Shakti & Shakta (1918) Audiobook by Arthur Avalon [Ch. 1-10]

Shakti and Shaka: Essays and Addresses on the Shaka Tantra Shastra

By Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe)

Chapter 1: Indian Religion as Barat Dharma

A friend of mine, who read the first edition of this book, suggested that I should add to it an opening chapter stating the most general and fundamental principles of the subject, as a guide to the understanding of what follows, together with an outline of the latter, in which the relation of the several parts should be shown. I have not at present the time, nor in the present book the space, to give effect to my friend's wishes in the way I would have desired, but will not altogether neglect them.

To the Western, Indian religion generally seems a jungle of contradictory beliefs, amidst which he is lost. Only those who have understood its main principles can show them the path. Path. It has been asserted that there is no such thing as Indian religion, though there are many religions in India. This is not so. As I have already pointed out, is India civilized? There is a common Indian religion, which I have called Barat Dharma, which is an Aryan religion. Arad Dharma, held by all Aryans, whether Brahmanic, Buddhist, or J. These are the three main divisions of the Barata Dharma. I exclude other religions in India, namely the Semitic religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Not that all these are purely Semitic. Christianity became in part Aryanized when it was adopted by the Western Aryans, as also happened with Islam when accepted by such Eastern Aryans as the Persians and the Aryanized peoples of India. Thus, Sufism is either a form of Vedanta or indebted to it.

The general Indian religion, or Par Dharma, holds that the world is an order or Cosmos. It is not a chaos of things and beings thrown haphazard together, in which there is no binding relation or rule. The world-order is Dharma, which is that by which the universe is upheld (dhārayati). Without Dharma, it would fall to pieces and dissolve into nothingness. But this is not possible, for though there is disorder (adharma), it exists and can exist only locally, for a time, and in particular parts of the whole. Order, however, will, and from the nature of things must, ultimately assert itself. And this is the meaning of the saying that righteousness, or Dharma, prevails. This is in the nature of things, for Dharma is not a law imposed from without by the ukase of some celestial Tsar. It is the nature of things, that which constitutes them what they are (svakshana). Dharma, it is the expression of their true being, and can only cease to be when they themselves cease to be. Belief in righteousness is then in something not arbitrarily imposed from without by a lawgiver, but belief in a principle of reason which all men can recognize for themselves, if they will.

Again, Dharma is not only the law of each being, but necessarily also of the whole, and expresses the right relations of each part to the whole. This whole is again harmonious, otherwise it would dissolve. The principle which holds it together as one mighty organism is Dharma. The particular Dharma calls for such recognition and action in accordance therewith. Religion, therefore, which etymologically means that which obliges or binds together, is in its most fundamental sense the recognition that the world is an order of which each man, being, and thing is a part, and to which each man stands in a definite, established relation, together with action based on and consistent with such recognition, and in harmony with the whole cosmic activity. Whilst, therefore, the religious man is he who feels that he is bound in varying ways to all being, the irreligious man is he who egoistically considers everything from the standpoint of his limited self and its interests, without regard for his fellows or the world at large. The essentially irreligious character of such an attitude is shown by the fact that if it were adopted by all, it would lead to the negation of Cosmos, that is, chaos. Therefore, all religions are agreed in the essentials of morality, and hold that selfishness, in its widest sense, is the root of all sin (adharma). Morality is thus the true nature of man. The general Dharma (samanya Dharma) is the universal law governing all, just as the particular Dharma (vishesha Dharma) varies with and is peculiar to each class of being.

It follows from what is above stated that disharmony is suffering. This is an obvious fact. Wrong conduct is productive of ill, as right conduct is productive of good. As a man sows, so he will reap. There is an imminent justice, but these results, though they may appear at once, do not always do so. The fruit of no action is lost. It must, according to the law of causality, which is a law of reason, bear effect. If its author does not suffer for it here and now, in the present life, he will do so in some future one. Birth and death mean the creation and destruction of bodies. The spirits so embodied are infinite in number and eternal. The material universe comes and goes. This, in Brahmanism, has been said (cf. Sanatana Vaidika Dharma by Bhavanas) to be the systa and diesto of the one universal Heart itself at rest, the moveless play of Consciousness. The appearance and disappearance of the universe is the nature or svabhava of that which it ultimately is. Its immediate cause is desire, which Buddhism calls trishna, or thirst, that is, desire or thirst for world-enjoyment. In the universe of form, action (karma) is prompted by desire and breeds again desire. This action may be good (Dharma) or bad (adharma), leading to enjoyment or suffering. Each embodied soul (jivatma) will be reborn and reborn into the world until it is freed from all desire. This involves the doctrine of reincarnation. These multiple births and deaths in the transmigratory worlds are called samsara, or wandering.

The world is a danda, that is, a composite of happiness and suffering. Happiness of a transitory kind may be had therein by adherence to Dharma, in following kama (desire) and artha (the means by which lawful desires may be given effect). These constitute what Brahmanism calls the triara of the purushartha, or three aims of sentient being. But just as desire leads to manifestation in form, so desirelessness leads away from it. Those who reach this state seek moksha, or Nirvana, the fourth purushartha, which is a state of bliss beyond the worlds of changing forms. For there is a rest from suffering which desire, together with a natural tendency to pass its right limits, brings upon men. They must therefore either live with desire in harmony with the universal order, or, if desireless, they may, for each is master of his future, pass beyond the Manifest and become that which is moksha or Nirvana.

Religion, and therefore true civilization, consists in the upholding of Dharma as the individual and general good, and the fostering of spiritual progress, so that with justice to all beings, true happiness, which is the immediate and ultimate end of all humanity, and indeed of all being, may be attained. Anyone who holds these beliefs follows the Barat Dharma, or common principles of all Aryan beliefs.

Thus, as regards God, we may either deny his existence (atheism), or affirm it (theism), or say we have no sufficient proof one way or another (agnosticism). It is possible to accept the concept of an eternal law (Dharma) and its sanctions in a self-governed universe without belief in a personal Lord (Ishvara). So Samkhya, which proceeds on intellectual proof only, does not deny God, but holds that the being of a Lord is not proved.

There are then, based on this common foundation, three main religions: Brahmanism, Buddhism, and Jainism. Of the second, a great and universal faith, it has been said that with each fresh acquirement of knowledge, it seems more difficult to separate it from the Hinduism out of which it emerged, and into which, in Northern Buddhism, it relapsed. This is, of course, not to say that there are no differences between the two, but that they share in certain general and common principles as their base.

Brahmanism, of which the Shaka doctrine and practice is a particular form, accepts Veda as its ultimate authority. By this, in its form as the four Vedas, is revealed the doctrine of the Brahman, the all-pervader, the infinite substance, which is in itself (svarupa) Consciousness (chit), or (sat), from which comes creation, maintenance, and withdrawal (commonly called destruction), though man, not God, destroys. And which, in its relation to the universe which the Brahman controls, is known as Ishvara, the ruling Lord, or personal God (va). Both as spiritual experience and the word which is heard (shruti) is the warrant for this. But shruti, as the ultimate authority, has received various interpretations, and so we find in Brahmanism, as in Christianity, differing schools and sects adopting various interpretations of the revealed word.

Vedas say: "All this (that is, the universe) is Brahman." All are agreed that Brahman, or Spirit, is, relatively to us, being (sat), Consciousness (chit), and Bliss (ananda). It is (sasid)ananda. But in what sense is this idam Brahman? The monistic interpretation (advaita), as given, for instance, by the great scholastic Shankara, is that there is a complete identity in essence of both. There is one Spirit (Atma) with two aspects: as Transcendent Supreme (Paramatma) and as immanent and embodied (jivatma). The two are at base one, when we eliminate avidya in the form of mind and body. According to the qualified monism (vishishta advaita) of the great scholastic Ramanuja, this is Brahman in the sense that it is the body of the Brahman, just as we distinguish our body from our inner self. According to the dualists (dvaita), the saying is interpreted in terms of nearness (samipya) and likeness (sadṛśya). For though God and man are distinct, the former so pervades and is so inextricably involved in the universe as Creator and Maintainer that the latter, in this sense, seems to be Brahman through proximity.

Then again, there is the Shuddha advaita of that branch of the Agamas which is called Shiva Advaita, the Vaikhanasa Pancharatra doctrine, the Advaita of the Kashmirian Shiva Agama (Trika). The followers of which, though Advaitins, have very subtly criticized Shankara's doctrine on several points. Difference of views upon this question, and that of the nature of Maya, which the world is said to be, necessarily implies difference upon other matters of doctrine.

Then there are, with many resemblances, some differences in ritual practice. Thus it comes about that Brahmanism includes many divisions of worshippers, calling themselves by different names. There are Smartas, who are the present-day representatives of the old Vedic doctrine and ritual practice, and on the other hand, a number of divisions of worshippers calling themselves Shaktas, Shivas, Vaishnavas, and so forth, with subdivisions of these. It is not possible to make hard and fast distinctions between the sects, which share much in common and have been influenced one by the other. Indeed, the universality of much of religious doctrine and practice is an established fact. What exists in India as elsewhere today has, in other times and places, been in varying degrees anticipated. In religion, it has been said (cf. Gnostics and their Remains) that there is no new thing. The same ideas are worked up over and over again. In India, as elsewhere, but particularly in India, where religious activity has been syncretistic rather than by way of supersession, there is much which is common to all sects, and more again which is common between particular groups of sects.

These latter are governed, in general, that is, in their older forms, by the Agamas or Tantra Shastras, which, at any rate today and for centuries past, whatever may have been their origin, admit the authority of the Vedas and recognize other scriptures. As to these, see the Introduction to the Karkaria Satyananda's commentary on the Isha Upanishad, which I have published. The meaning of Veda is not commonly rightly understood, but this is a vast subject which underlies all others, touching as it does the seat of all authority and knowledge, into which I have not the space to enter here.

There are four main classes of Brahmanical scripture, namely: Veda (or Shruti), Smriti, Purana, and Agama. There are also four ages, or Yugas. The latter being a fraction of a Kalpa, or day of Brahma, of 420,000,000 years. This period is the life of a universe, on the expiration of which all re-enters Brahman, and thereafter issues from it. A Maha Yuga is composed of the four ages called Satya, Treta, Dwapara, Kali, the first being the Golden Age of righteousness, since when all has gradually declined physically, morally, and spiritually. For each of the ages, a suitable Shastra is given: for Satya, or Krita, the Vedas; for Treta, the Smriti Shastra; for Dwapara, the Puranas; and for Kali Yuga, the Agama or Tantra Shastra. So the Kularnava Tantra says: "Krita Yuga (is for) the Vedas; Treta Yuga (for) Smriti; Dwapara Yuga (for) the Puranas; Kali Yuga (for) the Tantras." (See also Mahanirvana Tantra, I. 28). And the Tara Pradipa says that in the Kali Yuga, the supposed present age, the Tantrika, and not the Vaidika Dharma (in the sense of mode of life and ritual), is to be followed. (See Principles of Tantra).

When it is said that the Agama is the peculiar scripture of the Kali Age, this does not mean, at any rate to any particular division of its followers, that something is presented which is opposed to Veda. It is true, however, that as between these followers, there is sometimes a conflict on the question whether a particular form of the Agama is an-Vedic or not. The Agama, however, as a whole, purports to be a presentment of the teaching of Veda, just as the Puranas and Smritis are. It is that presentment of Vedic Truth which is suitable for the Kali Age. Indeed, the Shākta followers of the Agama claim that its Tantras contain the very core of the Veda, to which it is described to bear the same relation as the Supreme Spirit (Paramatma) to the embodied Spirit (Jivatma). In a similar way, in the seven Tantric chakras, Muladhara is the controlling, informing life of the gross body, called the physical body; each of the chakras which follow the latter up to Sahasrara being more and more subtle sheaths. The Tantra Shastra is thus that presentment of Vedantic Truth which is modeled, as regards mode of life and ritual, to meet the characteristics and infirmities of the Kali Yuga. As men have no longer the capacity, longevity, and moral strength required to carry out the Vaidika Khanda (ritual section), the Tantra Shastra prescribes a sadhana of its own for the attainment of the common end of all Shastra, that is, a happy life on Earth, Heaven thereafter, and at length, Liberation. Religion is, in fact, the true pursuit of Happiness, as explained in the next and following chapters.

This Agama, which governs, according to its followers, the Kali Yuga, is itself divided into several schools or communities of worshippers. One of these divisions is the Shākta. It is with Shākta doctrine and worship, one of the forms of Brahmanism, which is again a form of the general Barat Dharma, that this book deals. The Shākta is so-called because he is a worshipper of Shakti (Power), that is, God in Mother form, as the supreme Power which creates, sustains, and withdraws the universe. His rule of life is Shākta Dharma. His doctrine of Shakti is Shakti Vada, or Shākta Darśana. God is worshipped as the Great Mother because, in this aspect, God is active and produces, nourishes, and maintains all. Theological Godhead is no more female than male or neuter. God is Mother to the sadhaka who worships her Lotus feet, the dust on which are millions of universes. The Power, or active aspect, of the immanent God is thus called Shakti. In her static, transcendent aspect, the Mother, or Shakti, or Shiva, is of the same nature as Shiva, or the Good. That is, philosophically speaking, Shiva is the unchanging Consciousness, and Shakti is its changing Power, appearing as mind and matter. Shiva-Shakti is therefore Consciousness and its Power. This, then, is the doctrine of dual aspects of the one Brahman, acting through its Trinity of powers: Iccha (will), Jñāna (knowledge), Kriya (action). In the static, transcendent aspect, Shiva, the one Brahman, does not change, and in the kinetic, immanent aspect, Shiva, or Shakti, it does. There is thus changelessness in change. The individual or embodied spirit (jivatma) is one with the Transcendent Spirit (Paramatma). The former is a part (amsa) of the latter, and the enveloping mind and body are manifestations of supreme Power. Shākta Darśana is therefore a form of monism (advaita).

In creation, an effect is produced without change in the producer. In creation, the Power (Shakti) goes forth (prasara) in a series of emanations or transformations, which are called in the Shiva and Shakta Tantras the 36 Tattvas. These mark the various stages through which Shiva, the Supreme Consciousness, as Shakti, presents itself as object to itself as subject. The latter, at first experiencing the former as part of the self, and then, through the operations of Maya Shakti, as different from the self. This is the final stage in which every self (purusha) is mutually exclusive of every other. Maya, which achieves this, is one of the powers of the Mother or Devi. The will to become many (bahu syam prajayeya) is the creative impulse which not only creates but reproduces an eternal order. The Lord remembers the diversities latent in his own Maya Shakti, due to the previous karmas of jivas, and allows them to unfold themselves by his volition. It is that Power by which infinite, formless Consciousness veils itself to itself, and negates and limits itself, in order that it may experience itself as form. This Maya Shakti assumes the form of Prakriti Tattva, which is composed of three gunas or factors, called sattva, rajas, tamas. The function of tamas is to veil, limit, or finitize pure, infinite, formless Consciousness, so as to produce form; for without such limitation, there cannot be the appearance of form. These gunas work by mutual suppression. The function of tamas is to veil consciousness; of sattva, to reveal it; and of rajas, the active principle, to make either tamas suppress sattva, or sattva suppress tamas. These gunas are present in all particular existence, as in the general cause, or Prakriti Shakti. Evolution means the increased operation of sattva. Thus, the mineral world is more subject to tamas than the rest. There is less tamas and more sattva in the vegetable world. In the animal world, sattva is increased, and still more so in man, who may rise through the cultivation of the sattva guna to Pure Consciousness (moksha itself). To use Western parlance, Consciousness more and more appears as forms evolve and rise to man. Consciousness does not in itself change, but its mental and material envelopes do, thus releasing and giving Consciousness more play. As pure Consciousness is Spirit, the release of it from the bonds of matter means that forms which issue from the Power of Spirit (Shakti) become more and more sattvic. A truly sattvic man is therefore a spiritual man. The aim of sadhana is therefore the cultivation of the sattva guna nature. Prakriti is thus the veil of Spirit as tamas guna, the revealer of Spirit as sattva guna, and the activity (rajas guna) which makes either work. Thus, the upward or revealing movement from the predominance of tamas to that of sattva represents the spiritual progress of the embodied Spirit, or jivatma.

It is the desire for the life of form which produces the universe. This desire exists in the collective vasanas, held, like all else, in incoit state in the Mother Power, which, passing from its own svarupa (formless) state, gives effect to them. Upon the expiration of the vast length of time which constitutes a day of Brahma, the whole universe is withdrawn into the great causal womb (yoni) which produced it. The limited selves are withdrawn into it, and again, when the creative throes are felt, are put forth from it, each appearing in that form and state which its previous karma had made for it. Those who do good karma, but with desire and self-regard (sakama), go on death to Heaven and thereafter receive their reward and good future birth on Earth; for Heaven is also a transitory state. The bad are punished by evil births on Earth and suffering in the Hells, which are also transitory. Those, however, who have rid themselves of all self-regarding desire and work selflessly (nishkama karma) realize the Brahman nature, which is Sachidananda. Such are liberated, that is, never appear again in the world of form, which is the world of suffering, and enter into the infinite ocean of bliss itself. This is moksha, or mukti, or Liberation, as it is freedom from the universe of form. It can only be attained through detachment from the world and desirelessness, for those who desire the world of form cannot be freed of it. Life, therefore, is a field in which man, who has gradually ascended through lower forms of mineral, vegetable, and animal life, is given the opportunity of Heaven, life, and Liberation. The universe has a moral purpose, namely, the affording to all existence of a field wherein it may reap the fruit of its actions. The forms of life are therefore the stairs (sopana) on which man mounts to the state of infinite, eternal, and formless Bliss. This, then, is the origin and the end of man. He has made for himself his own past and present condition, and will make his future one. His essential nature is free. If wise, he adopts the means (sadhana) which lead to lasting happiness, for that of the world is not to be had by all, and even when attained, is perishable and mixed with suffering. This sadhana consists of various means and disciplines employed to produce purity of mind (shuddhi) and devotion to and worship of the Magnum Opus of all. It is with these means that the religious Tantra Shastras are mainly concerned.

The Shākta Tantra Shastra contains a most elaborate and wonderful ritual, partly its own, partly of Vedic origin. To a ritualist, it is of absorbing interest. Ritual is an art, the art of religion. Art is the outward, material expression of ideas intellectually held and emotionally felt. Ritual art is concerned with the expression of those ideas and feelings which are specifically called religious. It is a mode by which religious truth is presented and made intelligible in material forms and symbols to the mind. It appeals to all natures, passionately sensible of that beauty in which, to some, God most manifests himself. But it is more than this, for it is the means by which the mind is transformed and purified. In particular, according to Indian principles, it is the instrument whereby the consciousness of the worshipper (sadhaka) is shaped, an actual fact, into forms of experience which embody the truths which scripture teaches. The Shākta is thus taught that he is one with Shiva and his Power, or Shakti. This is not a matter of mere argument; it is a matter for experience. It is ritual and yoga practice which secure that experience for him. How profound Indian ritual is will be admitted by those who have understood the general principles of all ritual and symbolism, and have studied it in its Indian form with a knowledge of the principles of which it is an expression. Those who speak of "mummy gibberish and superstition" betray both their incapacity and ignorance.

The Agamas are not themselves treatises on philosophy, though they impliedly contain a particular theory of life. They are what are called sadhana shastras, that is, practical scriptures prescribing the means by which happiness, the quest of all mankind, may be attained. And as lasting happiness is God, they teach how man, by worship and by practice of the disciplines prescribed, may attain a divine experience. From incidental statements and the practices described, the philosophy is extracted. The speaker of the Tantras, and the revealer of the Shakta Tantra, is Shiva himself, or Shiva, the Devi herself. Now it is the first who teaches, and the second who listens. Agama, now again, the latter assumes the role of Guru and answers the questions of Shiva. Nigama, for the two are one. Sometimes there are other interlocutors. Thus, one of the Tantras is called Ishvara-Kartikeya Samvada, for there the Lord addresses his son Kartikeya. The Tantra Shastra, therefore, claims to be a revelation, and of the same essential truths as those contained in the eternal Veda, which is an authority to itself (svataḥ pramāṇa). Those who have had experience of the truths recorded in Shastra have also proclaimed the practical means whereby their experience was gained. "Adopt those means," they say, "and you will also have for yourself our experience." This is the importance of sadhana, and all sadhana shastras. The Guru says: "Do as I tell you. Follow the method prescribed by scripture. Curb your desires. Attain a pure disposition, and thus only will you obtain that certainty, that experience, which will render any questionings unnecessary." The practical importance of the Agama lies in its assumption of these principles and in the methods which it enjoins for the attainment of that state in which the truth is realized.

The following chapters shortly explain some of the main features of both the philosophy and practice of the Shākta division of the Agama. For their full development, many volumes are necessary. What is here said is a mere sketch, in a popular form, of a vast subject.

I will conclude this chapter with extracts from a Bengali letter written to me shortly before his death, now many years ago, by Pandit Shiva Chandra Vidyarnava Bhattacharya, the Shākta author of the Tantra Tattva, which I have published under the title "Principles of Tantra." The words in brackets are my own.

"At the present time, the general public are ignorant of the principles of the Tantra Shastra. The cause of this ignorance is the fact that the Tantra Shastra is a sadana shastra, the greater part of which becomes intelligible only by sadana. For this reason, the Shastra and its teachers prohibit their general promulgation so long as the Shastra was learned from gurus only. This golden rule was of immense good. In course of time, the old tradition has become almost extinct, and along with it, the knowledge of the deep and mighty principles of the Shastra is almost lost. Nevertheless, some faint shadowing of these principles, which can be thoroughly known by sadhana only, have been put before the public, partly with the view to preserve Shastric knowledge from destruction, and partly for commercial reasons.

When I commenced to write Tantra Tattva some 25 years ago, Bengali society was in a perilous state owing to the influx of other religions, want of faith, and a spirit of disputation. Shortly before this, a number of English books had appeared on the Tantra Shastra, which, whilst ignorant of Dharma, sadana, and siddhi, contained some hideous and outrageous pictures drawn by the Bengali historians and novelists, ignorant of and unfaithful to Shastric principles. The English books by English writers contained merely a reflection of what English-educated Bengalis of those days had written. Both are even today equally ignorant of the Tantra Shastra. For this reason, in writing Tantra Tattva, I could not go deeply into the subject as my heart wished. I had to spend my time in removing thorns, objections, and charges from the path by reasoning and argument. I could not, therefore, deal in my book with most of the subjects which, when I brought out the first volume, I promised to discuss.

The Tantra Shastra is broadly divided into three parts, namely: sadana, siddhi (that which is gained by sadana), and philosophy (darśana). Unlike other systems, it is not narrow, nor does it generate doubt by setting forth conflicting views, for its speaker is one and not many, and he is omniscient. The philosophy is, however, scattered throughout the Tantric treatises and is dealt with as occasion arises in connection with sadana and siddhi. Could, as I had suggested to him, such parts be collected and arranged according to the principles of the subject matter, they would form a vast system of philosophy, wonderful, divine, lasting, true, and carrying conviction to men. As a philosophy, it is at the head of all others.

You have prayed to Paramesvara (God) for my long life, and my desire to carry out my project makes me also pray for it. But the state of my body makes me doubt whether the prayer will be granted. By the grace, therefore, of the Mother, the sooner the work is done the better. You say that those who worship Paramesvara, He makes of one family. Let, therefore, all distinctions be put aside, for all sadhakas are, as such, one. This noble principle is the final word of all Shastras, all communities, and all religions. All distinctions which arise from differences in the physical body are distinctions for the human world only; they have no place in the world of worship of Paramesvara. The more, therefore, that we shall approach Him, the more will the differences between you and me vanish. It is because both of us pray for the removal of all such differences that I am led to rely on your encouragement and help, and am bold to take up this difficult and daring work. If, by your grace, the gate of this Tantric philosophy is opened in the third part of Tantra Tattva, I dare to say that the learned in all countries will gaze and be astonished, for it is pure truth, and for this reason I shall be able to place it before them with perfect clearness. Unfortunately, this project of a third part of the Tantra Tattva could not be carried out owing to the lamented death of its author, which followed not long after the receipt of this letter.

Naturally, like all believers throughout the whole world, he claimed for his scripture the possession, in all its details, of what was true or good. Whilst others may not concede this, I think that those with knowledge and understanding, and free from prejudice, will allow that it contains a profoundly conceived doctrine, wonderfully worked out in practice. Some of its ideas and principles are shared through it, be it under other names and forms, by all religious men, and others, either by all or some Indian communities who are not Shaktas. Leaving, therefore, for the moment aside what may be said to be peculiar to itself, it cannot be that "holy, absurd, repulsive, and infamous system, lust, mummy, and magic," as Brian Hodgson called it, which it has been said to be. An impartial criticism may be summed up in the few words that, together with what has value, it contains some practices which are not generally approved and which have led to abuse. As to these, the reader is referred to the chapter on the Pancha Tattva, or secret ritual.

I conclude with a translation of an article in Bengali by a well-known writer. It was evoked by the publication of Arthur Avalon's translation of and introduction to the Mahanirvana Tantra. It is an interesting statement as regards the Shakta Tantra and Bengali views thereon. Omitting here some commentary statements touching Avalon's work and the writer's thanks "a hundred times for the English version," the article continues as follows:

"At one time, the Mahanirvana Tantra had some popularity in Bengal. It was printed and published under the editorship of Pandit Ananda Chandra Vedantavagisha, and issued from the Adi Brahmo Samaj press. Raja Ram Mohan Roy himself was a follower of the Tantras, married after the Shiva form, and used to practice the Tantric worship. His spiritual preceptor, Swami Hariharananda, was well known to be a saint who had attained to perfection (Siddha Purusha). He endeavored to establish the Mahanirvana Tantra as the scripture of the Brahmo Samaj. The formula and the forms of the Brahmo Church are borrowed from the initiation in Brahman worship (Brahma-yajna) in this Tantra. The later Brahmos, somewhat losing themselves in their spirit of imitation of Christian rituals, were led to abandon the path shown to them by Raja Ram Mohan. But yet, even now, many among them recite the hymn to the Brahman which occurs in the Mahanirvana Tantra.

In the first era of the excessive dissemination of English culture and training, Bengal resounded with opprobrious criticisms of the Tantras. No one among the educated in Bengal could praise them. Even those who called themselves Hindus were unable outwardly to support the Tantric doctrines. But even then, there were very great Tantric sadhakas and men learned in the Tantras, with whose help the principles of the Tantras might have been explained to the public. But the educated Bengali of the age was bewitched by the Christian culture, and no one cared to inquire what did or did not exist in their paternal heritage. The more especially that any who attempted to study the Tantras ran the risk of exposing themselves to contempt from the educated community. Maharaja Sir Jatindra Mohan Tagore, of sacred name, alone published two or three works with the help of the venerable Pandit Jagannatha Tarkalankara. The Bharat Tattva Dipa, associated with the name of his father, is even now acknowledged to be a marvelously glorious production of the genius of the Pandits of Bengal. The venerable Vedic Pandit Jagannatha also published a commentary on the Mahanirvana Tantra. Even at that epoch, such study of the Tantras was confined to a certain section of the educated in Bengal. Maharaja Sir Jatindra Mohan alone endeavored to understand and appreciate men like Bama Kapa, Mad Bama, the Naked Father, Nitai Baba of Kadua, and Swami Sadananda. The educated community of Bengal had only neglect and contempt for sadhakas like Bishap Pagal, the mad Bisha, and Benu, the Candala woman.

Bengal is even now governed by the Tantra. Even now, the Hindus of Bengal receive Tantric initiation, but the glory and the honor which the Tantra had and received in the time of Maharajas Krishna Chandra and Shiva Chandra no longer exist. This is the reason why the Tantric sadhakas of Bengal are not so well known at present. It seems as if the World Mother has again willed it, has again desired to manifest her power, so that Arthur Avalon is studying the Tantras and has published so beautiful a version of the Mahanirvana. The English-educated Bengali will now, we may hope, turn his attention to the Tantra.

The special virtue of the Tantra lies in its mode of sadana. It is neither mere worship (upasana) nor prayer. It is not lamenting or contrition or repentance before the deity. It is the sadana which is the union of purusha and prakriti. The sadhana which joins the male principle and the mother element within the body and strives to make the attributed attributeless, that which is in me and that for which I am. This Consciousness is ever present in me, is spread like butter and milk throughout the created world of moving and unmoving things, through the gross and the subtle, the conscious and unconscious, through all. It is the object of Tantric sadana to merge that self-principle (svarupa) into the universal (virat). This sadana is to be performed through the awakening of the forces within the body. A man is capable in this sadhana when he is able to awaken Kundalini and pierce the six chakras. This is not mere philosophy, a mere attempt to ponder upon husks of words, but something which is to be done in a thoroughly practical manner. The Tantras say: "Begin practicing under the guidance of a good Guru. If you do not obtain favorable results immediately, you can freely give it up." No other religion dares to give so bold a challenge. We believe that the sadhana of the Muslims and the esoteric religion or secret sadana and rituals of the Christians of the Roman Catholic and Greek churches is based on this groundwork of the Tantras. Wherever there is sadhana, we believe that there is the system of the Tantra. While treating of the Tantra sometime back in the Sahitya, I hinted at this conclusion, and I cannot say that the author, Arthur Avalon, has not noticed it too, for he has expressed his surprise at the similarity which exists between the Roman Catholic and the Tantric mode of sadana. The Tantra has made the yoga system of Patanjali easily practicable, and has combined with it the Tantric rituals and the ceremonial observances (karmakanda). That is the reason why the Tantric system of sadana has been adopted by all the religious sects of India. If this theory of the antiquarians that the Tantra was brought into India from Chaldea or Shakedvipa be correct, then it may also be inferred that the Tantra passed from Chaldea to Europe. The Tantra is to be found in all the strata of Buddhism. The Tantric sadhana is manifest in Confucianism, and Shintoism is but another name of the Tantric cult. Many historians acknowledge that the worship of Shakti, or Tantric sadana, which was prevalent in Egypt from ancient times, spread into Phoenicia and Greece. Consequently, we may suppose that the influence of the Tantra was felt in primitive Christianity.

The Tantra contains nothing like idolatry or worship of the doll, which we, taking the cue from the Christian missionaries, nowadays call it. This truth the author, Arthur Avalon, has made very clear in the introduction to his translation. The Tantra repeatedly says that one is to adore the deity by becoming a deity (devata) himself. The Ishta Devata is the very self of Atman, and not separate from it. He is the receptacle of all, yet he is not contained in anything, for he is the great Witness, the Eternal Purusha. The true Tantric worship is the worship in and by the mind. The less subtle form of Tantric worship is that of the Yantra. Form is born of the Yantra; the form is made manifest by japa and awakened by mantra Shakti. Tens of millions of beautiful forms of the Mother bloom forth in the heavens of the heart of the sadhaka (devotee or aspirant of a lower order of competency - nimna adhikari). Under the directions of the Guru, adore the Great Maya by making manifest to themselves one of her various forms, which can be only seen by dhyana (meditation). That is not mere worship of the idol. If it were so, the image would not be thrown into the water. No one, in that case, would be so irreverent as to sink the earth and image of the goddess in the water. The primordial Shakti is to be awakened by bhava, by dhyana, by japa, and by the piercing of the six chakras. She is all Will. No one can say when and how she shows herself, and to what sadhaka. We only know that she is, and there are her names and forms, wonderfully transcending is her form, far beyond the reach of word or thought. This has made the Bengali bhakta sing this plaintive song: "Hard indeed is it to approach the sea of forms and to bathe in it; ah me, this my coming is perhaps in vain."

The Tantra deals with another special subject: Mantra Shakti. It is no exaggeration to say that we have never heard, even from any Bengali Pandit, such a clear exposition of Mantra Shakti as that which the author, Arthur Avalon, has given in his introduction to the Mahanirvana Tantra. We had thought that Mantra Shakti was a thing to be felt and not to be explained to others, but the author, with the force of his genius, has in his simple exposition given us such explanation of it as is possible in the English language. The Tantras say that the soul in the body is the very self of the letters of the Devanagari sound. The Mother, the embodiment of the 50 letters (varna), is present in the various letters in the different chakras, like the melody which issues when the chords of a lute are struck. The Mother, who moves in the six chakras, and who is the very self of the letters, awakens with a burst of harmony when the chords of the letters (varnas) are struck in their order, and siddhi becomes as easy of attainment to the sadhaka as the amalaka fruit in one's hand. When she is roused, that is why the great sadhaka Ramprasad awakened the Mother by the invocation: "Arise, O Mother!" (Jagi Janani). That is the reason why the bhakta sang: "How long wilt thou sleep in the Muladhara, O Mother?" (Kulakundalini). The bodhana (awakening ceremony) in the Durga Puja is nothing but the awakening of the Shakti of the Mother, the mere rousing of the consciousness of the Kundalini. This awakening is performed by Mantra Shakti. The Mantra is nothing but the harmonious sound of the lute of the body. When the symphony is perfect, she who embodies the worlds (jaganmayi) rouses herself. When she is awake, it does not take long before the union of Shiva and Shakti takes place. Do japa once, do japa according to rule, looking up to the Guru, and the effects of japa, of which we hear in the Tantra, will prove to be true at every step. Then you will understand that the Tantra is not mere trickery or a false weaving out of words. What is wanted is the good Guru, Mantra capable of granting siddhi, and application (sadhana). Arthur Avalon has grasped the meaning of the principles of Mantra, which are so difficult to understand. We may certainly say that he could only make this impossible thing possible through inherent tendencies (samskara) acquired in his previous life.

The Tantra accepts the doctrine of rebirth. It does not, however, acknowledge it as a mere matter of argument or reasoning, but like a geographical map, it makes clear the unending chain of existences of the sadhaka. The Tantra has two divisions: the Dharma of society (samaja) and the Dharma of spiritual culture (sadana). According to the regulation of samaja Dharma, it acknowledges birth and caste, but in sadana Dharma, there is no caste distinction, no Brahman or Shudra, no man or woman distinction between high and low. Follow success in sadana and siddhi. We only find the question of fitness or worthiness (adhikara tattva) in the Tantra. This fitness (adhikara) is discovered with reference to the samskaras of past existences. That is why the Chandala Panchan is a Brahman, and Kaca, the sadhaka, is equal to Sarvananda. That is why Ramprasad of the Vaidya caste is fit to be honored even by Brahmanas. The Tantra is to be studied with the aid of the teachings of the Guru, for its language is extraordinary, and its exposition impossible with a mere grammatical knowledge of roots and inflections. The Tantra is only a system of Shakti sadana. There are rules in it whereby we may draw Shakti from all created things. There is nothing to be accepted or rejected in it. Whatever is helpful for sadhana is acceptable. This sadhana is decided according to the fitness of the particular person (adhikari anusara). He must follow that for which he is fit or worthy. Shakti pervades all and embraces all beings and all things – the inanimate and the moving, beasts and birds, men and women. The unfolding of the power (Shakti) enclosed within the body of the animal (jiva) as well as the man is brought about only with the help of the tendencies within the body. The mode of sadana is ascertained with regard to these tendencies. The very meaning of sadhana is unfolding, rousing up, or awakening of power (Shakti). Thus, the Shākta obtains power from all actions in the world. The sadhana of the Tantra is not to be measured by the little measuring yard of the well-being or ill-being of your community or mine. Let you understand, and I understand, O my mind, whether anyone understands it or not. The author, Arthur Avalon, is fully conscious of this. In spite of it, he has tried to explain almost all points, making them easy to comprehend for the intellect of materialistic, civilized society of today. For this attempt on his part, we are grateful to him.

The Tantra has no notion of some separate, far-seeing God. It preaches no such doctrine in it as that God, the Creator, rules the universe from Heaven. In the eye of the Tantra, the body of the sadhaka is the universe. The autocatalytic Atma Shakti within the body is the desired (Ishta) and the to be sought for (Sadhya) deity (Devata) of the sadhaka. The unfolding of this self-power is to be brought about by self-realization (Atma Darana), which is to be achieved through sadhana. Whoever realizes as himself attains to Liberation (Mukti). The author, Arthur Avalon, has treated of these matters (Santa) in his work, the Tantra Tattva. Many of the topics dealt with in the Mahanirvana Tantra will not be fully understood without a thorough perusal of the book. The principles of the Tantra must be lectured on to the Bengali AR fresh. If the Mahanirvana Tantra, as translated by Arthur Avalon, is spread abroad, if the Bengali is once more desirous to hear, that attempt might well be undertaken. Our land of Bengal used to be ruled by Tantric works such as the Saraka, Shaka Tarangini, Prakriti Tantra Sara, etc. Then the Mahanirvana Tantra did not have so great an influence. It seems to us that, considering the form into which, as a result of English education and culture, the mind of the Bengali has been shaped, the Mahanirvana is a proper Tantra for the time. Raja Ram Mohan Roy endeavored to encourage regard for the Mahanirvana Tantra because he understood this. If the English translation of the Mahanirvana Tantra by Arthur Avalon is well received by the thoughtful public in Bengal, the study of the original Sanskrit work may gradually come into vogue. This much hope we may entertain. In fact, the English-educated Bengali community is without religion (Dharma) or action (Karma) and is devoid of the sense of nationality (jatiya Dharma) and caste. The Mahanirvana Tantra alone is fit for the country and the race at the present time. We believe that probably because such an impossibility is going to be possible, a cultured, influential, rich Englishman like Arthur Avalon, honored of the rulers, has translated and published the Mahanirvana Tantra. When his Tantra Tattva is published, we shall be able to speak out much more. For the present, we ask the educated people of Bengal to read this most unprecedented Mahanirvana Tantra. Arthur Avalon has not spoken a single word to satisfy himself, nor tried to explain things according to his own imagination. He has only given what are true inferences according to the principles of Shastric reasoning. An auspicious opportunity for the English-knowing public to understand the Tantra has arrived. It is a counsel of the Tantra itself that if you desire to renounce anything, renounce it only after a thorough acquaintance with it. If you desire to embrace anything new, accept it only after a searching inquiry. The Tantra embodies the old religion (Dharma) of Bengal, even if it is to be cast away for good."

ought only to be done after after it has been fully known. In the present case, a thoughtful and educated Englishman of high position has taken it upon himself to give us a full introduction to the Tantra. We can frankly say that in this introduction, he has not tried a jot to shirk or to gloss over the conclusions of the shastra with the vanity of explanation born of his imagination. He has endeavored to bring before the mind of his readers whatever actually is in the Tantra, be it regarded as either good or evil. Will not the Bengali receive with welcome such a full offering, argia made by aaka from a foreign land?

Chapter 2. Shakti: The World as Power.

There is no word of wider content in any language than this Sanskrit term, meaning power. For Shakti, in the highest causal sense, is God as mother, and in another sense, it is the universe which issues from her womb. And what is there which is neither one nor the other? Therefore, the yoginah Tantra thus salutes her who conceives, bears, produces, and thereafter nourishes all worlds. Obey be to her who is pure being, Consciousness, Bliss as power, who exists in the form of time and space and all that is therein, and who is the radiant illuminatrix in all beings. It is therefore possible only to outline here, in a very general way, a few of the more important principles of the Shakti Doctrine, omitting its deeply interesting practice (sadana) in its forms as ritual worship and yoga.

Today, Western science speaks of energy as the physical ultimate of all forms of matter. So has it been for ages to the Shakas, as the worshippers of Shakti are called. But they add that such energy is only a limited manifestation, as mind and matter, of the almighty, infinite, supreme power (Mahashakti) of becoming in that tat which is unitary being (Sat) itself. Their doctrine is to be found in the traditions, oral and written, which are contained in the Agamas, which with Puran, Smriti, and Veda constitute one of the four Great classes of scripture of the Hindus. The Tantras are scriptures of the Agama. The notion that they are some queer byproduct of Hinduism and not an integral part of it is erroneous. The three chief divisions of the Agama are locally named Bengal, Gujarat, Kashmir, and Kerala. That Bengal is a home of Tantra shastra is well known. It is, however, little known that Kashmir was in the past a land where tantric doctrine and practice were widely followed.

The communities of so-called tantric worshippers are five-fold, according as the cult is of the Sun, Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, or Shakti. To the knower, however, the five named are not distinct divinities but different aspects of the one power or Shakti. An instructed Shakti worshipper is one of the least sectarian of men. He can worship in all temples, as the saying is. Thus, the Samahan Tantra says that he is a fool who sees any difference between Rama and Avatara of Vishnu and Shiva. "What matters the name?" says the commentator of the Sakra Nirupa, after running through the gamut of them. The Shaka is so-called because the chosen deity of his worship (Ishta Devata) is Shakti. In his cult, both in doctrine and practice, emphasis is laid on that aspect of the One in which it is the source of change and, in the form of time and space and all objects therein, change itself.

The word Shakti is grammatically feminine. For this reason, an American orientalist critic of the doctrine has described it as a worthless system, a mere feminization of orthodox whatever that be Vedanta, a doctrine teaching the primacy of the female and thus fit only for suffragette monists. It is absurd criticism of this kind which makes the Hindu sometimes wonder whether the Western psyche has even the capacity to understand his beliefs. It is said of the mother in the hymn to her in the Mahakala Samhita: "Thou art neither girl nor maid nor old; indeed, thou art neither female nor male nor neuter. Thou art inconceivable, immeasurable power, the being of all which exists, void of all duality, the Supreme Brahman, attainable in illumination alone." Those who cannot understand lofty ideas when presented in ritual and symbolic garb will serve their reputation best by not speaking of them.

The Shiva is so-called because his chosen divinity is Shiva, the name for the changeless aspect of the One whose power of action and activity is Shakti. But as the two are necessarily associated, all communities acknowledge Shakti. It is for the above reason a mistake to suppose that a Tantra or follower of the Agama is necessarily a Shaka and that the Tantra is a Shaka scripture only. Not at all. The Shaka is only one branch of the Agamic school, and so we find the scriptures of Shaivism, whether of North or South, called Tantras, as also those of that ancient form of Vaishnavism which is called the Pancaratra. The doctrine of these communities, which share certain common ideas, varies from the monism of the Shakas and Northern Shivas to the more or less dualistic systems of others. The ritual is to a large extent common in all communities, though there are necessarily variations due both to the nature of the divine aspect worshipped and to the particular form of theology taught.

Shaka doctrine and practice are contained primarily in the Shakat Tantras and the oral traditions, some of which are secret. As the Tantras are mainly scriptures of worship, such doctrine is contained by implication in the ritual. For reasons above stated, recourse may be had to other scriptures in so far as they share with those of the Shaka certain common doctrines and practices. The Tantras proper are the word of Shiva and Shakti, but there are also valuable tantric works in the nature of compendia and commentaries which are not of divine authorship. The concept Shakti is not, however, peculiar to the Shakas. Every Hindu believes in Shakti as God's power, though he may differ as to the nature of the universe created by it. Shaka doctrine is a special presentment of so-called monism (Advaita), lit. "not two." And Shaka ritual, even in those condemned forms which have given rise to the abuses by which this scripture is most generally known, is a practical application of it.

Whatever may have been the case at the origin of these Agamic Cults, all now and for ages past recognize and claim to base themselves on the Vedas. With these are coupled the word of Shivashakti as revealed in the Tantras. Shaka doctrine is like the Vedanta in general, what in Western parlaments would be called a theology based on Revelation, that is, so-called spiritual or super-sensual experience in its primary or secondary sense. For Vedanta is that. This leads to a consideration of the measure of man's knowing and of the basis of Vedanta knowledge. It is a fundamental error to regard the Vedanta as simply a speculative metaphysic in the modern Western sense. It is not so. If it were, it would have no greater right to acceptance than any other of the many systems which jostle one another for our custom in the philosophical fair. It claims that its super-sensual teachings can be established with certainty by the practice of its methods. Theorizing alone is insufficient.

The Shaka, above all, is a practical and active man, worshipping the divine activity. His watchword is Kriya, or action. Taught that he is power, he desires fully to realize himself in fact as such. A tantric poem, Ananda Stotra, speaks with amused disdain of the learned chatterers who pass their time in feudal debate around the shores of the lake of doubt. The basis of knowing, whether in super-sense or sense knowledge, is actual experience. Experience is of two kinds: the whole or full experience, and incomplete experience, that is, of parts not of, but in, the whole. In the first experience, consciousness is said to be upward-looking (un-mukhi), that is, not looking to another. In the second experience, it is outward-looking (bahir-mukhi). The first is not an experience of the whole but the experience whole; the second is an experience not of parts of the whole (for the latter is partless) but of parts in the whole and issuing from its infinite power to know itself in and as the finite centers, as the many. The works of an Indian philosopher, my friend Professor Pratha Natha Mopadya, aptly call the first "the Fact" and the second "the Fact Section." The Isha Upanishad calls the Supreme experience Purna, the full or whole. It is not, be it noted, a residue of the abstracting intellect, which is itself only a limited stress in consciousness, but a plenum in which the existent All is as one whole. Theologically, this full experience is Shiva with Shakti at rest or as potency. The second experience is that of the finite centers, the numerous puruas or jivas, which are also Shiva Shakti as potency actualized. Both experiences are real. In fact, there is nothing unreal anywhere. All is the Mother, and she is reality itself. "Soham she" (I am She), the Shaka says, and all that he senses is She in the form in which he perceives her. It is She who, in and as he, drinks the consecrated wine, and She is the wine. All is manifested power which has the reality of Being from which it is put forth. But the reality of the manifestation is of something which appears and disappears, while that of causal power to appear is enduring. But this disappearance is only the ceasing to be for a limited consciousness. The seed of power which appears as a thing for such consciousness remains as the potency in infinite Being itself.

The Infinite Experience is real as the full (Purna); that is, its reality is fullness. The finite experience is real as such. There is perhaps no subject in Vedanta which is more misunderstood than that of the so-called unreality of the world. Every school admits the reality of all finite experience, even of elusive experience strictly so-called, while such experience lasts. But Shankarakara defines the truly real as that which is changeless. In this sense, the world as a changing thing has relative reality only. Shankara so defines reality because he sets forth his doctrine from the standpoint of transcendent Being. The Shaka to shastra, on the other hand, is a practical scripture of worship, delivered from the world standpoint, according to which the world is necessarily real. According to this view, a thing may be real and yet be the subject of change, but its reality as a thing ceases with the passing of the finite experiencer to whom it is real. The Supreme Shiva Shakti is, on the other hand, a real, full experience which ever endures. A worshipper must, as such, believe in the reality of himself, of the world as his field of action and instrument in its causation by God, and in God himself as the object of worship. Moreover, to him, the world is real because Shiva Shakti, which is its material cause, is real. That cause, without ceasing to be what it is, becomes the effect. Further, the world is the Lord's experience. He, as Lord (Pati), is the whole experience, and as creature (Pashu), he is the experiencer of parts in it. The experience of the Lord is never unreal. The reality, however, which changeless endures, may, if we so choose, be said to be reality in its fullest sense. Real, however, as all experience is, the knowing differs according as the experience is infinite or finite, and in the latter case, according to various grades of knowing. Full experience, as its name implies, is full in every way. Assume that there is at any time no Universe at all, that there is then a complete dissolution of all universes, and not of any particular universe. Even then, the power which produced past and will produce future universes is one with the Supreme Consciousness whose Shakti it is. When again this power actualizes as a universe, the Lord Consciousness, from and in whom it issues, is the allower. As Sarvan, he knows all generals, and as Svait, all particulars. But all is known by him as the Supreme Self, and not, as in the case of the finite center, as objects other than the limited self.

Finite experience is, by its definition, a limited thing. As the experience is of a sectional character, it is obvious that the knowing can only be of parts and not of the whole, as the part cannot know the whole of which it is a part. But the finite is not always so. It may expand into the infinite by processes which bridge the one to the other. The essential of partial experience is knowing in time and space. The Supreme experience, being changeless, is beyond both time and space as aspects of change. The latter is the alteration of parts relative to one another in the changeless whole. Full experience is not sense knowledge. The latter is worldly knowledge (Loka Jna) by a limited knowing center of material objects, whether gross or subtle. Full experience is the Supreme knowing Self, which is not an object at all. This is unworldly knowledge (Aloka Jna) or Vedanta. Sense knowledge varies according to the capacity and attainments of the experiencer, but the normal experience may be enhanced in two ways: either physically, by scientific instruments such as the telescope and microscope, which enhance the natural capacity to see, or psychically, by the attainment of what are called psychic powers. Everything is Shakti, but psychic power denotes that enhancement of normal capacity which gives knowledge of matter in its subtle form, while the normal man can perceive it only in the gross form as a compound of sensible matter. The Buddhas psychic power is thus an extension of natural faculty. There is nothing supernatural about it. All is natural. All is real. It is simply a power above the normal. Thus, the clairvoyant can see what the normal sense experiencer cannot. He does so by the mind. The gross sense organs are not, according to Vedanta, the senses (Indriya). The sense is the mind, which normally works through the appropriate physical organs, but which, as the real factor in sensation, may do so without them, as is seen both in hypnotic and yogic states. The area of knowledge is thus very widely increased. Knowledge may be gained of subtle chemistry, subtle physiology, as of the chakras or subtle bodily centers, of various powers, of the world of spirits, and so forth. But though we are here dealing with subtle things, they are still things and thus part of the sense world of objects, that is, of the world of Maya. Maya, as later explained, is not illusion but experience in time and space of self and not-self. This is by no means necessarily illusion.

The whole, therefore, cannot be known by sense knowledge. In short, sense or worldly knowledge cannot establish, that is, prove, what is super-sensual, such as the whole, its nature, and the other side of its processes taken as a collectivity. Reasoning, whether working in metaphysics or science, is based on the data of sense and governed by those forms of understanding which constitute the nature of finite mind. It may establish a conclusion of probability, but not of certainty. Grounds of probability may be made out for idealism, realism, pluralism, and monism, or any other philosophical system. In fact, from what we see, the balance of probability perhaps favors realism and pluralism. Reason may thus establish that an effect must have a cause, but not that the cause is one. For all that we can say, there may be as many causes as effects. Therefore, it is said in Vedanta that nothing in these matters is established by argument. All Western systems which do not possess actual spiritual experience as their basis are systems which can claim no certainty as regards any matter not verifiable by sense knowledge and reasoning thereon.

Shaka, and indeed all Vedantic teaching, holds that the only source and authority (Prana) as regards super-sensual matters, such as the nature of Being in itself and the like, is Veda. Veda, which comes from the root "vid" (to know), is knowledge par excellence, that is, super-sensual experience, which, according to the monist (to use the nearest English term), is the experience whole. It may be primary or secondary. As the first, it is actual experience (Sakshat Kara), which in English is called spiritual experience. The Shaka, as a monist, says that Veda is full experience as the One. This is not an object of knowledge; this knowing is Being. To know Brahman is to be Brahman. He is a monist not because of rational argument only, though he can induce reasoning in his support, but because he, or those whom he follows, have had in fact such monistic experience and therefore, in the light of such experience, interpret the Vedantic texts.

But spiritual experience, to use that English term, may be incomplete both as to duration and nature. Thus, from the imperfect ecstasy (Savikalpa Samadhi), even when of a monistic character, there is a return to world experience. Again, it may not be completely monistic in form, or may be even of a distinctly dualistic character. This only means that the realization has stopped short of the final goal. This being the case, that goal is still perceived through the forms of duality which linger as part of the constitution of the experiencer. Thus, there are Vedantic and other schools which are not monistic. The spiritual experiences of all are real experiences, whatever be their character, and they are true according to the truth of the stage in which the experience is had. Do they contradict one another? The experience which a man has of a mountain at 50 miles distance is not false because it is at variance with that of the man who has climbed it. What he sees is the thing from where he sees it. The first question then is: Is there a monistic experience in fact? Not whether monism is rational or not, and shown to be probable to the intellect, but how can we know this with certainty? Only by having the experience oneself. The validity of the experience for the experiencer cannot be assailed otherwise than by alleging fraud or self-deception. But how can this be proved to the experiencer? His experience is real, and nothing else is of any account. But the spiritual experience of one is no proof to another who refuses to accept it. A man may, however, accept what another says, having faith in the latter's alleged experience. Here we have the secondary meaning of Veda, that is, secondary knowledge of super-sensual truth, not based on actual experience of the believer, but on the experience of some other which the former accepts. In this sense, Veda is recorded for Brahmanism in the scriptures called Vedas, which contain the standard experience of those whom Brahman has recognized as its Rishis or Seers. But the interpretation of the Vedic record is in question, just as that of the Bible is. Why accept one interpretation rather than another? This is a lengthy matter. Suffice it to say here that each chooses the spiritual food which his spiritual body needs and which it is capable of eating and assimilating. This is the doctrine of Adhikara. Here, as elsewhere, what is one man's meat is another man's poison. Nature works in all who are not altogether beyond her workings. What is called the "will to believe" involves the affirmation that the form of a man's faith is the expression of his nature. The faith is the man. It is not man's reason only which leads to the adoption of a particular religious belief; it is the whole man, as evolved at that particular time, which does so. His affirmation of faith is an affirmation of his Self in terms of it. The Shaka is therefore a monist, either because he has had himself spiritual experiences of this character, or because he accepts the teaching of those who claim to have had such experience. This is AP knowledge that is received from a source of authority, just as knowledge of the scientific or other expert is received. It is true that the latter may be verified, but so, in its own way, can the former. Revelation to the Hindu is not something stated from above, incapable of verification below. He who accepts revelation as teaching the unity of the many in the One may himself verify it in his own experience. How? If the disciple is what is called unfit to receive truth in this monistic form, he will probably declare it to be untrue and, adhering to what he thinks is true, will not further trouble himself in the matter. If he is disposed to accept the teachings of monistic religion and philosophy, it is because his own spiritual and psychical nature is at a stage which leads directly, though in a longer or shorter time as may be the case, to actual monistic experience. A particular form of spiritual knowledge, like a particular psychic power, can be developed only in him who has the capacity for it. To such a one, asking with desire for the fruit, "How may I gather it?" the Guru says, "Follow the path of those who have achieved siddhi, and you will gain what they gained." This is the path of the Great Ones, who are those whom we esteem to be such. We esteem them because they have achieved that which we believe to be both worthy and possible. If a would-be disciple refuses to follow the method (sadana), he cannot complain that he has not had its result. Though reason by itself cannot establish more than a probability, yet when the super-sensual truth has been learned by Veda, it may be shown to be conformable to reason, and this must be so, for all realities are of one piece. Reason is a limited manifestation of the same Shakti who is fully known in ecstasy (Samadhi) which transcends all reasoning. What, therefore, is irrational can never be spiritually true. With the aid of the light of Revelation, the path is made clear, and all that is seen tells of the Unseen. Facts of daily life give auxiliary proof. So many miss the truth which lies under their eyes because, to find it, they look away or upwards to some fancied Heaven. The sophisticated mind fears the obvious. It is here, it is here, the Shaka and others say, for he and every other being is a microcosm. And so the Vishvasara Tantra says: "What is here is elsewhere; what is not here is nowhere." The Unseen is the scene which is not some alien disguise behind which it lurks. Experience of the scene is the experience of the Unseen. In time and space, the life of the individual is an expression of the same laws which govern the universe. Thus, the Hindu knows from his own daily rest that the power which projects the universe rests. His dreamless slumber, when only Bliss is known, tells him in some fashion of the causal state of universal rest. From the mode of his awakening and other psychological processes, he divines the nature of creative thinking. To the Shaka, the thrill of Union with his Shakti is a faint reflection of the infinite Shiva Shakti Bliss in and with which all universes are born. All matter is a relatively stable form of energy. It lasts a while and disappears into energy. The universe is maintained a while. This is Shakti as Vaishnavi, the maintainer. At every moment, creation as rejuvenescent molecular activity is going on as the Shakti Brahman. At every moment, there is molecular death and loosening of the forms. The work of Rudrani Shakti, creation, did not take place only at some past time, nor is dissolution only in the future. At every moment of time, there is both. As it is now and before us here, so it was in the beginning. In short, the world is real. It is a true experience. Observation and reason are here the guide. Even Veda is no authority in matters falling within sense knowledge. If Veda were to contradict such knowledge, it would, as Shankara says, be in this respect no Veda at all. The Hindu is not troubled by biblical science. Here and now, the existence of the many is established for the sense experiencer. But there is another and full experience which also may be had here and now, and is in any case also a fact. That is when the Self stands out (ecstasis) from mind and body and sense experience. This full experience is attained in ecstasy (Samadhi). Both experiences may be had by the same experiencer. It is thus the same One who became many. "He said, 'May I be many'," as Veda tells. The will to be many is power or Shakti, which operates as Maya.

In the preceding portion of this paper, it was pointed out that the power whereby the One gives effect to its will to be many is Maya Shakti. What are called the 36 Tattvas, accepted by both Shakas and Shivas, are the stages of evolution of the One into the many as mind and matter. Again, with what warrant is this affirmed? The secondary proof is the word of Shiva and Shakti, revealers of the Tantra shastra, as such word is expounded in the teachings of the Masters (Acharyas) in the Agama. Corroboration of their teaching may be had by observation of psychological stages in normal life and reasoning thereon. These psychological states again are the individual representation of the collective cosmic processes. As here, so elsewhere, primary evidence is actual experience of the surrounding and supreme states. Man does not leap at one bound from ordinary finite sense experience to the full experience; by stages he advances thereto, and by stages he retraces his steps to the world, unless the fullness of experience has been such as to burn up, in the fire of self-knowledge, the seed of desire which is the germ of the world. Man's consciousness has no fixed boundary. On the contrary, it is at root the infinite Consciousness which appears in the form of a contraction (Sham Coka) due to limitation as Shakti in the form of mind and matter. This contraction may be greater or less. As it is gradually loosened, Consciousness expands by degrees until all bonds being gone, it becomes one with the full Consciousness or Purna. Thus, there are, according to common teaching, seven ascending light planes of experience called Lokas (that is, what are seen, Lokante, or experienced) and seven dark descending planes or Talas (that is, places). It will be observed that one name is given from the objective and the other from the subjective standpoint. The center of these planes is the Earth plane (Beroa). This is not the same as experience on Earth, for every experience, including the highest and lowest, can be had here. The planes are not like geological strata, though necessity may picture them thus. The Earth plane is the normal experience. The ascending planes are states of supernormal, and the descending planes of subnormal experience. The highest of the planes is the Truth plane (Satal Loka). Beyond this is the Supreme experience, which is above all planes, which is light itself, and the love of Shiva and Shakti, the heart of the Supreme Lord (Rayam Paramu). The lowest Tala on the dark side is described in the Puranas with wonderful symbolic imagery as a place of darkness where monster serpents, crowned with dim light, live in perpetual anger. Below this is the Shakti of the Lord called Tamaya Shakti, that is, the veiling power of Being in all its infinite intensity.

What then is the reality whole or Purna? It is certainly not a bare abstraction of intellect, for the intellect is only a fractional power or Shakti. In it, such an abstraction has no worth for man. In the Supreme reality, which is the whole, there is everything which is of worth to men and which proceeds from it. In fact, as a Kashmir scripture says, "the without appears without only because it is within." Unworthy also proceeds from it, not in the sense that it is there as unworthy, but because the experience of duality, to which evil is attached, arises in the Blissful whole. The full is not merely the collectively Sashi of all which exists, for it is both immanent in and transcends the universe. It is a commonplace that it is unknowable except to itself. Shiva, in the Yogandaya Tantra, says: "Who knows the heart of a woman? Only Shiva knows the heart of yogini." The Supreme Shakti, for this reason, the Buddhist tantric schools call it Shunyam or the Void. This is not nothing, but nothing known to mind and senses. Both Shakas and some Vavas use the term Shunyam, and no one suspects them of being nihilists. Relatively, however, the One is said to be Being (Sat), Bliss (Ananda), and Chit (an untranslatable term which has been most accurately defined as the changeless principle of all changing experience, a principle of which sensation, perception, conception, self-consciousness, feeling, memory, will, and all other psychic states are limited modes). It is not, therefore, Consciousness or Feeling as we understand these words, for these are directed and limited. It is the infinite root of which they are the finite flower. But Consciousness and, possibly, according to the more ancient views, Feeling, approach the most nearly to a definition, provided that we do not understand thereby Consciousness and Feeling in man's sense. We may thus, to distinguish it, call all Chit pure Consciousness or pure Feeling, as Bliss (Ananda) knowing and enjoying its own full reality. This, as such pure Consciousness or Feeling, endures even when finite centers of Consciousness or Feeling arise in it. If, as this system assumes, there is a real causal nexus between the two, then Being as Shiva is also a power or Shakti which is the source of all becoming. The fully real, therefore, has two aspects: one called Shiva, the static aspect of Consciousness, and the other called Shakti, the kinetic aspect of the same. For this reason, K Shakti, dark as a thundercloud, is represented standing and moving on the white inert body of Shiva. He is white as illumination (Prakasha); he is inert, for pure Consciousness is without action and at rest. It is She, his power, who moves. Dark is She here because, as Kali, she dissolves all in darkness, that is, vacuity of existence, which is the light of Being itself. Again, she is creatrix. Five corpse-like Shivas form the support of her throne, set in the wish-granting groves of the Isle of Gems (Manidvipa), the golden sands of which are lapped by the still waters of the ocean of nectar (Amrita), which is immortality. In both cases, we have a pictorial presentment in theological form of the scientific doctrine that to every form of activity there is a static background. But until there is in fact change, Shakti is merely the potency of becoming in Being, and as such is wholly one with it. The power Shakti and the possessor of power, Shakti man, are one. As therefore he is Being, Bliss, Consciousness, so is she. She is also the full Purna, which is no mere abstraction from its evolved manifestations. On the contrary, of her, the Mahakali Stra says: "Though without feet thou movest more quickly than air; though without ears thou dost hear; though without nostrils thou dost smell; though without eyes thou dost see; though without tongue thou dost taste all tastes." Those who talk of the bloodless abstractions of Vedanta have not understood it. The ground of man's being is the Supreme Eye (Pisham), which, though in itself beyond finite personality, is yet ever finitely personalizing as the beings of the Universe. "Soham She" (I am She) is the Supreme Shakti, the ultimate object of the Shaka's adoration, though worshipped in several forms, some gentle, some formidable. But potency is actualized as the universe, and this also is Shakti, for the effect is the cause modified. Monistic Vedanta teaches that God is the material cause of the world. The statement that the Supreme Shakti also exists as the forms evolved from it may seem to conflict with the doctrine that power is ultimately one with Shiva, who is changeless Being. Shankara answers that the existence of a causal nexus is Maya, and that there is, from the transcendental standpoint, only a seeming cause and seeming modification or effect. The Shaka, who from his world standpoint posits the reality of God as the cause of the universe, replies that while it is true that the effect as effect is the cause modified, the cause as cause remains what it was and is and will be. Creative evolution of the universe thus differs from the evolution in it. In the latter case, the material cause, when producing an effect, ceases to be what it was; thus milk turned into curd ceases to be milk. But the simile given of the other evolutionary process is that of light from light. There is a similarity between the conventional standpoint of Shankara and the explanation of the Shaka. The difference being that while to the former the effect is, from the transcendental standpoint, unreal, it is, from the Shaka's immanent standpoint, real.

It will have been observed that cosmic evolution is in the nature of a polarization in Being into static and kinetic aspects. This is symbolized in the Shakat Tantras by their comparison of Shiva Shakti to a grain of graham kanaka. This has two seeds which are so close together as to seem one, and which are surrounded by a single sheath. The seeds are Shiva and Shakti, and the sheath is Maya. When the sheath is unpeeled, that is, when Maya Shakti operates, the two seeds come apart. The sheath unrolls when the seeds are ready to germinate, that is, when in the dreamless slumber (Sushupti) of the world Consciousness, the remembrance of past enjoyment in form gives rise to that divine creative thinking of imagining (Sisalana) which is creation. As the universe in dissolution sinks into a memory which is lost, so it is born again from the germ of recalled memory or Shakti. Why such a question may be answered when we are dealing with facts in the whole, but the latter itself is uncaused, and what is caused is not the whole. Manifestation is of the nature of Being-Power, just as it is its nature to return to itself after the actualization of power. To the devotee who speaks in theological language, it is his will, as the Yogan says: "He painted the world picture on himself with the brush which is his will and was pleased therewith." Again, the world is called a propan, that is, an extension of the five forms of sensible matter (Bhuta). Where does it go at dissolution? It collapses into a point (Bindu). We may regard it as a metaphysical point which is the complete subjectification of the Divine or full I (Prah) or objectively as a mathematical point without magnitude. Round that point is coiled a mathematical line which, being in touch with every part of the surface of the point, makes one point with it. What then is meant by these symbols of the point and line? It is said that the Supreme Shiva sees himself in and as his own power or Shakti. He is the white point or Moon (Chandra), which is illumination, and in the completed process, the I (Aham) side of experience. She is the red point. Both colors are seen in the microcosmic generation of the child. Red too is the color of desire. She is fire, which is the object of experience or this Edam, the objective side of experience. This here is nothing but a mass of Shiva's own illuminating rays. These are reflected in himself as Shakti, who in the Kamala Vasa is called the pure mirror of Shiva. The Self sees the Self, the rays being thrown back on their source. This is the germ of what we call otherness, but here the other is and is known as the Self. The relation and fusion of these two points, white and red, is called the mixed point or Sun. These are the three Supreme lights. A is Shiva, Ha is Shakti, which, united, spell Aham or I. This Sun is thus the state of fullness (Prah Baba). This is the point into which the world at dissolution lapses, and from which, in due time, it comes forth again. In the latter case, it is the Lord Consciousness as the Supreme Eye and Power about to create. For this reason, Bindu is called a condensed or massive form of Shakti. It is the tth state of power immediately prior to its first actualization. That form of Shakti again, by which the actualization takes place, is Maya, and this is the line round the point, as coiled round the point. It is the Supreme Serpent Power (Maha Kundalini) encircling the Shivalinga. From out of this power comes the whisper to enjoy in worlds of form, as the memory of past universes arises therein. Shakti then sees Shakti, opens her eyes, as she reawakens from the cosmic sleep (Nirmana), which is dissolution. The line is at first coiled and one with the point, for power is then at rest. Creation is movement, an uncoiling of Mayaki. Hence is the world called Jagat, which means "what moves." The nature of this power is circular or spiralin, hence the roundness and curvature of things, of which we now hear nothing moves in a really straight line. Hence again, the universe is also called a spheroid (Brahmanda). The gross worlds are circular universal movements in space, in which is the ether (Akasha). Consciousness as the full Purna is never dichotomized, but the finite centers which arise in it are so. The point or Bindu then divides into three in various ways, the chief of which is knower, knowing, and known, which constitute the duality of the world experience by mind of matter.

Unsurpassed for its profound analysis is the account of the 36 Tattvas or stages of cosmic evolution, accepted by both Shivas and Shakas, given by the Northern Shiva School of the Agama, which flourished after the date which Western orientalists assigned to Shankarakara, and which was therefore in a position to criticize him. According to this account, which I greatly condense, subject and object in pure Being are in indistinguishable Union as the Supreme Shiva Shakti. We have then to see how this Unity is broken up into subject and object. This does not take place all at once. There is an intermediate stage of transition in which there is a subject and object, but both are part of the Self which knows its object to be itself. In man's experience, they are wholly separate, the object then being perceived as outside the Self, the plurality of selves being mutually exclusive centers. The process and the result are the work of Shakti, whose special function is to negate, that is, to negate her own fullness so that it becomes the finite center, contracted as a limited subject perceiving a limited object, both being aspects of the One Divine Self. The first stage after the Supreme is that in which Shakti withdraws herself and leaves, as it were, standing by itself, the I-side (Aham) of what, when completed, is the I-this (Aham Idam) experience. But simultaneously, for the I must have its content, she presents herself as a this (Edam), at first faintly and then clearly, the emphasis being at first laid on the I and then on the this. This last is the stage of Ishvara Tattva or Bindu, as the Mantra Shastra, dealing with the causal state of sound (Shabda), calls it. In the second and third stage, as also in the fourth which follows, though there is an I and a this, and therefore not the indistinguishable I-this of the Supreme experience, yet both the I and the this are experienced as aspects of and in the Self. Then, as a preliminary to the division which follows, the emphasis is laid equally on the I and the this. At this point, Maya Shakti intervenes and completely separates the two, for that power is the sense of difference (Bheda Buddhi). We have now the finite centers, mutually exclusive one of the other, each seeing, to the extent of its power, finite centers as objects outside of and different from the Self. Consciousness thus becomes contracted. In lieu of being all-knowing, it is a little knower, and in lieu of being Almighty Power, it is a little doer. Maya is not rightly rendered illusion. In the first place, it is conceived as a real power of Being, and as such is one with the full reality. The full, free of all illusion, experiences the engendering of the finite centers and the centers themselves in and as its own changeless, partless Self. It is these individual centers, produced from out of power as Maya Shakti, which are ignorance or Avidya Shakti. They are so-called because they are not a full experience but an experience of parts in the whole. In another sense, this ignorance is a knowing, namely, that which a finite center alone has. Even God cannot have man's mode of knowledge and enjoyment without becoming man. He, by and as his power, does become man, man, and yet remains Himself. Man is power in limited form, as Avidya. The Lord is unlimited power, as Maya, in whom then is the illusion? Not all will admit in the Lord, nor is it in fact, whatever be the talk of it, in man, whose nature it is to regard his limitations as real, for these limitations are he. His experience as man provides no standard whereby it may be judged illusion. The latter is non-conformity with normal experience, and here it is the normal experience which is said to be illusion. If there were no Avidya Shakti, there would be no man. In short, the knowing which is full experience is one thing, and the knowing of the limited experience is another. The latter is Avidya, and the power to produce it is Maya. Both are eternal aspects of reality, though the forms which are Avidya Shakti come and go. If we seek to relate the one to the other, where and by whom is the comparison made? Not in and by the full experience beyond all relations, where no questions are asked or answers given, but on the standing ground of present finite experience, where all subjectivity and objectivity are real, and where, therefore, ipso facto, illusion is negative. The two aspects are never present at one and the same time for comparison. The universe is real as a limited thing to the limited experiencer, who is himself a part of it. But the experience of the Supreme Person (Parahuna) is necessarily different, otherwise it would not be the Supreme experience at all. A God who experiences just as man does is no God but man. There is, therefore, no experiencer to whom the world is illusion. He who sees the world in the normal waking state loses it in that form in ecstasy (Samadhi). It may, however, with the Shaka, be said that the Supreme experience is entire and unchanging, and thus the fully real, and that though the limited experience is also real in its own way, it is yet an experience of change in its twin aspects of time and space. Maya, therefore, is the power which engenders in itself finite centers in time, time and space, and Avidya is such experience, in fact, of the finite experiencer in time and space. So much is this so that the time theorists (Cadens) give the name Supreme Time (Parakala) to the Creator, who is also called by the Shaka Great Time (Mahakala). So in the Pura Vayala it is said that Mahadeva Shiva distributes his rays of power in the form of the year, that is, timeless experience appears in the finite centers as broken up into periods of time. This is the lesser time which comes in with the sun, moon, six seasons, and so forth, which are all shakes of the Lord, the existence and movements of which give rise in the limited observer to the notion of time and space. That observer is essentially the Self or Spirit, vehicled by its own Shakti in the form of mind and matter. These two are its body, the first subtle, the second gross. Both have a common origin, namely, the Supreme Power. Each is a real mode of it. One, therefore, does not produce the other; both are produced by and exist as modes of the same cause. There is a necessary parallelism between the perceived and the perceiver, and because mind and matter are at base one as modes of the same power, one can act on the other. Mind is the subjective, and matter the objective aspect of the One Polarized Consciousness. With the unimportant exception of the Lokayatas, the Hindus have never shared what Sir William Jones called the "vulgar notions of matter," according to which it is regarded as some gross, lasting, and independently existing outside thing. Modern Western science now also dematerializes the ponderable matter of the Universe into energy. This, and the forms in which it is displayed, is the power of the Self to appear as the object of a limited center of knowing. Mind again is the Self as Consciousness, limited by its power into such a center. By such contraction, there is, in lieu of an all-power, a little knower, and in lieu of an all-doer, a little doer. Those, however, to whom this way of looking at things is naturally difficult, may regard the Supreme Shakti from the objective aspect as holding within itself the germ of all matter which develops in it. Both mind and matter exist in every particle of the universe, though not explicitly displayed in the same way in all. There is no corner of the universe which contains anything either potential or actual which is not to be found elsewhere. Some aspect of matter or mind, however, may be more or less explicit or implicit. So in the Mantra scripture it is said that each letter of the alphabet contains all sound. The sound of a particular letter is explicit, and the other sounds are implicit. The sound of a particular letter is a particular physical, audible mode of the Shabda Brahman. Brahman as the cause of Shabda or sound, in whom is all sound actual and potential, pure consciousness, is fully involved in the densest forms of gross or organic matter, which is not inert but full of movement (Spanda). For there is not but the Supreme Consciousness which does not move. Immanent in mind and matter is Consciousness (Sit Shakti). Inorganic matter is thus Consciousness in full subjection to the power of ignorance. It is thus Consciousness identifying itself with such inorganic matter. Matter in all its five forms of density is present in everything. Mind too is there, though owing to its imprisonment in matter, undeveloped. The Brahman sleeps in the stone. Life too, which displays itself with the organization of

Matter is potentially contained in being, of which such inorganic matter is to some a lifeless form. From this deeply involved state, Shakti enters into higher and higher organized forms. Prana, or vitality, is a Shakti, the mantra form of which is "hang." With the mantra "hang," the breath goes forth; with "sa," it is drawn in. A fact which anyone can verify for himself, if he will attempt to inspire after putting the mouth in the way it is placed in order to pronounce the letter H.

The rhythm of creative power, as of breathing, a microcosmic form of it, is two-fold: outgoing prti, or involution, as universe, and an evolution, or return, niti, of supreme power to itself. Shakti, as the great heart of the universe, pulses forth and back in cosmic systole and diastole. So much for the nature of the power as an evolutionary process. It is displayed in the forms evolved as an increasing exhibition of consciousness, from apparently, though not truly, unconscious matter, through the slight consciousness of the plant and the greater consciousness of the animal, to the more highly developed consciousness of man, who, in the completeness of his own individual evolution, becomes freed of mind and matter which constitute the form, and thus is one with the Supreme Consciousness itself.

There are no gaps in the process. In existence, there are no rigid partitions. The vital phenomena to which we give the name of life appear, it is true, with organized matter, but life is not then something entirely new which had no sort of being before. For such life is only a limited mode of being, which itself is no dead thing, but the infinite life of all lives. To the Hindu, the difference between plant and animal, and between the latter and man, has always been one rather of degree than of kind. There is one Consciousness, and one mind and matter throughout, though the matter is organized and the mind is exhibited in various ways. The one Shakti is the self, as the string (sutra) on which all the beads of form are strung, and these beads again are limited modes of herself.

As the string, evolution is thus the loosening of the bonds in which Consciousness itself, unchanging, is held, such loosening being increased and Consciousness more fully exhibited as the process is carried forward. At length is gained that human state which the scripture calls so hard to get, for it has been won by much striving and through suffering. Therefore, the scripture warns man not to neglect the opportunities of a stage which is the necessary preliminary to the attainment of the full experience. Man, by his striving, must seek to become fully Humane, and then to pass yet further into the divine fullness which is beyond all forms, with their good and evil.

This is the work of sadana, a word which comes from the root sad, "to exert," which is discipline, ritual, worship, and yoga. It is that by which any result (siddhi) is attained. The Tantric shastra is a sadana scripture. As powers are many, so may be sadana, which is of various kinds and degrees. Man may seek to realize the Mother Power in her limited forms, as health, strength, long life, wealth, magic powers, and so forth. The so-called New Thought and kindred literature, which bids men to think power and thus to become power, is very ancient, going back at least to the Upanishad, which says, "What a man thinks, that he becomes." Those who have need for the infinite Mother, as she is not in any form but in herself, seek direct the Adorable One, in whom is the essence of all which is of finite worth.

The gist of a high form of Kula sadana is given in the following verse from the hymn of Mahakal, Arudra himself, to Mahakali: "I torture not my body with penances; is not his body hers? If man be God in human guise, why torment him? I lame not my feet in pilgrimage to holy places; the body is the devia, or temple, of divinity; therein are all the spiritual tiras, or holy places; why then trouble to go elsewhere? I spend not my time in reading the Vedas." The Vedas, which he has already studied, are the record of the standard spiritual experience of others. He seeks now to have that experience himself, directly. What is the use of merely reading about it? The Kularnava Tantra enjoins the mastering of the essence of all scriptures, which should then be put aside, just as he who has threshed out the grain throws away the husks and straw. "But I strive to attain thy two sacred feet."

Chapter 3. What are the Tantras and their significance?

A very common expression in English writings is "the Tantra," but its use is often due to a misconception and leads to others. For what does Tantra mean? The word denotes injunction, regulation, shastra, generally, or treatise. Thus, Samkara calls the Samhita a Tantra. A secular writing may be called Tantra. For the following note, I am indebted to Professor Surendra Dasgupta. The word Tantra has been derived in the Kashika of Panini from the root tan, "to spread," by the Uṇādi rule, "sarvadu paya tran," with the addition of the suffix "tran." Vācaspati, Anandagiri, and Govinda Nanda, however, derive the word from the root "tantri" of "tantry" in the sense of "utpādana," origination, or knowledge. In Gaṇanātha, however, "tantri" has the same meaning as "tan," to spread, and it is probable that the former root is a modification of the latter. The meaning "utpādana" is also probably derived by narrowing the general sense of "vistara," which is the meaning of the root "tan." According to the derivation of Tantra from "tan," to spread, Tantra is that scripture by which knowledge (jñāna) is spread: "tanoti vistṛṇoti jñānam anena iti tantram." The suffix "stra" is from the root "as," "to save," that knowledge is spread which saves. What is that but religious knowledge? Therefore, as here and generally used, Tantra means a particular kind of religious scripture. The Kamika Agama of the Shiva Śaiva Tantra Pāṭala says, "tanoti vipulāṁ jñānaṁ." It is called Tantra because it promulgates great knowledge concerning tattva and mantra, and because it saves.

It is a common misconception that Tantra is the name only of the scripture of the Śāktas, or worshippers of Śakti. This is not so. There are Tantras of other sects of the Agama, Tantras of Śivas, Vaiṣṇavas, and so forth. We cannot speak of "the treatise," nor of "the Tantra," any more than we can or do speak of "the Purāṇa," "the Samhita." We can speak of "the Tantras," as we do of "the Purāṇas." These Tantras are śāstras of what is called the Agama. In a review of one of my works, it was suggested that the Agama is a class of scriptures dealing with the worship of saguṇa īśvara, which was revealed at the close of the age of the Upaniṣads, and introduced partly because of the falling into desuetude of the Vedic ācāra, and partly because of the increasing numbers of persons entering the Hindu fold who were not competent adhikārī for that ācāra. I will not, however, deal with this historical question beyond noting the fact that the Agama is open to all persons of all casts and both sexes, and is not subject to the restrictions of the Vedic ācāra. This last term is a common one and comes from the verbal root "car," which means "to move" or "to act," the prefix "vi" being probably used in the sense of restriction. Ācāra thus means practice, way, rule of life, governing a sādhaka, or one who does sādhana, or practice, for some desired end (siddhi).

The Āgamas are divided into three main groups, according as the iṣṭa-devatā worshipped is Śakti, Śiva, or Viṣṇu. The first is the Śākta Āgama, the second the Śaiva Āgama, and the third the Vaiṣṇava Āgama, or Pañcarātra. This last is the scripture to which the Śrīmad Bhāgavata refers as "Satvat Tantra" in the lines "rudra-saro vīta." Some Āgamas are called "vaidika," "vaidika āgama," and some "naivaitika," "a-vaidika." The Kurma Purāṇa (15.21) mentions as belonging to the latter: Kapala, Laṅgula, Vāma, Pāśupata, Pañcarātra, and many others. Pāśupata again is said to be both "vaidika" and "a-vaidika," such as Laṅgula. Kurma Purāṇa (Uttara Ch. 38) says: "By Me was first composed for the attainment of liberation, Śraiva Vaidika Pāśupata, which is excellent, subtle, and secret, the essence of Veda, Veda-sāra. The learned devoted to Veda should meditate on Śiva Pasupati. This is Pāśupata Yoga to be practiced by seekers of liberation. By Me also have been spoken Pāśupata, Saula, and Vāma, opposed to Veda, Viraṇi. These should not be practiced; they are outside Veda."

S. Kumāra Samhita says: "Śrauta Śama is of two kinds, Śaiva and A-śaiva. Śaiva is Śruti-sāra, and of two kinds, svatantra and itara. Svatantra is first of 10 kinds, and then Śānta of 18 kinds. This is the Śiva Śaiva Agama, with 28 mūla Āgamas and two and seven upa-gamas. It is śuddha, because in it there is no viśeṣaṇa. Itara is śruti-sāra, with numerous varieties." Into this mass of sects I do not attempt here to enter, except in a general way. My subject is the doctrine and ritual of the Śāktas. There are said to be Śiva, Vaiṣṇava, and Śākta Upaniṣads, favoring one or another doctrine. We must, however, in all cases distinguish between what a school says of itself and what others say of it. So far as I am aware, all Āgamas, whatever be their origin, claim now to be based on śruti, though of course, as different interpretations are put on śruti, those who accept one interpretation are apt to speak of differing schools as heretical.

These main divisions again have subdivisions. Thus, there are several schools of Śivas, and there are Śāktas with their nine āmnāyas: four Sadāśiva, Kerala, Kāśmīra, Gauḍa, and Vāsa, each divided into a two-fold division of inner and outer worship. There is, for instance, the Northern Shiva School, called Trika of Kashmir, in which country at one time Tantra śāstras were very prevalent. There is again the Southern Shiva School, called Śiva Śaiva. The Śāktas, who are to be found throughout India, are largely prevalent in Bengal and Assam. The Śāktas are rather allied with the Northern Advaita Śiva than with the others, though in them also there is worship of Śakti. Śiva and Śakti are one, and he who worships one necessarily worships the other. But whereas the Śiva predominantly worships Śiva, the Śākta predominantly worships the Śakti side of the Ardhanārīśvara mūrti, which is both Śiva and Śakti. Mahāviṣṇu and Sadāśiva are also one. As the Samhāna Tantra says: "Without prkṛti, the saṁsāra world cannot be; without puruṣa, true knowledge cannot be attained. Therefore, should both be worshipped." With Mahākālī, Mahākāla. Some, it says, speak of Śiva, some of Śakti, some of Nārāyaṇa (Viṣṇu), but the Supreme Nārāyaṇa, Ādinārāyaṇa, is Supreme Śiva, Parambrahma, the Nguṇa Brahman, pure as crystal. The two aspects of the Supreme reflect the one in the other. The reflection (pratibimba) is Māyā, whence the world, lords, lokas, and the worlds are born. The Ādi Śakti Mahāśakti at one time assumed the male form of Kṛṣṇa, and at another that of Rāma, for all aspects are in Mahākālī one with Pāva Mahākāla, who is Mahāviṣṇu. It is only a fool, it says, who sees any difference between Rāma and Śiva. This is, of course, to look at the matter from the high Vedantic standpoint of Śākta doctrine. Nevertheless, separate worship and rituals exist among the sects.

A common philosophical basis of the Śivas and those of the Śāktas who are Ādins is the doctrine of the 36 Tattvas. These are referred to in the Tantra so well known in Bengal, which is called Kulārṇava, and they are also referred to in other Śākta works and their commentaries, such as the Ānandalaharī. The Śāradā Tilaka, a great authority amongst the Bengal Śāktas, is the work of Lakṣmaṇakara, an author of the Kashmir Shiva School. The latter school, as also the Śāktas, are Ādins. The Śiva Śaiva and Pañcarātra are śuddha and viśuddha respectively. There is also a great body of Buddhist Tantras of differing schools. Now, all these schools have Tantras of their own. The original connection of the Shiva schools is said to be shown, amongst other things, by the fact that some Tantras are common, such as Māndra and Mātaṅga Tantras. It has been asserted that the Śākta school is not historically connected with the Śivas. No grounds were given for this statement. Whatever be the historical origins of the former, the two appear to be in several respects allied at present, as anyone who knows Śākta literature may find out for himself. In fact, Śākta literature is in parts unintelligible to one unacquainted with some features of what is called the Śiva Darśana. How otherwise is it that the 36 Tattvas and Ṣaḍāṅga Yoga (my Garland of Letters) are common to both?

The Śāktas have again been divided into three groups. Thus, the esteemed Pandit R. Ananta Shastri, in the introduction to his edition of Ānandalaharī, speaks of the Kaula, or Śākta śāstras, with 64 Tantras; the Miśra, with eight Tantras; and the Samaya group, which are said to be the most important of the Śākta Āgamas, of which five are mentioned. This classification purports to be based on the nature of the object pursued, according as it belongs to one or the other of the Puruṣārthas. Pañcarātra literature is very considerable, 108 works being mentioned by the same Pandit in Valmīki, 13 of the Theosophist. I would refer the reader also to the very valuable edition of the Ahirbudhnya Saṁhitā by my friend Dr. Otto Schrader, with an introduction by the learned doctor on the Pañcarātra system, where many Vaiṣṇava Tantras and Saṁhitās are cited. The Trika School has many Tantras, of which the leading one is Mālinī-vijaya. The Śaiva Saṁhitā comes next. Jagadīśa Chandra Chattopadhyāya, Vidyā-varidhi, has written with learning and lucidity on this school. The Śiva Śaiva has 28 leading Tantras and a large number of upa-gamas, such as Tārakā Tantra, Vātula Tantra, and others, which will be found enumerated in Śāstrī D. Śiva Śaiva Nārāyaṇa Pillai's Studies in Śiva Śaiva and Śiva Śaiva Siddhānta. The Samhāna Tantra mentions 64 Tantras, 327 upa-tantras, as also Yamalas, Damaras, Saṁhitās, and other scriptures of the Śiva class; 75 Tantras, 205 upa-tantras, also Yamalas, Damaras, Saṁhitās of the Vaiṣṇava class; numerous Tantras and other scriptures of the Gaṇapa and Śāra classes; and a number of Purāṇas, Upa-purāṇas, and other variously named scriptures of the B class. It then mentions over 500 Tantras and nearly the same number of Upa-tantras of some 22 Āgamas: Āgama, Budhama, Japa, Kapālika, Pañcarātra, Pāśupata, and others.

There is thus a vast mass of Tantras in the Āgamas belonging to differing schools of doctrine and practice, all of which must be studied before we can speak with certainty as to what the mighty Agama as a whole is. In this book, I briefly deal with one section of it only. Nevertheless, when these Āgamas have been examined and are better known, it will, I think, be found that they are largely variant aspects of the same general ideas and practices. As instances of general ideas, I may cite the following: the conception of deity as a supreme personality (parā-pūrṇa), and of the double aspect of God, in one of which he really is or becomes the universe, a true emanation from him in his creative aspect; successive emanations (abhāsa), vṛtti, as of fire from fire, from subtle to gross; doctrine of Śakti and impure creation; the denial of unconscious Māyā, such as Śaṁkara teaches; doctrine of Māyā-kośa and the kukas (the six Śiva kukas being, as Dr. Schrader says, represented by the possibly earlier classification in the Pañcarātra of the three Saṁ-cokas); the carrying of the origin of things up and beyond puruṣa-prkṛti; acceptance at a later stage of puruṣa-prkṛti; the saṁ-guṇas and evolution of tattvas as applied to the doctrine of Śakti; affirmation of the reality of the universe; emphasis on devotion (bhakti); provision for all casts and both sexes.

Instances of common practice are, for example: mantra, bīja, yantra, mudrā, nyāsa, bhasmodhāra, kuṇḍala, yoga, construction and consecration of temples and images, kriya, religious and social observances, kriya, such as āhnika, varada, dharma, utsava, and practical magic (māyā-yoga), where there is mantra, yantra, nyāsa, dīkṣā, guru, and the like, there is Tantra śāstra. In fact, one of the names of the latter is Mantra Śāstra. With these similarities, there are certain variations of doctrines and practice between the schools. Necessarily also, even on points of common similarity, there is some variance in terminology and exposition, which is unessential. Thus, when looking at their broad features, it is of no account whether with the Pañcarātra we speak of Lakṣmī, Śakti, vṛtti, saṁ-coka, or whether in terms of other schools we speak of Tripurasundarī and Mahākālī. Tattvas and kukas again, there are some differences in ritual which are not of great moment, except in one, and that a notable instance. I refer to the well-known division of worshippers into dakāra and vakāra. The secret sadana of some of the latter, which I may here say is not usually understood, has acquired such notoriety that to most the term "the Tantra" connotes this particular worship and its abuses, and nothing else.

I may here also observe that it is a mistake to suppose that aberration in doctrine and practice are peculiar to India. A missionary wrote to me some years ago that this country was a "demon-haunted land." There are demons here, but they are not the only inhabitants. And tendencies to be found here have existed elsewhere. The West has produced many a doctrine and practice of an antinomian character. Some of the most extreme are to be found there. Moreover, though this does not seem to be recognized, it is nevertheless the fact that these kāla-rātra rites are philosophically based on monistic doctrine. Now, it is this kāla doctrine and practice, limited probably, as being a secret doctrine at all times to comparatively few, which has come to be known as "the Tantra." Nothing is more incorrect. This is but one division of worshippers, who again are but one section of the numerous followers of the Ādina, Śiva, Śākta, and Vaiṣṇava. Though there are certain common features which may be called tantric, yet one cannot speak of "the Tantra" as though it were one entirely homogeneous doctrine and practice, still less can we identify it with the particular practices and theories of one division of worshippers only.

Further, the Tantras are concerned with science, law, medicine, and a variety of subjects other than spiritual doctrine or worship. Thus, Indian chemistry and medicine are largely indebted to the Tantrikas. According to a common notion, the word Tantra is, to use the language of a well-known work, restricted to the necromantic books of the latter Śivik or Śakti mysticism. As charity covers many sins, so mystic and mysticism are words which cover much ignorance. Necromancy too looms unnecessarily large in writers of this school. It is, however, the fact that Western authors generally so understand the term Tantra. They are, however, in error in so doing, as previously explained.

Here I shortly deal with the significance of the Tantra śāstra, which is of course also misunderstood, being generally spoken of as a jumble of black magic and erotic mysticism, cemented together by a ritual which is meaningless mumbo-jumbo. A large number of persons who talk in this strain have never had a Tantra in their hands, and such Orientalists as have read some portions of these scriptures have not generally understood them. Otherwise, they would not have found them to be so meaningless. They may be bad, or they may be good, but they have a meaning. Men are not such fools as to believe for ages in what is meaningless. The use of this term implies that their content had no meaning to them. Very likely, for to define, as they do, mantra as mystical words, mudrā as mystical gestures, and yantra as mystical diagrams, does not imply knowledge. These erroneous notions as to the nature of the Agama are of course due to the mistaken identification of the whole body of the scripture with one section of it. Further, this last is only known through the abuses to which its dangerous practices, as carried out by inferior persons, have given rise. It is stated in the śāstra itself, in which they are prescribed, that the path is full of difficulty and peril, and he who fails upon it goes to hell. That there are those who have so failed, and others who have been guilty of evil magic, is well known. I am not in this chapter concerned with this special ritual or magic, but with the practices which govern the life of the vast mass of the Indian people, to be found in the Tantras of the Āgamas of the different schools which I have mentioned.

A Western writer, in a review of one of my books, has expressed the opinion that the Tantra śāstra (I think he meant the Śākta) was at least in its origin alien and indeed hostile to the Veda. He said: "We are strongly of opinion that in their essence the two principles are fundamentally opposed, and that the Tantra only used Vedic forms to mask its polemical opposition." I will not discuss this question here. It is, however, the fact now, as it has been for centuries past, that the Āgama-Vādins claim to base their doctrine on Veda. The Vedanta is the final authority and basis for the doctrine set forth in the Tantras, though the latter interpret the Vedanta in various ways. The real meaning of Vedanta is Upaniṣad, and nothing else. Many persons, however, speak of Vedanta as though it meant the philosophy of Śaṁkara, or whatever other philosopher they follow. This, of course, is incorrect. Vedanta is śruti. Śaṁkara's philosophy is merely one interpretation of śruti, just as Rāmānuja's is another, and that of the Śaiva Āgama or Kāpālika Āgama is a third. There is no question of competition between Vedanta (as śruti) and Tantra śāstra. It is, however, the fact that each of the followers of the schools of Āgama contend that their interpretation of the śruti texts is the true one and superior to that of other schools. As a stranger to all these sects, I am not here concerned to show that one system is better than the other. Each will adopt that which most suits him. I am only stating the facts.

As the Ahirbudhnya Saṁhitā of the Pañcarātra Āgama says: "The aspects of God are infinite, and no philosopher can seize and duly express more than one aspect." This is perfectly true. All systems of interpretation have some merits, as they have defects, that of Śaṁkara included. The latter, by his Māyāvāda, is able to preserve more completely than any other interpretation the changelessness and stainlessness of Brahman. It does this, however, at the cost of certain defects which do not exist in other schools, which have also their own peculiar merits and shortcomings. The basis and seed of authority is śruti, or experience, and the Agama interprets śruti in its own way. Thus, the Śiva Śākta doctrines are specific solutions of the Vedantic theme, which differ in several respects from that of Śaṁkara, though, as they agree (I speak of the Northern Shiva School) with him on the fundamental question of the unity of jīvātma and paramātma, they are therefore Advaita.

The next question is, how the experience of which the Agama speaks may be gained. This is also prescribed in the śāstra in the form of peculiar sadanas, or disciplines. In the first place, there must be a healthy physical and moral life. To know a thing in its ultimate sense is to be that thing. To know Brahman is, according to Advaita, to be Brahman. One cannot realize Brahman, the pure, except by being oneself pure. But to attain and keep this state, as well as progress therein, certain specific means, practices, rituals, or disciplines are necessary. The result cannot be got by mere philosophical talk about Brahman. Religion is a practical activity, just as the body requires exercise, training, and gymnastics, so does the mind. This may be of a merely intellectual or spiritual kind. The means employed are called sadana, which comes from the root sad, "to exert." Sadana is that which leads to siddhi. Sadana is the development of Śakti. Man is consciousness (Ātmā), vehicled by Śakti in the form of mind and body. But this Śakti is at base pure consciousness, just as Ātmā is, for Ātmā and Śakti are one. Man is thus a vast magazine of both latent and expressed power. The object of sadana is to develop man's Śakti, whether for temporal or spiritual purposes. But where is sadana to be found? Seeing that the Vedic ācāra has fallen into practical desuetude, we can find it nowhere but in the Āgamas and in the Purāṇas, which are replete with tantric rituals. The Tantras of these Āgamas, therefore, contain both a practical exposition of spiritual doctrine and the means by which the truth it teaches may be realized. Their authority does not depend, as Western writers and some of their Eastern followers suppose, on the date when they were revealed, but on the question whether siddhi is gained thereby. This too is the proof of Ayurveda; the test of medicine is that it cures. If siddhi is not obtained, the fact "it is written, Shiva uvāca, Shiva speaks," or the like, counts for nothing. The Agama, therefore, is a practical exposition and application of doctrine, varying according to its different schools.

The latest tendency in modern Western philosophy is to rest upon intuition, as it was formerly the tendency to glorify dialectic. Intuition has, however, to be led into higher and higher possibilities by means of sadana. This term means work or practice, which in its result is the gradual unfolding of the spirit's vast latent magazine of power (śakti), enjoyment, and vision, which everyone possesses in himself. The philosophy of the Agama is, as a friend and collaborator of mine, Professor Prāṇanātha Mūpa, very well put it, a practical philosophy, adding that what the intellectual world wants today is this sort of philosophy, a philosophy which not merely argues but experiments. The form which sadana takes is a secondary matter; one goal may be reached by many paths. What is the path in any particular case depends on considerations of personal capacity and temperament, race and faith. For the Hindu, there is the Āgama, which contains forms of discipline which his race has evolved and are therefore primarily suitable for him. This is not to say that these forms are unalterable or acceptable to all. Others will adopt other forms of sadana suitable to them. Thus, amongst Christians, the Catholic Church prescribes a full and powerful sadana in its sacraments, saṁsāra, and worship (pūjā, upāsanā, meditation, dhyāna, rosary, japa, and the like). But any system to be fruitful must experiment to gain experience.

The significance of the Tantra śāstra lies in this, that it claims to afford a means available to all, of whatever cast and of either sex, whereby the truths taught may be practically realized. The Tantras, both in India and Tibet, are the expression of principles which are of universal application. The mere statement of religious truths avails not; what is necessary for all is a practical method of realization. This too the occultist needs. Further, the ordinary run of mankind can neither apprehend nor do they derive satisfaction from mere metaphysical concepts. They accept them only when presented in personal form. They care not for śūnyatā, the void, nor sac-cid-ānanda in the sense of mere consciousness being bliss. They appeal to personal Bodhisattvas, Buddhas, Śiva, Viṣṇu, Devī, who will hear their prayer and grant them aid. Next, they cannot stand by themselves; they need the counsel and guidance of priest and guru, and the fortifying virtues of the sacraments. They need a definite picture of their object of worship, such as is detailed in the dhyāna of the devatās, an image, a yantra, a mandala, and so forth, a developed ritual and pictorial religion. This is not to say that they are wrong. These natural tendencies, however, become accentuated in course of time to a point where superstition, mechanical devotion, and life formalism and other abuses are produced. There then takes place what is called a reform in the direction of a more spiritual religion. This too is accentuated to the point of barrenness; religion becomes sterile to produce practical result, and ritual and pictorial religion recurs. So Buddhism, which in its origin has been represented to be a reaction against excessive and barren ritualism, could not rest with a mere statement of the Noble Truths and the Eight-fold Path. Something practical was needed. The Mahayana, the Tāntra, the Chen-re-zig, was produced. Nāgārjuna in the 2nd century A.D. is said to have promulgated ideas to be found in the Tantras. In order to realize the desired end, use was made of all the powers of man, physical and mental. Theistic notions, as also yoga, came again to the fore in the Yoga-cārya and other Buddhist systems. The worship of images and an elaborate ritual was introduced. The worship of the Śāktas spread. The Mantrayāna and Vajrayāna found acceptance, with what an English writer, the Buddhism of Tibet by L. Waddell, describes in the usual style as its "silly mumbo-jumbo of unmeaning jargon and gibberish," the latter being said to be the most depraved form of Buddhist doctrine. So-called Tantric Buddhism became thus fully developed. A Tantric reformer, in the person of Tsong-kha-pa, arose, who codified the Tantras in his work, Lam-rim chen-mo. The Kagyur contains, in one of its sections, the Tantras, Rūḍha, containing ritual worship of the Divine Mothers, theology, astrology, and natural science, as do their Indian counterparts. These are of four classes: the Kriya, Carya, Yoga, Anuttara Tantras; the latter comprising Mahā-anuttara and Ati-yoga Tantras. The Tangyur similarly contains many volumes of Tantras, Rūḍha.

Then, at length, Buddhism was driven from out of India. Brahmanism and its rituals survived and increased until, both in our day and the nearer past, we see in the so-called reformed sects a movement towards what is claimed to be a more spiritual religion. Throughout the ages, the same movements of action and reaction manifest. What is right here lies in the middle course. Some practical method and ritual is necessary if religion is not to be barren of result. The nature of the method and ritual will vary according to the capacity and development of men. On the other hand, the crooked influence of time tends to overlay the essential spiritual truths with unintelligent and dead formalism. The Tantra śāstra stands for a principle of high value, though, like other things admittedly good, it is capable of, and has suffered, abuse. An important point in this connection should be noted: in Europe, we see extreme Puritan reaction, with the result that the religious movements which embody them become one-sided and without provision for ordinary human needs. Brahmanism has ever been all-inclusive, producing a sadana of varying kinds, material and mental, for the different stages of spiritual advancement, and exempting from further ritual those for whom, by reason of their attainment, it is no longer necessary.

Chapter 4. Tantra Śāstra and Veda.

In writing this chapter, I have in mind the dispute which some have raised upon the question whether the Āgamas, or some of them, are Vedic or non-Vedic. I do not here deal with the nature and schools of Tantra or Agama, nor with their historical origin. Something has been said on these points in the introductions to the English translations of Pandit Shiva Chandra Vidyārṇava's Tantra Tattva. I have also dealt with this subject in the two chapters, "What are the Tantras and their Significance?" and "Śakti and Śākta." I wish to avoid repetitions, except so far as is absolutely necessary for the elucidation of the particular subject in hand. On the disputed question whether the Āgamas are Vedic or non-Vedic, I desire to point out that an answer cannot be given unless we keep apart two distinct matters, viz.: one, what was the origin of the Āgamas, and two, what they are now. I am not here, however, dealing with the first, or historical, question, but with the second. So far as the Śākta Āgama is concerned, let us assume, for the sake of argument, that to take a specific example, worship of Kāli and other Devīs by the Śāktas indicates the existence of non-Aryan elements in their Āgama. The question of real importance here, as always, is not as to what were the facts in remote past ages, but what they are now. The answer then is: let it be as you will regarding the origin of the Śākta Āgama, but at present, Śākta worship is an integral part of the Hinduism, and as such admits the authority of Veda, accepting, as later explained, every other belief held by the general body of the Hindu people.

In a recent prosecution under sections 292, 293 of the Indian Penal Code against an accused who had published a Tantra, but who was rightly acquitted, an Indian Deputy Magistrate, who had advised the prosecution and who claimed to be an orthodox Hindu, stated: "I am informed in the witness box that he could not define what the Tantra śāstra was, or state whether it was a Hindu scripture of the Kali age, or whether a well-known particular śāstra shown to him was one of the Tantras." Such ignorance is typical of many at the present time, and is a legacy from a vanishing age. How is it that a śāstra which has had its followers throughout India, from the Himalayas, the abode of Śiva and of Pārvatī Devī, to Cape Comorin (a corruption of Kumārī Devī), which ruled for centuries, so that we may speak of a Tantric epoch, which even today governs the household and temple ritual of every Hindu, how is it that such a śāstra has fallen into complete neglect and disrepute amongst the larger body of the English-educated community? I remember a time when mention of the śāstra was only made (I speak, of course, of the same class) with bated breath, and when anyone who concerned himself therewith became thereby liable to the charge of giving lentia sway to drink and women.

The answer is both a general and particular one. In the first place, the English-educated people of this country were formerly almost exclusively, and later to a considerable extent, under the sway of their English educators. In fact, they were, in a sense, their creation. They were, and some of them still are, the Manosutra of the English. For them, what was English and Western was the mode. Hindu religion, philosophy, and art were only, it was supposed, for the so-called uneducated women and peasants, and for native pandits, who, though learned in their feudal way, had not received the illuminating advantages of a Western training. In my own time, an objection was, I am informed, taken by Indian Fellows of the Calcutta University to the appointment of the learned Pandit Candrakanta Tarkālaṅkāra to a chair of Indian philosophy on the ground that he was a "mere native Pandit." In this case, English Fellows and the then Vice-Chancellor opposed this absurd and snobbish objection. When the authority of the English teachers was at its highest, what they taught was law, even though their judgments were, in respect of Indian subjects, of which they had but a scant and imperfect knowledge, defective. If they said, with or in anticipation of one professor, that the Vedas were the "babbling of a child," humanity and the Brahmanas the "dril of madmen," or with another that the thought of the Upaniṣads was so low that it could not be correctly rendered in the high English language; that in treating of Indian philosophy, a writer has to deal with thoughts of a lower order than the thoughts of the everyday life of Europe; that Śrauta was mere priestly tyranny; the Purāṇas, idol legend; and the Tantras, mere wickedness and debauchery; that Hindu philosophy was, to borrow another English professor's language concerning the Samkhya, "with all its folly and fanaticism, little better than a chaotic impertinence"; and that Yoga was, according to the same man of learning, the "fanatical vagaries of theocracy"; that Indian ritual was nothing but superstition, mumbo-jumbo, and idolatry; and Indian art, inelegant, monstrous, and grotesque—all this was with readiness accepted as high learning and wisdom, with perhaps here and there an occasional faint and even apologetic demur. I recollect in this connection a rather halting and shamefaced protest by the late Rajendra Lala Mitra. I do not say that none of these, or other adverse criticisms, had any ground whatever. There has been imperfection, folly, superstition, wickedness here, as elsewhere. There has been much of it, for example, in the countries whence these critics of India came. It is, however, obvious that such criticisms are so excessive as to be absurd. Even when giving an account of Eastern thought, the Western is apt to take up a superior attitude because he believes himself to be superior. The Bishop of Durham very clearly reveals this sense of superiority when, after stating that the duty of the Christian missionary was to substitute for the sterile theism of Islam and the shadowy vagueness of Hindu philosophy a belief in a living and speaking God, he goes on to point out that "our very advantages by way of the consciousness of social and intellectual superiority with which we are filled, and the national force which sets us as conquerors where we come as evangelists, constitute a danger in the mission field." It is this notion of superiority also which prevents a right understanding and which, notwithstanding the facts, insists on charges which, if established, would maintain the reputation for inferiority of the colored races. It is this reiterated claim to superiority that has hypnotized many persons amongst Eastern races into the belief that the European is, amongst other things, always a safe and learned critic, even of their own beliefs and practices.

Raja Ram Mohan Roy was the first to take up the cause of his faith, divorcing it from the superstitious accretions which gather around all religions in the course of the ages. The same defense was made in recent times by that man of upstanding courage, Swami Vivekananda. Foreign criticism on Indian religion now tends in some quarters to greater comprehension. I say "in some quarters," for even in quite recent years, English books have been published which would be amazing, were one not aware of the deep ignorance and prejudice which exist on the subject. In one of these books, the Hindu religion is described as "a mixture of nightmare, nonsense, and time-wasting rubbish, fulfilling no useful purpose whatever, only adding to the general burden of existence borne by humanity in its struggle for existence." In another, it is said to be "a weltering chaos of terror, darkness, and uncertainty. It is a religion without the apprehension of a moral evolution, without definite commandments, without a religious sanction in the sphere of morals, without a moral code, and without a God. Such so-called God as there is being a mixture of beaches, Don Juan, and dictatorial." It is there further described as "the most material and childishly superstitious animalism that ever masqueraded as idealism, not another path to God, but a pit of abomination, as far set from God as the mind of man can go, staggering the brain of a rational man, filling his mind with wild contempt for his species, and which has only endured because it has failed, except for the purpose of fanatical polemic." One would assume that the endurance of a faith was in some measure the justification of it. It is still more wonderful to learn from this work that "out of this weltering chaos of all that is ignominious, immoral, and crassly superstitious come forth men who, in the words of the author, 'standing at prayer, startle you by their likeness to the pictures of Christ—eyes large, luminous, and tranquil, the whole face exquisite with meekness and majestic with spirit.' One marvels how these perfect men arise from such a worthless and indeed putrescent source." This absurd picture was highly colored in a journalistic spirit and with a purpose.

In other cases, faulty criticism is due to supercilious ignorance. As another writer says (the italics are mine): "For an Englishman to get a plain statement of what Brahmanism really means is far from easy. The only wonder is that people who have to live on 9 pence a week, who marry when they are 10 years old, are prevented by past life from rising out of what is often, if not always, a degraded state, have any religion at all." As the Bishop of Peterborough has recently said: "It is difficult for some to estimate worth in any other terms than GSD." It is to be hoped that all such snobbish materialism will be hindered from entrance into this country. These quotations reveal the depths of ignorance and prejudice which still exist. As we are, however, aware, all English criticism is not as ignorant and prejudiced as these, even though it be often marred by essential error. On the contrary, there are an increasing number who appreciate and adopt, or appreciate if they cannot accept, Indian beliefs. Further than this, Eastern thought is having a marked influence on that of the West, though it is not often acknowledged. Many have still the notion that they have nothing to learn in any domain from this hemisphere. After all, what anyone else says should not affect the independence of our own judgment. Let others say what they will; we should ourselves determine matters which concern us. The Indian people will do so when they free themselves from that hypnotic magic which makes them often place blind reliance on the authority of foreigners, who, even when claiming to be scholars, are not always free from bias, religious or racial. Such counsel, though by no means unnecessary today, is happily becoming less needed than in the past. There are, however, still many Indians, particularly those of my own generation, whose English gurus and their teaching have made them captives. Their mind has been so dominated and molded to a Western manner of thinking—philosophical, religious, artistic, social, and political—that they have scarcely any greater capacity to appreciate their own cultural heritage than their teachers. Be that capacity in any particular case more or less, some of them care nothing for their śāstra; others do not understand it. The class of whom I speak are, in fact, as I have said, the Manosutra of the English. In a strict sense of the term, the Indian who has lost his Indian soul must regain it if he would retain that independence in his thought and in the ordering of his life which is the mark of a man—that is, of one who seeks svārājya, city. How can an imitator be on the same level as his original? Rather, he must sit as a śiṣya at the latter's feet. Whilst we can all learn something from one another, yet some in this land have yet to learn that their cultural inheritance, with all its defects (and none is without such), is yet a noble one, an equal in rank, to say the least, with those great past civilizations which have molded the life and thought of the West. All this has been admitted by Indians who have discernment. Such value as my own remarks possess is due to the fact that I can see and judge from without, as an outsider, though I will admit, in one sense, an interested observer—interested because I have at heart Indian welfare, and that of all others, which, as the world now stands, is bound up with it.

As regards the Tantra śāstra in particular, greater ignorance prevailed and still exists. Its Vāmācāra practice, however, seemed so peculiar, and its abuses were so talked of, that they captured attention to the exclusion of everything else. The more particularly that this and the rest of the śāstra is hard to understand, whilst the śāstra provides by its ācāras for all types, from the lowest to the most advanced. Its essential concepts, under whatever aspect they are manifested and into whatever pattern they are woven, are, as Professor G. Tucci says of the Buddhist Tantra, of a metaphysical and subtle character. Indeed, it is largely because of the subtlety of its principles, together with the difficulties which attend ritual exposition, that the study of the Tantras, notwithstanding the comparative simplicity of their Sanskrit, has been hitherto neglected by Western scholars. Possibly it was thought that the practices mentioned rendered any study of a system in which they occurred unnecessary. There was, and still is, some ground for the adverse criticism which has been passed on it. Nevertheless, it was not a just appreciation of the śāstra as a whole, nor even an accurate judgment in respect of the particular ritual thus singled out for condemnation. Let those condemn this śāstra who will; that is their affair, but let them first study and understand it. I have dealt with the subject of the Tantras in several papers. It is only necessary here to say that the Tantra, as it is called, was wrongly considered to be synonymous with the Śākta Tantras; that in respect of the latter, the whole attention was given to the vakāra ritual and to magic (ṣaṭkarma); that this ritual, whatever may in truth be said against it, was not understood; that it was completely ignored; that the Tantras contained a remarkable philosophic presentment of religious teaching, profoundly applied in a ritual of psychological worth; and that the śāstras were also a repertory of the alchemy, medicine, law, religion, art, and so forth, of their time. It was sufficient to mention the word "Tantra," and there was supposed to be the end of the matter. I have often been asked why I had undertaken the study of the Tantra śāstra, and in some English (as opposed to Continental) quarters, it has been suggested that my time and labor might be more worthily employed. One answer is this: following the track of unmeasured abuse, I have always found something good. The present case is no exception. I protest, and have always protested, against unjust aspersions upon the civilization of India and its peoples. If there be what is blameworthy, accuracy requires that criticism should be reduced to its true proportions. Having been all my life a student of the world's religions and philosophies, I entered upon a particular study of this śāstra to discover for myself what it taught and whether it was, as represented, a complete reversal of all other Hindu teaching with which I was acquainted, for it was said to be the cultivation or practice of gluttony, lust, and malevolence, ferocity, lust, and mumbo-jumbo, as Brian Hodgson called it, which I knew the Indian śāstra, like all the other religious scriptures of the world, strictly forbids. I found that the śāstra was of high importance in the history of Indian religion. The Tantra śāstra, or Agama, is not, as some seem to

Suppose a petty shastra of no account, one and an unimportant sample of the multitudinous manifestations of religion in a country which swarms with every form of religious sect. It is, on the contrary, with Veda, Smriti, and Purana, one of the foremost important shastras in India, governing in various degrees and ways the temple and household ritual of the whole of India today and for centuries past.

Those who are so strenuously averse to it, by that very fact, recognize and fear its influence. From a historical point of view alone, it is worthy of study as an important part part of Indian culture. Whatever be its intrinsic worth, history cannot be written if we exclude from it what we do not personally like. As Terren grandly said, "We are men, and nothing which man has done is alien to us." There are some things in some of the Tantras and a spirit which they manifest, of which their student may not personally approve. But the cause of history is not to be influenced by personal predilections. It is so influenced, in fact.

There are some who have found in the shastra a useful weapon of attack against Indian religion and its tendencies. Should one speak of the heights which Indian spiritual experience has reached, one might be told that the infamous depths to which it had descended in Tantra shastra, the Pushimara, the Vava Sahaja, and so forth, were more certainly established. Did one praise the high morality to be found in Indian shastra, it might be admitted that India was not altogether destitute of the light of goodness, but it might be asked, "What of the darkness of the Tantra?" and so on and so forth.

Let us then grapple with, and not elude, the objection. There was, of course, something in all this, but such objectors and others had not the will, even if they had the capacity, to understand to give a true presentment of the teachings of the shastra. But the interests of fairness require both. Over and above the fact that the shastra is an historical fact, it possesses in some respects an intrinsic value which justifies its study.

Thus, it is the storehouse of Indian occultism. This occult side of the Tantras is of scientific importance, the more particularly having regard to the present revived interest in occultist study in the West. New Thought, as it is called, and kindred movements are a form of Mantra Vidya. Vasikaran is hypnotism, fascination. There is spiritualism and powers in the Tantras, and so forth.

For myself, however, the philosophical and religious aspect of the scripture is more important still. The main question for the generality of men is not powers. Indeed, the study of occultism and its practice has its dangers, and the pursuit of these powers is considered an obstacle to the attainment of that true siddhi which is the end of every shastra. A subject of greater interest and value is the remarkable presentation of Vedantic knowledge which the Shakta Tantra in particular gives. I never properly understood the Vedanta until after I had studied the Tantras, as also the ritual by which it is sought to gain realization. The importance of the Shakta Tantra may be summed up by the statement that it is a Sadhana shastra of Advaita.

I will develop this last matter in a future paper. I will only say now that the main question of the day everywhere is how to realize practically the truths of religion, whatever they be. This applies to all, whether Hindu, Muhammadan, or Christian. Mere philosophical speculation and talk will avail nothing beyond a clarification of intellect, but that we all know is not enough. It is not what we speculate about, but what we are, which counts. The fundamental question is how to realize sakshatkara. Religious teaching, this is the fruit of sadhana alone, whether the form of that sadhana be Christian, Hindu, Muhammadan, Buddhist, or what else. The chief sadhana shastra for the orthodox Hindu is the Tantra shastra or Agama in its varying schools. In this fact lies its chief significance and, for Hindus, its practical importance. This, and the Advaita Vedanta on which the Shakta ritual rests, is in my opinion the main reason why Shakta Darana or doctrine is worthy of study.

The opinion which I had formed of the shastra has been corroborated by several to whom I had introduced the matter. I should like to quote here the last letter I had only a month ago from an Indian friend, both Sanskritist and philosopher, a combination too rare. He says, "They (the Tantras) have really thrown before me a flood of new light, so much so that I really feel as if I have discovered a new world. Much of the mist and haziness has now been cleared away, and I find in the Tantras not only a great and subtle philosophy, but many of the missing links in the development of the different systems of Hindu philosophy which I could not discover before, but which I have been seeking for for some years past."

These statements might perhaps lead some to think that the shastra teaches something entirely that is, in every respect, new as regards fundamental doctrines. The Tantra shastra (for convenience, I confine myself to the Shakta form) teaches much which is to be found in the Advaita of Vedanta. Therefore, those who think that they will find in the shastra some fundamental truths concerning the world which are entirely new will be disillusioned. The observation does not apply to some doctrinal teaching, presentment, methods, and details to which, doubtless, my friend's letter referred.

He who has truly understood Indian shastra as a whole will recognize, under variety of form and degree of spiritual advancement, the same substance by way of doctrine. Whilst the Shakta Tantra recognizes, with the four Vedas, the Agamas and Nigamas, it is now based, as are all other truly Indian shastras, on Veda. Veda, in the sense of knowledge, is ultimately spiritual experience, namely, sight which Brahman is, and in the one, partless, infinite ocean of which the world as a limited stress in consciousness arises. So it is said of the Devi in the commentary on the Trishati, "Adanta Mahavakya, Jiva sakshatkara rupa Brahma Vidya." She is Brahman knowledge, Brahma Vidya, in the form of direct realization produced by the Vedantic great saying (Mahavakya), that is, "Tatwam asi" (that thou art) and all kindred sayings, "Soham" (he I am), "Brahmasmi" (I am Brahman), and so forth. In other words, self-knowledge is self-luminous and fundamental, and the basis of all other knowledge. Owing to its transcendency, it is beyond both proof and proof. It is self-realized (svanubhava). But Shruti is the source from which this knowledge arises, as Samkara says, by removing, as also to some extent reason may do, false notions concerning it. It reveals by removing the superincumbent mass of human error.

Again, Veda, in a primary sense, is the world as idea in the cosmic mind of the creating Brahman, and includes all forms of knowledge. Thus, it is eternal, arising with and as the samsaras at the beginning of every creation. This is the Vedamurti Brahman. Veda, in the secondary sense, is the various partial revelations relating to Tattva, Brahman, or God, and Dharma, morality, made at different times and places to the several Rishis, which are embodied in the four Vedas: Rig, Yajur, Sama, and Atharva. Veda is not coextensive, therefore, with the four Vedas, but are these, even if they be regarded as the earliest, the only, to use an English term, Revelations. Revelation (Akashavani) never ceases. When and wherever there is a true Rishi or Seer, there is revelation, and in this sense, the Tantra shastra or Agama claims to be a revelation. The Shabda Brahma Murti is Nigama Shastra. Maya, it being said that Agama is the Paramatma of that Murti. The four Vedas with their Angas are its Jivatma. The six philosophies, its Indriyas. The Puranas and Upapuranas, its gross body. Smriti, its hands and other limbs, and all other shastras are the hairs of its body. In the heart lotus are the 50 Matrikas. In the pericarp are the Agamas, glittering like millions of suns and moons, which are svadaramaya, brahma maya, sarvavida, and murdhamana. These were revealed to the Rishis. In fact, all shastras are said to constitute one great, many-million collection (Shatakoti Samhita), each being particular manifestations to man of the one essential Veda.

From this follows the belief that they do not contradict, but are in agreement with one another, for truth is one, whatever be the degree in which it is received or the form in which the Seers (Rishis) promulgated it to those whose spiritual sight has not strength enough to discern it directly and for themselves. But how, according to Indian notions, can that which is put forward as a revelation be shown to be such? The answer is that of Ayurveda: a medicine is a good one if it cures. In the same way, a shastra is truly such if the siddhi which it claims to give is gained as the fruit of the practice of its injunctions, according to the competency and under the conditions prescribed. The principle is a practical and widely adopted one: the tree must be judged by its fruit. This principle may, if applied to the general life of today, lead to an adverse judgment on some Tantric practices. If so, let it be. It is, however, an error to suppose that even such practices as have been condemned claim to rest on any other basis than Veda. It is, by the learned in Tantra shastra, said to be ignorance (avidya) to see a difference between Agama and Veda.

Ignorant notions prevail on the subject of the relation of the Tantras to Veda and the Vedas. I read some years ago in a Bengali book by a Brahmo author that the difference was that between hell and heaven. Now, on what is such a condemnatory comparison based? It is safe to challenge production of the proof of such an assertion. Let us examine what the Shakta Tantra, to which allusion was made, teaches. In the first place, hell recognizes heaven, for the Shakta Tantra, as I have said, acknowledges the authority of Veda. All Indian shastras do. If they did not, they would not be Indian shastra. The passages on this point are so numerous and the point itself is so plain that I will only cite a few.

The Kularnava Tantra says that Kularnava is based on and inspired by the truth of Veda: "Tasmad Vedatmakam shastram Viddhi Katmakam priyam." In the same place, Shiva cites passages from Shruti in support of his doctrine. The Prapanchasara and other Tantras, seed of Vaidika Mahavakya and mantras, and as mantras are part of Veda, therefore. The Mahanirvana Tantra says that Tantra is part of Veda, and Kakara is named the fifth ashrama, that is, it follows all others. Matahata Tantra says that the disciple must be pure of soul (chaitma) and a knower of Veda. He who is devoid of Vaidika Kriya, Vaca, Vivara is disqualified. Gandhara Tantra says that the Tantric sadhaka must be a believer in Veda (astika), ever attached to Brahman, ever speaking of Brahman, living in Brahman, and taking shelter with Brahman, which, by the way, is a queer demand to make of those the supposed object of whose rites is mere debauchery. The Kularnava says that there is no knowledge higher than that of Veda, and no doctrine equal to Kala. Here a distinction is drawn between Veda, which is Vidya, and the Kala teacher, which he calls Darana. See also Mahanirvana Tantra. In Mahanirvana Tantra, the mantra "Om Saham Brahma" is given, and in the Prapanchasara, this, what it calls the secret of the Vedas, is explained.

That the Shakta Tantra claims to be based on Veda admits of no doubt. In fact, Kalidasa, the celebrated commentator on Manu, says that Shruti is of two kinds: Vaidika and Tantric. Vaidika Tantras Kavyam, Deiva Shruti Kti. It is, of course, the fact that different sects bandy words upon the point whether they, in fact, truly interpret Shruti and follow practice conformable to it. Statements are made by opposing schools that certain shastras are contrary to Shruti, even though they profess to be based thereon. So a citation by Bhaskaracharya in the commentary of the Lalita Sahasra speaks of some Tantras as opposed to Veda (Veda virani). The Vayu Samhita says Shiva Agama is twofold: that which is based on Shruti and that which is not. The former is composed of the essence of Shruti. Shruti is svatantra and itara. Vante par. 19. Shopi. [Music] Duay swaro mat. So again, the Bhagavata or Pancaratra Agama has been said to be non-Vaidika. This matter has been discussed by Samkara and Ramanuja, following Yamunacharya. We must, in all cases, distinguish between what a school says of itself and what others say of it. In Christianity, both Catholicism and Protestantism claim to be based on the Bible, and each alleges that the other is a wrong interpretation of it. Each again of the numerous Protestant sects says the same thing of the others.

But is Shakta Tantra contrary to Veda? In fact, let us shortly survey the main points in its doctrine. It teaches that Paramatma, Nirguna Shiva, is Sat-Chit-Ananda. Samkara says, "Shiva is the impart Supreme Brahman, the all-knowing (sarvajna), creator of all. He is the stainless one and the Lord of all. He is one without a second (Advaita). He is light itself. He changes not and is without beginning or end. He is attributeless and above the highest. He is Sat-Chit-Ananda. Brahman is Sat-Chit-Ananda, eternal (nitya), changeless (vikara), partless (nishkala), untouched by Maya (Nirmala), attributeless (Nirguna), formless (arupa), imperishable (akshara), all-spreading like space (vyomasanba), self-illuminating (svayamjyoti), reality (tattva) which is beyond mind and speech and is to be approached through spiritual feeling alone (Banam)." In his aspect as the Lord (Ishvara) of all, he is the all-knower (sarvajna), Lord of all, whose body is pure Sattva (Shuddha Sattvamaya). Maya, the soul of the universe (Vishvatma). Such definitions simply reaffirm the teaching of Veda. Brahman is that which pervades without limit the universe, as oil the sesamum seed. This Brahman has two-fold aspect as Parabrahman (Nirguna, Nishkala) and Saguna Brahman (Saguna, Sakala, Samana).

A highly interesting Tantra says, "Chiti," that Kubjika is of threefold aspect, namely, Nishkala when she is "Kala Vakravakra," and Sakala when called "Paramayi." So too is Kali, who as the first is "Eka Vakravakra Mahapi," Advaita, and as the second, "Dasra." So the Kularnava says, "Shabda Brahma Parah Brahmano Vedyam Ukam." The same Tantra says that Sadashiva is without the bonds of Maya, and Jiva is with them, upon which the author of the Pranatosini, citing this passage, says, "Thus the identity of Jiva and Shiva is shown." (Jiva-Shiva-aikyam). The Shakta Tantra is thus Advaita, for it proclaims that Paramatma and Jivatma are one. So it affirms the grand words (Mahavakya) of Veda, "Tatwam asi," "Soham," "Brahmasmi." Pran Kasara, too, identifying Aham with Kundali and Hamsa, and then with "Soham," "Yasuka," "Sohana," "Pujaya," the mantra "All this is surely Brahman" (Sarvam Brahma). Is according to the Mahanirvana the end and aim of Tantrika Kakara, the realization of which, saying the Prapanchasara Tantra, describes as the fifth or supreme state. For the identity of Jivatma and Paramatma is liberation, which the Vedanta Sara defines to be "Jiva Brahman noram." K refers to the Advaita of which Shiva speaks. It is useless to multiply quotations on this point, of which there is no end. In fact, that particular form of worship which has earned the Shakta Tantra's ill fame claims to be a practical application of Advaita. The Samana Tantra gives high praise to the philosopher Samkara, saying that he was an incarnation of Shiva for the destruction of Buddhism. Kularnava is said to properly follow a full knowledge of Vedantic doctrine. Shiva, in the Kularnava, says, "Some desire dualism (Dva), others non-dualism (Advaita), but my truth is beyond both (Dva-Advaita)." Vedanta is the whole day and life of the Shakta sadhaka. On waking at dawn, Brahmamuhurta, he sits on his bed and meditates: "I am the Devi and none other. I am Brahman, who is beyond all grief. I am a form of Sachidananda, whose true nature is eternal liberation." [Music] Ahan. At noon again, seated in Padmasana at the time of Bhasi, he meditates on the dissolution of the Tattvas in Paramatma, seeing no difference between Paramatma and Jivatma, he affirms, "Soham, I am She." Again, in the evening, after ritual duties, he affirms himself to be the "Akhilatma and Sachidananda," and having so thought, he sleeps. Similarly, I may here interpose: in the Buddhist Tantra, the sadhaka, on rising, in the state of Dehadhyasa, imagines that the double drums are sounding in the heavens, proclaiming the mantras of the 24 Buddhas, Dakodara, and regards all things around him as constituting the mandala of himself as Buddha Vajrasattva. When about to sleep, he again imagines his body to be that of Buddha Vajrasattva, and then merges himself into the tranquil state of the Void (Shunyata). Gandhara Tantra says, "Having saluted the Guru as directed and thought 'Soham,' the wise sadhaka, the performer of the rite, should ponder the unity of Jiva and Brahman." Gur. [Music] Vias. Brahma Krita Tantra says, "Having meditated in this way, a sadhaka should worship Devi as his own Atma, thinking, 'I am Brahman.'" Kubjika Tantra says, "Devi is called Kubjika because she is Kundali. A sadhaka should meditate on his own self as one and the same with her." "Taham Atmanam utam Vayat," and so on.

The cardinal doctrine of these Shakta Tantras is that of Shakti, whether in its svarupa (that is, as it is in itself as Srinī, the particle of Paramatma) or as Maya and Priti Shakti. As the Kubjika Tantra says, "She is consciousness (Chaitanya rupini) and bliss (Ananda rupini). She is at the same time support of Guna and composed of the Gunas (Gunamayi)." Maya is, however, explained from the standpoint of sadhana, the Tantra shastra being a sadhana shastra, and not according to the Mayavada, that is, transcendental standpoint of Samkara. What is there in the great Davi Sukta of the Rigveda which the Shakta Tantra does not teach? The Rishi of this revelation was a woman, the daughter of Rishi Ambhrina. It was fitting that a woman should proclaim the Divine motherhood. Her hymn says, "I am the Sovereign Queen, the treasury of all treasures, the chief of all objects of worship, whose all-pervading self all devatas manifest, whose birthplace is in the midst of the causal waters, who breathing forth gives form to all created worlds and yet extends beyond them. So vast am I in greatness."

It is useless to cite quotations to show that the Shakta Tantra accepts the doctrine of Karma, which, as the Kularnava says, "Jiva cannot give up until he renounces the fruit of it." An infinite number of universes and their transitoriness, the plurality of worlds, heaven and hell, the seven lokas, the devatas and devas, who, as the Kulakudamani Nigama says, are but parts of the great Shakti, being Advaita. Moksha, the state of liberation, and so forth, is Paramatma. It accepts Smriti and Puranas. The Mahanirvana and other Tantras saying that they are the governing shastras of the Treta and Dvapara ages respectively, as Tantra is that of the Kali Yuga. So the Tara Pradipa says that in the Kali Yuga, the Tantric and not the Vaidika Dharma is to be followed. It is said that in Satya Yuga, Veda was undivided; in Dvapara, Krishna Dvaipayana separated it into four parts. In Satya, Vaidika Upasana was Pradhana, that is, prevailed. Sadhakas worshipping Indra for wealth, children, and the like, though Nishara Rishis adored the Sarvasaktiman Deva. This is Advaita. In Treta, worship according to Smriti prevailed. It was then that Vashistha is said to have done sadana of Brahma Vidya according to Shankara, though in the Dvapara, there was both Smriti and Purana. Rites were generally performed according to the Puranas. There was also then, as always, worshippers of the Para Shakti, Mahavidya. At the end of Dvapara and beginning of the Kali age, the Tantra shastra was taught to men. Then the 10 Samskaras, Shrauta and Antyeshti, were, as they are now, performed according to the Vaidika Dharma. Ashra Makara, according to Diaga and other Smriti texts. Vratas, according to Purana. Dhyana and Upasana of Brahman with Shakti and various kinds of Yoga Sadhana, according to the Agama, which is divided into three parts: Tantra Sadhana, Yamala, Raghuna, and Damara, Tamuna. There were 64 Tantras for each of the three divisions: Ashva, Raksha, Vishnu, Kanta. Such is the Tantric tradition concerning the ages and their appropriate scriptures. Whether this tradition has any historical basis still awaits inquiry, which is rendered difficult by the fact that many Tantras have been lost and others destroyed by those inimical to them. It is sufficient for my purpose to merely state what is the belief, that purpose being to show that the Tantra shastra recognizes and claims not to be in conflict with Veda or any other recognized shastra. It accepts the six philosophies (Darana), which Shiva says are the six limbs of Kula and parts of his body, saying that "he who severs them severs his limbs." The meaning of this is that the six philosophies and the six minds, as all else, are parts of his body. It accepts the Shabda doctrine of Mimamsa, subject to certain modifications to meet its doctrine of Shakti. It, in common with the Shiva Tantra, accepts the doctrine of the 36 Tattvas and Shadad. This is an elaboration in detail which explains the origin of the Purusha and Prakriti Tattvas of the Samkhya. These are shown to be twin facets of the one, and the development of Shakti into Purusha, Prakriti Tattva is shown. These Tattvas include the ordinary 24 Prakriti with its Gunas, to Prakriti. It accepts the doctrine of three bodies: causal, subtle, gross, and the three states: Jagrat, Swapna, Sushupti, in their individual and collective aspects. It follows the mode of evolution (parinama) of Samkhya, in so far as the development of Jiva is concerned, as also an abhasa in the nature of vivara from fire to fire in the pure creation. Its exposition of the body includes the five pranas, the seven dhatus, the doshas: Vata, Pitta, Kapha, and so forth. On the ritual side, it contains the commonly accepted ritual of present-day Hinduism: Mantra, Yantra, Pratima, Linga, Shalagrama, Japa, Puja, Stotra, Kavacha, Dhyana, and so forth, as well as the Vaidika rites, which are the 10 Samskaras, Homa, and the like. Most of the commonly accepted ritual of the day is Tantric. It accepts Yoga in all its forms: Mantra, Hatha, Laya, Chana, and is in particular distinguished by its practice of Laya or Kundalini Yoga and other Hatha processes. Therefore, not only is the authority of the Veda acknowledged along with the Agamas, Nigamas, and Tantras, but there is not a single doctrine or practice amongst those hitherto mentioned which is either not generally held or which has not the adherence of large, large numbers of Indian worshippers. It accepts all the notions common to Hinduism as a whole, nor is there a single doctrine previously mentioned which is contrary to Veda, that is, on the assumption of the truth of Advaita. For, of course, it is open to dualists and Vishishtadvaitins to say that its monistic interpretation of Vedanta is not a true exposition of Vaidic truth. No Shakta will, however, say that. Subject to this, I do not know of anything which it omits and should have included, or states contrary to the tenor of Vaidic doctrine. If there be anything, I shall be obliged, as a student of the shastra, to anyone who will call my attention to it.

The shastra has not, therefore, up to this point, shown itself as a hell in opposition to the Vaidic heaven. But it may be said that I have omitted the main thing which gives it its bad and unvi character, namely, the ill-famed Panchatattva, or worship with meat, wine, fish, grain, and woman. I have also omitted the magic to be found in some of the shastras. The latter may be first shortly dealt with. Magic is not peculiar to the Tantras; it is to be found in plenty in the Atharva Veda. In fact, the definition of Abhiachara is the karma described in the Tantras and Atharva. Abhiachara is magical process with intent to destroy or injure. It is Himsakarma, or act injurious to others. There is nothing anti-Vaidic, then, in magic. I may, however, here also point out that there is nothing wrong in magic (Shatkarma) per se. As with so many other things, it is the use or abuse of it which makes it right or wrong. If a man kills by Marana Karma a rival in his business to get rid of competition and to succeed to his client's custom, he commits a very grave sin, one of the most grievous of sins. Suppose, however, that a man saw a tiger stalking a child, or a dacoit about to slay it for its golden ornament, his killing of the tiger or dacoit would, if necessary for the safety of the child, be a justifiable act. Magic is, however, likely to be abused, and has, in fact, been abused by some of the Tantrics. I think this is the most serious charge established against them, for evil magic, which proceeds from malevolence, is a greater crime than any abuse of natural appetite. But in this, as in other matters, we must distinguish between what the shastra says and the practices of its followers. The injunction laid upon the sadhaka is that he should do good to other beings as if they were his own self: "Atmaham kurat." Kesari, in the Kularnava Samhita, a different and far inferior work to the Tantra of that name, Shiva recites some horrible rites with the flesh of rat and bat, with the soiled linen of a Chandala woman, with the shroud of a corpse, and so forth, and then he says, "My heart trembles (ham k mama), my limbs tremble (grathani), my mouth is dry (mukam shush), O Parvati, my mind is all disturbed (jate bhadre). What more shall I say? Conceal it (na octavium), conceal it, conceal it." He then says, "In the Kali Yuga, sadhakas are generally greedy of money, having done greatly sinful acts, they destroy living beings. For them, there is neither Guru nor Rudra nor Thee nor Sadhika, my dear life. They are ready to do acts for the destruction of men. Therefore, it is wrong to reveal these matters, O Devi. I have told thee out of affection for thee, being greatly pleased by thy kisses and embrace, but it should be as carefully concealed by thee as thine own secret body, O Parvati. All this is greatly sinful and a very bad Yoga." [Music] "None of these things are ever to be done by thee, O daughter of the mountain (svava parvini). Whoever does so incurs the sin of destroying me. I destroy all such as does fire dry grass of assurity. Such incur the sin of slaying a Brahmana. All such incur the sin of slaying a Brahmana." SV. [Music] "Naavah." When, therefore, we condemn the sin of evil magic, it is necessary to remember both such teaching as is contained in this quotation and the practice of those of good life who follow the shastra. To do so is to be both fair and accurate. There is nothing, in any event, in the point that the magical contents of the Tantra shastra make it contrary to Veda. Those who bring such a charge must also prefer it against the Atharva Veda. As a matter of fact, magic is common to all early religions. It has been practiced, though condemned, in Christian Europe. It is not necessary to go back to the old Witchcraft Trials.

There are some who protest against its recrudescence today. It has been well observed that there are two significant facts about occultism, namely, its catholicity: it is to be found in all lands and ages, and its amazing power of recuperation after it has been supposed to have been disproved as mere superstition. Even some quarter of a century ago, I am quoting from the same author, there were probably not a score of people in London, and those kept their preoccupation to themselves, who had any interest at all in the subject except from a purely antiquarian standpoint. Magic was dismissed by practically all educated men as something too evidently foolish and nonsensical to deserve attention or inquiry. In recent years, the position has been reversed in the West, and complaint is again made of the revival of witchcraft and occultism today. The reason of this is that modern scientific investigation has established the objectivity of some leading phenomena of occultism. For instance, a little more than a century or so ago, it was still believed that a person could inflict physical injury on another by means other than physical, and this is what is to be found in that portion of the Tantra shastras which deal with the Shat Karma. Witches confessed to having committed this crime and were punished therefore. At a later date, the Witchcraft Trials were held to be evidence of the superstition both of the accused and accusers. Yet psychology now allows the principle that thought is itself a force, and that by thought alone, properly directed, without any known physical means, the thought of another, and hence his whole condition, can be affected. By physical means, I mean direct physical means, for occultism may and does avail itself of physical means to stimulate and intensify the force and direction of thought. This is the meaning of the magic rituals which have been so much ridiculed. Why is black the color of Marana Karma? Because that color incites and maintains and emphasizes the will to kill. So hypnotism, Vashikaran, as an instance of the exercise of the power of thought, makes use of gestures, rotatory instruments, and so forth. The magician, having a firm faith in his or her power (for faith in occultism, as in religion, is essential), surrounds himself with every incentive to concentrated, prolonged, and in malevolent magic, malevolent thought. A figure or other object, such as part of the clothing, hair, nails, and so forth, of the victim represents the person to be attacked by magic. This serves as the immediate object on which the magical thought is expended. The magician is helped by this and similar aids to a state of fixed and malignant attention, which is rendered intense by action taken on the substituted object. It is not, of course, the injuries done to this object which are the direct cause of injury to the person attacked, but the thought of the magician, of which these injuries are a materialization. There is thus present the circumstances which a modern psychologist would demand for success in a telepathic experiment. As the Witchcraft Trials show, the victim is first affected in thought, and then in body, by the malignant thought thus focused upon him. Sometimes no apparent means are employed, as in a case reported to me by a friend of mine as occurring in a Bombay Hotel, when a man well known in India for his powers (siddhi) drove away by the power of his thought only a party of persons sitting at a neighboring table, whose presence was greatly distasteful to one of his companions. This, if the effect of magical power, was an instance of what the Tantras call Uchchathana. In all cases, the general principle is the same, namely, the setting in motion and direction of powerful thought by appropriate means. This is the view of those who give what may be called a psychological explanation of these phenomena. These would hold that the magical symbolisms are without inherent force, but work according to race and individual characteristics on the mind, which does the rest. Others believe that there is an inherent power in symbolism itself, that the symbol is not merely such, but an actual expression of and instrument by which certain occult laws are brought into play. In other words, the power of symbolism derives not merely from the effect which it may have on particular minds likely to be affected by it, but from itself as a law external to human thought. Some again, and Indian magicians amongst others, believe in the presence and aid of discarnate personalities, such as the unclean Yakshas, given in the carrying out of occult operations. Similarly, it is commonly held by some that where so-called spiritualistic phenomena are real and not fraudulent (as they sometimes are), the action is not that of the dead, but of infernal spirits simulating them and misleading men to their ruin.

Occultism, in the sense of a belief in and claim to be able to use a certain range of forces which may be called preternatural, has the adherence not only of savage and barbarous people who always believe in it, but also of an increasing number of civilized Londoners, Berliners, Americans, Parisians, and other Western peoples. They differ in all else, but they are united in this. Even what most would regard as downright superstition still abundantly flourishes in the West, witness the hundreds of thousands of touchwood figures and the like sent to the troops in the recent war, the horror of sitting 13 to a table, and so on. In fact, from the earliest ages, magic has gone hand in hand with religion, and if for short periods the former has been thought to be dead, it always rises again. Is this, as some say, the mark of the inherent silly credulity of mankind, or do the facts show that there is something in the claims which occultism has made in all ages? India, I do not speak of the English educated community, which shares in the rise and fall of English opinion, has always believed in occultism, and some of the Tantra shastras are repertories of its ritual. Magic and superstition proper exist in this country, but are also to be found in the West. The same remark applies to every depreciatory criticism passed upon the Indian people. Some have thought that occultism is the sign both of savagery and barbarism on the one hand, and of decadent civilization on the other. In India, it has always existed and still exists. It has been well said that there is but one mental attitude impossible to the educated man, namely, blank incredulity with regard to the whole subject. There has been and is a change of attitude due to an increase of psychological knowledge and scientific investigation into objective facts. Certain reconciliations have been suggested, bringing together the ancient beliefs, which sometimes exist in crude and ignorant forms. These reconciliations may be regarded as insufficiently borne out by the evidence. On the other hand, a proposed reconciliation may be accepted as one that, on the whole, seems to meet the claims made by the occultist on one side and the scientific psychologist on the other. But in the present state of knowledge, it is no longer possible to reject both claims as evidently absurd. Men of approved scientific position have, notwithstanding the ridicule and scientific bigotry to which they have been exposed, considered the facts to be worthy of their investigation, and on the psychological side, successive and continuous discoveries are being made which corroborate ancient beliefs in substance, though they are not always in consonance with the mode in which those beliefs were expressed. We must face the fact that with religion, occultism is, in some form or another, a widely diffused belief of humanity. All, however, will be agreed in holding that malevolent magic is a great sin.

In leaving the subject of magic, I may here add that modern psychology and its data afford remarkable corroboration of some other Indian beliefs, such as that thought is a force and that its operation is in a field of consciousness which is wider than that of which the mind is ordinarily aware. We may note also the aid which is derived from the establishment of dual and multiple personalities in understanding how it may be possible that in one unity there may be yet varying aspects.

The second charge is the alleged aidic character of the secret Panchatattva Sadhana with wine, flesh, and women, its alleged immorality of principle, and the evil lives of those who practice it. I am not, in the present paper, dealing in full with this subject, not that I intend by any means to shirk it, but it is more more appropriately the subject of consideration in future chapters on the subject of Shakta Tantric Sadhana, of which it forms a part. What I wish to say now is only this: We must distinguish, in the first place, between a principle and its application. A principle may be perfectly right and sound, and yet a supposed application may not be an application in fact, or if there be an application, the latter may violate some other moral or physical law, or be dangerous and inexpedient as leading to abuse. I will show later that the principle involved is one which is claimed to be in conformity with Vaidic truth and to be, in fact, recognized in varying forms by all classes of Hindus. Some do so dualistically. The sadhana of the Shakta Tantra is, whether right or wrong, an application of the principles of Advaita, and in its full form should not, it is said, be entered upon until after Vedantic principles have been mastered. For this reason, Kula Dharma has been called the fifth ashrama. Secondly, I wish to point out that this ritual with wine and meat is not, as some suppose, a new thing, something introduced by the Shakta Tantric. On the contrary, it is very old and has sanction in Vaidic practice, as will appear from the authorities cited in the appendix to this chapter. So much is this this so that a Tantric Sadhu, discussing the matter with a Bengali friend of mine, said of himself as a follower of this ritual that he was a Hindu, and that those who were opposed to it were Jains. What he meant, and what seems to be the fact, is that the present-day general prohibition against the use of wine and the generally prevalent avoidance or limitation of an animal diet are due to the influence of Jainism and Buddhism, which arose after and in opposition to Vaidic usage. Their influence is most marked, of course, in Vaishnavism, but has not been without effect elsewhere. When we examine ancient Vaidic usage, we find that meat, fish, and mudra (the latter in the form of padasha) were consumed, and intoxicating liquor in the form of Soma was drunk in the Vaidic Yajnas. We also discover some Vaidic rites in which there was Maithuna. This I have dealt with in my article on Shakti and Shakta. The above-mentioned facts show, in my opinion, that there is ground for the doctrine of the Tantrikas that it is a mark of ignorance (avidya) to separate Veda and Tantra. My conclusion is not, however, a counsel to follow this or any other particular form of ritual. I am only concerned to state the facts. I may, however, here add two observations from an outside point of view, for I do not here deal with the subject otherwise. We must consider the age in which a particular shastra was produced and, consequently, the conditions of the time, the then state of society, its moral and spiritual development, and so forth. To understand some rites in the past history of this and other countries, one must seek, in lieu of surface explanations, their occult significance in the history of the human race, and the mind must cast itself back into the ages whence it has emerged, by the aid of those traces it still bears in the depths of its being, of that which outwardly expressed itself in ancient custom. Take, for instance, the rite of human sacrifice, which the Kalikalpalata says that the Raja alone may perform ("Raja narim daena yopi parameshwari"), but in which, as the Tantrasara states, no Brahman may participate ("Brahmanam narv valadan nikara"). Such an animal sacrifice is not peculiarly Tantric, but an instance of the survival of a rite widely spread in the ancient world, older than the day when Jehovah bade Abraham sacrifice his son, and on which Sunahipa, like Isaac, was released. Reference, it is true, is made to this sacrifice in the shastras, but save as some rare exception (I myself judged a case in court some years ago), it does not exist today, and the vast mass of men do not wish to see it revived. The Chakra ritual similarly is either disappearing or becoming in spirit transformed. Where there had been abuse, what is of primary value in the Tantra shastra are certain principles with which I have dealt elsewhere, and with which I deal again, in part, in this and the following lectures. The application of these principles in ritual is a question of form. All form is a passing thing in the shape of ritual. Its validity is limited to place and time. As so limited, it will continue so long as it serves a useful purpose and meets the needs of the age and the degree of its spiritual advancement, or that of any particular body of men who practice it. Otherwise, it will disappear, whilst the foundations of Vedanta on which it rests may remain. In the same way, it is said that we ourselves come and go with our merits and demerits, but that the spirit ever abides beyond both good and evil.

Note to Chapter 4. The following note as to Tantra Shastra and Veda was kindly prepared for me at my request by S.R. Mukerji, M.A. My purpose in this paper is not to give to the public any preconceived opinion, but is simply to put together certain facts which will enable it to form a correct opinion on the subject. These facts have been collected from sources as to the authenticity of which there is no doubt. There is no dispute that most of these works disclose the state of Vaidic society prior to the 6th century A.D., and that at the time when the said works were composed, the Vaidic rituals were being observed and performed. Certain elements which have been assumed to be non-Vaidic appear in the said works, or at least in many of them, and they have been summarily disposed of by some scholars as supplementary (Parishista) or interpolations (Prakshipta). The theory that these portions are interpolations is based on the assumption that the said elements are non-Vaidic or post-Vaidic, and also on the assumption that at the times when the said works were composed, the Anush Chanda was not known, and that therefore those portions of the said works which appear in Anush Tu must be later interpolations. We need not go into the propriety of these assumptions in this paper, but suffice it to say that the first assumption simply begs the question, and the second one is not of any importance in connection with the subject of this paper, inasmuch as the statements made in the Anush portions are corroborated by earlier authorities as to whose antiquity there is no question, and in any case, the fact that the statements have been made is proof of earlier usage or custom.

Vaidic sacrifices are divided into three classes: one, Pakayajnas; two, Jyotish-tomas; and three, Soma sacrifices, and there are subdivisions under each of the said classes. The Soma sacrifices are classed under three heads according to the number of days required for performance, viz., Ekaha, Ahina, and Satra. Ekaha sacrifices are those which are performed in one day by three Savanas, exactly as in the Jagadhatri Puja. Ahina sacrifices are performed from 2 to 11 days, and Satras are performed during a long period, the minimum number of days required being 13 and the maximum being a thousand years. The 12-day sacrifices are arranged as a separate class. The principal Somas are: one, Agnistoma; two, Atyagnistoma; three, Ukthya; four, Shodashi; five, Vajapeya; six, Atiratra; seven, Aptoryama. The Istis or Havya are also principally seven in number, namely: one, Agadam; two, Agnihotra; three, Darapurnamasa; four, Chaturmasya; five, Nirudha Pasubandha; six, Sautramani; and seven, Shrauta. The Pakayajnas are also seven in number, namely: one, Ashvaka; two, Paranam; three, Shatam; four, Shravani; five, Agrayana; six, Kirtri; and seven, Ashvayuji. The last seven are to be performed with the help of the Ghrita fire and are described in the Grihya works. The others are described in the Shrauta works. Whatever be the differences among these Yajnas in regard to the number of Stotras or Stotras and the Samans to be sung, and the Kapala Grahas or the number and nature of sacrifices, or as to other particulars, there are some ideas which prevail in all of them. All Yajnas are based on the idea that Maithuna Arana leads to spiritual happiness. Sexual intercourse is Agnihotra (SB. Ex. 6.2.10). Maithuna is consecration. They enclose the Sada secretly, for enclosing is Maithuna Karana, and therefore it must be done secretly. Bricks Vishva Jyotis are made because the making of the bricks causes generation. Two Padas or Karana of an Anushtubh verse are read in a detached manner, and the two remaining are read together to imitate the manner of sexual union. They do not worship a female devata unless she is coupled with a male devata. They use a couple of Chandandas, distinguishing the one as male from the other as female, and the two are taken together and believed to be the symbol of Maithuna, and by such Maithuna, the desired result of ritual is achieved. They believe that the reading of the Asya Mantra will confer bliss. They say that the highest and best form of Maithuna is that of Shraddha and Satya (piety and truth), and this kind of Maithuna in the abstract is directed for Agnihotris who have purified themselves by actual performances and observances in a religious spirit. They direct the observance and performance of Maithuna as a religious rite or part of a religious rite, and they direct that mantras are to be uttered during the observance of this. One of the articles of faith of the Vaidic people, therefore, was that sexual union led the way to bliss hereafter and must be performed in a true religious spirit to ensure spiritual welfare, want and indulgence being severely deprecated. "A woman said, 'If thou wilt make use of me at the sacrifice, then whatever blessing thou shalt invoke through me shall be granted to thee.'" The Vaidic people performed their Soma Yajnas and Havya, which included the Sautramani with libations and drinks of intoxicating liquor. Sura purifies the sacrificer whilst itself is purified. Rishi Kakana sings the praises of Sura. It is said to be a desirable thing. They prefer Soma, the sweet drink. Soma is Paramah Huti; it is the nectar of immortality. They deprecate and punish the wanting use of intoxicating liquor. They direct the use of Sura and Soma for.

The attainment of happiness and prescribe the manner and purpose of drinking the same. They prescribe the measure and number of drinks to be offered or taken at a sacrifice, and they add that a breach of these rules destroys the efficacy of the rite.

They offer libations of sura to the fathers, they offer sura to the ashin, they offer sura to V's mother. During the performance of a sacrifice, the priests and the householder sit together. They all touch their cups and raise them to their mouths, all the while reciting proper mantras addressed to divas, and then they drink.

The Viic people used to offer to their devatas at their sacrifices animal and vegetable food. The vegetable substances are tandola, ptaka, ficara, padasha, Odana, yavu, pruka, laa, Dan, and Saku. And the animal food was paa, Dadi, aam, amixa, vaginam, vapa, mamsam, litam, pasura. The principle of these being Dana, karamba, paraha, padasha, and payasia. Indeed, it would not be incorrect to say that no Viik right can be performed without these offerings, the forms and the mode of preparation and the number of cakes to be offered differing in each case.

They offer animal sacrifices which include the horse, goats, sheep, oxen, and human beings. They believe that by performing animal sacrifices, the sacrificer ransoms himself or wins all these worlds. The animal is the sacrificer himself. They direct by special rules in what manner the animal should be killed, cut, and offered. They were aware that want and killing of animals was wrong and believed that offering animal sacrifices to the devatas was one of the means whereby bliss hereafter could be attained, and it was only for certain yashas that animals could be slain. Wanton and killing of animals was very severely punished.

The Viic people from the time of the earliest yashas severely deprecated lust of any kind whatsoever, and they allowed myuna, mamsa, madia, and mudra for religious purposes only and as offerings to the Davis. The kakra sittings of the Tantric have unmistakable similarities with the Vaja and Saanii, and even the manner of drinking in company has been preserved, as will appear from the references given above. When performing yajna in company, the members of the company become brahmanas, and there is no distinction of cast.

The worship in both Viic and Tantric rites begins with Akana, which is a form of ablution in which certain parts of the body are touched with water. In this respect, the Viic and the Tantric practices are exactly similar. They purify themselves by uttering some mantras as beas while contemplating the deities of certain parts of their bodies and touching such parts with their fingers. They contemplate each Diva through his or her particular mantras, which will be found collected in the Parisha to the Tieria Aranyaka. They make use of certain sounds for removing unclean spirits, e.g., cat, fat, whom, and for other purposes. They attribute a deity to each letter in a mantra. They make gestures with their fingers as part of their religious rites and locate the devaus of particular sounds in particular parts of their bodies. They perform their baths as a means of and with the view of pleasing their dvas, and in performing the Akana, they sacrifice unto themselves, conceiving that they are part and parcel of the great Brahma.

They worship the Great Brahma thrice daily, such worship being called Sandia Vandan or Anikaa, Twilight prayers or daily wrs. How and when the forms of Vic Sandia now practiced by V IAS commenced has not yet been ascertained, but there is no doubt that prior to the time when the Tieria Aranyaka was composed, the practice existed in its present form. It will be remembered that it is only in that work that we find the Sania mantras recorded. The practice of pranayama and tarpana to Rishi fathers and Davis also existed before Bayana. This practice of Viik Santia worship should be compared with the Tantric mode to gain an insight into the relationship of the Vadas and the Tantas.

In the yashas, the Viic people principally worshiped one Sarasvati, to whom animals are sacrificed, and who is the same as Vach or Vag DVI, who became a lioness and went over to the devatas on their undertaking that to her offerings should be made before they were made to Agy, and who bestows food. Two mAh AA or Mahesa, another form of AGI in all his eight forms. Three Rudra. Four Vishnu. Five Vinayaka Ganesa. Six Scanda CA. Seven the Lingam or phus, on whom they meditated during the daily Sandia worship, and who is the same as Shambu riding on a bull. Eight Shiva.

They also worshiped nine the cow, whom they called Bhavati, and also 10 Indra, Veruna, AGI, Som, Rudra, PusAn, the Ashvin, Suria, and some other deities. For purposes of attaining eternal bliss, they worshiped Ratri DVI, and this Ratri Davy is described as a girl growing into Womanhood who bestows happiness. She has long and flowing hair, has in her hand a noose. If she is pleased, then all other Divas are pleased. She being pleased offers Boon, but the worshipper must reject the same, and then he will gain freedom from rebirth. This is the worship of Ratri. It requires no fasting and must be performed at night. The mantras to be recited is the Ratri Sukta, which commences with Ratri Vakad, to be followed by Arri Param Rajas.

The Rig Vidana Brahman, which follows the Sama Vidana Brahman, declares that the Ratri Suta must be recited. The worship must be performed as a stalp Paka Yajna. Ratri is substantially the same with, but in form different from, Vagdevi, and they are sometimes worshiped as one and the same. The Ratri Sukta describes her as black. The portion of the Ratri Sukta which is included in the Kila portion of the Rigveda calls Ratri Dei by the name of Durga, and this Mantra appears in Tieria Aranyaka. She is described here as the bearer of oblations, therefore she is the same as Agy, and as such she has tongues which are named as follows: one Kali, 2 Karali, 3 Mano Jaava, 4 Sulita, 5 Sudum Rara, 6 Spingi, 7 Suchi Smita, and these tongues La out, and by these tongues offerings are received. The Brihad Devata mentions that Aditi, Vach, Sarasvati, and Durga are the same.

In conformity with the Viic system, the Tantric system of worship acknowledges that Om is the Supreme Bea. The rules and practice of Akimana and the bath are exactly the same as will be found on a comparison of chapter 5 of the Mahanana Tantra with the Snan Sutra of Goila. The Tantas prefer to use single compounds instead of long sentences to express an idea and form onl mantras very much according to the Viic method. We also find the practice of Niasa and Shudi foreshadowed in the Vas, as has been already mentioned.

The principal Devi of the Veda is Sarasvati, who is called Nagna in the Nanu, expressing nudeness and also referring to that age of a woman when Womanhood has not expressed itself. If we again take these ideas with that of the Sama Vidana Brahman, we have the almost complete form of a Devie who is called at the present day by the name of Ki. Another Deie whose worship is very popular at the present day is Durga, who has a lion for her carrier. It will have been observed that Vos turned herself into a lion and after earnest solicitations went over to the Davis, and therefore Vach and the lion are identically the same. We have already given references which show that Vos and Durga were the same, and these facts explain how Durga has a lion to carry her.

The worship of Ratri is to be performed at night, and therefore the worship of Kali must be a night performance, and therefore must partake of all the features of a night performance. And these elements must be sought for in the Viidik Atra. The Atra is a performance of three parias or rounds of four stotras and shastras in each, and at the end of each libation are offered, followed by drinking of Som. The same rules and practices as in the Atra are substantially followed in the worship of the Davali, bang being very largely used under the name of Vijaya and Amita. It will be remembered that the Davy of the Atra is Sarasvati.

The principal male Deata of the Tantas is Mahadeva, named also Shiva, Mahesa, Shambu, Som, and also in a different aspect Rudra. Rudra and Mahadeva are admittedly Viic Gods. Rudra is described as having bows and arrows and has 100 heads and thousand eyes. Mahadeva is Maham DEA, the great God. It appears that the mantras of the different aspects of Mahadeva, which are even now used by Tantrics, were known and used by the Viic people. I cannot, however, trace the name Mahesa in Viik literature. Shiva can be identified with Rudra, Susha, who is a kind God. Mahadeva Som is clad in a tiger skin, which can be traced in Viik literature. Rudra is black in the Tantas as well as in the Vas. He is the same as Manu with a Dei on each side of him. In this connection, we must not fail to note some of the attributes of Viik NTI. NTI is black and is a terrible Davy and punishes those who do not offer Som to her. She is the Devie of misfortunes and removes all misfortunes. She is the genetrix, and she is fond of the cremi ground.

The Tantas direct the worship also of Ganesa, Cartia, and Vishnu, for whose worship the Sama Vidana Brahman prescribes the singing of certain samans known as the Vinayaka Samita, Scanda Samhita, and the Vishnu Samita, respectively. The Tantas also direct the use of certain figures which are called Yantas. These may be of various kinds and forms and may be used for various purposes. One of these, which is constantly used, is a triangle within a square, and this can trace to the rules for the preparation of the Agnik Chetra or the fire altar of the Viic people. Another curious circumstance in connection with the altar is that both in the Viic and the Tantric ritual, the heads of five animals are used in its preparation.

The worship of the Lingum is foreshadowed by the Vic deity Vishnu ship Visha, and the serpent which twines round Davis or Devas is foreshadowed by the Sarar Raji, the serpent queen, who is the same as Vos. The facts collected here will, it is hoped, enable impartial readers to come to a definite conclusion as to the relationship of the Viic to the Tantric ritual.

Chapter 5. The Tantas and Religion of the Shakas. What follows this bracket is a translation done in literal fashion from the German of an article by the learned Sanskritist Professor Winter nits entitled "D Tantras and Relig Zas" published in the Berlin monthly "OstAs at Sid ShrIft" 1916, Heft three. The article does not show a complete comprehension of its subject matter, nor was this to be expected in European fashion. Sadaka is translated magician, and Sedon is thought of as magical evocation, and Mahayogi as great magician. This is the more unfortunate, as the professor evidently does not like magic. It is true that in Indra Jal Avidia there is Sana to achieve its purposes, but what is of course meant is s in its religious sense. We hear again of idolatry, though idolatry is not, in the sense in which those who make the charge use the word, to be found in any part of the world. Mantra is still gibberish, trash, and so on. After all, many of these matters are as much a question of temperament as argument. The mind which takes these views is like that of the Protestant who called the Catholic mass "Hocus Pocus." It is superstitious trash to him, but a holy reality to the believer. Such criticism involves the fallacy of judging others from one's own subjective standpoint. Moreover, not one man in thousands is capable of grasping the inner significance of this doctrine, and for this reason it is kept secret, nor does any writing reveal it to those without understanding. The learned professor has also evidently no liking for occultism and and India fsts Indian schwarmer, but the former exists whether we like its facts or not. Nevertheless, in reading this article, one feels oneself in the presence of a learned mind which wills to be fair and is not to be stampeded from investigation.

On hearing the frightful word Tantra, several appreciations are just. Particularly noteworthy is the recognition that the Tantra Shastras or Agamas are not merely some pathological excre on Hinduism, but simply one of its several presentations, nor are they simply scriptures of the Shakas. Their metaphysics and ethics are those of the common Brahmanism, of which all the sects are offshoots, whatever be the special peculiarities in presentment of doctrine or in its application. Before this, Professor Albert Grun Vdel had said in his "Der Ve Nambala Munin" 195, 15, "The Tantas are nothing but the continuation of the Vdantas." Z V he calls also the Tantas the "model room akal" of Indian art. The akal is a room in an Academy of Art in which casts are kept as models for the students. These scriptures, he adds, furnish the Aesthetics, and in fact, we find that in the later books of the Kala Chakra, the whole figurative mythology of that system has been built upon this scheme. Whence this evolution of forms arises is indeed another question, which will bring many a surprise to the friends of national Indian art. Talking is easier. The Gines too have such things. I may add that the fact that some Gines carry out some so-called Tantric rites is not generally known. Vavas and Bodas also have these rights. Notions and practices generally charged to Shakas only are held and carried out by other sects. It is to be remembered also that there are many schools of Agama. Some of them state that other Agamas were promulgated for the delusion of men. It is needless to add that here, as elsewhere, to the adherent of a particular Agama, his particular scripture is good, and it is the scripture of his opponent which is for delusion. Orthodoxy is my doxy. In India also, amongst some sex, Shaka liberalism being Adite of Adant finds a place for all. It cannot therefore be said the Agamas are wholly worthless and bad without involving all Hinduism in that charge. On the contrary, the professor discovers that behind the nonsense there may be a deep sense, and that immorality is not the end or aim of the cult of the mother. He also holds that if the Tantric scriptures contain some things to which he and others take objection, such things in no wise exhaust their contents. There is nothing wonderful about this discovery, which anyone may make for himself by simply reading and understanding the documents, but the wonder consists in this, that it has not hitherto been thought necessary where it has been possible to read and understand the Tantra Shastras first and then to criticize them. All the greater than are our thanks to the learned Sanskritist for his share in this work of justice.

J.W. India remains still the most important country on Earth for the student of religion. In India, we meet with all forms of religious thought and feeling which we find on Earth, and that not only at different times, but also all together. Even today, here we find the most primitive belief in ancestral spirits, in demons and nature deities, with a primeval imageless sacrificial cult. Here also is a polytheism passing all limits, with the most riotous idolatry, temple cult, pilgrimages, and so forth. And side by side with, and beyond these crudest forms of religious life, we find what is deepest and most abstract of what religious thinkers of all times have ever thought about the deity: the noblest pantheistic and the purest monotheistic conceptions. In India, we also find a priestcraft as nowhere else on Earth, side by side with a religious tolerance which let sect after sect with the most wonderful saints exist together. Here there were and still are forest recluses, ascetics, and mendicant monks to whom renunciation of this world is really and truly a matter of deepest sincerity, and together with them, hosts of idol mendicant monks, vain fools, and hypocrites to whom religion is only a cloak for selfish pursuits, for the gratification of greed for money, of greed for fame, or the hankering after power.

From India also, a powerful stream of religious ideas has poured forth over the West, and especially over the East, has flooded Central Asia, has spread over Tibet, China, Korea, and Japan, and has trickled through the further East down to the remotest islands of the East Indian Archipelago. And finally, in India as well as outside India, Indian religions have often mixed with Christianity and with Islam, now giving and now taking. Indeed, sufficient reason exists to welcome every work which contributes in one way or other to a richer, deeper, or wider knowledge of Indian religion. I would like there to draw attention in what follows to some recently published works of this nature. These these are the exceedingly meritorious publications of Arthur Avalon with reference to the literature of the Tantress. Through these works, we obtain for the first time a deeper insight into the literature of the Tantras, the holy books of Shaktism, and into the nature of this much abused religion itself. It is true that H.H. Wilson in his "Essays on the Religious Sects of the Hindus," which appeared from 1828 to 1832, has given a brief but relatively reliable and just exposition of this religion. M. Monier Williams, who has treated more fully of Shaktism, worship of the Goddess, and the contents of the Tantras, has only to tell terrible and horrible things. He describes the faith of the Shakas, of the worshippers of the feminine deities, as a mixture of sanguinary sacrifices and orgies with wine and women. Similar is the picture of this sect presented by A. Barth, who on the one hand indeed admits that the cult of the mother is based on a deep meaning and that the Tantas are also full of theosophical and moral reflections and aesthetic theories, but is not thereby prevented from saying that the Shaka is nearly always a hypocrite and a superstitious deuche. Even though many amongst the authors of the Tantras may have really believed that they were performing a sacred work. R.G. Bhandar, to whom whom we owe the latest and most reliable exposition of Indian sectarianism, happens in fact to deal with the Shakas very summarily, whereas the greater part of his excellent book deals with the religion of the Vavas and with the sects of the Shivas. He only devotes a few pages to the sect of the Shakas, which evidently seems unimportant to him. He speaks, however, both about the metaphysical doctrines and about the cult of this sect within every way the cool, quiet objectivity of the historian. The exposition is only a little too brief and meager, so all the more are Avalon's books welcome.

The most valuable is the complete English translation of a Tantra, the Mahan Nirvana Tantra, with an introduction of 146 pages, which introduces us to the chief doctrines of the Shakas and with the exceedingly complicated, perhaps purposely confused, terminology of the Tantras. If we have been accustomed up till the present to see nothing else in Shaktism and in the Tantras, the sacred books of this sect, then wild superstition, occult humbug, idiocy, empty magic, and a cult with a most objectionable morality and distorted by orgies, then a glimpse at the text made accessible to us by Avalon teaches us that all these things are indeed to be found in this religion and in its sacred texts, but that by these their contents are nevertheless in no wise exhausted. On the contrary, we rather find that behind the nonsense there lies hidden after all much deep sense, and that immorality is not the end and aim of the cult of the mother. We find that the mysticism of the Tantas has been built up on the basis of that mystic doctrine of the unity of the soul and of all with the Brahman, which is proclaimed in the oldest Upanishads and which belongs to the most profound speculations which the Indian Spirit has imagined. This Brahman, however, the highest divine principle, is, according to the doctrines of the Shaka philosophers, no nothing but the eternal primeval energy Shakti, out of which everything has been created, has originated, has been born. Shakti, energy, however, is not only grammatic feminine. Human experience teaches also that all life is born from the womb of the woman, from the mother. Therefore, the Indian thinkers from whom Shaktism has originated believe that the highest deity, the supremist creative principle, should be brought nearest to the human mind not through the word father, but through the word mother. And all philosophical conceptions to which language has given a feminine gender, as well as all mythological figures which appear feminine in popular belief, become goddesses, divine mothers. So before all, there is Preti, taken from the Samia philosophy, primeval matter, nature, who stands in contrast to Perusia, the male spirit, and is identical with Shakti. And this Shakti is again mythologically conceived as the spouse of God Shiva, Mahadeva, the great God. Mythology, however, knew already Uma or Parvati, the daughter of the mountain, the daughter of the Himalaya, as the spouse of Shiva. And so Prti, Shakti, Uma, Parvati are ever one and the same. They are only different names for the one great all-mother, the Jagan Mat, the mother of all the living. The Indian mind had been long since accustomed to see unity in all multiplicity. Just as one moon reflects itself in a new nerble waters, so Devi, the goddess, by whatever other names she may be otherwise called, is the embodiment of all gods and of all energies, shakes of the gods. Within her is Brahma, the Creator, and his Shakti. Within her is Vishnu, the Preserver, and his Shakti. Within her is also Shiva as Mahakala, great father time, the great Destroyer. But as this one is swallowed up by herself, she is also Adak Kalika, the primordial Kali. And as a great magician, Mahayogi, she is at the same time creatrix, preserv, and destroyer of the world. She is also the mother of Mahakala, who dances before her, intoxicated by the wine of maduka blossoms.

As, however, the highest deity is a woman, every woman is regarded as an embodiment of this deity. Devie, the goddess, is within every feminine being. This conception it is which has led to a woman worship, which undoubtedly has taken the shape in many circles of wild orgies, but which also, at least according to the testimony of the Mahan Nirvana Tantra, could appear in a purer and nobler form, and has as surely done so. To the worship of the Davy, the goddess, who is the joyously creative energy of nature, belong the five true things: patat, through which mankind enjoy gladly, preserve their life, and procreate; intoxicating drink, which is a great medicine to man, a breaker of sorrows, and a source of pleasure; meat of the animals in the villages, in the air, and in the forests, which is nutritious and strengthens the force of body and mind; fish, which is tasty and augments procreative potency; roasted corn, which easily obtained grows in the Earth and is the root of life in the three worlds; and fifthly, physical Union with Shakti, the source of bliss of all living beings, the deepest cause of creation, and the root of the eternal world. But these five true things may only be used in the circle of initiates and only after they have been consecrated by sacred formulas and ceremonies. The Mahan Nirvana Tantra lays stress on the fact that no abuse may be made of these five things. Who drinks immoderately is no true worshipper of the Devie. Immoderate drinking, which disturbs seeing and thinking, destroys the effect of the Sacred action. In the sinful Kali age also, only the own spouse should be enjoyed as Shakti. In everything, the Tantra takes all imaginable trouble to excuse the panat tapa ceremonies and to prevent their abuse. In the Kali age, sweets, milk, sugar, honey must be used instead of intoxicating drink, and the Adoration of the lotus feet of the Deie should be substituted for the physical Union. The worship should not be secret, indecencies should not occur, and evil, impious people should not be admitted to the circle of the worshippers. True, it is permissible for the hero Vera, who is qualified to the Sadhaka or magician, to unite in secret worship with other Chakis. Only in the highest heavenly condition, Div Abhava, of the saint, do purely symbolical actions take the place of the five true things. But to the worship of the Davy belong, in the first place, mantras, formulas, and beas, monosyllabic mysterious words like Aim, Clim, Rm, etc.; further also yantas, diagrams of a mysterious meaning drawn on metal, paper, or other material; mudras, special finger positions and hand movements; and nasas. These last consist in putting the tips of the fingers and the flat of the right hand with certain mantras on the various parts of the body, in order by that to fill one's own body with the life of the Devie. By the application of all these means, the worshipper renders the deity willing and forces him into his service and becomes a Sadhaka, a magician. For Sadana, magic is the chief aim, though not the final aim of D worship. This highest and final aim is the same as that of all Indian sects and religious systems: MSHA or Deliverance, the unification with the deity. In Mahan Nirvana, the great Extinction, the perfected saint, the Kaa reaches this condition already in the present life and is one who is liberated whilst living, Jivan Mukta. But the way to Deliverance can only be found through the Tantas, for Veda, Smriti, Puranas, and Iasa are each the sacred books of past ages of the world, whilst for our present evil age, the Kali age, the Tantas have been revealed by Shiva for the salvation of mankind. The Tantas thus, on the strength of their own showing, indicate themselves to be relatively modern works. In the present age, Vad and other rites and prayers have no value, but only the mantras and ceremonies taught in the Tantas. And just as the worship of the Devie leads equally to thoroughly materialistic results through magic and to the highest ideal of Nirvana, so there is a strong mixture in the worship itself of the sensuous and the spiritual. Characteristic is Mahan Nirvana Tantra. The worshipper first offers to the Devie spiritual adoration, dedicating to her his heart as her seat, the nectar of his heart as the water for washing her feet, his mind as a gift of honor, the restlessness of his senses and thoughts as a dance, selflessness, dispassionate, and so forth as flowers. But then he offers to the Devie an ocean of intoxicating drink, a mountain of meat and dried fish, a heap of roasted corn and milk with sugar and butter, nectar, and other things besides the five trth things and other elements of this most sensuous worship, which is calculated to produce the intoxication of the senses, and in which also bells, incense, flowers, lights, and rosaries are not lacking. There is also the quiet contemplation Diana of the deity, and likewise we find side by side with mantras which are completely senseless and insipid, such beautiful sayings as, for instance: "Oh, Akali, who dwellest in the innermost soul of all, who art the innermost light, oh mother, accept this prayer of my heart. I bow down before Thee."

The Shakas are a sect of the religion which is commonly designated Hinduism, a term which is a fasil one, but which has not been chosen very happily. The word embraces all the sects and Creeds which have originated from Brahmanism through a mixture with the Cults of the Aborigines of India, and thus present a kind of degeneration of the old Brahmanical religion, but which still hold fast more or less to Orthodox Brahmanism, and so distinguish themselves from the heretical sect Buddhists and Jains. In reality, there is strictly no sense in speaking of Hinduism as a system or as one religion, for it is impossible to say where Brahmanism ends and where Hinduism begins. We are also altogether ignorant as to how much the old Brahmanic religion had already assimilated from the faith and the customs of the non-Aryan populace, for it is not admissible to classify without further ado all animal worship, all demon worship, all feedism, and so on, as non-Aryan. In reality, all sects of Hinduism which are related to a worship of Vishnu or of Shiva are nothing but offshoots of the original Brahmanism, which they never, however, deny. So also Shaktism has as a special characteristic merely the worship of the shakes of the female deities with its accessory matter of the five true things, the worship in the cakra or circle of the initiates, and so on. For the rest, its dogmatics, or if it be preferred, its metaphysics, as well as its ethics, are altogether those of Brahmanism, of which also the essential ritual institutions have been preserved. In dogmatics, it is the teachings of the Orthodox systems of the Vidant and the Samia which meet us also in the Tantas, clearly enough, sometimes even under the trash of senseless magic formulas. And as far as ethics are concerned, the moral teaching in the eth chapter of the Mahan Vanat Tantra reminds us from beginning to end of Manu's Code, the Bhagavat Gita, and the Buddhist sermons. Notwithstanding the fact that in the ritual proper of the Shak, there are no cast differences, but in Shakti worship, all casts, as well as the sexes, are equal, yet in harmony with Brahmanism, the casts are recognized with this modification that a fifth cast is added to the four usual ones, which springs from the mixture of the four older ones, namely, the cast of the Sanas. Whilst Manu, however, distinguishes four ashramas or statuses of life, the Mahan Nirvana Tantra teaches that there are only two ashramas in the Col age: the status of the householder and that of the aesthetic. For the rest, everything which is taught in art Tantra about the duties towards parents, towards wife and child, towards relations, and in general towards fellowmen, might find a place exactly in the same way in any other religious book or even in a profane manual of morals. As an example, we may quote only a few verses from this chapter: Eight, the duties of each of the casts as well as the duties of the king are not prescribed much differently from Manu. Family life is estimated very highly by the Mahan Nirvana Tantra, so it is rigorously prescribed that no one is allowed to devote himself to the aesthetic life who has children, wives, or such like near relations to maintain. Entirely in consonance with the prescriptions of the Bromantic texts also are the SA sacraments from conception until the marriage, which are described in the ninth chapter of the Mahan Tantra. Samsaras likewise, in the 10th chapter, the direction for the disposal and the cult of the dead Shada are given. A peculiarity of the Shakas in connection with marriage consists in the fact that side by side with the Brahma marriage, for which the Brahmanic prescriptions are valid, there is also a Shiva marriage, that is, a kind of marriage for a limited period, which is only permitted to the members of the circle cakra of the initiates, but children out of such a marriage are not legitimate and do not inherit. So far, Brahmanic law applies also to the Shakas, and so the section concerning civil and criminal law in the 11th and 12th chapters of the Mahan Vanat Tantra substantially agree with Manu. Of course, notwithstanding all this, the Cad Dharma expounded in the Tantra is declared the best of all religions in an exuberant manner, and the veneration of the Kula Saint is praised as the highest merit. It is said in a well-known Buddhist text: "As ye monks, there is place for every kind of footprints of living beings that move in the footprint of the elephant, because, as is known indeed, the footprint of the elephant is the first in size amongst all. So ye monks, all salutary doctrines are contained in the Four Noble Truths." So it is said in the Mahan Vanat Tantra, probably in recollection of the Buddhist passage: "As the footprints of all animals disappear in the footprint of the elephant, so disappear all other religions Dharma in the Coola religion Kula Dharma."

From what has been said, it is clear that Avalon is right when he declares that up until now this literature has been only too often judged and still more condemned without knowing it, and that the Tantas deserve to become better known than has been the case hitherto. From the point of view of the history of religion, they are already important for the reason that they have strongly influenced Mahayana Buddhism, and especially the Buddhism of Tibet. It is therefore much to be welcomed that Avalon has undertaken to publish a series of texts and translations from this literature. It is true that we have no desire to be made acquainted with all the 3x64 Tantras which are said to exist, for this should not be denied that for the greatest part these works contain after all only stupidity and gibberish. Do Stumon on Cvel. This is especially true of the beas and mantras, the mysterious syllables and words, and the magic formulas which fill these volumes. To understand this gibberish only to a certain degree and to bring some sense in into this stupidity, it is necessary to know the Tantric meaning of the single vowels and consonants, for amongst the chief instruments of the magic which plays such a great part in these texts belongs the spoken word. It is not the meaning embedded in the Mantra which exercises power over the deity, but the word, the sound. Each sound possesses a special mysterious meaning, therefore there are special glossies in which this mysterious meaning of the single vowels and consonants is taught. A few of such glossies, indispensable helps for the Sadhaka, or rather the pupil who wants to develop himself into Sadhaka, have been brought to light in the first volume of the series of Tantric texts published by Avalon: the Mantra Bedana belonging to the Rudra Yamala, Ekak Sharak Kosha ascribed to Purusham MVA, the Banig Gantu of Pyroa, and to Matri Ananus, the one by Mahara, the other by Madava. Added to these is one other auxiliary text of the same kind, the Mudran Gantu belonging to the Vakesh Varara Tantra, an enumeration of the finger positions as they are used in yoga. The second volume of the same series of texts contains the text of the Satak Rupana, the description of the six circles, together with no less than three commentaries. The six circles are six places in the human body imagined as lotus-shaped, of great mystical significance, and therefore of great importance for yoga. The first of these circles is Muladar, which is described as a triangle in the middle of the body with its point downwards and imagined as a red lotus with four petals, on which are written the four golden letters Vam, Sham, Sham, and Sham. In the center of this lotus is Sambul Linga. At the root of this reddish-brown linga, the citrinin opens, through which the Dei Kundalini ascends, more delicate than a lotus fiber and more effulgent than lightning, and so on. The Satak Rupana is the chapter of the Shatv Chintamani composed by Panand Swami. In addition, the volume contains the text of a hymn entitled Paduka Panchakam, which is said to have been revealed by Shiva, and a voluminous commentary. The third volume of the series contains the text of the Pranka Sarat Tantra, which is ascribed to the Vedantic philosopher Sham Karakara, and by others to the deity Shiva in his Incarnation as Sham Karakara. The name Samara appears fairly often in Tantra literature, but it is not at all sure that the works in question really come from the philosopher. Avalon prefaces the text by a detailed description of the contents of the work. Propan means extension, the extended universe, from which Propan Kasara, the innermost being of the universe. The work begins with a description of creation, accompanied in the first two chapters by detailed expositions of chronology, embryology, anatomy, physiology, and psychology, which are exactly as scientific as both the following chapters, which treat of the mysterious meaning of the letters of the Sanskrit alphabet and of the beas. The further chapters, which partly contain rituals, partly prayers, meditations, and stotras, are of greater importance from the standpoint of the history of religion. To how high a degree in the Shakti cult the erotic element predominates is shown in nine, where a description is given how the wi lives of the Gods, demons, and demigods, impelled by mantras, come to the magician, the Sadhaka, oppressed by the greatness of their desires. In the 13th chapter, the mantras and the Dias meditations for the Adoration of the God of Love and his shakes are taught, and the union of man and woman is represented as a mystic union of the eye, a hamara, with perception, budy, and as a s sacred sacrificial action. When a man honors his beloved wife in such a way, she will, struck by the arrows of the god of love, follow him like a shadow, even in the other world. The 23rd chapter is devoted to Ardar Isvara, the God who is half woman. Shiva, represented as a wild-looking man, forms the right-hand half of the body, and his Shakti, represented as a voluptuous woman, the left-hand half. The 33rd chapter, which seems to have originally closed the work, describes in its first part ceremonies against childlessness, the cause of which is indicated as lack of veneration of the Gods and neglect of the wife. The second part is connected with the relation between teacher and pupil, which is of extreme importance for the Shaka religion. Indeed, worship of the Guru, the teacher, plays a prominent part in this sect. However, the rituals and mantras described in this time RA are not exclusively connected with the different forms of the Divi and Shiva, but Vishnu and his avataras are also often honored. The 36th chapter contains a disquisition on Vishnu Trilokia Moana, the enchanter of the triple world. In verses 35-47, translated by Avalon, it is a description glowing and sensuous. Vishnu shines like millions of suns and is of infinite beauty, full of full of goodness. His eye rests on Shri, his spouse, who embraces him full of love. She too is of incomparable beauty. All the gods and demons and their wives offer homage to the August pair. The goddesses, however, press themselves in a burning yearning of love towards Vishnu, whilst exclaiming, "Be our husband, our refuge, August Lord!" In addition to this passage, Avalon has also translated the hymns to Prti, to V Shu, and to Shiva. Of these hymns, the same holds good as of the collection of hymns to the Davy, which Avalon, together with his wife, has translated in a separate volume. Whilst many of these texts are mere insipid litanies of names and epithets of the worship deities, there are others which, as to profoundness of thought and beauty of language, may be put side by side with the best productions of the religious lyrics of the Indians. So the hymn to Prti in the Propan Kasara begins with the words: "Be gracious to me, o Praana, who art Prreti in the form of the elemental world, life of all that lives. With folded hands, I make obes to thee, our lady, whose very nature it is to do that which we cannot understand." It is intelligible that the poets have found much more intimate cries of the heart when they spoke of the deity as their mother than when they address themselves to God as father. So, for instance, it is said in a hymn to the goddess ascribed to Shamara: "Two, by my ignorance of their commands, by my poverty and sloth, I had not the power to do that which I should have done. Hence my omission to worship thy feet. But oh mother, auspicious deliverer of all, all this should be forgiven me, for a bad son may sometimes be born, but a bad mother never. Three, oh mother, thou hast many sons on Earth, but I, your son, am of no worth, yet it is not meat that thou shouldst abandon me, for a bad son may sometimes be born, but a bad mother never. For, oh mother of the world, oh mother, I have not worshiped thy feet, nor have I given abundant wealth to thee, yet the affection which thou bestow on me is without compare, for a bad May sometimes be born, but a bad mother never."

Avalon looks with great sympathy on the Shaka religion, which has found the highest expression for the divine principle in the conception mother. He is of opinion that when the European thinks that it is a debasement of the deity to conceive of it as feminine, then this can only be because he looks upon his mother's sex as lower than his own, and because he thinks it unworthy of the deity to conceive it otherwise than masculine. That the conception of the Indian, and especially of the Shaka, is in this connection the more unbias and unprejudiced one, we will freely concede to Avalon. He however goes still further and believes that the Tantras not only have an interest from the point of view of the history of religion, but that they also possess an independent value as manuals of Satana, that is, Magic. However grateful we might be to the editor and translator of these texts for having made us better acquainted with a little known and much misunderstood Indian system of religion, we yet would hope to be saved from the possibility of seeing added to the Vids, Neo-Buddhists, Theosophists, and other India fatest in Europe and America, adherents of the Sodon of the Shakti cult. The student of religion cannot and may not leave the Tantras and Shaktism unnoticed. They have their place in the history of religion, but may this occultism, which often flows from very turbid sources, this word should not be translated as secret science, thus abusing the sacred name of science, but rather as mystery-mongering gim to orai remain far away from our intellectual life.

To the above may be added a recent criticism of M. Mason Orel of the College def France in the journal Isis, which is summarized and translated from the French: "The obscurity of language, strangeness of thought, and rites sometimes a judged scandalous have turned away from the study of the immense Tantric literature even the most courageous savants. If, however, the Tantras have appeared to be a mere mass of aberration, it is because the key to them was unknown. The Tantas are the culmination of the whole Indian literature. Into them how both the Viic and and popular Cults. Tantrism has imposed itself on the whole Hindu mentality." Lant EST and U Arthur Avalon has undertaken with complete success a task which in appearance seems to be a thankless one, but is in reality feun of results.

The article of Dr. Winternet deals largely with the Maha Nirvana Tantra because objections cannot be easily found against this Tantra. The theory has been lately put forward by Dr. Farquar in his last work on Indian literature that this particular scripture is exceptional and the work of Ramun Roy's Guru, Hariharananda Parti. The argument is in effect: "All Tantras are bad; this is not bad; therefore it is not a Tantra." In the first place, the manuscript referred to in the preface to a Avalon's translation of this Tantra as having been brought to Kolkata was an old manuscript having the date Shaaba 1300 odd, that is, several hundreds of years ago. Secondly, the Mahan Nirvana, which belongs to the Vnr or, as some say, Rakr, is mentioned in the Mahasa Tantra, an old copy of which was the property of Raja Sir Radak Kant Dev, a contemporary of Rajar Ram Mun Roy (1774-1833), who survived the latter's son. The earliest edition of that Tantra by Ananda Condra Vidant Vagisha was published from a text in the Sanskrit College library, which is not likely to have had amongst its manuscripts one which was the work of a man who, whatever be the date of his death, must have died within a comparatively short period of the publication of this edition. In fact, the catalog describes it as an old manuscript and an original Tantra. Dr. Gendra Lala Mitra, in his notice of a manuscript of the Tagor collection, speaks of it as containing only the first half of 14 chapters. This is so; the second half is not published and is very rare. The Pandit's copy to which reference was made in the preface to Aa's translation of the Mahan Nirvana contained both parts. How comes it that if the Tantra was written by Rajer Ram Mun Roy's Guru, that we have only the first first half and not the second, containing amongst other things the so-called magic or shut Karma? It should be mentioned that there are three Tantras: the Nirvana, Brian Nirvana, and Mahan Nirvana Tantras, similar to the group Nila Banala and Mahanil Tantras. It is to be noted also that in the year 1293 BS or 1886, an edition of the Mahan Nirvana was published with commentary by As Samas, calling himself Sham Karakara, under the opes of the Dand Shaba of Manikarnika, Banares, which contains more verses than is contained in the text commented upon by Hariharananda, and the interpretation of the latter, as also that of Jagamohan Taramara, are in several matters controverted. We are asked to suppose that Hariharananda was both the author of and commentator on the Tantra. That the Mahan Nirvana has its merits is obvious, but there are others which have theirs. The same critic speaks of the Propan Casara as a rather foul work. This criticism is ridiculous. The text is published for anyone to judge. All that can be said is what Dr. Winternet has said, namely, that there are a few passages with sensuous erotic imagery. These are descriptive of the state of women in love. What is wrong here? There is nothing foul in this, except for people to whom all erotic phenomena are foul. "This is a very indecent picture," said an elderly lady to Byron, who retorted, "Madam, the indecency consists in your remark." It cannot be too often asserted that the ancient East was purer in these matters than the modern West, where under cover of a puant modest exterior, a Kaka of extraordinarily varied psychopathic filth may flow. This was not so in earlier days, whether of East or West, when a spade was called a spade and not a horticultural.

Instrument in America, it is still, I am told, considered indecent to mention the word "leg." One must say "limb." Said Tertullian, "Nata veneranda at non erubescenda," that is, where the knower venerates his unknowing, critic blushes. The Propan Sara, which does not even deal with the right against which most objection has been taken, while the Mahan Nervana does, treats of the creation of the world, the generation of bodies, physiology, the classification of the letters, the Coloss initiation, Japa, the Gayatri Mantra, and ritual worship of various devatas, and so forth, with facts, in short, which are not foul, with or without the qualifying "rather."

JW, Chapter 6. Shakti and Shaka. Shakti, who is in herself pure, blissful Consciousness, is also the mother of Nature, and is Nature itself, born of the creative play of her thought. The Shaka faith, or worship of Shakti, is, I believe, in some of its essential features, one of the oldest and most widespread religions in the world. Though very ancient, it is yet, in its essentials and in the developed form in which we know it today, harmonious with some of the teachings of modern philosophy and science. Not that this is necessarily a test of its truth.

It may be here noted that in the West, and in particular in America and England, a large number of books are now being published on new thought, willpower, vitalism, creative thought, right thought, self-unfoldment, secret of achievement, mental therapeutics, and the like. The principles of which are essentially those of some forms of Shakti Sadhana, both higher and lower. There are books of disguised magic, as how to control Vashikaran by making them buy what they do not want, how to secure affection, and so forth, which, notwithstanding some hypocrisies, are in certain respects on the same level as the Tantric Shavara, as a low class of books on magic are called. Shavara or Kandala are amongst the lowest of men.

The ancient and, at the same time, distinguishing character of the faith is instanced by Temple worship. The old Vedic worship was generally in the home or in the open by the river. The cult of images of Linga and Yoni, neither of which, it is said, were part of the original Vedic practice. The worship of Devis and of the Magna Mater, the Great Vic Deata, was the male Indra and other matters of both doctrine and practice.

Many years ago, Edward Sellin, with the aid of a learned orientalist of the Madras Civil Service, attempted to learn its mysteries, but for reasons which I need not here discuss, did not view them from the right standpoint. He, however, compared the Shakas with the Greek Testica or Dynamica, the mysteries of Dionysus, fireborn in the cave of initiation, with the Shakti Puja, the Shakti Shodon with the purification shown in De Honkerville's antique Greek vases. And after referring to the frequent mention of this ritual in the writings of the Jews and other ancient authors, concluded that it was evident that we had still surviving in India, in the Shaka worship, a very ancient, if not the most ancient, form of mysticism in the whole world.

Whatever be the value to be given to any particular piece of evidence, he was right in his general conclusion. For when we throw our minds back upon the history of this worship, we see stretching away into the remote and fading past the figure of the mighty mother of nature, most ancient among the ancients, the Adya Shakti, the Dusk Divinity, many-breasted, crowned with towers, whose veil is never lifted, Isis, the one who is all that has been, is, and will be, Ki, Hathor, Cil, the cow-mother goddess, Ida, Trius, Andari, the Ionic mother, Te, the spouse of Shu, by whom he affects the birth of all things, Aphrodite, Astarte, in whose groves the Balum were set, Babylonian Militta, Buddhist Tara, the Mexican Ixchel, Hellenic Rhea, the consecrated, the free and pure African Salomo, who like Parvati roam the mountains, Roman Juno, Egyptian Bass, the flaming mistress of life, of thought, of love, whose festival was celebrated with want and joy, the Assyrian mother, Sothis, Benoth, Northern Freya, Mulati, Semele, Maya, Ishtar, Cybele, n, mother of the Gods, eternal, deepest ground of all things, Kundali, Gamahavi, and all the rest.

And yet there are people who allege the Tantric cult is modern. To deny this is not to say that there has been or will be no change or development in it. As man changes, so do the forms of his beliefs. An ancient feature of this faith, and one belonging to the ancient Mysteries, is the distinction which it draws between the initiate, whose Shakti is awake (Prabuddha), and the Pashu, the unilluminated or animal. And as the Gnostics called him, material man.

The natural, which is the manifestation of the mother of Nature, and the spiritual, or the mother as she is in and by herself, are one. But the initiate alone truly recognizes this unity. He knows himself, in all his natural functions, as the one Consciousness, whether in enjoyment (Bhukti) or liberation (Mukti). It is an essential principle of Tantric Sadhana that man, in general, must rise through and by means of Nature, and not by an ascetic rejection of her. A profoundly true principle is here involved, whatever has been said of certain applications of it. When Orpheus transformed the old Bacchic cult, it was the purified who, in the beautiful words of Euripides, went dancing over the hills with the daughters of Iacchus.

I cannot, however, go into this matter in this paper, which is concerned with some general subjects and the ordinary ritual. But the evidence is not limited to the Mysteries of the Shakti Puja. There are features in the ordinary outer worship which are very old and widespread, as are also other parts of the esoteric teaching. In this connection, a curious instance of the existence beyond India of Tantric doctrine and practice is here given. The American Indian Maya scripture of the Zunis, called the Popol Vuh, speaks of Huracan, or lightning, that is, I am told, Kundalini Shakti, of the air tube, or white cord, or the Sushumna, of the two-fold air tube, that is, Ida and Pingala, and of various bodily centers which are marked by animal glyphs.

Perhaps the Panchatattva ritual, followed by some of the adherents of the Tantras, is one of the main causes which have operated in some quarters against acceptance of the authority of these scriptures, and as such, responsible for the notion that the worship is modern. On the contrary, the usage of wine, meat, and so forth, is itself very old. There are people who talk of these rites as though they were some entirely new and comparatively modern invention of the Tantra, wholly alien to the spirit and practice of the early times. If the subject be studied, it will, I think, be found that in this matter, those worshippers who practice these rites are, except possibly as to Maithuna, the continuators of very ancient practices which had their counterparts in the earlier Veda Cara, but were subsequently abandoned, possibly under the influence of Jainism and Buddhism. I say "counterpart," for I do not mean to suggest that in every respect the rites were the same. In details and as regards, I think, some objects in view, they differed. Thus, we find in this Panchatattva ritual a counterpart to the Vedic usage of wine and animal food. As regards wine, we have the partaking of Soma. Meat was offered in the Mamaka Shraddha, fish in the Ashtaka Shraddha, and Maithuna as a recognized rite will be found in the Vadhia Vrata and Marava of universally recognized Vedic texts, apart from the alleged and generally unknown Sahasra of the Atharva Veda, to which the Kaushitaki Upanishad and other Tantric Upanishads are said to belong. Possibly, however, this element of Maithuna may be foreign and imported by Shankara. So again, as that distinguished scholar Professor R. Sundara Try has pointed out in his Vichitra Prasanga, the Mudra of Panchatattva corresponds with the Pura Cake of the Soma and other Yagas. The present rule of abstinence from wine, and in some cases meat, is due, I believe, to the original Buddhism. It is so-called Tantrics who follow, in and for their ritual, only the earlier practice.

It is true that the Samhita of Usana says, "Wine is not to be drunk, given, or taken." (Madyam apyaam adyam agam). But the yet greater Manu states, "There is no wrong in the eating of meat or the drinking of wine." (Namam sabakam). Though he rightly adds, "as many now do, that abstention therefrom is productive of great fruit." (Nishthu mahapam). The Tantric practice does not allow extra-ritual or useless drinking (Prapana).

Further, it is a common error to confound two distinct things, namely, belief and practice, and the written records of it. These latter may be comparatively recent, whilst that of which they speak may be most ancient. When I speak of the ancient past of this faith, I am not referring merely to the writings which exist today, which are called Tantras. These are composed generally in a simple sense Sanskrit by men whose object it was to be understood rather than to show skill in literary ornament. This simplicity is a sign of age, but at the same time it is Laika and not Arya Sanskrit. Moreover, there are statements in them which, unless interpolations, fix the limits of their age. I am not speaking of the writings themselves, but of what they say. The faith that they embody, or at least its earlier forms, may have existed for many ages before it was reduced to writing amongst the Kulas or family folk, who received it as handed down by tradition (Parampara), just as did the Vedic Gotras. That such beliefs and practices, like all other things, have had their development in course of time is also a likely hypothesis. A vast number of Tantras have disappeared, probably forever. Of those which survive, a large number are unknown. Most of those which are available are of fragmentary character. Even if these did appear later than some other Shastras, this would not, on Indian principles, affect their authority. According to such principles, the authority of a scripture is not determined by its date, and this is why it is asked, "Should something said 1,000 years ago be on that account only truer than what was said 100 years ago?" It is held that whilst the teaching of the Agama is ever-existent, particular Tantras are constantly being revealed and withdrawn. There is no objection against a Tantra merely because it was revealed today. When it is said that Shiva spoke the Tantras, or Brahma wrote the celebrated Vaisnava poem called the Brahma Samhita, it is not meant that Shiva and Brahma materialized and took a reed and wrote on birch bark or leaf, but that the Divine Consciousness, to which men gave these and other names, inspired a particular man to teach or to write a particular doctrine or work touching the eternally existing truth. This again does not mean that there was anyone whispering in his ear, but that these things arose in his consciousness. What is done in this world is done through man. There is a profounder wisdom than is generally acknowledged in the saying, "God helps those who help themselves." Inspiration, too, never ceases.

But how, it may be asked, are we to know that what is said is right and true? The answer is, by its fruits. The authority of a Shastra is determined by the question whether Siddhi is gained through its provisions or not. It is not enough that "Shiva Uvacha" (Shiva says) is writ in it. The test is that of Ayurveda. A medicine is a true one if it cures. The Indian test for everything is actual experience. It is from Samadhi that the ultimate proof of Advaita is sought. How is the existence of Kalpas known? It is said they have been remembered, as by the Buddha, who is recorded as having called to mind 91 past Kalpas. There are arguments in favor of rebirth, but that which is tendered as real proof is both the facts of ordinary daily experience, which can, it is said, be explained only on the hypothesis of pre-existence, as also actual recollection by self-developed individuals of their previous lives. Modern Western methods operate through magnetic sleep, producing regression of memory (C.D. Roas Levi, Successive and Lanloi, Posthumous Age). However, is not wholly without its uses, because one of the things to which men look to see in a Shastra is whether it has been accepted or quoted in works of recognized authority. Such a test of authenticity can, of course, only be afforded after the lapse of considerable time, but it does not follow that a statement is in fact without value because, owing to its having been made recently, it is not possible to subject it to such a test. This is the way in which this question of age and authority is looked at on Indian principles.

A wide survey of what is called Orthodox Hinduism today, whatever be its origins, will disclose the following results. Vedanta, in the sense of Upanishad, has its common doctrinal basis, though variously interpreted, and a great number of differing disciplines or modes of practice by which the Vedanta doctrines are realized in actual fact. We must carefully distinguish these two. Thus, the Vedanta says "So'ham" (Ahamsha Hakara) is one wing, Sakara is the other. When stripped of both wings, she Tara is Kamala. Tantra Raja Tantra, the Akara, set forth the means by which So'ham is to be translated into actual fact for the particular Sadhaka. Sadhana comes from the root "sad," which means effort, or striving, or accomplishment. Effort for and towards what? The answer for those who desire it is liberation from every form in the hierarchy of forms which exist as such because Consciousness has so limited itself as to obscure the reality which it is, and which So'ham or Shivoham affirms. And why should man liberate himself from material forms? Because it is said that way only lasting happiness lies, though a passing, yet fruitful, bliss may be had here by those who identify themselves with active Brahman Shakti. It is the actual experience of this declaration of So'ham which, in its fundamental aspect, is Veda knowledge (Vid, or actual spiritual experience). For in the humanistic sense, to truly know anything is to be that thing. This Veda, or experience, is not to be had sitting down, thinking vaguely on the great ether, and doing nothing. Man must transform himself, that is, act, in order to know. Therefore, the watchword of the Tantras is Kriya, or action.

The next question is, what Kriya should be adopted towards this end of Jnana? "Tanote vate janam an it tantam." According to this derivation of the word Tantra from the root "tan" (to spread), it is defined as the Shastra by which knowledge (Jnana) is spread. Mark the word Jnana. The end of the practical methods which these Shastras employ is to spread Tattvic Jnana. It is here we find that variety which is so puzzling to those who have not gone to the root of the religious life of India. The end is substantially one; the means to that end necessarily vary according to knowledge, capacity, and temperament. But here again, we may analyze the means into two main divisions, namely, Vedic and Tantric, to which may be added a third, or the mixed (Mishra). The one body of Hinduism reveals, as it were, a double framework, represented by the Vedic and Tantric Acharas, which have in certain instances been mingled.

The word "Tantra" by itself simply means, as I have already said, treatise, and not necessarily a religious scripture. When it has the latter significance, it may mean the scripture of several divisions of worshippers who vary in doctrine and practice. Thus, there are Tantras of Shaivas, Vaishnavas, and Shaktas, and of various subdivisions of these. So amongst the Shaivas, there are the Shaivas of the Shiva Santa, the Advaita Shiva of the Kashmir school, Prapates, and a multitude of other sects which have their Tantras. If "Tantric" be used as meaning an adherent of the Tantra Shastra, then the word, in any particular case, is without definite meaning. A man to whom the application is given may be a worshipper of any of the five Devatas: Surya, Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Shakti, and of any of the various Sadhanas worshipping that Devata with varying doctrine and practice. The term is a confusing one, though common practice compels its use. So far as I know, those who are named Tantrics do not themselves generally use this term, but call themselves Shaktas, Shaivas, and the like, of whatever Sadhana they happen to be.

Again, Tantra is the name of only one class of scripture. Followed by Tantrics, there are others, namely, Nigamas, Agamas, Yamalas, Damares, Udas, Kaputas, and so forth. None of these names are used to describe the adherents of these Shastras, except, so far as I am aware, Agama in the use of the term Agamika and Advaita in the descriptive name of Advaita Shiva. I give later a list of these scriptures as contained in the various Agamas. If we summarize them shortly under the term Tantra Shastra, or preferably Agama, then we have four main classes of Indian scripture, namely, Veda, Samhita, Brahmana, Upanishad, Agama or Tantra Shastra, Purana, Smriti. Of these Shastras, the authority of the Agama or Tantra Shastra has been denied in modern times. This view may be shown to be erroneous by reference to Shastras of admitted authority. It is spoken of as the fifth Veda. Kubja, the celebrated commentator on Manu, says, "Shruti is twofold: Vedic and Tantric." (Vedic Tantri Kid). This refers to the Contra portion of the Agamas. In the great Vaisnava Shastra, the Shrimad Bhagavata, Bhagavan says, "My worship is of three kinds: Vedic, Tantric, and mixed (Mishra), and that in Kali Yuga, Kriya is to be worshiped according to the injunction of Tantra." The Devi Bhavat speaks of the Tantra Shastra as a Vidanga. It is cited as authority in the Ashtashati Tatva of Gandana, who prescribes for the worship of Durga, as before him had done, Shruta, Harinatha, Vidara, and many others. Some of these and other references are given in Maham, Mahopadhyaya Yavvesara Tararat Tantra Prva in the Saha Samhita of Ashwin 1317. The Tara Pradipa and other Tantric works say that in the Kali Yuga, the Tantrika, and not the Vedic Dharma, is to be followed. This objection about the late character and therefore unauthoritative of the Tantra Shastras generally (I do not speak of any particular form of it) has been taken by Indians from their European gurus.

According to the Shaka scriptures, Veda, in its wide sense, does not only mean Rig, Yajur, Sama, Atharva, as now published, but comprises these together with the generally unknown and unpublished Taras of the Atharva Veda, called Saubhagya, with the Upanishads attached to this. Sayana's commentary is written on the Purana. These are said, though I have not yet verified, to be 64 in number. Some of these, such as Advaita, Tattva Bhava, Kriya, Kalika, Tripura, Tara, Aruna Upanishad, and Bhavopanishad, Bhanopanishad, I have published as the 11th volume of Tantric Texts. Aruna means "she who is red." Redness, Lalita is Vimara. I may also here refer my reader to the Kakaria Satan's commentary on the great Isha Upanishad, included also in Veda. According to the same view, are the Nigamas, Agamas, Yamas, and Tantras. From these, all other Shastras which explain the meaning (Artha) of Veda, such as Purana and Smriti, also I, and so forth, are derived. All these Shastras constitute what is called a "many million Shatakoti Samhita," which are developed the one from the other, as it were, an unfolding series. In the Tantric Sangraha, called Sarasa, by the Sarva Vyasa Sarvananda, the latter cites authority, Narayani Tantra, to show that from Nigama came Agama. Here I pause to note that the Samana says that Kara Shrauta is Dakshina and follows Veda, Veda Marasta, whilst Vama, to which Sarvananda belonged, is Vama and follows Nigama, hence apparently the preeminence given to Nigama. He then says, "From Agama came Yamala, from Yamala the four Vedas, from Vedas the Puranas, from Puranas Smriti, and from Smriti all other Shastras." There are, he says, five Nigamas and 64 Agamas. Four Yamalas are mentioned, which are said to give the gross form (Sthula Rupa). As some may be surprised to learn that the four Vedas came from the Yamalas, i.e., were antara of the Yamalas, which literally means what is uniting or comprehensive. I subjoin the Sanskrit verse from Narayani Tantra: "Brahman [Music] Vishar Mahat."

Some Tantras are called by opposing sects, Vama Virudha, opposed to Veda, which, of course, those who accept them deny. Just as the commentary of the Nitya Shikara speaks of the Panarin as Vashta. That some sects were originally Advaita is probable, but in process of time, various amalgamations of scriptural authority, belief, and practice took place. Whether we accept or not this theory, according to which the Agamas and kindred Shastras are given authority with the four Vedas, we have to accept the facts. What are these? As I have said, on examination, the one body of Hinduism reveals, as it were, a double framework. I am now looking at the matter from an outside point of view, which is not that of the Shaka worshipper. We find on the one hand the four Vedas with their Samhitas, Brahmanas, and Upanishads, and on the other, what has been called the fifth Veda, that is, Nigama, Agama, and kindred Shastras, and certain especially Tantric Upanishads attached to the Shaka of the Atharvaveda. There are Vedic and Tantric Kalpa Sutras and Sutras, such as the Tantrika Devi and Maya Sutras. As a counterpart of the Brahma Sutras, we have the Shakti Sutras of Agastya. Then there is both Vedic and Tantric ritual, such as Homa, Vedic Samskaras, and the Tantric Samskaras, such as Abhisheka, Vedic and Tantric initiation, Upanayana and Diksha, Vedic and Tantric Gayatri, the Vedic Al, the so-called Tantric Bija, such as Hing, Vedic Guru and Desika Guru, and so forth. This dualism may be found carried into other matters as well, such as medicine, law, writing. So whilst the Vedic Ayurveda employed generally vegetable drugs, the Tantric used metallic substances. A counterpart of the Vedic Dapot was the Shiva wife, that is, she who is given by desire. Kama. I have already pointed out the counterparts of the Panchatattva in the Vedas. Some allege a special form of Tantric script, at any rate in Gaud Desa and so forth.

What is the meaning of all this? It is not at present possible to give a certain answer. The subject has been so neglected and is so little known. Before tendering any conclusions with any certainty of their correctness, we must examine the Tantric texts which time has spared. It will be readily perceived, however, that if there be such a double frame as I suggest, it indicates that there were originally two sources of religion, one of which, possibly in some respects the older, incorporated parts of and in time largely superseded the other. And this is what the Tantrics implicitly allege in their views as to the relation of the four Vedas and Agamas. If they are not both of authority, why should such reverence be given to the Desika Gurus and to Tantric Diksha? Probably there were many Avida cults, not without a deep and ancient wisdom of their own, that is, cults outside the Vedic religion (Vahya), which in the course of time adopted certain Vedic rites, such as Homa. The Vaisyas, in their turn, taking up some of the Avida practices. It may be that some Brahmanas joined these so-called Anarya Sadhanas, just as we find today Brahmanas officiating for low castes and being called by their name. At length, the Shastras of the two cults were given at least equal authority. The Vedic practice then largely disappeared, surviving chiefly both in the Smarta rites of today and as embedded in the ritual of the Agamas. These are speculations to which I do not definitely commit myself. They are merely suggestions which may be worth consideration when search is made for the origin of the Agamas. If they be correct, then, in this as in other cases, the beliefs and practices of the soil have been upheld until today against the incoming cults of those Aryas who followed the Vedic rites, and who, in their turn, influenced the various religious communities without the Vedic fold. The Smarts of today represent what is generally called the Smarta side, though in these rites there are mingled many Puranic ingredients. The Arya Samaj is another present-day representative of the old Vedic Achara, mingled, as it seems to me, with a modernism which is Puritan and otherwise. The other, or Tantric, side is represented by the general body of present-day Hinduism, and in particular by the various sectarian divisions of Shaivas, Shaktas, Vaishnavas, and so forth, which go to its making. Each sect of worshippers has its own Tantras. In a previous chapter, I have shortly referred to the Tantras of the Shiva Santa, of the Pancaratra Agama, and of the Northern Shaivism, of which the Malini Vijaya Tantra sets the type. The old five-fold division of worshippers was according to the Pancha Upasana: Surya, Ganapati, Vaisnava, Shiva, and Shakta, whose Mula Devatas were Surya, Ganapati, Vishnu, Shiva, and Shakti, respectively. At the present time, the three-fold division Vaisnava, Shiva, Shakta, is of more practical importance, as the other two survive only to a limited extent today. In parts of Western India, the worship of Ganapati is still popular, and I believe some Sauras, or traces of Sauras, here and there exist, especially in Sindh.

Six Amnayas are mentioned in the Tantras: Shad-amnaya. These are the six faces of Shiva, looking East (Purva Amnaya), South (Dakshina Amnaya), West (Paschima Amnaya), North (Uttara Amnaya), Upper (Urdhva Amnaya), and concealed (Adhama). The six Amnayas are thus so-called according to the order of their origin. They are thus described in the Daksha Agama, cited in the Tantra Rahasya (see also, with some variation, probably due to corrupt text, Patala 2 of Sakarat Tantra):

1. The face in the East, that is, in front, is of pearl-like luster, with three eyes and crowned by the Crescent Moon. By this face, I (Shiva) revealed the Devis: Shri Bhuvaneswari, Tripura, Lolita, Padma, Shuli, Sarasvati, Darita, Nitya, Vajra, Prar, Anapa, Mahalakshmi, Lakshmi, Vadini, with all their rites and mantras.

2. To the southern face is of a yellow color, with three eyes. By this face, I revealed Prasad, Sadashiva, Maha Prasad, Mantra, Damti, Vuka, Mugosa, Pava, M, Sanjian, Viya, Munaya, with their rites and mantras.

3. The face in the West, that is, at the back, is of the color of a freshly formed cloud. By this face, I revealed Gopala, Krishna, Narayana, Vasudeva, Nishimha, Manu, Varaha, Ramachandra, Vishnu, Harihara, Ganesha, Agni, Yama, Surya, Vidhu, Chandra, and other planets, Garuda, Dalis, Hanuman, and other Suras, their rites and mantras.

4. The face in the North is blue in color and with three eyes. By this face, I revealed the Devis: Dhalika, Mahakali, Guaka, Smashana Kalika, Padali, Ekata, Ugratara, Tarit, Kayani, Chasta, Nila, Sarasari, Durga, Jayadurga, Navadurga, Vashi, Davati, Vishalakshi, Gri, Balam, Mukhi, Pratyangira, Matangi, Mahisha Mardini, their rites and mantras.

5. The upper face is white. By this face, I revealed Shri Tripura Sundari, Triari, Pyi, Trurh, Smashi, Shatab, Anaer, Pami, Shodashi, Molini, Valavala, with their rites and mantras.

6. The sixth face below is lustrous, of many colors, and concealed. It is by this mouth that I spoke of Dastana, Asana, Yantra, Mala, Naedia, Balana, Sadhana, Puraran, Mantra, Siddhi. It is called Ishana Amnaya.

The Sakarat Tantra, Ch. 2, says that whilst the first four Amnayas are for with the Katara or Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha, the upper (Urdhva) and lower (Adhama) are for liberation only. The Samana Tantra first explains Purva, Damaya, Pasaya, Uttara, Ura, according to what is called Desap Paraya. I am informed that no Puja of Adhama is generally done, but that Shad-amnaya Shaivas, very, very high Sadhakas, at the door of liberation, Dasa, with this sixth concealed face. It is said that Patala Amnaya is Samboa Yoga. The Nisha aspect in Shaktia is for Purva Tripura; for Dakshina, Sa Ganapa and Vaishnava; for Paschima, Rudra Pyroa; for Uttara, Ugra, Aarini. In Shiva Karma, the same aspect is for the first Sampat Prada and Mahesh; for the second, Agora, Kalika, and Vaishnava Darana; for the third, Rudra, Vra, Shiva; for the fourth, Kubera, Pira, Saaka; and for Urdhva Amnaya, Ardhan, Arisha, and Pranava. Narada Tantra says that the first two Amnayas contain rites for the Pashu Sadhaka (see as to the meaning of this and the other classes of Sadhakas, the chapter on Panchatattva ritual). Purvam Yitam Karma Pasam Kitam Pri. And so with the next. The third or Paschima is a combination of Pashu and Vira. Paschim Jam Karma Pasu. Uttara is for Vira and Deva. Uttara Karma Divam Pri. The upper Amnaya is for the Deva Karma Pri. It adds that even the Deva does Sadhana in the Cremation ground in Virabhava, that is, heroic frame of mind and disposition, but he does such worship without Virasana. The Samana also gives a classification of Tantras according to the Amnayas, as also special classifications, such as the Tantras of the six Amnayas according to Vatam Naya. As only one text of the Sahana is available whilst I write, it is not possible to speak with certainty of accuracy as regards all these details. Each of these divisions of worshippers have their own Tantras, as also had the Jains and Bauddhas. Different sects had their own particular subdivisions and Tantras, of which there are various classifications according to Kantas, Dapara, Kalapara, and so forth. The Samana Tantra mentions 22 different Agamas, including Sagama (a Shaka form), Pashupata (a Shiva form), Pancaratra (a Vaisnava form), Kapalika, Pava, Agora, Gina, B, each of which is said there to contain a certain number of Tantras and Upat Tantras. According to the Samana Tantra, the Tantras according to Kalapara are the 64 Shaka Tantras with 327 Upat Tantras, eight Yamalas, four Damaras, two Kalpalatas, and several Samhitas, Kudam Manis, 100 Arnas, Puranas, Upas, Kaputas, Vim Marini, and Camonis. The Shiva class contains 32 Tantras with its own Yamala, Damaras, and so forth. The Vaisnava class contains 75 Tantras with the same, including CPUs and other Shastras. The Saura class has Tantras with its own Yamas, Udas, and other works, and the Ganapatya class contains 30 Tantras with Upat Tantras, Kalpas, and other Shastras, including one Damara and one Yamala. The Bauddha class contains Kalpadruma, Cadenus, Suktas, Cromas, Puranas, and other Shastras.

According to the Karava and Janadipa Tantras, there are seven Acharas, of which the first four (Veda, Vaisnava, Shiva, and Daksha) belong to Pashu Achara. Then becomes Vama, followed by Santa, in which gradual approach is made to Kakara. The reputed highest. Elsewhere, six and nine Acharas are spoken of, and different kinds of Babas: Sababa, Vibhava, and Devava, and so forth, which are referred to in Babak Chudamani. An account of the Acharas is given in the Harat. Vama Achara is the lowest, and Kakara the highest. Their characteristics are given in the 24th Patala of Vishvasa. Sarat Tantra: The first four belong to Pashu Achara (see chapter on Shakas Sadhana), and the last three are for Vira and Divya Sadhakas. Summarizing the points of the Vishvasa: A Sadhaka in Vama Achara should carry out the prescriptions of the Veda. Should not cohabit with his wife except in the period following the courses. He should not eat fish and meat on the Parva days. He should not worship the Deva at night. In Vaisnava Achara, he follows injunctions Nama of Vama Achara. He must give up eating of flesh. Nitya Tantra says he must not kill animals, avoid sexual intercourse, and even the talk of it. This doubtless means a negation of the Vira ritual. He should worship Vishnu. This Achara is distinguished from the last by the great endurance of Tapas and the contemplation of the Supreme everywhere. In Shakara, Vama Achara is prescribed, with this difference that there must be no slaughter of animals, and meditation is on Shiva. Dakshara is said to have been practiced by Rishi Dakshinamurti, and is therefore so-called. This Achara is preparatory for the Vira and Divya Babas. Meditation is on the Supreme Ishvari. After taking Vijaya (hemp), Japa of Mantra is done at night. Siddhi is attained by using a rosary of human bone (Maalaka) at certain places, including a Shaktia. Vama Achara is approved for Viras and Divas. One should be continent (Brahmachari) at day and worship with the Panchatattva at night. Panchatattva Ratra Deim Pruet. The statement of Nitya Patala Ratra Deim Pruet Jayet is, if correctly reported, I think incorrect. This is Vira Sadhana, and the Vira should generally only use substitutes when the real Tattvas cannot be found. Kakara worship is done. Siddhi is destroyed by Revelation thereof, therefore the Vama path is hidden. The Santari is superior to the last by his knowledge hidden in the Vedas, Shastras, and Puranas like fire in wood, by his freedom from fear of the Pashu, by his adherence to the truth, and by his open performance of the Panchatattva ritual, open and frank. He cares not what is said. He offers the Panchatattvas openly. Then follows a notable passage: "Just as it is not blamable to drink openly in the Srauta Yajna (Vedic rite), so in Santara wine is drunk openly. As it is not blamable to kill horses in the Ashva Yajna (Vedic rite), so no offense is committed in killing animals in this Dharma." Nitya Tantra says that an article, be it pure or impure, becomes pure by purification. Holding a cup made of human skull and wearing the Rudraksha, the Santari moves on Earth in the form of Pira himself. The knowledge of the last Achara, that of the Kakara, makes one Shiva. Just as the footprint of every animal disappears in that of the elephant, so every Dharma is lost in the greatness of Kula Dharma. Here there are no injunctions or prohibitions, no restriction as to time or place; in fact, no rule at all. Achara is himself Guru and Sadashiva, and none are superior to him. Kalas are of three classes: Inferior, the ordinary or Prapra Kala, who is ever engaged in rituals such as Japa, Homa, Puja, follows Vama Achara with Panchatattva, and strives to attain the Highland of knowledge. Middling is the Kala, who does Sadhana with Panchatattva, is deeply immersed in meditation (Dhyana) and Samadhi. Superior, the Kala, who, O Mistress of the Kalas, sees the imperishable and all-pervading Self in all things and all things in the Self. He is a good Kala who makes no distinction between mud and sandal paste, gold and straw, a home and the Cremation ground. He is a superior Kala who meditates on the Self with the Self, who has equal regard for all, who is full of contentment, forgiveness, and compassion. Nitya Tantra, Patala 3, says that Kalas move about in various shapes: now as an ordinary man of the world, adhering to social rules (Shishta); at other times as one who has fallen therefrom (Vrutta); at other times he seems to be as weird and unearthly as a ghost (Bhuta). Kakara is, it says, the essence which is obtained from the ocean of Veda and Agama after churning it with the staff of knowledge.

In a modern account of the Acharas, C. Sanatana Sadhan Tatva, or Tantra Rahasya, by Sachidananda Swami, it is said that some speak of Agorachara and Yogachara as two further divisions between the last but one and last. However this may be, the Aghoras of today are a separate sect who, it is alleged, have degenerated into mere eaters of corpses, though Aghora is said to only mean one who is liberated from the terrible Ghara Samsara. In Yogachara, one learns the upper heights of Sadhana and the mysteries of Yoga, such as the movements of the Vayu in the bodily microcosm (Kshudra Randhra), the regulation of which controls the inclinations and propensities (Vriti). Yogachara is entered by Yoga Diksha, and achievement in Ashtanga Yoga qualifies for Kakara. Whether there were such further divisions, I cannot at present say. I prefer for the time being to follow the Kolar Navava. The Swami's account of these is as follows: Vama Achara, which consists in the daily practice of the Vedic rites with, I may add, some Tantric observances, is the gross body (Sthula Deha), which comprises within it all the other Acharas, which are, as it were, its subtle body (Sukshma Deha) of various degrees. The worship is largely of an external character, the object of which is to strengthen Dharma. This is the path of action (Karma Marga). This, and some other observations, may be a modern reading of the old facts, but are, on the whole, I think, justified. The second stage of Vama Achara is the path of devotion (Bhakti Marga), and the aim is Union of devotion with faith previously acquired. The worshipper passes from blind faith to an understanding of the Supreme Protecting Energy of the Brahman, towards which his devotion goes forth with an increasing determination to uphold Dharma and to destroy Adharma. The Sadhaka passes into the third stage, or Shiva Achara, which the author cited calls the militant Kshatriya stage, wherein to love and mercy are added strenuous striving and the cultivation of power. There is Union of Faith, devotion, and inward determination (Antaraka). Entrance is here made upon the Path of Knowledge (Jnana Marga). Following this is the fourth stage, or Dakara, which originally and in Tantra Shastra does not mean right-hand worship, but, according to the author cited, is the Achara favorable to the accomplishment of the higher Sadhana, of which Dhya Kika is Dei. The Vishvasa already cited derives the word from Daksha Murti Muni, but Daksha in either case has the same meaning. Dhali is a Dei of Uttara, and approach is here made to Vira rituals. This stage commences when the worshipper can make Dhyana and Dhyana of the three-fold Shakti of the Brahman (Ichha, Kriya, Jnana) and understands the mutual connection of the three and of their expression as the Gunas, and until he receives the right of initiation called Paba Bisha. At this stage, the Sadhaka is Shakta and qualified for the worship of the three-fold Shakti of Brahman: Brahma, Vishnu, Maheshvara. He worships the Adya Shakti as Dha Kika, in whom are united the three Shaktis. The aim of this stage is the union of Faith, devotion, and determination with a knowledge of the three-fold energies. Passages thus made from the Deva aspect to the Deva whole. Up to this stage, the Sadhaka has followed Priti Marga, or the outgoing path, the path of worldly enjoyment, albeit curbed by Dharma. The Sadhaka now, upon the exhaustion of the form of the outward current, makes entry on the path of return (Nivritti Marga). As this change is one of primary importance, some have divided the Acharas into the two broad divisions of Dakshina Achara, including the first four, and Vamachara, including the last three. Strictly, however, the first three can only be thus included in the sense that they are preparatory to Dakara proper, and are all in the Priti Marga, and are not Vama Achara. It is thus said that men are born into Dakara, but are received by initiation into Vama Achara. As Dakara does not mean right-hand worship, so Vama Achara does not mean, as is vulgarly supposed, left-hand worship. Left hand in English has a bad sense, and it is not sense to suppose that the Shastra which prescribes this Achara itself gives it a bad name. Vama is very variously interpreted. Some say it is the worship in which woman (Vama) enters, that is, Ladana. Vama, this author says, means adverse, that is, the stage adverse to the Priti which governs in varying degrees the previous Acharas, for entry is here made on the Nivritti path of return to the source of outgoing. In this Achara also, there is worship of the Vada Devi. In Vama Achara, the Sadhaka commences to directly destroy Priti, and with the help of the Guru to cultivate Nivriti. The help of the Guru throughout is necessary. It is comparatively easy to lay down rules for the Priti Marga, but nothing can be achieved in Vama Achara without the Guru's help. Some of the disciplines are admittedly dangerous, and if entered upon without authority and discretion, will probably lead to abuse. The method of the Guru at this stage is to use the forces of Priti in such a way as to render them self-destructive. The passions which bind, notably the fundamental instincts for food, drink, and sexual satisfaction, may be, it is said, so employed as to act as forces whereby the particular life, of which they are the strongest physical manifestation, is raised to the universal life. Passion, which has hitherto run downward and outwards, often to waste, is directed inwards and upwards and transformed to power. But it is not only the lower physical desires of eating, drinking, and sexual intercourse which must be subjugated. The Sadhaka must at this stage commence the process, it continues until the fruit of Kalakara is obtained, to cut off all the eight bonds (Pasha) which have made him a Pashu. For up to and including Dakara is Pashu worship. These Pasha bonds or afflictions are variously enumerated, but the more numerous classifications are merely elaborations of the smaller divisions. Thus, according to the Devi Bhavat, Moha is ignorance or bewilderment, and Maha Moha is the desire for worldly pleasure which flows from it. The Karava Tantra mentions eight primary bonds: Daya, that is, pity, as the feeling which binds, as opposed to divine compassion or Karuna; Moha, ignorance; Lajja, shame, which does not mean that a man is to be a shameless sinner, but weak, worldly shame of being looked down upon, of infringing conventions, and so forth; family (Kula), which ceases to be a tie; Shila, here usage, convention; and Varna, cast, for the enlightened is beyond all its distinctions. When, to take the Swami's example, Shri Krishna stole the clothes of the bathing Gopis, or milkmaids and cowherds, and made them approach him naked, he removed the artificial coverings which are imposed on man in the Samsara. The Gopis were eight, as are the bonds, and the errors by which the Jiva is misled are the clothes which Krishna stole. Freed of these, the Jiva is liberated from all bonds arising from his desires, family, and society. Formerly, it was sufficient to live in worldly fashion, according to the morality governing life in the world. Now, the Sadhaka must go further and transcend the world, or rather seek to do so. He rises by those things which are commonly the cause of fall. When he has completely achieved his purpose and liberated himself from all bonds, he reaches the stage of Shiva, Shivat. It is the aim of the Nivritti Sadhana to liberate man from the bonds which bind him to the Samsara and to qualify the Vira Sadhaka through Rajasa Upasana (see chapter on Panchatattva) of the highest grades of Sadhana, in which the Sattvika Guna predominates. He is then Deva, or Divine. To the truly Sattvika, there is neither attachment, fear, nor disgust (Ghrina). What is thus commenced in Vama Achara is gradually completed by the rituals of Santara and Kakara. In the last three Acharas, the Sadhaka becomes more and more freed from the darkness of Samsara, and is attached to nothing, hates nothing, is ashamed of nothing, really shameful acts being ex hypothesi below his acquired stage, and has freed himself of the artificial bonds of family, cast, and society. He becomes an Avadhuta, that is, one who has washed off everything and has relinquished the world. Of these, as stated later, there are several classes. For him, there is no rule of time or place. He becomes like Shiva himself, a dweller in the Cremation ground (Smashana). He attains Brahma Jnana, or the Gnosis, in perfect form. On receiving Mahapra, he performs his own funeral rites and is dead to the Samsara. Seated alone in some quiet place, he remains in constant Soma ecstasy and attains it in its highest, or Nirva Palpa form. The great Mother, the Supreme Priti, Mahashakti, dwells in his heart, which is now the inner cremation ground, wherein all passions have been burnt away. He becomes a Paramahamsa, who is liberated whilst yet living (Jivanmukta).

From the above, it will be seen that the Acharas are not various sects in the European sense, but stages in a continuous process through which the Sadhaka must pass before he reaches the Supreme state of the highest Kala. For the Kalas are of differing degrees. Passing from the gross outer body of Vama Achara, he learns its innermost core of doctrine, not expressed but latent in it. These stages need not be, and are not ordinarily, passed through by each Jiva in the course of a single life. On the contrary, they are, as a rule, traversed in the course of a multitude of births, in which case the weaving of the spiritual garment is recommenced where in a previous birth it was dropped. On death, in one life, the Sadhaka may commence at any stage. If he is a true Kala, now it is because in previous births he has, by Sadhana in the preliminary stages, won his entrance into it. Knowledge of Shakti is, as the Narada Tantra says, acquired after many births, and according to the Mahan Tantra, it is by merit acquired in previous births that the mind is inclined to Kakara. Kala Dharma is in no wise sectarian, but on the contrary, claims to be the head of all sects. It is said, "At heart a Shaka, outwardly a Shiva, in gatherings a Vaisnava, who are wont to gather together for worship in praise of Hari." In thus many a guise the Kalas wander on Earth. "An Shaka Mah." The saying has been said to be an expression of this claim, which is, I think, involved in it. It does, however, also, I think, indicate secrecy and adaptability to sectarian form of him who has pierced to the core of that which all sects, in varying though partial ways, present. Kala is one who has passed through these and other stages, which have as their own inmost doctrine, whether these worshippers know it or not, that of Kakara. It is indifferent what the Kala's apparent sect may be. The form is nothing and everything. It is nothing in the sense that it has no power to narrow the Kala's inner life. It is everything in the sense that knowledge may infuse its apparent limitations with an universal meaning. A man may thus live in all sects without their form being ever to him a bond.

In Vedic times, there were four Ashramas, that is, states and stages in the life of the Arya, namely, in their order: that of the chaste student (Brahmacharya), secular life as a married householder (Grihastha), the life of the forest recluse with his wife in retirement from the world (Vana Prastha), lastly, that of the beggar (Bhiku) or Avad.

Huta, wholly detached from the world, spending his time in meditation on the Supreme Brahman in preparation for shortly coming death. All these four were for the Brahman cast; the first three for the Chhatria; the first two for the Visha; and for the Sudra, the second only. As neither the conditions of life nor the character, capacity, and powers of the people of this age allow of the first and third ashrama, the Mahanana Tantra states that in the Kali age there are only two ashramas, namely the second and last, and these are open to all casts indiscriminately.

The same Tantra speaks of four classes of yogi or avadhutas, namely the Shaad avadhuta and Brahma avadhuta, which are of two kinds: imperfect (ara) and perfect (purna). The first three have enjoyment and practice yoga. The fourth, or Paramahamsa, should be absolutely chaste and should not touch metal. He is beyond all household duties and cast and ritual, such as the offering of food and drink to devata. The Pura Vadara classes the avadhuta into: a) Kuluta, b) Bhavavuta, c) Brahma Vuta, d) Hamsa Vuta. Some speak of three divisions of each of the classes: Shiva Vuta and Brahma Vuta. The Sha vadas are not, either from a western or shastric standpoint, as high as the Brahma Vuta. The lowest of the last class can have intercourse only with his own wife (shakti), as opposed to the Shivashakti. The middling has ordinarily nothing to do with any shakti, and the highest must under no circumstance touch a woman or metal, nor does he practice any rites or keep any observances.

The main divisions here are Vakara, Dakara, and Vakara. Vakara is not Vika Cara, that is, in the Shauta sense, for the Shrout of Idara appears to be outside this sevenfold tantric division, of which Vakara is the tantric counterpart. For it is tantric upasana with Viic writs and mantras, with I have been told Agy as deata. As a speculation, we may suggest that this Akara was for those not adhikari for what is called the Shav Vakara. The second and third belong and lead up to the complete, completed Dakara. This is Pash Vakara. Vakara commences the other mode of worship, leading up to the completed Kaa. The Kaav Vuta, Avuta, and Divia. Here, with the attainment of Brahmana, we reach the region which is beyond all Aaras, which is known as Sakara. All that those belonging to this state do or touch is pure. In and after Vamachara, there is eating and drinking in and as part of worship, and mathuna. After the Pashu, there is the Vera, and then the Diva. Pashu is the starting point, Vera is on the way, and Diva is the goal.

Each of the sects has a Dakshina and Vama division. It is commonly thought that this is peculiar to Shakas, but this is not so. Thus, there are Vama Ghap Patiyas and Vavas, and so forth. Again, Vakara is itself divided again into a right and left side. In the former, wine is taken in a cup of stone or other substance, and worship is with the Sakia Shakti or sedaka's own wife. In the latter, and more advanced stage, drinking is done from a skull, and worship may be with Parer, that is, some other Shakti. In the case, however, of some sects which belong to the Vakara division, whilst there is meat and wine, there is, I am told, no shaki, for the members are chased Brahmachari. So far as I can ascertain, these sects which are mentioned later seem to belong to the Shiva, as opposed to the Shaka group.

The Tantric Sraha called Shakan Nand Tarangini by Brahmananda Swami says that Aama is both Sadagama and Aadama, and that the former alone is Aama according to the primary meaning of the word. Sagama Eva Aash Shabd Dasha Mvat. He then says that Shiva in the Aama Samhita condemns the Asatama, saying, "Oh Devesi, men in the Kali age are generally of a rajasic and thomasc disposition, and being addicted to forbidden ways, deceive many others. Oh Surari, those who in disregard of their Varnashrad Dharma offer to us flesh, blood, and wine become Bhas Pritus and Brahmarakshas," that is, various forms of evil spirits. This prohibits such worship as is opposed to Varnashrad Dharma. It is said, however, by the Vakari who take consecrated wine and flesh as a yajna, not to cover their case.

It is not uncommonly thought that Vakara is that Akara into which Vama or woman enters. This is true only to a certain extent, that is, it is a true definition of those Sadhakas who do worship with Shakti according to Vakara writes. But it seems to be incorrect insofar as there are, I am told, worshippers of the Vamachara division who are chased Brahmachari. Vakara means literally "left way," not "left-handed" in the English sense, which means what is bad. As the name is given to these Sadhakas by themselves, it is not likely that they would adopt a title which condemns them. What they mean is that this Akara is the opposite of Du Shakara. Philosophically, it is more monistic. It is said that even in the highest city of Adakin Akari, there is always someone above him. But the fruit of Vakara and its subsequent and highest stages is that the Sadhaka becomes the emperor himself. The Baba differs, and the power of its method compared with Dakshin Nakara is said to be that between milk and wine. Moreover, it is to be noted that the Devi whom they worship is on the left of Shiva.

In Vakara, we find Kikas, Kukas, Pasup, Banderas, Digambaras, Aoras, followers of Kinara, and Kus. Generally, who are initiated. In some cases, as in that of the advanced division of Kalus, worship is with all five Tatvas (panat tatvas). In some cases, there is Brahmacharya, as in the case of Agora and Pashupata, though these drink wine and eat flesh food. Some Vomaris, I am informed, never cease to be chased Brahmachari, such as Ogad Sadus, worshippers of Batuka Hra, Kadari, and followers of Gorakshanaa, Sitan, and Mats, and Ran. In Nil, there is no Myuna. In some sects, there are differing practices. Thus, I am told, amongst the Calamas, the Calavas only worshiped Kumaris up to the age of N, whereas the Kamam Mohanas worship with adult shakes. Some advanced members of this, in its general sense, Vakara division, do not, I am informed, even take wine and meat. It is said that the great Vakari Sadhaka, Raja Krishna Kondra of Nadia, upasaka of the Chinnamasta Murti, did not take wine. Such and similar Sadhakas have passed beyond the preliminary stage of Vakara, and indeed, in its special sense, Vakara itself. They may be Brahma Callas.

As regards Sadhakas generally, it is well to remember what the Mahakala Samhita, the great Shastra of the Masta Kalus, says in the 11th Aasa called Sharira Yoga Kathanam: "Some Kalas there are who seek the good of this world (Adat Mana). So also the Vias enjoy what is here (Aaram Kamayan), as do I (interpose the vast bulk of present humanity) and are not Seekers of Liberation (Amri Raim Nakurvanti). Only by Nishkama Sadana is Liberation attained." The Panchatatva are either real (Praka). Idealizing statements to the contrary are, when not due to ignorance, false (substitutional ANUK palpa) or esoteric (Divat Tatva). As regards the second, even a vegetarian would not object to meat, which is in fact ginger, nor the abstainer to wine, which is coconut water in a bell metal vessel. As for the esoteric Tatva, they are not material articles or practices, but the symbols for yogic processes.

Again, some notions and practices are more moderate, and others extreme. The account given in the Mahan Nirvana of the Pavi and Tatva Kakas may be compared with some more unrestrained practice, and the former again may be contrasted with a modern Kakra described in the 13th chapter of the Life of Bjoy Krishna Goswami by Jaged Bandu Mitra. There, a Tantrika Sida formed a Kakra at which the Goswami was present. The latter says that all who were there felt as if the Shakti was their own mother who had borne them, and the devatas whom the Keshvara invoked appeared in the circle to accept the offerings. Whether this is accepted as a fact or not, it is obvious that it was intended to describe a Cakra of a different kind from that of which we have more commonly heard.

There are some practices which are not correctly understood. There are some principles which the bulk of men will not understand, for to so understand, there must be, besides knowledge, that indefinable Bhava, the possession of which carries with it the explanation which no words can give. I have dealt with this subject in the chapter on the P Kataa. There are expressions which do not bear their surface meaning. Gamsa Bakana is not be feeding, but putting the tongue in the root of the throat. What some translate as "ravishing the widow" refers not to a woman, but to a process in Kundalini Yoga, and so forth. Lastly, and this is important, a distinction is seldom, if ever, made between shastric principles and actual practice, nor is count taken of the conditions properly governing the worship and its abuse. It is easy to understand that if Hinduism has in general degenerated, there has been a fall here. It is, however, a mistake to suppose that the sole object of these rites is enjoyment. It is not necessary to be a Tantric for that. The moral of all this is that it is better to know the facts than to make erroneous generalizations.

There are said to be three Kantas or geographical divisions of India, of which, roughly speaking, the northeastern portion is Vishnu Kanta, the northwestern Rakr, and the remaining and Southern portion is Ashvar. According to the Shakam Mariala and Mahasi Sarat Tantras, Vishnu Kanta, which includes Bengal, extends from the Vinda range to Chatala or Chittagong. From Vinia to Tibet and China is Rakr. There is then some difference between these two Tantras as to the position of Ashva. According to the first, this last Kanta extends from the Vinda to the Sea, which perhaps includes the rest of India. According to the Mahasi Sarat Tantra, it extends from the Katoya River to a point which cannot be identified with certainty in the text cited, but which may be Java. To each of these 64 Tantras have been assigned. One of the questions awaiting solution is whether the Tantras of these three geographical divisions are marked by both doctrinal and ritual peculiarities, and if so, what they are. This subject has been referred to in the first part of the Principles of Tantra, wherein a list of Tantras is given.

In the Shaka division, there are four Sadas, namely Carala, Kashmir, Ga, and Vasa, in each of which there is both outer and inner worship. The Samana Tantra gives these four Sadas also, the number of Tantras not only in the first three Sadas but in Cena and Dravida. I have been informed that out of 56 desas, which included besides Hunas, places outside India such as Cena, Mahat, B, Simala, 18 follow GA, extending from Napala to Kalinga, and 19 follow Kerala, extending from Vinda Ala to the Southern Sea. The remaining countries forming part of the Kashmir DEA, and that in each Sraa there are Padati such as Shuda, Gupta, Ugra. There is variance in devatas and rituals, some of which are explained in the Tarasuk and Shakti Samama Tantra. There are also various Matas such as Karimata, called Virad Danuta, of which the Deata is Khali. Introduction to Tantra Raja Tantra, a short analysis. Hadata called Hamsar Raja, of which Tripurasundari is Dvata, and Kahar Mat, the combination of the two, of which Tara is Dvata, that is, Nila Sarasvati. Certain desas are called Kadi Hadi Gahad desas, and each Mata has several Amnas. It is said that the Hamara Mahavidya is the Sovereign Lady of Yoga, whom Ginus call Padmavati. Shakas, Shakti, Bas, Tara, CA, Sadakas, Mogra, and Kaas, Kakari. The Kadis call her Khali, the Hadis Shri Sundari, and the Kadi Hadis Hamsa. Volumes 8 and 12 of Tantric Texts contain that portion of the Tantra Raja which belongs to Kadima, and in the English introduction mentioned above, I have dealt with this subject. GA Sadia considers Kotti the highest, whilst Kashmir and Kola worship Tripura and Tara. Possibly there may have been originally Deas which were the exclusive seats of specific schools of Tantra, but later and at present, so far as they exist, this cannot be said. In each of the desas, different Sadas may be found, though doubtless at particular places, as in Bengal, particular sex may be predominant.

In my opinion, it is not yet possible to present with both accuracy and completeness the doctrine and practice of any particular Tantric school and to indicate wherein it differs from other schools. It is not possible at present to say fully and precisely who the original Shakas were, the nature of their subdivisions, and of their relation to or distinction from some of the Shiva group. Thus, the Kalas are generally in Bengal included in the Brahaj Jani Shaka group, but the Samana, in one passage already cited, mentions Kala and Shaka separately. Possibly, it is there meant to distinguish ordinary Shaktas from the special group called Kaa Shakas. In Kashmir, some Kalas, I believe, call themselves Shivas. For an answer to these and other questions, we must await a further examination of the texts. At present, I am doing clearing of mud (panod) from the tank, not in the expectation that I can wholly clear away the mud and weeds, but with a desire to make a beginning which others may complete.

He who has not understood Tantra Shastra has not understood what Hinduism is as it exists today. The subject is an important part of Indian culture and therefore worth study by the duly qualified. What I have said should be sufficient to warn the ignorant from making rash generalizations. At present, we can say that he who worships the Mantra and Yant of Shakti is a Shaka, and that there were several Sadas of these worshippers. What we can and should first do is to study the Shaka Darana as it exists today, working back from the known to the unknown.

What I am about to describe is the Shak to Faith as it exists today, that is, Shakiva, not as something entirely new, but as the development and amalgamation of the various cults which were its ancestors. Summarizing Shaka Doctrine, we may first affirm that it is Adada, or monism. This we might expect, seeing that it flourished in Bengal, which, as the old Gaad Desa, is the guru both of Adada and of Tantra Shastra. From GAA came Gaap Pakara, Madusu Sarasvati, author of the Great Advit Cidi, Ramachandra Tabh Harati, Sitsu Kakaria, and others. There seems to me to be a strong disposition in the Brahma Parayana Bengali temperament towards Adv Avada. For all Adians, the Shaka Agama and Adv Shagama must be the highest form of worship. A detailed account of the Adv teachings of the Shakas is a matter of great complexity and of a highly esoteric character, beyond the scope of this paper.

I may here note that the Shakat Tantras speak of 94 Tatvas, made up of 10, 12, and 16 Callus of Fire, Sun, and Moon, constituting the Kakala respectively, and 19 of Sadashiva, six of Ishvara, 10 each of Rudra, Vishnu, and Brahma. The 51 Callus or Matracas, which are the Sukar Rupa of the 51 letters (Varna), are a portion of these 94. These are the 51 coils of Kundali from Bindu to Shrim Trotti Sundari, mentioned in my Garland of Letters, or Studies on the Mantra Shastra. These are all worshipped in the wine jar by those Shakas who take wine. The Shastras also set out the 36 Tatvas which are common to Shakas and Salvas. The five Kalas, which are Soma to the Tatvas, namely Nivriti, Pratisha, Vidya, Shanta, Shanti, Atita, and the Shadad, namely Varna, P, and Mantra, Kala, Tatva, Bhuvana, which represent the Artha aspect and the Shabda aspect respectively (see Garland of Letters).

To pass to more popular matters, a beautiful and tender concept of the Shakas is the motherhood of God, that is, God as Shakti, or the power which produces, maintains, and withdraws the universe. This is the thought of a worshipper, though the Saman Tantra gives high place to Shamara as conqueror of Buddhism, speaking of him as a manifestation of Shiva and identifying his four disciples and himself with the five Maha Pret as. The Agamas, as shastras of worship, do not teach Mayavada as set forth according to Shamara's transcendental method. Maya, to the Shaka worshipper, is not an unconscious something, not real, not unreal, not real-unreal, which is associated with Brahman in its Ishara aspect, though it is not Brahman. Brahman is never associated with anything but itself. Maya, to the Shaka, is Shakti veiling herself as Consciousness, but which, as being Shakti, is Consciousness. To the Shaka, all that he sees is the Mother; all is Consciousness. This is the standpoint of Sadana. The Adians of Shamara School claim that their Doctrine is given from the standpoint of City. I will not argue this question here. When City is obtained, there will be no argument. Until that event, man is, it is admitted, subject to Maya and must think and act according to the forms which it imposes on him. It is more important, after all, to realize in fact the universal presence of the Divine Consciousness than to attempt to explain it in philosophical terms.

The Divine Mother first appears in and as her worshipper, earthly mother, then as his wife, thirdly as Kik. She reveals herself in old age, disease, and death. It is she who manifests, and not without a purpose, in the vast outpouring of Samhara Shakti, which was witnessed in the great world conflict of our time. The terrible beauty of such forms is not understood, and so we get the recent utterance of a missionary professor at Madras, who, being moved to horror at the sight of, I think, the Kunda Murti called the Dei, a she-devil. Lastly, she takes to herself the dead body and the fierce tongues of flame which light the funeral pyre.

The monest is naturally unsectarian, and so the Shaka Faith, as held by those who understand it, is free from a narrow sectarian spirit. Nextly, it, like the other Agamas, makes provision for all casts and both sexes. Whatever be the true doctrine of the Vias, their practice is in fact marked by exclusiveness. Thus, they exclude women and Sudras. It is easy to understand why the so-called Anaria Sadas did not do so. A glorious feature of the Shaka faith is the honor which it pays to woman, and this is natural for those who worship the Great Mother, whose representative vigraha all earthly women are. Strio DEA, Stria Prana, women are dasas, women are life itself. And as an old hymn in the Sarasa has it, it is because woman is a vigraha of the Ambadevi, her likeness in flesh and blood, that the Shakat Tantras enjoy the honor and worship of women and girls (Kumaris) and forbid all harm to them, such as the Sati WR enjoining that not even a female animal is to be sacrificed. With the same solicitude for women, the Mahana prescribes that even if a man speaks rudely (dvata IAM cathan) to his wife, he must fast for a whole day and enjoins the education of daughters before their marriage. The Muslim author of The Dabistan says, "The Agama favors both sexes equally. Men and women equally compose mankind. This sect hold women in great esteem and call them shakes, and to ill treat a Shakti, that is, a woman, is a crime." The Shakat Tantras again allow of women being being Guru or spiritual director, a reverence which the West has not, with rare exceptions, yet given them. Initiation by a mother bears eight-fold fruit. Indeed, to the enlightened Shaka, the whole universe is Stree or Shakti. Aam, as the Adaba Vano Upanishad says, "A high worship therefore which can be offered to the mother today consists in getting rid of abuses which have neither the authority of an shastra nor of modern social science, and to honor, cherish, educate, and advance women." Shakti, Strio DEA, Stria Prana, Gaia Tantra says, "Sarara Narin Yogia Aaka," that is, the Tantra Shastra is for all casts and for women. And the Mahan Rana says that the low Kaa who refuses to initiate a Candela or Yavana or a woman out of disrespect goes the downward path. No one is excluded from anything except on the grounds of a real and not artificial or imagined incompetency.

An American orientalist critic, in speaking of the worthlessness of Tantric philosophy, said that it was "religious feminism run mad," adding, "What is all this but the feminization of Orthodox Vedanta? It is a doctrine for suffragette monists, the dogma unsupported by any evidence that the female principle antedates and includes the male principle, and that this female principle is supreme divinity." The worthlessness of the Tantric philosophy is a personal opinion on which nothing need be said, the more particularly that orientalists who, with insufficient knowledge, have already committed themselves to this view, are not likely to easily abandon it. The present criticism, however, in disclosing the grounds on which it is based, has shown that they are without worth. Were it not for such ignorant notions, it would be unnecessary to say that the Shakas Sadhaka does not believe that there is a woman suffragette or otherwise in the sky, surrounded by the members of some celestial feminist association, who rules the male members of the universe. As the Yamala says, for the benefit of the ignorant: "Yoshit Nakapan N o Nada Smita," that is, God is neither female, male, hermaphrodite, nor unconscious thing, nor is His doctrine concerned with the theories of the American Professor Lester Ward and others as to the alleged preeminence of the female principle. We are not here dealing with questions of science or sociology. It is a common fault of Western criticism that it gives material interpretations of Indian scriptures and so misunderstands it. The Shaka Doctrine is concerned with those spiritual principles which exist before and are the origin of both men and women. Whether in the appearance of the animal species the female antedates the male is a question with which it is not concerned, nor does it say that the female principle is the Supreme Divinity. Shiva, the male, is co-equal with Shiv, the female, for both are one and the same. An orientalist might have remembered that in the Samia, Preeti is spoken of as female, and Perusia as male, and in Vidant, Maya and Dei are of the feminine gender. Shakti is not a male nor a female person, nor a male nor a female principal in the sense in which sociology, which is concerned with gross matter, uses those terms. Shakti is symbolically female because it is the productive principle. Shiva, in so far as he represents the sit, or Consciousness aspect, is actionless (Nisha), though the two are inseparably associated. Even in creation, the Supreme is the attributeless (Nuna) Shiva, or the neuter Brahman, which is neither male nor female. With such mistaken general views of the doctrine, it was not likely that its more subtle aspects by way of relation to Shamara's Mayavada or the Samya Darana should be appreciated. The doctrine of Shakti has no more to do with feminism than it has to do with old age pensions or any other sociological movement of the day. This is a good instance of those apparently smart and sure judgments which orientalists and others pass on things Indian. The errors would be less ridiculous if they were on occasions more modest as regards their claims to know and understand. What is still more important, they would not probably in such cases give unnecessary ground for offense.

The characteristic features of Shaka Dharma are thus: its monism, its concept of the motherhood of God, its unsectarian spirit, and provisions for Shudras and women, to the latter of whom it renders high honor, recognizing that they may be even gurus. And lastly, its Sadana, skillfully designed to realize its teachings. As I have pointed out on many an occasion, this question of Sadana is of the highest importance and has been in recent times much overlooked. It is that which, more than anything else, gives value to the Agama or Tantra Shastra. Mere talk about religion is only an intellectual exercise. Of what use are grand phrases about Atma on the lips of those who hate and injure one another and will not help the poor? Religion is kindness. Religion again is a practical activity. Mind and body must be trained. There is a spiritual as well as a mental and physical gymnastic.

According to Shaka Doctrine, each man and woman contains within himself and herself a vast latent magazine of power, or Shakti (a term which comes from the root shock, to be able to have force, to do, to act). They are each shocky and nothing but shocky, for the Sarupa of Shaki, that is, Shakti as it is in itself, is consciousness, and mind and body are Shakti. The problem then is how to raise and vivify Shakti. This is the work of Satana. In the religion of power, the Agama is a practical philosophy, and as the Bengali friend and collaborator of mine, Professor Pranaa Mopa, whom I cite again, has well put it, "What the intellectual world wants to today is the sort of philosophy which not merely argues but experiments."

This is Kaa. The form which Sadon takes necessarily varies according to faith, temperament, and capacity. Thus, amongst Christians, the Catholic Church, like Hinduism, has a full and potent Sadon in its sacraments: samsara, temple, church, private worship, Puja, Upasana with upacara, bell, light, and incense (ganta, deepa, dupa), images or pratima (hence it has been called idolatrous), devotional rights such as novenas and the like, Vata, the three-fold Angelus at mour, noon, and evening, sdia, rosary, japa, the wearing of kakas, scapulars, metals, Agnus Dei, pilgrimage (titha), fasting, abstinence, and mortification (tapas), monastic renunciation (samasa), medit, Diana, ending in the union of mystical theology (samade), and so forth. There are other smaller details, such for instance as Shanti, Abisheka, asperis, into which I need not enter here. I may, however, mention the spiritual director, who occupies the place of the guru; the worship (hyperdulia) of the Virgin Mother, which made Swami Vianda call the Italian Catholics Shakas; and the use of wine (mia) and bread corresponding to mudra in the Eucharist, or communion service. Whilst, however, the Blessed Virgin evokes devotion as warm as that which is here paid to Divi, she is not Dei, for she is not God, but a creature selected as the vehicle of His incarnation (avatara). In the Eucharist, the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ, appearing under the form or accidents of those material substances. So also Terara is Dvay, that is, the savior in liquid form. In the Catholic Church, though the early practice was otherwise, the Ley no longer take wine but bread only, the officiating priest consuming both. Whilst, however, the outward forms in this case are similar, the inner meaning is different. Those, however, who contend that eating and drinking are inconsistent with the dignity of worship may be reminded of Tertullian in saying that Christ instituted His great Sacrament at a meal. These notions are those of the dualist with all his distinctions. For the Advian, every function and act may be made a yajna. Agape, or love feasts, a kind of cakra, were held in early times and discontinued as orthodox practice on account of abuses to which they led, though they are said still to exist in some of the smaller Christian sects of the day.

There are other points of ritual which are peculiar to the Tantra Shastra and of which there is no counterpart in the Catholic ritual, such as Niasa and Yantra. Mantra exists in the form of prayer and as formula of consecration, but otherwise the subject is conceived of differently. Here there are certain gestures (mudra) made in the ritual, as when consecrating, blessing, and so forth, but they are not so numerous or prominent as they are here. I may someday more fully develop these interesting analogies, but what I have said is for the present sufficient to establish the numerous similarities which exist between the Catholic and Indian Tantric ritual. Because of these facts, the reformed Christian sects have charged the Catholic Church with paganism. It is, in fact, the inheritor of very ancient practices, but is not necessarily the worst for that.

The Hindu finds his Sadana in the Tantras of the Agama, in forms which his race has evolved. In the abstract, there is no reason why his race should not modify these forms of Sadon or evolve new ones, but the point is that it must have some form of Sadon. Any system to be fruitful must experiment to gain experience. It is because of its powerful sacraments and disciplines that in the West, the Catholic Church has survived to this day, holding firm upon its rock amid the dissolving sex born of what is called the reform. It is likely to exist when these, as presently existing sex, will have disappeared. All things survive by virtue of the truth in them. The particular truth to which I here refer is that a faith cannot be maintained by mere hymn singing and pious addresses. For this reason too, Hinduism has survived. This is not necessary to say that either of these will, as presently existing forms, continue until the end of time.

The so-called reformed or Protestant sects, whether of West or East, are, when viewed in relation to man in general, the imperfect expression of a truth misunderstood and misapplied, namely, that the higher man spiritually ascends, the less dependent he is on form. The mistake which such sects make is to look at the matter from one side only and to suppose that all men are alike in their requirement. The Agama is guilty of no such error. It offers form in all its fullness and richness to those below the stage of yoga, at which point man reaches what the Karava Tantra calls the Varna and Ashrama of light (jotter vami) and gradually releases himself from all form that he may unite himself with the formless One.

I do not know which most to admire: the colossal affirmations of Indian Doctrine, or the wondrous variety of the differing disciplines which it prescribes for their realization. In fact, the Buddhists called Brahmanism "Shilav Vata Paramara," that is, a system believing in the efficacy of ritual acts, and so it is, and so at length was Buddhism when, passing through Mahayana, it ended up with the full time Sadana of the Vajana school. There are human Tendencies which cannot be suppressed. Hinduism will, however, disappear if and when Sadana, whatever be its form, ceases, for that will be the day on which it will no longer be something real, but the mere subject of philosophical and historical talk.

Apart from its great doctrine of Shakti, the main significance of the Shakat Tantra Shastra lies in this: that it affirms the principle of the necessity of Sedon and claims to afford a means available to all, of whatever cast and of either sex, whereby the teachings of Vidant may be practically realized. But let no one take any statement from anyone, myself included, blindly, without examining and testing it. I am only concerned to state the facts as I know them. It is man's prerogative to think. The Sanskrit word for man comes from the root man, to think. Those who are Shakas may be pleased at what I have said about their faith. It must not, however, be supposed that a Doctrine is necessarily true simply because it is old. There are some Horry errors. As for science, its conclusions shift from year to year. Recent discoveries have so abated its pride that it has considerably ceased to give itself those pontifical Hees which formerly annoyed some of us. Most will feel that if they are to bow to any Master, it should be to a spiritual one. A few will think that they can safely walk alone. Philosophy again is one of the noblest of life's Pursuits, but here too we must examine to see whether what is proposed for our acceptance is well founded. The maxim is current that there is nothing so absurd but that it has been held by some philosopher or another. We must each ourselves judge and choose, and if honest, none can blame our choice. We must put all to the test. We may here recollect the words of Shuti: "Shavia Manava Nid Diavia," listen, reason, and ponder, for as Manu says, "Y Sad," he who by discussion investigates, he knows Dharma, and none other. Ultimately, there is experience alone, which in shock to speech is Saham she.

I. Note to Chapter 6. I have referred to the Viik and A-gamic strands in Indian Dharma. I wish to add some weighty remarks made by the well-known Vedantic monthly, the Pruda Parata. They were elicited by the publication of Arthur Avalon's Principles of Tantra. After pointing out that "a vindication of the Tantras rebounds directly to the benefit of Hinduism as a whole, for Tantrism in its real sense is nothing but the Vedic religion struggling with wonderful success to reassert itself amidst all those new problems of religious life and discipline which historical events and developments have thrust upon it," and after referring to the introduction to that work, the author of the review wrote as follows: "In this new publication, the most noteworthy feature of this new introduction he has written for the Tantra Tataa is his appreciative presentation of the orthodox views about the antiquity and the importance of the Tantras, and it is impossible to overestimate the value of this presentation. For hitherto, all theories about the origin and the importance of the Tantras have been more or less prejudiced by a wrong bias against Tantrism, which some of its own later sinister developments were calculated to create. This bias has made almost every such theory read either like a condemn or an apology. All investigation being thus disqualified, the true history of Tantrism has not yet been written, and we find cultured people mostly inclined either to the view that Tantrism originally branched off from the Buddhistic Mahayana or Vajana as a cult of some corrupted and self-diluted monastics, or to the view that it was the inevitable dowy which some barbarous non-Aryan races brought along with them into the fold of Hinduism. According to both these views, however, the form which this Tantrism, either a Buddhistic development or a barbarous importation, has subsequently assumed in the literature of Hinduism is its improved edition as issuing from the crucibles of Vedic or Vedantic transformation. But this theory of the curious comingling of the Vas and Vidant with Buddhistic corruption or with non-Aryan barbarity is perfectly inadequate to explain the all-pervading influence which the Tantras exert on our present-day religious life. Here it is not any hesitating compromise that we have got before us to explain, but a bold organic synthesis, a legitimate restatement of the Vedic culture for the solution of new problems and new difficulties which signalize the dawn of a new age."

In tracing the evolution of Hinduism, modern historians take a blind leap from Vedic ritualism direct to Buddhism, as if to conclude that all those newly formed communities with which India had been swarming all over since the close of the fateful era of the Kuruk Chetra War, and to which was denied the right of Vedic sacrifices, the monopoly of the higher three-fold casts of pure orthodox descent, were going all the time without any religious ministrations. These Aryanized communities, we must remember, were actually swamping the Vedic Orthodoxy, which was already gradually dwindling down to a helpless minority in all its scattered centers of influence and was just awaiting the final blow to be dealt by the rise of Buddhism. Thus, the growth of these new communities and their occupation of the whole land constituted a mighty event that had been silently taking place in India on the outskirts of the daily shrinking Orthodoxy of Vedic ritualism, long before Buddhism appeared on the field, and this momentous event our modern historians fail to take due notice of, either because of a curious blindness of self-complacency or because of the dazzle which the sudden triumph of Buddhism and the overwhelming mass of historical evidences left by it create before their eyes. The traditional Cuga dates from the rise of these communities, and the Vedic religious culture of the preceding Yuga underwent a wonderful transformation along with a wonderful attempt it made to arize these rising communities. History, as hitherto understood and read, speaks of the Brahmans of the Buddhistic age, their growing alienation from the Janaka, or the Upanishadic wisdom, their impotency to save the orthodox Vedic communities from the encroachments of the non-Vedic hordes and races, their ever-deepening religious formalism and social exclusiveness. But this history is silent on the marvelous feats which the Upanishadic sex of anchorites were silently performing on the outskirts of the strictly Vedic Community with the object of Aryanized the new India that was rising over the ashes of the Kurukshetra conflagration. This new India was not strictly Vedic like the India of the Byon ages, for it could not claim the religious ministrations of the orthodox Vedic Brahmans and could not therefore perform Yashas like the latter. The question, therefore, is as to how this new India became gradually Aryanized, for Aryanization is essentially a spiritual process, consisting in absorbing new communities of men into the fold of the Vedic religion. The Vedic ritualism that prevailed in those days was powerless, we have seen, to do anything for these new communities springing up all over the country. Therefore, we are obliged to turn to the only other factor in Vedic religion besides the Kakanda for an explanation of those changes which the Vedic religion wrought in the rising communities in order to Aryanized them. The Upanishads represent the Janaka of the Vedic religion, and if we study all of them, we find that not only the earliest ritualism of Yashas was philosophized upon in the earlier Upanishads, but the foundation for a new and no less elaborate ritualism was fully laid in many of the later Upanishads. For example, we study in these Upanishads how the philosophy of Pano Pasana (five-fold worship) viav, the worship of Shiva, Davy, Sun, Ganesha, and Vishnu, was developed out of the mystery of the Prava OM. This philosophy cannot be dismissed as a post-Buddhistic interpolation, seeing that some features of the same philosophy can be clearly traced even in the Brahmanas, e.g., the discourse about the conception of Shiva. Here, therefore, in some of the later Upanishads, we find recorded the attempts of the pre-Buddhistic recluses of the forest to elaborate a post-Vedic ritualism out of the doctrine of the Prava and the Vedic theory of yogic practices. Here, in these Upanishads, we find how the Bea mantras and the Shataka of the Tantras were being originally developed. For on the Prava or Uda had been founded a special learning and a school of philosophy from the very earliest ages, and some of the spinal centers of yogic meditation had been dwelt upon in the earliest Upanishads and corresponding Brahmanas. The Upakar of tantric worship, namely, such material adjuncts as grass, leaves, water, and so on, were most apparently adopted from Vedic worship along with their appropriate incantations. So even from the Brahmanas and the Upanishads, stands out in clear relief a system of spiritual discipline which we would unhesitatingly classify as tantric, having at its core the Panka Upasana and around it a fair round of rituals and writs consisting of Bea mantras and Vidic incantations, proper meditative processes, and proper manipulation of sacred adjuncts of work worship adopted from the Vedic rights. This may be regarded as the earliest configuration which Tantrism had on the eve of those silent but mighty social upheavals through which the Aryanization of vast and increasing multitudes of new races proceeded in pre-Buddhistic India, and which had their culmination in the eventful centuries of the Buddhistic Cuda Grass. Now, this pre-Buddhistic Tantrism, perhaps then recognized as the Vedic Panasa, could not have contributed at all to the creation of a new India had it remained confined completely within the limits of monastic sects. But like Ganism, this Panal Pasana went forth all over the country to bring ultrac communities under its spiritual ministrations. Even if we inquire carefully into the social conditions obtaining in the strictly Vedic ages, we find that there was always an extended wing of the Aryanized Society where the purely Vedic Kakanda could not be promulgated, but where the molding influence of Vedic ideals worked through the development of suitable spiritual activities. It is always to the Janda and the monastic voies thereof that the Vedic religion owed its wonderful expansiveness and its progressive self-adaptability, and every religious development within the Vedic fold but outside the ritualism of homac sacrifices is traceable to the spiritual wisdom of the all-renouncing forest recluses. This forest wisdom was most forcibly brought into requisition when, after the Kuruk Chetra, a new age was dawning with the onrush and upheaval of non-Aryan and semi-Aran races all over India, an echo of which may be found in that story of the Mahabharata where Arjuna fails to use his Gandiva to save his proteges from the robbery of the non-Aryan hordes. The greatest problem of the pre-Buddhistic Ages was the Aryanization of the new India that rose and surged furiously from every side against the fast dwindling centers of the old Vedic Orthodoxy, struggling hard but in vain by social enactments to guard its perilous insulation. But for those religious movements, such as those of the Batas, Shakas, Saras, Shivas, Ganap Patias, and Ginus, that tackled this problem of Aryanization most successfully, all that the Vedic Orthodoxy stood for in the real sense would have gradually perished without trace. These movements, especially the five Cults of Vedic worship, took up many of the non-Aryan races and cast their life in the mold of the Vedic spiritual ideal, minimizing in this way the gulf that existed between them and the Vedic Orthodoxy, and thereby rendering possible their gradual amalgamation. And where this task remained unfulfilled owing to the mold proving too narrow still to fit into the sort of life which some non-Aryan races or communities lived, there it remained for Buddhism to solve the problem of Aryanization in due time. But still, we must remember that by the time Buddhism made its appearance, the pre-Buddhistic phase of T worship had already established itself in India so widely and so firmly that instead of dislodging it by its impetuous onset (all the force of which, by the by, was mainly spent on the tattering Orthodoxy of Vedic ritualism), Buddhism was itself swallowed up within three or four centuries by its perhaps least suspected opponent of this tantric worship, and then wonderfully transformed and ejected on the arena as as the Mahayana.

The publication of these two volumes is an event of great interest and importance. The religious beliefs of the modern Hindus have been represented to English readers from various points of view, but the peculiar mold into which they have been sought to be cast in comparatively modern centuries has not received adequate attention. The exponents of the religion of modern Hindus take cognizance more of the matter and source of their beliefs than of the change of form they have been undergoing through the many centuries. The volumes under review, as well as other publications brought out by Arthur Avalon, serve to carry this important question of form to such a prominence as almost makes it obligatory for every exhaustive exposition of Hindu doctrines in future to acknowledge and discriminate in them the formative influences of the Tantric restatement. In the Tantra Tatva, the presentation and vindication of the Hindu religious beliefs and practices avowedly and closely follow the methodology of the Tantras, and the learned pundit has fully succeeded in establishing the fact that what lies behind these beliefs and practices is not mere prejudice or superstition, but a system of profound philosophy based on the Vas. Every student of modern Hinduism should acquaint himself with this, namely, its immediate background, ground of Tantric philosophy and ritualism. The Hindu religious consciousness is like a mighty Ganges emerging from the Himalayas of Vedic wisdom, receiving tributaries and sending out branch streams at many points in its course, and though the nature of the current, its color, velocity, or uses may vary at different places, the Ganges is the same Ganges, whether at Hardware, Allahabad, or Kolkata. The stream is not only one, but it has also its one main channel in spite of all the many tributaries and branches, and the whole of the stream is sacred, though different sects may choose special points and confluences as of special sanctity to themselves, deriving inspiration then for their special sectarian developments. Now, though the rise of Tantric philosophy and ritualism created in former times new currents and backwaters along the stream of Hinduism, it was essentially an important occurrence in the mainstream and channel, and instead of producing a permanent bifurcation in that stream, it coalesced with it, coloring and renovating more or less the whole tenor of the Hindu religious consciousness. As a result, we find Tantric thought and sentiment equally operative in the extreme metaphysical wing of Hinduism as well as in its lower matter ofa phases. This actual permeation of Hindu religious consciousness by Tantric thought and sentiment should receive the fullest recognition at the hands of every upto-date exponent. His predecessors of former generations might have to strengthen their advocacy of Tantric doctrines by joining issue with the advocates of particular phases of Hindu religion and philosophy, but the present epoch in the history of our religious consciousness is preeminently an epoch of wonderful synthetic mood of thought and sentiment which is gradually pervading the Hindu religious consciousness ever since Shri Ramak Krishna Paramahamsa embodied in himself its immediate possibilities. To find in the literature that is being so admirably provided for English readers by Arthur Avalon an occasional tendency to use Tantric doctrines as weapons for combating certain phases of Hindu belief and practice, this tendency seems to betray quite a wrong standpoint in the study of the Tantras, their relation to other scriptures, and their real historical significance.

Chapter 7 is Shakti Force. There are some persons who have thought and still think that Shakti means force, and that the worship of Shakti is the worship of force. Thus, Keshub Cheren wrote four centuries ago: "The Shakas gave way before the Bakas. Gaitan's army proved invincible and carried all Bengal captive. Even today, his Gospel of Love rules as a living force, though his followers have considerably declined both in faith and in morals. Just the reverse of this we find in England and other European countries; there the Shakas are driving the Bakas out of the."

Field, look at the Huxley, the Tindles, and the Spencers of the day. What are they but Shaka worshippers of Shaki or Force? The only deity they adore, if they at all adore one, is the Prime Force of the universe. To it they offer dry homage. Surely then, the scientists and materialists of the day are a sect of Shaka worshippers who are chasing away the true Christian devotees who adore the God of Love. Alas for European Vaishnavas, they are retreating before the advancing millions of Western Shakas. We sincerely trust, however, the discomfort of devotion and Bhakti will be only for a time, and that a Chaitanya will yet arise in the West, crush the Shakas who only recognize Force as deity and are sunk in carnality and voluptuousness, and lead Nature into the loving Faith, spirituality, simplicity, and rapturous devotion of the Vaishnava.

Professor Monier Williams, Hinduism also called it a doctrine of force. Recently, the poet Rabindranath Tagore has given the authority of his great name to this error. (Modern Review, July 1919). After pointing out that egoism is the price paid for the fact of existence, and that the whole universe is assisting in the desire that "I" should be, he says that man has viewed this desire in two different ways: either as a whim of creative power or a joyous self-expression of creative love. "Is the fact then of his being," he asks, "a revealment of force or of love?"

Those who hold to the first view must also, he thinks, recognize conflict as inevitable and eternal. For according to them, peace and love are but a precarious coat of armor within which the weak seek shelter. Whereas that which the timid anathematize as unrighteousness, that alone is the road to success. The pride of prosperity throws man's mind outwards, and the misery and insult of destitution draws man's hungering desires likewise outwards. These two conditions alike leave man unashamed to place above all other gods Shakti, the deity of power, the cruel one, whose right hand wields the weapon of guile.

In the politics of Europe, drunk with power, we see the worship of Shakti. In the same way, the poet says that in the days of their political disruption, the coward and downtrodden Indian people, through the mouths of their poets, sang the praises of the same Shakti, the Chandi of Kavikankan and of the Annadamangal, the ballad of Manasa, the goddess of snakes. What are they but paeans of the triumph of evil? The burden of their song is the defeat of Shiva, the good, at the hands of the cruel, deceitful, criminal Shakti. The male deity who was in possession was fairly harmless, but all of a sudden a feminine deity turns up and demands to be worshipped in his stead. That is to say, that she insisted on thrusting herself where she had no right. Under what title? Force. By what method? Any that would serve. The deity of peace and renunciation did not survive. Thus, he adds, that in Europe, the modern cult of Shakti says that the pale, anemic Jesus will not do, but with high pomp and activity, Europe celebrates her Shakti worship.

Lastly, the Indians of today have set to the worship Europe's divinity in the name of religion. Some are saying that it is cowardly to be afraid of wrongdoing. Both those who have attained worldly success and those who have failed to attain it are singing the same tune. Both fret at righteousness as an obstacle which both would overcome by physical Force.

I am not concerned here with any popular errors that there may be. After all, when we deal with a Shastra term, it is to the Shastra itself that we must look for its meaning. Shakti comes from the root "shak" to be able to do. It indicates both activity and capacity. Therefore, the world as word is activity. But when we have said that, we have already indicated that it is erroneous to confine the meaning of the term Shakti to any special form of activity. On the contrary, Shakti means both power in general and every particular form of power. Mind is a power, so is matter. Mind is constantly functioning in the form of Ritt (reasoning), will, and feeling (bhava), such as love, aversion, and so forth. All are aspects of mind power. In its general sense, force is power translated to the material plane, and is therefore only one, and the grossest aspect of Shakti or power.

But all these special powers are limited forms of the great creative power which is the Mother (Amba) of the universe. Worship of Shakti is not worship of these limited forms, but of the Divine will, knowledge, and action, the cause of these effects. That Mahashakti is perfect Consciousness (Chit), Srini, and Bliss (Anandamayi), which produces from itself the contracted consciousness experiencing both pleasure and pain. This production is not at all a whim; it is the nature (bhava) of the ultimate Bliss. Bliss is Love (Nayasana Anandam). The production of the universe is, according to the Shaka, an act of Love, illustrated by the so-called erotic imagery of the Shastra. The Self loves itself, whether before or in creation. The thrill of human love, which continues the life of humanity, is an infinitesimally small fragment and faint reflection of the creative act in which Shiva and Shakti join to produce the Bindu, which is the seed of the universe.

I quite agree that the worship of mere force is absurd, except in a transient sense. Feudal force, however, may be moralized by the good purpose which it serves. The antithesis is not rightly between might and right, but between might in the service of right and might in the service of wrong. To worship Force merely is to worship matter. He, however, who worships the Mother in her material forms (sthula rupa) will know that she has others, and will worship her in all such forms. He will also know that she is beyond all limited forms, as that which gives being to them all. We may then say that force is a gross form of Shakti, but Shakti is much more than that. Here (iha) is the Infinite Power of Consciousness. There (amutra) is this last, the Shakti of worship, called by the Shastra the Para-bhava or the experience. (All I Am, Chapter 8).

Shankara, Vashishta, and Buddha. It has been the subject of debate whether the Tantric Panchatapa ritual with wine and so forth is a product of Buddhism and whether it is opposed to Vedic Dharma. Some have supposed that these rites originally came from Yellow Asia, penetrated into India, where they received its impress, and again made their way to the North to encounter earlier, original forms. I have elsewhere put forward some facts which suggest that these rites may be a continuance, though in another form, of ancient Vedic usage in which Soma, meat, fish, and purana formed a part. Though there are some "Mina" rites in the Vedas, it is possible that the Bengal Shaka ritual, in this respect, has its origin in Shankara. Possibly the whole ritual comes there from.

I have spoken of Bengal because we should distinguish it from other forms of Shaka worship. The matter is so obscure at present that any definite affirmation as to historical origins lacks justification. Most important, however, in the alleged Buddhist connection is the story of Vashishta to be found in the Tantras. He is said to have gone to Mahat Tibet, which, according to popular belief, is halfway to Heaven. Mahadeva is said to be visible at the bottom of the Manasarovar lake near Kyasa. Some of the texts bearing on it have been collected in the appendix to the edition of the Tarat Tantra, which has been published by the Varendra Anusandhana Samiti.

The Tarat Tantra opens with the following question: "O, Mahasarasvati, thou didst speak of the two Kabas, Buddha and Vashishta. Tell me, by what mantra they became Siddha?" The same Tantra defines Abhra as follows: "He who purifies these five, i.e., patat, and after offering the same to the Devata, partakes thereof, is Abhra." Buddha, then, is said to be a Kulaka. It is to be noted that Buddhist Tantrics who practice this ritual are accounted Kulakas. Shiva replied: "Janardana (Vishnu) is the excellent Devata in the form of Buddha (Buddha-rupi)." It is said in the Samayachara Tantra that Tara and Kalika in their different forms, as also Matangi, Bhairavi, Chinnamasta, and Dhavati, belong to the Northern Amnaya. The sixth chapter of the Samayachara Tantra mentions a number of scriptures of the Bhairava class, together with others of the Shaka, Shiva, Vaishnava, and Ganapatya classes. Vashishta is spoken of in the 17th chapter of the Rudrayamala and the first patala of the Brahmatamala.

The following is the account in the former Tantric scripture: "Vashishta, the self-controlled, the son of Brahma, practiced for ages severe austerities in a lonely spot. For 6,000 years he did sadhana, but still the daughter of the mountains did not appear to him. Becoming angry, he went to his father and told him his method of practice. He then said, 'Give me another mantra, O Lord, since this Vidya mantra does not grant me siddhi success. Otherwise, in your presence, I shall utter a terrible curse dissuading him.' Brahma said, 'O son, who art learned in the Yoga path, do not do so. Do thou worship her again with wholehearted feeling, when she will appear and grant you boons. She is the Supreme Shakti. She saves from all dangers. She is lustrous like 10 million suns. She is dark blue (nila). She is cool like 10 million moons. She is like 10 million lightning flashes. She is the spouse of Kala (kalakaminī). She is the beginning of all. In her there is neither dharma nor adharma. She is in the form of all. She is attached to pure Shankara (shararat). She is the initiator (pravāra) of Shakti-chakra. Her greatness is infinitely boundless. She helps in the crossing of the ocean of the samsara. She is Buddhi-vari (possibly Buddhi-vari), Lord of Buddhi. She is Buddhi itself (buddhi-rupa). She is in the form of the Arvava branch of the Vedas (Arvava Veda shakini).' Numerous Shastric references connect the Tantra Shastra with the Arvava. See in this connection my citation from Shakti Sangama Tantra in Principles of Tantra. 'She protects the beings of the worlds. Her action is spread throughout the moving and motionless. Worship her, my son, be of good cheer. Why so eager to curse? Thou art the jewel of kindness, O son. Worship her constantly with thy mind, cedus being entirely engrossed in her. Thou of assurity shalt gain sight of her.'

Having heard these words of his Guru and having bowed to him again and again, the pure one, Vashishta, versed in the meaning of Vedanta, betook himself to the shore of the ocean. For full a thousand years he did japa of her mantra, still he received no message (adesha). Thereupon, the Muni Vashishta grew angry and, being perturbed of mind, prepared to curse the Mahavidya Devi. Having sipped water (akshana), he uttered a great and terrible curse. Thereupon, Kulishvari (Lady of the Kalas), Mahavidya, appeared before the Muni. She who dispels the fear of the yogin said, 'How now, Vipra? Our Vipra, why have you terribly cursed without cause? Thou dost not understand my Agama, nor knowest how to worship. How by mere Yoga practice can either man or Deva get sight of my Lotus feet? My worship (dhyana) is without austerity and pain to him who desires my Agama, who is Siddha in my mantra and knows my pure Vihara. My Sadhana is pure punya and beyond even the Vedas. Vidya-mapy-agaram.' This does not mean unknown to the Vedas or opposed to them, but something which surpasses the Vedic ritual of the Pashu. This is made by the following injunction: 'To follow the Arvava Veda, go to Mahina Tibet and the country of the Bas, and always follow the Arvava.' (Badhe tharava Mahina sraava). Having gone there and seen my Lotus feet, which are Mahabhava (the great blissful feeling which in her true nature she is), thou shalt, O Maharsi, become versed in my Kula and a great Siddha."

Having so said, she became formless and disappeared in the ether and then passed through the ethereal region. The great Rishi, having heard this from the Mahavidya Sarasvati, went to the land of China, where Buddha is established (Buddha-pratistha). Having repeatedly bowed to the ground, Vashishta said, "Protect me, O Mahadeva, who art the imperishable one in the form of Buddha (Buddha-rupa). I am the very humble Vashishta, the son of Brahma. My mind is ever perturbed. I have come here (sena) for the sadhana of the Mahadevi. I know not the path leading to Siddhi. Thou knowest the path of the Devas. Seeing, however, thy way of life (akara), doubts assail my mind (pāni śānti me'dhi). Because he saw the, to him, extraordinary ritual with wine and woman, destroy them and my wicked mind which inclines to Vedic Ritual (Vaimini), that is the ordinary Pashu ritual, O Lord. In thy abode, there are ever rites which are outside Veda (Vāhish), that is the Vedic ritual, and what is consistent with Veda?" As Vashishta then supposed, "How is it that wine, meat, woman (angana) are drunk, eaten, and enjoyed by naked Dambara Siddhas, who are high Varna and all-inspiring (rakap-anod-diata)? They drink constantly and enjoy or make enjoy beautiful women (muhur muhu privan ramayan varanga nam) with red eyes, they are ever exhilarated and replete with flesh and wine (sadang sasava). They are powerful to favor and punish. They are beyond the Vedas (Veda-yāgara). They enjoy wine and women (madhyas vanata)."

Vashishta merely saw the ritual surface, thus spoke the great Yogi: "Having seen the rites which are outside the Veda (Vāhish), Vante, then bowing low with folded hands, he humbly said, 'How can inclinations such as these be purifying to the mind? How can there be Siddhi without Vedic rites?'"

Buddha said, "O Vashishta, listen the while I speak to thee of the excellent Kula path, by the mere knowing of which one becomes in a short time like Rudra himself. I speak to thee in brief the Agama which is the essence of all and which leads to Kula. First of all, the Vira hero should be pure (shuchi). Buddha here states the conditions under which only the rites are permissible: His mind should be penetrated with discrimination (viveka) and freed of all Pashu state of an uninitiated Pashu or animal man. Let him avoid the company of the Pashu and remain alone in a lonely place, free from lust, anger, and other passions. He should constantly devote himself to Yoga practice. He should be firm in his resolve to learn Yoga. He should ever tread the Yoga path and fully know the meaning of the Veda (vedāni puno mahan). In this way, the pious one (dharmātmā) of good conduct and largess of heart (ācārya) should by gradual degrees restrain his breath and through the path of breathing compass the destruction of mind. Following this practice, the self-controlled (vashi) becomes Yogi in slow degrees of practice. The body firstly sweats; this is the lowest stage (adhama). The next is middling (madhyama); here there is trembling (kampā). In the third or highest (para) stage, one is able to levitate (bhumaga). By the attainment of Siddhi in Pranayama, one becomes a master in Yoga. Having become a Yogi by practice of Kumaka (restraint of breath), he should be mounty given over to silence and full of intent devotion (a kabaki) to Shiva, Krishna, and Brahma. The pure one should realize by mind, action, and speech that Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva are restless like the moving air (viyati canala). Perhaps the transient nature of these Devas as compared with the Supreme Shakti is indicated. The man of steady mind should fix it on Shakti, who is Consciousness (Siddha). Thereafter, the manin should practice Mahavira-bhava (the feeling of the great hero) and follow the Kula path, the Shakti-chakra, the Vava-sattva-chakra, and Navavi, and should worship Kakayāni (the excellent one), the Prakāśā Devata, that is, the deity who responds to prayer, who grants prosperity and destroys all evil. She is consciousness (Siddha), she is the abode of knowledge (gyana), and is consciousness and bliss, lustrous as 10 million Lightnings, of whom all Tattvas are the embodiment, who is Roudri with 18 arms, fond of wine and mountains of flesh. (The text is Shiva m sakal, but the first word should be Sura). Man should do japa of the mantra, taking refuge with her and following the Kula path. Who in the three worlds knows a path higher than this? By the grace gained therein, the great Brahma himself became the Creator, and Vishnu, whose substance is Sat-guna, the object of adoration of all, highly deserving of worship, the great and Lord of Yajurveda became able to protect by it. Hara, the Lord of Viras, the wrathful one, Lord of Wrath and of Mighty Power, became the destroyer of all by the grace of Vibhava. The Dikpalas, Protectors of the Quarters, became like unto Rudra. By a month's practice, power to attract (akarana) Siddhi is attained. In two months, one becomes the Lord of Speech. In four months, one becomes like unto the Dikas. In five months, one becomes the five arrow (probably Masters the five tanmatras), and in 6 months, he becomes Rudra himself. The fruit of this method (acara) is beyond all others. This is Kama-marga. There is nothing which surpasses it. If there be Shakti, the Vipra becomes a complete Yogi by six months' practice. Without Shakti, even Shiva can do naught. What then shall we say of men of small intelligence?"

Having said this, he whose form is Buddha (Buddha-rupi) made him practice sadhana. He said, "O Vipra, do thou serve Mahashakti. Do thou practice sadhana with wine (madya) sadhana, and thus shalt thou get sight of the Lotus feet of the Mahavidya." Vashishta, having heard these words of the Guru and meditating on Devi Sarasvati, went to the Kulamandapa to practice the wine ritual (madira sadana) and having repeatedly done sadana with wine, meat, fish, parched grain, and shakti, he became a complete Yogi (purna yogi).

A similar account is given in the Brahma Yamala. There are some variants, however. Thus, while in the Rudrayamala, Vashishta is said to have resorted to the shore of the ocean, in the Brahma Yamala, he goes to Kamakhya, the great Tantric Pitha and shrine of the Devi. The prevalence of her worship amongst the Mongolian Assamese is noteworthy. It may be here added that this Yamala states that except at time of worship, wine should not be taken, nor should the Shakti be unclothed. By violation of these provisions, life, it says, is shortened and man goes to hell.

According to the account of the Brahma Yamala, Vashishta, complaining of his ill success, was told to go to the Blue Mountains (Nila) and worship Parameshwari near Kamakhya (Karma). In a Pitha, he was told that Vishnu in the form of Buddha (Buddha-rupi) alone knew this worship. According to Shankara, "Devi said, 'Without Shankara, you cannot please me. Go to Vishnu, who is Uddhava-rupi, illumined, and worship me according to the Acara taught by him.'" Vashishta then went to Vishnu in the country Mahina, which is by the side of the Himalaya (Himavat parve), a country inhabited by great Sadhakas and thousands of beautiful and youthful women, whose hearts were gladdened with wine and whose minds were blissful with enjoyment (vilasa). They were adorned with clothes which inspired love (shringara), and the movement of their hips made tinkle their girdles of little bells. Free of both fear and prudish shame, they enchanted the world. They surround Ishvara and are devoted to the worship of Devi. Vashishta wondered greatly when he saw him in the form of Buddha (Buddha-rupi) with eyes drooping from wine. "What," he said, "is Vishnu doing in his Buddha form? This map-acara is opposed to Veda (Vāva Vāvruda). I do not approve of it (asamāram mama)."

Whilst so thinking, he heard a voice coming from the Ether saying, "O thou who art devoted to good acts, think not like this. This Acara is of excellent result in the sadhana of Tarini. She is not pleased with anything which is the contrary of this. If thou dost wish to gain her grace speedily, then worship her according to Chinara." Hearing this voice, Vashishta's hairs stood on end, and he fell to the ground, being filled with exceeding joy. He prayed to Vishnu in the form of Buddha (Buddha-rupa). Buddha, who had taken wine, seeing him was greatly pleased and said, "Why have you come here, Vashishta?" Bowing to Buddha, he told him of his worship of Tarini. Buddha, who is Hari and full of knowledge (tattva-vajana), spoke to him of the five Makararas (Ma - that is, the five commencing with the letter M: Aradia or wine, and so forth, which are in Shankara, Mananam, Shankara, Dhyanam), saying that this should not be disclosed. A common injunction as regards this ritual renders it, from the opponent's standpoint, suspect. "By practicing it, thou shalt not again sink into the ocean of being. It is full of knowledge of the essence (tattva-vajana) and gives immediate liberation (mukti)."

He then goes on to explain a principal feature of this cult, namely, its freedom from the ritual rules of the ordinary worship, above which the Sadhaka has risen. It is mental worship. In it, bathing, purification, japa, and ceremonial worship are by the mind only. No outward acts are necessary. The bathing and so forth is in the mind, and not in actual water, as is the case in lower and less advanced worship. There are no rules as to auspicious and inauspicious times, or as to what should be done by day and by night. Nothing is pure or impure. There is no ritual defect of impurity, nor prohibition against the taking of food. Deva should be worshipped even though the worshipper has had his food, and even though the place be unclean. Woman, who is Her image, should be worshipped (pānam striyam) and never should any injury be done to her (stri veso naiva kavyā).

Are we here dealing with an incident in which Sakyamuni or some other Buddha of Buddhism was concerned? According to Hindu belief, the Ramayana was composed in the Treta Age, and Vashishta was the family priest of Dasharatha and Rama. The Mahabharata was composed in Dvapara. Krishna appeared in the Samvat between this and the Kali Age. According to this chronology, Vashishta, who was the Guru of Dasharatha, was earlier than Sakyamuni. There were, however, Buddhas before the latter. The text does not mention Sakyamuni or Gotama Buddha. According to Buddhistic tradition, there were many other Buddhas before him, such as Dianara, the Luminous One, Kucha, and others. The term "Buddha" being a term applicable to the enlightened, whoever he be.

It will, no doubt, be said by the Western Orientalist that both these Yamalas were composed after the time of Sakyamuni. But if this be so, their author or authors, as Hindus, would be aware that according to Hindu chronology, Vashishta antedated Sakyamuni. Apart from the fact of there being other Buddhas according to Hinduism, types as distinguished from forms of various things, ideas, and faiths are persistent, though the forms are variable, just as is the case with the Platonic ideas or eternal archetypes. In this sense, neither Veda, Tantra Shastra, nor Buddhism had an absolute beginning at any time. As types of ideas or faiths, they are beginningless (anadi), though the forms may have varied from age to age, and though perhaps some of the types may have been latent in some of the ages. If the Vedas are anadi, so are the Tantra Shastras. To the yogic vision of the Rishi, which makes latent things patent, variable forms show their hidden types. Nothing is therefore absolutely new. A Rishi in the Treta Yuga will know that which will apparently begin in Kali or Dvapara, but which is already really latent in his own age. Vishnu appears to his vision as the embodiment of that already latent but subsequently patent cult. Moreover, in a given age, what is latent in a particular land, say Araara, may be patent in another, say Mahāha. In this way, according to the Hindu Shastra, there is an essential conservation of types, subject to the conditions of time, place, and person (desha-kala-patra). Moreover, according to these Shastras, the creative power is a reproducing principle. This means that the world process is cyclic, according to a periodic law. The process in one Kalpa is substantially repeated in another, and Vashishta, Buddha, and the rest appeared not only in the present but in previous grand cycles or Kalpas. Just as there is no absolute first beginning of the universe, so nothing under the sun is absolutely new. Vashishta, therefore, might have remembered past Buddhas, as he might have foreseen those to come. In yogic vision, both the past and the future can project their shadows into the present. Every Purana and Samhita illustrates these principles of yogic intuition backwards and forwards. To the mind of Ishvara, both past and future are known, and so it is to such who, in the necessary degree, partake of the qualities of the Lord's mind. The date upon which a particular Shastra is compiled is, from this viewpoint, unimportant. Even a modern Shastra may deal with ancient matter.

In dealing with apparent anachronisms in Hindu Shastra, it is necessary to bear in mind these principles. This, of course, is not the view of Oriental scholars or of Indians whom they have stampeded into regarding the beliefs of their country as absurd. It is, however, the orthodox view, and as an Indian friend of mine, to whose views I have referred, has said, "What the Psychic Research Society of the West is conceding to good mediums and subjects cannot be withheld from our ancient supermen, the Rishis."

The peculiar features to be noted of this story are these: Vashishta must have known what the Vedas and Vedic rites were, as ordinarily understood. He is described as vidit, yet he was surprised on seeing Shankara rites and disapproved of them. He speaks of it as outside Veda (Vāhish) and even opposed to it (Vāvruda). On the other hand, the connection with Veda is shown in that the Devi who promulgates this Acara is connected with the Arvava and directs Vashishta always to follow that Veda and speaks of the Acara not as being opposed to, but as something so high as to be beyond the ordinary Vedic ritual (Vidya-mapy-agaram). He is to be fully learned in the import of Veda (vedāni puno). It was by the grace of the doctrine and practice of Shankara that Vishnu became the Lord of Yajurveda. The meaning, therefore, appears to be that the doctrine and practice lie implicit in the Veda but go beyond what is ordinarily taught. Vishnu, therefore, says that it is not to be disclosed. What meaning again are we to attach to the word Vishnu-Buddha-rupa? Buddha means enlightened, but here a particular Buddha seems indicated, though Vishnu is also spoken of as Uddhava-rupi, and the Devi as Buddhi-vari. The Tarat Tantra calls him Aulabha-brahma. As is well known, Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu. Vashishta is told to go to Mahat by the Himalaya and the country of the Bas. Badhe, the Bas who follow the Panchatapa ritual are accounted cowards. It is a noteworthy fact that the flower of the Devi is Japa, the scarlet hibiscus or China Rose. As the last name may indicate, it is perhaps not indigenous to India but to China, whence it may have been imported, possibly through Nepal. This legend, incorporated as it is in the Shastra itself, seems to me of primary importance in determining the historical origin of the Panchatapa ritual.

Chapter 10. A Tibetan Tantra. This chapter is an admirably understanding review reprinted from The Theosophist of July 1919 by Mr. Johan van Manen, the Tibetan scholar. It was written on the seventh volume of Tantric Texts, which contains the first Tibetan Tantra to be published. The Tantra which was selected for the series was the Shakra Sambara because the editor happened to have manuscripts of this and other works of the same school. All lovers of Indian philosophy are familiar with the magnificent series of works on the Tantra which, under the general editorship of Arthur Avalon, have seen the light within the last few years. Some 15 volumes, either texts, translations, or studies, have hitherto been published, and the titles of a number of further works are announced as in preparation or in the press. Just now, a new volume has been added to the series, constituting Volume 7 of the Texts, and this book is undoubtedly one of the most interesting of all those hitherto issued. Up till now, the series has only dealt with works and thoughts originally written down in Sanskrit. This new volume goes further afield and brings us the text and translation of a Tibetan work dealing with the same subject. The whole series is intended to study Tibetan Tantrism. Undoubtedly, it is a development of its Indian prototype, and at a further stage of our knowledge of the whole subject, the historical development of this school of thought will be no doubt studied minutely. Though this present volume brings valuable material towards such an historical study, our knowledge of the Tantra under this aspect is as yet far too limited to enable us to say much about this side of the questions raised by its publication or to find a place for it in the present review of the work. What is more urgent now is to examine this book as it stands, to try to define the general trend of its content, and to attempt to value it generally in terms of modern speech and thought. In our discussion of the book, therefore, we shall not concern ourselves with questions of technical scholarship at all, but attempt to go to the heart of the subject in such a manner as might be of interest to any intelligent man attracted towards philosophical and religious thought. And it is perhaps easier to do so with the present work than with many others in the series to which it belongs. For more than these others, this work makes an appeal to the intellect direct and proves very human and logical, so as to evoke a response in even such readers as are not prepared by a detailed knowledge of system and terminology to disentangle an elaborate outer form from the inner substance. It is true that here also, every page and almost every line bristles with names and terms, but the thought connecting such terms is clear, and these, serving much the purposes of algebraic notations in mathematical formula, can be easily filled in by any reader with values derived from his own religious and philosophical experience.

The Tantras have often not been kindly spoken of. It has been said that they have hitherto played in Indology the part of a jungle which everybody is anxious to avoid. Still stronger, a great historian is quoted as having said that "it would be the unfortunate lot of some future scholar to wade through the disgusting details of drunkenness and debauchery which were regarded as an essential part of their religion by a large section of the Indian community not long ago." And Grunwedel, speaking especially of the Tibetan Tantras, from the immense literature of which as yet nothing had been translated, says, "To work out these things will be indeed a sacrificium intellectus, but they are after all no more stupid than the Brahmanas on which so much labor has been spent." But here we have the first translation into a European language of one of these Tantric texts, and far from being obscene or stupid, it strikes us as a work of singular beauty and nobility, and as a creation of religious art almost unique in its lofty grandeur. It is so totally unlike any religious document we are acquainted with that it

Is is almost inconceivable that this is only a brief specimen, a first specimen made accessible to the general public, of a vast literature of which the extent as existing in Tibet cannot yet even be measured. Yet in saying that the nature of our book is unique, we do not mean to imply that close analogies cannot be found for it in the religious literatures and practices of the world. Such an aloofness would be rather suspicious, for real religious experience is of of course Universal, and proceeding from the same elements in the human heart and aspiring to the same ends must always show kinship in manifestation.

Yet this Tibetan product has a distinctive style of its own, which singles it out in appearance as clearly, let us say, as the specific character of Ayrian or Egyptian art is different from that of other styles. When we now proceed to examine the document before us, at the outset of verdict of one of the critics of Tantrism comes to our mind, to the effect that the Tantra is perhaps the most elaborate system of Autos suggestion in the world. This dicum was intended as a condemnation, but though accepting the verdict as correct, we ourselves are not inclined to accept together with it the implied conclusion.

Autos suggestion is the establishment of mental States and moods from within, instead of as a result of impression received from without. Evidently, there must be two kinds of this Autos suggestion, a true and a false one. The true one is that which produces States Of Consciousness corresponding to those which may be produced by realities in the outer world, and the false one is that which produces States Of Consciousness not corresponding to reactions to any reality without. In the ordinary way, the consciousness of man is shaped in response to Impressions from without, and so ultimately rests on sensation. But theoretically, there is nothing impossible in the theory that these modifications of the thinking principle should be brought about by the creative will and rest rather on imagination and intuition than on sensation.

This theory has not only been philosophically and scientifically discussed, but also practically applied in many a school of mysticism or yoga. If I remember well, there is a most interesting book by a German non- Mystic Professor Stouten Meer dealing with this subject under the title of "Magic as an Experimental Science" in German, and the same idea seems also to underly Steiner's theory of what he calls imaginative Clairvoyance. In Christian mysticism, this has been fully worked out by de Loyola in his Spiritual Exercises as applied to The Passion of the Christ. In what is nowadays called New Thought, this principle is largely applied in various manners.

In our book, we find it applied in terms of Tantric Buddhism with a fullness and detail surpassing all other examples of this type of meditation. In order to present the idea in such a way that it may look plausible in itself, we have first to sketch out the rationale underlying any such system. This is easily done. We can conceive of this universe as an immense ocean of Consciousness or intelligence, in which the separate organisms, human beings included, live and move and have their being. If we conceive of this mass of Consciousness as subject to laws analogous to those of gravity, and at the same time as being fluidic in nature, then the mechanism of all intellectual activity might well be thought of in one of its aspects as hydraulic in character.

Let any organism fit to be a bearer of consciousness only open itself for the reception of it, and the hydraulic pressure of the surrounding Sea Of Consciousness will make it flow in, in such a form as the construction of the organism assumes. The wave and the sea, the pot and the water are frequent symbols in the East used to indicate the relation between the all Consciousness and the individual Consciousness. If the human brain is the pot sunk in the ocean of divine Consciousness, the form of that pot will Det determine the form which the all Consciousness will assume within that brain. Now imagination or Autos suggestion May determine that form through guess, intuition, speculation, tradition, Authority, or whatever the determinant Factor may be.

Any such form may be chosen. The man May create any form and then by expectancy, Stillness, passivity, love, aspiration, or whatever term we choose, draw the COS Consciousness within him, only determining its form for himself, but impersonally receiving the power which is not from himself but from without. The process is like the preparation of a mold in which molten metal is to be cast, with this difference that the metal cast into the mold is not self-active and alive, and not everpresent and pressing on every side as the living Consciousness is, which constitutes our universe.

We may take an illustration from The Mechanical Universe. This universe is one seething mass of forces in constant interplay. The forces are there and at work all the time, but only become objectified when caught in suitable receivers. The wind Force, if not caught by the arms of the windmill; the forces of stream or waterfall, if not similarly gathered in a proper mechanism, disperse themselves in space and are not focused in and translated into obje units of action. So with the vibrations sent along the wire in telegraphic or telephonic communication, or with the other vibrations sent wirelessly.

In a universe peopled with intelligences, higher beings, Gods, a whole hierarchy of entities from the highest power and Perfection to such as belong to our own limited class, constant streams of intelligence and Consciousness must continuously flash through space and fill existence. Now it seems theoretically indeed very probable, assuming that Consciousness is one and Akin in essence, that the mechanical phenomenon of sympathetic vibration may be applied to that Consciousness as well as to what are regarded as merely mechanical vibrations.

So putting all the above reasonings together, it is at least a plausible theory that man, by a process of Autos suggestion, May so mod ify the organs of his Consciousness and likewise attune his individual Consciousness in such a way as to become able to enter into a sympathetic relation with the forces of cosmic Consciousness ordinarily manifesting outside him and remaining unperceived, passing him as it were, instead of being caught and harnessed. And this is not only a theory, but more than that, a definite statement given as the result of experience by Mystics and meditators of all time and climbs.

Now we may ask, how has this method been applied in our present work? A careful analysis of its contents makes us discover several interesting characteristics. First of all, we have to remember that our text presupposes a familiarity with the religious conceptions, names, personalities, and philosophical principles of Northern Buddhism, which are all freely used in the composition. What is strange and foreign in them to the Western reader is so only because he moves in unfamiliar surroundings, but the character of the composition is one which might be compared to such analogous Western Productions, with great differences, however, as the Passion Play at Ober Ammergau or the medieval Mystery Plays. Only in some of the latter the historical element predominates, whilst in the Tibetan composition, the mythological element, for want of a better word, forms the basis and substance. In other words, in this ritual of meditation, the God's powers and principles are the actors, and not historical or symbolical personages of religious tradition.

Secondly, the play is enacted in the mind inwardly, instead of on the scene outwardly. The actors are not persons, but conceptions. First, the meditator has to swing up his Consciousness to a certain pitch of intensity, steadiness, quiet determination, and expectancy. Having tuned it to the required pitch, he fixes it on a simple center of attention, which is to serve as a starting point or gate through which his imagination shall well up, as the water of a fountain comes forth through the opening of the water pipe. From this Central Point, the mental pictures come forth. They are placed around the central conception, from simple to complex and orderly progression. The imaginative structure is elaborated. The chief Gods appear successively, followed by the minor deities. Spaces, regions, directions are carefully determined. Attributes, colors, symbols, sounds are all minutely prescribed and deafly worked in, and explications carefully given. A miniature world is evolved, seething with elemental forces working in the universe as Cosmic forces, and in man as forces of body and spirit. Most of the quantities on this elaborate notation are taken from the body of indigenous religious teaching and mythology. Some are so Universal and transparent that the non-Tibetan reader can appreciate them even without a knowledge of the religious technical terms of Tibet. But anyhow, an attentive reading and rereading reveals something even to the outsider of the force of this.

Here we are assisting in the unfolding of a grand spiritual drama, sweeping up the mind to Heights of exaltation and nobility. As to the terminological side of the text, the editor's Abundant notes prove as valuable as useful. They may disturb the elevated Unity of the whole at first, but after some assiduous familiarizing lead to Fuller and deeper comprehension. Even a single reading is sufficient to gain the impression that a stately and solemn mental drama is enacted before us, with an inherent impressiveness which would attach, for instance, to a Christian to the performance of a ritual in which all the more primary biblical persons, human and superhuman, were introduced in suitable ways as actors. And the superlative cleverness of this structure, starting from a single basic note, this is developed into a chord, which again expands into a melody, which is then elaborately harmonized. Indeed, the meditation is in its Essence both music and ritual. The initial motives are developed, repeated, elaborated, and new ones introduced. These again are treated in the same way. A symphony is evolved and brought to a powerful Climax, and then again, this full world of sound, form, meaning, color, power is withdrawn, limited, taken back into itself, folded up and dissolved, turned inwards again, and finally returned into utter Stillness and rest, into that tranquil void from which it was originally evoked, and which is its Eternal mother.

I do not know of any literature which in its nature is so absolutely symphonic, so directly akin to music, as this sample of a Tibetan meditational exercise. And curiously enough, it makes us think of another manifestation of Indian religious art, for in words, this document is akin to the Indian temple decoration, especially the South Indian Gopura, which in its endless repetitions and elaborations seems indeed Instinct with the same Spirit which has given birth to this scheme of imagination taught in these Tantras. Only in stone or plaster, the mythological host is sterile and immovable, whilst as created in the living mind, the similar structure partakes of the life of the Mind within and without. The sculptural embodiment is therefore serviceable to the less evolved mind; the Tantra is for the religious thinker who possesses power.

But we said that our meditational structure was also akin to Ritual. What we mean by this is that all the figures and images evoked in the mind in this meditation are after all only meant as the words, vestures, and gestures in a ritual, to suggest feelings, to provoke States Of Consciousness, and to furnish, if the simile be not thought too pathetic, pegs to hang ideas upon. Like as a fine piece of music or a play can only be well rendered when rehearsed over and over again and practice, so that the form side of the production becomes almost mechanical, and all power in the production can be devoted to the infusion of inspiration, so can this meditation only be perfect performed after Untold practice and devotion. It would be a totally mistaken idea to read this book as a mere piece of literature, wants to go through it to see what it contains, and then to Let It Go, just as the master pieces of music can be heard hundreds of times, just as the great rituals of the world grow in power on the individual in the measure with which he becomes familiar with them and altogether identifies himself with the most infinitely small minutia of their form and Constitution. So this meditation ritual is one which only by repetition can be mastered and perfected. Like the great Productions of art or nature, it has to grow on the individual.

This meditational exercise is not for the small, nor for the flippant, nor for those in a hurry. It is inherently an esoteric thing, one of those teachings belonging to the regions of quiet and tranquility and rest, of Taoistic philosophy. To the ignorant, it must be jabber, and so it is truly esoteric, hiding Itself by its own nature within itself, though seemingly open and accessible to all. But in connection with this meditation, we do not think of pupils who read it once or twice, or 10 times, or a 100, but of auster thinkers who work on it as a life work, through laborious years of strenuous Endeavor. For what must be done to make this meditation into a reality? Every Concept in it must be vivified and drenched with life and power. Every God in it must be made into a living God. Every Power manipulated in it made into a potency. The whole structure must be made vibrant with forces capable of entering into sympathetic relation with the greater Cosmic forces in the universe, created in imitation on a lower scale within the indiv idual meditator himself.

To the religious mind, the universe is filled with the thoughts of the Gods, with the powers of great intelligences and consciousnesses radiating eternally through space and really constituting the world. That is, the world is only a thought in the mind of God. It must take years of strenuous practice even to build up the power to visualize and correctly produce as an internal drama this meditation given in our book. To endow it with life and to put Power into this life is an achievement that no small mind, no weak devote can hope to perform. So this meditation is a solemn ritual, like the Roman Catholic Mass, only it is performed in the mind instead of in the church, and the Mystery it celebrates is an individual and not a general Sacrament.

In what we have said above, we have tried to give some outlines of the chief characteristics of of this remarkable work, now brought within the reach of the general reading public, and especially of benefit to those among them interested in the study of comparative religion along broad lines. We owe indeed a debt of gratitude to Arthur Avalon, whose enthusiasm for and insight into the Indian religious and philosophical mind have Unearthed this particular gem for us. We may be particularly grateful that his enthusiasm has not set itself a limit so as to prevent him from dealing with other than Sanskrit lore alone, and from looking for Treasure even beyond the Himalayas. In this connection, we may mention that it is his intention to maintain this Catholic attitude, for he is now taking steps to incorporate also an important Japanese work on the Vajrayana in his Tantric series.

As far as this first Tibetan text is concerned, the choice has been decidedly happy, and he has been no less fortunate in having been able to secure a competent collaborator to undertake the philological portion of the work, the Translating and editing labor. The result of thus associating himself with a capable indigenous scholar to produce the work has been a great success, a production of practical value which will undoubtedly not diminish in all Essentials for a long time to come. For not only is this particular work in and for itself of Interest, with a great beauty of its own, it has another value in quite other directions than those connected with the study of meditation or of religious artistic creation.

The work furnishes a most important key to a new way of understanding many phases and Productions of Indian philosophy. The projection of the paraphernalia of Hindu mythology inwards into the mind as instruments of meditation, the internalizing of what we find in the Puranas or the Epic externalized as mythology, has seemed to me to throw fresh and Illuminating Light on Indian symbology. To give an illustration, in this Tantra, we find an elaborate manipulation of weapons, Shields, armor as instruments for the protection of the Consciousness. Now all these implements figure, for instance, largely and elaborately in such a work as the Ahir Buna Samhita, of which Dr. Shrer has given given us a splendid summary in his work "Introduction to the Pancaratra." But in the Pancaratra, all these implements are only attributes of the Gods. In our text, we find a hint as to how all these external mythological data can also be applied to and understood as internal workings of the human consciousness, and in this light, Indian mythology assumes a new and richer significance.

I do not want to do more here than hint at the point involved, but no doubt any student of Hindu mythology who is also interested in Hindu modes of thought, in the Hindu psyche, will at once see how fruitful this idea can be. One of the riddles of Indian thought is that its symbology is kinetic and not static, and eludes the objective formality of Western thought. That is why every Hindu god is another, who is again another, who is once more another. Did not Kipling say something about K who is Parvati, who is Sitala, who is worshiped against the smallpox? So also, almost every philosophical principle is an aspect of another principle, but never a clear-cut, well circumscribed, independent thing by itself. Our text goes far towards giving a hint as to how all these gods and principles which in the Puranas and other writings appear as extra human elements, May perhaps also be interpreted as aspects of the human mind, and even human body, and become a psychological mythology instead of a cosmic one.

The idea is not absolutely new, but has been put forward by Mystics before. The cherubic Wanderer saying that it would be of no avail to anyone, even if the Christ were born a 100 times over in Bethlehem, if he were not born within the man himself. It has been said of the Bhavat Gita that it is, in one sense, the drama of the soul, and that meditation on it, transplanting the field of Kurukshetra within the human consciousness, may lead to a direct realization of all that is taught in that book, and to a vision of all the glories depicted therein. That idea is the same as that which is the basis of our text. Its message is: create a universe within, in order to be able to hear the Echoes of the universe without, which is one with that within.

If seers, occultists, meditators really exist, they may be able to outline the way and Method by which they themselves have attained. So it was with de Loyola and his Spiritual Exercises, and there is no reason why it should not be the same with the book we are discussing here. As to how far we have here a result of practical experience or only an ingenious Theory, a great attempt as it were, we will not and cannot decide to make statements about this. This needs previous experiment, and we have only read the book from the outside, not lived its contents from within. But however this may be, even such an outer reading is sufficient to reveal to us the Grandeur of the conception put before us, and to enable us to feel the symphonic Splendor of the creation as a work of religia philosophic art, and that alone is enough to enable us to judge the work as a masterpiece and a document of first class value in the field of religious and mystical literature.

The form is very unworn indeed, and in many ways utterly unfamiliar and perhaps bewildering, but the harmony of thought, the greatness of the fundamental conceptions, the Sublimity of endeavor embodied in it are clear, and these qualities are certainly enough to gain for it admirers and Friends, perhaps here and they are a disciple, even in our time, so badly prepared to hear this Tibetan Echo from that other world, which in many ways we in the West make it our strenuous business to forget and to discount.