Shakti and shakta
Shakti and shaktaChapter One. Indian Religion As Bharata DharmaChapter Two. Shakti: The World As PowerChapter Three. What Are The Tantras And Their Significance?Chapter Four. Tantra Shastra And VedaChapter Five. The Tantras And Religion Of The ShaktasChapter Six. Shakti And ShaktaChapter Seven. Is Shakti Force?Chapter Eight. Cinacara (Vashishtha And Buddha)Chapter Nine. The Tantra Shastras In ChinaChapter Ten. A Tibetan TantraChapter Eleven. Shakti In TaoismChapter Twelve. Alleged Conflict Of ShastrasChapter Thirteen. SarvanandanathaChapter Fourteen. Cit-Shakti (The Consciousness Aspect Of The Universe)Chapter Fifteen. Maya-Shakti (The Psycho-Physical Aspect Of The Universe)Chapter Sixteen. Matter And ConsciousnessChapter Seventeen. Shakti And MayaChapter Eighteen. Shakta AdvaitavadaChapter Nineteen. Creation As Explained In The Non-Dualist TantrasChapter Twenty. The Indian Magna MaterChapter Twenty-One. Hindu RitualChapter Twenty-Two. Vedanta And Tantra ShastraChapter Twenty-Three. The Psychology Of Hindu Religious RitualChapter Twenty-Four. Shakti As Mantra (Mantramayi Shakti)Chapter Twenty-Five. Varnamala (The Garland Of Letters)Chapter Twenty-Six. Shakta Sadhana (The Ordinary Ritual)Chapter Twenty-Seven. The Pañcatattva (The Secret Ritual)Chapter Twenty-Eight. Matam Rutra (The Right And Wrong Interpretation)Chapter Twenty-Nine. Kundalini Shakta (Yoga)Chapter Thirty. ConclusionsCopyright
Shakti and shakta
Arthur Avalon
Chapter One. Indian Religion As Bharata Dharma
A FRIEND of mine who read the first edition of this book
suggested that I should add to it an opening Chapter, stating the
most general and fundamental principles of the subject as a guide
to the understanding of what follows, together with an outline of
the latter in which the relation of the several parts should be
shown. I have not at present the time, nor in the present book the
space, to give effect to my friend's wishes in the way I would have
desired, but will not altogether neglect them.To the Western, Indian Religion generally seems a "jungle" of
contradictory beliefs amidst which he is lost. Only those who have
understood its main principles can show them the path.It has been asserted that there is no such thing as Indian
Religion, though there are many Religions in India. This is not so.
As I have already pointed out(Is India
Civilized?)there is a common Indian religion
which I have called Bharata Dharma, which is an Aryan religion
(Aryadharma) held by all Aryas whether Brahmanic, Buddhist or
Jaina. These are the three main divisions of the Bharata Dharma. I
exclude other religions in India, namely, the Semitic religions,
Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Not that all these are purely
Semitic. Christianity became in part Aryanized when it was adopted
by the Western Aryans, as also happened with Islam when accepted by
such Eastern Aryans as the Persians and the Aryanized peoples of
India. Thus Sufism is either a form of Vedanta or indebted to
it.The general Indian Religion or Bharata Dharma holds that the
world is an Order or Cosmos. It is not a Chaos of things and beings
thrown haphazard together, in which there is no binding relation or
rule. The world-order is Dharma, which is that by which the
universe is upheld (Dharyate). Without Dharma it would fall to
pieces and dissolve into nothingness. But this is not possible, for
though there is Disorder (Adharma), it exists, and can exist only
locally, for a time, and in particular parts of the whole. Order
however will and, from the nature of things,mustultimately assert itself. And this
is the meaning of the saying that Righteousness or Dharma prevails.
This is in the nature of things, for Dharma is not a law imposed
from without by the Ukase of some Celestial Czar. It is the nature
of things; that which constitutes them what they are
(Svalakshana-dharanat Dharma). It is the expression of their true
being and can only cease to be, when they themselves cease to be.
Belief in righteousness is then in something not arbitrarily
imposed from without by a Lawgiver, but belief in a Principle of
Reason which all men can recognize for themselves if they will.
Again Dharma is not only the law of each being but necessarily also
of the whole, and expresses the right relations of each part to the
whole. This whole is again harmonious, otherwise it would dissolve.
The principle which holds it together as one mighty organism is
Dharma. The particular Dharma calls for such recognition and action
in accordance therewith. Religion, therefore, which etymologically
means that which obliges orbindstogether, is in its most fundamental sense therecognitionthat the world is an Order,
of which each man, being, and thing, is a part, and to which each
man stands in a definite, established relation; together
withactionbased on, and
consistent with, such recognition, andin
harmonywith the whole cosmic activity. Whilst
therefore the religious man is he who feels that he isboundin varying ways to all being, the
irreligious man is he who egoistically considers everything from
the standpoint of his limited self and its interests, without
regard for his fellows, or the world at large. The essentially
irreligious character of such an attitude is shown by the fact
that, if it were adopted by all, it would lead to the negation of
Cosmos, that is Chaos. Therefore all Religions are agreed in the
essentials of morality and hold that selfishness, in its widest
sense, is the root of all sin (Adharma). Morality is thus the true
nature of man. The general Dharma (Samanya Dharma) is the universal
law governing all, just as the particular Dharma (Vishesha Dharma)
varies with, and is peculiar to, each class of being. It follows
from what is above stated that disharmony is suffering. This is an
obvious fact. Wrong conduct is productive of ill, as right conduct
is productive of good. As a man sows, so he will reap. There is an
Immanent Justice. But these results, though they may appear at
once, do not always do so. The fruit of no action is lost. It must,
according to the law of causality, which is a law of reason, bear
effect. If its author does not suffer for it here and now in the
present life, he will do so in some future one. Birth and death
mean the creation and destruction of bodies. The spirits so
embodied are infinite in number and eternal. The material universe
comes and goes. This in Brahmanism has been said (seeSanatana Vaidika Dharmaby Bhagavan
Das) to be "the Systole and Diastole of the one Universal Heart,
Itself at rest -- the moveless play of Consciousness". The
appearance and disappearance of the Universe is the nature or
Svabhava of That which it ultimately is. Its immediate cause is
Desire, which Buddhism calls Trishna -- or Thirst, that is desire
or thirst for world-enjoyment in the universe of form. Action
(Karma) is prompted by desire and breeds again desire. This action
may be good (Dharma) or bad (Adharma) leading to enjoyment or
suffering. Each embodied soul (Jivatma) will be reborn and reborn
into the world until it is freed from all desire. This involves the
doctrine of Re-incarnation. These multiple births and deaths in the
transmigratory worlds are called Samsara or Wandering. The world is
a Dvandva, that is, a composite of happiness and suffering.
Happiness of a transitory kind may be had therein by adherence to
Dharma in following Kama (desire) and Artha (the means) by which
lawful desires may be given effect. These constitute what
Brahmanism calls the Trivarga of the Purushartha, or three aims of
sentient being. But just as desire leads to manifestation in form,
so desirelessness leads away from it. Those who reach this state
seek Moksha or Nirvana (the fourth Purushartha), which is a state
of Bliss beyond the worlds of changing forms. For there is a rest
from suffering which Desire (together with a natural tendency to
pass its right limits) brings upon men. They must, therefore,
either live with desire in harmony with the universal order, or if
desireless, they may (for each is master of his future) pass beyond
the manifest and become That which is Moksha or Nirvana. Religion,
and therefore true civilization, consists in the upholding of
Dharma as the individual and general good, and the fostering of
spiritual progress, so that, with justice to all beings, true
happiness, which is the immediate and ultimate end of all Humanity,
and indeed of all being, may be attained.Anyone who holds these beliefs follows the Bharata Dharma or
common principles of all Aryan beliefs. Thus as regards God we may
either deny His existence (Atheism) or affirm it (Theism) or say we
have no sufficient proof one way or another (Agnosticism). It is
possible to accept the concept of an eternal Law (Dharma) and its
sanctions in a self-governed universe without belief in a personal
Lord (Ishvara). So Samkhya, which proceeds on intellectual proof
only, doe not deny God but holds that the being of a Lord is "not
proved".There are then based on this common foundation three main
religions, Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism. Of the second, a great
and universal faith, it has been said that, with each fresh
acquirement of knowledge, it seems more difficult to separate it
from the Hinduism out of which it emerged and into which (in
Northern Buddhism) it relapsed. This is of course not to say that
there are no differences between the two, but that they share in
certain general and common principles as their base. Brahmanism, of
which the Shakta doctrine and practice is a particular form,
accepts Veda as its ultimate authority. By this, in its form as the
four Vedas, is revealed the doctrine of the Brahman, the
"All-pervader," the infinite Substance which is in Itself (Svarupa)
Consciousness (Caitanya or Cit), from Which comes creation,
maintenance and withdrawal, commonly called destruction (though
man, not God, destroys), and Which in Its relation to the universe
which the Brahman controls is known as Ishvara, the Ruling Lord or
Personal God. Veda both as spiritual experience and the word "which
is heard" (Shruti) is the warrant for this. But Shruti, as the
ultimate authority, has received various interpretations and so we
find in Brahmanism, as in Christianity, differing schools and sects
adopting various interpretations of the Revealed Word. Veda says:
"All this (that is, the Universe) is Brahman." All are agreed that
Brahman or Spirit is relatively to us, Being (Sat), Consciousness
(Cit) and Bliss (Ananda). It is Saccidananda. But in what sense is
"This" (Idam) Brahman? The Monistic interpretation (Advaitavada),
as given for instance by the great scholastic Shamkaracarya, is
that there is a complete identity in essence of both. There is one
Spirit (Atma) with two aspects: as transcendent supreme
(Paramatma), and as immanent and embodied (Jivatma). The two are at
base one when we eliminate Avidya in the form of mind and body.
According to the qualified Monism (Vishishtadvaita) of the great
scholastic Ramanuja, "This" is Brahman in the sense that it is the
body of the Brahman, just as we distinguish our body from our inner
self. According to the Dualists (Dvaitavada) the saying is
interpreted in terms of nearness (Samipya) and likeness (Sadrishya)
for, though God and man are distinct, the former so pervades and is
so inextricably involved in the universe as creator and maintainer,
that the latter, in this sense, seems to be Brahman through
proximity.Then again there is the Shuddhadvaita of that branch of the
Agamas which is called Shaivasiddhanta, the Vaishnava Pañcaratra
doctrine, the Advaita of the Kashmirian Shaiva-gama (Trika), the
followers of which, though Advaitins, have very subtly criticized
Shamkara's doctrine on several points. Difference of views upon
this question and that of the nature of Maya, which the world is
said to be, necessarily implies difference upon other matters of
doctrine. Then there are, with many resemblances, some differences
in ritual practice. Thus it comes about that Brahmanism includes
many divisions of worshippers calling themselves by different
names. There are Smartas who are the present day representatives of
the old Vaidik doctrine and ritual practice, and on the other hand
a number of divisions of worshippers calling themselves Shaktas,
Shaivas, Vaishnavas and so forth with sub-divisions of these. It is
not possible to make hard and fast distinctions between the sects
which share much in common and have been influenced one by the
other. Indeed the universality of much of religious doctrine and
practice is an established fact. What exists in India as elsewhere
to-day has in other times and places been in varying degrees
anticipated. "In Religion," it has been said(Gnostics and 1heir Remains,viii)
"there is no new thing. The same ideas are worked up over and over
again." In India as elsewhere, but particularly in India where
religious activity has been syncretistic rather than by way of
supersession, there is much which is common to all sects and more
again which is common between particular groups of sects. These
latter are governed in general, that is, in their older forms, by
the Agamas or Tantra-Shastras, which, at any rate to-day and for
centuries past (whatever may have been their origin), admit the
authority of the Vedas and recognize other Scriptures. (As to
these, see the Introduction to the Kaulacarya Satyananda's
Commentary on the Isha Upanishad which I have
published.)The meaning of Veda is not commonly rightly understood. But
this is a vast subject which underlies all others, touching as it
does the seat of all authority and knowledge into which I have not
the space to enter here. There are four main classes of Brahmanical
Scripture, namely, Veda or Shruti, Smriti, Purana, and Agama. There
are also four ages or Yugas the latter being a fraction of a Kalpa
or Day of Brahma of 4,320,000,000 years. This period is the life of
an universe, on the expiration of which all re-enters Brahman and
thereafter issues from it. A Mahayuga is composed of the Four Ages
called Satya, Treta, Dvapara, Kali, the first being the golden age
of righteousness since when all has gradually declined physically,
morally, and spiritually. For each of the ages a suitable Shastra
is given, for Satya or Krita the Vedas, for Treta the
Smritishastra, for Dvapara the Puranas, and for Kaliyuga the Agama
or Tantra Shastra. So theKularnava
Tantrasays:Krite shrutyukta acarastretayam
smriti-sambhavahDvapare tu puranoktah,
kalavagamasammatah(see alsoMahanirvana Tantra,I -- 28et seq.)and
theTara-pradipasays that in
the Kaliyuga (the supposed present age) the Tantrika and not the
Vaidika Dharma, in the sense of mode of life and ritual, is to be
followed (seePrinciples of Tantra).When it is said that the Agama is the peculiar Scripture of
the Kali age, this does not mean (at any rate to any particular
division of its followers) that something is presented which is
opposed to Veda. It is true however that, as between these
followers, there is sometimes a conflict on the question whether a
particular form of the Agama is unvedic (Avaidika) or not. The
Agama, however, as a whole, purports to be a presentment of the
teaching of Veda, just as the Puranas and Smritis are. It is that
presentment of Vaidik truth which is suitable for the Kali age.
Indeed the Shakta followers of the Agama claim that its Tantras
contain the very core of the Veda to which it is described to bear
the same relation as the Supreme Spirit (Paramatma) to the embodied
spirit (Jivatma). In a similar way, in the seven Tantrik Acaras
(see Ch.IV post),Kaulacara is
the controlling, informing life of the gross body called Vedacara,
each of the Acaras, which follow the latter up to Kaulacara, being
more and more subtle sheaths. The Tantra Shastra is thus that
presentment of Vedantic truth which is modeled, as regards mode of
life and ritual, to meet the characteristics and infirmities of the
Kaliyuga. As men have no longer the capacity, longevity and moral
strength required to carry out the Vaidika Karmakanda (ritual
section), the Tantra Shastra prescribes a Sadhana of its own for
the attainment of the common end of all Shastra, that is, a happy
life on earth, Heaven thereafter, and at length Liberation.
Religion is in fact the true pursuit of happiness.As explained in the next and following Chapters, this Agama,
which governs according to its followers the Kali-yuga, is itself
divided into several schools or communities of worshippers. One of
these divisions is the Shakta. It is with Shakta doctrine and
worship, one of the forms of Brahmanism, which is again a form of
the general Bharata Dharma, that this book deals.The Shakta is so called because he is a worshipper of Shakti
(Power), that is, God in Mother-form as the Supreme Power which
creates, sustains and withdraws the universe. His rule of life is
Shaktadharma, his doctrine of Shakti is Shaktivada or Shakta
Darshana. God is worshipped as the Great Mother because, in this
aspect, God is active, and produces, nourishes, and maintains all.
Theological Godhead is no more female than male or neuter. God is
Mother to the Sadhaka who worships Her Lotus Feet, the dust on
which are millions of universes. The Power, or active aspect of the
immanent God, is thus called Shakti. In Her static transcendent
aspect the Mother or Shakti or Shivé is of the same nature as Shiva
or "the Good". That is, philosophically speaking, Shiva is the
unchanging Consciousness, and Shakti is its changing Power
appearing as mind and matter. Shiva-Shakti is therefore
Consciousness and Its Power. This then is the doctrine of dual
aspects of the one Brahman acting through Its Trinity of Powers
(Iccha, Will; Jñana, Knowledge; Kriya, Action). In the static
transcendent aspect (Shiva) the one Brahman does not change and in
the kinetic immanent aspect (Shivé or Shakti) It does. There is
thus changelessness in change. The individual or embodied Spirit
(Jivatma) is one with the transcendent spirit (Paramatma). The
former is a part (Amsha) of the latter, and the enveloping mind and
body are manifestations of Supreme Power. Shakta Darshana is
therefore a form of Monism (Advaitavada). In creation an effect is
produced without change in the Producer. In creation the Power
(Shakti) "goes forth" (Prasharati) in a series of emanations or
transformations, which are called, in the Shaiva and Shakta
Tantras, the 36 Tattvas. These mark the various stages through
which Shiva, the Supreme Consciousness, as Shakti, presents Itself
as object to Itself as subject, the latter at first experiencing
the former as part of the Self, and then through the operations of
Maya Shakti as different from the Self. This is the final stage in
which every Self (Purusha) is mutually exclusive of every other.
Maya, which achieves this, is one of the Powers of the Mother or
Devi. The Will-to-become-many (Bahu syam
prajayeya) is the creative impulse which not
only creates but reproduces an eternal order. The Lord remembers
the diversities latent in His own Maya Shakti due to the previous
Karmas of Jivas and allows them to unfold themselves by His
volition. It is that Power by which infinite formless Consciousness
veils Itself to Itself and negates and limits Itself in order that
it may experience Itself as Form.This Maya Shakti assumes the form of Prakriti Tattva, which
is composed of three Gunas or Factors called Sattva, Rajas, Tamas.
The function of Prakriti is to veil, limit, orfinitizepure infinite formless
Consciousness, so as to produce form, for without such limitation
there cannot be the appearance of form. These Gunas work by mutual
suppression. The function of Tamas is to veil Consciousness, of
Sattva to reveal it, and of Rajas the active principle to make
either Tamas suppress Sattva or Sattva suppress Tamas. These Gunas
are present in all particular existence, as in the general cause or
Prakriti Shakti. Evolution means the increased operation of Sattva
Guna. Thus the mineral world is more subject to Tamas than the
rest. There is less Tamas and more Sattva in the vegetable world.
In the animal world Sattva is increased, and still more so in man,
who may rise through the cultivation of the Sattva Guna to Pure
Consciousness (Moksha) Itself. To use Western parlance,
Consciousness more and more appears as forms evolve and rise to
man. Consciousness does not in itself change, but its mental and
material envelopes do, thus releasing and giving Consciousness more
play. As Pure Consciousness is Spirit, the release of It from the
bonds of matter means that Forms which issue from the Power of
Spirit (Shakti) become more and more Sattvik. A truly Sattvik man
is therefore a spiritual man. The aim of Sadhana is therefore the
cultivation of the Sattva Guna. Nature (Prakriti) is thus the Veil
of Spirit as Tamas Guna, the Revealer of Spirit as Sattva Guna, and
the Activity (Rajas Guna) which makes either work. Thus the upward
or revealing movement from the predominance of Tamas to that of
Sattva represents the spiritual progress of the embodied Spirit or
Jivatma.It is the desire for the life of form which produces the
universe. This desire exists in the collective Vasanas, held like
all else, in inchoate state in the Mother-Power, which passing from
its own (Svarupa) formless state gives effect to them. Upon the
expiration of the vast length of time which constitutes a day of
Brahma the whole universe is withdrawn into the great Causal Womb
(Yoni) which produced it. The limited selves are withdrawn into it,
and again, when the creative throes are felt, are put forth from
it, each appearing in that form and state which its previous Karma
had made for it. Those who do good Karma but with desire and
self-regard (Sakama) go, on death, to Heaven and thereafter reap
their reward in good future birth on earth -- for Heaven is also a
transitory state. The bad are punished by evil births on earth and
suffering in the Hells which are also transitory. Those, however,
who have rid themselves of all self-regarding desire and work
selflessly (Nishkama Karma) realize the Brahman nature which is
Saccidananda. Such are liberated, that is never appear again in the
World of Form, which is the world of suffering, and enter into the
infinite ocean of Bliss Itself. This is Moksha or Mukti or
Liberation. As it is freedom from the universe of form, it can only
be attained through detachment from the world and desirelessness.
For those who desire the world of form cannot be freed of it. Life,
therefore, is a field in which man, who has gradually ascended
through lower forms of mineral, vegetable and animal life, is given
the opportunity of heaven-life and Liberation. The universe has a
moral purpose, namely the affording to all existence of a field
wherein it may reap the fruit of its actions. The forms of life are
therefore the stairs (Sopana) on which man mounts to the state of
infinite, eternal, and formless Bliss. This then is the origin and
the end of man. He has made for himself his own past and present
condition and will make his future one. His essential nature is
free. If wise, he adopts the means (Sadhana) which lead to lasting
happiness, for that of the world is not to be had by all, and even
when attained is perishable and mixed with suffering. This Sadhana
consists of various means and disciplines employed to produce
purity of mind (Cittashuddhi), and devotion to, and worship of, the
Magna Mater of all. It is with these means that the religious
Tantra Shastras are mainly concerned. The Shakta Tantra Shastra
contains a most elaborate and wonderful ritual, partly its own,
partly of Vaidik origin. To a ritualist it is of absorbing
interest.Ritual is an art, the art of religion. Art is the outward
material expression of ideas intellectually held and emotionally
felt. Ritual art is concerned with the expression of those ideas
and feelings which are specifically called religious. It is a mode
by which religious truth is presented, and made intelligible in
material forms and symbols to the mind. It appeals to all natures
passionately sensible of that Beauty in which, to some, God most
manifests Himself. But it is more than this. For it is the means by
which the mind is transformed and purified. In particular according
to Indian principles it is the instrument whereby the consciousness
of the worshipper (Sadhaka) isshaped in actual
factinto forms of experience which embody the
truths which Scripture teaches. The Shakta is thus taught that he
is one with Shiva and His Power or Shakti. This is not a matter of
mere argument. It is a matter for experience. It is ritual and
Yoga-practice which secure that experience for him. How profound
Indian ritual is, will be admitted by those who have understood the
general principles of all ritual and symbolism, and have studied it
in its Indian form, with a knowledge of the principles of which it
is an expression. Those who speak of "mummery," "gibberish" and
"superstition" betray both their incapacity and
ignorance.The Agamas are not themselves treatises on Philosophy, though
they impliedly contain a particular theory of life. They are what
is called Sadhana Shastras, that is, practical Scriptures
prescribing themeansby which
happiness, the quest of all mankind, may be attained. And as
lasting happiness is God, they teach how man by worship and by
practice of the disciplines prescribed, may attain a divine
experience. From incidental statements and the practices described
the philosophy is extracted.The speaker of the Tantras and the revealer of the Shakta
Tantra is Shiva Himself or Shivé the Devi Herself. Now it is the
first who teaches and the second who listens (Agama). Now again the
latter assumes the role of Guru and answers the questions of Shiva
(Nigama). For the two are one. Sometimes there are other
interlocutors. Thus one of the Tantras is called
Ishvarakartikeya-samvada, for there the Lord addresses his son
Kartikeya. The Tantra Shastra therefore claims to be a Revelation,
and of the same essential truths as those contained in the Eternal
Veda which is an authority to itself (Svatah-siddha). Those who
have had experience of the truths recorded in Shastra, have also
proclaimed thepractical meanswhereby their experience was gained. "Adopt those means" they
say, "and you will also have for yourself our experience." This is
the importance of Sadhana and all Sadhana Shastras. The Guru says:
"Do as I tell you. Follow the method prescribed by Scripture. Curb
your desires. Attain a pure disposition, and thus only will you
obtain that certainty, that experience which will render any
questionings unnecessary." The practical importance of the Agama
lies in its assumption of these principles and in the methods which
it enjoins for the attainment of that state in which the truth is
realized. The following Chapters shortly explain some of the main
features of both the philosophy and practice of the Shakta division
of the Agama. For their full development many volumes are
necessary. What is here said is a mere sketch in a popular form of
a vast subject.I will conclude this Chapter with extracts from a Bengali
letter written to me shortly before his death, now many years ago,
by Pandit Shiva-candra Vidyarnava, the Shakta author of theTantratattvawhich I have published
under the titlePrinciples of Tantra.The words in brackets are my own."At the present time the general public are ignorant of the
principles of the Tantra Shastra. The cause of this ignorance is
the fact that the Tantra Shastra is a Sadhana Shastra,the greater part of which becomes intelligible only by
Sadhana.For this reason the Shastra and its
Teachers prohibit their general promulgation. So long as the
Shastra was learnt from Gurus only, this golden rule was of immense
good. In course of time the old Sadhana has become almost extinct,
and along with it, the knowledge of the deep and mighty principles
of the Shastra is almost lost. Nevertheless some faint shadowings
of these principles (which can be thoroughly known by Sadhana only)
have been put before the public partly with the view to preserve
Shastric knowledge from destruction, and partly for commercial
reasons. When I commenced to write Tantra-tattva some 25 years ago,
Bengali society was in a perilous state owing to the influx of
other religions, want of faith and a spirit of disputation. Shortly
before this a number of English books had appeared on the Tantra
Shastra which, whilst ignorant of Dharma, Sadhana and Siddhi
contained some hideous and outrageous pictures drawn by the Bengali
historians and novelists ignorant of, and unfaithful to, Shastric
principles. The English books by English writers contained merely a
reflection of what English-educated Bengalis of those days had
written. Both are even to-day equally ignorant of the Tantra
Shastra. For this reason in writing Tantratattva I could not go
deeply into the subject as my heart wished. I had to spend my time
in removing thorns (objections and charges) from the path by
reasoning and argument. I could not therefore deal in my book with
most of the subjects which, when I brought out the first volume, I
promised to discuss. The Tantra Shastra is broadly divided into
three parts, namely Sadhana, Siddhi (that which is gained by
Sadhana) and Philosophy (Darshana). Unlike other systems it is not
narrow nor does it generate doubt by setting forth conflicting
views. For its speaker is One and not many and He is omniscient.
The philosophy is however scattered throughout the Tantrik
treatises and is dealt with, as occasion arises, in connection with
Sadhana and Siddhi. Could (as I had suggested to him) such parts be
collected and arranged, according to the principles of the
subject-matter, they would form a vast system of philosophy
wonderful, divine, lasting, true, and carrying conviction to men.
As a Philosophy it is at the head of all others. You have prayed to
Parameshvara (God) for my long life, and my desire to carry out my
project makes me also pray for it. But the state of my body makes
me doubt whether the prayer will be granted. By the grace therefore
of the Mother the sooner the work is done the better. You say 'that
those who worship Parameshvara, He makes of one family. Let
therefore all distinctions be put aside for all Sadhakas are, as
such, one.' This noble principle is the final word of all Shastras,
all communities, and all religions. All distinctions which arise
from differences in the physical body are distinctions for the
human world only. They have no place in the world of worship of
Parameshvara. The more therefore that we shall approach Him the
more will the differences between you and me vanish. It is because
both of us pray for the removal of all such differences, that I am
led to rely on your encouragement and help and am bold to take up
on your encouragement and help and am bold to take up this
difficult and daring work. If by your grace the gate of this
Tantrik philosophy is opened in the third part of Tantra-tattva I
dare to say that the learned in all countries will gaze, and be
astonished for it is pure truth, and for this reason I shall be
able to place it before them with perfect clearness."Unfortunately this project of a third part of the
Tantra-tattva could not be carried out owing to the lamented death
of its author, which followed not long after the receipt of this
letter. Naturally, like all believers throughout the whole world,
he claimed for his Scripture the possession in all its details of
what was true or good. Whilst others may not concede this, I think
that those with knowledge and understanding and free from prejudice
will allow that it contains a profoundly conceived doctrine,
wonderfully worked out in practice. Some of its ideas and
principles are shared (through it be under other names and forms)
by all religious men, and others either by all or some Indian
communities, who are not Shaktas. Leaving therefore for the moment
aside what may be said to be peculiar to itself it cannot be that
wholly absurd, repulsive, and infamous system ("lust, mummery and
magic" as Brian Hodgson called it) which it has been said to be. An
impartial criticism may be summed up in the few words that,
together with what has value, it contains some practices which are
not generally approved and which have led to abuse. As to these the
reader is referred to the Chapter on the Pañcatattva or Secret
Ritual.I conclude with a translation of an article in Bengali by a
well-known writer, (P. Bandyopadhyaya, in theSahitya,Shrubby 1320, Calcutta,
July-August 1913). It was evoked by the publication of Arthur
Abalone's Translation of, and Introduction to, theMahanirvana Tantra.It is an
interesting statement as regards the Shakta Tantra and Bengali
views thereon. Omitting here some commendatory statements touching
A. Avalon's work and the writer's "thanks a hundred times" for the
English version, the article continues as follows:"At one time theMahanirvana
Tantrahad some popularity in Bengal. It was
printed and published under the editorship of Pandit Ananda-candra
Vedanta-vagisha and issued from the Adi-Brahmo-Samaj Press. Raja
Ram Mohan Roy himself was a follower of the Tantras, married after
the Shaiva form and used to practice the Tantrik worship. His
spiritual preceptor Svami Hariharananda, was well known to be a
saint who had attained to perfection (Siddha-purusa). He endeavored
to establish theMahanirvana Tantraas the Scripture of the Brahmo-Samaj. The formula and the
forms of the Brahmo Church are borrowed from the initiation in
Brahman worship, (Brahma-diksha) in this Tantra. The later Brahmos
somewhat losing their selves in their spirit of imitation of
Christian rituals were led to abandon the path shown to them by
Raja Ram Mohan; but yet even now many among them recite the Hymn to
the Brahman which occurs in theMahanirvana
Tantra.In the first era of the excessive
dissemination of English culture and training Bengal resounded with
opprobrious criticisms of the Tantras. No one among the educated in
Bengal could praise them. Even those who called themselves Hindus
were unable outwardly to support the Tantrik doctrines. But even
then there were very great Tantrik Sadhakas and men learned in the
Tantras with whose help the principles of the Tantras might have
been explained to the public. But the educated Bengali of the age
was bewitched by the Christian culture, and no one cared to inquire
what did or did not exist in their paternal heritage; the more
especially that any who attempted to study the Tantras ran the risk
of exposing themselves to contumely from the 'educated community'.
Maharaja Sir Jatindra Mohan Tagore of sacred name alone published
two or three works with the help of the venerable Pandit Jaganmohan
Tarkalankara. The Hara-tattva-didhiti associated with the name of
his father is even now acknowledged to be a marvelously glorious
production of the genius of the Pandits of Bengal. The venerable
(Vriddha) Pandit Jaganmohan also published a commentary on
theMahanirvana Tantra.Even at
that epoch such study of the Tantras was confined to a certain
section of the educated in Bengal. Maharaja Sir Jatindra Mohan
alone endeavored to understand and appreciate men like Bama Khepa
(mad Bama), the Naked Father (Nengta Baba) of Kadda and Svami
Sadananda. The educated community of Bengal had only neglect and
contempt for Sadhakas like Bishe Pagla (the mad Bishe) and Binu the
Candala woman. Bengal is even now governed by the Tantra; even now
the Hindus of Bengal receive Tantrik initiation. But the glory and
the honor which the Tantra had and received in the time of
Maharajas Krishna-candra and Shiva-candra no longer exist. This is
the reason why the Tantrik Sadhakas of Bengal are not so well known
at present. It seems as if the World-Mother has again willed it,
has again desired to manifest Her power, so that Arthur Avalon is
studying the Tantras and has published so beautiful a version of
theMahanirvana.The English
educated Bengali will now, we may hope, turn his attention to the
Tantra."The special virtue of the Tantra lies in its mode of
Sadhana. It is neither mere worship (Upasana) nor prayer. It is not
lamenting or contrition or repentance before the Deity. It is the
Sadhana which is the union of Purusha and Prakriti; the Sadhana
which joins the Male Principle and the Mother Element within the
body, and strives to make the attributed attributeless. That which
is in me and that for which I am (this consciousness is ever
present in me) is spread, like butter in milk, throughout the
created world of moving and unmoving things, through the gross and
the subtle, the conscious and unconscious, through all. It is the
object of Tantrik Sadhana to merge that self-principle (Svarat)
into the Universal (Virat). This Sadhana is to be performed through
the awakening of the forces within the body. A man isSiddhain this Sadhana when he is able
to awaken Kundalini and pierce the six Cakras. This is not mere
'philosophy' a mere attempt to ponder upon husks of words, but
something which is to be done in a thoroughly practical manner. The
Tantras say -- 'Begin practicing under the guidance of a good Guru;
if you do not obtain favorable results immediately, you can freely
give it up.' No other religion dares to give so bold a challenge.
We believe that the Sadhana of the Moslems and the 'esoteric
religion' or secret Sadhana (and rituals) of the Christians of the
Roman Catholic and Greek Churches is based on this ground work of
the Tantras."Wherever there is Sadhana we believe that there is the
system of the Tantra. While treating of the Tantras some time back
in theSahitya,I hinted at this
conclusion and I cannot say that the author, Arthur Avalon, has not
noticed it too. For he has expressed his surprise at the similarity
which exists between the Roman Catholic and the Tantrik mode of
Sadhana. The Tantra has made the Yoga-system of Patañjali easily
practicable and has combined with it the Tantrik rituals and the
ceremonial observances (Karma-kanda); that is the reason why the
Tantrik system of Sadhana has been adopted by all the religious
sects of India. If this theory of the antiquarians, that the Tantra
was brought into India from Chaldea or Shakadvipa be correct, then
it may also be inferred that the Tantra passed from Chaldea to
Europe. The Tantra is to be found in all the strata of Buddhism;
the Tantrik Sadhana is manifest in Confucianism; and Shintoism is
but another name of the Tantrik cult. Many historians acknowledge
that the worship of Shakti or Tantrik Sadhana which was prevalent
in Egypt from ancient times spread into Phoenicia and Greece.
Consequently we may suppose that the influence of the Tantra was
felt in primitive Christianity."The Tantra contains nothing like idolatry or 'worship of the
doll' which we, taking the cue from the Christian missionaries,
nowadays call it. This truth, the author, Arthur Avalon, has made
very clear in the Introduction to his translation. The Tantra
repeatedly says that one is to adore the Deity by becoming a Deity
(Devata) himself. The Ishta-devata is the very self of Atman, and
not separate from It; He is the receptacle of all, yet He is not
contained in anything, for He is the great witness, the eternal
Purusha. The true Tantrik worship is the worship in and by the
mind. The less subtle form of Tantrik worship is that of the
Yantra. Form is born of the Yantra. The form is made manifest by
Japa, and awakened by Mantra-Shakti. Tens of millions of beautiful
forms of the Mother bloom forth in the heavens of the heart of the
Siddhapurusha. Devotees or aspirants of a lower order of competency
(Nimna-adhikari) under the directions of the Guru adore the great
Maya by making manifest'. (to themselves) one of Her various forms
which can be only seen by Dhyana (meditation). That is not mere
worship of the idol! if it were so, the image would not be thrown
into the water; no one in that case would be so irreverent as to
sink the earthen image of the Goddess in the water. The Primordial
Shakti is to be awakened by Bhava, by Dhyana, by Japa and by the
piercing of the six Cakras. She is all will. No one can say when
and how She shows Herself and to what Sadhaka. We only know that
She is, and there are Her names and forms. Wonderfully transcending
is Her form -- far beyond the reach of word orthought. This has made the Bengali Bhakta sing
thisplaintive song --'Hard indeed is it to approach the sea of forms, and
tobathe in it.Ah me, this my coming is perhaps in vain?'"The Tantra deals with another special subject
--Mantra-Shakti. It is no exaggeration to say that we have
never heard even from any Bengali Pandit such a clear exposition of
Mantra-Shakti as that which the author, Arthur Avalon, has given in
his Introduction to theMahanirvana
Tantra.We had thought that Mantra-Shakti was a
thing to be felt and not to be explained to others. But the author
with the force of his genius has in his simple exposition given us
such explanation of it as is possible in the English language. The
Tantras say that the soul in the body is the very self of the
letters -- of the Dhvani (sound). The Mother, the embodiment of the
fifty letters (Varna), is present in the various letters in the
different Cakras. Like the melody which issues when the chords of a
lute are struck, the Mother who moves in the six Cakras and who is
the very self of the letters awakens with a burst of harmony when
the chords of the letters (Varnas) are struck in their order; and
Siddhi becomes as easy of attainment to the Sadhaka as the Amalaka
fruit in one's hand when She is roused. That is why the great
Sadhaka Ramaprasad awakened the Mother by the invocation -- 'AriseO
Mother (Jagrihi, janani)'. That is the reason why the Bhakta sang
--'How long wilt thou sleep in the Muladhara,O
MotherKulakundalini?'"The Bodhana (awakening) ceremony in the Durga Puja is
nothing but the awakening of the Shakti of the Mother, the mere
rousing of the consciousness of the Kundalini. This awakening is
performed by Mantra-Shakti. The Mantra is nothing but the
harmonious sound of the lute of the body. When the symphony is
perfect, She who embodies the Worlds (Jaganmayi) rouses Herself.
When She is awake it does not take long before the union of Shiva
and Shakti takes place. Do Japa once; do Japa according to rule
looking up to the Guru, and the effects of Japa of which we hear in
the Tantra will prove to be true at every step. Then you will
understand that the Tantra is not mere trickery, or a false weaving
out of words. What is wanted is the good Guru; Mantra capable of
granting Siddhi, and application (Sadhana). Arthur Avalon has
grasped the meaning of the principles of Mantra which are so
difficult to understand. We may certainly say that he could only
make this impossible thing possible through inherent tendencies
(Samskara) acquired in his previous life."The Tantra accepts the doctrine of rebirth. It does not,
however, acknowledge it as a mere matter of argument or reasoning
but like a geographical map it makes clear the unending chain of
existences of the Sadhaka. The Tantra has two divisions, the Dharma
of Society (Samaja) and the Dharma of Spiritual Culture (Sadhana).
According to the regulation of Samaja-Dharma it acknowledges birth
and caste. But in Sadhana-Dharma there is no caste distinction, no
Brahmana or Shudra, no man or woman; distinction between high and
low follows success in Sadhana and Siddhi. We only find the
question of fitness or worthiness (Adhikara-tattva) in the Tantra.
This fitness (Adhikara) is discovered with reference to the
Samskaras of past existences; that is why the Candala Purnananda is
a Brahmana, and Kripasiddha the Sadhaka is equal to Sarvananda;
that is why Ramaprasada of the Vaidya caste is fit to be honored
even by Brahmanas. The Tantra is to be studied with the aid of the
teachings of the Guru; for its language is extraordinary, and its
exposition impossible with a mere grammatical knowledge of roots
and inflections. The Tantra is only a system of Shakti-Sadhana.
There are rules in it whereby we may draw Shakti from all created
things. There is nothing to be accepted or rejected in it. Whatever
is helpful for Sadhana is acceptable. This Sadhana is decided
according to the fitness of the particular person
(Adhikari-anusare). He must follow that for which he is fit or
worthy. Shakti pervades all and embraces all beings and all things,
the inanimate and the moving, beasts and birds, men and women. The
unfolding of the Power (Shakti) enclosed within the body of the
animal (Jiva) as well as the man is brought about only with the
help of the tendencies within the body. The mode of Sadhana is
ascertained with regard to these tendencies. The very meaning of
Sadhana is unfolding, rousing up or awakening of Power (Shakti).
Thus the Shakta obtains power from all actions in the world. The
Sadhana. of the Tantra is not to be measured by the little
measuring-yard of the well-being or ill-being of your community or
mine."Let you understand and I understand,O my mind
--Whether any one else understands it or not."The author, Arthur Avalon, is fully conscious of this. In
spite of it, he has tried to explain almost all points making them
easy to comprehend for the intellect of materialistic civilized
society of to-day. For this attempt on his part we are grateful to
him."The Tantra has no notion of some separate far-seeing God. It
preaches no such doctrine in it as that God the Creator rules the
Universe from heaven. In the eye of the Tantra the body of the
Sadhaka is the Universe, theauto-kratos(Atma-Shakti) within the
body is the desired (Ishta) and the "to be sought for" (Sadhya),
Deity (Devata) of the Sadhaka. The unfolding of this self-power is
to be brought about by self-realization (Atma-darshana) which is to
be achieved through Sadhana. Whoever realizes his self attains to
Liberation (Mukti). The author, Arthur Avalon, has treated of these
matters (Siddhanta) in his work, theTantra-tattva.Many of the topics dealt
with in theMahanirvana Tantrawill not be fully understood without a thorough perusal of
the book. The Principles of the Tantra must be lectured on to the
Bengali afresh. If theMahanirvana
Tantraas translated by Arthur Avalon is spread
abroad, if the Bengali is once more desirous to hear, that attempt
might well be undertaken."Our land of Bengal used to be ruled by Tantrik works such as
the Saradatilaka, Shaktanandatarangini, Pranatoshini, Tantrasara,
etc. Then the Mahanirvana Tantra did not have so great an
influence. It seems to us that, considering the form into which, as
a result of English education and culture, the mind of the Bengali
has been shaped, the Mahanirvana is a proper Tantra for the time.
Raja Ram Mohan Roy endeavored to encourage regard for theMahanirvana Tantrabecause he
understood this. If the English translation of theMahanirvana Tantraby Arthur Avalon is
well received by the thoughtful public in Bengal, the study of the
original Sanskrit work may gradually come into vogue. This much
hope we may entertain. In fact, the English-educated Bengali
community is without religion (Dharma) or action (Karma), and is
devoid of the sense of nationality (Jatiya Dharma) and caste.
TheMahanirvana Tantraalone is
fit for the country and the race at the present time. We believe
that probably because such an impossibility is going to be
possible, a cultured, influential, rich Englishman like Arthur
Avalon, honored of the rulers, has translated and published
theMahanirvana Tantra.When
hisTantratattvais published we
shall be able to speak out much more. For the present we ask the
educated people of Bengal to read this most unprecedentedMahanirvana Tantra.Arthur Avalon has
not spoken a single word to satisfy himself nor tried to explain
things according to his own imagination. He has only given what are
true inferences according to the principles of Shastric reasoning.
An auspicious opportunity for the English-knowing public to
understand the Tantra has arrived. It is a counsel of the Tantra
itself, that if you desire to renounce anything, renounce it only
after a thorough acquaintance with it; if you desire to embrace
anything new, accept it only after a searching inquiry. The Tantra
embodies the old religion (Dharma) of Bengal; even if it is to be
cast away for good, that ought only to be done after it has been
fully known. In the present case a thoughtful and educated
Englishman of high position has taken it upon himself to give us a
full introduction to the Tantra. We can frankly say that in this
Introduction he has not tried a jot to shirk or to gloss over the
conclusions of the Shastra, with the vanity of explanation born of
his imagination. He has endeavored to bring before the mind of his
readers whatever actually is in the Tantra, be it regarded as
either good or evil. Will not the Bengali receive with welcome such
a full offering (Arghya) made by a Bhakta from a foreign
land?"
Chapter Two. Shakti: The World As Power
There is no word of wider content in any language than this
Sanskrit term meaning 'Power'. For Shakti in the highest causal
sense is God as Mother, and in another sense it is the universe
which issues from Her Womb. And what is there which is neither one
nor the other? Therefore, theYoginihridaya
Tantrathus salutes Her who conceives, bears,
produces and thereafter nourishes all worlds: "Obeisance be to Her
who is pure Being-Consciousness-Bliss, as Power, who exists in the
form of Time and Space and all that is therein, and who is the
radiant Illuminatrix in all beings."It is therefore possible only to outline here in a very
general way a few of the more important principles of the
Shakti-doctrine, omitting its deeply interesting practice (Sadhana)
in its forms as ritual worship and Yoga.Today Western science speaks of Energy as the physical
ultimate of all forms of Matter. So has it been for ages to the
Shaktas, as the worshippers of Shakti are called. But they add that
such Energy is only a limited manifestation (as Mind and Matter) of
the almighty infinite Supreme Power (Maha-Shakti) of Becoming in
'That' (Tat), which is unitary Being (Sat) itself.Their doctrine is to be found in the traditions, oral and
written, which are contained in the Agamas, which (with Purana,
Smriti and Veda) constitute one of the four great classes of
Scripture of the Hindus. The Tantras are Scriptures of the Agama.
The notion that they are some queer bye-product of Hinduism and not
an integral part of it, is erroneous. The three chief divisions of
the Agama are locally named Bengal (Gauda), Kashmira and Kerala.
That Bengal is a home of Tantra-shastra is well known. It is,
however, little known that Kashmir was in the past a land where
Tantrik doctrine and practice were widely followed.The communities of so-called 'Tantrik' worshippers are
five-fold according as the cult is of the Sun, Ganesha, Vishnu,
Shiva or Shakti. To the Knower, however, the five named are not
distinct Divinities, but different aspects of the one Power or
Shakti. An instructed Shakti-worshipper is one of the least
sectarian of men. He can worship in all temples, as the saying is.
Thus theSammohana Tantrasays
that "he is a fool who sees any difference between Rama (an Avatara
of Vishnu) and Shiva'. "What matters the name," says the
Commentator of theSatcakranirupana,after running through the gamut of them.The Shakta is so called because the chosen Deity of his
worship (Ishta-devata) is Shakti. In his cult, both in doctrine and
practice, emphasis is laid on that aspect of the One in which It is
the Source of Change and, in the form of Time and Space and all
objects therein, Change itself. The word Shakti is grammatically
feminine. For this reason an American Orientalist critic of the
doctrine has described it as a worthless system, a mere
feminization of orthodox (whatever that be) Vedanta -- a doctrine
teaching the primacy of the Female and thus fit only for
"suffragette monists". It is absurd criticism of this kind which
makes the Hindu sometimes wonder whether the Western psyche has
even the capacity to understand his beliefs. It is said of the
Mother (in the Hymn to Her in theMahakala-Samhita):"Thou art neither
girl, nor maid, nor old. Indeed Thou art neither female nor male,
nor neuter. Thou art inconceivable, immeasurable Power, the Being
of all which exists, void of all duality, the Supreme Brahman,
attainable in Illumination alone." Those who cannot understand
lofty ideas when presented in ritual and symbolic garb will serve
their reputation best by not speaking of them.The Shaiva is so called because his chosen Divinity is Shiva,
the name for the changeless aspect of the One whose power of action
and activity is Shakti. But as the two are necessarily associated,
all communities acknowledge Shakti. It is, for the above reason, a
mistake to suppose that a 'Tantrik,' or follower of the Agama, is
necessarily a Shakta, and that the 'Tantra' is a Shakta Scripture
only. Not at all. The Shakta is only one branch of the Agamik
school. And so we find the Scriptures of Saivaism, whether of North
or South, called Tantras, as also those of that ancient form of
Vaishnavism which is called the Pancaratra. The doctrine of these
communities, which share certain common ideas, varies from the
monism of the Shaktas and Northern Shaivas to the more or less
dualistic systems of others. The ritual is to a large extent common
in all communities, though there are necessarily variations, due
both to the nature of the divine aspect worshipped and to the
particular form of theology taught. Shakta doctrine and practice
are contained primarily in the Shakta Tantras and the oral
traditions, some of which are secret. As the Tantras are mainly
Scriptures of Worship such doctrine is contained by implication in
the ritual. For reasons above stated recourse may be had to other
Scriptures in so far as they share with those of the Shakta certain
common doctrines and practices. The Tantras proper are the Word of
Shiva and Shakti. But there are also valuable Tantrik works in the
nature of compendia and commentaries which are not of divine
authorship.The concept 'Shakti' is not however peculiar to the Shaktas.
Every Hindu believes in Shakti as God's Power, though he may differ
as to the nature of the universe created by it. Shakta doctrine is
a special presentment of so-called monism (Advaita: lit. 'not-two')
and Shakta ritual, even in those condemned forms which have given
rise to the abuses by which this Scripture is most generally known,
is a practical application of it. Whatever may have been the case
at the origin of these Agamic cults, all, now and for ages past,
recognize and claim to base themselves on the Vedas. With these are
coupled the Word of Shiva-Shakti as revealed in the Tantras.
Shakta-doctrine is (like the Vedanta in general) what in Western
parlance would be called a theology based on revelation that is,
so-called 'spiritual' or supersensual experience, in its primary or
secondary sense. For Veda is that.This leads to a consideration of the measure of man's knowing
and of the basis of Vedantik knowledge. It is a fundamental error
to regard the Vedanta as simply a speculative metaphysic in the
modern Western sense. It is not so; if it were, it would have no
greater right to acceptance than any other of the many systems
which jostle one another for our custom in the Philosophical Fair.
It claims that its supersensual teachings can be established with
certainty by thepracticeof its
methods. Theorizing alone is insufficient. The Shakta, above all,
is a practical and active man, worshipping the Divine Activity; his
watchword is Kriya or Action. Taught that he is Power, he desires
fully to realize himself in fact as such. A Tantrik poem(Anandastotra)speaks with amused
disdain of the learned chatterers who pass their time in futile
debate around the shores of the 'Lake of Doubt'.The basis of knowing, whether in super-sense or
sense-knowledge, is actual experience. Experience is of two kinds:
the whole or full experience; and incomplete experience -- that is,
of parts, not of, but in, the whole. In the first experience,
Consciousness is said to be 'upward-looking' (Unmukhi) -- that is,
'not looking to another'. In the second experience it is
'outward-looking' (Bahirmukhi) The first is not an
experienceofthe whole,
buttheExperience-whole. The
second is an experience not of parts of the whole, for the latter
is partless, but of parts in the whole, and issuing from its
infinite Power to know itself in and as the finite centers, as the
many. The works of an Indian philosopher, my friend Professor
Pramatha Natha Mukhyopadhyaya, aptly call the first the Fact, and
the second the Fact-section. TheIsha
Upanishadcalls the Supreme Experience -- Purna,
the Full or Whole.It is not, be it noted, a residue of the abstracting
intellect, which is itself only a limited stress in Consciousness,
but a Plenum, in which the Existent All is as one Whole.
Theologically this full experience is Shiva, with Shakti at rest or
as Potency. The second experience is that of the finite centers,
the numerous Purushas or Jivas, which are also Shiva-Shakti as
Potency actualized. Both experiences are real. In fact there is
nothing unreal anywhere. All is the Mother and She is reality
itself. "Sa'ham" ("She I am"), the Shakta says, and all that he
senses is She in the form in which he perceives Her. It is She who
in, and as, he drinks the consecrated wine, and She is the wine.
All is manifested Power, which has the reality of Being from which
it is put forth. But the reality of the manifestation is of
something which appears and disappears, while that of Causal Power
to appear is enduring. But this disappearance is only the ceasing
to be for a limited consciousness. The seed of Power, which appears
as a thing for such consciousness, remains as the potency in
infinite Being itself. The infinite Experience is real as the Full
(Purna); that is, its reality is fullness. The finite experience is
real, as such. There is, perhaps, no subject in Vedanta, which is
more misunderstood than that of the so-called 'Unreality' of the
World. Every School admits the reality of all finite experience
(even of 'illusive' experience strictly so-called) while such
experience lasts. But Shamkaracarya, defines the truly Real as that
which is changeless. In this sense, the World as a changing thing
has relative reality only. Shamkara so defines Reality because he
sets forth his doctrine from the standpoint of transcendent Being.
The Shakta Shastra, on the other hand, is a practical Scripture of
Worship, delivered from the world-standpoint, according to which
the world is necessarily real. According to this view a thing may
be real and yet be the subject of change. But its reality as a
thing ceases with the passing of the finite experiencer to whom it
is real. The supreme Shiva-Shakti is, on the other hand, a real,
full Experience which ever endures. A worshipper must, as such,
believe in the reality of himself, of the world as his field of
action and instrument, in its causation by God, and in God Himself
as the object of worship. Moreover to him the world is real because
Shiva-Shakti, which is its material cause, is real. That cause,
without ceasing to be what it is, becomes the effect. Further the
World is the Lord's Experience. He as Lord (Pati) is the whole
Experience, and as creature (Pashu) he is the experiencer of parts
in it. The Experience of the Lord is never unreal. The reality,
however, which changelessly endures may (if we so choose) be said
to be Reality in its fullest sense.Real however as all experience is, the knowing differs
according as the experience is infinite or finite, and in the
latter case according to various grades of knowing. Full
experience, as its name implies, is full in every way. Assume that
there is at any 'time' no universe at all, that there is then a
complete dissolution of all universes, and not of any particular
universe -- even then the Power which produced past, and will
produce future universes, is one with the Supreme Consciousness
whose Shakti it is. When again this Power actualizes as a universe,
the Lord-Consciousness from and in Whom it issues is the
All-knower. As Sarvajña He knows all generals, and as Sarvavit, all
particulars. But all is known by Him as the Supreme Self, and not,
as in the case of the finite center, as objects other than the
limited self.Finite experience is by its definition a limited thing. As
the experience is of a sectional character, it is obvious that the
knowing can only be of parts, and not of the whole, as the part
cannot know the whole of which it is a part. But the finite is not
always so. It may expand into the infinite by processes which
bridge the one to the other. The essential of Partial Experience is
knowing in Time and Space; the Supreme Experience, being
changeless, is beyond both Time and Space as aspects of change. The
latter is the alteration of parts relative to one another in the
changeless Whole. Full experience is not sense-knowledge. The
latter is worldly knowledge (Laukika Jñana), by a limited knowing
center, of material objects, whether gross or subtle. Full
Experience is the Supreme Knowing Self which is not an object at
all. This is unworldly knowledge (Alaukika Jñana) or Veda.
Sense-knowledge varies according to the capacity and attainments of
the experiencer. But the normal experience may be enhanced in two
ways: either physically by scientific instruments such as the
telescope and microscope which enhance the natural capacity to see;
or psychically by the attainment of what are called psychic powers.
Everything is Shakti; but psychic power denotes that enhancement of
normal capacity which gives knowledge of matter in its subtle form,
while the normal man can perceive it only in the gross form as a
compound of sensible matter (the Bhutas). Psychic power is thus an
extension of natural faculty. There is nothing 'supernatural' about
it. All is natural, all is real. It is simply a power above the
normal. Thus the clairvoyant can see what the normal
sense-experiencer cannot. He does so by the mind. The gross
sense-organs are not, according to Vedanta, the senses (Indriya.)
The sense is the mind, which normally works through the appropriate
physical organs, but which, as the real factor in sensation, may do
without them, as is seen both in hypnotic and yogic states. The
area of knowledge is thus very widely increased. Knowledge may be
gained of subtle chemistry, subtle physiology (as of the cakras or
subtle bodily centers), of various powers, of the 'world of
Spirits,' and so forth. But though we are here dealing with subtle
things, they are still things and thus part of the sense-world of
objects -- that is, of the world of Maya. Maya, as later explained,
is, not 'illusion,' but Experience in time and space of Self and
Not-Self. This is by no means necessarily illusion. The Whole
therefore cannot be known by sense-knowledge. In short, sense or
worldly knowledge cannot establish, that is, prove, what is
super-sensual, such as the Whole, its nature and the 'other side'
of its processes taken as a collectivity. Reasoning, whether
working in metaphysic or science, is based on the data of sense and
governed by those forms of understanding which constitute the
nature of finite mind. It may establish a conclusion of
probability, but not of certainty. Grounds of probability may be
made out for Idealism, Realism, Pluralism and Monism, or any other
philosophical system. In fact, from what we see, the balance of
probability perhaps favors Realism and Pluralism. Reason may thus
establish that an effect must have a cause, but not that the cause
is one, For all that we can say, there may be as many causes as
effects. Therefore it is said in Vedanta that "nothing (in these
matters)isestablished by
argument." All Western systems which do not possess actual
spiritual experience as their basis are systems which can claim no
certainty as regards any matter not verifiable by sense-knowledge
and reasoning thereon.Shakta, and indeed all Vedantik teaching, holds that the only
source and authority (Pramana) as regards supersensual matters,
such as the nature of Being in itself, and the like, is Veda. Veda,
which comes from the rootvid,to know, is knowledgepar
excellence,