The Real Vijñāna Bhairava Tantra - A Treasury of 112 Types of Yoga Part 1

For those who have trained as yoga teachers with us at Akram Yoga, you will know the deep affection I have for a classical text—the Vijñāna Bhairava Tantra. This is a sacred discourse between the first yogi, Śiva, and his consort Devi (Pārvatī).

This text, considered by me (and others) as the birth of yoga and the foundation of much of Indian and Hindu philosophy, has had a profound influence on my life—not only as a spiritual seeker but also as someone striving each day to be a better husband and father.

However, the version that has shaped my practice and understanding is not the original Sanskrit text but a poetic and romanticized translation. The version I always refer to, where Devi begins by asking, “O Śiva, what is your reality?”, is a retelling by the English poet Paul Reps. In his 1957 book, Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, Reps introduced the Vijñāna Bhairava Tantra to the West.

While some scholars argue that this translation is overly poetic and loses the deeper nuances of the original Sanskrit, there is evidence that Reps’ work was inspired and guided by Swami Lakshmanjoo, the great 20th-century mystic and scholar of Kashmir Shaivism.

So, even though Reps’ version is a reimagining, it was still created under the guidance of an expert on the Tantra, who likely approved of making this intricate and deeply esoteric text accessible to a wider audience.

Why a Poetic Translation Was Needed

To understand why a poetic translation was necessary, consider the original Sanskrit verses, believed to have been composed between the 7th and 8th centuries CE.

Let’s examine the opening verses to see how the poetic and structured versions compare.

The Original Sanskrit Inquiry: Devi’s Question to Śiva

Verse 1: The Seeking of Ultimate Truth

Bhairavī (Devi or Pārvatī) speaks:

"O divine one, you manifest the universe as a great play, and you are none other than my own Self. I have listened to all the sacred teachings that originate from the union of Rudra (Śiva) and his Śakti. I have studied the wisdom of the Rudrayāmala Tantra, including the Trika system and its various interpretations. I have understood its profound essence, yet, O Supreme Lord, my doubt remains."

Here, Bhairavī expresses her deep yearning for truth. Despite her vast knowledge, she feels that intellectual learning is not enough—she seeks direct realization.

Verses 2-4: What is the True Nature of Bhairava?

Bhairavī asks:

"O Lord, from the highest perspective of reality, what is the true essence of Bhairava? In the teachings of the Bhairava Āgamas, is it found in the energies of mantras and sacred letters? Or does it consist of nine distinct forms that lead to realization?""Or is Bhairava understood through a specific mantra, which unites three divisions as described in the Triśirōbhairava Tantra?"Does Bhairava reside within the three Śaktis (energies)? Or is Bhairava the subtle Nāda (primordial sound vibration)? Or Bindu (the point of condensed energy)?"Is his nature hidden in the Cakras (energy centers in the body)? Or is it the pure, vowel-less vibration of ‘Ha’? Or is Bhairava simply the ultimate form of Śakti?"

Here, Bhairavī is questioning all traditional concepts of spiritual practice. She wonders whether Bhairava’s essence can be contained in structured methods, such as mantras, sound vibrations, energy centers, or mystical formulas—or whether it is something beyond all these structures.

This reflects the common struggle of spiritual seekers: Is truth found through rituals and specific techniques, or is it something more direct and immediate?

Verses 5-6: Can Ultimate Reality Be Divided?

Bhairavī asks an even deeper question:

"Is the supreme energy (Para Śakti) made up of parts (sakala), like the immanent energy (Aparā Śakti) that manifests as the world?"Or is the supreme transcendent energy (Para Śakti) indivisible and beyond all limitations?"

She clarifies:

"If Para Śakti, the energy of absolute transcendence, is also made up of different parts, then how can it be truly transcendent?"True transcendence (Paratva) cannot be fragmented into letters, colors, or forms—it must be indivisible. It cannot coexist with the limitations of division."

"O Lord, please bestow your grace upon me and completely remove my doubt."

Here, Bhairavī is asking a crucial philosophical question in Kashmir Shaivism:

• Is transcendence structured and defined?

• Or is it beyond all division, existing as pure, indivisible awareness?

  
  

Paul Reps’ Poetic Retelling:

Now, compare this with Paul Reps' poetic rendering, which makes the text accessible to a Western audience:

O Śiva, what is your reality?

What is this wonder-filled universe?

What constitutes seed?

Who centers the universal wheel?

What is this life beyond form pervading forms?

How may we enter it fully, above space and time, names and descriptions?

Let my doubts be cleared!

This translation strips away the technical complexity of the original Sanskrit, making it more poetic and universally relatable.

While scholars argue that Reps’ version loses some depth, it also preserves the essence of inquiry—the deep spiritual longing that drives Bhairavī’s questioning.

Why Was the Original So Cryptic?

You can see from the original Sanskrit verses why a poetic translation was necessary for a Western audience. Without a deep knowledge of Sanskrit and Kashmir Shaivism, the original would be nearly inaccessible to the casual reader.

Perhaps this was intentional—the cryptic language and structure of the original text may have been designed to keep its teachings hidden from those who were not ready for them.

This aligns with the esoteric nature of Tantric traditions, where sacred knowledge is often veiled and revealed only to those who are truly prepared.

Can a Poetic Translation Be incorrect? Rethinking the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra

For years, I’ve heard scholars argue that Paul Reps’ translation of the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra is overly poetic, romanticized, and ultimately inaccurate. The claim is that Reps' interpretation lacks depth, misrepresents key philosophical ideas, and, by extension, makes any additional commentaries on the text (even my own reflections) equally flawed.

But every time I hear this, I can’t help but think: Can a poetic translation ever really be “incorrect”?

After all, the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra itself is a poetic and mythological text—a mystical conversation between Shiva and Devi that was never intended as a rigid, literal doctrine. So why are we so quick to dismiss a poetic retelling of something that is already poetic in its essence? If a translation deeply moves people, brings them into a state of meditation, and transforms their lives (as it has done my own), isn’t that a sign of its success rather than its failure?

How "Authentic" Is Any Version of the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra?

Before we even debate whether Paul Reps’ translation is accurate, we need to ask: How authentic is the text itself?

We must acknowledge a simple but profound truth: every text we read, whether ancient or modern, is a re-telling.

The Vijnana Bhairava Tantra is based on a conversation that legend and tradition has it was around 12,000 years old, but there is no evidence of a manuscript that ancient. Most scholars date it to somewhere between the 7th and 9th centuries CE. That means that for thousands of years, these teachings were passed down orally, long before they were written in Sanskrit. And once they were finally written, they were copied, rewritten, and reinterpreted countless times by scribes—each with their own understanding, cultural biases, and spiritual agendas.

So, we have to ask: Is the Sanskrit version that scholars hold so dearly the “real” conversation between Shiva and Parvati? Or is it itself an imagined re-telling by the sages of medieval India?

How many times has this text been reshaped, repackaged, and repurposed before it reached the pages we read today?

All Yoga is a Retelling—So Why Shouldn’t Translations Be?

This isn’t just an issue with ancient scriptures—it applies to all of yoga philosophy and practice.

Consider the modern postural yoga that dominates studios today. Purists often argue that most of the poses we do in vinyasa classes are modern inventions, that traditional hatha yoga has been stripped of much of its depth, and that what is taught today is a Westernized distortion.

While I understand the point, I also think these critics miss the bigger picture. A Westernized version of postural yoga is the reason yoga is still alive today. Without its adaptation to modern fitness culture, yoga could have faded into obscurity, practiced only in small monastic circles. Instead, yoga thrives globally—millions practice it, and many are eventually led into deeper philosophical explorations precisely because of its accessibility.

The same could be said for Paul Reps’ Vijnana Bhairava Tantra.

Without his beautiful, simplified, and poetic translation, who in the West would even know about such a profound text? Certainly not the academic purists who insist on keeping it locked in Sanskrit.

Would we rather the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra remain hidden, inaccessible to all but the few who can read classical Sanskrit? Or should we celebrate that Paul Reps took this complex, esoteric knowledge and made it available to anyone with an open mind and a curious heart?

Who Gets to Decide What is "Authentic"?

I often find that those who argue about the “correctness” of translations are gatekeepers—those who insist that only their version is valid. But let’s remember: no translation is neutral.

Even the most precise scholarly translations are shaped by the translator’s biases, worldview, and linguistic limitations. The mere act of choosing one word over another is an act of interpretation. To dismiss Paul Reps’ version as inaccurate because it is poetic is to ignore the poetic nature of the original text itself.

The Vijnana Bhairava Tantra was not meant to be dissected like a legal document. It is a living, breathing guide to meditative experience—a book of practices meant to be felt, not just analyzed. If Paul Reps’ poetic translation leads people to a real experience of meditation, then he has done exactly what the text itself intended—perhaps even more effectively than the purists clinging to the Sanskrit.

Final Thoughts: Scholarship and Experience Can Coexist

None of this is to say that academic translations are useless. Scholars do important work in preserving the integrity of Tantric philosophy. Their meticulous research helps us understand the historical and linguistic nuances of these texts.

But experience is just as valid as scholarship. If a poetic translation opens the door for someone to directly experience meditation, then it has succeeded—even if it strays from the original wording.

As the saying goes, the map is not the territory. A poetic translation may not be the map in its most precise form, but if it helps someone walk the path, then it has done something even more valuable.

So, can a poetic translation be wrong?

A poetic translation can only be another path—one of many—that leads to the same awakening.

Keep an eye out for part 2.

Zahir Akram - Eternal Seeker

---------------------------------

Interested in deepening your practice or teaching skills?

Our online training courses are now available, offering comprehensive content on anatomy, biomechanics, and yoga philosophy. These courses are designed to support students and yoga teachers in their continued development.

We also offer in-house Yoga Teacher Training here at our studio in Addlestone, Surrey, UK.

For more information on our online courses, mentoring or to book in-house training, email Zahir.

Zahir@AkramYoga.co.uk