same information as you do. Then I got trained by some real Vajrayana scholars and yogis that know the language of the original texts, both Sanskrit and Tibetan and got corrected, both through scholarly information and direct experience.

 

These assertions above sited by you are false. Yes, there was cross influence, but Buddhist Tantra is far more the complete influencer long before the muslim invasion via the ancient school of Nalanda, considered one of the first great universities in history. Vajrayanas depth of method and philosophy is undeniably deeper and more vast. Having been a long student of Shaivite Tantra before coming to Vajrayana, I not only speak from experience, having Shaktipat, and having read with experience the Shaivite Tantras of various lineages, I can speak with authority that the goal of Shaivite Tantra in the most subtle aspects is entirely different from the goal of Vajrayana. The cosmology is different, the view is different, due to the fact that Shaivism is Eternalistic and substantialist, believing in a supreme deity that has personal, creative omnipotence over all things and beings, not as a metaphor, but as a real and visceral fact of their spiritual philosophy conditioning the experience and outcome of the practice. Vajrayana is far more complicated in expression due to the fact of dependent origination/emptiness. Shaivism is a philosophy and condition of methods revolving around the view of independent origination/consciousness. The axioms are too unreconcilable on the fundamental basis, unless one were to see the Kaula Tantra 36 tattvas as emanating from ones personal being, yet still empty of inherent existence. But, Abhinavagupta does not say this and in fact says the opposite, that we all emanate from one supreme being that truly exists from his own side, beyond concepts, etc. The outcome being that Shaivite Tantra only leads to long lived God realms or formless bliss realms in the end. As even Siddhaloka, the heaven realm of Shaivite Tantra is also swallowed up by Shiva at the end of a cosmic eon according to Shaivite Cosmology.

 

Buddhism influenced Shaivism, not the other way around. There are tons of scriptural passages from history to support this fact. But, you should just study more in depth. It's Shaivite scholars that feel uncomfortable with the fact that Advaita Vedanta is crypto Buddhism with passages taken directly from Madhyamaka and the tantric techniques anthropologically speaking existed in and through Buddhism pryer to Hinduism, but mostly got destroyed with texts burnt by Muslim invaders with the university of Nalanda being one of the major centers of this knowledge being decimated by jealous Brahmins as well. From Wiki:

According to some Indian historians, increasing pressure was felt on Nalanda from Brahmanical society over the course of the 10th century.[28] According to historian Prakash Buddh, a Yajna a fire sacrifice performed by Hindus resulted in a great conflagration which consumed Ratnabodhi, the nine-storeyed library of Nalanda.[29] In his Social history of India, the historian Sadasivan states, "the enormous manuscript library of the University was set on fire by Trithikas (all sects of Brahmins) with the support of Jainas due to the mounting jealousy they nurtured against the great center of learning."

Hindus are constantly trying to rewrite history and push the dates of their texts back, with their tantric texts and scriptures like the Vasisthas Yoga and such texts that clearly reveal how much is stolen from Buddhism without complete understanding of what they are borrowing from. You should read the Vasisthas Yoga translated in the unabridged version by Swami Venkatesananda. It's quite revealing of the limits of Shaivite/Hindu Tantra. Though he didn't intend to reveal the limits, he did when compared to the more in depth cosmology of Vajrayana and Dzogchen. Edited January 27, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

Any Bums have some experience with Tantra? Even if not, have any good book recommendations?

 

The topic has sparked my interest. I'm concerned with understanding exactly what it's about. That is, what is the purpose? What are the methods? What are the outcomes of practice?

 

Namaste

 

JZ

 

Tantra means to weave and loom. It's a concept applied to spiritual practices in the sense of meaning to transform or weave a new state of mind through various techniques.

 

Here are my book recommendations, as far as the Buddhist view on Tantra goes.

 

Indestructible Truth

 

also... part 2

 

Secret of the Vajra World

[Ulises]

Vajrayana is older than Hindu Tantra and is in fact more likely the influencer on Shaivism.

 

If you actually knew anything about Vajrayana Ulisis, you would understand how far more complete of a path it is, and how it's history is far more in depth and older. Dzogchen which isn't Tantra, as well as Vajrayana which is Tantra, influenced early Shaivism. There is no way that Vajrayana is Shaivism in disguise. I used to believe as you did, thinking I was so right siting much of the same information as you do. Then I got trained by some real Vajrayana scholars and yogis that know the language of the original texts, both Sanskrit and Tibetan and got corrected, both through scholarly information and direct experience.

 

These assertions above sited by you are false. Yes, there was cross influence, but Buddhist Tantra is far more the complete influencer long before the muslim invasion via the ancient school of Nalanda, considered one of the first great universities in history. Vajrayanas depth of method and philosophy is undeniably deeper and more vast. Having been a long student of Shaivite Tantra before coming to Vajrayana, I not only speak from experience, having Shaktipat, and having read with experience the Shaivite Tantras of various lineages, I can speak with authority that the goal of Shaivite Tantra in the most subtle aspects is entirely different from the goal of Vajrayana. The cosmology is different, the view is different, due to the fact that Shaivism is Eternalistic and substantialist, believing in a supreme deity that has personal, creative omnipotence over all things and beings, not as a metaphor, but as a real and visceral fact of their spiritual philosophy conditioning the experience and outcome of the practice. Vajrayana is far more complicated in expression due to the fact of dependent origination/emptiness. Shaivism is a philosophy and condition of methods revolving around the view of independent origination/consciousness. The axioms are too unreconcilable on the fundamental basis, unless one were to see the Kaula Tantra 36 tattvas as emanating from ones personal being, yet still empty of inherent existence. But, Abhinavagupta does not say this and in fact says the opposite, that we all emanate from one supreme being that truly exists from his own side, beyond concepts, etc. The outcome being that Shaivite Tantra only leads to long lived God realms or formless bliss realms in the end. As even Siddhaloka, the heaven realm of Shaivite Tantra is also swallowed up by Shiva at the end of a cosmic eon according to Shaivite Cosmology.

 

Buddhism influenced Shaivism, not the other way around. There are tons of scriptural passages from history to support this fact. But, you should just study more in depth. It's Shaivite scholars that feel uncomfortable with the fact that Advaita Vedanta is crypto Buddhism with passages taken directly from Madhyamaka and the tantric techniques anthropologically speaking existed in and through Buddhism pryer to Hinduism, but mostly got destroyed with texts burnt by Muslim invaders with the university of Nalanda being one of the major centers of this knowledge being decimated by jealous Brahmins as well. From Wiki: Hindus are constantly trying to rewrite history and push the dates of their texts back, with their tantric texts and scriptures like the Vasisthas Yoga and such texts that clearly reveal how much is stolen from Buddhism without complete understanding of what they are borrowing from. You should read the Vasisthas Yoga translated in the unabridged version by Swami Venkatesananda. It's quite revealing of the limits of Shaivite/Hindu Tantra. Though he didn't intend to reveal the limits, he did when compared to the more in depth cosmology of Vajrayana and Dzogchen.

 

 

I told you I have a mischievous smile on my face...it's a pity you can't play with me...

[C T]

A practical, straightforward starter read i would recommend is "The Secret Oral Teachings" by Alexandra David-Neel (foreword by Alan Watts). It details the hows and whys of Tantra as it is transmitted from master to student in the Himalayan regions.

 

From Watts: "...yet despite the occultist flavor of its title, The Secret Oral Teachings is the most direct, no nonsense, and down-to-earth explanation on Mahayana Buddhism which has thus far been written. Specifically, it is a wonderfully lucid account of the Madhyamika school of Buddhism....

 

Man may have potentialities of all kinds for the psycho-technology of clairvoyance, telekinesis, precognition, and telepathy (not to mention epipathy, catapathy, apopathy and peripathy). Power games of this kind are not, however, the concern of Tibetan Buddhism. On the contrary, the point is to realize that by virtue of what you always are, have been, and will be, there is no need whatsoever to defend yourself or prove yourself." (Sausalito, Calif. August 1967)

[Cheshire Cat]

Tantra is a method that focus on using the power of desire (the most powerfull force in the universe because desire gave birth to the universe).

The power of desire is used to attain spiritual development and liberation through body exercise (similar to Qi-gong... but, from my point of view they are lesser refined and faster in attaining results with a little bit of risk), Mantra repetition used both to move/cultivate energy in the body and worship divinity.

Yantra is a visual technology in wich you focus on divinity (related to a specific type of prana -or qi-) and do worship.

 

What you can find in tantric practices more than in qi-gong is the God/Goddess worship methods including mantra, yantra and so on...

By these type of things, you can do magical works, healing and faster your own growth.

But you need trasmission by a living master (more than in simply body exercise transmission) because the master can connect you with the force of the God/Goddes for the tantric worship.

 

Sorry for bad english

Hope to be usefull

 

[rex]

Sorry, link to potentially copyrighted material removed which also renders this post redundant.

Edited January 27, 2011 by rex

[phore]

umaatantra.com

 

This websight has great books and videos. Santiago is one of my teachers. Tantra has many arms. Some are sexual, some are alchemical.

 

Tantra is expansion of the human personality and consciousness into "divine" personality and universal consciousness

-umaatantra websight

Edited January 27, 2011 by phore

[Ulises]

A classic

 

http://www.amazon.com/Tantric-Way-Art-Science-Ritual/dp/0500270880

[Vajrahridaya]

I told you I have a mischievous smile on my face...it's a pity you can't play with me...

 

Like the Devil? Just kidding...

 

But, misinformation is misinformation. I will correct it because I can. I know you mean well, but Buddhism doesn't have a creation myth for a reason. Buddhism is the odd one out, or in... according to us Buddhists.

 

P.S.

 

The fact remains that Tantra first appears in Buddhism, then in Hinduism, Jainism and Sikhism. So, if you want to know about original Tantric practices, psychology and philosophy that still remain pure to this day, you're going to look at Vajrayana which finds it's origins in India in around the 2nd and 3rd century and is preserved in Tibet, Bhutan, Burma and Ladakh before it's decimation in India. Buddhism was the biggest tradition of India from the time of Ashoka in the 300's B.C. until only about 1,100 to 1,200 years ago with the destruction of Nalanda University and more, first by Muslim invaders then having been weakened, destroyed even further by Brahmins, then came the proliferation of Shankaras Advaita Vedanta known by Buddhist scholars as "Crypto Buddhism" due to it's large borrowing and reformatting into a different goal all together of various Buddhist core teachings.

 

Of course there are all these people that say Tantras origins are earlier, but we can't verify this through evidence.

 

So, I will post the Vajrayana texts on Tantra as the pure forms of Tantra, all other forms being somewhat of an adulteration leading only to lesser goals of long lived god realms and formless bliss realms. The "ecstatic" experiences merely based upon attachment to a transcendent concept as evidenced in all forms of theistic tantra and shamanism, which does not include Bon as it is not Monotheistic and never has been.

Edited January 29, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Ulises]

"Buddhism is the odd one out"

I have found all kind of missionaries in my life, all of them preaching/praising their religion as "the one and only"; sorry, but I feel you are not different: the system devours the person.

 

Sufis say Sufism was the root of all systems; Shaivites, that Buddhism is Shaivism in disguise; Buddhists like you that Tantra originated in Buddhism (it's a joke, isn't it?): BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!!!!!!!

 

I'm sick of meeting religious zombi-minded people. Sick of the religious sectarism that is destroying humankind.

 

I remember how Mirra Alfassa (Sri Aurobindo's yogic partner), considered by (non-sectarian) scholars in comparative mysticism, as one of the most extraordinary mystics of our time, was shown the extreme importance of not degrading her experiences into another religion....

[C T]

.....dibble post..... dubble post?

Edited January 29, 2011 by CowTao

[C T]

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!!!!!!!

 

For clarification purposes, is that an expansion of 'Bore' or 'Boor'?

 

(clarity being a staple of spiritual insights?)

 

 

Allow me to assist, assuming its this: BORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRING!!!!!

Edited January 29, 2011 by CowTao

[Vajrahridaya]

"Buddhism is the odd one out"

I have found all kind of missionaries in my life, all of them preaching/praising their religion as "the one and only"; sorry, but I feel you are not different: the system devours the person.

 

Sufis say Sufism was the root of all systems; Shaivites, that Buddhism is Shaivism in disguise; Buddhists like you that Tantra originated in Buddhism (it's a joke, isn't it?): BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!!!!!!!

 

I'm sick of meeting religious zombi-minded people. Sick of the religious sectarism that is destroying humankind.

 

I remember how Mirra Alfassa (Sri Aurobindo's yogic partner), considered by (non-sectarian) scholars in comparative mysticism, as one of the most extraordinary mystics of our time, was shown the extreme importance of not degrading her experiences into another religion....

 

Buddhism is not a religion, except for those that cling to it as a religion. Dependent origination/emptiness is the entirety of the cosmos. Your idea of independent origination/consciousness is an all absorbing dogma that leads merely to absorption states, altered states integrated with everything and not self liberation, or liberation from the self.

 

Not to say that beings from religions of various types can't attain the same realization, but generally they don't because of their Eternalistic leanings.

 

If you haven't had the realization of dependent origination, I can understand your strong leaning and clinging to Eternalism. I used to suffer from the same bliss. I know, sounds oxymoronic... suffer from the same bliss. It's just a bliss that doesn't realize the ultimate insight and see it's own emptiness but rather clings to itself as ultimate reality, thus sewing the seed of future rebirth into whatever realm or another unconsciously. Simply because one becomes blinded by this light instead of awakened through this light.

 

You still think this light is the one all be all ultimate cause of all things, when it's merely the light of awareness passing through empty space making all things seem as one, when really all things are merely connected and impermanent, yet ongoing, which is the one truth, but not an ultimate essence, unless you want to say this one truth is an essence.

 

Language is deceptive. Because it's the same word doesn't mean it's the same meaning.

 

Awakeness is not a dogma, but it's a definite insight that finds it's most clear expression through the Buddhadharma... on Earth that is.

Edited January 29, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

I remember how Mirra Alfassa (Sri Aurobindo's yogic partner), considered by (non-sectarian) scholars in comparative mysticism, as one of the most extraordinary mystics of our time, was shown the extreme importance of not degrading her experiences into another religion....

 

Sri Aurobindo was a high level Eternalist, those that feel and think all things come from one thing and that all traditions lead to the same place because they come from the same place because all things are in essence one thing.

 

This is independent origination/consciousness, a different view leading to a different "place" than dependent origination/emptiness.

[ralis]

Buddhism is not a religion, except for those that cling to it as a religion. Dependent origination/emptiness is the entirety of the cosmos. Your idea of independent origination/consciousness is an all absorbing dogma that leads merely to absorption states, altered states integrated with everything and not self liberation, or liberation from the self.

 

Not to say that beings from religions of various types can't attain the same realization, but generally they don't because of their Eternalistic leanings.

 

If you haven't had the realization of dependent origination, I can understand your strong leaning and clinging to Eternalism. I used to suffer from the same bliss. I know, sounds oxymoronic... suffer from the same bliss. It's just a bliss that doesn't realize the ultimate insight and see it's own emptiness but rather clings to itself as ultimate reality, thus sewing the seed of future rebirth into whatever realm or another unconsciously. Simply because one becomes blinded by this light instead of awakened through this light.

 

You still think this light is the one all be all ultimate cause of all things, when it's merely the light of awareness passing through empty space making all things seem as one, when really all things are merely connected and impermanent, yet ongoing, which is the one truth, but not an ultimate essence, unless you want to say this one truth is an essence.

 

Language is deceptive. Because it's the same word doesn't mean it's the same meaning.

 

Awakeness is not a dogma, but it's a definite insight that finds it's most clear expression through the Buddhadharma... on Earth that is.

 

 

The problem with your insistence that Buddhism is not a religion and therefor claims no revelations from an ultimate divinity, is problematic. Why? By insisting that Buddhism is some ultimate holder of absolute truth, puts Buddhism in the same category as other purveyors of absolute truth. Buddhists can in no way compare what they believe to be non-religious to a religious belief system such as Islam, Hinduism or whatever. That pseudo logic does not make sense. You posit the same argument as the atheists vs. the fundamentalists. The results of which create sectarianism.

 

Given your claim to absolute truth, why do you even care what others believe? Why the insecurity of belief?

Edited January 29, 2011 by ralis

[Birch]

"Why the insecurity of belief?"

 

I reckon it's a way of providing identity for some people as well as a way of dealing with the world. So if I can consistently get you to argue with me about my beliefs, it means I must be saying something "true" - which is very reassuring.

[markern]

Vaj used to to talk and talk and talk about the superiority of budhism in every damn thread. Eventually he found that this was not entirely wholesome and started retaining his budhist superiority belief energy. But like most people practicing retention he finds that once or twice a month a realse feels natural and then he ejaculates a ton of budhist superiority writings such as now. On the whole this situation is OK and balanced as for the most part neither he nor we loose energy in endless dogma debates and we get the benefit of his vast knowledge without the religious fervour but once or twice a month release is necesarry as otherwise Vaj would eventually explode and the energy drain in is very little on the rest of us. Actually just like seminal retention when one ejaculates only once every now and then ejaculations can actually be energizing. Especially if it is done with love.

Edited January 29, 2011 by markern