Tantric Fustration

"Consider instead the discourses surrounding the so-called "five meats" and "five ambrosias" as they appear in the Mahayoga Tantra ritual and scripture, specifically that of the most renowned of the Mahayoga Tantras, the aforementioned Esosteric Community. These two sets of five substances-beef, dog, elephant, horse, and human flesh and feces, urine, blood, semen, and marrow- featured the prominently in the literature of the Mahayoga Tantras, and bear great significance within their ritual performance."


Hmm... Well it looks like the profound content of this post departed with the sensical understanding of the reading Beef, Dog, and Other Mythologies: Connotative Semiotics in Mahayoga Tantra Ritual and Scripture. Now as an academic individual when I don't understand something, my first thought is to read it again. After the second time of misunderstanding, I try to identify any words that I may have missed or review certain concepts. If all else fails I then turn to google for guidance. I am saddened to say none of these outlets have been a source of assistance to me, which is frustrating.

The quote that I have listed above is there due to its special capability to disturb my mind. I say this because it is mentioned at the beginning of the article as a piece of an important ritual, yet at the end of the article it discusses how these things are not to be used. This article is full of contradictions, and I am not exactly sure where to go with it. I feel as if I understand the general concept of differentiating between literal and figurative statements, but I am not sure how far this 'figurative' mindset goes. And if it goes so far as to negate itself, is that not a literal idea, just in a negative light?  My hope is that being in class will clear up the confusion .