Tantra & The Householder Path
Of the many excellent meditation teachers with whom I have studied, Paul Muller Ortega is unique in one important respect: he is very explicit about distinguishing between renunciate and householder spiritual paths.
Paul speaks very respectfully of each path but emphasized that for the vast majority of us who wish to live life as householders, it is essential to be clear about the distinction between these two trajectories and to consciously choose a householder approach to one’s sadhana (spiritual practice), if this is in fact how one intends to live one’s life, outside of the particular container of a monastic setting. If not, confusion and disorientation will inevitably arise.
If you’re unfamiliar with these terms, that’s completely understandable, as modern practitioners of meditation or yoga don’t hear much mention of these concepts. There are practical reasons for this. Monasteries become institutions that serve to propagate spiritual teachings and practices far and wide.
Householder traditions, specifically within Tantric paths which were based on initiation, were by their nature not focused on growing their numbers. There is another important reason in terms of the transmission of these traditions to the West: the spiritual teachers who either brought these teachings to the West, or who taught Westerners in Asia who would go on to become prominent teachers in their own right, were swamis or monks (renunciates).
Renunciate vs. Householder: Understanding the Terms
A renunciate could be living in a monastery or wandering freely throughout the mountains, but what makes this practitioner a renunciate involves both the view that this person brings to the world and their practice as well as the vows that they have taken. This position also rests on what they view as the appropriate response to the central problem of samsara: how to work with our desires and karma (habitual patterns) that keep us spinning around and around in the same behaviors (and in the traditional view, from lifetime after lifetime through rebirth). For the origins of the yoga traditions and this approach to spirituality you can read more about this here (insert link).
Householders are people who wish to “live in the world.” Householder life could look very different from one household practitioner to another, from being married with kids, with a full-time job and a mortgage, to living a very quiet contemplative life by oneself that entails practicing many hours of meditation and yoga a day.
While the range between these two lifestyles is great in very practical respects, both groups share a fundamentally similar set of vows that they have taken, as well as those that they have not (such as celibacy and making money). They will also share a particular view and approach to practice, even though this might look different based on their lifestyles. This difference in view and vows will inevitably orient householders to the spiritual path in a different way than renunciates.
In explaining the renunciate vs the householder path, I would highly recommend watching an 18 minute talk from Paul Muller Ortega called “Tantra: The Potency of Consciousness,” available on Gaia TV (you can watch it for free through a free 7 day trial that Gaia has on offer). To outline the difference between these two paths, Paul would use the metaphor of the wave and the ocean. Each individual person is like a wave on this vast ocean of consciousness. The ocean is eternal and vast beyond our conception.
This is a vastness of non duality, rooted in a recognition that the ocean and the wave is inseparable (the perception of separation arises through living our life through concepts). Duality, limitation and separation arise within the vastness of the ocean. Our individual life form is like a wave. But we forget our true nature: our natural interdependence with the vast ocean as an individual wave.
Renunciate Path vs. Householder Path: A Metaphor
The renunciatory path gives a teaching that says your individuality must subside completely. It’s like a wave that will submerge completely back into the ocean. You must abandon any sense of separation or individual impulse of desire or creativity or agenda. The goal is extinction or annihilation of the individual life form. The renunciate path entails a series of practices that achieve this extinction.
In the householder path, as an individual life wave we can learn a series of practices that allows us to draw from the depths of this oceanic consciousness, the intelligence and the power that is inherent in the nature of the ocean, and allow it to rise up into our individuality. Practice over a long period of time allows the potency of the ocean to express itself uniquely through our individual life wave. In the householder path, we’re not attempting to leave behind or abandon anything, but to make a contribution to the world that allows us to transform, refine, create and uplift others in powerful ways. This Tantric view of liberation expresses the idea of “Jivamukti,” the goal of freedom in this lifetime. Yet practice is not simply about this traditional yogic goal of liberation (moksha) and of the traditional masculine ideal of transcendence, but of learning to align ourselves with that which makes us feel most alive (Shakti in Sanskrit; Eros in Greece) so that we can channel this energy and intelligence of the universe taking form through us in order to create, connect and love our lives in ways that honor the unique gifts and interests that each of us has.
To pick one example, the way that one relates to desire will certainly be different. While renunciation can be a skillful means for a householder in many respects and in certain contexts, a householder must learn to consciously work with desire: to use one’s desire to gain deeper insight into and ultimate liberation from attachments, rather than relying on renunciation as the method for working with one’s desires and attachments.
Monastics and Householders: A Symbiotic Relationship
It’s important to briefly underscore that the relationship between monastics and householders should not be one of conflict, but of symbiosis. I have indescribably immense gratitude for the lineages and individuals who have created, refined, and passed along these teachings over the years.
As a household practitioner, I want part of my work to go towards better supporting monastics. I also think that being a monastic or professional contemplative is an incredibly meaningful way to live one’s life, and if anyone feels called to do so then that’s wonderful.
In the nondual Tantric lineages of Kashmir Shaivism, you may well hear a teaching that says if you’re a renunciate your teacher should be a renunciate and if you’re a householder your teacher should be a householder.
In the Tantric traditions of Vajrayana Buddhism, in which Tantra became monasticized in Tibet, there is a long history of dialogue, we might say creative tension, between the monastic and yogic traditions. I am not here to take a position one way or the other. I can simply share my own experience.
Personal Reflections: The Path of Renunciation and Householding
Monastics have been very important teachers for me on my own journey, either directly or indirectly. I have also found that monastics simply can’t answer certain questions that I have regarding how spirituality can fully embody itself in all aspects of life, such as sexuality and romantic relationships, making money and building a career.
Given their vows, there is no reason they should be able to answer such questions, yet many practitioners project the belief onto their spiritual teacher that they should be a fountain of wisdom in all areas of life. To see them in this light is to deny their basic humanity and to not acknowledge the essential differences in the path that they are walking. I trust the teachers most who aren’t afraid to say: “I don’t know the answer to that question. You should ask someone else who is an expert in this area.”
Personally, I have also experienced a significant amount of confusion through practicing in a spiritual tradition premised on renunciation, in my case, Theravada Buddhism. I am not suggesting that Theravada Buddhism can not be adapted in ways that are relevant for householder life. Clearly, this path works for many people.
However, it also can not be denied from a historical perspective what this tradition was designed to do. Approaching spirituality and meditation with the view articulated in the early sutras personally oriented me away from the world.
For a period of time while I was intensively practicing in this tradition, I lost interest in romantic relationships and many other “worldly” aspirations, including professional life. To some extent, I think this may well be a natural phase in the hero’s journey evolution as it manifests in a spiritual search for many people. However, I did not find an on-ramp back into engaging the world through this approach. I think this speaks to archetypal yearnings that go beyond any specific culture or religious tradition.
I was completely identified with the masculine ideal of transcendence. I had lost all connection to eros. This is to be expected from fundamentally ascetical religious practices that view passion and desire as a problem to be solved, rather than as the source of creativity and connection and, we might say, the power fueling the drive for liberation itself.
I share my own experience not to denigrate anyone else’s choices, but rather to provide information to other seekers and practitioners who might find themselves encountering similar challenges at this moment in their lives. Or perhaps this might help to save many people a lot of time and confusion in the first place.
Choosing a Path with Heart
What’s important to bear in mind is that when you get involved with a spiritual tradition, you’re learning much more than a technique; you’re imbibing an entire worldview that will orient you to life in ways big and small.
It’s helpful to step back and recognize that the project of spirituality, or waking up, is both one of the important forms of human development we can engage in and yet it is not the entire project of human flourishing. This larger goal entails other streams of development that speak to drives and desires to which spiritual traditions, even householder ones, might not be able to speak.
However, in my experience, those traditions that are more deeply integrated into the world (that teach to practice not only on the mountaintop but also in the village), will set you up for greater success at integrating your drives for spirituality along with other aspects of human development. From my vantage point, the more we can step back and understand the historical context in which all of these traditions and styles of practice arose, the more this becomes clear.
This is not to engage in academic discussion for the sake of it, but to understand the ways in which we find ourselves embedded in contexts and networks that shape our beliefs and actions in ways that can be subtle.
As my teacher Jack Kornfield says, there are many paths for different people but whatever you do, choose a path with heart. Choose a path that allows you to dance with the paradox of desire, the archetypally masculine and feminine forces within all of us: both your yearning for freedom, transcendence, and autonomy, but also your impulses for eros, connection, and creativity.