Talk:Panchamakara

message: This talk page is for the discussion of the 5 Ms. I have noted that P.R. Sarkar in his spiritual alter ego mentioned that the 5 Ms have dual meaning. I believe this is significant in the interpretation of tantra as not just a physical practice, but rather as a spiritual practice being misunderstood throughout the ages. I haven't found any other interpretations of the 5Ms than Ananadamurti's own, so I welcome furter comments. cJ --Cracker jack 14:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

message: This article needs expansion, I'll try to update it from what I know from Rawson (mostly his book "The Art of Tantra"). --Snowgrouse 06:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion needed

message: Can we have some discussion about which authors are considered notable for purposes of inclusion in this article?  I am unfamiliar with this one that was just added, which does not mean much, but I am wondering how long the list will become if we begin adding to the section on interpretations in this way. Buddhipriya 20:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point, but I don't know what the criteria should be for an interpretation to be included in the article... Samael Aun Weor is best known in the spanish-speaking world but is beginning to grow more and more in the english-speaking world. There are schools all over the world from different organizations which teach his doctrine. I don't know much about other people's interpretations of the panchamakara, but it would make sense to include interpretations that in some ways differ from others', that contribute with something new, wouldn't you agree? In what ways do the interpretations mostly differ between interpreters? Am I right to assume that many take the five M's as having more subtle meanings than meat, fish, etc.? In that case Samael Aun Weor is different. But I think that the most important distinction is in the Maithuna part, which is sexual intercourse without reaching the orgasm. Is there anything else you want to know? I appreciate that you started a discussion instead of just deleting the passage. Anton H 08:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From a Wikipedia point of view, the issue is Wikipedia:Notability.  Simply because someone has published a book on something does not automatically make them notable.  In fact, inclusion of non-notable books is sometimes considered spam. I am not saying that this case is spamming, I am just trying to clarify what the notability issue is for any source mentioned in the article.  Another issue is WP:FRINGE, which covers how to handle theories that are so far off the beaten track that they are difficult to refute simply because no WP:RS mention them.  One way to determine if something is a WP:RS is to check if that source is used by other reliable sources whose quality is not disputed.  Is this author mentioned in the bibliography of any book on tantra written by another author? I am not picking on this author in particular, by the way, but I am concerned that there is the potential for this article getting out of hand quickly. Buddhipriya 17:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the Fringe issue should be a problem. The most unusual is probably the maithuna and there are many others who advocate the same thing (although they seem to be a minority). As far as I know, Samael Aun Weor is not mentioned in any other book on tantra, but if you perform a search on amazon.com his name will come up in a few other books. He is mentioned though in the website www.reuniting.info (by Marnia Robinson, author of the book Peace Between the Sheets) which is all about coitus reservatus and has a lot of scientific articles about it. Anton H 12:46, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the author is not mentioned by any other established and notable sources, then he is not clearly notable.  I am moving the material to the talk page pending further discussion to establish why his views deserve mention.  The reference to a self published web site does not establish notability, as that site would not be considered a WP:RS per WP:EL.  Buddhipriya 07:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, maybe there are other authors then who are better fitted in this article. Thank you for your time. Anton H 14:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samael Aun Weor 

message: The contemporary writer Samael Aun Weor connects the five M's to the five tattvas or elements and refers to the "intelligent enjoyment" of them as the "Pancatattva Ritual". Regarding the purpose of this ritual he writes:
The wonderful sparks of Maha-Kundalini are found within all the properties of Nature's five elements. We urgently need to turn these sparks into flames within ourselves. Unquestionably, even when the hidden Inner Divinity is not found within the intellectual animal mistakenly called human being, it consciously extends its innermost energy through the ritual Pancatattwa with the clear purpose of helping the Essence in the process of awakening...
The connection of the five M's with the five elements is made in the following way: "With respect to the organic subject, ether is encountered as being closely related to woman or to sexuality (Maithuna); air to wine (Madya); fire to meat (Mamsa); water to fish (Matsya) and earth to grains (Mudra)".Samael Aun Weor, The Mystery of the Golden Blossom, Thelema Press,  2003 (1971) It should be noted that the "wine" of Madya should always be unfermented; in other words, grape juice.
He writes that it is important to neither eat too much nor to little of the tattvas in order to be able to gain control over them. Regarding Mamsa, for example, he says this:
By what method or manner can we acquire the miraculous igneous powers of the Tejas Tattwa if we make the mistake of renouncing the carnivorous element? Unfortunately, the human multitude either becomes radically vegetarian or turns almost cannibalistic.
The type of sexual intercourse that Maithuna refers to is White Tantra, in which the sexual energy instead of being expelled through the orgasm is transmuted into ojas.Samael Aun Weor, The Doomed Aryan Race (excerpt), Thelema Press, 2003 (1967)
--Material moved from article on basis of non-notability of author. Buddhipriya 07:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Samael Aun Weor

message: Should Panchatattva (Tantra) be merged with this article? I know very little of this subject, but from recent comments it appears the two may be different titles for the same thing? Gouranga(UK) 14:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already redirected that article to here. It looked like most or all of the info was duplicate. IPSOS (talk) 16:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge with Panchatattva (Tantra)? 

message: Followers of this secret tradition broke caste taboos not only by associating with outcastes, but in accepting a sacred five-fold sacrament of meat, wine, fish, bread and sexual intercourse. This inner tradition was and is a gnostic one, in that it teaches a secret knowledge which leads to a direct experience of God. But unlike the Gnostic sects of Rome and Alexandria, the purpose of Tantra is not so much illumination as release: moksa, freedom from the cycle of endless birth, death and rebirth. In this it is uniquely Indian. 
Some Tantric schools, the so-called daksinachari, or "followers of the right-hand path," do not accept the five sacraments in their literal forms. Instead, madya, wine, is seen as symbolic of the knowledge that intoxicates; mamsa, meat, is taken to signify the mastery of speech; matsya, fish, stands for the currents of energy that flow through the body; mudra, parched grain, symbolizes the intense concentration of yogic meditation; while maithuna, the sexual act, is transformed into a meditation on the primal act of creation. 
In other circles, the meat, wine, fish and ritual sex were replaced, not with intellectual concepts, but by simple substitutes which were considered harmless from the karmic point of view. Thus wine was often replaced by honey, cow's milk or coconut water; meat by garlic or ginger; fish by buffalo's or sheep's milk; and the sexual act by roasted fruits and shoots. 
There can be no doubt, however, that in many circles, the real forms of the sacraments were enjoyed. Well-respected Tantras, like the Kularnava-tantra, emphasize that those who take part in the panchamakara ritual mainly for sexual pleasure or out of mere hedonism only defeat themselves. The senses are to be conquered by leaving nothing unexperienced.Sinha, Indra  (2007). The Five-Fold Sacrament. Source:  (accessed: January 31, 2008)
B9 hummingbird hovering (talk • contribs) 15:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information for inclusion in article