The Way and the Apparent Eroticism of Tantrism

The attempt to resolve the tension that exists between the feeling of frustration and the sense of fulfilment, between the fictions about man's being and the awareness of his Being, is termed 'the Way'. It is not an inert rod lying between two points, nor is it the favouring of one side in the dilemma that constitutes the human situation, but grounded in Being it is an exercise of regaining and staying with Being. In other words, it is the actualization of intrinsic awareness, Mind-as-such (semsnyid), together with or inseparable from value-being (chos-kyi-sku). As this is not the same as the ideas we may have about it, the 'Way' is summarized in the statement:

"Free from the concepts of mandala and (gana)cakra,

Padma dkap-po explains mandala as the 'bearer' ("ten) of this or that psychic activity, ga,za-cakra (brten), manifesting itself as 'divine' forces (Iha); Karmamudrä as a woman (mo) who yields pleasure containing the seed of frustration ; and Jñãnamudrä as a woman who yields a purer, though unstable, pleasure. He goes on to say:

"By attending to these facets alone we may be able to reach the Akanistha realm, the ultimate in sensuousness, but not the absolute, because not free from concretizations, we convert (the real) into un-knowing.

Obviously, our conceptualizations and concretizations of some pleasurable experience may provide a temporary escape, but an escape into sentimentality is not the solution of man's burning problem to find himself. In the same way, an intellectually induced suspension of all mental activity is no answer; nor is the problem solved by an essentially intellectual negativism, as advocated by the Präsangikas.86 Sentimentality is compassion divorced from understanding, and the open dimension of Being divorced from all feeling becomes negativism.

Therefore Saraha said :

"He who becomes involved with openness without compassion
Will never set forth on the most excellent path.
So also by attending to compassion alone
He will stay in Samsãra, but not become free."
Against such one-sided efforts the following statement is directed :
"Do not negate, do not suspend (the mental working), do not find fault,
Do not fix (the mind on something), do not evaluate, but just let be. "87
In other words, the way is not travelled by abrogating the ability to think, by destroying the inner continuity of one's being and by introducing a division where there is none, but by preserving the unitary character of Being. Again we may quote Saraha:
"He who can combine both (compassion and openness of Being),
Stays neither in Samsära nor in NirvãQa.'
Moreover, apart from Being there is no other being that can serve as a way :
"Friend, since words falsify, give up this infatuation,
And to whatever you become attached, give that up, too.
Once you understand (the real), all turns out to be It ;
Nobody knows anything else but this."
But it is the tendency of our un-knowing to look for our Being where it cannot be. So Saraha declares:
' 'V/here it is present
There we do not see it.
Still, the doctrinaires all explain the texts

But do not understand the Buddha to be in (their) body." Karma Phrin-las-pa explains this verse as referring to the 'togetherness-awareness' that is present in and with every individual but is not recognized as such by him who is involved with his propositions. Such an individual, therefore, is unable to see Being as it is, but by looking outward he tries to understand what actually is within him. It is in his own body, speech, and mind, that the individual must understand Buddhahood to reside, though not in the manner of the body being a container, but as the representation, the embodiment of Buddhahood. Due to the fact that our concrete existence is an intricate pattern of interacting forces, not only can it be viewed from different angles, but even more so experienced on different levels, and since our individual life is our 'Way', at every step it partakes of ritual and imagery. This can be seen from the following verse by Saraha and its explanation by Karma Phrin-las-pa :

"By eating and drinking and by enjoying copulation Forever and everywhere one fills the rounds. Thereby the world beyond is reached,

And one goes away having crushed the head of infatuation under one's feet.'

Karma Phrin-las-pa's interpretation is based on the importance which the tactile sense has for the relationship between man and his outer and inner environment and their corresponding evaluation as well as on the significance of aesthetic perception. We must never forget that man is in the world in the sense that it is through his body that there is for him the corporeality of things, and the interaction between the environment and its impressions on the tactile organs or

the body-surface induces sensations of change and intensity in our physical condition. At the same time this experience of materiality and thereby of an objective reality gives way to a visual world picture which is much wider than the limitations imposed by the purely tactile experience, and this is meant by the use of the word 'beyond', which must never be understood as the impossibility of there being a world other than the one we experience. However, there are wide-spread ramifications of the tactile sense, and the corresponding world experiences interlace man with the world or nature on the one hand and with the

physiological side of his being on the other. It is this interlacing pattern with various focal points that is termed rtsa,88 which we can best translate by 'pattern', 'structure' and, in specific localizations as 'focal points of experience' . 89 Because of the importance of the tactile sense which gives us immediate contact with the world surrounding us, and because of the fact that we are embodied beings, the cognition that is most highly valued is the aesthetic one, not the one that through its association with concepts introduces the painful separation of object and subject. Togetherness and separateness can best be

illustrated by a reference to the place a work of art, particularly sculpture, has in either framework. While the conceptual framework was responsible, as far as our Western tradition is concerned, for removing the work of art from the space and time of our experience and locating it in an ideal space, thereby enabling the spectator to look at it coldly from a distance, in aesthetic perception the work of art remains alive; it calls out to be felt and touched, and each part of it is perceived as if it were for the moment all of the world, unique, desirable, perfect, not needing something other than itself in order to be

itself. In this experience there is the warmth of closeness, not the coldness of distance. Instead of disrupting the unity of Being by separating and downgrading the instinctive side, as represented by the tactile experience, from the perceptual side which then becomes over-evaluated conceptually, the Tantric 'Way' attempts to preserve this unity of sensuousness and spirituality, the latter being essentially the former's value, by clarifying the various aspects. It is in this light that Karma Phrin-las-pa gives different interpretations of the above quoted verse by Saraha

"Discussing the problem objectively: Having received the (necessary) empowerments,91 (the person) eats the meat (prepared for) the assemblage and drinks the beer (or other alcoholic beverage). Then he unites with his partner having the appropriate characteristics, by developing three ideas.92 In the act of the rubbing together of the two organs he concretely fixates and preserves the origination of the four kinds of delight in an ascending or descending manner as taught by the Guru, and thus forever fills the four focal points

in his (existential) pattern by making the (bodhicitta) move downward or by forcing it to move upward. 93 By such an experience he reaches a world-transcending Buddhahood experience. Stepping on the head of the worldly people who, not having received the empowerments, are deluded about the maturing effect and, not having received guidance, are deluded about the instruction, one crushes this delusion by (the above) non-delusive method and reaches the level of Buddhahood. "Discussing the problem in terms of a subjective experience: He who follows the Mantrayoga, eats and drinks the five kinds of nectar in (what is a mixture of)

the pure and impure; he unites the motility in (his existential) patterns with the bodhicitta and he steadies in his being the awareness of the four kinds of delight due to attending to the process of unification. Continuously attending to this experience he fills the focal points, that is, the pure in his body, with the awareness of absolute bliss. Thereby he attains a Nirvãr:la beyond this world. Stepping on the head of those who are deluded about the Mantrayãna method and crushing this delusion, he goes to a place superior to their status.

"Discussing the problem in terms of a mystical experience: 'Eating' means to know the world of appearance to be mind, through instruction in the meaning of 'memory' • 'drinking' means to know mind to be open, through instruction in the meaning of 'non-memory'; through instruction in the meaning of 'unorigination' appearance and mind meet in one flavour and become united; and through instruction in the meaning of 'transcendence',9' the self-validating intrinsic awareness rises as spontaneous joy; and by experiencing the ineffable, one forever and everywhere fills one's noetic being with original awareness, through an

instruction which is like an uninterruptedly on-going effort; through this experience he goes to the world beyond. "Discussing the problem from the viewpoint of ultimate Being: A follower of the Mahãmudrä teaching takes as his food the world of appearance rising incessantly in splendour, and has for his drink the open dimension (of Being) merging in the absoluteness of Being. By experiencing the unity and inseparability of appearance and openness of Being he is immediately aware with unsurpassable joy. Forever and everywhere making this experience in the above gradation he fills

the rounds, i.e., the world of the knowable or the whole of appearance and possibility, with a spontaneous original awareness, and by this (feeling of) unity he goes to the world beyond." This fourfold interpretation represents a growing awareness as a continuous process, in which ideas act as functions of unification rather than as separating agents. This, of course, places a different connotation on our concept of ideas which is mainly an instrument for perpetuating the gulf between subject and

object and for preventing man from penetrating to his Being which is possible only through experience. According to the above fourfold interpretation, the experience 'A' is understood by the experience 'B', since 'B' is of a higher order than 'A'. To speak, in the last analysis, of an identification of the cognizer with the cognized is another instance of 'misplaced concreteness'. What happens is the emergence of the feeling of unity. The idea as a vehicle of unification is indicated by gNyis-med Avadhütipa95 who, in commenting on the first part of Saraha's verse, explains Karma Phrin-las-pa's cryptic 'Three ideas'.

They are the idea that the body is a god, speech a mantra, and mind absolute Being. To see the body, by which the body as lived by me is meant, as a god is to appreciate it as a value in its own right ; similarly speech as mantra is not empty talk, rather it is communication which does not depend on words with their conventional meaning in usage. Lastly, mind as absolute Being is not the absolutization of subjectivism, it is rather the cognitiveness of Being-as-such which expresses itself in and through the activity of our Mind.

Throughout Tantrism reference is made to the body as lived by me, perceiving, moving, acting, and so on. Taking this reference as our clue we can say that sexuality is itself a mode of being of the person in question, and is concretely interpreted in the stream of lived experience. A human being, whether man or woman, is in this world with his or her body and the body discloses itself as meaningful in its attitudes, gestures, and actions. As an embodied being man is embodied with a certain sex, and the sexuality of the body manifests itself in a variety of manners so that it is justifiable to say that sexuality expresses a

human being's existence in the same way as his existence expresses his sexuality. Thus, if the body expresses Existence, it does so because the body actualizes it, and at the same time is its actualization. In other words, the body is not something external to my existence, but is its concrete realization and hence both 'expression' and 'the expressed'. Another point to be noted is that the body discloses itself to my experience as being mine and somehow belonging to me who 'lives' it. At the same time it is peculiarly ambiguous, and this ambiguity may be stated as follows : That body over there is simultaneously a woman

herself and not herself; her sex presents me with her, and she as embodied presents me with her sex. In the same way, this body here is simultaneously a man himself and not himself; his sex presents her with himself, and he as embodied presents her with his sex. In terms of subject and object, each individual is both subject and object, but the individual is object in a special way, both for himself, as when I speak of my body, and for others as a mere body (to be manipulated and controlled). Although human beings are male and female and although sexuality is coextensive with life, sexuality cannot be reduced to Being-

as-such, nor can the latter be reduced to sexuality. Hence sexuality is the dialectic of lived experience, in which I apprehend the other as subject or, to put it more cautiously, in which I should apprehend the other as a subject, which means to recognize the intrinsic value of the other, as indicated by the statement that in the realm of lived experience men and women are gods and goddesses.96 The failure to grasp the meaning of 'Being', of 'body'and 'sexuality' has resulted in a thorough misunderstanding of Buddhist Tantrism. This is mainly due to the difference of 'climate' contributing to the development of ideas.

Western civilization derives from the early Mediterranean slave societies with their attendant postulate of a celestial lawgiver who 'legislates' for both human beings and non-human natural phenomena, and who 'owns' the human beings as his chattels, just as a shepherd owns his flock and takes up an active attitude of command. Pastoral dominance, on the one hand, and among seafaring people, the unquestioning obedience to the one in command of a ship, on the other, greatly assisted the development of a 'dominance' psychology which attempts to rationalize the crave for power, domination, and control. It aims not

only at turning the other into an object to be used or misused at will, but also at making the other feel as an object in the eyes of the master or postulated super-power. This is, of course, impossible because an object, a slave, cannot give the recognition sought for by the master as only a subject can do so, and it is precisely the individual's subject character that the master cannot tolerate and that he attempts to deny. Inasmuch as Hindu Tantrism has been deeply influenced by the dominance psychology of the Sämkhya system, professing a dualism of puruša who is male, and of prakrti who is female and who dances or stops

dancing at the bidding of the Lord or purz«a, this purely Hinduistic power mentality, so similar to the Western dominance psychology, was generalized and applied to all forms of Tantrism by writers who did not see or, due to their being steeped so much in dominance psychology, could not understand that the desire to realize Being is not the same as the craving for power. Hence Tantrism was equated with 'power'. And since purusa and prakrti involved a sexual symbolism, which was concretized in the sense that the sexual act was the proof of one's masculinity, the paranoid Western conception about Tantrism resulted:

it is the paranoid who is obsessed with his sexual potency and attempts to compel the object to come towards him (the prakrti dances at the bidding of the He tries to make the other (the woman) responsible for the action of satisfying his needs. At the same time he identifies himself with his sexuality, and this identification becomes the basis for his idea of power, preferably of 'omnipotence'. It is a fact that any dominance psychology inevitably destroys the individual as subject. Its dehumanizing force was keenly felt by those brought up in the

Western world and so they turned to

THE the 'mysterious' East which was supposed to hold the key to their acquiring the powers that the Western institutions denied them. But exchange of one kind of dominance for another does not lead to the realization of Being; it remains a slave's dream of becoming a master.

There is another area in which the destruction of the individual as a living being is deeply felt, and where traditional Western religion fails and has always failed us. This is the feeling of sex, rigorously excluded from the realm of speech and thought and frowned upon in deeds. This exclusion, too, has a long history and is inextricably tied up with the contempt for and fear of the body. The official attitude has been and is in favour of continence, abstinence and asceticism having their root in fear, and while contempt might assist the official attitude, it more often has been in opposition to it, particularly in its

aspect of defiance. Libertinism did not appear under the auspices of communion and joy, but under those of arrogance and contempt. To suffer from an obsessive fear of the body is perhaps not so different from a compulsive addiction to sex, be these addicts virility-provers or seductiveness-provers. The important point to note is that in all these cases sex is confined to only one dimension, sensual pleasure and exploitation, but the aesthetic experience of joy and through it the enrichment of one's Being is missed. The use of sex as an instrument of power distorts its function. Instead of being an experience of feeling

for the partner, it becomes a manoeuvre to establish one's imaginary superiority. A man who sees himself as a sexual object will imagine himself as 'the great lover', and a woman who sees herself as a sexual object believes in the irresistibility of her sex appeal. Both may feel repelled by their body, but they are convinced of its power. Tantrism certainly is not on the side of asceticism, but it would be wrong to conclude that therefore it must of necessity advocate libertinism and that its

appeal to Western man, reared in an atmosphere hostile to women, pleasure, and life, is due to the fact that Tantrism approves of women and of sex and, by implication, can serve as the moral justification for the sex addict's compulsion. It is true, Tantrism recognizes pleasure as valuable and positive, but much more than mere pleasure-seeking is involved. It is equally true that in its Hinduistic form it combines power with pleasure which essentially is appreciation and is meant to lead to aesthetic enjoyment, and so has a positive content, unlike Christianity which advocates the impotence of man, denounces pleasure and

condemns its source, woman.97 Buddhist Tantrism dispenses with the idea of power, in which it sees a remnant of subjectivistic philosophy, and even goes beyond mere pleasure to the enjoyment of being and of enlightenment unattainable without woman. "How can enlightenment be attained in this bodily existence Without thine incessant love, o lovely young girl?' '98 Enlightenment is the name for a change in perspective, and Tantrism is the practical way of bringing about this change. It does not mean that in this change of

perspective something is seen that others cannot see, but that things and, above all, persons are seen differently. This is clearly stated by Padma dkar-po "In attending to the vision of (seeing himself as) a god (Iha) the yogi apprehends, not incorrectly, what ordinarily appears before his eyes; however, mentally he takes a firm pride in his being a god (Iha'i sku). This is termed adhisthãnayoga. In this term, adhi means 'superior', and sthãna means 'arrangement', 'accomplishment', 'adornment', hence 'to be graced'. A 'superior accomplishment' is termed 'superior feeling of reverence' from the root

To see oneself as a god is to be aware of one's existence as valuable and as good; it is not deifying one's shortcomings which are the products of a limited and selfish vision and hence negative and evil. The emotional quality of this value-perception is the 'feeling of reverence' which is not contradictory to exaltation or pride; the negative counterpart to pride is arrogance and to reverence, contempt and self-debasement. The attempt to see oneself as a god is not

yet to be enlightened, but it enfeebles the negative view one takes of oneself.100 Only by taking a positive view of oneself can one truly be. The experience of really being is not only felt as blissful but is also an identity-experience. Here man has found himself and is no longer a 'thing-of-and-inthe-world'. In order to find himself man needs the 'other' who is no intellectual abstraction, but part of himself, needed in order to be himself. Sahajayoginï Cintã, speaking of the state when one spontaneously is oneself, says :101

"Here, in spontaneity which is non-dual and naturally pure, one's Being (bdag-nyid), in order that one may understand one's Being, manifests itself in the shape of man and woman. ' The concrete 'other' person, for me, is whoever enters my life-world and whom I accept as one accepting me in order to accept me or her as one who is willing to accept me as one accepting myself. This complex situation of the interaction of man and woman is termed Karmamudrã and Jñänamudrã, the one referring to the

'without', the other to the 'within', each of them representing an 'encounter' that changes both partners. A. Karmamudrä—an 'outward' encounter. According to Näropa , who briefly refers to the charms of woman elaborated in Indian ornate poetry :102 "Karmamudrä means a woman with firm breasts and a rich display of hair. She is the impetus and sustaining power of pleasure in the realm of desire (Kämadhãtu).

Karma implies kissing, embracing, touching of the private parts, erection of the penis, and so on and so forth. A mudrã which is characterized by initiating these occurrences is said to set up a certain relationship. This relationship yields only a self-defeating pleasure. The term mudrä itself is used, because (such a woman) gives joy (mudam) and sexual gratification (rativ).' It is in the realm of the sex drive and in the fever of desire that, to all outward appearance, the relationship between man and woman expresses itself most

effectively. But although all drives postulate and even enforce fulfilment with reference to their objective, they cannot be evaluated as to their biological domain exclusively. Such could only be the case if man and woman were totally unaware of themselves as well as of each other. Yet each is aware of his sex, while the tendencies and features of the other sex appear 'extrajected' and give rise to a longing for the other sex. This results in a rather fanciful perception of reality, because wherever a subject establishes a rapport with an object, there will occur projections and objectivations. Projection is either

subjectrelated or object-related. In the former case, qualities of an extraject, that is, object representations which emerge in extrajection, are incorrectly imputed to an external object; in the latter case, qualities of an object remembered are incorrectly imputed to an external object. These two factors determine what one 'sees' in the other. Actually, one encounters oneself in the other who, in turn, encounters himself or herself in myself, because between subject and object, myself and the other, there exists the relationship of reactivity. The less an individual is aware of his Being and the more he is concerned with what

he believes himself to be, the more he comes under the spell of the fictions of his own making, and the more he becomes entangled in the so-called 'objective' world, where he believes that he can find what he wants and needs, the farther he is led away from himself. The dependence on the object, the woman, will not appear to him as dependence. By having intercourse with the woman and by becoming absorbed in the spell of the sex drive he may have the feeling that his insularity has been abolished and that he has been reunited with what was wanting in him. However, only an extremely fragile solution has been found. Plagued

by frustration and haunted by anxiety, he is tempted into the vicious circle of seeking all the more in the objective world around him, in order to quench the burning thirst and to still the gnawing hunger for total satisfaction. What happens may be gleaned from the 'four momentary situations' and 'four intensities of joy' in connection with the Karmamudrä. The first, 'variedness', comprises both the stimulus of the object and the attention given by the subject. Its feeling correlate is joy. The second, 'maturation' or 'elaborated

response', is the process that combines the various stimuli into a fairly coherent whole. The feeling correlate is transport. The third, 'climax', is related to the feeling of spontaneity, 'to-be-wholly-

with'. But it generally gives way to a 'break-down' and the feeling of quiescence. In more concrete terms, first a man and a woman become attracted to and interested in each other. The man then 'explores' the charms of his partner, his exploration in the end leading to intercourse. \Vith the orgasm the climax is

reached. He now believes himself to be 'existentiallv aware', but his knowledge breaks in his hands, and he has to start all over again. The climax, expected to come from outside, cannot fulfil the expectations because it is based on a postulate, and so the climax becomes man's very failure which, due to the inherent unknowing, becomes responsible for the exaggeration of sex behaviour, for nymphomania in the female and satvrlsrn in the male, and for the peculiar attitudes of those who have been taucy ht that sex is the most base activitv of man, all of asudden discoverinΠthat it is the most basic one and that there is nothing else.

The unmistakablv erotic lan cr uage must not deceive us. As embodied beings we use svmbols derived from the phenomenal world and from fundamental, human experience. Man's sexualitv is but one amoncr the many 'expressions' of his Beincr and of what is 'expressed' in the body which is mind as well. As a term for an impressive encounter, the Karmamudrã is more a symbol than a siffn and does not exclusively point to the woman of the physical world, but to occurrences of which the woman herself and the encounter with her are a symbol. Therefore it is not so much a matter of what one does with her, but of how it feels to be with her.

"The way of the Karmamudrä is to feel the awareness of the sixteen kinds of intensities of joy when after having properly united with her one's creative energy is released from the 'head' and descends to the tip of the 'jewel', " says Padma dkar-po, 103 who here refers to the perception of pleasure as a rhythmic and pulsatory activitv of the body. More explicit is Karma Phrin-las-pa commenting on a verse by Saraha, which according to gNyis-med Avadhütipa refers to the Karmamudrä as such. Saraha's words are:

"1Åïhere motility and intentionality are not operative And where neither sun nor moon appear, THE There, you fools, let mind relax restfully.

Having given all the instructions Saraha has gone away.'

Karma Phrin-las-pa gives various interpretations, all of them related to the sensations experienced in the body-schema :104 "Explaining this verse literally; When you have the experience (of the Karmamudrä), let the mind relax and rest there, where the motility of the concepts and the intentions of memory and perception do not operate and where the concepts (through which) one sees mind's activity symbolized by sun and moon106 like an apparition, do not enter. (With

the word 'let') Saraha addresses those who do not know (the meaning of) existential presence and, having given them all instructions, he has gone away.

"Explaining this verse in a general context; The symbol of motility indicates movement and refers to the 'seventh (emotionally predisposed, ego-centred) mind'; the symbol of intentionality indicates the intention of the 'sixth (or categorically perceptive) mind'. 106 When the concepts of subject and object deriving from these (two 'minds') are not operative and when the concretization of 'appearance' symbolized by the sun and the concretization of 'openness' symbolized by

the moon, and the addictiveness deriving from them does not occur, one relaxes in a state of selfsameness (i.e. identity-experience). "Explaining this verse as to its hidden meaning: When one experiences the way of desire107 and when motility which is the vehicle of conscious perception, and the intentionality of perception are not operative, the idea of 'object' fades away since the sun-motility to the right (of the body-schema) is not active and so does the idea of 'subject' since the moon-motility to the left (of the bodyschema) is not active. Relax then in the centre where subject and object do not

prevail. "Explaining this verse from the viewpoint of ultimate Being: When a person through the four mudrãs108 which are the specific methods in the Mantrayãna, realizes his goal, the motility of the four elementary forces (rigidity, cohesion, temperature, movement) ceases and turns into the motility of pure awareness; so also the intentionality moving in the subject-object dichotomy ceases to operate and, free from all concrete indications and concrete feelings, it becomes

the centre where internally sun and moon do not shine. Relax in this state which brings forth the three Indestructibles (of authentic being, communication, and responsiveness). With these words Saraha or (any other competent) Guru gives instruction to those who do not know the appropriate methods." Although the language is highly technical, the message is clear. The symbol of the Karmamudrä points not from the sensuous and aesthetic experience of her to

her being a physical- chemicalelectromagnetic-biological body indirectly verified by postulates, but from one factor in this aesthetic experience to another. Abstract concepts give way to emotionally moving images. In other words, the aesthetically immediate, present in the intersubjective relationship between man and woman, is not used as the springboard for arriving at postulationally perceived, indirectly verified beliefs about three-dimensional, external objects, and what the subject then can do with or to them, but is appreciated in its own right. In the case of the Karmamudrã as a stimulating situation, sexuality is a

value in the sense that it is the manifestation in determinate, transitory, and limited form of absolutely real and irreducible Being. But like all manifestations it is ambiguous; it can lead man to himself as much as it can destroy his humanity. If and to the extent that in the Karmamudrä situation the partners enjoya strong sense of affinity and harmonious complementariness, their action leads to the deepest possible experience of Being; but if and to the extent that the partners feel alienated or estranged, they will merely create an illusion that perpetuates their alienated condition. He will try to prove

himself to be the 'perfect lover' and in this attempt will be only pre-occupied with his ego image. She will try to prove herself to be the 'perfect wife' or 'love goddess' and become insensitive to her husband's feelings. Both partners who seemingly live for nothing but the sensations the THE sexual act may afford, are incapable of enjoying their partnership and merely go through the motions of being together. B. Jñänamudrä—an 'inward' encounter.

While the Karmamudrã is basically the encounter with a physical woman, which in the context of the physiological realm gives only a self-defeating pleasure (omne animal post coitum triste), the Jñãnamudrã is "the imaginary personification of the aesthetically appreciative and discriminative perceptive function, and lets one taste some fleeting bliss through appearing radiantly in concentration.' '109 More explicit is the description by Näropa:110 nanamudrä is the creation of one's own mind. She is of the nature of the Great Motherlil or other goddesses and comprises all that has been previously experienced. She is the

impetus and sustaining power of pleasure in the realm of aesthetic forms (Rüpadhãtu). The awareness (of her) is marked by reminiscences of former experiences such as smiles and enjoyments. This relationship yields satiety.' Two points have to be clarified lest they lead to a serious misunderstanding of what is meant by the Jñãnamudrä. The one is the statement that 'she' is a creation of one's mind. Somehow the word 'creation' evokes in us the idea of a product, and we tend to overlook the actual creativeness that becomes formulated

in what we prosaically call a product. Creativeness is the characteristic of mind and is its special kind of perceptiveness that can see anew and afresh and therefore lives far more in the world of the real than in the world of concepts and other stereotypes with which most people confuse the real. The other is the statement that 'she' is a personification of the aesthetically perceptive function and by nature a goddess. Personification is a term that originated in the animistic theory that attempted to 'explain' primitive conscious life according to the fallacies of AngloFrench positivism. The Jñänamudrã experience does not

wish to 'explain' anything, it records how the experience comes to a man in visible and intelligible forms. To call the function a goddess, and, by transference, to say that woman is a goddess incarnate may be poetry. But poetry does not tell lies; it means what it says, but it does not always say all that it means. Poetry, like any other art, is a special revelation of the reality whose nature is determined by an awareness of value and its appreciation. The symbolic expressions of the poet are his means of apprehending and expressing values otherwise not expressible. Their appraisal and appreciation involve the

feelings because values, unless they are arbitrarily assigned values, are not intellectually and conceptually detachable from the real. Through the goddess man gains a living vision of reality. To see in the woman a goddess is not simply a sentimentality, it rather indicates the uniqueness of such an experience and its content is inexpressible by any other category. Man and goddess are two forms or moulds in which Being expresses itself. The goddess is not merely a flight of fancy, and man is not an abject thing-in-the-world. The relationship between the two is rather like the one between the participants in a ballet. In the

interplay between man and goddess one has the feeling of how wonderfully the divine part is enacted and how real man is, but also of how unsuspecting each is of the other. When the one moves, a complementary movement is seen in the other. When man turns altogether too human, the goddess threatens him; when he unassumingly turns to her she lovingly goes near him. Then suddenly the tableau changes. The man submits to the world of the divine and the goddess displays her beauty in the world of man. The former partnership founded on expectations becomes a partnership grounded in values perceived. The goddess here becomes a

bridge between man and his Being. Such a vision IS not a mere abstraction, but is a tangibly perceived and felt situation, as Padma dkar-po points out :112 "The way of the Jñãnamudrã is to become firmlyhabituated to (a vision of greater reality) by purifying all that is subsumed under the psycho-physical constituents, the elementary forces, and the interactional fields, through the image of a god; then when one has the experience of properly feeling and seeing the mandala 113 one unites with Vajravarähi or Nairätmyã or any other goddess, being the formulation of the aesthetically appropriate function, and through this union the fire of original awareness blazes

forth, and one's creative energy, melted by this fire, flows to the Vajra and the centre of the Padma and all the senses and their objects settle in the

sixteen kinds of joy having the same flavour in absolute bliss." It is significant that in this experience reference is made to the creative energy which is allowed to flow freely, just as in the description of the Karmamudrã. The difference is that the Jñãnamudrä experience makes man see his biological background of his life in a different light. 'She' becomes a balm to the mind divided against itself by the conflict of concepts. 'She' is then an education in loving and an adventure in fulfilment, a search for higher integration:

"Highest mistress of the world I Let me in the azure

Tent of Heaven, in light unfurled Hear thy Mystery measure!

Justify sweet thoughts that move

Breast of man to meet thee! And with holy bliss of love

Bear him up to greet thee!" says the German poet Goethe and, unsuspectingly, voices the Buddhist awareness of the Jñänamudrä.

Through the goddess man is enabled to see more of himself and his Being and also comes closer to his Being by seeking out through love what is real and unique, for the goddess is 'aesthetically appreciative-discriminative perceptiveness' (shes-rab-ma) which singles out the real from the fictitious, in short, 'valuecognition'. Such cognition helps us to remove the obstacles which by un-knowing we put up between ourselves and life. Although we often say that love is

blind, it would be more correct to recognize the fact that love is more perceptive and ready to accept what has been repressed or spurned for 'moral' or other rationalizations. When love prevails, the individual is no longer preoccupied with the hate-and-contempt inspired attempts to change things (or persons) that enter his life by reforming, punishing them, protecting himself against their alleged interference, either by forestalling or by crushing them. The whole net of intriguing concepts that intervene between himself and the other and make the recognition of his Being through the respect for the other who is part of this

Being impossible, vanishes. Love heals the wounds of separateness and gives dignity to what there is. Through it the worlds are not annihilated, but shine in a more beautiful light. Therefore, according to gNyis-med Avadhütipa, Saraha's words: "Do not create duality, create unity! Without setting up distinctions between the patterns,

Colour the whole triple world

In absolute love colour and . . .

refer to the Jñãnamudrä experience.114

While the Karmamudrã, manipulating organs, unless it merely employs sex to prove prowess and sensuality to hide sensitivity, can lead to and causally initiate the Jñãnamudrä, making love, and while the latter brings us closer to our Being, it is not the same as Being, and also

cannot causally initiate Being. Rather, Being is presupposed by the Karmamudrä and the Jñänamudrã through which we as embodied beings catch a glimpse of our Being. Therefore also, even love, Jñãnamudrã, gives us merely a fleeting sense of bliss, although this feeling is of a higher, and hence more positive, order than the Karmamudrã who makes us

'sad' in the pleasurable feeling she provides ("it's so quickly over Being-as-such cannot be reduced to an object and every attempt to objectifr it destroys its life-sustaining reality. Nor can it be equated with a self or subject, which is the organizing function of an individual by means of which one human being relates himself to another. And yet in the experience of Being-as-such we experience ourselves as being most ourselves without creating a 'self' that introduces a rift into our Being. While we can be, we cannot describe it,

and only from the periphery, as it were, can we point to it and illustrate it by referring to instances in which we experience Being most poignantly, as when we have a sudden insight after having struggled in vain for days. The experience is so overwhelming that it makes us want to express it, but words fail us. Being impresses itself on us in such a way that we may refer to it as an encounter in an absolute sense, Mahãmudrä, but in the end we have to concede with Saraha:

"There is neither beginning, middle, nor end;

It is neither Samsãra, nor Nirvana I

As to this supreme and absolute bliss

'Tis neither a self nor another. "115

The fact that we are able, though rarely, to be aware without the intervention of our prejudices and concepts, to love without making demands, and to be without playing a role, gives us a basis of meaning for our embodied existence and our actions. This basis is referred to by the technical term Samãyämudrã, the commitment to be.

Thus we have four encounters with Being (mudrã)116 which are related in a specific way. We begin with the Karmamudrä and, if we are lucky, i.e., healthy, proceed through her to the Jñãnamudrä through whom we are enabled to realize our Being, or Mahãmudrã, which informs us as embodied beings through the Samãyämudrä. In other words, we begin with sex which quite literally is the beginning of ourselves, but sex is not a mere manipulation of organs; it generates

an awareness which may turn into undemanding love, and it is through such love that we see the world and ourselves in a different light, and develop an unclouded awareness of the value of being. What on the previous level was a cold abstraction becomes now a living symbol pointing to the source, Being-as-such, and through its experience we return to the world differently. Thus Maitripa says .•117

"Karmamudrã is the awareness that comes from a woman with firm breasts and a rich display of hair, who has learned her part well; the Dharmamudrä or Jñãnamudrã is an attention by sealing all that is engendered in the union with such a Karmamudrã, or it is an attention by not becoming separated from an awareness that (knows that) all that is is like an apparition by having investigated it by the syllogism of the one and the many. Mahãmudrä is the integrated state of the

radiant light. Samãyãmudrã is to act for ever on behalf of the sentient beings through the two Rüpakãyas out of the sphere of this radiant light." Being in the world again, but differently, carries with it the feeling of certainty; the individual feels himself to be his own master, free from doubts, no longer haunted by questions whose answers elude him. Less a thing-of-the-world, the person has become the embodiment of values and radiates these values which become

discernible to the observer. This is the meaning of acting on behalf of others through the Rüpakäyas, which are both inwardly felt and outwardly observed and can be described both ways, and which have their root in the 'radiant light', which is not some mysterious entity but the radiance of an alive person. Saraha is again our guide here. He says :

"In front and in the rear and in the ten directions Whatever one sees is It; Of this day, a master,118 1 have destroyed error:

Now I need not ask anyone.'

Symbols of Unity and Transformation

Since Tantrism aims at bringing man closer to his Being, it employs many methods of which the sex experience is only one. Because of this fact Tantrism is not a philosophy of sex. However, due to the fact that it recognizes sex as a powerful means of bringing about a change in perspective, much misunderstanding has

resulted. It is true that the sexual organs are a natural focus of both sensation and interest in erotic experience, but it is not so much the physiological aspect with which Tantrism is concerned, but the experience itself and the effect it has on the individual. Somehow, in the course of history, Western man has been led astray by his economic and biological model so that he can hardly think of sex as anything else but the gratification of a physiological need.

Consequently the subtler distinction that Tantrism makes between the physiological side and its 'symbolical' meaning is overlooked and reduced to the 'nothing but'. Another source of misunderstanding is the naive belief that words have meanings and, in this particular case, only one meaning. The fact is that words are sounds that acquire or are assigned meanings by usage and in this process those who use words do one of two things: either they report what people in

general, using the language they speak, already mean by it, or they stipulate a use and meaning; that is, they state what they are going to mean by it. Stipulating a meaning is most often the result of a moving experience and, since more often than not, words already available in a given language are used for stipulative definitions, it seems that the word used indicates a certain resemblance or analogy that is felt to exist between the experience referred to by the

word and the inexpressible, non-conceptualizable X which the word or symbol is said to stand for. This distinction between reportive terms and stipulative terms is clearly observed in the two cases of Karmamudrä and Jñänamudrä. For us as embodied beings it is only natural that we first start with our body and its organs (note the impersonal diction as if the body were something alien to us), and with how we manage and manipulate them. Hence the Karmamudrä is aptly

reported to initiate embraces, kisses, touching the erogenous zones and finally the climax in the act of copulation. "In uniting with the Karmamudrã and in making love to the Jñänamudrã The bodhicitta, quintessence of bliss, has to be preserved, by those of firm vows.

Having inserted the prick in the cleft he may not let go the bodhicitta, But must attend to the Buddha-vision, encompassing the three worlds.' '119 Although at first glance this statement may seem to refer to the moment of penetration and little else, the associations that go with the words used in the

original, point to something much more important. The same text explains: "Cleavage is called cleft because it rends apart the deadening power of the conflicting emotions ; The conflicting emotions are to be overcome by valuecognition, therefore value-cognition is called the cleft. "120

This shows that even the Karmamudrã is never a matter of mere physiological sex, a preoccupation with the orgasm, but that the situation summed up by the term Karmamudrã engenders an awareness of ever-new facets of the experience. The awareness thus engendered is a 'transcendent function' (pãramitã), as it releases the individual from his thing-related concern and opens him to an appreciation of the value of Being, but does not annihilate him in a nihilistic

transcendentalism. Therefore Anangavajra says .•121 "(As) the transcendent function of discriminativeappreciative awareness she has to be served by those desirous of liberation, Pure in her absoluteness, only in this empirical world has she assumed the shape of a woman.

In the shape of a woman she is everywhere present. Therefore the Vajranätha has said that she comes from the outer world "122 In the following description of her he grows quite lyrical :

"Like a ship sailing to its peaceful harbour, she saves all beings, From the terrible ocean of birth, surging with waves of old age. Divine, beautiful, rich in qualities, she quickly leads to realization,

Like the Wish-Fulfilling Gem she provides whatever one desires. Without her, who is praised by Vajradhara, and who is the quintessence of all Buddha qualities, No realization is possible; therefore those desirous of liberation should wisely follow her unrivalled conduct.

By following her whose lotus-feet have been worshipped by Murãri, Indra, Šiva, Kubera, Brahma, and others, And her evil-destroying course, the Tathãgatas have reached the highest state."123 It is through the development of the appreciative and discriminative function that man is led out of the world of biological desires, where he is driven on to

seek a satisfying release and pleasurable relief, to a world of enjoyment and appreciation. It is the same world, but experienced differently. Its perception has been given major scope, depth, and dignity. It differs from ordinary perception which is merely a means to a metaperceptual end, and is reduced to a very economical recording of qualities and events significant for these ends; in other words, in the Karmamudrä situation I take stock of the woman's vital

statistics and what they may offer for gratification, But even here flickers of aesthetic experiences occur, although they are mostly incidental. But in the Jñänamudrã situation the opposite is the case. Whatever is perceived is done to serve perception, to make it more clear and precise, more ample and subtle. Within the orbit of such perception, as here understood, sensation, feeling, imagination, preferences, and interests operate as much as the physiological

factors. But the main point is that in such a perception the total being of the participant is brought into action. Thus Anangavajra says .•12' "Soon after he has embraced his mudrã, and started to insert the sceptre,

To drink from her nectar-moist lips, to induce her to speak cooingly, To enjoy rich delights, and to make her thighs quiver, King Cupid, Vajrasattva, will certainly be realized."

The bodily description can hardly be more realistic and yet the situation has changed, and the language (in the original) expresses it. Here, sceptre (vajra) and, by implication, lotus (padma), are the indicators. Unlike the corresponding terms of the Karmamudrã situation, linga and bhaga, these terms connotate an emotionally changed value. By 'sceptre' or, more literally, 'diamond', is meant what is undestructible and the primary factor in the nature of things, and what

is felt to be valuable and a solid basis for one's being. Its definition runs as follows :125 "It is firm, round, cannot be changed, be pierced, be split, Cannot be burnt, is indestructible and (as) openness (ýünyatã) it is called vajra.'

In the term Vajrasattva, which refers to the change that has been effected, when, so to speak, we have been enabled to love instead of temporarily 'falling in and out of love', vajra indicates the bliss that is experienced when authentic being, communication and responsiveness have become an integrated whole, while

the term sattva refers to the world as cognized integratively. The unity, as expressed in the symbol Vajrasattva, is not so much a placing of the experience in a system of concepts or even words but a savouring of the qualities of the experience, particularly of that which cannot be put into words or reduced to something other than itself. This is technically known as ýinyatã, a term that has been grossly misunderstood, as its translation by 'empty' and 'void'

indicates. Sünyatã is a term for the absolutely positive. It is nothing, when compared with what ordinary perception is about, but as an utter openness it is an infinite source of what we can only inadequately indicate by a feeling of perfection, completeness, freedom. But in order to perceive this openness perception itself must be open and untainted, not internally warped by any bias. In other words, it must be perceptive, appreciative, not forceful, demanding.

Rather than trying to change the experience and make it something other than it is, it submits and surrenders to the experience. This is done by the prajñã, an appreciativediscriminative function, perceptive of values that cannot be shorn away from the reality of Being. While vajra is a symbol for the ultimate and indestructible quality of Being, which is the same as being aware, the suppleness of this appreciative awareness is indicated by the symbol of the lotus flower

(padma). Since early times the lotus flower has been a symbol of creativity producing the world of things from its fertile seeds, and of purity, because water does not cling to its leaves. This symbol is used by Saraha in describing the peak-experience of Being which is in this world, but not just this world: "Even when among the objects and pressed hard by the desire for them—

—As long as he has not this spontaneity, he clings to evil— He is not affected by the objects enjoying them, Just as water does not cling to the leaves of a lotus flower.' gNyis-med Avadhütipa elaborates as follows .•126

"The external objects are the five pleasurable senseperceptions, the internal objects are 'memory'. Indulging in them, but not being aware of the real, a person imagines them as an assembly of gods and goddesses, both in the within and in the without. (This is meant by Saraha when he says): 'Even when among the objects and pressed hard by the desire for them . . . ' However, spontaneity as a god is not a creation of the mind; only a (mind-created) god is unhealthy.

(Hence Saraha states): 'As long as he has not this spontaneity, he clings to evil. '—The ground of all that is is the spontaneity that is not a creation of the mind. If one is aware of this—'He is not affected by the objects when enjoying them.' To give an example: a blue or white lotus flower or jasmine-flower can

enthrall a person with its lovely colour, its softness and its fragrance. That it can do so lies in the fact that it grows in the unclean ponds of villages and hamlets, but is not affected by their uncleanliness. The same holds good for the attitude of the yogi. Even if he 'thinks' of the objects of the outer and inner world, by knowing the real, he is not affected by the mire of the objects and taking the lotus flower without its (surrounding) mire, he understands the

absolutely real without its (deflecting) ideas." The imagery and symbolism clearly point to the aesthetic experience which in connection with the Jñãnamudrã is freed from the narrowness of the specific practical dealing with the Karmamudrã. The aesthetic experience, however, is not exhausted by being a valuable addition to the other moments of our lived

existence, it also possesses instrumental values. It can be a means of self-growth by enlarging the horizon of meaning and by diminishing the tendencies to seize and exploit. Nonetheless, the aesthetic experience is not an end in itself, it is a stimulation to the one who has the experience. As far as the 'object matter' is concerned, there is no difference between ordinary and aesthetic perception; but while ordinary perception is inhibitive and restricted to an

immediate purpose, aesthetic perception sets the observer free by letting all that is present in the object appear in the fullest and most vivid manner, thus enabling a more lively appreciation of the actualities of the object and preventing a distortion of the object by the imposition of subjective fancy. This is meant by the statement that a person becomes free in intrinsic perception. That aesthetic perception is not an end, although it is superior to ordinary perception, is stated by Saraha, contrasting the Karmamudrä and Jñãnamudrã:

"In coition to find bliss supreme

Without knowing the real, is like

A thirsty man who pursues a mirage: will he ever Find the heavenly nectar before he dies of thirst?

Ineffective is the revelling

In that most blissful feeling

Which lies between the Padma and the Vajra;

How will he fulfill the hopes of the three

In a more prosaic way we can restate Saraha's words as follows : Karmamudrä as an end sums up the frustrating efforts of the pleasure-chaser, the compulsive collector of physical contacts; nanamudrä as an end is an aestheticistic mood which tends to make the individual being out of touch with the situation. Karmamudrä is the situation in which a man finds himself, who seeks fun and is 'in for kicks', while pleasure eludes him; Jñãnamudrä is the situation of the drug addict who changes his inner reality, but does nothing, and is utterly incapable of doing anything, about the depressiveness and grimness of the external situation.

One other point must be noted in this connection which is significant for Tantric thought. Ordinary perception is egocentred, harsh, aggressive, imposing; aesthetic perception is object-centred, receptive, appreciative. In it the object becomes the guide, and the subject submits to its lead. This submissive union of the subject with the object, an aesthetic union, is undertaken for a more intimate appreciation of the object's intrinsic value and being which is, paradoxically, the subject's very being.

Here subject and object become identical in nature. Käsha says .

"In the same way as salt dissolves in water, so also the mind embraced by his spouse Goes to identity of feeling (samarasa) the very moment it remains with her."

KäQha's words, read in connection with the statement that in the aesthetic experience of the Jñãnamudrã the woman is seen as a goddess, reveal a very important point. In the aesthetic union the subject is transformed in terms of the object, because only by becoming a god himself is the subject able to perceive the goddess. In other words, to the extent that we are more 'ourselves' we can be aware of the other as more 'himself' or 'herself'. This experience is not of something other than what there is, but is a very intensive existential awareness. On the other hand, to imagine a god or goddess as over and above or outside the

experience and to conceive of Him or Her as the ground of Being, is to absolutize a fiction and the negation of the absoluteness of Being. There cannot be any 'other' being but Being-assuch without invalidating Being-as-such, hence there cannot be any 'other' god or goddess over and against Being-as-such. It is the

mistake of all theisms (monotheism, polytheism, pantheism and so on) to invent a god in order to conceal their existential incompetence and to escape from existential responsibility. Responsibility means to respond in the knowledge that the world around me is glowingly alive, not to cling to beliefs which without exception are based on a distortion, if not a flat denial, of reality and which constitute no value at all. When the quest for knowledge is sin and ignorance a virtue, no responsibility is possible, and as Saraha and gNyis-med Avadhütipa point out, an invented god is evil and mentally unhealthy. The historical record of all theistic religions provides all the necessary evidence for Saraha's indictment.

Because of its intrinsically 'divine' character the aesthetic experience is of greatest importance as a preparation for the creation of works of art. We have only to think of the vast number of sculptures and paintings of Buddhist 'deities' (actually a misnomer as they are representations of aspects of Buddhahood), who have taken from the physical environment the suggestions for their sensuous execution. Their aim is to transform their creators and beholders into intrinsically satisfied perceptual agents, satisfied because they have come closer to their Being. The relationship that Tantrism has to the development of the

fine arts shows that it is not merely a sex preoccupation, the pastime of the modern West's 'hollow men'. Karmamudrä and Jñãnamudrã are, on an intimate level, shortterms for the way in which we may see ourselves, in the sense that we are not isolated entities in an alien environment, but always and inseparably with the world around us as our horizon of meaning. To the extent that I take a derogatory view of myself, I see everything and everyone in the same light as myself, and to the extent that I view my existence as valuable I recognize the other's value as well. This means that it is possible for us to percetve in two different ways, sometimes in an impoverishing, deficiency-causing way, sometimes in an enriching, value

awareness. Most of the time, it seems, we perceive in a deficiencycausing way and find it hard to imagine that there are different ways of looking and that there is more to life than what is labelled 'the obvious'. These two ways of perceiving and the way to effect the transition from an impoverished and impoverishing perception of the world to an enriching awareness of Being are the theme of Saraha's verses .

"I Like a tree overgrown with creepers, the beings
Suffer from thirst in the desert of self-centredness.
Like a prince, homeless and fatherless,
They suffer mental anguish with no chance for happiness.

Il The awareness of the Real, that does not come by categorical thinking
Is free from artifacts and is not stored-up Karma.
Thus, I, Saraha, who know it, declare.
Yet the heart of the pedants is filled with poison.
The peace of Mind-as-such is difficult to understand:

2 Untrammeled by limiting concepts, undefiled, the heart Can never be investigated concretely in its Being.
3 If it can, it turns into an irritated poisonous snake.
bl Things postulated by the intellect are nothing in themselves.
Because they are without foundation, they all do not exist. 2 When one knows the Real free in its reality
Then there is no seeing and no hearing, but also not what is not this.

Ill All those who believe in concrete things are said to be like cattle,
But those who believe in abstract things are even stupider than these.
Those who use the analogy of a burning lamp and those who use the one of an extinguished lamp
Stay both in Mahämudrã that knows not of duality.

IVa What is born as a thing comes to rest in the no-thing:— Wise is he who is free from this partiality.
When the fools search their mind with their mind turned inward,
The freedom of that moment is called Dharmakãya.
b Although the simpletans may say: There exists a place
Of Bliss other than this freedom, 'tis likewater in a mirage."

The first verse (I) is an apt description of those who suffer, both physically and mentally, when they perceive in a needdetermined way, always, always demanding the gratification of their needs that remain unfulfilled because they themselves are unable to give and to share. Karma Phrin-las-pa elaborates on this verse as follows, and it is easy to rediscover in his words the contemporary problem, the feeling of loneliness and alienation •130. "A tree overgrown by

creepers is an analogy for the beings who through their actions and emotions are fettered in Samsãra. Similarly, those whose very being is overgrown, and firmly fettered by the subject-object dichotomy, are tormented by various pains engendered by their belief in a self; suffering from thirst in this desert of misery they experience physical pain and, having no chance for happiness, they experience intense mental anguish. This suffering of body and mind in Samsãra is like the unbearable misery a prince with no kingdom and no father has to endure. And this is the nature of Samsãra. A forest-tree overgrown by creepers is an

analogy for the beings fettered in the world by their actions and emotions; to suffer from thirst in a desert is an analogy for being tormented by the belief in a self. The desert of misery means that as far as the ocean reaches there is no grass, no trees, no sweet water, and in a desert of rocks and sand there are no caves. There, scorched by the sun, one becomes exhausted and wilts like a sprout dried up by the sun.

"The young prince, homeless and fatherless, is an analogy for the suffering in Samsãra. Being a 'prince', he had never suffered before, but now in his suffering, like any other common man, he looks run down; and being 'young' he cannot bear the suffering because, unlike an old man, he has not experienced many ups and downs, and does not know how to assess them. 'Homeless' he is not protected by his subjects, and 'fatherless' he is not even sheltered by his next

of.kin.' The subsequent three verses (Il) refer to intrinsic perception, first in a general way and then (a I-b2) in a more specific way. In explaining these verses Karma Phrin-las-pa speaks of the identity of Being and Awareness and of the resistance which people set up against intrinsic perception. It is the fear of

knowledge of oneself. This fear is basically defensive in the sense that it is a means to protect our self-centredness. We are afraid of 'losing ourselves', that is, afraid to see the fictions we have created about ourselves as fictions, and we are also afraid to be. Karma Phrin-las-pa's words are "The objective reference, the absolutely Real, and the owner of the objective reference, the awareness which understands the absolutely Real, are indivisible

and this is termed the 'awareness of the Real'. It is the Real and it is Awareness. Saraha declares it to have five characteristics: one may enjoy it as much as one likes and one will never be fed up with it, and since one cannot be fed up with it even after enlightenment one stays with (its) Reality. Since it is not produced by causes and conditions it is without artifacts and it is not Karma stored up by ideas about good and evil. It is to be experienced within

ourselves by itself, and it terrifies those doctrinaires who have not practised it. How does it terrify them? To say that the absolutely Real is the indivisibility of objective reference, and owner of the objective reference, is to increase their discomfiture, as if poison enters their heart, because insisting on their difference they cannot bear the dissolution of these two."

Karma Phrin-las-pa then goes on to say that (a) intrinsic perception is conceptually incomprehensible and that (b) it goes beyond the range of the intellect. Because it is unassailable by concepts it is (1) difficult to understand; (2) concepts cannot exhaust it; and (3) concepts damage it.132 "(1) Mind-as-such, the genuine, peace, the presence (of Being), the Real, is difficult to understand by all those who are involved in concepts. Why? Because it

is not an object for concepts (which define between them an entity). "(2) Mind-as-such, untrammeled by all limiting concepts such as eternalism, nihilism, existence, non-existence and so on ; the pure Buddhahood potentiality has been intrinsically pure since its (beginningless) beginning, and as it is the very nature of the radiant light it is inaccessible to such concepts as 'deep'.

The reason for this statement is given in the next line (3). "(3) First to conceive of mind as coarse and then as subtle is an artificial procedure and by it the fact of the genuine presence of Being is not understood. It becomes distorted. How? If the fact of the presence of Being is investigated by concepts, not only is it not understood but even tranquillity of mind is not

achieved. It becomes like a poisonous snake. As long as a snake is left alone and not irritated it stays happily where it is, but if it is irritated it bites. Similarly, if the presence of Being, mind, is left in its genuine state, it remains undisturbed in the sphere of original awareness, like salt dissolved in water, but if it is investigated conceptually, it is disturbed by them."

Karma Phrin-las-pa here makes it clear that intrinsic or aesthetic perception is 'passive' rather than active, as is ordinary perception, where the beholder chooses what to perceive and relates his selection to his subjective needs, concretizes his percepts and assigns them a reality which they can never have. Such concretizations are the ideas of both object and subject as 'real' entities. About the former (bl) Karma Phrin-las-pa says .•133 "All that is subsumed under

(the categories of) the visible world and its potentiality, under Samsãra and is but an interpretative postulate of the intellect; there is not so much as an atom of (independent) reality in these categories. Therefore all these postulates of a visible world and its possibility are nothing in themselves and since they do not exist at all as they seem to do in the postulate, Samsãra and Nirvana, freed from their

conceptual inadequacy, are nowhere perceived and are understood as the self-sameness (of Being). Therefore, devoid of their condition, the intellect, all that is postulated by it, becomes free in itself and is not something existing in itself." About the latter (h) he says •13.'

"Reality is the Real. Free from all concretizations and characterizations, it is real freedom. It is really free and it is Real, and this freely Real is a spontaneous awareness. If one knows it correctly, then there are no concretizations and characterizations as they occur through seeing, hearing and inspecting; and free from seeing and hearing and so on, the subject also is free in itself."

While the previous considerations have shown that Being-assuch is the same as Awareness, the one indicating its existential reality, the other its cognitive one, a new idea is introduced here. This is the idea of freedom as an existential fact, and not as a mere negatively conceived abstraction. We have to remind ourselves here that to be is to be aware, and that in being aware Being exercises its freedom. Freedom is thus synonymous with Being and with Awareness, and is

a descriptive term of the functioning of Being as Awareness. From this it follows that 'bondage' is the effect of the functioning of the failure of freedom. This can be illustrated in the following way. In aesthetic experience or intrinsic perception I perceive in a more effortless way, while in ordinary categorical perception I am 'caught' in the fictions of my own making. But this being caught and fettered does not contradict the intrinsic freedom of the

noetic functioning. To think of freedom as being something other than the fact of being and of being aware, is to be caught in fictions and in the loss of freedom.

In the following verse (Ill) Saraha, according to Karma Phrin-las-pa's interpretation, indicates the 'presence' of the Way which, as has been previously shown,

is not an inert link between two points, but is the self-manifestation of Being-as-such or, in terms of its cognitiveness, the presence of intrinsŽc awareness which in its functioning may glide into categorical perception with its postulational affirmations and negations.135 "Generally speaking, some people claim that the presence of Being, the absolutely real, is a concrete entity, similar to a burning lamp appearing clearly and

concretely before the mind. Thus making an affirmative statement, these people are said to be like cattle, not understanding what presence means. There are others who claim that since the presence of Being cannot be found concretely, it is an abstract entity, similar to a lamp that has been extinguished, not appearing concretely (as burning) before the mind. These Madhyamika philosophers,136 making a negative statements, are even stupider than the other people.

However, the adherents of a philosophy who, as is evident from the analogies they use, claim the absolutely real to be either a concrete entity or an abstract fact, do not understand the meaning of being free from limitations, because they cling to either appearance or nothingness. Actually, the absolutely real is the spontaneous awareness (in which both, the real and its awareness, are given together), and this is the unsurpassable presence of Being, Mahämudrã, where

concrete things and abstract facts are not existing as two (separate postulates). The meaning is that, since the presence of Being-as-such is free from concretizations and characterizations, to conceive of the Mahãmudrã as a concrete entity is the sign of a stupid person, comparable to an ox. If it is then argued that this presence must be an abstract fact, this idea is even stupider than the previous one because there cannot be an abstract fact in the absence of

a negandum. To exemplify, to say that a burning lamp is burning is a silly tautology, but to extinguish a nonburning lamp is even sillier. The word 'both' in Saraha's verse refers to both partisans of the burning lamp and of the extinguished lamp. Thus the Mahãmudrã, existential presence, in which concrete entities and abstract facts do not form a duality, is the genuine, the absolutely real, the Real." It is on the 'Way' that the human being experiences himself as

'divided against himself', that he is discontented, while at the same time he wants unity. In this respect man is goal-orientated. However, 'goal' must be understood as the possibility or capability of Being to make life meaningful, to 'comprehend' meaning and to be. It is a creative potential but never an end-state. This is precisely what Tantrism is about, and in its own words it claims 'to make the goal the path'. The goal as (a) a possibility and (b) not as an

end-state is the message of Saraha's last (IV) verse .13? "a Because it is free from what in conceptualization appears as becoming a thing and then as coming to rest in the nothing, the Real, and also from what is conceptualized as the 'no-thing' as contrasted with the 'thing', this knowledge in (its) non-dual awareness, quickly realizes its freedom. If it is argued that

there must be a (special) agency to effect this freedom, the answer may be given as follows propositionally: When mind is turned upon itself as it rises unceasingly in the mind of those who are as yet not trained but enjoy the grace of a teacher, the restlessness of the categorical perception of the apparent world gives way to a self-validating aesthetic perception and at that moment gains its freedom. To see the Real, in a manner of not seeing it as something,

is said to be seeing the Dharmakayã.

"b But does the special experience, of what in the Tantras is said to be unchanging bliss, not contradict Buddhahood? The answer is that although simpletons, who do not know what the real levels (of understanding and the paths to be traversed) mean, may say that there is a level of great bliss, which is different

from the freedom in self-validating aesthetic perception, it does not exist as such and is but like the water in a mirage. Therefore in the Tantras selfvalidating awareness is termed absolute bliss." Karma Phrin-las-pa's detailed interpretation of Saraha's verses reveals the importance aesthetic perception has in Tantrism, because it is through this

perception that more of what there is can be seen. However, aesthetic perception is not an end in itself but a means of becoming aware of one's Being. If it were an end in itself it would result in the sentimentality of the kind of aestheticism that, instead of enriching a man's life, actually impoverishes it due to the demand it makes on the objects. Aesthetic perception as a means towards gaining an existential awareness recognizes the world appearing to our senses as

being there and, in bringing about an enhanced vision, it reveals the limitations of categorical perception and its deadening effects. But if it is taken as an end in itself, it has the same effect as categorical perception. Saraha and Karma Phrin-las-pa leave no doubt about this: "The awareness that is not differentiated and alone Is encompassed by the mind left in itself.

Knowing that what appears as oneself and the other is one actuality, Hold to this alone by not moving away from it ; But since this same act may be the mind's torment, renounce it And deal with anything in bliss supreme without attachment.'

The unitary awareness which is one's own mind if it is 'let alone' can well be understood as a peak experience, but when it is taken to be an end in itself it is no longer 'left alone', and in the difference that is set up between subject and object all the torment that usually accompanies the rift in Being asserts itself. In this sense the peak experience may well be the opposite of what it promises. Karma Phrin-las-pa has this to say by way of explana-

tion .138 "The awareness in the self-validating aesthetic experience in which there is no differentiation into self and other, subject and object, Samsära and Nirväl)a, is the sole bliss supreme. This is to be understood as permeating itself with bliss supreme, through the mind that has settled in its genuine and original

state. When one first has recognized that the actuality of all that appears in a dual way, due to the postulates of a self and another, has but one flavour, one should hold unswervingly in full concentration to this one-flavoured actuality. But this same concentration turns Out to be a torment to lower minds, and therefore, according to the words 'give it up when there is attachment' 139 one should get rid of this attachment and only then can one deal with anything

without attachment in this bliss supreme that is individually experienced as self-validating. There is no doubt that aesthetic perception as an end in itself fails miserably in what it sets out to do, to enrich perception and, by implication, to make a person learn more about his Being which he shares with everybody else and everything else. Since all and everything both represents and constitutes Being, it

becomes a 'teacher' in the sense that it makes one realize Being through accepting what there is : "ÄNhen one looks at all and everything when pointed out There is nothing that does not become a teacher. The sky, pointed out by a finger, does not see the sky,

'Tis the same with the teacher pointed out by the teacher." says Saraha, and Karma Phrin-las-pa comments .•140 " 'All and everything' is an intensifying phrase and will say that nothing has been left out. Therefore, when one looks at the whole of the phenomenal world as constituting an existential presence, when the teacher points it out, at the moment of the Self-validating awareness there is nothing that does not become the

teacher of this existential presence. In the People Dohã141 it is said: Seeing, hearing, touching, thinking, Eating, smelling, running, walking, sitting, Idly talking, talking back—

Know all this to be the mind and do not run from this oneness. To see Being is not to see it as something. In the same way as the sky pointed out to a child with the finger, does not see the sky in the manner of subject and object, so also the spontaneous awareness, the teacher, pointed out by the teacher, is seen in a non-dual manner."

But if anything and everything in the phenomenal world to which I belong by my being embodied in it, and which at any level constitutes my horizon of meaning, can teach me about my existential values, how much more is this possible through interpersonal relationships and their emotional conditions that affect the ways of knowing? A person who is attached to, or hates, another, remains not only ignorant of the other, who for him is not a genuine person, but a segment

that is selectively, classificatorily distorted by his own feelings, but he remains equally ignorant of himself. Treating others as mere objects he turns himself into a mere object for others, dispensable, and the quicker done away with the better. Inter-personal relationships require existential knowledge rather than categorical, 'objective', knowledge. It is here that the change from the boredom with the 'dead' object to the appreciation of an alive person, the

transmutation of dry facts into values, becomes most marked. The change, not only in attitude, but also in the actual action, is again the theme of Saraha's words: 142 "A yogi keeping his observances while thinking of a village Enters a king's palace and in dallying with the princess,

Like a man who has tasted bitter food assumes all other food to be bitter, Is aware of everything as (exemplifying) the presence of Being.' One of the striking features in the imagery employed is the disparity in status, the inequality of the yogi and the king and his daughter, the humble village

and the gorgeous palace. This thesis implies a kind of knowledge which recognizes this inequality as long as the objective scrutiny lasts. But there also is implied another kind of knowledge which recognizes the existential quality which does not negate the things observed, but lets their disparity and difference fade into the background and lets the two perceptual forces fuse creatively for the enhancement of the awareness. The importance of change and transmutation,

hierarchically organized, is elaborated by Karma Phrin-las-pa:1'3 "The literal interpretation is that a yogi, who has understood the meaning of existential presence and acts in accordance with his vows, may think of villages and other temporary places of residence and wandering from one place to another happen to enter the palace of a king. Even when he dallies with the princess he is not affected.

Just as a man who has previously tasted some bitter food will see any other food as tasting bitter, so (the yogi) seeing the external objects, colour-form and so on, will be intrinsically aware of them in their existential value. The exoteric interpretation is: A yogi who has subdued evil and has punctiliously set out on the path to liberation, thinks of the hamlets of ordinary persons as impermanent abodes. Entering unsurpassable enlightenment, the palace of the Buddha,

King of Dharma, even when he, wise in appropriate action, amuses himself with the princess, the prajñãpãramitã, like a man who previously has tasted some bitter food and sees all food as tasting bitter, will experience all the objects of senses such as colours, sounds, and so on, as existential values. "The esoteric interpretation is: A yogi who has overcome specific modes of behaviour and engages in a nonspecific one, thinks of the inner and outer world as

the abode of 'heroes' and 'däkas' and, entering the great mystic circle, the palace of Vajradhara, king of gods, he, wise in the ways of mysticism, amuses himself with the princess Nairätmyã, and knows everything as existentially real. "This may suffice as an example of the many explanations possible."

Human relations differ in degrees of intimacy; this applies in particular to sexual relations which can be extremely casual or an inseparable part of very deep human relationship. The physical aspect is never merely physical, but always expressive of meaning, although this is not often realized. Inasmuch as sexuality expresses Being, as has been shown above, in its expression it at once becomes the battleground of two conflicting attitudes which may be

termed as a Beingorientated attitude and an ego-centred attitude. The Beingattitude is more likely to recognize sexuality and, in this recognition, runs the risk of reducing Being to some sort of being, and of absolutizing it. The ego-centred attitude is more likely to reject sexuality because it poses a threat to the ego which is felt to be lost or 'transcended' in the sexual experience, and, in its

rejection, the ego-centred attitude becomes destructive of itself and of others. Every society consists of individuals who adopt certain attitudes, and the life of any society seems to depend on the interaction of the extreme attitudes of either glorifying or denouncing sex. However, in the ultimate analysis there

is little difference between glorification and denunciation, in either case something or other has been singled out and abstracted from Being and turned into an obsession. In the one case, the person is obsessed to get more and more out of it, in the other to make less and less of it. The common denominator for both activities is the orgy, an excessive indulging in any particular action. In the narrower sense of sexual activity orgies developed in the wake of fertility

cults which were a kind of sympathetic magic to 'help life on', and in this respect became a correlate to asceticism as a means to make an end of life. Orgies have been part of life in India since earliest times and are not a particular feature of Tantrism. But since Tantrism stayed alive long after the great philosophical systems had exhausted themselves in sterile abstractions, on the basis of ignorance about the historical scene, the impression has been created

that orgies and Tantrism in some way or other belonged together. Moreover, since sex is the source of life and an orgy more an outgrowth, and since a life-affirming attitude in its acceptance of life in all its vagaries is likely to assume that life will eventually adjust itself, the Indians did not feel called upon to give this outgrowth undue attention, unlike the established church in the West with its political ties and aims, which true to its life-denying spirit,

celebrated orgies of persecution and extermination of those who showed any regard for life in any form, as is exemplified by the Albigensian Crusade, the Inquisition and other unsavoury activities. There is a tremendous difference, however, between orgies as outgrowth of sexuality and sexual relationship as a means of self-growth. The main point of an orgy is not to know who one's partner is, and when the other has no identity, not only does one's own identity not

get any buttressing from the other but one also has none oneself. Everyone is, as it were, drowned in a common pool of anonymity. Sex as a means towards self-growth also tears down the barriers of selfhood, but there is as much dissolving as tempering. The reaction which is the interaction between man and woman and, in a wider horizon, Samsära and Nirvãt)a, becomes unitary, not diverse; compound rather than mixed. The 'self', for want of a better term in English, that

emerges is thus a compound of two factors, man and woman, neither of which separately has the characteristic properties of a 'self', just as salt is a compound of two substances, neither of which by itself has the characteristic properties of salt. However, it would be unwise to press the analogy to chemical compounds too far. So far as we know, no permanent change is produced in the properties of either chemical element when they are united to form a compound. In the human

sphere both man and woman seem to be permanently affected by their union, so that, if they become separated again and continue to live apart, their 'properties' are characteristically different from what they were when the two became connected with each other. This consideration may help to understand what sex as a unifying symbol in Tantrism is about. Saraha says :144

"In a place emblazoned by the ga,zacakra

The yogis (and yoginïs) during the act of copulation

Witn ess bliss supreme and through symbols and commitment

Are tempered into Mahãmudrä, the self-sameness of Samsära and Nirvana."

Karma Phrin-las-pa gives four interpretations, each one following out of the other :145

"The literal explanation is as follows: In a selected spot which is 'emblazoned by the ga?tacakra', the assemblage of yogis and yoginïs who have received their

empowerments and are keeping their commitments, these yogis and yoginïs seeing the birth of bliss supreme in their act of copulation, when each one unites with his or her partner, through the exchange of symbols and enacting their commitments, are tempered into Mahämudrã, the vision of Samsära and Nirvana as alike. The exoteric explanation is as follows: The accumulation of appropriate action and appreciative awareness as forming a unity is similar to cakra, because it

overcomes what is adverse. In a secluded and pleasant place 'emblazoned by this gaëacakra' when Being is seen, symbolized by the act of copulation, the yogis and yoginïs, witnessing the birth of bliss supreme in their self-validating intrinsic awareness, see through their expertise in symbols and action and their enactment of the commitments, Samsära and Nirvana as alike in their unreality. Since this vision is the path to the union with Mahãmudrã they will temper all

that is into a unity.

"The esoteric explanation is as follows: Coition takes place in the 'conch', the lower end of the central structural pathway, a place enriched by four or six focal points of experience surrounded by countless delicate channels.146 The yogis and yoginïs, witnessing the ever-growing intensity of bliss supreme during

their experience of spontaneous pleasure, rely on the symbols of the four joys and the Samayamudrã combining the 'white' and 'red' energies, and understand Samsära and NirväQa as alike in bliss and openness. Since this is the way to Mahãmudrä they temper everything into self-sameness of bliss and openness.

"The explanation from an ultimate point of view is as follows: Since the assemblage (ga?ta) of symbols and appropriate actions destroys the fetters of the conceptual fictions it is a cakra. 'Emblazoned by it' means that appropriate action is not divorced from absolute compassionateness. Coition is the union with the Karmamudrã ; the awareness in self-validating intrinsic perception, symbolized by the vision of the birth of bliss supreme. 'Symbol' means openness of

Being and 'enacting the commitment' means to have absolute compassionateness. Therefore, the yogi who is aware of the unity of appropriate action and appreciative awareness understands the self-sameness of intrinsic awareness and openness ; intrinsic awareness being a symbol for Samsära and openness for NirvãQa. Since this understanding is Mahãmudrã they temper everything into the self-sameness of intrinsic awareness and openness." It will have been noted that

in all these passages emphasis is on knowledge, appreciative rather than cumulative, and on unity. Stress is laid upon knowledge through personal encounter (Karmamudrä, Jñãnamudrä) and upon the need for involvement in order to know (snyoms-par 'jug-pa), though not as an end in itself. This makes knowledge existential and it must be realized in personal time-consuming experience. The unity of this existential knowledge cannot be stated adequately at all, because

the individuality of the experience is in conflict with the generality of conceptual language. Traditionally it has been assumed that it is possible to contemplate body, mind, life, value, man and woman conceptually as objects and all that was necessary for a final presentation of a world picture was to think them together. It is now realized that there is a need to experience and to understand as far as we can not only these 'entities' through a knowledge gained in

direct relationship, by being involved with them, but also these in relation to each other. "Without knowing the concrete existential presence of the body as the bearer (of psychical life) one does not understand the concrete existential presence of the mind as (the life existing in the body) "147 says Padma dkar-po, and after quoting a few passages from the Buddhist scriptures in support of his statement

he continues :148 "When by knowing the body as the bearer (of psychical life) the place of the mind (resting on it) is known, it is through an involvement that a realization necessarily springs up. To give an example, although milk pervades the body of a cow, you can get it from the udder, not from the horns.' Thus, in order to understand body and mind, man and woman, or Samsãra and Nirvana, as different parts of some complex unified knowledge, it is necessary to

know them existentially one by one, to know them existentially in their relationship, and to know their unity. This does not happen in a haphazard way, but through feeling, acting, thinking, which is the 'Way' as a process of unification. The result, the unity of knowledge, is then not a constructed intellectual