Adamantine wrote:deepbluehum wrote:A guru with a lineage will give shaktipat in an initiation ceremony. I received it from several gurus. The best was Anandi Ma. She holds an excellent lineage of Mahayoga. It is not Bhakti. I'm Indian from a religious family so I know the difference. Maha Siddha Yoga gurus teach that Shaktipat arouses emotions as it purifies them. Those with karmic imprints of yoga in past lives would only experiences emotions of the higher realms so they might only feel uplifted or radiance as was the case for me. When the imprints are purified one can achieve jivan mukti. There is no emotion at the time of fruit. But it's not the same view action fruit in dzogchen or mahamudra. There are many reasons why this is so. You can debate amongst yourselves.
Buddhism doesn't work this way. Whatever exotic experience you are prone to believe in notwithstanding, again many reasons why this is so. In short, take Longchenpa's divisions of Ati where at the top even introduction is no importance. Ati yoga is the highest of all yanas. Shaktipat is the lowest. You can debate amongst yourselves.
You may have some specific experiences based on your own karmic connection, your family and personal experiences with Anandi Ma, etc. But I think you'd be surprised about the variation of this term, the expression of it and how it manifests according to lineage. I do agree that generally how it is practiced in non-Buddhist contexts is not comparable to the type of Guru yoga we have access to in Dzogchen lineage. Of course, we must have confidence in this, it is the path we have chosen and for good reasons. I don't think there is much of a reason for any debate here. However, in my own experience I would not say that emotion, even what you categorize as "experience or emotions of the higher realms" is a necessary or defining characteristic of the transmission of shakti. There are probably different frameworks and different flavors of energy transmission that evoke varying experiences.. and maybe we are both right. We'll probably just have to agree to disagree here because much of it is not easily framed in language and we might just be talking past each other unknowingly.
It's actually pretty simple. Shaktipat comes from the lineage of Kundalini Siddha Yoga aka Maha Yoga. There's no other lineage in India where this originates. If you want to know the teaching you have refer to them re guru manta, automatic kriyas, rising kundalini from muladhara to sahasrar, etc. From the Buddhist standpoint these experiences are only due to illusion. If one has a stable Mahamudra practice for example, there won't be any experiences of kundalini rising up a sushumna. Why. Because the view is beyond three times. Thinking this is analogous to tummo is also based on a misunderstanding of Buddhism. In Buddhism the body is not something to be shed and the channels etc are not real. The practice is done with visualization and nothing is believed to really be happening. In shaktipat the idea is that there is some entity agency that acts upon you even without your wanting it to. This is all completely dependent on your belief, opinion and emotion. It's only attachment.