CHAPTER 11

THE SAKTA CREED
There are four great sects among the Hindus, the Vaishnavas, the Ramaits, the Saivas and the Saktas. The difference between the Vaishnavas and the followers of Ram is more of nomenclature than of any thing else. The Vaishnavas worship Vishnu and his divine consort Lakshmi, or Lord Sree Krishna and Radha, who are identical with Vishnu and. Lakshmi, though certain rites and rituals differ in the Vaishnavism of old and in modern Vaishnavism of Bengal, founded by Sree Chaitanya who is regarded as an incarnation of Sree
Car 3
Krishna. The worshippers of Ram and Sita are, in fact, worshippers of Vishnu and Lakshmi, for Ram is Vishnu and Sita is Lakshmi, only in certain tespects the forms of worship differ from those of the Vaishnavas of both of the old and the new schools.
Likewise, the difference between the Saivas and the Saktas isa difference without a distinction, as between the Tweedledum and the Tweedledee. There is more wrangling about words tl an about anything else, A staunch, uncompromising Saiva worships Siva alone as the Supreme Deity of the universe. The Saktas, however, worship not, ‘only Sakti, but also Siva. Even the great Sankaracharyya, the great Saiva,has sung warm songs of glory to Sakti,: as in the classical hymns of Ananda Lahari etc In the opinion ot the Saktas, Siva and Sakti are inseparable. -God is inseparable from His energy or power. Both are, in fact, identically the same,— two phases of Eternal Brahma. Siva without Sakti, says the Sakta, is Cava or a dead corpse. In other words, wecan not conceive any idea of God apart from His divine attributes or power. There is an image of the Deity among the Saktas known as Ardhanaricvar, or Har-Gauri, the one half of which is Siva and the other half is Sakti or Gauri i.e. the one is inseparable from the other. It is the figurative image of Brahma and the Principle of creation, which are ever united together. It4is both important and interesting to note that images of Ardhanaricvara are found represented in old Javanese sculptural art. There Ardhanaricvara is known as Ardhanarecvari. In ‘Balinese theology, i.e. in the religious scriptures of the people of the Island of Bali, Purusha is the Male and Pradhana ( Prikriti) is the Female principle, and the Cosmos has been born from their union. This Dogma has been connected with the
3
-
Coma. 5)
Hindu Trinity, which in Balinese known as Tripurusa, in sculpture where the combination of Ardhanarecvari is found with two gods of the Trinity.' This, again, proves the antiquity of the Tantric creed. There is positive historical evidence to show that Tantric creed and Saiva cult attained their supremacy in Java and Bali between 500—900 A, D. So Tantric religion is not of Yesterday's origin—
The Sakta thus makes no distinction between Siva and Sakti, though in the Tantric form the worship of Sakti predominates, over Siva-worship but Siva is also worshipped. :
As there is a wrong notion about the antiquity of Tantric religion, likewise there is a wrong belief, even among many educated people, that the Tantric religion is based upon the system of Sankhya philosophy.. Nothing can be more erroneous than this. Only certain words have misled even educated people to this wrong conclusion, viz., the famous terms of Purusha and Prikriti of the Sankhya system of philosophy. But these terms have been used in quite different meanings in the Tantras and in other Hindu Scriptures.
In the Sankhya system of philosophy, Purusha is not the Supreme Soul of the universe, as Siva’ 1s an’ «Tantric! religion. Jt 1sstiam Indivisible, Infinite, Eternal Brahma, but Sankhaya’s Purusha isa multitude of souls, like the Monads of the famous German philosopher
and mathematician Lebneitz. This Purusha (or
the multitudes of souls ) exists with Primeval Prikriti, but itself inert and inactive unable to produce anything whatsoever. It is united with
1 Vide A.A. Bake’s article on Dr. Gori’s Monograph in Dutch to the knowledge of the Javanese and Balinese Theology—Journal and Proceeding of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Vol. XXII of 1926.
Canto" *)
Prikriti in order to contemplate her’ and to be abstracted from her, Thus difference between Siva and Purusha of Sankhya is obviously clear. Again, according to the Sankhya philosophy—the Prime cause of this visible universe--an eternal Nature exists from eternity. Atthe universal destruction of all things, all the elements are withdrawn and all return to the First cause, the indistin- guishable one, which is Prikriti But the Tantras follow the philosophy of the Upanishadas; they declare that creation is but the manifestation of God, His Lila, a mode of Brahma, and at the time of the universal destruction (or Mahapralaya ) Purusha and Prikriti become merged in Eternal Brahma or God. Again, there is a _ world of difference between Sankhaya’s Prikriti and Sakti of the Tantras,
The Tantras call Sakti as Para Prikriti i,e. the personified Divine Energy of the Supreme Deity, in other words, Brahma itself, which is quite distinct. from the Mula Prikriti of the Sankhaya system, that holds matter to be eternal and Purusha ( a multitude of souls ). co-existent with it.
According to the Sankxhya system, Prikriti possesses three properties, namely Sattwa, Raja, and Tamas. Creation is evolved from the fusion and agitation of these three basic attributes in the following order :—
(1) Prikriti or the basic Elemental matter.
(2) From Prikriti proceeds Mahattatwa or the principle of greatness, i. e. Intellect
(Buddhi). .3) From Mahattatwa proceeds Ahamtatwa or the principle of egoism.
(4) From the former five very subtle elemental things (Tanmatras).
( 20 )
(5) And from the Tanmatras gross elements in the followihg order :-- (9—19 ) (A) Mind.
(10) The five organs of sense and five of action :— The organs of sense :—
‘a) Eye,
(be Har:
(c) Nose. (d) Tongue. (e) Skin.
Five organs of action :—
(a) The organ of Speech.
(b) The hand.
(c) The feet.
(d) The excretory termination of the Intestines, (e) The organ of generation.
( 20---24 ) (II) The five Elements (1) The Earth. (2) The Water, (3) The Fire. (4) The Space. 25. Purusha.
Thus in the scale of creation, Prikriti stands
at the head of all, and Purusha at the bottom of all,
beer’)
Thus from Prikriti takes place the creation consisting from the development of intellect (Mahttatwa) down to gross elements.
Whereas according to the Tantras the union of Purusha with Prikriti, Siva and Sakti, is necessary for creation. It is Purusha or the Eternal Spirit that impregnates matter with life, or breathes life into matter, Again, Sankhaya leads to a Dualistic theory, the Tantras, like the Upanishads, declare absolute Monism. According the Tantras, as we find in the Upanishads, Purusha and Prikriti are but different modes of the manifestation of Eternal and Infinite Brahma ; Sarvam Khalvidam Brahma.
Thus the account of the creation given in the Sankhaya philosophy. fundamentally differs from the account of the creation given inthe Tantras. Sankhaya’s account of creation is the first Mate- _rialistic theory in the world’s literature about the creation of the universe, Again, it first propounded the evolutionary theory of creation The Law of Evolution was first discovered and established in India, like the Law of gravitation.’ It is, again, the ancient Hindus that invented the method of numerical notation viz., 1,2, 3.4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, that lies at the root of human advancement not only in science and mathematics, but also of human civilisation and culture in general. Yet in every thing we always fondly look to the West for our light and guide.
However, to resume our topic. The great sage Kapila, the illustrions founder of the Sankhya system denies the very existence of God: ‘Isward- _siddhe’’—(the existence of God is not proven). The great commentator of Sankhya, Vijnan Bhikshu, adds to the above auoted aphorism—lIswarasiddhe Pramanabhavat—i. e. for want of proof. In other
1 Vide: Dr Draper's classical book, “History of The Intellectual Development of Europe .
(Sees 2)
words, for want. of proof, the existence of God can not be proved. ‘It practically denies God, and the great author of the Sankhya system traces the origin of every thing to a primeval matter which, exists from eterinity. Prikriti at the time of creation, like a tortoise, puts forth her limbs, and at the time of the universal destruc- tion, she withdraws them within her shell. Thus. Prikriti is all in all. We have already said that, in a sense, here we first meet with the enunciation of the modern scientific doctrine of Indestructibility of matter. According to the logical conclusion of Vedanta philosophy also, matter is indestructible, not of course in the sense of Sankhaya, but in the sense that it is a mode of divine manifestation of Brahma. Matter ever changes its forms, but its essence at the end merges into. God, because creation itself is a mode of God, apart of Brahma evolved’ by Him. But matter is transitory the only Eternal Reality is Brahma. .
Sankhaya’s Purusha is not the Eternal, Infinite, Spirit, as is generally understood in philosophical terminology. Neither the terms Purusha and Prikriti have been used axactly in the sense of Matter and Spirit of the Western systems of philosophy. Nor they convey the same meaning in which they have been used in the Hindu Scriptures’. Purusha is quite a nonentity in the Sankhya system, it plays no part either in creation or in destruction. It is a mere sight- seer, a mere spectator to witness the phenomena Of-Prikriti,
Thus it it is wrong to believe that Tantric religion or the Tantras rest on the Sankhya system of philosophy. Not only in the Srimad Bhagavat Gita, but in many other sacred texts of ‘the
1 Vide the First Sloka of the 13th Chapter of the Gita :— “Prikitim Purashanchaib Kshetram, Kshetrajnamevacha Atad Veditumichhami Jnanam Jneyam cha ‘Kesava.”
cea
Hindus, as in the Srimad Bhagavat Puran, the terms Purusha and Prikriti have been used in the sense of Brahma and the creation.
Again, we have already seen that the Sankhya system denies the very existence of God, but the Tantras; like other religious texts, assume the existence of God as the very axiom of religion, The Tantras believe in the existence of one and one God alone,’ Sarvam Khalwidam Brahma. The Mahanirvana Tantram thus declares :—‘tHe is the cause of our being,” says Siva to Parvati, “the Cause of all creatures, He is the sole Supreme Lord, and by ‘virtue of His having brought every object into being. He is Brahma and is known among the people as the Creator And it ison account of His so willing, O Goddess, Vishnu is the Preserver and myself am the Destroyer of the universe, and the guardian-gods of the worlds, with Indra at their head, are all under his sway.”’
The Mahanirvana Tantram