Tag: Tibetan Buddhism

Tantra’s Hidden Origins: Magicians, Sorcerers, and the Non-Literate World of Ancient India

mim

Modern scholarship on tantra has often treated it as a sophisticated religious system rooted in elite textual traditions and later integrated into high philosophical frameworks. In Buddhist contexts, especially in Tibetan scholastic traditions, tantric practice is frequently interpreted through the lens of Madhyamaka philosophy and incorporated into systematic doctrinal models. In these settings, tantra is positioned as the highest and most effective form of religious practice, supported and rationalized by philosophical analysis. There is truth in this account, but it reflects a later stage of development, the priorities of literate traditions that preserved texts, not necessarily the conditions under which tantra first emerged.

A growing number of scholars have challenged this retrospective model. Ronald M. Davidson’s study, Magicians, Sorcerers and Witches: Considering Pretantric, Non-sectarian Sources of Tantric Practices, offers a particularly forceful corrective: tantra cannot be adequately explained as the product of elite intellectual systems alone, nor as a simple inversion of orthodox traditions such as the Vedic corpus or the dharmasūtras.¹

Instead, Davidson argues that tantra must be understood within a much broader social and ritual field, one that includes non-literate practitioners whose activities long predate the emergence of tantric traditions as such. These figures, magicians, sorcerers, witches, and seers, were not marginal anomalies. They formed a durable and widespread presence in Indian religious life, operating across ancient, medieval, and even modern periods.² Their repertoire included healing, cursing, divination, spirit invocation, and various forms of ritual manipulation. These were not abstract techniques but effective practices. Some were performed in cremation grounds, involving work with corpses or restless or malevolent spirits: textual sources describe specialists who could animate a corpse or compel it to speak, a practice later associated with so-called vetāla rites. Others performed rituals to harm enemies, cure illness, or divine hidden information by invoking local deities or spirit beings. Such practices circulated widely and were recognized across Buddhist, Jain, and Brahmanical sources, even when criticized or prohibited. Many of these practices including corpse animation, harmful spells, and spirit work, would today be grouped under what is often called ‘witchcraft,’ though they were not understood as a single category in their original context.

Crucially, these practitioners were not “tantric.” They did not articulate soteriological goals of liberation, nor did they belong to the sectarian, lineage-based systems that later came to define tantric traditions.³ Their work was primarily practical rather than philosophically systematized, oriented toward immediate results rather than metaphysical coherence. Yet it is precisely this domain of practice–pragmatic, adaptive, and often non-literate–that Davidson identifies as a significant source for the later development of tantra.

This argument challenges a longstanding assumption in the study of Indian religions that authoritative origins must be found in texts. Much of the scholarship on tantra has privileged literate, intellectual traditions, in part because these are the sources that survive. But this creates a methodological distortion. If literacy rates in premodern India were extremely low, as Davidson notes, perhaps in the range of five percent, then any account of religious development that focuses exclusively on textual production necessarily excludes the overwhelming majority of practitioners.⁴ Tantra, emerging in such a context, cannot be reduced to what its later textualizers said about it.

The alternative Davidson proposes is not a single counter-origin, but a different model altogether. Rather than tracing tantra to one source, whether Vedic, Buddhist, or Śaiva, he describes a “multi-nodal” formation, meaning a network of multiple, overlapping sources in which diverse practices and traditions contribute to its development over time.⁵ Among these, the ritual activities of non-sectarian specialists play a crucial role. These practitioners developed techniques, terminologies, and ritual logics that were later appropriated by tantric communities. The process was neither systematic nor uniform. It was selective and intermittent, shaped by local needs and conditions.

In this light, tantra appears less as a coherent invention and more as a process of accumulation. Davidson characterizes this process in terms of bricolage: the assembling of new systems from pre-existing materials.⁶ Tantric traditions did not create their ritual repertoire out of nothing. They drew upon an already existing pool of practices—many of them associated with figures who operated outside the boundaries of orthodox religion—and recontextualized them within new ideological frameworks.

This perspective also clarifies why attempts to define tantra in purely oppositional terms have limited explanatory power. Some scholars have suggested that tantra emerges as a deliberate inversion of orthodox norms, particularly those codified in the dharmasūtras. Yet Davidson points out that such a model fails to account for the diversity of tantric practices. If inversion were the governing principle, one would expect a consistent pattern of reversal. Instead, the evidence reveals a heterogeneous collection of rituals, many of which do not correspond neatly to any orthodox counterpart.⁷

What this suggests is that tantra is not primarily a reaction against orthodoxy, but a reconfiguration of practices that existed alongside it. This is an important distinction. The categories of “orthodox” and “heterodox” begin to lose their explanatory clarity when we consider the extent to which ritual knowledge circulated outside formal institutions. The activities of magicians, sorcerers, and similar figures were not simply deviations from a normative system; they constituted an alternative domain of religious practice with its own internal logic.

The implications of this shift are quite significant. If tantra is, at least in part, a product of such practices, then its later intellectualization represents a secondary development. The philosophical frameworks that now define tantric traditions, whether in Buddhist or Hindu contexts, may be understood as attempts to systematize and legitimize practices that originated elsewhere.

It also complicates modern efforts to present tantra as a purely elevated or refined system. The desire to align tantra with high philosophy, particularly in contemporary interpretations, risks obscuring the conditions of its formation. Davidson’s analysis suggests that tantra’s roots lie not only in monasteries and scholastic debates, but in cremation grounds, village rituals, and the magical practices of specialists who worked with forces that formal religion often sought to regulate or marginalize.

To acknowledge this is not to reduce tantra to merely “magic,” nor to deny its later philosophical sophistication. It is to recognize that its development cannot be understood without taking seriously the contributions of those who operated outside the textual and institutional frameworks that scholars have traditionally privileged. Tantra, in this view, is not the product of a single tradition or a moment of divine revelation as is often taught. It is the outcome of a long process of interaction, appropriation, and reinterpretation across multiple domains of religious life, many of them outside the philosophical and textual traditions that later claimed to define it. In other words, tantra begins exactly where most scholars have not been looking—in the diverse and often non-literate ritual practices of magicians, sorcerers, and other specialists in ancient India.

Notes

  1. Ronald M. Davidson, “Magicians, Sorcerers and Witches: Considering Pretantric, Non-sectarian Sources of Tantric Practices,” Religions 8, no. 9 (2017): 188.
  2. Davidson, 2017, pp. 1–2.
  3. Davidson, 2017, p. 1.
  4. Davidson, 2017, p. 4.
  5. Davidson, 2017, pp. 2–3.
  6. Davidson, 2017, p. 1.
  7. Davidson, 2017, p. 2.

Guru Possession in Tibetan Buddhism: Power, Devotion, and the Loss of Autonomy

mim

What does it mean to be possessed?

In its most literal sense, possession refers to a person being overtaken by another force, such as a spirit, deity, or entity, that overrides their ordinary sense of control. This idea appears across many cultures in forms like trance, mediumship, and ritual invocation.

There is also a more subtle way to understand possession. It can describe a condition in which a person’s thoughts, emotions, loyalties, and identity become so deeply shaped by another that their independence begins to fade. The individual still appears outwardly intact, but internally their center of gravity has shifted.

After years of deep immersion in Tibetan Buddhist environments, I came to experience something that felt unmistakably like a form of possession. This is not a claim about official Tibetan Buddhist doctrine, which goes to great length to avoid that term, but a description of how the dynamics of devotion and authority unfolded in lived experience.

The Guru in Tibetan Buddhism

In Tibetan Buddhism, the role of the guru is central and highly elevated. Teachers such as Padmasambhava, Tsongkhapa, and Patrul Rinpoche all emphasize devotion to the spiritual teacher as a powerful means of transformation. The guru is described as the embodiment of awakened awareness and the source of blessings that lead the student toward realization.

In tantric practice, this relationship becomes especially intense. The student is encouraged to visualize the guru in an idealized form, merge their mind with the guru’s mind, and regard the guru as inseparable from themself. In theory, this is meant to dissolve the ego and reveal deeper awareness. In practice, it can become spiritual hijacking and inhabitation by a highly realized vajra master.

Charisma and the Aura of Power

Many Tibetan gurus possess a powerful form of charisma that is difficult to describe but easy to feel. It may appear as a kind of luminous presence that affects the emotional atmosphere around them. Students often report feelings of clarity, devotion, and euphoria in their presence.

Traditional accounts describe gurus as having extraordinary powers, sometimes referred to as siddhis. These may include heightened perception and an uncanny facility to read the minds of others as well as an ability to transmit meditative experiences into the minds of others. Stories circulate within communities about moments of insight or events that seem to confirm the guru’s special status. These magical capabilities have a strong effect. Over time, they reinforce the perception that the guru operates beyond human limits. That perception deepens one’s conviction that the guru isn’t ordinary but a godlike presence.

The Shift Toward Total Influence

At a certain point, devotion can cross into something absolute and intractable. The student’s sense of truth begins to align with the guru’s words. Emotional life becomes tied to the guru’s approval. Identity becomes shaped by the role of being a disciple. Doubt is no longer a neutral process but is seen as a failure of faith or commitment. Independence starts to disintegrate and students often become infantile, needing to discuss all their major life decisions with the guru, rather than act independently.

In my experience, this is where the language of possession begins to feel appropriate. It captures the sense that one’s inner center has been replaced by another’s influence.

Psychic and Energetic Dimensions on an Inner Level

Tantric Buddhism makes extensive use of visualization and subtle body practices. In guru yoga, students are instructed to imagine the guru sitting above their heads. The preliminary disciplines of Tibetan Buddhism (called ngondro) are designed to condition the mind and body for a major transformation. At the culmination of the practice, the guru dissolves into the practitioner, becoming inseparable from their awareness. Students are trained to dissolve their ordinary identity and merge with a more elevated form. This process is not superficial but reshapes perception at a deep level.

Over time, the boundary between self and guru can begin to dissolve. The guru’s presence may feel internal, continuous, and directive. Thoughts and emotions can be shaped in ways that are difficult to trace back to their origin. In a positive framing, this may be experienced as guidance or protection. The practitioner may hear the guru’s voice both internally and externally, offering direction, reassurance, or correction.

Within advanced tantric practice, particularly in forms associated with highest yoga tantra, this dynamic can deepen further. The guru and the yidam (meditational deity) may be experienced within the subtle body not as abstract symbols, but as vivid and intimate presences. At times, this can take on an erotic or deeply affective quality, often described in traditional language as the union of bliss and awareness.

The practitioner may experience powerful currents of energy moving through the inner network of channels and chakras. These movements can generate intense sensations of expansion, pleasure, and emotional fullness that feel complete and self-validating. From the inside, this can feel like direct spiritual guidance operating through the body itself.

At the same time, this is also a point of vulnerability. When identity and authority converge so completely, it becomes difficult to distinguish between one’s own agency and the influence of the internalized figure of the guru. In my experience, this dynamic can become a powerful mechanism for control.

Exclusivity and Control in the Outer Realm

This internal dynamic is often mirrored externally. In many communities, strong emphasis is placed on extreme loyalty to a single teacher. Seeking instruction from others may be discouraged or framed as a sign of fickleness or lack of devotion.

This creates a closed environment in which the guru becomes the primary source of meaning and authority. The student’s world gradually narrows, and alternative perspectives become harder to access, both intellectually and emotionally. Questioning the structure can feel destabilizing, not only in a social sense, but at the level of identity itself.

Hidden Dynamics

The more difficult aspects of these relationships are rarely visible in the beginning. New students often encounter warmth, insight, and a sense of belonging. Over time, as more complicated dynamics emerge, there may be increasing pressure to conform. Questioning or leaving can begin to feel impossible.

Because the relationship with the guru is embedded in sacred language, what might otherwise be recognized as manipulation or a violation of boundaries is instead interpreted as a higher teaching. This reframing makes it difficult to evaluate the situation clearly.

Deities, Power, and Obligation

Tibetan Buddhism includes many practices involving meditational and protector deities. Traditionally, these are understood as symbolic or as expressions of enlightened qualities. In lived experience, however, they can take on a more immediate spiritual and psychological presence.

Students may come to feel that the guru’s authority is supported by unseen forces. There may be a growing sense that resistance carries consequences that are not entirely understood or controlled. This adds another layer to the relationship. The influence of the guru extends beyond direct interaction and into belief, imagination, fear, and the manipulation of supernatural wrathful entities.

A Darker Interpretation

After years within this system, I began to interpret these dynamics in a more troubling way. The guru does not simply receive respect or devotion. The guru becomes the focal point of identity investment for many individuals at once. Each student focuses their attention and emotional energy on the same person. Students are encouraged to offer their body, speech, and mind to the guru, as well as time and support to the guru’s many projects. Physical offerings of money and goods are implicit. Over time, this concentration of devotion can inflate the guru’s sense of authority and power, and make criticism nearly impossible. The guru becomes someone who can do no wrong within the closed system that surrounds him. He becomes the absolute monarch of the community.

For the student, the result is often a complete erosion of autonomy. One’s sense of self becomes secondary to the structures that support the guru’s role and influence. On an esoteric level, it can feel as though one has been absorbed into another’s stream of being. Even though Tibetan Buddhist texts do not describe this as possession, this is essentially what is happening. The guru taps into powerful magic that binds the disciples and bends them to his will.

The success of the Tibetan Buddhist tantric system depends on many interconnected elements functioning correctly. If one aspect of the practice is misunderstood or misapplied, the entire process can shift and go awry. What is presented as liberation can instead become a dangerous entanglement, leading to destruction and annihilation.

In that state, the practitioner may no longer be guided, but completely overtaken and absorbed, unable to separate their mind, body, and will from the overpowering structure they have entered.

Enlightenment or Inversion? A “What If” Reflection on Lucifer’s Original Role

mim

There was a moment in a recent interview with the Catholic exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger that struck me. [1]

While speaking about Satan he said,

“Lucifer was his originally assigned name. “Lucifer” comes from a root meaning “to bear light.” He was supposed to enlighten our minds, that was his originally assigned task, and he refused to do so.”

That line intrigued me because if Lucifer’s original function was to enlighten, and he rejected that role in rebellion against God, then a natural question follows: What would a fallen angel do with that original mandate?

The Inversion Principle

Later in the same interview, Fr. Ripperger describes something even more striking:

“Beelzebub is the inversion of the Holy Spirit. Lucifer is the inversion of [Christ] the Second Person of the Trinity… And Satan is the ‘Father of Lies,’ so the inversion of God the Father. So you basically have this unholy trinity.”

If that’s true, then inversion isn’t incidental but structural and Lucifer’s rebellion becomes a mirroring, a distortion, and a counterfeit. What if Lucifer didn’t abandon his original assigned task of enlightening, but instead inverted it? What if instead of leading minds toward truth, he developed systems that simulate enlightenment while directing souls away from God?

A Familiar Word: Enlightenment

The word itself appears across a wide range of esoteric and mystical traditions such as Buddhist tantra, certain strands of Freemasonry, occult systems, and various Eastern philosophies.

But what does “enlightenment” mean in each context?

In Christianity, truth is revealed by God and received through grace, but in many esoteric systems, enlightenment is something achieved, often through hidden knowledge, ritual, and disciplined technique. In tantric traditions, enlightenment involves engagement with spiritual forces or entities other than the Biblical God.

If a being like Lucifer wanted to draw souls away from God, not by force, but by deception, what would be the most effective strategy? Probably not obvious evil, but something that resembles truth while subtly redirecting it in a parallel system that is a convincing alternative. Wouldn’t he create a spiritual landscape that feels ancient and profound, but is ultimately oriented away from the Creator?

From that perspective, several contrasts begin to stand out:

1. Creator vs. Non-Creator Frameworks

Biblical Christianity affirms a personal God who created all things. Many non-theistic or differently structured systems do not center reality on a personal Creator, and may instead describe it as arising through interdependent processes or consciousness.

2. One Life vs. Many Lives

Christianity teaches that we live once and then face judgment. Traditions such as Tibetan Buddhism describe cycles of rebirth (samsara) across many lifetimes.

3. Grace vs. Technique

In Christianity, salvation is not earned but given. In esoteric systems, advancement is often tied to occult knowledge, initiation, and disciplined practice.

4. Prohibition of Magic vs. Ritual Use

The Bible consistently forbids sorcery and magical practice. Tantric traditions incorporate rituals, mandalas, invocations, and even practices described as subjugation or destruction of enemies.

That last point raises a difficult question: how do such practices relate to broader Buddhist teachings on compassion and non-harm?

5. Apostolic Succession vs. Spiritual Lineage

In Catholic Christianity, spiritual authority is understood to flow through apostolic succession: a historical, traceable line from Christ to the apostles and through the bishops of the Church. This succession is not merely symbolic; it is understood as a transmission of authority grounded in Christ Himself, preserved through sacrament and doctrine.

In Tibetan Buddhism and related traditions, there is also a strong emphasis on lineage. Spiritual authority and teaching are passed from guru to disciple in an unbroken chain, often tracing back to an enlightened master. In Tibetan Buddhist lineages it traces back to the Buddha himself. Initiation into practices, especially in tantric contexts, typically requires empowerment from someone within that lineage.

At a structural level, the resemblance is striking. Both systems emphasize continuity, transmission, and authorized access to deeper spiritual realities. But within the framework of inversion, the similarity itself becomes significant.

If Lucifer’s rebellion operates through mirroring and distortion rather than outright opposition, then a counterfeit system would not discard the idea of transmission but it would replicate it in altered form. Instead of a lineage grounded in divine revelation and safeguarded by the Church, one might expect a lineage grounded in esoteric knowledge, initiation, and experiential realization.

In that sense, what appears to be parallel structure could be interpreted as inversion: a system that retains the form of authorized transmission while redirecting its source and purpose.

Which leads to a deeper conclusion: if both claim lineage, continuity, and authority, you must discern the true source of that transmission, whether it originates from the Most High God or from something that imitates Him.

Are These Just Different Paths?

At this point, some might object: what if these are simply two different paths to the same ultimate reality? What if “God” in Christianity and “enlightenment” in other systems are just different expressions of the same truth? But that idea becomes difficult to sustain when the core claims directly contradict one another. A personal Creator who judges the soul is not the same as an impersonal reality with no creator. A single earthly life followed by judgment is not the same as endless cycles of rebirth. Grace given by God is not the same as enlightenment achieved through occult techniques. These are not minor differences but fundamentally opposed descriptions of reality. Within the framework of inversion, this matters. If one system is true, then a parallel system that contradicts it cannot simply be an alternative route to the same destination, it must lead somewhere else entirely.

The Question of Power

Another detail from the interview adds an important layer. Fr. Ripperger describes cases in which individuals gained accurate hidden knowledge through demonic influence:

“The demons would tell her, ‘This is what your husband’s doing,’ etc. And it was accurate… that’s how you know it’s true—it’s actually accurate.”

Accuracy, in itself, is not proof of goodness. Many systems, ancient and modern, promise access to hidden knowledge, insight, or power. But the deeper question is: what is the source of that knowledge?

A Counterfeit System?

If we follow this line of thought, a possibility emerges. A fallen angel, originally designed to enlighten, could create entire systems that:

  • Mimic divine structure
  • Offer real spiritual experiences
  • Provide accurate, but limited or misleading, knowledge
  • Encourage self-deification (“you will be like gods”)
  • And ultimately redirect worship, trust, and dependence away from the Biblical God

In that light, the serpent’s words in Genesis begin to look less like a one-time event and more like a recurring pattern:

“You will be like God.”

Not through obedience, but hidden knowledge, technique, and transformation.

Final Thought

If Lucifer’s original role was to enlighten, and he rejected God, then the question is not whether enlightenment exists. The question is where each path promising “enlightenment” ultimately leads.

Footnote:

  1. Interview with Tucker Carlson and Fr. Chad Ripperger:
    https://youtu.be/Of3ys0dmyYc?si=U630YmXL0sF0-C2-

Tibetan Buddhism and the Reality of Possession

mim

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 .

The Tantric Image That Is Never Explained

mim

Among the many images that circulate quietly within Tibetan tantric lineages, there are several that are never explained to most practitioners and never shown outside advanced ritual contexts. One such image, often embedded within long Mahākāla rites and other high-level tantric liturgies, depicts a bound, pierced, weapon-studded human figure marked with mantras, seals, and symbolic restraints. To the uninitiated, it resembles a wrathful medical diagram or an esoteric curse talisman. To insiders, it represents something much more disturbing.

These images are not symbolic reminders of compassion, nor are they abstract metaphors for ego-death. They are ritual instruments. Specifically, they are used in rites intended to punish, bind, obstruct, or destroy the lives of those who are deemed to have broken samaya—the sacred vows binding a tantric practitioner to their guru, lineage, and yidam deity.

This fact is rarely discussed openly. When it is mentioned at all, it is framed euphemistically as “removing obstacles,” “protecting the Dharma,” or “subjugating harmful forces.” What is almost never acknowledged is that, within some tantric systems, the “harmful force” being targeted is a former disciple.

Why Beginners Are Never Told

Students entering Tibetan Buddhism are typically introduced through ethics, meditation, philosophy, and aspirational ideals: loving-kindness, compassion, non-violence, and wisdom. Tantric Buddhism is presented as a fast but benevolent path, dangerous only insofar as it requires devotion and discipline.

What they are not told is that questioning, criticizing, or emotionally reacting to a guru can itself be framed as a samaya violation. Nor are they told that certain rituals explicitly teach that lineage holders have the right, and sometimes the obligation, to retaliate metaphysically against perceived betrayal.

Beginners are warned vaguely that breaking samaya leads to “terrible consequences,” often described as karmic rather than intentional. The implication is that the universe itself will respond. What is left unsaid is that these consequences may be deliberately invoked, ritualized, and sustained by human agents acting within a tantric framework.

The unspoken lesson is simple: dissent is dangerous.

The Yidam Is Watching

At the core of highest yoga tantra is the yidam deity, the meditational deity with whom the practitioner forms an exclusive, intimate bond. The yidam is not merely visualized as an external symbol but is gradually internalized, embodied, and ultimately identified with as one’s own enlightened nature.

This process is often described in modern terms as psychological transformation. In traditional terms, however, it is far closer to classical possession.

The practitioner receives initiation from a master understood to be fully realized–meaning fully inhabited by the yidam. Through empowerment, mantra recitation, repeated visualization, and ritual invitation, the practitioner repeatedly invites the deity to enter their body and mind. Over time, the boundary between practitioner and deity is intentionally dissolved.

This is how the yidam “monitors” the practitioner: not metaphorically, but through total psychic access. Thoughts, emotions, doubts, and impulses are no longer private. They are offerings or offenses.

Within this framework, enlightenment, siddhis, and protection are granted conditionally. The deity gives, and the deity can withhold. More disturbingly, the deity can retaliate.

“Sons” of the Deity and Absolute Obedience

Advanced tantric systems often refer to lineage masters as the “sons” of the yidam. These are the men who have fully merged with the deity through practice. Disrespecting such a figure is not treated as a social conflict or ethical disagreement; it is framed as an attack on the deity itself.

This becomes especially dangerous in cases involving sexual relationships between guru and disciple. While not every such relationship is abusive, many are. In some cases, a guru expects sexual access as a demonstration of devotion and service. When the disciple becomes distressed, confused, or resistant, or when she later speaks out, the guru’s response is not accountability but punishment.

From within the tantric logic, the guru is not merely a man abusing power. He is a god-being whose will cannot be questioned. The disciple’s suffering is reframed as karmic purification or divine retribution.

Ritual Retaliation Is Real

There is a tendency among modern defenders of Tibetan Buddhism to dismiss accounts of retaliation as superstition or paranoia. Yet whistleblowers, both Western and Asian, have repeatedly documented actions taken against former disciples over months or years. In the most extreme cases, these are not momentary curses but sustained practices intended to ruin health, relationships, livelihood, and sanity.

I personally have known three gurus who engaged in such retaliatory behavior. These were not fringe figures. They were respected, accomplished masters with devoted followings. The rituals were not symbolic. They were methodical, intentional, and experienced by the practitioners themselves to be effective.

This is witchcraft in the plain sense of the word. It is no different in structure or intent from Haitian vodou curses or European malefic magic. The only difference is the religious branding.

The Ethical Contradiction at the Heart of Tantra

This raises an unavoidable question: how can a system that claims descent from the historical Buddha whose teachings emphasize non-harming, restraint, and compassion contain practices that deliberately destroy human lives?

The answer lies in tantric exceptionalism. Within these systems, ordinary Buddhist ethics are considered provisional. Once one enters the tantric domain, morality becomes subordinate to obedience, secrecy, and power. A guru possessed by a wrathful deity is no longer bound by conventional ethics because the deity is not.

Publicly, tantric masters speak constantly of compassion and loving-kindness. They smile, bless, and perform virtue with great skill. Privately, nothing is free. Every empowerment creates obligations. Every vow tightens the noose. And the deeper one goes, the more rigid and unforgiving the system becomes.

The Real Danger

Not all Tibetan Buddhist teachers engage in these practices. Many do not. But the fact that some of the most accomplished masters have done so for centuries means the danger is structural, not incidental.

The real threat of tantric Buddhism is that it weaponizes devotion, sanctifies possession, and normalizes ritual violence while hiding behind the language of Buddhist compassion and enlightenment.

Until this is openly acknowledged, aspirants will continue to walk blindly into systems that can, and sometimes do, destroy them, all in the name of awakening.

Thomas Merton’s Exploration of Tibetan Buddhist Mysticism and His Untimely Death

mim

Thomas Merton remains one of the most fascinating and controversial figures in modern Catholic spirituality. A Trappist monk whose writing reached millions, he invited readers into a life of contemplation shaped by silence, inner stillness, and spiritual inquiry. By the 1960s, his search had expanded far beyond the borders of Christian tradition and into the world of Eastern mysticism. His journey raises important questions about discernment, authority, and the possibility that some mystical experiences do not come from God at all.

Why Merton looked East

Merton believed that Western Christianity had lost something essential. He felt that institutional concerns and intellectual debate had overshadowed direct experience of God. Eastern religions appeared to preserve a contemplative path in a purer form. Like many in the post–Vatican II era, he saw dialogue with non-Christian religions as an opportunity rather than a threat.

But such openness came with a cost. Many Catholics of his time assumed that all deep mystical traditions shared a common source. The idea that spiritual experiences could arise from contrary or even deceptive origins was rarely discussed. This lack of discernment created a vulnerable generation of seekers who treated Eastern practices as spiritually neutral when they were not.

Merton’s early interest in Asia

Long before traveling to Asia, Merton was reading Zen, Taoism, Advaita Vedanta, and Sufi mystics. He approached them with sincere curiosity, but also with a growing assumption that truth could be gleaned from any direction. His writings from this period suggest a desire for universal contemplative experience, sometimes without sufficient attention to the distinct theological and spiritual claims behind each tradition.

This tendency to universalize mystical experience would shape his final years.

Meeting the Dalai Lama

In 1968, Merton traveled to Dharamsala and spent several days with the Dalai Lama. Their meetings were warm and genuinely contemplative. Merton admired the Dalai Lama’s kindness, discipline, and clarity. The Dalai Lama later remembered Merton as the first Christian monk who came to him not as a tourist or academic but as a fellow practitioner of deep prayer.

Yet admiration does not erase theological differences. Tibetan Buddhism denies a creator God, embraces reincarnation, and employs esoteric tantric practices that involve deities outside the Holy Trinity. From a Christian point of view, this difference is huge. The Church has long taught the discernment of spirits: mystical experiences must be tested, because deceptive spiritual forces can imitate peace, clarity, and even compassion. Merton did not always express this caution.

Encounter with Kalu Rinpoche

Merton also met Kalu Rinpoche, one of the most respected Tibetan meditation masters of the twentieth century. He attended teachings on Mahamudra and was deeply impressed by the monastic discipline he witnessed. Kalu Rinpoche even invited him to undertake a long hermit retreat. Merton seemed drawn to the idea.

But Tibetan Buddhism contains layers of esoteric practice that Merton, like most Westerners of his time, did not fully understand. The serene exterior of Tibetan spirituality often conceals tantric rituals, spirit invocation, and hierarchical guru devotion that are fundamentally incompatible with Christianity. Later revelations of abuse and occult manipulation inside some of the major Tibetan lineages show how incomplete the Western picture had been. Merton could not have known this, yet his enthusiasm reflected a lack of discernment that would affect many who followed in his footsteps.

What else he explored

Merton’s range of interests was broad. He read Zen masters, Taoist sages, Hindu philosophers, and Sufi poets. He studied Christian hesychasm with new energy and sought common threads among all traditions. His impulse was generous, but generosity is not the same as spiritual clarity. Christian prayer directs the soul toward union with God. Eastern meditation, especially tantra, aims at dissolving the ego and merging with non-Christian spiritual entities.

These are not complementary goals but representative of different spiritual destinies.

Bangkok and a mysterious death

After leaving Dharamsala, Merton traveled to Bangkok to speak at an international monastic conference. On December 10, 1968, he died in his cottage shortly after giving a lecture. The official explanation was accidental electrocution from a faulty fan. Yet no autopsy was performed, and the circumstances were poorly documented. The inconsistencies have fueled speculation for decades.

His death came at a moment when he was moving more deeply into Buddhist thought. Whether he intended to integrate aspects of Tibetan practice into Christian monasticism remains unknown. His passing has an unfinished quality, as if he was on the edge of a major spiritual shift whose implications were never tested.

Why Merton still matters

Merton’s life challenges readers to seek authentic spiritual contemplation, not just intellectual understanding. It also warns Christians that not every path that promises depth is aligned with God. Eastern systems often carry metaphysical commitments and spiritual forces that stand in real conflict with Christian revelation. Without a strong framework of discernment, even sincere seekers can be misled.

Merton’s writings still inspire, yet his story also stands as a cautionary tale. The longing for mystical experience is real and often holy, but it must be shaped by sound doctrine and a sober awareness that not every spiritual path leads toward God.

Why a Baptized Christian Cannot Also Hold Tantric Vows

mim

As young Western seekers, we were told directly by the refuge lama, a highly accomplished yogi whose presence and meditative depth made his words seem authoritative, that we could be both Christian and Buddhist. He said there was no conflict, that a person could be both Christian and take refuge in Tibetan Buddhism. Only much later did I begin to see that the metaphysical claims of Christianity and Tibetan Buddhism do not sit comfortably together. When examined honestly they point in opposite directions. This article explores that truth and why the issue deserves more clarity than it usually receives.

The Christian indelible mark

Catholic teaching holds that baptism is not a symbolic rite. It confers a real spiritual character on the soul, a mark that is indelible and permanent.¹ The person baptized is said to belong to Christ in a definitive way. Even if one later rejects Christian belief, the character imprinted by baptism remains. This teaching forms a central claim about spiritual identity. Baptism is a covenant, a seal, and a bond that cannot be undone by human action. Some theologians and exorcists describe it as a spiritual allegiance that shapes the destiny of the person marked by it.²

Vows in Tibetan Buddhism

Tibetan Buddhism also understands vows as real phenomena rather than mental constructs. They are described as subtle forms that arise in the practitioner’s continuum and remain active as long as the vow is kept.

Refuge: The refuge vow is the foundation of the path. To take refuge is to entrust oneself entirely to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. This commitment is said to exist as a subtle form until broken.³

Bodhisattva vow: This vow stabilizes the intention to attain enlightenment for all beings. It is also considered to have ontological presence, shaping the practitioner’s moral and spiritual life.⁴

Tantric vows: Tantric samaya binds the practitioner to the guru, the deity, and the mandala. Tibetan commentaries treat samaya as a form that abides in the subtle body. Maintaining it is essential for any tantric practice to function. Breaking it has extremely dire consequences.⁵ Tantric vows require a view of reality that rejects any creator God and understands the deity as a manifestation of awakened mind.⁶

The awareness of the deities

What makes this tension even more striking is the role of the tantric deities. In traditional Tibetan understanding these deities are not abstract ideas. They are regarded as fully aware and responsive.⁶ When a practitioner takes refuge or samaya, the commitment is made not only in the presence of a human teacher but in the presence of the deity invoked.⁷

This means that even if a lama sincerely believes there is no conflict with Christianity, the deity knows exactly what commitments the practitioner brings into the mandala. The deity is aware of conflicting allegiances. If baptism marks a person as belonging to Christ, the tantric deity would encounter that mark as a pre-existing and incompatible bond.

When my refuge lama told us that being Christian was no problem, I accepted his assurance. He was revered, a man of immense yogic accomplishment. Yet the actual teachings of the system he represented do not support his statement. Neither do the Christian teachings. Christianity requires allegiance to the Most High God and sees baptism as a permanent seal of belonging.⁸ Thus, the two religious systems do not fit together. They are not partial overlaps but mutually exclusive covenants.

The question of whether one can be both Christian and a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner is not merely philosophical. It concerns real commitments that each tradition claims have unseen but powerful form. To treat these vows and sacraments lightly is to misunderstand them. To treat them seriously is to recognize that both paths make exclusive claims on the identity and destiny of the practitioner. Honesty requires admitting that they cannot be combined without dissolving the integrity of one or the other.

Sources

¹ Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed., §§1272–1274.
² Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q. 63, aa. 1–6.
³ Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Taye, The Treasury of Knowledge, Book Six.
⁴ Je Tsongkhapa, The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment, Vol. 1.
⁵ Khenpo Ngawang Pelzang, A Guide to the Words of My Perfect Teacher.
⁶ Patrul Rinpoche, The Words of My Perfect Teacher.
⁷ Dalai Lama and Alexander Berzin, The Gelug/Kagyu Tradition of Mahamudra, chapters on tantric initiation.
⁸ Benedict XVI, Address to the Roman Curia, 22 December 2006, section on baptismal identity.

Tibetan Tantra: A Snake in a Bamboo Tube

mim

In Tibetan tantric Buddhism, the image of the snake trapped in a bamboo tube is more than a vivid proverb. It functions as a doctrinal warning: once a student enters the tantric path, there is no lateral escape. One either goes upward toward awakening or downward toward failure and “vajra hell.” Teachers have used this image to describe the uncompromising nature of samaya, the vows that bind a student to the guru, the deity, and the tantric methods themselves.¹

What is striking is how explicitly the tradition frames tantra as irreversible and high-stakes, and how rarely that stark truth is communicated to Western beginners before they agree to the vows that supposedly make the tube snap shut behind them. This mismatch between traditional warning and Western presentation is not a minor detail; it shapes the entire experience of Vajrayāna in modern contexts.

When the Warning Arrives Too Late

Many longtime practitioners have reported that the “snake in the tube” metaphor is introduced only after they have taken empowerments, established loyalty to the teacher, and accepted vows they did not fully understand. In one account, students were told after receiving advanced teachings that they were now like snakes [in a tube] with no side exit, and that questioning or leaving the guru’s authority carried dire karmic consequences.² Once framed in these terms, the student is no longer encountering tantra freely. The imagery becomes a retrospective justification for total commitment and an interpretive trap that discourages reevaluation, dissent or disengagement.

This sequencing matters. Warnings given after the student is already inside the tube are not warnings at all; they function as a mechanism of control. Sadly, it’s not just empty scaremongering to get the student to do whatever the teacher wants. The teacher can play a part in destroying the student if he wishes.

Western students, however, often enter tantra without the cultural framework that understands concepts like vajra–hell, and as a result frequently interpret them metaphorically or ignore them altogether during empowerments or teachings. As a result, the gravity of samaya is often hidden in plain sight. Students may assume that vows are symbolic or aspirational when, within the tradition, they are treated as binding conditions that determine spiritual destiny.

The asymmetry of information here is profound. Tibetan teachers know the stakes, but Western students usually do not.

Fear as a Reinforcing Mechanism

Inside the tantric system, samaya is often discussed as a bond of trust and devotion. But its shadow side is rarely addressed openly: the way threats of karmic ruin can be used to enforce silence and obedience. If leaving the guru, criticizing harmful behavior, or even doubting the teacher’s purity is framed as a breach of samaya, then fear becomes central to the student’s experience. Some Tibetan masters teach that both teacher and student can fall into vajra-hell for damaging the guru-disciple bond.³ In practice, however, this warning is most often directed at students, who are told that speaking publicly about misconduct or abuse may destroy their spiritual future.

Why the Snake Matters

The “snake in the bamboo tube” metaphor distills these concerns with unusual clarity. It shows that tantra is not designed to allow experimentation or partial commitment. It requires total participation in a closed system with its own rules, hierarchies, and cosmology. In cultures where this system has historically been embedded, those entering it do so in fuller awareness of the stakes. In the West, students often do not and they may hear such warnings in a highly suggestible state, without really grasping the implications.

One famous guru in the 1980s bluntly told students that they could be both Christian and Buddhist with no conflict whatsoever. This blatantly goes against Christian teaching. In those days Westerners were often thrust into the three-year-retreat program shortly after they signed up for teachings at Dharma centers with no knowledge of what they were really getting into. Many had little preparation to truly understand the arcane nature of samaya and its risks. Furthermore, many Tibetan teachers took advantage of their roles as authority figures to manipulate vulnerable students into sexual relationships and other sorts of commitments. Engaging in secretive sexual relationships with students while pressuring them to take highest yoga tantra vows and practices that would bind them forever often led to deep confusion and psychological unmooring.

The result is a form of spiritual engagement that looks consensual on the surface but lacks true informed consent. Students may be drawn in by promises of transformation but only later discover the rigidity of the commitments they have made. This is especially jarring given that Vajrayāna wraps together the renunciation of the Hinayāna, the boundless compassion of the Mahāyāna, and the esoteric demands of tantra. In this unwieldy fusion, the same tradition that teaches gentle observation of thoughts can also insist that a single critical thought toward one’s guru carries the weight of karmic catastrophe. The threat of vajra-hell sits uneasily beside Buddhism’s wider emphasis on compassion and non-judgment. An ethical issue looms large: a path that describes itself as having no side exit should not be offered as if it does.

To treat tantra’s danger as a secret or secondary detail is to undermine the integrity of the path itself. If practitioners are indeed snakes in a tube, they deserve to be told before they go inside.

Footnotes

¹ “Once you take samaya you become like a snake in a vertical bamboo tube: you’re either going up, or you’re going down. You can’t sneak out the side.” (Kun zang.org) (kunzang.org)
² Note: practitioner-reports and forum posts indicate the metaphor is often applied post-initiation. For example: “A Vajrayana practitioner is like a snake in a tube; … he can either go up or down, not left or right.” (dharmawheel.net)
³ “The metaphor for samaya is a snake in a bamboo tube. It has only 2 directions – up to enlightenment or down to the hells.” (TibetDharma.com) (Tibetan Buddhism)

From the Yellow Brick Road to the Rock of Peter: A Journey Back

mim

I was raised in the Catholic faith. Its prayers, seasons, schools, and sacraments shaped my earliest understanding of the world. But as I grew older, the atmosphere changed and it started to feel foreign to me. After the upheavals in the liturgy and doctrine that followed the Second Vatican Council, everything became muted and seemed different. Gone was the mystery and ritual of the high Mass. What replaced it was grey and humdrum. As I embraced my mid-teens I felt like the Church had become unrecognizable. I was bored in Mass and began to question everything. I felt myself drifting, carried away by the freedom and experimentation of the post-Hippie generation.

That search carried me far from the Church for more than three decades. As an adult I immersed myself in Tibetan Buddhism. Compared to the Catholicism I thought I had outgrown, this new path was exhilarating. The colorful symbols, rituals, exotic chanting, and promises of hidden knowledge shone bright like the Technicolor world Dorothy steps into after her house lands in Oz. Everything was vibrant and different. For a long time, I believed I had found a far richer spiritual universe than the one I had left behind.

As the years passed, I committed myself more deeply to Tibetan tantric Buddhism. Gurus, deities, and intricate ritual practices in long retreats promised transformation. I accepted men as guides who claimed they could lead me toward enlightenment. But slowly, over time, questions emerged. The yanas contradicted one another. The path began to feel less like liberation and more like entanglement in a feudal system with a hazy set of arcane laws. What had once seemed full of promise started to feel like a maze of deception.

The turning point came when I least expected it. Like Dorothy traversing the Emerald City, dazzled by spectacle, I had followed the yellow brick road as far as I could, believing I was approaching a transformative experience of enlightenment. And just as Dorothy eventually reaches Oz and pulls back the curtain, only to find a small man manipulating levers, I was forced to see behind the veil as well. The Root Guru I had trusted was revealed as a sorcerer, and the tantric deities I had once exalted no longer appeared as divine guides but as accusing, demonic forces. They became something like the scary flying monkeys that viciously attack Dorothy and her friends at one point. I suddenly realized that the impressive display I had put my faith in was only smoke and mirrors, and the powers behind it were not what they claimed at all, but actually fallen angels and their human minions.

That realization shook me to my core. In the very moment the illusion collapsed, a strange clarity emerged. I found myself remembering what I had learned as a child, what the Church had taught from the very beginning. The contrast between truth and imitation soon became unmistakable. What I had embraced as enlightened beings were nothing of the sort. Their nature did not align with the Most High God but with the very deceptive forces that the Bible warns against. I had spent years seeking hidden wisdom only to discover that the truth I needed had been with me since childhood. What a bizarre discovery after so many years of a life lived in error.

When I returned to the Catholic Church, I expected judgment or distance. Instead, I found the opposite. The Church received me with open arms, with the warmth of a parent waiting for a child who has been gone far too long. Over the years, thanks to Popes like John Paul II and Benedict, the Church regained some of its true colors that had been lost in the hasty rush to modernize. It now seemed sacramental and grounded in truth. I began to approach my re-version with the discerning mind of an adult hungry for knowledge. Gradually, a whole new world opened up to me and I was amazed that the truth of Christ’s sacrifice to humanity held new meaning after the horrors I had just lived through in the occult. Is the institution of the Catholic Church perfect? No. Its human side can fail, and at times it clearly has. Some say it is in crisis. Yet Christ promised, “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). That promise has become an anchor for me in these difficult times.

My journey through the many beguiling practices of Tibetan Buddhism taught me how convincing illusions can be. It taught me how eager the human heart is for spiritual novelty, and how easy it is to mistake mystical experiences for truth. The Catholic Church, which I once believed had lost its footing, proved steady after all. After thirty-five years away, I came home to the enduring Christian faith that had been guiding me from the beginning.

The Structure of Tantric Abuse

mim

In Tibetan tantric Buddhism, the relationship between guru and disciple is said to be sacred, a channel for transmission of enlightenment itself. Yet within that same structure lies a potential for absolute domination. When a guru feels threatened, betrayed, or exposed, the same system that demands devotion can become an instrument of terror.

The tantric logic of punishment

In tantric doctrine, every vow (samaya) between guru and disciple is a metaphysical bond. Breaking it is said to unleash cosmic consequences. Ancient texts speak of wrathful deities and oath-bound protectors who punish those who “slander the guru” or “harm the Dharma.” The idea is not metaphorical. Illness, accidents, or misfortune are interpreted as visible proof that unseen forces are enforcing spiritual law.¹

A guru who believes this, and who claims mastery of the dark ritual practices that command those forces, often teaches others to believe it. That teacher wields enormous psychological power. To label someone a “samaya-breaker” is to mark them as deserving of sickness or death. This is not an internal accusation only; it shapes the views of the community where the guru holds god-like power. It gives the guru a pretext to use ritual methods to harm students whenever he deems it necessary.

Entities that cause disease

Traditional Tibetan cosmology offers a detailed taxonomy of spirits believed to cause physical and mental harm: bdud (demons), gdon (malevolent spirits), btsan (fiery mountain gods), klu (serpent beings of water), and srin po (ogres).² Each category is said to afflict a different organ, emotion, or realm of life. Texts such as René de Nebesky-Wojkowitz’s Oracles and Demons of Tibet describe elaborate systems of offerings and threats designed to control these beings.

Within this worldview, ritual specialists do not invent malevolent forces but redirect them. A demon bound by oath can be petitioned to punish a perceived oath-breaker. Protector deities can be asked to “remove obstacles” by striking enemies with disease or madness. These ideas are deeply embedded in tantric liturgy and methodology, even if modern dharma centers prefer to describe them symbolically.

The internal logic of coercion

When this metaphysical framework meets the authoritarian structure of a retreat or monastic hierarchy, the result can be catastrophic.³ Gurus can claim divine justification for acts that would otherwise be seen as abusive. If a disciple questions orders, refuses sexual advances, or tries to leave, the teacher can declare them in spiritual violation. From that point on, any misfortune that follows can be attributed to supernatural punishment rather than the guru’s actions.

Real world allegations

The potential for that logic to cross into criminal abuse is not theoretical. Adele Tomlin has published a series of testimonies from women who participated in long-term tantric retreats under the auspices of major Tibetan Buddhist organizations in the United Kingdom and Nepal. According to Tomlin’s report, complaints were submitted to trustees of the dharma centers, as well as to resident teachers. Police reports were also made, with at least one woman reportedly informed that criminal acts had occurred.

The list of complaints is substantial: “…sexual harassment, sexual assault/coercion, ‘false imprisonment’ i.e. refusing to allow people to leave the retreat for urgent matters, such as medical diagnosis and treatment or due to psychological breakdowns, emotional bullying, insistence on signing non-disclosure legal agreements, refusal to provide proper aid to those in physical pain or serious sickness. It was reported that women who had requested to leave the retreat for the above reasons were responded to with threats that they would go to hell…and telling them they would have short lives, terrible sicknesses and their family members would die and get sick too.” There are also accounts of tantric rituals being misused “to ‘force’ consorts to engage in ‘subtle body energy’ unions without appropriate consent/devotion or even pre-requisite qualifications of the guru or consort for such a relation,” and reports that participants’ passports were confiscated before entering retreats in Nepal.”³ See Tomlin’s article here.

The psychology of fear

Once a disciple internalizes the idea that disobedience invites divine punishment, ordinary safeguards such as the law, conscience, and community protection lose their power. The guru becomes both the source of danger and the only possible protection from it. Fear of sickness, insanity, or karmic ruin may keep followers silent even when they experience or witness abuse. This is coercive control disguised as spirituality.

Why tantra is uniquely risky

Every hierarchical religion can produce abuse, but tantric systems amplify the risk because they contain dark magical rituals that can be used to secretly harm students who do not show proper obedience. In the Tibetan tantric system, the guru is not just a teacher but the embodiment of enlightenment itself. Vows are said to bind across lifetimes. Breaking them is imagined to destroy spiritual progress and unleash demonic retribution. That belief gives abusive teachers a supernatural mandate to harm and a theological excuse when they do.⁴

Many practitioners are drawn to long-term retreats by tantra’s promise of transformation. But are the risks worth it? Without structural accountability, the same tools can become weapons. When secrecy, charisma, and ritual authority converge, even devoted, sincere, and intelligent students can be trapped in a reality of pain and punishment.

For those who have lived inside such systems, the scars run deeper than physical or sexual trauma. The damage is also ontological: the haunting sense that unseen forces will stalk them forever and that they are cursed beyond escape. Healing begins by reclaiming moral and spiritual agency, by recognizing that no guru, spirit, or protector holds dominion over one’s body, mind, or fate. Yet once that agency has been surrendered to powerful gurus and their invisible minions, recovering it can be very difficult.

Notes

  1. Stanley Mumford, Himalayan Dialogue: Tibetan Lamas and Gurung Shamans in Nepal (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989).
  2. René de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, Oracles and Demons of Tibet (The Hague: Mouton, 1956).
  3. Adele Tomlin sole author of Dakini Translations website: NOT SO “HOLY ISLE”? TRAGIC TALES OF REPORTED (AND ENABLED) BULLYING AND SEXUAL MISCONDUCT TOWARDS WOMEN AT SAMYE LING UK BUDDHIST CENTRES THAT ENDED IN PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL HARM, ATTEMPTED SUICIDES AND MURDER. Article excerpted with attribution.
  4. Geoffrey Samuel, Civilized Shamans: Buddhism in Tibetan Societies (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1993).