QC

So what is tantra, or what is the tantric distinction? One way of starting that discussion might be to say that tantra assumes emptiness or direct experience of non-duality as a starting point. Without sunyata, no tantra.

christ people make this complicated. tantra is simply enlightened people who have or might have kids, getting through their days. you live, knowing you will die. you deal with work, kids, family, money, sex, duty, all from an enlightened perspective. life goes on until it don't

Something something chop wood carry water

the trick is getting enlightened people to have kids. that's the hard part of tantra. two enlightened beings fucking is, sure, all kinds of magic wonderland as you might expect. but these are practices from before the age of birth control. it's that simple. it's so very clear.

I like you Vinay, but yours sounds something like a neo-stoicism. Abhinavagupta would laugh at the idea that tantra was about keeping it cool in the worldly life. That would be a form of stoicism.

And he would further laugh at the idea that his works were too complicated. The beauty of his work is a part of tantra.

I think I get what you are saying, and I agree, to some extent. But, the Vijnanabharaiva says nothing about children. Tantra is a skillful means to enlightenment in that work. It is not a manual for worldly life.

So even if you don't see the kid thing spelled out in tantra, *sex=babies* in the cultures this came from, and if you weren't a monk, you were a parent, end of story. The tantra is literally *you don't renounce your role* even if you inwardly renounce. You just get on with life.