Source: TW
Many often ask us the question as to why major “Tantric states” failed. For the idea of a Tantric state see: https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/geopolitics-of-the-tantra-age-an-attempt-at-a-blunt-assessment/ https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/the-erotic-the-warlike-and-the-imperial-in-the-tantra-age/ Several of the questioners believe that it might be due to 1. An intrinsic defect in the organization of the Tantric state. 2. Something negative stemming from the focal deity of the Tantric state. 3. Degeneracy from Tantric rituals, primarily those of a sexual nature or involving the use of alcohol.
Various examples of major collapses of Tantric states in India and beyond include: 1. oDDiyAna, the root of the tantra-s themselves; 2. the Kashmirian kingdom; 3. Nepal. 4. the vA~Nga states 5. Tibet; 6. later Tang chIna. 7. The Javan H kingdoms. 8. The late Qubilaiid Mongol state.
A closer study reveals that the collapse of the Tantric state simply follows the Splengerian principle applicable to any state: birth, growth, maturity, senescence and collapse. What is often ignored is the role of the Tantric state in the birth and growth process, often accompanied by immense creativity. Two examples of this are the Kashmirian kingdom and Tibet whose highpoints of creativity where when they were fullblown Tantric states. It should also be noted that the allure of the Tantric state was constant for almost 1500-1600 years. Even the Moghol tyrant Awrangzeb toyed with aspects of its. Over such a long period many different trajectories played out and not all collapses were the same even if the endpoint looked sort of similar.
The vitality and survival of the Tantric state depends a lot on what other secular material it brings to the table. In this the shaiva-s of the Urdhvasrotas offered a complete package; thus they were more effective at state building and fostering than other Tantric states. But they faced the difficulty of centralization and dependency on hub-maTha. Such network structures collapse from attacks on the hub-nodes – a well-known graph-theoretic outcome. The more distributed nodes of the kaula system could keep it alive as a pan-Indospheric system (being immune to the above type of attack) but lack the large resources for providing a complete secular package.
To conclude, the Tantric state brought the Hindu experience to a wider swath of the population across Eurasia and that could be seen as its major success.
Could it be that the deeply individualist inward focus encouraged by the Tantric state ultimately couldn’t match the organization, goal-orientedness and military technology that came with extroverted Abrahamic society
Your above criticism seems to be echoed by others. What I was trying to say is that it might not be the sole or even major factor in the success of the Abrahamistic ravages