|
chapter ix
Śiva and Śākti
Sadhaka, no Śāstra or community denies that the above-mentioned Atma, who is Śākti, is Bharmān. Differences of opinion exist among those whose knowledge consists of distinctions only, in respect of the three words Atma, Śākti and Caitanya.' The word Atma is masculine, the word Śākti is feminine, and the word Chaitanya is neuter. As there are differences of gender between the three as names, so there are also differences of kind between them as things—Bharmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara are male, Śākti is female, and Caitanya or Bharmān is neuter. As there is no scope for distinction of kind in attributeless CitŚākti the Śāstra has designated Caitanya or Bharmān as neuter. Again, owing to differences in the forms in which the Śākti of will, the Śākti of knowledge, and the Śākti of action appear,2 the Śāstra calls the Deva male and the Devī female, in accordance with the male or female principle inherent in all fathers and mothers in the world, beginning at the root from the Father of the world and the Mother of the world. This is no mere imagination on the part of the authors of the Śāstra; it is but a statement of what is really true. Femininity and masculinity exist wherever there is a description of creation, preservation, and destruction caused by māyā through a union of the two persons. The neuter state, or the state beyond that of a male or a female exists when the aspect above māyā is described. To speak of neuter does not imply complete absence of the male or the female principle; it implies only an unmanifested or undeveloped state of those principles (Śākti). Even in the bodies of neuters we see in life that both the masculine and feminine marks are found to be present. In some cases the neuter's body is found
1 That is, spirit, power, and intelligence or consciousness respectively. 2 IcchhaŚākti, jñānaŚākti, kriyaiakti. to be more like that of a male, while in others it is found to be more like that of a female, the only distinction being that the male or the female principle is not fully developed.
From what the Śāstra says about the generation of neuters it appears that when neither the male nor the female principle can subdue the other, a neuter is created, in whom the two principles exist in a state of equilibrium. The Saradatilaka1 says: "An excess of menstrual blood causes the birth of a female, an excess of seed that of a male, and an evenness of the quantities of blood and semen that of a neuter. This is certain."
The Matrkabheda Tantra says: "An excess of the Śākti's (woman's) blood over the purusa's (man's) seed causes the birth of a female child; its opposite causes the birth of a male child, and if the blood and the semen be equal in quantity a neuter is born. This is certain." It has also been stated what proportions of blood and semen mean equality in quantity.
"At the time of procreation twenty-two2 units of menstrual blood and fourteen units of seed are produced in the bodies of the woman and the man respectively. This is equality. If the blood be in excess (that is to say, if twenty-two units of blood mix with less than fourteen units of semen), a female is born; and if the semen be in excess (that is to say, if fourteen unite of semen mix with less than twenty-two units of blood), a male is born; and if the above-mentioned numbers of units of blood and semen remain the same, a neuter is born."
Even in this equality of the numbers of units the excess3 of half a unit one way or the other leads to the appearance of female marks or male marks in the body of a neuter; and according to these marks neuters may be divided into male-neuters and female-neuters. But the Śāstra, which notices the result only, has rejected this useless classification and has ordinarily treated all neuters as the same. Nevertheless, although the difference between male neuters and female neuters makes no difference
1 See also as to the process of sexual union, chap, ii of the Matrkabheda Tantra, chap, i, SaktanandaTārāngini; Pranatosini, p. 29. 2 See Saradatilaka. 3 The equality is supposed to hold so long as there is not the difference of one full unit. in the fruit, it makes some difference at the root and in the flower; otherwise, the difference would not have appeared. At the root there is the difference between the quantities of blood and semen, and in the flower there are differences, physical, mental, and functional. The neuter whose body resembless that of a male develops mostly masculine tendencies, and the neuter whose body resembles that of a female develops mostly feminine tendencies. Similarly, just as the male and female principles exist undeveloped in neuters, their developed forms being the male and female entities, so both the principles of Śākti and Śiva exist unmanifested in the Bharmān, their manifestations being Uma and MahesVara, Lakşmī and Nārāyaņa, Rādhā and Kŗşņa, Sītā and Rāma, and so on. Besides this, that blissful Bharmān aspect of Śiva and Śākti, wherein They are manifest and yet unmanifest and are inseparate from each other, and which can be worshipped only as an undifferentiated mass of consciousness and bliss—that aspect is Mahavidya, primordial, beginningless, worshipped of Bharmā and other Devas and sought by the three worlds.
We shall possibly, while dealing with the subject of śadhana, be able to present to the scrutiny of Sadhakas a sketch of a part of that aspect wherein bliss has its full play and which is monistic and eternal and above māyā. Here we must understand that Caitanya1 is nothing but Śākti, although the word itself is neuter in gender. To this end we shall quote a single surra from the Tantra Śāstra, in which the all-luminous aspect of Bharmān is established. The Nirvana Tantra2 says:
"In the Satyaloka,3 MahaKālī and Mahanidra live, embracing one another inseparably. That eternal Śākti, possessing the lustre of the moon, the sun, and fire, taken together and united with the eternal Purusa, exists like a grain of gram. (That is to say just as the two halves of a grain of gram are attached to one another, so they too are attached to one another.) As a grain of gram is covered by an external shell, so She is covered
1 Consciousness. 2 This is not to be confused with the Mahānirvāna Tantra. 3 See Introduction to Tantra Śāstra. by Her own covering of māyā. As the shell of a grain of gram is dark and hard compared with its brilliant and soft valves, so māyā also, discordant with its three gunas, is dark and hard compared with Śiva-Śākti, full of brilliance and soft with supreme bliss. As the whole, consisting of two halves and a shell, is called gram, so the whole consisting of Śiva-Śākti and māyā, is called Bharmān. To an ordinary observer, making his observation from outside the shell, a grain of gram seems to contain only one thing, but he who can see through the shell finds within that grain two halves facing and inseparably attached to one another. Similarly, he who judges Bharmā-tattva through māyā finds Bharmān to be but one. To the eyes, however, of an adept in such knowledge,1 an accomplished Sadhaka, who is aware of the deceptive character of māyā, there are manifested both His aspects of Śiva and Śākti, all full of supreme love. As sparks shoot from a burning fire, so Jivas, forming parts of Her body, shoot from the limbs of the luminous Devī into infinite millions of BrahmSndas."
The male and female forms, different from one another, are, whether they appear in the aspect of Isvara or in that of Jlva, but instruments in the dualistic play. They are different only as instruments, but not as agents. The agent is the same for both the instruments, and that is Atma or Śākti. Again, as in the bodies of males and females, so in the bodies of neuters also, Atma or Śākti is the presiding Devata. It therefore comes to this, that the bodies of males, females and neuters are alike seats of the play of CitŚākti. There is no other alternative. It is an extremely erroneous conclusion that because words ending in the suffix "kti" are feminine, Śākti must always refer to the female body and have no concern with the male body.
But, then, it may be asked, Why does the word Śākti mean a female only? To this question we shall be bound so far as it will be in our power to give a suitable answer in its proper place-Here, we shall say this much alone, that the word Śākti, meaning the female principle, is Yogarudha,2 for, fundamentally, Śākti
1 Tattva. 2 That is, a word which has an etymological as well as a special or conventional meaning, but is used only in the latter sense. Thus, pankaja, which etymologically applies to what is "mud-born," is used only in respect of a particular thing—viz., the lotus of which it is the synonym. is the same as Prakrti, and males and neuters are but changed forms of that Prakrti. The assumption of the male form by Śākti for the purpose of creation is but an exhibition of play. At the close of the play of samsāra, MahaŚākti will withdraw this form and exist in that which is really Her own. This is the conclusion of those who believe in a perfect Maha-pralaya.1 But the arguments and authorities in favour of this view are very weak.
The Tantra Śāstra, therefore, holds that the purusa side2 is the cause of the bondage consisting of attachment to the samsāra, and that the Śākti side is the cause of liberation3 or cessation of attachment to the samsāra. There is no ground for the occurrence of a perfect great Dissolution4 of the flow of worlds. For this reason, eternal are the creation, preservation, and destruction by Her who is eternally blissful. Eternal is Her bondage, and eternal also is Her liberation. In the eternal form of Her who is ever liberation itself, eternal also is Purusa as the seed of creation. But in the case of liberation in the form of perfect nirvana, the PurusaŚākti exists only to enjoy the play of bliss. Waves of creation no longer play in Her.5
For this reason, keeping that Śākti6 beneath Her as a mere instrument of play, the MahaŚākti, who grants liberation, stands upon it and, lost in the enjoyment of the sweetness of Bharmā-bliss, assumes the part of a mad woman, subduing the inactive Purusa, or creative Śākti,7 under Her feet. She of dishevelled hair proclaims the victory of liberation, and, extending Her
1 A pralaya (dissolution of things) after which there is 2 Literally, "part" (of Śākti) 3 In so far as Śākti 4 Mahapralaya. For karma is eternal, and after pralaya exists in the Bharmān in a latent subdued form, which, on the rewakening, becomes the seed of new worlds. 5 That is, in liberation (mukti) that aspect of Śākti 6 That is, Purusa, 7 Though the creative agent, He has uplifted hands, gives assurance to Her children, frightened by the dread of existence, with the cry, "Fear not! fear not!". That Purusa, the creative Śākti, is Mahākāla, and on his breast that Dispeller of the fear of death, that Delighter of the heart Charmer of the mind of kāla holds Her Kaivalya-play. It, has, therefore, been said in the Mahākāla Tantra:
"Purusa is called right (Daksina, because he is the right side of the body), and Śākti is called left (Varna, because she is the left side of the body). So long as the right and left, the male and female, remain equally powerful, so long alone does the bondage of samsāra endure. When, by dint of intense sadhana, the left Śākti has been awakened, when the left has overpowered Purusa, the right Śākti, and lost Herself in gracious joy on His body (that is to say, when both the parts of right and left are filled with Her power), then She (who is bliss unalloyed) grants highest liberation1 to Jiva. For this reason, the Mother, the saviour of the three worlds, is called Daksina Kali. Just as the body of a neuter, which represents the unmanifested state of both the male and female sides, is not produced without a union between a male and a female, so the Bharmān aspect does not appear without the presence in it of Śiva and Śākti, the Father and Mother of the Bharmāņda in an unmanifested state.
"As a neuter cannot give birth to children, so the Bharmān aspect, which is above the three gunas, is devoid of the creative, preservative, and destructive activities. Again, in its state with attributes there appear from it Bharmā, Visnu, MahesVara, Surya, Ganesa, Savitri, Lakşmī, Sarasvati, Gauri, and other forms, according to distribution of gunas, and as the male and female agents for the control of those gunas. It is from the same aspect of Śākti that the creation, preservation, and destruction of untold millions of Bharmāņdas take place."
It therefore follows that Bharmā, Visnu, Mahesvara, Rāma, Kŗşņa, Surya and Ganesa, Rādhā, Lakşmī, Sarasvati, Savitri, Durga, Rukmini, and whomsoever else, male or female, you may mention, are all aspects of Śākti. rahma is the aspect of Śākti in Her play of creation, Visnu is the aspect of Śākti in Her
1 Mahamoksa. play of preservation, and Mahesvara is the aspect of Śākti in Her play of destruction. Surya is the aspect of Śākti in Her play as light and heat,1 Ganesa is the aspect of Śākti in Her play as siddhi,2 Rādhā, Lakşmī, Sarasvati, Savitri, Durga, Sītā, Rukmini and others are the aspects of Śākti in Her play as the MahaŚākti, who is at the root of all Śāktis, and in whom they all rest. If a Sadhaka is a Vaisnava, his knowledge of Visnu-Śākti will remain imperfect so long as he does not understand that that Śākti is not different from Śiva, Durga, Surya, and Ganesa Śāktis; and if he is a Sakta his knowledge of Śāktitattva will remain imperfect so long as he does not recognize that the AdyaŚākti3 is not different from Visnu, Śiva, Surya, and Ganesa Śāktis. And this is the case whichever be the Śākti a Sadhaka may worship. And so long as knowledge remains thus inperfect, liberation is unattainable.
The Devata I worship is the Devata whom the world worships. I do not think of Śiva, Śākti, Surya, Ganesa, Visnu, or whomsoever else you may mention, as nothing to me, and as one whom I cannot worship, for all of them are but different aspects, assumed in play, of Him whom I do worship. All these aspects represent the play which He loves, who is the life of my life and the dearest treasure of my heart. How can I dishonour those aspects, the beloved wealth, and the treasure of śadhana of Him who forms my most beloved treasure ? When such perfect love appears with full force, the heart of the Sakta is rent, as it were, into a hundred pieces by the thunderbolt of discriminating knowledge4 were he to think of Kŗşņa as different from Kālī. The Vaisnava, also, is sorely pained to think of Kālī as different from Visnu. No one can be perfectly happy with an imperfect knowledge of the Devata he worships. The Tantra Śāstra has therefore said, with a deep voice which stirs the community of Sadhakas:
" 'O Devī! Nirvana can never be attained without a knowledge of Śākti." This message is as dear to the heart of the devoted Sadhakas, full of love, as it is painful to the community
1 Tejas. 2 Success (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). 3 The primordial Śākti. 4 Bhcdajflana. of Asuras in human form, who are inimical to Devas. It has always been a self-evident truth that words spoken by Devas pain the hearts of Asuras. We have, therefore, nothing to say on the point. Just as Śāktas have imperfect knowledge of Śākti-tattva if they think that the term 'Śākti' denotes only such aspects as Kālī, Tārā, and Durga, which are but fruits of Śāktitattva so Vaisnavas have imperfect knowledge of Visnutattva also if they distinguish Visnu from Śākti, with this difference, however, that the latter consider themselves pandits to boot. But Bhagavan, the ocean of eternal knowledge, and the treasure which devotees worship, has in speaking of His own self, said in the Tantra Śāstra:
" 'Śākti, Mahesvara, and Bharmān—these three words mean the same thing. The only difference which exists between them is that one is feminine, another is masculine, and another is neuter.
" 'This difference, however, belongs only to the words. In themselves there is, in the highest sense, no difference between them.' "
We fail to understand the notions which those people entertain of Paramesvara and Paramesvari who, when they observe marks of masculinity and femininity in the appearance of Devatas of worship, thereupon say that the forms of even Paramesvara and Paramesvari differ, in that the one is a male and the other a female principle. If the shape of IsVara's body be as fixed and material as that of the body of a Jiva, then of what does his lila1 consist? That is called HIS which, though not really true, is done as if it were true in the excitement of the bliss enjoyed by the Self. Just as an actor has really no connection with the parts he plays, so Bhagavan or Bhagavati also have no connection with the forms which, in play, they assume in various ways.
Their connection with the assumption of forms is the same as that which exists between an actor and his acting. Nevertheless, although the assumption of forms is not really true so far as they are concerned, it is perfectly and undoubtedly true so far as a Jiva is concerned. For, to their eyes, the samsāra is as much a play as their own bodies, but so long as this samsāra does not appear to you and me as a play, their bodies also do not appear
1 Play (see Introduction to this book). to us as such. Secondly, if for the sake of peculiarities of terms, it be necessary to admit that their forms follow those peculiarities, then, like the female and male forms of Śākti and Śiva, or Lakşmī and Nārāyaņa, the form of Bharmān becomes neuter owing to the term Bharmān being neuter; but in reality the thing denoted by the term Bharmān is not neuter, although it is so according to the gender of the terms. Similarly, the things denoted by the terms Śiva and Śākti are not in reality always bound in male and female forms respectively, although they are male and female, according to the gender of the terms.
There is, however, this particularity to be noted here, that as forms for play are impossible in the state of an attributeless neuter, He assumes male and female forms as a being with attributes for the purpose of creating, preserving, and destroying the dualistic world,1 fulfilling the desire of Sadhakas, and that the sweetness of the play be enhanced. Worship of an attributeless being is impossible. The Tantra2 therefore says:
"The neuter state of monistic existence, which is the result of the union of Śiva and Śākti, is revealed of Itself, without any separate worship thereof.3 The attributeless aspect which is the fruit of all śadhana, and in which, at the conclusion of all śadhana, the worshipper sinks and loses himself, cannot be attained while śadhana continues. It is attained by the great siddhi known as nirvana."
Whatever form She may assume in Her aspect with attributes is but Her form. That Śākti alone who grants enjoyment, salvation, and devotion, is in all such forms. Now the Sadhaka may, if he so desires, know Her as Visnu, Kŗşņa, Śiva, and Rāma', or as Kālī, Tārā, Rādhā, Durga, Sītā, and Lakşmī, or please himself by calling Her mother, father, friend, and well-wisher. It does not matter whether the Vaisnava considers Her as Visnu in the form of Śākti, or the Sakta considers Her as Śākti in the form of Visnu. When we sink in the ocean of Her substance
1 Prapaftca; literally things formed by the combination of the five elements. 2 Gandharva Tantra, 34th patala. 3 That is, the male and female forms are assumed by the Supreme for śadhana. When a sadhaka has attained siddhi in any of these forms, the neuter form reveals itself before him without any further effort on his part. which is Cit-Śākti,1 forgetful of all differences of masculinity and femininity appertaining to forms, then Kŗşņa,Śākti, ŚivaŚākti, or KālīŚākti, and all other Śāktis, will be mingled into one by the waves of that ocean.
That MahaŚākti is everywhere the real giver of liberation, from whomsoever it may come, whether Śiva, Visnu, Durga, Ganesa, or Surya. This condition of unity does not arise without a knowledge of Śākti-tattva.2 Nirvana liberation is impossible so long as all things do not combine into a state of unity. It is for this reason that the Tantra has said: "O Devī! Nirvana can never be attained without a knowledge of Śākti." RāmapRāsada3 also, whose life was in the Tantra, has sung the same air: "You assume five principal forms, according to differences of worship. But, O Mother! how can you escape from the hands of him who has dissolved the five and made them into one ?"
To our great misfortune, our doubts thicken round the very names of the Mother of the world on account of that very śadhana, with which devoted sadhakas sink into the sweetness of Her being4 and are blessed and liberated from the state of a Jiva. One of Her names, which are suspected to contain imprints of māyāvada,3 is Visnumāyā. It is out of this name that Her title of "great Vaisnavi" has been evolved. It has been said in the Yogini Tantra:6 "Remembering the time when, after the destruction of the Asura, Ghora, in the waters of pralaya, AdyaŚākti gave to Bharmā, Visnu and Mahesvara the charge of creation, preservation, and destruction respectively, Mahadeva said: 'O Spouse of Sambhu! that MahaKālī granted us the Śākti of will, the Śākti of knowledge, and the Śākti of action for doing the work of creation, preservation, and destruction. She gave the Śākti of will to Bharmā for creation, the Śākti of action to Visnu, and the Śākti of knowledge, which is the embodiment of all Śāktis, to me.' "
1 See post. 2 The truth relating to Śākti. 3 Rāma PRāsada Sen, the great Bengali poet, Tāntrik, and worshipper of 4 Lit.: "sweetness of Tattva." 5 māyā theory. 6 10th patala. According to differences in the mutual relation of the gunas of māyā which consists of three gunas, the rajas guna gives rise to the Śākti of will, the sattva guna gives rise to the Śākti of action, and the tamas guna gives rise to the Śākti of knowledge. In Her play, wherein She appears as embodied beings, these three forms of Śākti constitute the forms of Bharmāni, Vaisnavi, and MaheSvarl. In these three forms She is as mush Bharmāmāyā and Śivamāyā as She is Visnumāyā; but still, in most places, the Śāstra has spoken of Her as Visnumāyā. The reason for this is that from the commencement of creation to the time of pralaya, Jivas, in this samsāra are subject to the preservative Śākti. The preservative Śākti rests in Visnu, and the presiding Devī over the act of preservation is VaisnaviŚākti or Visnumāyā. The Devas have therefore said in this hymn to the Devī:
"O Devī! thou art VaisnaviŚākti of infinite power, Thou art PaRāma (Supreme) māyā, which is the seed of the universe. All this world is deluded by Thee, and Thou, again, when pleased, grantest liberation to Jivas." Although as māyā She is Śivamāyā. and Bharmāmāyā also, the Devas said: "Thou art VaisnaviŚākti, Thou art PaRāma (supreme) māyā," because preservation of the Universe is impossible without the influence of Vaisnavi-māyā. For this reason they again said: "Thou art the seed of the Universe," because "all this world is deluded by Thee"— that is to say, without delusion the Universe cannot exist. It is under the power of VisnuŚākti that Jiva is overcome by delusion," and for this reason one of the names of Visnu is Janardana, or He who overcomes Jana.2
The world, whilst in the condition of preservation, has not so much concern with the māyā of Bharmā, by which it was created in the past, or the māyā of MaheSvara, by which it will be destroyed in the future, as with the māyā of Visnu, which has operation in the present time. At the time of creation Jivas had no independence in the matter of coming into the world, for the Jivahood of Jivas was created by the force of the will of Him who also created the world by His will. Again, at the time of the great Dissolution,3 Jivas will have no independence in the
1 māyā and moha. 2 An Asura. 3 Mahapralaya. matter of leaving the samsāra for the Jivahood of Jivas is withdrawn by Him who also destroys the world. Neither, therefore, at creation nor dissolution have Jivas an opportunity to think or even a right to pray independently. At those periods Jivas are naturally bound to enter into the womb of Prakrti, and to issue from it even against their will, just as a child is bound to enter into and issue from the womb of its mother. As from the time of conception to that of delivery a mother remains pregnant with child, so from the time of creation to that of dissolution māyā remains full of the spirit of preservation. It is during this period that She is called VisnumSya. The Śāstra says: "The child in the womb grows according to the quality of the food which the Mother takes." Similarly, we, the children in the womb of Prakrti, will be built or grow according to the things She enjoys in the samsāra. The best efforts of the Jiva should therefore be directed towards seeing that the things enjoyed by Prakrti become free from elements of rajas and tamas gunas, and full of the sattva guna. Customs, principles, practices, rules and regulations, śadhanas and bhajanas,1 mantras and tantras, all are required for this end.
He who, by satisfying the Prakrti of the self with sattvik food, and being himself nourished by the high quality of that food, is able in due time and with safety to issue from the womb of māyā; he alone is able, after Her delivery, to see the child-bearing aspect of Mother Mahamāyā, and will fondly be placed on Her lap. Just as on issuing from the womb a child who has, while living within it, suffered indescribable pains, forgets them all at the sight of the affectionate face of its mother, so, issuing from the womb of māyā, a great yogi, who has attained siddhi, forgets all the sufferings of the dualistic samsāra at the sight of the refulgent liberating2 beauty of the face of Mother Bharmā-mayi, full of love for the universe. When confined in the womb of māyā, the Sadhaka saw the terrors of the darkness of delusion; but issuing from it he to-day takes shelter in the lap of the same Mother of the Universe.
1 Worship. 2 Kaivalya. He now, instead of being in darkness, sinks in the sea of an existence made of light, brilliant with the lustre of a hundred crores1 of autumnal moons, and beauteous with bliss. Rocked on the lap of the Mother by the waves of his emotion and the ripples of affection, he now plays, and sees that māyā no longer exists as māyā, but has become Mother māyāmayl.2 For this reason I said that in conformity with the custom of entertaining a pregnant mother in sadha,3 so all the śadhana4 and bhajana in the samsāra are but eatables offered to Prakrti for Her sadha. In preparing for this entertainment it is only necessary to understand that these infinite millions of Bharmāņdas receive their conception from the Śākti of Bharmā, or the Śākti who is Bharmā; that the nourishment of the child in the womb comes from VisnuŚākti, or the Śākti who is Visnu, and that the delivery is caused by ŚivaŚākti or the Śākti who is Śiva.
The Śākti in whom the rajas guna predominates causes the creation of the world of Jivas; the Śākti in whom the sattva guna predominates causes its preservation; and the Śākti in whom the tamas guna predominates causes its dissolution—that is to say, release from the bondage of māyā. A change in the creation which proceeds from BharmāŚākti is impossible, so that any desire on the part of a Jiva to alter the physical creation by means of worship of BharmāŚākti or Bharmāmāyā is futile; but if the worship is intended for any other object, that is a different thing altogether. Every Jiva is, in the present state, subject to VisnuŚākti or Visnu-māyā.. The question of destroying the rajas guna and the tamas guna can arise only in the future state when, by means of śadhana and bhajana practised in the present state, the sattva guna has been developed. It is only then that one becomes fully competent to worship ŚivaŚākti, the Destructrix and Dispeller of the woes of samsāra.
Fundamentaly, the very tamas guna with which, as Avidya, She creates the samsāra, is again destroyed at the time of the
1 See post. 2 The Mother whose substance is māyā. 3 Sadha is the entertainment of a mother during the eighth or ninth month of her pregnancy, so that no desire for food may be left unfulfilled. 4 See Introduction to Tantra nostra. great dissolution1 by Herself in Her aspect of ŚivaŚākti, as is eternal knowledge and bliss; but this competence for worship arises only with the perfection of sattva guna. All the instructions of Śāstras are meant for the development of the sattva guna during the period that Jiva lives in the womb of Avidya, overpowered by the rajas and tamas gunas. In explaining māyā-tattva to those who have acquired competence for śadhana, the Śāstra has therefore in most places referred to māyā as Visnu-māyā, who exercises direct power in the present state instead of as Bharmāmāyā or Śivamāyā, whose work concerns the past and the future respectively. The reason why the Śāstra does this is that the Jiva's direct knowledge of māyā2 must be derived from the present display of Her power in the samsāra.
By Visnumāyā or VisnuŚākti is not meant māyā or Śākti subordinate to Visnu, Such Vaisnavas as are ill-disposed towards Śākti will probably refuse to understand this; but we say that whether Vaisnavas understand it or not, Visnu Himself understood, in His battle with Madhu and Kaitaba, whether Śākti is subordinate to Visnu or Visnu is subordinate to Śākti, and made others also understand it. In short, O Vaisnava! the very notion which you possess of the "dual" existence of Śākti and possessor of Śākti, or of māyā and the wielder of māyā, is erroneous. In reality the aspect of Visnu is but an aspect assumed by Her who is māyā or Śākti.
Again, some communities, proud of their Vaisnavism, are nowadays heard to say that Bhagavati is a great Vaisnavi. "To serve as if it were one's own self" (to serve God as one would serve oneself) is the conclusion (idea) of the Vaisnava Śāstra. We have therefore nothing to say to the Vaisnava who holds that Bhagavati is a great Vaisnavi, because this notion merely bespeaks his own nature. There is, moreover, this delightful inconsequence, that while the Mother is considered a Vaisnavi the Father is a spiritual brother.3
1 Mahapralaya, 2 māyā Tattva. 3 That is, Śiva have realized the beauty of this relationship. If you have such a strong desire to call Mahadeva your spiritual brother in order to create a precedent (which they follow) for your own community, then why not treat every one equally, from the Mother of Bharmā, Visnu and Mahesvara to the mother of the smallest insect? Let the Sakta and the Vaisnava unite their voices in singing: "Jiva is Śiva! Śiva is Jiva!" Then, why Mahadeva alone ? All Devas, Adhidevas,1 Upadevas,2 Danavas,3 Manavas,3
There will then exist no other relationship but that of the spirit, so that the three worlds will then be full of spiritual brothers only. Can you tell me, O Vaisnava! when, by the blessings of Vaisnavas and the grace of Visnu, the day will come on which you will realize Śākti, not as Visnumāyā, but as Visnu? Śākti is called Vaisnavi, not because She is possessed by Visnu, but because She is progenitrix of Visnu. Ganga7 is called Bhaglrathi because She was worshipped and brought down by Bhagiratha. The reason for Her being called after the name of Bhagiratha is not that She, whom even Bharmā and other Devas are rarely able to worship, is under the protection of Bhagiratha, but that, urged by the tender desire "to be called the mother of Bhagiratha,' and in order to immortalize in the three worlds the immense glory of Bhagiratha, that crest-gem of devotees, the Mother of the universe, dweller on the head of Sankara, and dispeller of the sorrows of samsāra, has proclaimed to the three worlds, out of love for Her devotees, the greatness of devotion shown to Her, by the adoption of the name of Bhaglrathi.
Similarly, in spite of Her being the progenitrix of Bharmā and other Devas, and Mother of the universe, She has proclaimed Her Śāktis of creation, preservation, and destruction by adopting the names of Bharmāni, Vaisnavi, and Mahesvari. She was born as Bharmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara and was, again, Herself
1 Ruling Devas. 2 Subordinate Devas. 3 Demonic spirits. 4 Men. 5 Devī as supporter of the universe. 6 Brahmāndas. 7 The River Ganges. their Mother. If you call Her dependent, She is dependent on Herself alone. If you call Her patroness, She patronizes none but Herself. There is, therefore, no possibility of Her being injured by anything which may be said about Her. What, however, we can do is to march along the path to hell. So I say, O Sadhaka, beware! save yourself from all these sinful notions.
Another of the names of the Mother is Bharmāmayi. This, too, gives to the detractors an opportunity to object that She who is Bharmān can never be Bharmāmayi. If She is Bharmāni why, then, is She called Bharmāmayi? She might very well be called Bharmān. In reply to this objection we shall not, after recitation of the whole of Ramāyāna, proceed to give an account of Sītā.1 It is no wonder that man, whose nature it is to err, will be deluded by Her māyā, which sometimes deludes even Bharmā and other Devas ardently devoted to Her. Sadhakas who are inquirers after spiritual knowledge2 should, however, know that just as beads are made of gold,3 images are made of earth,4 Ganga5 is made of water,6 and the sun is made of light and heat,7 so the substance of the Mother of the world is Bharmān.8 The word Bharmāmayi has been formed by adding the suffix māyāt to the word Bharmān in the sense of "Own form."9
What is Her "own form" that is Bharmān; or what is Bharmān's "own form" that is She. Even while embodied, Bharmān She is, in reality, above all gunas, and so She is called Bharmāmayi. Her hands, feet, and other limbs, her raiments, ornaments, and conveyances, the members of Her family, etc., are all Bharmān's "own form," and so She is Bharmāmayi. The meaning of the term Bharmāmayi is not "One who pervades Bharmān,"10 but "One who is Bharmān".11 Bharmān pervades the universe, but the Arya Śāstra makes no mention of anything which can pervade Bharmān.
From all that we have so far said on the subject of Śākti-tattva, Sadhakas have surely come to understand that the Śākti
1 That is to say, to repeat which is a useless task. 2 Lit.: "inquirers of tattva." 3 Svarnamayi. 4 Mrnmayi. 5 The River Ganges. 6 Jalamayi. 7 Tejomayi. 8 Bharmāmayi. 9 Svarupa. 10 Bharmāvyapini. 11 Bharmārupini. to whom ill-disposed Śāktas and Vaisnavas refer is not the same Śākti as forms the subject of the Tantra Śāstra.
Rādhā, Lakşmī, Sītā, Rukmini, Savitri, SarasvatI, Ganga, Gauri, Ganeia,1 Surya, Śiva, Visnu, Indra, Candra, Vayu, Varuna, Deva, Danava,2 Gandharva, Kinnara, Yaksa,3 Raksa,4 man, beast, bird, insect, and the endless universe which is full of all such moving and motionless things is Śākti in substance. Again, Rādhā, Lakşmī, Sītā, Sati, and other manifestations of Bharmān, are but the Kaivalya play5 of MahaŚākti. In the quotation which we have already made in connection with the destruction of thousand-headed Ravana, Sadhakas have obtained a notion of Sītā-tattva.6
Here we shall make a few quotations to illustrate the manner in which the Śāstra supports7 the contention of the Vaisnavas that Rādhikā is "ŚrīKŗşņa 's handmaid," and their practice of worshipping Rādhikā with articles of food first offered to Śrī-Kŗşņa. From this play of the waves of sastrik authority, Sadhakas will form a conception of the vast expanse and grave solemnity of the sea of the nectar of Rādhā-tattva.8
In the Devī Bhagavata9 ŚrīNārāyaņa says to Narada: "In the region of Goloka 10 Rādhikā was first of all worshipped by Kŗşņa, the PaRāmatma, within the Rāsamandala11 on the full-moon day in the month of Kartik. Next, under the command of Bhagavan, She was worshipped by the company of herds-women and cowherds, their boys and girls, the cows, and Surabhi, the queen of the race of cows. Since Her worship by the inhabitants of Goloka, Bharmā, Visnu, Mahesvara, and other
1 Rādhā, beloved of Kŗşņa,; the Devī Lakşmī; wife of Rāma; wife of Kŗşņa,; wife of Bharmā; the Devī Sarasvati; the River Ganges (considered as Devī); the elephant-headed Deva, son of Śiva. 2 The sun; Śiva; 3 Devayonis of those names (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). 4 Demonic beings. 5 That is, the play of unity in diversity. Rādhā, Lakşmī, Sītā, and Sati are MahaŚākti, and so one with Her. 6 7 That is, does not support. 8 The subject of Rādhā. 9 10 Kŗşņa,'s heaven (see Visnu Purana, I. iii). 11 The enclosure within which the Rāsalila was performed. Devas, and the Munis inhabiting the city of immortals ever worship and adore Her with devotion, with flowers and incense. On earth She was first worshipped by Suyajfia in the sacred field of Bharatavarsa, under the direction of Bhagavan Mahadeva. Subsequently, under the command of ŚrīKŗşņa, the PaRāmatma, the inhabitants of the three worlds began to worship Her."
In the second Ratra1 of the Naradapaficaratra it is said: "Just as Śrī Kŗşņa, who is Bharmān in reality, is above Prakrti and free from attachment,2 so Rādhikā, who is also Bharmān in reality, is above Prakrti and free from attachment. Just as, for the sake of work to be done, He at times assumes forms with attributes, so Mahaprakrti Rādhikā also, for the same purpose, at times assumes the form of gross Prakrti. In gross form that subtle Prakrti lives, by the force of yoga, in the life,3 the tongue, the intellect, and the mind of Śrī Kŗşņa, the Paramesvara. Narada! at times She seems to appear in, and disappear from, the world formed of māyā; but in reality She neither takes birth, nor is dependent on the action of any other being or person. Like Bhagavan Hari, Bhagavati Rādhikā also is eternal and truth in substance. O Muni! the MahaŚākti who presides over the life of Bhagavan Śrī Kŗşņa appears as Rādhā, and She who presides over His tongue is Sarasvati Herself. She who presides over His intellect is Durga, the destroyer of evil, who has now incarnated Herself as the daughter of Himalaya, the Mountain-king, the destroyer of the enemies of the Devas, who, by appearing in the form of the mass of energy4
1 Chap. ii. 2 Nirlipta. 3 Prana, the vital principle, 4 Tejas. 5 Titans. 6 Ailvaryya, that which constitutes Isvara-hood (see post). born1 Kamala, who arose from out of the sea of milk what time it was churned. It is She who is the earthly Lakşmī on earth, and the spouse of Nārāyaņa who lies upon the sea of milk. The heavenly Lakşmī also, who presides over the dwellings of Indra and other Devas, appeared from a part of Devī MahaLakşmī who Herself is the spouse of the Lord of Vaikuntha. Savitri, who dwells in the Bharmāloka, is the wife of Bharmā. At the command of Bhagavan, Saravasti had already divided Herself into two parts. The first part remained as Sarasvati and the second became Bharati2. Both were accomplished yoginis by dint of yoga. Of them, Bharati is the wife of Bharmā, and Sarasvati is the spouse of Visnu. ParamesVari Rādhikā, the mistress of the play of Rāsa,3 is the presiding Devata, over the Rāsa-circle, and that eternal Bharmāsanatani incarnated Herself in full in the region of Brndavana.4 Within the Rāsa-circle She was the principal actress of the play of Rāsa, making use of the occasion of the love-play to show Her love to devotees. Bhagavati ate betel chewed by Bhagavan, and Bhagavan ate betel chewed by Bhagavati (in order to show their love for devotees, or to show that both of them were, in fact, the same). In reality both of them have the same body. (In outward vision they appear to possess different bodies to enhance the sweetness of their play, but in reality no such difference exists.) The difference between them is like the difference between milk and its whitenses, that is to say, just as the substance milk is an aggregate of such constituent qualities as whiteness, liquidity, sweetness, and so forth, so the substance Bharmān is an aggregate of existence, consciousness, bliss, and the like. Just as the state of milk cannot be determined if we omit any of its qualities, such as whiteness, liquidity, sweetness, and so forth, so Bharmānhood cannot be determined if we omit any of its qualities, such as Śākti, possessor of Śākti, Śākti vibhuti,5 and the like. Just as substantially no difference exists between the constituent parts of a thing, although,
1 Sindhubala, who came out of the sea. 2 Savitri. 3 See post. 4 The town Brndavana, in the United Provinces. 5 Manifestation of Śākti (see post). according to the method of linguistic exposition, differences are imagined to exist between them, and different names are assigned to them, so actually no difference exists between Rādhā and Kŗşņa, although they are different in the aspects they assume in play. Bharmān is both Rādhā. and Kŗşņa,. She who is Rādhikā is also Kŗşņa, and He who is Kŗşņa is also Rādhikā. Those who distinguish between Rādhā and Kŗşņa, who constitute one non-differentiable, non-dualistic supreme Being,1 will not escape the torments of hell so long as the sun and moon will endure. The heinous bodies of those who make a distinction between them, and, failing to understand the play of Bharmān, speak ill of Rādhikā, the supreme Prakrti, will be boiled in the Kumbhi-paka hell so long as Bharmā lives."
Again, in the sixth Chapter it is said: "First utter the name of Rādhā and next that of Kŗşņa or Madhava.2 Whoever reads in the opposite way surely commits a sin equal to that of murdering a Bharmāna. Rādhikā is the Mother and Śrī Kŗşņa is the Father of the universe.3 Although both are the same in substance, yet in the incarnation They take in play and, according to human4 custom, the Mother is the object of a hundred times greater glory, adoration, and worship5 than the father."
"It is in order to maintain this glory that Śāstra has enjoined men to take the name of Rādhikā first and that of Śrī Kŗşņa next. It is natural to expect that because the mother is the wife of the father her position will be less glorious than his, according to men's notions; but here custom is inspired by dharma,6 and is, consequently, approved by the Śāstra. Not only the custom of men, but even the Śāstra itself says: 'In glory the mother surpasses the father a thousand times.' The reason, also, for this has been stated in the Śāstra. It says that: 'The mother is an object of greater glory than the father because she holds the child in her womb and nourishes it.' He is the Guru of the
1 Tattva. 2 Madhava is one of the names of Kŗşņa as destroyer of the demon Madhu. 3 The mother's name is always placed first. 4 Laukika. 5 See post. The child should regard its mother and father as two visible incarnate Deities (Mahānirvāna Tantra, chap, viii, verse 25). 6 a religious spirit. world by whom the world is educated and initiated. Prakrti tests this education and initiation of the world—that is to say, the Guru can teach only what the Jivas1 (nature) can accept. Prakrti, therefore, has the charge of testing the passion or dis-passion for education.
"This Prakrti, the examiner of the world, however, has also to receive education and initiation from mother Mahaprakrti.2 For ten months and ten days before its appearance in the world of men the child's Prakrti is initiated in the mantra which is contained in the mother's body, food, senses, and mind, and educated therein. It has already been shown that in the proportion of seed and blood the quantity of blood, which is the mother's portion, is the greater. For this reason the mother's contribution to the Jiva's body is larger than the father's. At the very outset this gives to the mother superiority over the father. Next comes the pregnancy for ten months and ten days. During this period the record of the Jiva's destiny lies engraved on the foundations of the mother's body. The child's body is built and developed according to her thoughts, her doings, and the humours3 nd blood flowing in her body.
"After this, again, for five years the child drinks the mother's milk. Taking all these matters together, it appears that the child's indebtedness to the mother permeates his veins, arteries, bones, marrow, vital airs, body, senses, mind, and, indeed, every molecule and atom from the tip of his toe to the top of his head. His indebtedness to his father is only in respect of the act of procreation. This is the law of nature. The child's indebtedness to his father for acts done subsequent to procreation, such as performances of the ten samskaras,4 education, maintenance, and so forth, is not such as must naturally appertain to the father, for in his absence these acts may he done by any other guardian. For this reason it does not matter very much to the child if the father dies after procreation; but if the mother dies after conception, not even the united power of the three worlds can supply her place.
1 Prakrti. 2 The greater Prakrti. 3 Rāsa. 4 Sacraments (see Introduction to Tantra "Under the weight of this great and solemn glory the Śāstras ordaining household duties have, with heads bowed down, said: 'The mother is a thousand times more glorious and more worshipful than the father.' Such being the decision of even such Śāstras as deal principally with domestic duties, it need hardly be said that in the spiritual1 vision of the Tantra Śāstra, which deals principally with śadhana dharma,2 there is in this no difference between the worldly mother and the spiritual Mother (or Śākti). In the chapter on Śāktilila3 we shall try, as far as it will be in our power, to show how the principle1 (of the superiority) of human motherhood is applicable to Rādhā, the embodiment of the unattached4 Bharmān, and what the Tantra Śāstra says on the subject. Here we desist, for to do so would be to digress. For the present, the very notion under which Sadhakas know Her as Mother will enable them to understand this much, that the name of Rādhā should be taken first and then that of Kŗşņa, and that a reversal of this order is faulty worship in their śadhana for truth.1
"Those who speak ill of
Rādhikā either through perversity of intellect caused by unavoidable fate, or through blindness due to ill-feeling towards Vamacara,5
or through ignorance or sin, do not know that Rādhikā is an aspect of Hari's own self, and that an enemy of
Rādhā
"(So long as that detractor of Śākti shall not die), he will fall (from his own dharma6 through unrighteousness),7 and be deprived of the power to arise on account of malice against Śākti; he will be prostrate on earth and suffer from endless disease and
1 Tattva. 2 Rules as to ritual practice, worship, etc. 3 The play of Śākti. 4 Nirlipta. The supreme inactive Bharmān, unaffected by, and unattached to, the Bharmāņda (universe). 5 Vamacara is one of the Tāntrik Acaras (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). 6 Svadharma. 7 Adharma. perils at every step. In the Bharmāksetra,1 the Puskara tirtha, this (truth) about Rādhā was told by Hari to Bharmā, and subsequently I heard it from Bharmā. Sadhus (who are themselves pure and purify others) constantly worship the lotus-feet of Rādhā, who purifies the three worlds. BhagavSn Śrī Kŗşņa Himself ever offers arghya2 with devotion at those worshipful lotus-feet. Besides this, (during the play he enjoyed) in the woods and groves of Brndavana, Bhagavan (possessed of a form sweet with love) painted with devotion (by soft touches of his own finger) the tips of the toes of the lotus-feet of Her (who was all full of love and Bharmān incarnate) with the cool and brilliant paint of alakta."3
In the Rādhā Tantra it has been said: "In the great mantra consisting of
Rādhikā's thousand names, Śrī Kŗşņa is the Rsi, the great
Devī who crushed Mahisa is the presiding Devata and Gāyatrī
The Rsi of a mantra is he who was the first to be initiated and attain siddhi in it.5 There is nothing to say to those who are worshippers of the yugala form6 and with a knowledge of monistic truth do not discriminate between Rādhā and Kŗşņa,. But even from the dualistic standpoint sadhakas should now understand how Rādhikā stands in relation to Śrī Kŗşņa,.7
Again, in the Narada Pancaratra it has been said: "Of the great mantra consisting of one thousand names of Rādhikā, by whose grace Śrī Kŗşņa is the Sovereign Master" of the region of Goloka, and has attained the position of supreme Lord of the great mantra, Narada is the Rsi, and (owing to its being a different mantra)10 Rādhikā, who is supreme over the supreme, is the Devata. Its application is for the fulfilment of the fourfold aim.11
1 At Puskara, in Ajmer, where there is a temple to Bharmā. 2 An offering of grains of paddy and blades of durva grass to a person honoured and respected, or to an image. 3 Red lac paint, with which the soles of the feet of Hindu women are painted. 4 The successful attainment of knowledge of Devī Mahavidya. 5 And who reveals it. 6 The form in which Rādhā and Kŗşņa are combined. 7 That is, even if they make a distinction between Rādhā and Kŗşņa, sadhakas should understand from the above the relation of the one to the other. 8 Chap, v, 5th Ratra. 9 AdhisVara. 10 From the preceding. 11 Dharma, artha, kama, moksa (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). Rādhikā is the handmaid, initiation in whose mantra, and education and accomplishment in whose Tantra, made Bhagavan to become Bhagavan. To worship Her, even the Lord of the universe descended on earth from Goloka and became Her servant. In the hope of kissing Her graceful feet the head or Cintamani1—the thought of whose feet gratifies the world of moving and unmoving things, who is the crest-gem of the four-headed Deva2—touched the dust. If, then, you call Her who is such an one Śrī Kŗşņa,'s handmaid, then whom would you call Śrī Kŗşņa,'s Īśvarī?3 I would not of my own accord, say all this. I am obliged to do so in reply to your words. It is for this reason that there is so much discussion about honour and dishonour. My Kŗşņa has neither a handmaid nor an Īśvarī; but when your Kŗşņa has necessity for a handmaid, why should he not have necessity for an Īśvarī as well ? The moment you step within the bounds of dualistic knowledge He, in spite of His being Isvara, will have, by your grace, to suffer inevitably as well the state of a servant as that of a master. Or, if in your language, the person served is called handmaid and the person serving is called master, then we have nothing to object to this servitude and lordship. However that may be, O you whose knowledge is of a dualistic kind, take note that it is the nineteenth century of the Kālī yuga, and apparently the custom of the age is to call mothers and aunts handmaids!
However that be, it requires now to be seen what we gain or lose, whether or not there exists a relation of master and servant between Bhagavan and Bhagavati. If it exists, a worshipper has no right to discuss it, nor is there the necessity to do so. If Rādhikā is to be worshipped merely on the ground of Her being Bhagavan's handmaid, and if, in that worship, Her satisfaction is to be sought, then surely it is necessary to ascertain and arrive at a final conclusion as to whether She is really Śrī
1 One of the names of Kŗşņa,. 3 Feminine of Iisvara, or Lord. 2 Bharmā. selves will supply the evidence, then, too, it will be extremely difficult to arrive at a definite conclusion. For in the play of love which they enjoyed during their stay at Vraja, when Rādhikā said to Śrī Kŗşņa, "You are my all," Śrī Kŗşņa said to Rādhikā, "I am unable to call You 'You'. To call You 'my own' is not much."1 Putting aside even what Śrī Kŗşņa said, which is more2 than what Rādhikā said, if the two are considered to be of equal positions, then, also, one of them cannot be a servant or handmaid of the other. Now, how can the matter be judged on the evidence of such witnesses ? If, therefore, you want to judge the matter by a consideration of acts instead of words, then it is not for you and me to judge and arrive at a final conclusion on the matter. In this effort to appease the anger3 of Rādhikā, Bhagavan Himself finally decided the question at the feet of Rādhikā.
But if you say that you will call Rādhikā Śrī Kŗşņa,'s handmaid, and worship Her with food first offered to Śrī Kŗşņa in reliance only on the sentiment expressed by the words, "You are my all," spoken by Rādhikā to Śrī Kŗşņa in a temporary moment of service—a ripple, as it were, in the midst of waves of play in the sea of love—then even Rādhikā cannot be called inferior to Kŗşņa,. If you can worship Rādhikā with food first offered to Śrī Kŗşņa, then I, too, can, in reliance upon the incident in which he appeases Rādhikā's anger, represent him as hankering after the leavings of Rādhikā's food and driven off with weeping. The service I speak of is as much one of sentiment as the one you speak of. As your words are sweet, but your acts are deceitful, so I am obliged to make my acts and words similar. In this state of things it is impossible for us even to come together, much less to arrive at any decision.
In sorrow have poets said: "If two persons be both candid, then the love that grows between them remains for ever candid and unshaken. If one of them be candid and another crooked,
1 The meaning of this is: "You and I are the same," so that the relationship of the speakers is not fully expressed by the expression "You are my all". 2 For Kŗşņa did not discriminate between Him and Her. 3 then love between them endures for a few days only—that is to say, so long as the crookedness of the crooked person does not show itself. And if both of them be crooked, there can be no love between them, much less a permanent love." O you who speak of distinctions, this crookedness of yours and mine precludes the possibility that love may grow between us. Think but once that They who are referred to in this discussion on the subject of love are both very crooked,1 with three bends in their bodies,2 and yet unite to form one person.3 The devotee has therefore said: "The moon will perish, the sun will perish, the Bharmāņda formed by the spread of the three gunas will perish, in the great dissolution, but it is the firm conviction of the Hari-vamsa4 community that the constant play of Rādhā and Kŗşņa at Brndavana will never come to an end."
So, I say, O Sadhaka, see the threefold play of creation, preservation, and destruction in the thrice-bent and fair bodies of the Father and the Mother of the universe, and forget all distinctions. Call, for once, the Father Mother and the Mother Father, and making the Father and the Mother one, take them to the Sahasrara.5 There, in the heart of that full-bloomed and thousand-petalled lotus, shining with the refulgence of the sun and moon, in that seat of the undifferentiated6 kaivalya-play7 of Him who is full of light and Her who is full of light, stand with folded hands, and with a disconsolate heart weep, and say: "I know not who you are? Be you Father or Mother or another, tell me whose I am?" Brother Sadhaka, be you a worshipper of the Father or a worshipper of the Mother, you cannot have a better opportunity for putting both the Father
1 Kutila. 2 Trbhanga: a favourite representation of the body with Indian artists is that with three curves, formed by the inclined neck, trunk, and legs. 3 Bhagavan and Bhagavati are here called kutila and trbhanga because of the inscrutability of Their ways. 4 Vaisnava. Harivamsa, or "family of Hari," is the name of a Pauranik work which gives the history of the family of Hari or Kŗşņa,. 5 The thousand-petalled lotus in the head, above the six cakras (see Introduction to Tantra 6 Abhinna. 7 Kaivalya is moksa. and the Mother to shame1 than at that time when they become one.
When the Father and the Mother will lower their faces in shame at making themselves known as Father or Mother, know, O Sadhaka, that on that day you will be victorious in this discussion. Whoever has once seen the place of the soft and sweet smile of shame in their silent faces, lowered in shame at the question of the son, for him all doubt as to who is the Father and who is the Mother, or who is great and who is small, has been for ever dispelled. O ye who are intimately associated with the principles of Tantra! O Sadhakas, who form the most beloved wealth2 of the Mother! if for any of you such a day has ever come or may come in future, then on this or that day kindly remember for once, at least, this poor and destitute son of the Mother who is full of mercy for the poor.
What can I do, O brother? The truth which has to be attained by śadhana cannot be explained in words. Once call out to Her who is truth3 itself, and of whom we now speak, and opening the portals of your heart, say: "O Mother, be Thou Rādhā adored by Śrī Kŗşņa, or Rādhikā adoring Him, Thou knoweth Thy own play. O playful Mother,4 appear once in Thine own real form in the solitary grove of this heart, and in the company of Thy companions stand with three-fold bend, yet making your body one with the body of Śyāmā.5 O charmer of the mind of the charmer of love,6 illumine but once the forest of my heart with the refulgence of Thy world-enchanting beauty, so that I may see Thee with Thine own light, just as one worships the Ganges with Ganges' water.
O beloved of yama, stand forth once with a dark body, so that, O Gauri! all idea of difference between a fair and a dark body may be dispelled from my mind.7 O Mother, Thou Thyself
1 The shame (lajja) is caused by their having manifested themselves in the distinctive aspects of Father and Mother. 2 Literally, "wealth bound in the skirt of the dress of the Mother." 3 Tattvamayi. 4 LilamayL 5 Śyāmā is a name of Kŗşņa, meaning of dark colour. 6 Madana. 7 The beloved of Śyāmā is Rādhā , who is fair-coloured. The word "Gauri" means "one who is fair". It is also the name of the wife of Śiva, who is in reality the same as Rādhā. The author here prays Rādhā to assume a dark body—that is to say, a body of the colour of Kŗşņa,—so that his mind may be disabused of all ideas of difference between Rādhā and Kŗşņa,. dost rouse and allay Thine own anger,1 Thou Thyself dost clasp Thine own feet as Rai (Rādhikā), Thou Thyself dost inflame Thine own anger, and as Śyāmā Thou Thyself dost appease it. Thou art all full of play, and art Bharmān,2 and so this anger becomes Thee. But, O Mother, we are erring Jivas, blinded by an intense intoxication.3 We can be angry, but cannot appease it. Being Jivas full of māyā,4 we cannot therefore, understand the meaning of the (appeasing) of the anger of Her who is Bharmān.
O Mother, for him who has understood its meaning, both honour5 and dishonour6 have for ever disappeared. O Dispeller of the fear of existence, Gladdener of the hearts of devotees, eternally pure Devī; O Mother, Thou art Śākti incarnate, the granter of Śākti and liberation. Of Thy mercy grant unto us the Śākti to understand the truth concerning Thyself, so that we may leave this samsāra never to return thereto, after having offered all honour and dishonour at those lotus-feet, so desired of devotees.
O you who speak of distinctions, do not widen the path whereby you go to your downfall by imagining distinctions between Śākti and the possessor of Śākti. If you offer to Rādhikā food first offered to Śrī Kŗşņa, She will not be insulted thereby; for in Her eyes the person7 of Kŗşņa is but a manifestation of Herself in play. But, for yourself, should this insulting idea arise in your mind, there is no escape from hell. Even He in the pride of whose glory you entertain these insulting notions concerning Rādhikā—even He has, in intense devotion to Her who is ever kind to devotees, said, in the Nirvana Tantra:
"Those who make japa of the names of Rādhā and Kŗşņa, placing the name of Kŗşņa after that of Rādhā, to him do I undoubtedly grant the lot that is mine. Those who, instructed by gurus in the path of bhava8 or of mantra, worship me in this manner—that is to say, those who, knowing Rādhā and Kŗşņa to be inseparable in reality and yet, in order to proclaim the
1 Mana (see ante). 2 Bharmāmayl. 3 Mada. 4 māyāmāyā. 5 Mana (see ante). 6 Apamana. 7 Murti, 8 Sentiment, emotion, love, devotion. triumph of the love of Her who is all full of love,1 make japa of the great mantra of the two names, placing the name of Kŗşņa after that of Rādhā—they are ever as powerful as Myself.
"That woman, who worships me, a male, in the faith that I am inseparable from Thee, also of a truth acquires power equal to Thine own. Hear, O Rādhikā! To those who (firmly believing that you and I are inseparable) worship the yugala aspect2 with or without pious devotion, to them I grant the state which is mine, owing to Thy love for me." That is to say, such is the unthinkable power of the yugala aspect, that, whether one has full devotion or not, it pours an abundant shower of love on one's heart, were it even the adamantine heart of a great sinner,3 and makes the tree of ParaBharmātattva,4 which is love for Rādhā and Kŗşņa, blossom, flower, and bear fruit thereon.
"O you discriminating Vaisnava! How dare you extend your authority over Visnu, after whose name you are called a Vaisnava, and who is your authority in everything? Being the servant of Visnu's servant's servant, what makes you so proud that you insult the Devata whom Visnu adores? You would not admit the superiority of any over the Devata. you worship. Very well. But ought you, on that account, to divide one thing into two parts, and attribute lordship to one and servitude to another ? Why should you call
Rādhā Kŗşņa,'s handmaid instead of Kŗşņa,'s own self?5
And even should you do so in the spirit of play, why do you not also call Kŗşņa
Rādhā's servant, just as you call Rādhā. Kŗşņa,'s handmaid? Or do you think that Kŗşņa,'s lordship cannot be maintained without calling Rādhā His handmaid ? Is this your idea of Kŗşņa,'s Bharmānhood ? He who is the Lord will always be so, whether Rādhā becomes His handmaid or not. O brother, you proceed to establish Kŗşņa,'s lordship on Rādhā
1 Premamayi. 2 In which both Kŗşņa and Rādhā are combined. 3 Literally, "heretic" (pasanda). 4 The tree which symbolizes the ParaBharmān. 5 Svarupa. you not saved in spite of the presence of the Lord, the Saviour of the three worlds ? To strike with a weapon the left limb of Him whose right limb you worship! Ah we know not whether, in consequence of such worship, Bhagavan will gratify you by appearing before you, or greet you with His SudarSana.1 Friend of the poor! Merciful Deva! Thou alone art the Saviour of the three worlds, Thou art ever the reliever of burdens of the earth.
"Lord, save the community of Sadhakas from these false beliefs. Or, O Lord, it is miserliness shown by your self of your own accord. It is because Thou, O Kŗşņa, art unwilling to make the being2 of Rādhā in which Thou hast sunk and lost Thyself the property of all, that Thou, O crest-gem of schemers,3 hast turned the wheel of the intelligence of Jivas. So I say, O discriminating Vaisnava, if your understanding of the subject is of a dualistic character, then understand this also, that it is doubtful whether even after a hundred crores4 of births, you will be able to worship Her whose worshipper Kŗşņa Himself is."
Amongst those who, by throwing all these thorns upon the spiritual path, consider themselves to be learned,5 there are some who are even heard to say that Śākti can exist only by the support6 of the possessor of Śākti, and therefore ask what is the necessity of worshipping the thing supported instead of the supporter ?
Sadhakas have already been given ample evidence to show the nature of relation of the supporter and the supported, between the possessor of Śākti and Śākti. What new answer can we now give to the above question? If, however, the matter must be judged from the point of view of the supporter and the supported, then, leaving aside considerations of Śākti-tattva, we see that Bharmā is supported by a swan,7 Visnu is supported by Garuda, Mahadeva is supported by a bull, and the Devī is supported by a lion. Should we, then, for this reason ignore Bharmā, Visnu, Mahesvara, and Mahesvari, and worship the swan, Garuda, the bull, and the lion, in the belief that as supporters they are more
1 The discus of Visnu. 2 Tattva. 3 Cakri. 4 1,000,000,000. " 5 Pandit. 6 Asraya. 7 Hamsa, or some say goose, duck, or flamingo. important of the two ? The relation between the possessor of Śākti and Śākti is the same as that which exists between the carrier" and the person carried. This is the only fit reply to a fit question.
In reality, there are no such two things as Śākti and possessor of Śākti. There is no evidence of, nor is there any necessity for, the existence of the two things. Male, female, and neuter, all are Śākti. Body, senses, mind, and Atma, all are manifestations2 of Śākti. CitŚākti3 as Atma is, like the solar orb, the condensed and massive form of Śākti; while body, senses, mind, and other things are, like sun's rays spreading on all sides, but fluid parts of that great massive Śākti. Although the sun is in reality energy 4 in substance, yet for common understanding such expressions as "the sun is possessed of energy" and "the sun's energy" are used. Similarly, although Atma is Śākti itself in substance, yet in order that Jiva may the better understand, Śāstra has used such expressions as "Atma is possessed of Śākti" and "Atma's Śākti". This is the only difference between Śākti and the possessor of Śākti. In a spiritual sense, nothing exists as possessor of Śākti besides Śākti.,
Even the Purusa-form,5 which you and I, according to our language and understanding, know as the possessor of Śākti, is but another or changed 6 form of Prakrti. Other evidence is unnecessary. ParameSvara himself, the sole and best Purusa in the world,7 who presides or dwells in all Purusas, has said in the Nirvana Tantra: "Just as trees grow on the earth and again disappear in it; just as bubbles are formed in water and again disappear in water; just as lightning is formed in clouds and again disappears in them; so at the time of creation Bharmā, Visnu, MaheSvara, and other Devas are born of the body of that beginningless and eternal Kālīka, and at the time of dissolution they again disappear in Her. O Devī, for this reason, so long as Jiva does not know the supreme truth" in regard to Her who plays with Mahākāla, 9
1 Vahana. 2 Vibhfiti. 3 See ante. 4 Tejas. 5 Murti. 6 Vikrti. 7 Jagadekapurusottama. 8 Tattva 9 Mahākālavilasini. his desire for liberation can only give rise to ridicule. From a part only of Kālīka, the primordial Śākti, arises Bharmā, from a part only arises Janardana, and from a part only arises Sambhu. O fair-eyed Devī, just as rivers and lakes are unable to traverse a vast sea—that is to say, however strong their currents may be, they all lose their individual existence entering into the vast womb of the sea—so Bharmā and other Devas lose their separate existence on entering into the untraversable and infinite being of Mahakall. Compared with the vast sea of the being of Kālī, the existence of Bharmā and other Devas is nothing but such little water as is contained in the hollow made by a cow's hoof. Just as it is impossible for a hollow made by a cow's hoof to form a notion of the unfathomable depth of a sea, so it is impossible for Bharmā and other Devas to have a knowledge of the nature1 of Kālī. (For Bharmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara are the presiding Devas of the three periods of creation, preservation, and dissolution; but who can master with his intellect the nature1 of that Kālī with whose playful glance even Mahākāla, to whom the three periods of time are but three twinkles of His three eyes, appears at one moment and disappears at another?). Neither Bharmā, nor Visnu, nor Mahesvara knows Her fully."
"They, too, are born at the beginning of creation as Lords of creation, preservation, and destruction, and again disappear in Her at the time of dissolution. For this reason Her Purusa appearances2 can lead only to svarga and other regions.3 There is none other but Herself who can grant nirvana liberation. The south is the region where Yama, who awards punishment to sinners, presides. Even if a great sinner, trembling with fear of death, utters but once the name of Kali while passing towards that south, the holder of the rod of punishment4 becomes frightened by the (tremendous force of the Bharmāņda piercing) name of Bharmān,5 and flees to all the quarters (forsaking his own place of rule, the southern region). The inhabitants of
1 Tattva. 2 Miirti. 3 Loka. Only the Bharmāmayl can give liberation (Mukti). 4 Yama-dandadhara. 5 Kālī. the three worlds, therefore, sing Her name as 'Daksina1 Kālī' (the Dispeller of the fear of the south). Or She is called Daksina 2 Kālī, because She is daksina or skilful in creating and destroying even Mahākāla, the Purusa, who is above gunas."
Vikrti alone appears and disappears, while Prakrti3 is eternally unchanging. Bhagavan, therefore, has again said: "It is only when Prakrti attains the state of Vikrti that She sees the three worlds (fashioned by Herself); and again when Vikrti attains the state of Prakrti, She does not see anything (for, She then exists in the form of Kaivalya"4 ) —that is to say, when Vikrti in the form of the dualistic Bharmāņda disappears in the womb of Prakrti, that monistic Prakrti alone exists in whose womb the Bharmāņda is contained, and consequently, nothing remains to be seen but Herself. In another place the Śāstra has clearly said: "Purusa is but a Vikrti 5 of Prakrti."
In the Saktamala. Candrika it is said: "Bharmā is Śākti, Śiva is Śākti, Visnu also is Śākti, and Vasava 6 is Śākti. Śākti is at the root of all the many other Devas. Without Śākti none is able to preserve his individual existence. O Thou who posses-seth a high mind, know, therefore, that Śākti is the greatest of all."
In the Bharmāņda Tantra it is said: "Amongst Vaisnavas some meditate upon that great Śākti as Kŗşņa, two-armed and beautiful with a dark 7 complexion, and others as the husband of Laksrni, four-armed and tranquil. She whom some Saivas see as five-headed, naked as space, and holding the trident; and others as four-headed, one-headed, and so on, according to different forms of meditation—that great Devī Prakrti inhabits the region 8 of Bharmā-tejas.9 Great yogis, by single-minded practice of the yoga of devotion,10 see that Prakrti alone behind all things. Just as one single sun is reflected in thousands and thousands of forms in mirrors, so one single Prakrti is reflected
1 Southern. The south is the region of death. 2 Skilful. 3 The true nature, as compared with its changing transformations or "corruptions" (vikrti). 4 The state of liberation from all 5 Evolved form (vide ante). 6 Indra. 7 Śyāmā. in infinite forms in Her own māyā. Just as in spite of the existence of different upadhis,1 by which space2 is known according as it is space in a pot,3 space in a room,4 space reflected in water,5 extensive space,6 and so on, there is in reality no difference in space; so in spite of the existence of infinite different forms,7 there is in reality no difference in Her who is infinity itself. That one sole Mahavidya fills the universe.8 The names only are different."
The Kurma Purana says: "The truth, which is the conclusion of all Bharmāvadins9 in the Vedas and Vedantas, is that which yogis see as one all-pervading, subtle, attributeless, motionless, and fixed. That is the supreme state of Mahadevl. What yogis see as endless, unwasting, sole, pure ParaBharmān, that is the supreme state of Mahadevl. That eternal existence,10 higher than the highest, universal, beneficent and faultless, which is in the womb of Prakrti, that is the highest state of Mahadevl. That which is white, spotless, pure, attributeless and non-dualistic, that which is only a matter for realization by the Atma, that is the highest state of Mahadevl."
The Devī's words in the same Purana are: "The supreme aspect of Mine the substance of which is consciousness,11 sole,12 and pure; the immortal state which is free from all upadhis,13 and eternal, that is only attainable by knowledge alone. Those who see the Atma as knowledge,14 undoubtedly enter into Me."
In the Devī Agama it is said: "That Mahamāyā, who in reality is consciousness and ParaBharmān, has assumed various forms out of favour to devotees."
The Yogini Tantra says: "He who exists pervading the visva (universe) as Deva Visvesvara is Himself Visvesvari, the universe-pervading Devī."
"Whatever Śākti anything possesses, that is Devī Visvesvari, and all those things are Deva Visvesvara. She into the hollows
1 Apparently limiting conditions. 2 Akàsa. 3 Ghatàkāéa. 4 Grihàkàsa. sJalākāsa. 6 Mahàkāsa. 7 Rupa. 9 Those who speak of and worship the Bharmān. 10 Tattva. 11 Cinmāyā. 12 Kevala. 13 Apparent limitations, vide ante. 14 Jnāna. of whose every hair millions of Brahmāndas constantly disappear; She it is who grants the desires of Sadhakas by the assumption of various forms in play (for such is Her kindness)."
In the Navaratnesvara it is said: "That Devī who is absolute existence, absolute consciousness, and absolute bliss, should be thought of as a female, or as a male, or as pure Bharmān. In reality, however, She is neither male nor female, nor neuter— (that is to say, she is not bound to any particular form).
"Still, just as a kalpalatā1 is called by a feminine name, so She, too, is called by a feminine name (Śākti—that is to say, one obtains from a kalpalatā anything which he desires, be it the fruit of a creeper (lata) or that of a tree, and this reveals a divine2 Śākti beyond that of a lata (creeper) or of a tree). Still, just as a kalpalatā is a lata (creeper) in form, so She assumes a female form,3 in spite of Her being all forms and above all forms." Just as the form of lata (creeper) is the real form of a kalpalatā, in spite of its bearing fruits of trees, so the form of Śākti is Her real form in spite of all male appearances,4 such as Devas, Dāna-vas, and so on, which are Her forms3 only. Whether in dualistic or in non-dualistic play, in the form of Bharmān or in the form of Jiva, the female is Śākti, and the male is sākta. Śākti is the person worshipped, and Purusa is the person worshipping. This is the last step of sādhana, the highest state of spiritual realization.6
Although male and female are both Her aspects, yet Her Śākti is naturally revealed more in the female than in the male form, and this is the cause of the distinction of worshipper and the worshipped,7 and it is on account of this greater manifestation that females are called "Śākti". From this one must not suppose that Śākti is less present in such appearances8 as Śiva, Kŗşņa, Rāma, Sürya, Visnu, Ganesa, and so on. For although these appearances are actually male, they are not bound to the male form. They are merely formed in the play of Her who is consciousness
1 Desire-fulfilling creeper. 2 Daiva. 3 Strirüpadhārini. 4 Mürtí. 5 Rüpa. 6 Prāpti. 7 The female principle is called Śākti because there is more Śākti revealed in it than in the male principle. As the Mundamala Tantra says, "Wherever there is a female (éakti), there I am." For the same reason the female is worshipped by the male. 8 Mürtí. in manifesting consciousness. If a Sadhaka who is a worshipper of the form of Kŗşņa desires to see Him as Kālī, then Bhagavan, the fulfiller of the desires of devotees, is bound to appear before him in that form.
Rādhikā Herself has, by pretending1 to be afraid of Ayana,2 given evidence of this perfect Śākti of Bhagavan.3 It is with reference to this force of perfect Śākti in the female form that Mahesvari Herself has said, in the Durgagita of the Mundamala Tantra:
"It is I who am Rādhikā in Goloka, Kamala in Vaikuntha, and Savitri and Sarasvati, the presiding Devī of speech in Bharmā-loka. It is I who am Parvati in Kailasa, Jānakī in Mithila, Rukmini in Dvaraka, and Draupadi4 in Hastinapura. I am Sandhya5 and Gāyatrī, the Mother of Vedas, the objects of adoration to all the twice-born people. Among Yogas6 I am Pusa, among flowers I am black Aparajita,7 among leaves I am the bael-leaf,8 among pithas I am the Yonipitha,9 I am Mahavidya formed of Hari and Hara,10 and I am also the worshipped of Bharmā, Visnu and Śiva. O Lord, O Sahkara,11 it is only by my special favour that Jivas can know me (what more need I say, O my husband!); wherever there is Śākti (a female) there I am. O Mahadeva, know for certain that this is the manner in which I am best contemplated. Whoever forsakes this path of Śākti and proceeds along another path in search of Me throws away the jewel which is in the palm of his hand, and runs after a heap of ashes."
This is the command of Śāstra. If, after this, any of you wish to solve the matter by a thorough understanding in the light of science or philosophy, in that case also it must be admitted that there is no Śākti or possessor of Śākti other than the Śākti
1 Abhinaya. 2 Rādhikā's husband. 3 This point here is not at all clear. For the story is that Kŗşņa took the form of Kālī for fear of Ayana. 4 As to these names, vide ante. 5 Morning, noon, and evening prayers personified (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). Sacred to Śiva. 6 See post. 7 The flower clitoria. 9 Kamrup, in Assam (see Introduction to Tantra Saslra). 10 Visnu and Śiva. 1 11 Śiva. of Ātmā, by which body, senses, mind, and life1 are guided. If everything is performed by Śākti, then why wait for a possessor of Śākti ? If you ask by whose support2 this Śākti exists, then do you yourself tell me by whose support the possessor of Śākti exists. If the BharmāŚākti who supports the Brahmànda has to wait for another's support, then this Brahmànda must go to perdition.3 Who is the container4 of the contained Śākti? By whose energy5 does fire burn? By whose speed does wind blow? Such questions do not bespeak a natural state of the mind. However that may be, it is because Purusa is enabled by the support of Śākti to display Himself6 that Sāstra has designated him as Śāktimàn (the possessor of Śākti). The Brahmànda play of Bharmāmayi manifests the same principles. For this reason, in the creation, preservation, and destruction of the dualistic material world,7 the Purusa aspects of Śākti are Brahmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara, and Her Prakrti aspects are Brahmānī, Vaisnavī, and Mahesvari. In the Gāyatrī mantra also it is these two Purusa and Prakrti aspects which have to be worshipped at the commencement in prānāyāma.8 Brahmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara are the Purusas, and at the end, in the Gāyatrī dhyàna,9 Brahmānī, Vaisnavī, and Mahesvari are the Prakrtis. The Gāyatrī is merely a Sûtra (aphorism), and the Sandhyā-prayers are its vrtti (exposition) or Bhāsya (commentary). In the Gāyatrī mantra five forms of Bharmān's self10 have been specified— namely, pervader of the universe,11 creator of the world,12 object of worship,13 playful Deva,14 and instigator of Jīva's intelligence.15 Of these five, the epithet "pervader of the universe" denotes the Self-aspect,16 and comes first. Next follows the introduction of the dualistic world. The world cannot be
1 Prana. 2 Asraya. 3 Rāsatala. 4 Adhara. 5 Tejas. 6 Lit.: to spread his own vibhutis (seepost). 7 Prapanca. 8 Breath-control (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). 9 The formula of meditation on the Gāyatrī. 10 Svarupa. 11 Bhurbhuvah suvah. 12 Tatsavituh. 13 Varenyam Bhargah. 14 Devasya dhimahi. The Deva is described in the text as playful (lila-māyā), for Ilia is a characteristic of Devas. 15 Dhiyo yo nah pracodayat (see Introduction to Tantra Śāstra). The Sanskrit in notes 10 to 14 are the portions of the Gāyatrī referred to, though not expressed, in the text. 16 Svarupa. created in the attributeless state, and without fully bringing into play the three gunas. By whom will He be worshipped if no worshipper exists ? Play1 is impossible if no desire exists. Lastly, why should He direct Jiva's intelligence if He has not taken upon Himself the lordship of the Bharmāņda? Intelligent Bharmānas will now understand from the Gāyatrī mantra itself whether the Devata, who forms its subject,2 is attributeless Bharmān or with attribute. Bharmān, whom the Gāyatrī seeks to establish, is neither attributeless nor with attribute—that is to say, It is both attributeless and with attribute. A Sadhaka, when he has attained siddhi in the śadhana of Bharmān with attribute will, in natural course, lose himself in the attributeless Self.3 He need not before this time shut his eyes and see darkness for three ages.4 By Bharmān with attribute you and I may understand a small Bharmān. But in the eyes of the Śāstra, Bharmān is neither small nor great, as you think.
As an aquatic animal must pass through the rivers if it wishes to journey to the sea, so a Jiva must pass through the dualistic world if he wishes to make his way to the Bharmān. Śāstra has, therefore, said that to reach Mahānirvāna, which is His attributeless aspect, one must proceed by the aid of the support of His forms5 with attributes. By the term "attributeless" one is not to understand that Bharmān has no attribute,6 but that, although with attributes,7 He is not attached8 to them. The Sea is not waterless. But as, notwithstanding its fullness of water, it is the Lord or presiding Devata over waters, so Bharmān, with attribute or attributeless, is, notwithstanding such attributes, Lord or presiding Devata over attributes. Every attribute bears eternal evidence of the infinite number of attributes of Her in Whom are all attributes.9
To say, therefore, that She is attributeless is only to show one's ignorance. The manifestations of Śākti in the forms10 of Devas, Danavas, and men, signify nothing but the spread11 of attributes belonging to Her who holds the three gunas. Attachment,
1 Lila. 2 Pratipadya. 3 Svarupa. 4 That is, he has not got to wait, but the result follows immediately. 5 Murti. 6 Guna. 7 Gunamāyā. 8 Lipta. 9 Gunamayi. 10 Murti. 11 VisTārā. inclination, permanence, peace, self-control, patience, error, enjoyment, liberation, devotion, and the like are all nothing but Śākti. Thanks, then, to the tongue of him who says that She is unconscious, She in whose substance hearing, thinking, going, seeing, and other acts of consciousness exist. Whether a person who asks if he has got a tongue has really got it or not, will be understood by others if not by himself. But he too, ought to understand this much, that if he has not got a tongue, with whose help, then, does he ask: "Have I got a tongue?"
Similarly, an advocate of the theory that Śākti is unconscious,1 ought at least to ask himself under whose influence earthly Jivas become conscious ? If Śākti be not really consciousness, by whose grace do I possess the power of asking whether Śākti is conscious or unconscious ? I know not what severe punishment for terrible crimes committed in previous births it is which smites a man so senseless as to cause him to make so delirious a statement as that "Śākti is unconscious". He is saying that of a Śākti the beams of the moon of whose consciousness are powerfully manifested in every vein, every artery, and in every atom of a Jiva's body. Śāstra has said: "O Devī, without a knowledge of Śākti nirvana cannot be attained." Do you think, O Jiva! that you will gain the knowledge of Śāktitattva which leads directly to nirvana liberation, merely by virtue of your being a great polemist, and without the possession of a wealth of śadhana stored by in many previous births ?
Are you to possess the wealth which is worshipped by Bharmā and other Devas—the treasure which lies eternally hidden in the storehouse of Sadananda's heart ? Hari, Hari, Hari ? You and I want to obtain Her by the force of intelligence, but we fail to realize that we have not the power to understand anything beyond what She, who is the intelligence of even intelligence, has with proper judgement, given us the competence to understand. Not to speak of anyone else, even Śańkarācārya himself, O Sadhaka, played at this sport.
When Bhagavan Śańkarācārya, upholder of the māyā doctrine, preacher of the Vedanta philosophy, and crest-gem
1 Jada. of philosophers, arrived at Kasi after having proved himself a conqueror in every quarter; when followers of other systems of philosophy, wounded all over by the powerful arrows of his arguments, had been dispersed and scattered, he, by some play of the Mother of the world which we know not of, commenced to the immense joy of the Saiva community, to hurl relentless thunderbolts on the heart of the Sakta community. For he proceeded to establish that "nothing exists as Śākti" besides Śiva. Śāktas thus sorely oppressed by him, though defeated outwardly by arguments, were undefeated in inner reasoning. They were, however, intensely grieved to see such scepticism1 proclaimed against the Devata whom they worshipped. Who but She who dwells in all hearts can realize the intensity of such grief in the hearts of Sadhakas ? Śańkarācārya, however, could not understand this even then; for his ideas did not go beyond the notion that "Kasi2 belonged to Śiva." It was even then unknown to him that there was also a Mistress3 of Kasi. The throne of Her who is Śākti in reality, was therefore moved to appease the pangs of the hearts of Sadhakas, and to lift the curtain of error which had fallen upon Saiikaracarya, the incarnation of all devotion.4
One day, therefore, Saiikaracarya, after an untiring discussion lasting till midday, lay with a wearied body on the Manikarnika ghat, enjoying in his mind his triumph in having disproved the Śākti doctrine.5 He then saw a girl of serene appearance slowly approaching the ghat,6 carrying a small pitcher on her lap. Śańkarācārya was lying with his head towards the south and feet towards the north, in such a way as to completely block the path. On coming near him, the girl very meekly said: "Bhagavan, please raise your feet so that I may fill my pitcher with water and go away." Śańkarācārya said: "Mother, you may step over me. There will be no blame in your doing so." The girl replied; "How can that be? You are a Bharmāna. How can I step over you ?" Śańkarācārya, proud
1 Nastikavada. 3 AdhĪśvarī. 5 Śāktivada. 2 The city of Benares. 4 BhaktavaTārā. 6 Steps leading down to the river. of his knowledge, said: "Mother, you are an ignorant female, and in that a mere girl. Bharmāna, Ksattriya, Vaisya, Śudra, female, male—all such differences merely arise from our ignorance.1 In the eyes of the wise everything is, in a spiritual sense, in substance, Bharmān. You may pass over me, and will commit no sin thereby." The girl looked greatly grieved, and said: "Lord, you yourself have said that I am an ignorant female, and have no competence for such spiritual knowledge.2 I can by no means step over a Bharmāna. Be good enough to raise your feet so that I may pass." Sahkaracarya was displeased, and said: "Mother, I have repeatedly told you what to do, and yet you will not hear me? My body is extremely tired, and, moreover, suddenly I feel, I know not why, as if I had not the Śākti (strength) even to raise my feet." The girl, who appeared to be somewhat frightened, said: "Lord, pardon me. Had I but known that you had not the Śākti to do so, I would never have asked you to raise your feet. I am one who is not fit to understand your spiritual knowledge, and have, in consequence, disturbed you repeatedly through my great fear at having to step over a Bharmāna. Had you, instead of speaking of spiritual knowledge, told me, at the beginning, plainly that 'you had not the Śākti to move,' I would myself have raised your feet and gone down to the water. However that may be, if you will now let me, I shall myself raise your feet." Śańkarācārya was greatly abashed at these words of the girl, and said: "You may do what you like." The girl then raised his feet with her own hands and put them aside, and then went down to the water, filled the pitcher, and ascended the steps. Śańkarācārya, who was lying prostrate with fatigue, called to the girl, and said: "Mother, I have been long thirsty, give me a little water." The girl smiled, and asked: "Why? You are lying on the water-side. How is it, then, that you suffer from thirst?" Saiikaracarya replied: "How many times more need I tell you that I have not the Śākti to rise?" The girl then rolled her eye,3 and making the banks of the Ganges resound with Her solemn voice, said:
1 Ajñāna. 2 Tattva-jñāna. 3 In surprise and resentment. "Sankara, is it not you who ignore Śākti?" Wounded by the echo of that heartpenetrating solemn sound, Sahkaracatya, who had been like a sleeping child startled by lightning, shut his eyes for a moment, and then, as he fearfully opened them, he saw that in the angry eyes of the girl waves of unbearable light, such as might proceed from hundreds of suns and moons, were playing. Instantly, as he cried "Mother!" and with outstretched arms rushed to clasp Her feet, the play of that playful Devī closed. The great light of Her who is Light itself,1 which had shown itself in the form of a girl, disappeared. None but a kindred sufferer can understand the darkness into which Śańkarācārya sank upon the disappearance of that light. The summit of pride of Bharmājñāna2 to which he had risen was shattered into pieces by a single glance of the daughter of the King of Mountains,3 as the summit of a mountain is shattered by a thunderbolt. Then, like a blind man who has fallen, like a child which has lost its mother, he wept loudly, and crying, "O my Mother, where have you gone?" ran with breathless speed towards the temple of Annapurna. Now the mother's son belongs to the Mother, and goes to the Mother's temple crying, "Mother!" Although there was nothing strange in this, yet the sight of such an unprecedented change in Śańkarācārya, the sceptic about Śākti, charmed the Saktas with the greatness of the Mother. The temple-yard was filled with their cry: "Victory to the Mother of the world." Surrounded on all sides by the assembly of Sakta devotees, Śańkarācārya came to the door of the temple of the RajarajesVari4 of the three worlds, the Queen5 of the Lord6 of Kail, and, trembling with fear at having committed so grave an offence, placed his head on the shrine of the feet touched by the heads of Suras and Asuras, of Adya Śākti, the Mother of the world. Then, weeping, he said: "O Mother, Śiva is able to maintain His Lordship only if He is united with Śākti; otherwise (if He is separated from Śākti) He is unable not merely to maintain His Lordship, but even (to maintain His own existence) to
1 Jyotirmayī. 2 Knowledge of Bharmān. 3 The Devī, who had thus appeared to the philosopher. 4 Queen of Queens. 5 Adhīsvarī. 6 Isvara. move His eyes. Explained in another way: According to Tantra, Śākti is denoted by the letter 'i'.1 Śiva is Śiva so long only as He is joined with Śākti—that is, with 'i'. The instant He is separated from Śākti—that is, from 'i'—He ceases to be Śiva, and becomes a motionless Sava (corpse). Thou art, therefore (Adya Śākti) an object of worship to even Hari, Hara, Virinci,2 and others who are themselves worshipped by the world. O Mother, how am I, who have done no act of religious merit, able to bow my head to, or hymn the feet (the lotus-feet, difficult of attainment by the three worlds, at which Bharmā and other Devas lay their heads)—that is to say, unless Thou thyself reveal it, who has the power to know the Śākti-tattva, which is in reality Thyself ? Bharmā, Visnu, and Mahesvara, who know but a part only of Thy greatness, have sought shelter at Thy feet. That tattva is not revealed to any who have not a store of religious merits acquired by Sadhana in many a previous birth. It is not within the power of Jivas to know the nature of Tārā,3 who is beyond the reach of mind and speech. It is therefore that a Jiva fails to know Thee, O Mother, even though he lies on Thy lap. O Mother, such is my state to-day. Out of fear of the offence I have committed, I have not the courage either to make hymn or to bow to Thee."
In this manner Śańkarācārya made hymn to the Mother of the world by one hundred and three verses, in which he described Her appearance, qualities, and greatness. In the conclusion he said: "To make hymn to Thee with words uttered by Thy grace is like the waving of lights4 before the sun in his worship, or the preparation of Arghya5 for the moon with the particles of water secreted by a moon-gem,6 or the offering of libations of its own water to the sea."
Thus gratified, Śańkarācārya made provision so that none among the descendants of his disciples might ever be deprived of
1 Called Vamaksi or Vamanetra (left eye), also Rati. 2 Visnu, Śiva, 3 That is, the tattva of Tārā, one of the Mahavidyas (see Introduction to Tantra Sdstra). 4 Arati, or the waving of lights in worship before an image. 5 An offering made to show respect to a person on meeting him, or to a Devata. 5 Candrakanta mani. the wealth of the śadhana of Śākti, or fall from Tāntrik initiation, notwithstanding that they were Sannyasins in the Vaidik cult. For this reason we see the Yantra of Śrī 1 established wherever there are Mathas,2 temples, and the like, founded amongst such Dandis3 as are followers of Śańkarācārya. This fact people daily see even at the present time, except that it is in some places openly displayed, and in some places kept secret as Sadhakas, who know the secret, are fully aware.
However that may be, we have something to say about the spiritual error of Bhagavan Śańkarācārya, an incarnation of Sankara, in the incident described above. Bhagavan Śańkarācārya was an incarnation of Śiva, who is Śākti Herself. It is extremely astonishing that He who has in His original form laid His breast under the feet of MahaŚākti, and sunk in Bharmā-bliss by resigning Himself to the Bharmā-form of Bharmāmayi, should, in His incarnate form, commit such an error in respect of Śākti-tattva. We are therefore led to think that it was in order to shatter the pride of knowledge, consisting of eternal ignorance, which filled the followers of the Vedantik system of philosophy, who were advocates of the māyā doctrine,4 deluded by the māyā of Mahamāyā, that he first ignored the existence of Her who is perfect and eternal Bharmān, and then proclaimed the greatness of the Mother of the world by holding, through Her grace, the ever-triumphant banner of the Tantra Śāstra in his own hand. Otherwise, it is not to be believed that the author of the hymn of which we have quoted the beginning and the end, and which bespeaks a deep and impressive knowledge of the entire Tantra Śāstra, was a disbeliever in Śākti, or did not know or worship Her.
Gaura Candra,5 the full-moon of the Sea of Gaura,6 descending upon Navadvipa,7 also belonged to a branch of Bhagavan Śańkarācārya's followers. His Guru who initiated him in
1 The Devī. 2 Monastic establishments. 3 A high class of Sannyasins. 4 The māyāvada, which speaks of māyā as Avidya only, and not (ignoring the true nature of Śākti) as both Vidya and Avidya. 5 The Vaisnavite Saint Caitanya. 6 The country Gaur or Bengal. 7 The town of Nadia, where Caitanya was born. asceticism,1 was Swami Kesava Bharati, a disciple in the line of the disciples of the Sankara community. Intelligent Sadhakas will, therefore, easily understand in what system Gaura Candra was initiated and according to which he was accustomed to worship. Still, we shall try to deal with this subject in its proper place, so far as it will lie in our power.
Sadhaka, whom shall I recognize as a greater philosopher than Bhagavan Śańkarācārya, who played his part in the above-mentioned sport? Where is the advocate of the theory that Śākti is unconscious,2 who is himself thereby lowered to the state of some unconscious thing, whose words I shall respect? If Śańkarācārya, an incarnation of Him who possesses all Śāktis, lost the power (Śākti) of raising his feet because he said, "There is no Śākti," who are you and I that we should raise our heads to say, "There is no Śākti" ?
He is very deeply mistaken who thinks that he can understand the Śākti-tattva by means of philosophical arguments, discussions, and reasonings. If She were a treasure to be acquired by arguments, discussions, and reasonings, for whose sake, then, are śadhana and bhajana3 required? Śańkarācārya did not know Her by means of philosophy (darsana). He knew Her in consequence of seeing Her (darsana)." He was not a blind philosopher, like the pandits we meet nowadays. His spiritual eye was painted and made brilliant by the collyrium paint5
Is he not the greatest of sceptics8 who finds it in him to say that Śākti "does not exist"—the Śākti whose existence has given to Bhagavan the name of "possessor of all Śāktis" ? What can
1 Sannyasa. 2 Jada. 3 Worship. 4 A play on the word "darsana". 5 Anjana used to give brilliance to the eyes. 6 Niranjana. 7 A play on the word darsana. Philosophy is so called, as it is supposed to give sight; but is here the cause of blindness. 8 Literally, the great-grandfather of sceptics. be a greater folly than that you, O Jiva, should proceed to discuss the existence or non-existence of the Śākti, whose greatness is preached by Bhagavan; the Śākti whose greatness is such that Bhagavan Himself has, in order that it may be proclaimed, ordained that the name of Śākti should be uttered first, and then that of the possessor of Śākti, declaring that he who shall fail to utter the names as Rādhā-Kŗşņa, Lakşmī-Nārāyaņa, Uma-Mahesvara, Gauri-Sankara,1 and Sītā-Rāma is guilty of a sin as great as that of murdering a Bharmāna. In the uncrossable ocean of Her existence a Bharmāņda-cauldron is less even than a bubble of water.2
Is it the Mother's fault or the son's ill-fortune that living in that bubble and even sinking in that ocean, you and I do not see Her; that sitting in the Mother's lap, nourished by the Mother's milk, and tended by the soft fingers of the Mother's hand, the son, born blind, does not see Her? Who does not take birth in his Mother's womb ? But for that reason everyone does not have the good fortune of seeing his mother. The graceful and refulgent beauty of the three eyes3 of the three-eyed Devī are reflected in the mirror of the eye of him only whose eye of knowledge has been opened by Her mercy, and has been smeared by his guru's kindness with the collyrium paint of love. Sanka-racarya has said: "What power has Jiva to see that beauty of Thine, which is visible only to PaRāmaŚiva ?"
So I say, O brother Sadhaka, do not forget the Mother's authority and power because you have not yourself got the power to see Her. And you, community of false devotees, who see a difference between Śākti and possessor of Śākti, who are partial on the Father's side and inimical to the Mother's side, to you, too, I say, whichever form a Jiva may worship, be it the form of a male or that of a female, the door of liberation is free to him.
He who worships the Father has not to wait to worship the Mother before he can secure liberation; but know it for certain
1 That is, the names of the Śāktis are placed first, and those of the Devas second. 2 The universe, which is shaped like a cauldron, is but as a bubble in the limitless ocean of Her being. 3 Including the central eye of wisdom. that not even the Father's father has the power to liberate him who worships the Father in a spirit of antagonism to the Mother. Sumbha, Nisumbha, Jambha, Mahisasura,1 and many others, worshipped the Father in this spirit. But I know not how vast is the mercy of Her who is full of mercy. Enmity cannot touch Her in the least, so that the Devī with dishevelled hair, whom immortals worship, liberated them from the bonds of existence even when in war with them. Nevertheless, by placing Himself in the form of a corpse under the Mother's feet, the Father showed to the Daityas that the garland of pearls of liberation lies ever set and ever stored under the feet of the Devī with dishevelled hair. To put on that garland one must place one's heart under those feet and lose one's self. It is with the view of this truth2 that thoughtful devotees of subtle insight have said: "Everyone says 'Father, Father!' no one says 'Mother!' But in the Father's court3 the final decision is that which is the Mother's command."
So I say: "O you who discriminate between the Father and the Mother, human birth is difficult of attainment. Open, then, the door of your heart while there is yet time, and with tears in your eyes say for once.
" 'A bad son may sometimes be born But a bad mother never.' "4
1 Daityas or demonic beings 2 Tattva. 3 Durbar or court held by 4 Kuputro jayeta kvachedapi kumata |
