Tibetan Buddhism and the Reality of Possession


Tibetan Buddhism is marketed in the West as a path of the highest integrity. It is described as a philosophical system with techniques for developing mindfulness, compassion, and ultimately for attaining enlightenment. What is rarely stated plainly is that Vajrayāna tantric systems are structured around ritualized spirit possession and identity takeover.

A 2022 doctoral dissertation, Āveśa and Deity Possession in the Tantric Traditions of South Asia by Vikas Malhotra, documents that possession became central to medieval Tantric practice, including Buddhist Tantra that later developed into Tibetan Vajrayāna.[1] The Sanskrit term āveśa literally means “entering into.” In Tantric contexts, it refers to the fusion of practitioner and deity. This was not marginal but foundational.[2]

Deity Yoga Involves Possession

In Tibetan Deity Yoga, practitioners visualize themselves as a deity, recite its mantra, adopt its gestures and identity, and are instructed to experience no separation between themselves and that being. Modern teachers frame this as symbolic or psychological and as a method to realize emptiness. But examined historically, it follows the structure of possession technology:

  • Invocation
  • Descent of power
  • Identity fusion
  • Altered agency
  • Bodily and psychological signs

Medieval Tantric texts describe possession markers such as trembling, ecstasy, altered consciousness, and loss of ordinary identity. These same phenomena and mechanisms are reported in Vajrayāna contexts.

Guru Yoga and Human Possession

There are also uncomfortable truths concerning Guru Yoga. In this practice, the visualized guru dissolves into light and enters the disciple. The disciple experiences the guru’s mind as inseparable from their own. Empowerment is described as a descent of blessing into the subtle body. The dissertation notes that in Tantric systems, even advanced humans could possess others in positive ways. [3]

  • The guru embodies enlightened power.
  • Through initiation, that power descends.
  • The disciple becomes a vessel.
  • Identity shifts from individual to lineage-bearer.

This is ritualized human-to-human possession. It is framed as a positive transmission, but is it really? What are the implications of inviting another human being in to possess you? If you examine the numerous exposés of abuse in Vajrayāna communities over the past few decades, you might wonder why anyone would let a fallible human being enter and possess them. As someone who lived through egregious abuse by a supposedly enlightened Vajrayāna master, I can speak from personal experience. Guru yoga creates a framework in which another human being is granted intimate internal authority over your mind and identity. Why would anyone knowingly consent to that dynamic? They probably wouldn’t if they knew that spiritual possession is what actually happens during guru and deity yoga.

Why This Is Glossed Over

The fact that this is glossed over in Tibetan Buddhist teachings should give one pause. Why isn’t this discussed up front? It is because possession sounds primitive and carries negative psychiatric and colonial baggage. For these reasons, traditions seeking Western legitimacy avoid the term and conceal the reality beneath layers of theological and philosophical euphemism. The issue is not vocabulary, but whether practitioners are told clearly what is structurally taking place. If Vajrayāna depends on ritualized possession through deity and guru incorporation, that should be stated plainly.

In Western religious history, especially within Christianity, possession has long been regarded as negative, spiritually dangerous, and psychologically destabilizing. It is associated with loss of agency, vulnerability to manipulation by demonic entities, and the need for protection or exorcism. It is not treated as spiritually glamorous. It is treated as a serious risk.

Yet when similar identity-dissolving dynamics appear within an imported spiritual system, they are often elevated, aestheticized, and shielded from scrutiny. The language changes but the underlying structure does not.

Why does ritual possession provoke alarm in one context but reverence in another? Why does a shift in metaphysical framing automatically neutralize the concern? If this would raise red flags in a Western church, why should it be exempt from examination in a Tibetan temple?

The historical record is clear. Possession is not peripheral to Tibetan Tantra. It is embedded in its ritual core. If that is so, then practitioners deserve to confront that reality consciously rather than encounter it disguised as harmless symbolism or elevated mysticism.

Footnotes

[1] Vikas Malhotra, Āveśa and Deity Possession in the Tantric Traditions of South Asia: History, Evolution, & Etiology, PhD diss., University of California, Santa Barbara, 2022 .

[2] Ibid., discussion of possession becoming central to Tantric praxis .

[3] Ibid., discussion of positive forms of human possession .

[4] Ibid., integrated model of possession as embodied transformation .