TANTRIC BOOK GNOSIS IN THE AEON OF WEAPONIZED HYPERSTITION

This was a space today, on X.com. You can listen to it here.

The Talk

Host: Lama Fede AndinoGuest: Lama Sherab

Lama Fede (Host):Thank you so much. Today’s topic is Tantric Book Gnosis in the Aeon of Weaponized Hyperstition.What do we mean by that? We mean the idea of gaining jñāna—gnosis—from books, and how this is being weaponized against us.

Lama Sherab, would you like to tell us about this idea of acquiring not so much scholastic learning, but gnostic or experiential knowledge from books?

Lama Sherab (Guest):Sure. I think it starts with an understanding—or rather misunderstanding—of what “knowledge” is. Those who seek within a hyperstitional universe often assume that when the tradition speaks of vidyā, it means the same as their own idea of knowledge. But in Vajrayāna that’s not the case at all.

In the conventional paradigm, knowledge is seen as an object to be possessed, guarded by a teacher, and transferred to the student—like in a school classroom. The seeker feels the teacher is a gatekeeper who withholds it. This creates antagonism: either the student flatters the teacher to get access, or they reject the teacher and try to “educate themselves.”

But in Vajrayāna, the guru and vidyā are inseparable. The teacher is not an obstacle to knowledge; the teacher is the very embodiment of knowledge. The vidyā is not something one can “acquire” externally—it is discovered through devotion, empowerment (abhiṣeka), transmission (āgama/lung), and instruction (upadeśa).

Lama Fede:So you’re saying that if someone frames the teacher as a barrier, then knowledge itself becomes something to be stolen, bypassed, or reverse-engineered. Whereas in the tradition, knowledge is embodied in the teacher.

Lama Sherab:Exactly. If you treat knowledge as some external object, then of course you’ll try to get it any way possible—even distorting the role of the guru. But in Buddhadharma, knowledge is not an object; it is realization inseparable from guru and blessing.

Lama Fede:Vlad asks on X: What do you think about claims that teachers like Garchen Rinpoche or His Holiness the Dalai Lama have said that mantric sādhana is open to all beings in this age?

Lama Sherab:I have never seen either of them say that. I’ve only seen others claim they said it. For example, there is a well-known quote of the Dalai Lama warning that we must give enough knowledge to prevent seekers from falling into the traps of false teachers who misuse tantra as sexual indulgence. But this was context-specific, not a declaration that “all tantras are now open.”

If empowerment (abhiṣeka) were unnecessary, why would His Holiness still be giving them regularly? Likewise, Garchen Rinpoche has never said one should break samaya or dispense with empowerments. These misrepresentations arise from trying to bypass the guru.

Lama Fede:So what do the tantras themselves say about this?

Lama Sherab:The tantras are very clear. To practice, you need empowerment (abhiṣeka), scriptural transmission (lung/āgama), and personal instruction (upadeśa). Guru and deity are not separate—if you receive a Tārā empowerment, your guru and Tārā are one.

The texts also describe three levels of teacher–student relationships:

1. Best case: A siddha-guru with miraculous powers and a disciple with realization of emptiness.

2. Middling case: A teacher capable of performing the four activities (pacifying, enriching, magnetizing, subjugating) and a disciple with pure vision.

3. Minimal case: At least a disciple with bodhicitta and devotion, and a guru with genuine empowerment and blessing.

In all cases, empowerment and devotion to the guru are indispensable.

Lama Fede:Yet nowadays we see empowerments being given widely, often online, but the tantras themselves are rarely taught. Why is that?

Lama Sherab:Several reasons:

• Structure: Tantras are complex, while sādhanas are more straightforward to apply.

• Content: Some passages are antinomian or shocking, making teachers reluctant to read them publicly.

• Translation: Many are poorly translated or untranslated.

• Politics: Sometimes access is controlled by attitudes of “ownership” of Dharma.

But ultimately, Dharma cannot be owned.

Lama Fede:Beautiful. Thank you so much, Lama Sherab. To close, let me remind everyone about the upcoming Mara Roast in Portland, Oregon. We’ll gather as a kula to roast the Māras of ignorance together, with teachings, empowerments, and community. Please join us if you’re nearby.

Summary

Topic: Tantric Book Gnosis in the Aeon of Weaponized Hyperstition

1. Misunderstanding of Knowledge (Vidyā)

• In modern contexts, seekers often see knowledge as an object that can be acquired or taken—like in a school system where the teacher is a gatekeeper.

• In Vajrayāna, this is a fundamental misunderstanding: the guru and vidyā (realization) are inseparable. Knowledge is not withheld; it is embodied in the teacher and discovered through devotion, empowerment, and instruction.

2. Guru and Knowledge Are One

• True knowledge cannot be separated from the teacher.

• Abhiṣeka (empowerment), āgama/lung (scriptural transmission), and upadeśa (personal instruction) are the gates to realization.

• Without the guru, one only chases a “ghost of Vajrayāna.”

3. Misrepresentation of Openness

• Claims that the Dalai Lama or Garchen Rinpoche declared tantras “open to all” are false.

• The Dalai Lama has only said that some knowledge must be shared to prevent seekers from falling into abuse, especially in contexts where tantra is misused as sexual indulgence.

• If empowerments were unnecessary, great lamas would not still be giving them.

4. The Tantric View of Practice

• The tantras describe three levels of teacher–disciple relationship:

  • Best: A siddha-guru with miraculous powers and a disciple with realization of emptiness.

  • Middling: A guru able to perform tantric activities and a disciple with pure vision.

  • Minimal: A disciple with bodhicitta and devotion, and a guru with genuine empowerment and blessing.

• In all cases, empowerment and devotion to the guru are indispensable.

5. Why Tantras Are Rarely Taught Directly

• Complexity: Tantras are convoluted and less immediately practical than sādhanas.

• Content: Some passages are antinomian or transgressive, making teachers reluctant to read them aloud.

• Translation: Many are untranslated or poorly translated.

• Politics: Sometimes Dharma is treated as property, reinforcing control and ownership attitudes.

6. Final Point

• Dharma cannot be owned.

• Realization requires empowerment, transmission, and instruction inseparable from the guru.

• Without devotion and samaya, what people chase is not Vajrayāna itself but its shadow.

#tantra #buddhism #aeon #magic #gnosis