Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c92: Section VI

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c92

Language
English

Contents

Section VI

v7.c92.1

Tāntrik doctrines and Dharmaśāstra

v7.c92.2

In H. of Dh. vol. II. p. 739 while dealing with the worship of Durgā, who is also worshipped as Śakti (cosmic power or energy), it was stated that the influence of Śākta worship has been great throughout India and a promise was given that a brief treatment of Śāktism would follow in a later volume. It is now time to deal with Śāktas and Tantras, which exercised some influence over the Purāṇas and directly and through the Purāṇas over Indian religious ritual and practices in the medieval ages.

v7.c92.3

There is a vast literature on Tantras, published and unpublished There are Buddhist Tantras, Hindu Tantras and Jaina Tantras. There is a philosophical or spiritual side in some of the Tantras which has not been much studied except by Arthur Avalon, B Bhattacharya and a few others. In the popular mind Tantras have been associated with the worship of Śakti (Goddess Kālī), with mudrās, mantras, maṇḍalas, the five *makāras*, the Dakṣiṇamārga and the Vāma-mārga, and magic practices for acquiring supernatural powers All that can and will be attempted here is to trace briefly the origin of Śāktism and Tantra and point out some of the ways in which *tantra* has entered into Hindu ritual directly and indirectly through the Purāṇas.

v7.c92.4

The Amarakośa states that *tantra* means 'principal matter or part', 'siddhānta' (i. e. doctrine or śāstra), a loom or paraphernalia But it does not state that tantra means a certain peculiar class of works. Therefore, the inference is not altogether unjustifiable that in its time works bearing the peculiar character of what are called Tantras were either not composed or had not at least attained great vogue. In Ṛg. X. 71. 9 the word 'tantra' occurs and appears to mean a loom 'These ignorant¹⁶⁶⁰ men do not move about lower down (in this world) nor in a higher world, being neither (learned) brāhmanas nor some-extracting priests, these resort to speech (of a vile kind) and with that vile speech they engage in handling ploughs and looms'. The Atharvaveda (X 7 42) ('tantram-eke yuvatī virūpe abhyākrāmam vayatah san-mayūkkham') employs the word tantra in the same sense and so does the Tai Br. II 5. 5. 3 in a closely similar passage Pāṇini (V. 2 70) derives the word 'tantraka' (a cloth that is recently taken away from a loom) from '*tantra*'. The Āp. Śr employs the word¹⁶⁶¹ tantra in the sense of 'procedure containing many parts'. The Śān. Śr. applies the word tantra to what being once done serves the purpose of many other actions. The Mahābhāṣya on Pāṇini IV. 2 60 and Vārtika 'sarvasāderdvigośca lah' cites 'sarvatantrah' and 'dvitantrah' as examples meaning 'one who has studied all the tantras' or 'one who has studied two tantras', tantra probably meaning 'siddhānta'. In Yāj. I. 228 ('tantram va vaiśva devikam') the word tantra is employed in the sense in which the commentary on the Śān. Śr. takes it The 15th adhikarana of Kautilya's Arthaśāstra bears the title 'Tantrayukti' (vide J. O. R, Madras, vol. 4, 1930, p. 82 ff) meaning the main canons or propositions or principles of exposition of a sāstra. Caraka (Siddhisthāna, chap 12. 40-45) also speaks of '36 tantrasya yuktayah' and Susruta (Uttaratantra, chap. 65) names 32 tantrayuktis In Bṛhaspati and Kātyāyana and in the Bhāgavata the word tantra is employed in the sense of 'doctrine' or 'śāstra'. Śabara in his *bhāṣya* on Jaimini XI. I. 1 remarks that when any thing or act, once done, becomes useful in several¹⁶⁶² matters, that is called 'tantra'. Sankarācārya in several passages of his bhāṣya on the Vedāntasūtras speaks of the Sānkhya system as sānkhya-tantra and of the Pūrvamīmāmsā as 'prathama-tantra'.¹⁶⁶³ In the Kālikā- purāṇa (87. 130) the works of Uśanas and Bṛhaspati on Rājanīti (the science of statecraft) are called tantras and in 92. 2 the Viṣṇudharmottara-purāṇa is called tantra. In all these cases the peculiar meaning attached to the word tantra- in medieval times does not occur.

v7.c92.5

¹⁶⁶⁰ इमे येऽर्वाङ् न परश्चरन्ति न ब्राह्मणासो न सुतेकरासः। त एते वाचमभिपद्य पापया सिरीस्तन्त्रं तन्वते अप्रजज्ञयः ॥ ऋ. X 71 9. सायण explains सिरी. सीरिणो भूत्वा तन्त्रं कृषिलक्षणं तन्वते विस्तारयन्ति कुर्वन्तीत्यर्थः ।

v7.c92.6

¹⁶⁶¹ उदिते आदित्ये पौर्णमास्यास्तन्त्रं प्रक्रमयति प्रागुदयादमावास्यायाः । आप श्रौ I 15 1, on which the com. says 'अङ्गसमुदायस्तन्त्रम् । तत्यक्रमयति यजमानोऽध्वर्युर्वा ' 'तन्त्रलक्षणं तत्।' शा श्रौ I 16 6 on which the com says 'यत्सकृत्कृतं बहूनामुपकरोति तत्तन्त्रमित्युच्यते।'

v7.c92.7

¹⁶⁶² आम्नाये स्मृतितन्त्रे च लोकाचारे च सूरिभिः । शरीरार्थं स्मृता जाया पुण्यापुण्यफले समा ॥ गृहस्पति q by अपरार्क p 710, दायभाग XI. 1 2 p. 119, कुल्लूक on मनु IX 187. आत्मन्यर्थे तु यज्जीक्तं तत्कुर्यात्कारणन्वितम् । q from कात्यायन by स्मृतित्त p 5, तन्त्रं सात्वतमाचष्ट नैष्कर्म्यं कर्मणो यतः । भागवत I 3 8 Here the पञ्चरात्र is called सात्वततन्त्र यत्तु सकृत्कृतं बहूनामुपकरोति तत्तन्त्रमित्युच्यतं यथा बहूनां ब्राह्मणानां मध्यदृनः प्रदीपः।' शबर's भाष्य on जै XI 4 1

v7.c92.8

¹⁶⁶³ On वे सू II 2 1 the Śānkara-bhāṣya says 'तथापि महाजनपरिगृहीतानि महान्ति साङ्ख्यादितन्त्राणि • सम्यग्दर्शनायोपादियान्येवेक्षा &c.', vide also भाष्य (*Continued from last page*) on V. S. II 1 1, and II. 4 9 (where a half verse from सांख्यकारिका 29 'सामान्यकरणवृत्तिः प्राणाद्या वायवः पञ्च' is cited as belonging to तन्त्रान्तर. The सांख्यकारिका itself calls सांख्य system 'Tantra' in verse 70 'tena ca bahudhā kṛtam tantram'. On वे सू III. 3. 53 the पूर्वमीमांसासूत्र is referred to as 'प्रथमे तन्त्रे' in the भाष्य.

v7.c92.9

It is difficult to determine the exact¹⁶⁶⁴ time when the word tantra came to be employed in the sense in which it is used in the so-called tantra literature nor is it possible to decide what people first introduced tantra principles and practices or where they first arose M. M. Haraprasad Shastri was inclined to hold that the principles and practices of tantra came to India from outside and he relies mainly on a verse in the Kubjikāmatatantra¹⁶⁶⁵ which says 'go thou to the country of Bhārata for exercising dominance on all sides and bring about new creation in various ways in *pīṭhas*, *upapīṭhas* and *kṣetras*'. With all respect to that great scholar it has to be said that the passage does not affirm that tantra principles were then unknown in India and were first introduced in Bhārata after that verse was uttered. That passage could very well have been uttered even when tantra practices had already taken hold of people's minds in India and the reference to pithas and ksetras (in the verse) clearly indicates that what is meant is only a record of an existing fact, just as the Purāṇas speak in a prophetic vein about what is past. It is possible that a few mystic practices of *Kulācāra* or *Vāmācāra* owe their origin to foreign elements or sources But the one verse on which M. M. H. P Shastri relied is far too inadequate for proving this. The Rudrayāmala (ed. by Jīvananda, 1892) contains a panegyric of the Atharvaveda (17th patala, verse 4), saying that all gods, all beings (on land, in water and air), all sages, Kāmavidyā and Mahāvidyā dwell in it; verses 10-17 dwell upon the mysterious Kuṇḍalinī, verses 31 ff dilate upon Yogic practices and six *cakras* in the body, verses 51-53 mention Kāmarūpa, Jālandhara, Pūrṇagiri, Uddiyāna, and a few others as Kālikā pīṭhas. Bagchi (in 'Studies in Tantra' pp 45-55) adduces some evidence of foreign elements in the tāntrik doctrines. The Rudrayāmala¹⁶⁶⁶ (17th Patala, verses 119-125) states that Mahāvidyā appeared to sage Vasiṣṭha and asked him to go to Cīnadeśa and Buddha, who is said to have taught Vasiṣṭha the Kaula path, Yoga practices for the attainment of siddhis (extraordinary powers) and directed him to make use of five *makāras* (*madya* &c.) in his *sādhanā* for becoming a perfect Yogin. All this shows that pīṭhas flourished in India when the Rudrayāmala was composed, that Tāntrik practices had grown in China or Tibet and that Buddha was deemed to have taught those practices, which is a libel and a vile travesty of Buddha's noble teaching.

v7.c92.10

¹⁶⁶⁴ Vide Dr. B. Bhattacharya's Intro to Buddhist Esoterism (p. 43), which work will be referred to hereafter as B. E

v7.c92.11

¹⁶⁶⁵ I. H Q. Vol. IX p. 358 f n 'गच्छ त्वं भारते वर्षे अधिकाराय सर्वतः। पीठोपपीठक्षेत्रेषु कुरु सृष्टिमनैकधा॥'. Vide H. P. Sastri's Cat. of Palm-leaf mss. in Nepal Durbar Library (Calcutta, 1905), Preface p. LXXIX, for the verse in Kubjikāmata, the ms. of which is written in late Gupta characters (i. e. about 7th century A. D.). Dr. B. Bhattacharya appears to hold the same opinion (p 43 of the work cited in the preceding note). Arthur Avalon in Mahānirvāṇatantra (3rd ed. of 1953 p. 560) holds that tantra was brought into India from Chaldea or Śakadvīpa. In 'Modern Review' for 1934 pp. 150-156 Prof. N. N. Choudhuri tries to prove that Indian tāntricism has its origin in the Bon religion of Tibet. He relies on the Tibetan tradition of Asaṅga having introduced Tāntricism in India. But that tradition is mainly based on Taranath's History of Buddhism. Lama Taranath was born in 1573 A. D. (1575 A. D. according to some) and completed his history in 1608 i. e. he wrote about twelve hundred years after Asaṅga. Prof. Choudhuri further relies on the colophon to Ekajaṭāsādhana (in Sādhanamālā No. 127, आर्यनागार्जुनपादैर्भोटेषु उद्धृतमिति). But this sentence is dropped in three out of the eight mss. on which the edition is based Prof. Choudhuri further asserts that the guru's position 'in tantra' is neither Vaidika nor Paurāṇika Here he is wrong. The Vidyāsūkta in Nirukta (II. 4) and the passage of the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad quoted in note 1540 make the Vaidika position of the guru clear. As for the Paurāṇika position of guru, vide the Liṅgapurāṇa (quoted in note 1718 below) and Devībhāgavata (XI. I. 49 'Gurur-brahmā' &c in the same note) and the verse 'यस्य देवे परा भक्तिर्यथा देवे तथा गुरौ॥ तस्यैते कथिता ह्यर्थाः प्रकाशन्ते महात्मनः॥' श्वेताश्व० उप VI. 23 and आप्रौसू. 392 6

v7.c92.12

¹⁶⁶⁶ च. कुलार्थी सिद्धमन्त्रो भवेदाचारनिर्मलः। प्राप्नोति साधनं पुण्यं वेदानाम्प्यगोचरम्॥ बौद्धदेशेऽथर्ववेदे महाचीने सदा व्रज ॥ ० ० ०मत्कुलज्ञो महर्षे त्वं महासिद्धो भविष्यसि॥ ० ० ततो मुनिवर. श्रुत्वा महाविद्यासरस्वतीम्। जगाम चीनभूमौ च यत्र बुद्ध प्रतिष्ठिति॥ 'बुद्ध उवाच। वसिष्ठ शृणु वक्ष्यामि कुलमार्गमनुत्तमम्। येन विज्ञान(त?)मात्रेण रुद्ररूपी भवेत्क्षणात्॥ ० ० अतः कुलं समाश्रित्य सर्वसिद्धीश्वरो भव ॥ मासेनाकर्षणं सिद्धिर्द्विमासे वाक्पतिर्भवेत् । ० ० ०शक्तिं विना शिवोऽशक्तः किमन्ये जडबुद्धयः। इत्युक्त्वा बुद्धरूपी च कारयामास साधनम्॥ कुरु विप्र महाशक्तिसेवनं मद्यसाधनम्। ० मदिरासाधनं कर्तुं जगाम कुलमण्डले। मद्यं मांसं तथा मत्स्यं मुद्रा मैथुनमेव च॥ पुनः पुनः साधयित्वा पूर्णयोगी बभूव स ॥ रुद्रयामल, 17th पटल verses 121-123, 125, 135, 152-153. 157-158, 160-161,

v7.c92.13

Magic spells are found in plenty in the Atharvaveda and some mystic words or syllables are used even in the Ṛgveda; e. g. the word '*vaṣaṭ*' occurs in Ṛg. VII. 99. 7, VII. 100. 7 and other verses and the word *svāhā*¹⁶⁶⁷ occurs over a dozen times in the Ṛgveda (e. g. in I. 13. 12, V. 5, 11, VII. 2. 11). A sleep-inducing spell occurs in Ṛg. VII. 55. 5-8,¹⁶⁶⁸ which verses occur also in the Atharvaveda IV. 5. 6, 5, 1, 3 and which spell was probably employed by a *purohita* to put to sleep some noble man complaining of sleeplessness at night. Some Western scholars have held that this hymn is a lover's charm for a clandestine meeting with his lady-love. But the whole hymn has hardly any words of love in it and the author is not able to accept that theory as proved. Ṛgveda X. 145 is a hymn to be employed against a co-wife, the first verse of which is 'I dig up this herb, which is a most powerful creeper, by which (a woman) injures her co-wife and by which she secures her husband (to herself alone)'

v7.c92.14

¹⁶⁶⁷ In the Tantras the word 'svāhā' in mantras is indicated by such a word as 'wife of Agni'. Vide Tāntrik Texts, vol 7, where स्वाहा is called वह्निजाया, ज्वलनवल्लभा and द्विष्ट, also शारदातिलक VI. 62-63.

v7.c92.15

¹⁶⁶⁸ सस्तु माता सस्तु पिता सस्तु श्वा सस्तु विश्पतिः । ससन्तु सर्वे ज्ञातयः सस्त्वयमभितो जनः ॥ य आस्ते यश्च चरति यश्च पश्यति नो जनः । तेषां सं हन्मो अक्षाणि यथेदं हर्म्यं -तथा । ...प्रोष्ठेशया वह्येशया नारीर्यास्तल्पशीवरीः । स्त्रियो याः पुण्यगन्धास्ताः सर्वाः स्वापयामसि ॥ ऋ VII. 55. 5-8

v7.c92.16

The Ṛgveda frequently mentions magicians who appear to have been mostly non-Aryans described as *adeva* (godless), *anṛtadeva* (worshipping false gods), *śiśnadeva* (lecherous, Ṛg. VII. 21. 5, X. 99. 3). For reasons of space, it is not possible to go into great details. Tāntrik works describe the six cruel acts which will be dealt with later on. In the Vedic times it was supposed that some wicked people could by charms and incantations bring about the death of men and animals or make them ill. Two long hymns (VII. 104 and X. 87 both containing 25 verses) are enough to show how the Ṛgveda people were afraid of black magic. Both hymns are full of the words '*Yātudhāna*' (one who employs black magic) and '*rakṣas*' (devil or evil spirit), the word yātu being the same as '*jādu*' (employed in Marathi and other regional Indian languages). There were female evil spirits also called '*piśācī*' (Ṛg. I. 133. 5 'O Indra! destroy the reddish very powerful piśācī and kill all evil spirits)'. A few verses from the Ṛgveda may be translated here. 'May I (Vasistha) die this very day if I be a practitioner of black magic or if I have scorched the life of any person; may he, who falsely called me a practitioner of black magic, lose his ten sons; may Indra kill with a terrible weapon him who called me *yātudhāna*, though I am not so and who, being himself a raksas, declares himself to be pure; may he, being most wretched, fall below all beings (Ṛg. VII. 104. 15-16); O Maruts! may you spread in different places among the people, and wish to seize the devils and pound to dust the devils (raksasah) who assuming the form of birds fly about at night and who, when the sacrifice is shining, produce deadly obstacles (*ibid*. verse 18); O Indra! kill the male practitioner of black magic and also the female (magician) that destroys with wiles; may the (devils) worshippers of foolish deities perish with their necks cut off; and may they not be able to see the sun rising (Ṛg. VII 104. 24); O Agni, split the skin of the yātudhāna, may thy destructive bolt kill him by its heat; O Jātavedas! shatter his joints, may some carnivorous beast longing for flesh seek (devour) the broken (yātudhāna), O Agni! shatter the yātudhānas by your heat, and the raksas by your glow and destroy the worshippers of foolish gods (*mūradevān*) and, shining towards those that feed on the lives of men (*asutṛpaḥ*), shatter them' (Ṛg. X. 87. 5 and 14)

v7.c92.17

In the Āp. Gṛ. (III. 9. 5-8) it is said that the plant used by the co-wife is called Pāthā and the hymn (Ṛg. X 145) is employed for securing domination over the husband and for harming a co-wife Ṛg I 191 is a charm against various poisons In the Atharvaveda there are numerous hymns styled 'śatrunāśana' (destructive of enemies) e g. II. 12-24, III. 6, IV. 3 and 40, V 8, VI. 6, 65-67 and 134 Atharva II. 11 is styled 'Kṛtyā-dūṣaṇa' (counteracting black magic). A few of the typical verses may be cited¹⁶⁶⁹ here. 'Employ magic spells against him, who hates us and whom we hate; attain (i. e. dominate) him who is superior and surpass him who is (*our*) equal'; 'O Soma! strike in the mouth with your thunderbolt him who speaks evil of us that speak what is good and may he, being crushed, run away'. The Sukranītisāra (ed. by G. Oppert, 1882) provides that the Tantras are the Upaveda of the Atharvaveda. Atharva III. 25 and VI. 130 are spells respectively employed by a man and a woman to soften the heart of the person loved; Atharva II. 30 and 31 are charms for driving away or destroying worms that cause diseases and V. 36 is a charm against *piśācas* (goblins)¹⁶⁷⁰ The sound ‘phat’ occurs in Vāj. S. In the Āp. Śr. Sūtra *phat* is employed in offering Soma stalks in *abhicāra* (employment of spells for a malevolent purpose). Phat is a sound frequently employed in the worship of Devī in Tantra works. But no direct connection or line of evolution from the Atharvaveda to the Tantras can be traced. The Tattvasangraha of Śāntarakṣita (705-762 A. D.) connects even Buddha with magic practices. It says ‘all wise men declare that it is dharma from which results worldly prosperity and the highest beatitude. Seen results such as intelligence, health, rulership are produced by properly observing the rules about mantras, yoga and the like declared by him (i. e.¹⁶⁷¹ by Buddha)’. But one cannot place implicit reliance on any writer's statement made more than a thousand years after the event or person referred to in it. There are, however, stories in the Pali sacred books about the cultivation of magic powers among Buddha's own disciples, e. g. the story of Bhāradvāja¹⁶⁷² who rose in the air for a bowl carved out of very fragrant sandalwood. Further, there is a story of miraculous powers possessed by all the members of the family of a layman called Meṇḍaka (viz. himself, his wife, son and daughter-in law) in Mahāvagga VI. 34. 1 ff. (S. B. E. vol. XVII. pp 121 ff) Here again we have to remember that there is nothing in the *Tipiṭaka* or any early Buddhist document to prove that Buddha or his first disciples had anything to do with *mudrās*, mantras and *maṇḍalas* and that neither Yuan Chwang nor I-tsing refers to any Tantras, though both of them refer to the Buddhist monasteries as centres of Buddhist culture (vide Dr. De in N. I A. vol. I pp. 1 ff). In the introduction to Sādhanamālā (vol. II. LXVIII.) Dr. Bhattacharya relies upon the words 'Sugatopadiṣṭam' and 'Sugataiḥ' occurring on pp. 334-335 of the Sādhanamālā for holding that Buddha himself must have promulgated some mantras. There are two weighty objections viz. 'Sugataiḥ' does not always mean Buddha, but means also 'followers of Buddha' and secondly, just as most Hindu Tantras are dialogues between Śiva and Pārvatī, so later Buddhist writers might have easily said that they are quoting the Buddha; the same objection applies to Kamalaśīla's remarks quoted by Dr. Bhattacharya, as Kamalaśīla and his teacher flourished about 1200 years after Buddha.

v7.c92.18

¹⁶⁶⁹ प्रति तमभि चर योऽस्मान् द्वेष्टि यं वयं द्विष्म । आप्नुहि श्रेयासमति समं क्रम ॥ अथर्व II 11 3; यो न सोम सुशसिनो दुःशंस आदिशति । वज्रेणास्य मुखे जहि स संपिष्टो अपायति ॥ अथर्व VI 6 2; विविधोपास्यमन्त्राणां प्रयोगाः सुविभेदतः। कथिताः सोपसंहारास्तन्त्रमेतन्मयैश्च यत् । अथर्वणा चोपवेदस्तन्तरूपः स एव हि ॥ शुक्रनीतिसार IV. 3. 39.

v7.c92.19

¹⁶⁷⁰ For the sound ‘phat’ in Durgā-pūjā, vide p. 161 n. 416; उपरि श्रुता भङ्गेन हतोऽसौ फट् प्राणाय त्वा व्यानाय त्वा। वाज. सं VII. 3. on which the com. महीधर explains ‘उपरि आगतेन भङ्गेन आमर्देन असाविति देवदत्तादिनामनिर्देशः। असौ द्वेष्यो हतो निहतः सन् फट् विशीर्णो भवतु। ’ ‘स्वाहाकारस्थाने फडिति अभिचारे प्रयुज्यते।

v7.c92.20

¹⁶⁷¹ यतोऽभ्युदयनिष्पत्तिर्यतो निःश्रेयसस्य च। स धर्म उच्यते तादृक् सर्वैरैव विचक्षणैः॥ तदुक्तमन्त्रयोगादिनियमाद्विधिकृत्कृतात् । प्रज्ञारोग्यविभुत्वादि दृष्टधर्मोऽपि जायते॥ तत्त्वसंग्रह p 905. कमलशील (pupil of शान्तरक्षित) comments ‘तेन भगवतोक्तश्चासौ मन्त्रयोगादिनियमश्चेति विग्रहः। योगः समाधि’ । आदिशब्देन मुद्रामण्डलादिपरिग्रहः।’. The first verse appears to have been based on the वैशेषिकसूत्र I 1. 1-2 ‘अथातो धर्म व्याख्यास्यामः। यतोऽभ्युदयनिःश्रेयससिद्धिः स धर्मः।’. The word अभ्युदय has been variously interpreted by the commentators of Kaṇāda's sūtra, but generally अभ्युदय means ‘worldly happiness or prosperity’; compare भरत's नाट्यशास्त्र ‘विवाहप्रसवावाहप्रमोदाभ्युदयादिषु। विनोदेकरणं चैव वृत्तमेतत्कीर्तितम्॥’ chap. IV. 263 (G. O S). Some take it to mean स्वर्ग in contradistinction to निःश्रेयस (which means मोक्ष or अमृतत्व).

v7.c92.21

¹⁶⁷² The story of Piṇḍola Bhāradvāja, a disciple of the Blessed One (Buddha) rising in the air, taking the bowl and going thrice round the city of Rājagṛha in the air, is narrated in Cullavagga (S B. E Vol. XX pp 78 ff). But it is said there that Buddha rebuked his disciple, ordered that bowl to be broken and reduced to powder.

v7.c92.22

The question whether Buddhist Tantras were prior to Hindu Tantras or *vice versa* is difficult to decide It appears probable that both arose nearly about the same time. Vide 'The Śāktas' by E. A Payne pp. 72-74 for discussion of views In the Sādhanamālā (a Vajrayāna work consisting of 312 small works composed according to Dr. Bhattacharya from the 3rd century A D to 12th century A D.) four *pīṭhas* (chief centres) of Vajrayāna¹⁶⁷³ are mentioned viz. Kāmākhyā, Sirihaṭṭa (or Śrīhaṭṭa), Pūrṇagiri and Uḍḍiyāna The first two are respectively identified with Kāmākhyā or Kāmarūpa (three miles from Gauhati) and modern Sylhet. The exact situation of the other two is a controversial matter. M. M. H. P. Shastri identified Uḍḍiyāna (which is most frequently mentioned as a pīṭha) with Orissa. His son Dr B. Bhattacharya thinks it most probable that Vajrayāna Tāntricism arose in Uḍḍiyāna (p. 46 of Intro. to B. E.). Dr. Bagchi in 'Studies in the Tantras' pp. 37–40 furnishes good grounds for holding that Uḍḍiyāna was near Swat valley in N. W. India and Grousset 'In the footsteps of Buddha' pp. 109–110 holds the same view. The Bārhaspatya-sūtra (ed. by F. W. Thomas) names eight Śāktakṣetras (III. 123–124). In his Intro. to Sādhanamālā (vol. II. p. LXXVIII) Dr Bhattacharya holds that the Hindu tantras were introduced on the model of the Buddhist tantras. But Winternitz (in 'History of Indian Literature', Eng. tr., vol. II. p. 401) states that this view of Dr. Bhattacharya is contrary to the facts and the present writer agrees with this view.

v7.c92.23

¹⁶⁷³ It appears that in some Tantra works five Pīṭhas are named (according to H P Sastri's Cat. of Nepal Palm-leaf and selected paper mss. in the Nepal Durbar Library, Calcutta, 1905, p LXXX) viz Oḍiyāna (in Orissa, says H P Sastri), Jāla (in Jalandar), Pūrṇa Mataṅga in Śrīśaila and Kāmākhyā in Assam The very fact that five pīṭhas are named in the work supposed to be delivered by Śiva shows beyond doubt that before the work Tāntrism had spread in all parts of India The Sādhanamālā (vol II pp. 453 and 455) mentions Uḍḍiyāna, Pūrṇagiri, Kāmākhyā and Sirihaṭṭa, the Kulacūḍāmaṇitantra (Tāntrik texts, Vol. IV) in 6th paṭala verses 3-7) refers to five pīṭhas viz. Uḍḍiyāna, Kāmarūpa, Kāmākhyā, Jālandhara and *(Continued from last page)* Pūrnagiri (vide also 3rd paṭala, 59–61). In I. H. Q vol. XI. pp 142–144 it is argued that Uḍḍiyāna and Śāhore are in Bengal. The Devībhāgavata (VII. 30 55–80) names over one hundred kṣetras of Devī.

v7.c92.24

Though Dr. Bhattacharya admits that Buddhism and Jainism exploited Hindu gods in the earlier period, he asserts (on p. 147 of his Intro. to B E.) that 'it is possible to declare without fear of contradiction that the Buddhists were the first to introduce the Tantras in their religion and that the Hindus borrowed them from the Buddhists in later times'. It is no honour to ancient Hindus to be called the pioneers in the practice of black magic. But scholars have to seek truth irrespective of the question of honour or dishonour. Very weighty arguments are advanced by Valleé Poussin (in E. R. E. vol XII. p 193), Winternitz and Payne (on 'Śāktas p 73) for the opposite view and the present author agrees with them. Hundreds of works were translated from Sanskrit into Tibetan and Chinese. The traffic of borrowing has been all one way from India to Tibet and China. Vide a paper on 'China's debt to India' by Prof. Liang Chi Chao in Viśvabhāratī Quarterly, vol. II. for 1924–25 pp 251–261, where it is stated that 24 Hindu scholars from A. D 67 to 789 came to China, besides 13 from Kashmir and that the Chinese scholars that went to India for study from 265–790 A. D. numbered 187 of which the names of 105 can be ascertained.

v7.c92.25

There is hardly any evidence of the translations of Chinese or Tibetan works into Sanskrit. Besides, the three great Chinese travellers never refer to the study of Buddhist Tantras in India. Watters on 'Yuan Chwang's Travels in India' vol. I p. 360 narrates a story from the pilgrim's life that when he left Ayodhyā in a boat and proceeded east down the Ganges, thugs that looted the boat decided to sacrifice him to Durgā but that the Chinese pilgrim was saved by a hurricane which put the thugs in terror, who released him and treated him with reverence Vide also 'In the Footsteps of Buddha' by René Grousset pp 133-135 for this incident. We see that there is evidence of the prevalence of Tāntrik and Śākta worship in India long before the 7th century A. D. There is hardly any evidence of any Buddhist Tāntrik work before 650 A D. except perhaps the Guhyasamājatantra and Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa, both of which contain late elements. In this way, presumption and chronology are both against borrowing by Hinduism from Buddhist Tibetan or Chinese Tāntrik works Vide 'Tibet past and present' by Sir Charles Bell (1924) pp 23, 25, 29, Sardar K. M. Panikkar's work 'India and China' (1957) p. 70, 'Introduction of the alphabet in Tibet' by M M Dr Satischandra who holds that it was borrowed from Magadha in 7th Century A. D., that show that a written script based on an Indian alphabet as prevalent in Kashmir was first introduced about 640 A. D., that the Tāntrik Buddhist Padmasambhava was summoned from Uddiyāna by a Tibetan king Ti-son De-tson (749-786 A. D ) on the recommendation of Sāntaraksita Bodhisattva and was induced to settle in Tibet Bunjiu Nanjio's 'Catalogue of Tripitaka' (Oxford, 1883), appendix II. p. 445 No 155 shows that Amoghavajra translated many works between 746 and 771 A. D., died in 774 A D. and that it was under his influence that Tantra doctrines gained currency in China. It is clear from the works of Bāṇa as detailed later on that worship of Caṇḍikā with wine and flesh was prevalent in India long before 600 A. D, that Śrīparvata was famed for its tāntrik *siddhis*, that Śivasamhitās existed, that japa of mantras a crore of times in a cemetery was supposed to confer *siddhis*, that he 14th of the dark half of a month was deemed the proper *tithi* for japa and black magic. Therefore, it is most likely that Śākta or Tāntrik doctrines were taken to China and Tibet from India and not *vice versa* Prof P. V Bapat in '2500 years of Buddhism' (pp. 360-376) follows (at p. 363) Dr. B. Bhattacharya and tries to prove that Tibetan Tāntrism is earlier than Hindu Tāntrism, but his arguments like those of Dr. Bhattacharya do not carry conviction at all. Dr. A. S. Altekar in his paper on Sanskrit Literature in Tibet (ABORI. vol. 35 pp. 54-66) shows how Buddhism entered into Tibet in the reign of Strong-Tsan-Gampo (637-693 A. D.), that about 750 A D :Padmasambhava from Orissa and Vairocana from Kashmir were pioneers and how about 4500 works were translated into Tibetan.

v7.c92.26

Even Dr. Bhattacharya admits that Buddhist Tantras in outward appearance resemble in a marked degree Hindu Tantras (p 47 of Intro to B E.), but he contends that in the subject matter, the philosophical doctrines and religious principles there is little similarity. As Buddhism did not believe in Hindu gods they do not speak about Śakti or Śāktism. But just as in Hindu Tantras there is the male principle Śiva and the female principle of Devī, the Buddhists postulate Prajñā (which is feminine) and Upāya (masculine) as two principles and invest them with the same roles as those of Śiva and Devī but reversed in character. They had to graft on the idea of *Śunyatā* the ideas underlying the concepts of Śiva and Devī or Śakti. The subject matter is very similar as regards the goal and means (Yoga &c) and the procedure of mantra, guru, mandala &c. is the same. The most important and early works of Buddhist Tantric cult, the Prajñopāya-viniścayasiddhi and Jñānasiddhi are not earlier than the 8th century A. D., when Śāktism and Tāntrism had both been long established in India.

v7.c92.27

The word 'Śākta' means one who is a worshipper or devotee of 'Śakti' (cosmic power or energy). It appears that long before the 8th century A. D. this cult had spread in almost all parts of India, particularly in Bengal and Assam. Śakti under different names (such as Tripurā, Lohitā, Sdaśikā, Kāmeśvarī) was conceived to be the primordial principle of all activity in the universe and is generally worshipped under the name of Devī. The Devīmāhātmya is one of the chief works of the Śāktas and has been described above on pp. 155-156. The chief characteristics of the Śākta cult are the doctrine that God or Deity is one and is to be conceived as the mother and also the destroyer¹⁶⁷⁴ and that there is a special form of ceremonial worship which sometimes assumed debased and revolting forms. Devī has been eulogised in other Purāṇas also as in Vāmana (18-19), Devī-bhāgavata (III. 27), Brahmāṇḍa (that contains the Lalitāmāhātmya in 44 chapters), Matsya (13. 24-54, where 108 names of Devī and 108 places of her worship are set out), Kūrma (I. 12). In the last Purāṇa (Kūrma I. 12) Devī is called Mahāmahiṣamardinī (98), Anāhatā, Kuṇḍalinī (128), Durgā, Kātyāyanī, Caṇḍī, Bhadrakālī (143 and 148) and it is stated that the śāstras opposed¹⁶⁷⁵ to the Veda and Smṛti that are popular among people such as Kāpāla, Bhairava, Yāmala, Vāma, Ārhata were propagated by Devī for deluding the world and were based on ignorance. Vide also Brahmapurāṇa (181. 48-52) for names of Devī and for the proposition that Devī when worshipped with offerings of wine, flesh and other edibles becomes pleased and grants men's desires. Bhadrakālī is comparatively an ancient name. In the Śāṅ. Gṛ. (SBE vol. XXIX p. 86) it is provided that an offering is to be made to Śrī at the head of the bed on which the householder sleeps and at the foot of the bed to Bhadra-kālī, while Manu provides that, in the daily *baliharaṇa*, *bali* (offering) is to be offered to Bhadrakālī in the south-west.

v7.c92.28

¹⁶⁷⁴ One of the *dhyānas* of Devī as Kālī is as follows: शवारूढां महाभीमां घोरदंष्ट्रां हसन्मुखीम्। चतुर्भुजा खङ्गमुण्ड-वराभयकरां शिवाम्। मुण्डमालाधरां देवीं ललज्जिह्वां दिगम्बराम्। एवं सञ्चिन्तयेत्कालीं श्मशानालयवासिनीम्॥ कालीतन्त्र in शाक्तप्रमोद (Venk. ed.)

v7.c92.29

¹⁶⁷⁵ यानि शास्त्राणि दृश्यन्ते लोकेऽस्मिन्विविधानि तु। श्रुतिस्मृतिविरुद्धानि निष्ठा तेषां हि तामसी॥ कापालं भैरवं चैव यामलं वाममार्हतम्। एवंविधानि चान्यानि मोहनार्थानि तानि तु॥ कूर्म I. 12. 261-262. These verses are quoted by रघुनन्दन in स्मृतितत्त्व I. pp. 785-786 (under मलमासतत्त्व).

v7.c92.30

The Tantras and Śākta works have much in common, the main point of difference being that in the Śākta cult Devī (or Śakti) is worshipped as the highest, while Tantras (which include also Buddhist and Jaina works) are not restricted to the worship of Devī or Śakti, but may be agnostic, Vedāntic or Sāṅkhya in their philosophical outlook. Dr. B. Bhattacharya (in Intro to Guhyasamājatantra p XXXIV and in Intro. to Sādhanamālā vol. II. p. XIX) states that, for a work to be called a real Tantra, there must be the element of Śakti in it. But this is plainly rather an over-statement. The Vāyupurāṇa enumerates the Śākta among six *darśanas* (philosophic points of view) as in note1675a.

v7.c92.31

1675a ब्राह्मं शैवं वैष्णवं च सौरं शाक्तं तथार्हतम्। षड्दर्शनानि चोक्तानि स्वभाव-नियतानि च। 104 16.

v7.c92.32.1

Even the Ṛgveda speaks of the Śaktis of the great gods of the Vedic pantheon. But the Śakti or Śaktis are of the God himself and not a separate creative principle and sometimes Śakti is meant as part of the poet, priest or sacrificer (as in Ṛg. I. 31. 18, I. 83. 3, IV. 22. 8, X. 25. 5). The word ‘Śakti’ occurs in the Ṛgveda about a dozen times in the singular as well as in the plural, five times with Indra,¹⁶⁷⁶ once with Aśvins (Ṛg. II. 39. 7), twice with pitṛs (I 109. 3, VI. 75. 9) and once with gods in general (X. 88. 10, who are said to have created Agni with their powers). Sometimes, the word ‘Māyā’ is used with regard to Indra instead of the word Śakti. ‘O Indra! I long for your great friendship and powers (śaktīḥ)...understand that you are our great protector; I proclaim your ancient and recent deeds, O Indra endowed with powers (Śaktīvaḥ)!......; ‘Indra assuming¹⁶⁷⁷ many forms by his powers (māyābhiḥ) repairs (to many sacrifices), ten hundred horses are yoked to his chariot’. In these passages there is no question of worshipping śakti or śaktis of the god praised. The more frequent word, however, is ‘Śacī’ (‘śacībhiḥ’ occurring 36 times and ‘śacyā’ 12 times). The word ‘Śacīpati’ (lord of Śacī or power) occurs sixteen times in the Ṛgveda and has been applied in all places to Indra, except once in Ṛg. VII. 67. 5 (where it is applied to Aśvins).

v7.c92.32.2

It cannot be said that in the Ṛgveda ‘Śacī’ is the wife of Indra (as it is said in later mythology), since the plural is more frequent than Śacī in the singular and since Aśvins also are called ‘Śacīpati’. once. Similarly, the word ‘Śacīvaḥ’ occurs eleven times, in nine of which it is addressed to Indra but it is once applied to Agni (Ṛg. III. 21. 4) and once to Soma (Ṛg. IX. 87. 9). The ideas associated with the words ‘Śakti’ and ‘Śacī’ are those of creation, protection, valour, and bounty. In Ṛg. I. 56. 4 Indra’s power is called ‘Devī taviṣī’ but the word Śacī does not occur in that verse. There is a sublime hymn (Ṛg. X. 125) of the power of Vāk (speech), wherein Vāk is said to associate with Rudras, Ādityas, Vasus, all gods and is declared to support Mitra and Varuṇa, Indra and Agni, the Aśvins, Soma, Tvaṣṭṛ, Pūṣan and Bhaga. Vāk is said to stretch the bow for Rudra in order that the destructive enemy of *brahma* (prayer or God Brahmā) may be killed, that Vāk stands occupying all worlds and that her body touches heaven, that it is beyond heaven and the earth, that Vāk stands so vast by its greatness'. Vāk becomes the principle of all energy. According to the Nighaṇṭu (I. 11), menā, gnāḥ and śacī are three of the 57 words meaning 'Vāk'. In Tai. S. V. 1. 7. 2 the metres are called 'gnās'. Ṛg. I. 164. 41 is an enigmatic description of Vāk explained in Nirukta XI. 40.

v7.c92.32.3

It should be noticed that, just as Devī or Śakti is associated with Śiva in later literature, so are Indrāṇī, Varuṇānī, Agnāyī, Rodasī associated with Indra, Varuṇa, Agni and Maruts respectively as wives. 'I invoke Indrāṇī,¹⁶⁷⁸ Varuṇānī and Agnāyī for my welfare and for drinking Soma', 'May the women, the wives of gods, partake of the offering, viz. Indrāṇī, Agnāyī, the brilliant (wife) of the Aśvins, Rodasī; may Varuṇānī listen (to our laud); may the goddesses partake (of offerings) at the time (appropriate) for women'. It must be said, however, that these goddesses (*devīḥ*) play a very subordinate part in the Ṛgveda. No direct connection can be traced between these Vedic goddesses and the later conception of Devī or Śakti. Indrāṇī is invoked for protection in Ṛg. I. 22. 12, II. 32. 8, V. 46. 8, X. 86. 11-12. In Ṛg V. 46. 8 Indrāṇī and three others are called Devapatnīs and 'gnās'. In Ṛg. I. 61. 8 it is said that the gnās, the wives of gods, wove, when Indra struck the demon Ahi, a song of worship. The word 'gnā' occurs 20 times in the Ṛg. in the nominative, objective, instrumental and locative and is an Indo-European word for wife (Greek has it). Vide Nir III. 21 where 'menā' and 'gnā' occur. In the Kenopaniṣad Umā Haimavatī (daughter of Himavat) tells of *Brahma* to the gods Agni, Vāyu and Indra (III. 12).

v7.c92.32.4

In the Śvetāśvataropaniṣad it is said 'they (brahmavādins) endowed with meditation and Yoga saw Śakti (power) abiding as non-different from God and concealed (from comprehension) by its own attributes (or by sattva, rajas and tamas).' The same Upanisad (in VI. 8) speaks of *Brahma* as possessing the highest Śakti¹⁶⁷⁹ in various forms and this text is quoted by Śaṅkarācārya on Vedāntasūtra II. 1. 24. In the *bhāṣya* on Vedāntasūtra II. 1. 30 and in the sūtra itself *Brahma* is said to be endowed with all powers. Vide also Śvetāśva. IV. 1. The Nārāyaṇopaniṣad contains an invocation of Durgā-devī¹⁶⁸⁰ 'I approach as a refuge the blazing goddess Durgā, brilliant like fire, luminous owing to *tapas*, that is resorted to for (yielding) the rewards of religious actions; O goddess possessed of excellent might! adoration to your power'. Rāghavabhaṭṭa¹⁶⁸¹ avers that Tantra cult is based on Śruti as can be seen from the Upaniṣads called Rāmapūrvottara-tāpanīya and Nṛsiṁhapūrvottara-tāpanīya. Similarly, Bhāskararāya in his commentary Setubandha on Vāmakeśvaratantra mentions several Upaniṣads as treating in detail of the bhakti of Mahātripura-sundarī and interprets Ṛg. V. 47. 4 'catvāri īṁ' as referring to Kādividyā. But all these Upaniṣads seem to be purposely composed to bolster up the *tantras* that had come to be looked down upon and they are mostly mentioned by late medievel writers like Rāghavabhaṭṭa and Bhāskararāya.

v7.c92.32.5

There are two great hymns addressed to Durgā in the Mahābhārata,¹⁶⁸² viz. in Virāṭaparva (chap. 6) by Yudhiṣṭhira and the other in Bhīṣmaparva (chap. 23) by Arjuna, but they are discarded as apocryphal in the Poona critical edition. The Gangadhara stone Inscription of Viśvavarman of 480 of the Mālava era (424 A.D.) refers to Mātṛs (Mother Goddesses) and Tantra.¹⁶⁸³ The Bṛ S. 57. 56 mentions the groups of Mātṛs. The Vṛddha-Hārīta-smṛti recommends that the householder should not enter places of Śaiva, Bauddha, Skānda and Śākta¹⁶⁸⁴ cults. The Viṣṇupurāṇa¹⁶⁸⁵ (one of the earliest among extant Purāṇas) speaks of the whole world as that of Viṣṇu, who is the highest *Brahma* and is endowed with Śakti, enumerates some of the names of Durgā as Āryā, Vedagarbhā, Ambikā, Bhadrā, Bhadra-kālī, Kṣemadā, Bhāgyadā and winds up by stating that when Durgā is worshipped with offerings of wine, flesh, various kinds of foods, she, being pleased, would fulfil all desires of men. In the Kādambarī of Bāṇabhaṭṭa there is a long description of the temple of Caṇḍikā at a few days' journey from Ujjayinī, where there was an old Draviḍa devotee, in which the following points deserve to be noted, viz.

v7.c92.32.6

offerings of the heads of animals, lion as *vāhana*, the slaughter of Mahiṣāsura, the doctrines of Pāśupatas written down on small books of palm leaves containing jugglery, tantra and mantras, Durgā-stotra written on a piece of cloth, ruined temples of the Mātṛs and description of the Draviḍa devotee as knowing thousands of wonderful stories about Śrīparvata. Bāṇa describes at length what queen Vilāsavatī, pining for a son, began doing to placate all Gods viz. sleeping in the shrines of Caṇḍikā where guggulu was being incessantly burnt, taking auspicious baths on nights of dark 14th in public squares where magic circles had been drawn by great magicians, visiting temples of Mātṛs, wearing amulets inside which were pieces of birch leaves on which mantras had been written with yellow pigment, and, when delivery was near, her bed was rendered holy with various herbs, roots and yantras (figures or diagrams). In the Harṣacarita (III) there is a reference to magic circles and to human sacrifices in the description of the Śaiva ascetic Bhairavācārya who had all the Śaiva-saṁhitās by heart, who performed the *japa* of a mahāmantra called Mahākālahṛdaya a crore of times in a cemetery and wanted the help of Puṣpabhūti (an ancestor of Emperor Harṣa) for perfection in that mantra to be achieved by subduing a *vetāla* and who ultimately attained to the position of Vidyādhara and rose into the starry firmament.

v7.c92.32.7

In the last Introductory verse of the Harṣacarita the Emperor Harṣa is, by means of puns, called the Śrīparvata in yielding all Siddhis (supernatural powers, or fulfilment) according to the wishes of all suppliants¹⁶⁸⁶ These descriptions from the works of Bāṇa (first half of 7th century) show how even long before the 7th century A. D. the worship of Caṇḍī with flesh and the Śākta or Tāntrik paraphernalia of mantras, siddhis, maṇḍalas and yantras had gripped the minds of all Indian people, great and small, rich and poor. In the Mālatīmādhava (Act V) we have a gruesome picture of human sacrifice to Cāmuṇḍā. In the same drama Saudāminī is described as observing the vows of a Kāpālika on Śrīparvata and as having secured supernatural powers by means of mantras. Śrīparvata is mentioned as a holy place of Śiva and Devī in Vanaparva 85. 19-20. The Vāsavadattā of Subandhu (p. 87 of Hall's ed.) speaks of Śrīparvata as 'Sannihita-mallikārjunaḥ.' Later on a few passages from Sanskrit and Prakrit literature will be cited to show how the teaching of Tāntrik practices led to great moral debasement and revolting orgies in the name of religion.

v7.c92.33

¹⁶⁷⁶ मह्ना ते सख्यं वश्मि शक्तौरा वृत्रघ्ने नियुतो यन्ति पूर्वीः । महि स्तोत्रमव आगन्म सूरेरस्माकं सु मघवन् बोधि गोपाः ॥ ऋ III 31. 14, प्र ते पूर्वांणि करणानि वोचं प्र नूतना मघवन्या चकर्ष । शक्तीवो यद्विभरा रोदसी उभे जयन्नपो मनवे दानुचित्राः ॥ ऋ. V 31 6. Vide also Ṛg. VII. 20. 10, X. 88. 10 (स्तोमेन हि दिवि देवासो अग्निमीजीजनञ्छक्तिभी रोदसिप्राम् ।'

v7.c92.34

¹⁶⁷⁷ इन्द्रो मायाभिः पुरुरूप ईयते युक्ता ह्यस्य हरयः शता दश ॥ ऋ. VI 47. 18. On this the बृह उप. II 5. 19 says ‘इदं वै तन्मधु दध्यङ्ङाथर्वणोऽश्विभ्यामुवाच । तदेतहृषिः पश्यन्नवोचत् । इन्द्रो मायाभिः ... शता दश ॥ इति । अयं वै हरयोऽयं वै दश च सहस्राणि बहूनि चानन्तानि च । तदेतद्ब्रह्म &c. '

v7.c92.35

¹⁶⁷⁸ इन्द्राणीमुप ह्वये वरुणानीं स्वस्तये । अग्नायीं सोमपीतये। ऋ I. 22. 12; उत ग्ना व्यन्तु देवपत्नीरिन्द्राण्यग्नाय्यश्विनी राट्। आ रोदसी वरुणानी शृणोतु व्यन्तु देवीर्य ऋतुर्जनीनाम् ॥ ऋ V 46. 8. सूर्या is said to be the wife of Aśvins in Ṛg. X. 85 8-9, यास्क explains Ṛg. V 146. 8 in निरुक्त XII 46 and holds रोदसी as the wife of रुद्र, in Ṛg. V. 56. 8 the Maruts are said to have 'Rodasī' on their chariot, in Ṛg V. 61 4 the Maruts are said to have a beautiful wife, in VI 50 5 Rodasī is called devī and is said to be mixed up with Maruts In Ṛg I. 167 4 and VI. 66.6 Rodasī is connected with Maruts.

v7.c92.36

¹⁶⁷⁹ ते ध्यानयोगानुगता अपश्यन्देवात्मशक्तिं स्वगुणैर्निगूढाम् । श्वेताश्व० I. 3; परास्य शक्तिर्विविधैव श्रूयते स्वाभाविकी ज्ञानवलक्रिया च॥ श्वेताश्व० VI. 8; सर्वोपेता च तद्दर्शनात् । वेदान्तसूत्र II. 1. 30, on which शङ्कर says 'एकस्यापि ब्रह्मणो विचित्रशक्ति-योगादुपपद्यते विचित्रो विकारप्रपञ्च इति।: But this is entirely different from the later Śākta doctrines. Here Brahma is said to be endowed with various *śaktis* (not one), while Śakti among Śāktas is the female principle that is supreme. It is possible that such a vedānta doctrine of *śakti* might have suggested the later all-engrossing power of Śakti as the only deity or principle

v7.c92.37

¹⁶⁸⁰ तामग्निवर्णां तपसा ज्वलन्तीं वैरोचनीं कर्मफलेषु जुष्टाम्। दुर्गां देवीं शरणमहं प्रपद्ये सुतरंसितरसे नमः। नारायणोपनिषद् 2. 1

v7.c92.38

¹⁶⁸¹ श्रुतिमूलकता तु रामपूर्वोत्तरतापनीय-नृसिंहपूर्वोत्तरतापनीय-सौराष्ट्राक्षर-शैव-पञ्चाक्षरात्मिका न साक्षाच्छ्रुतिरूपलभ्यत एव। राघवभट्ट on शारदातिलक p. 2; श्रीमहा-त्रिपुरसुन्दर्याश्च गौणी भक्तिं सेतिकर्त्तव्यताकां निरूपयितुमेतदर्थेण सुन्दरीतापनीपञ्चकं भावनोपनिषत्कौलोपनिषद्-गुह्योपनिषन्महोपनिषद्वृचेत्यादयो वेदशिरोभागाः प्रवृत्ताः। सेतुबन्ध on वामकेश्वरतन्त्र p. 4, तथा च बह्वृचैराम्नायते-चत्वार ईं बिभ्रति...अन्तान्-इति। अत्र हि कादिविद्याया ईंकारचतुष्टयवत्त्वविशेषणद्वारोद्धारः कृतः। सेतुबन्ध p. 17 In शाक्तोपनिषदः edited with the com. of उपनिषद्व्रह्मयोगिन् by Pandit A. Mahadevaśāstrī, Adyar, 1925, are printed त्रिपुरा, त्रिपुरातापिनी, देवी, बह्वृच, भावना, सरस्वतीरहस्य, सीता, सौभाग्यलक्ष्मी (the भावनोपनिषद् occurring on pp 68-73). In the बह्वृचोप-निषद् (on p. 62) occurs the passage 'सैषा परा शक्तिः सैषा शाम्भवी विद्या कादिविद्येति वा हादिविद्येति वा सादिविद्येति वा रहस्यमों वाचि प्रतिष्ठा।' The com. explains; श्रीमत्पञ्चदशाक्षरीमविभक्ता क ए ई ल ह्रीं प्रथमखण्डात्मना कादिविद्येति वा-ह स क ह ल ह्रीं-इति द्वितीयखण्डात्मना हादिविद्येति वा स क ल ह्रीं-इति सादिविद्या वा रहस्यम् ।.

v7.c92.39

¹⁶⁸² In *JRAS* for 1906 pp. 355-362 B. C. Majumdar endeavours to show that the two hymns to Durgā are late interpolations in the Mahābhārata, probably derived from practices of non-Aryan Śūdras in Oriyaspeaking hill tribes of Sambalpur. But he forgets that apart from other sources Kālidāsa (not later than about 400 A D.) speaks of Pārvatī as Umā, Aparṇā, Durgā, Gaurī, Bhavānī and Caṇḍī in his several works and also that Kālidāsa refers to the Ardhanārīśvara form of Śiva. In the last verse of the Śākuntala Kālidāsa speaks of Śiva as 'parigata-śaktih' and thereby suggests that at least the germs of the later Śakti worship were not unknown in his times. Therefore, the worship of Durgā in her several aspects is older than 300 A D. by at least a century or more; vide pp. 185-186 above

v7.c92.40

¹⁶⁸³ मातृणां च प्रमुदितघनात्यर्थनिर्ह्रादिनीनां तन्त्रोद्भूत-प्रवलपवनोद्वर्त्तिताम्भोनिधीनाम्। in Gupta Inscription No 17 p. 72 The बृहत्संहिता 57 56 provides rules about images of Mātṛs 'मातृगण. कर्तव्य. स्वनामदेवानुरूपकृतचिह्न.', the विष्णुधर्मोत्तरपुराण (in I 226) mentions a large number of मातृs including काली and महाकाली (in all over 180) Vide a recent work on 'the Cult of the Mother Goddesses' by E O. James (London, 1959), of which pp. 99-124 deal with India, 'Matsyendranātha and his Yoginī cult' by Dr. Karambelkar in *I H. Q.* Vol XXXI (for 1955) pp 362-374, which show that Ādīnātha (Śiva Himself) was the guru of Matsyendranātha, who was himself guru of Gorakṣanātha, the former being called Luipa (in Tibet), one of the 84 *Siddhas*, vide Cunningham's Archaeological Survey Report IX, for the temple of 64 Yoginīs at Bheraghat and 'Tāntrik cult in Epigraphs' by Mr. B. P. Desai in *J. O. R.* (Mad.), Vol. 19 pp 285-288

v7.c92.41

¹⁶⁸⁴ शैवबौद्धस्काान्दशाक्तस्थानानि न विशेत् क्वचित्। वृद्धहारीतस्मृति XI 143

v7.c92.42

¹⁶⁸⁵ एतत्सर्वमिदं विश्वं जगदेतच्चराचरम्। परब्रह्मस्वरूपस्य विष्णो. शक्तिसमन्वितम्। विष्णुपु V. 7. 60; सुरामांसोपहारैश्च भक्ष्यभोज्यैश्च पूजिता। नृणामशेषकामांस्त्वं प्रसन्ना संप्रदास्यसि ॥ विष्णुपु. V 1 86 This verse occurs in ब्रह्मपुराण 181 52 and the preceding three verses which contain the names of Durgā are the same in both.

v7.c92.43

¹⁶⁸⁶ जयति ज्वलत्प्रतापज्वलनप्राकारकृतजगद्रक्षः। सकलप्रणयिमनोरथ सिद्धिश्रीपर्वतो हर्षः॥ हर्षचरित 1. 21; सौदामिनी says in मालतीमाधव 'गुरुचर्या तपस्तन्त्रमन्त्रयोगाभियोगजाम् । दमामाक्षेपिणी सिद्धिमातनोमि शिवाय वः॥' IX.

v7.c92.44

The literature on Tantras was vast (vide 'Principles of Tantra' ed. by A. Avalon, part 1 pp. 390-392 for a long list of Tantras). Both Hindu and Buddhist writers composed numerous works on Tantra and a very large number of subjects came to be included in Tantra works. Buddhist and Hindu Tantras are alike in some respects but they differ in the topics discussed, philosophical doctrines and some religious principles and practices. Tantra works were introduced into Tibet, Mongolia, China, Japan and South East Asia. Originals of many of the Sanskrit Tāntrik works are now not available, but the translations of some of them in Tibetan are available.¹⁶⁸⁷ It is said that even now if proper search is made, three hundred works on Tantra may be discovered (vide Dr. B. Bhattacharya in vol. X. of Śrī Rāmavarmā Institute of Research at Cochin p. 81).

v7.c92.45

¹⁶⁸⁷ The following works will convey some idea of Śākta doctrines and practices R. G. Bhandarkars's 'Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism &c.' (in Collected Works, Vol IV pp 203-210); 'Śakti and Śākta' by Sir John Woodroffe (1920), 'Serpent Power' by Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe), 'the Śāktas' by E A. Payne (Oxford University Press, 1933) 'Śakti or divine power' by Dr. Sudhendu Kumar Das (Calcutta University, 1945); 'Doctrine of Śakti in Indian Literature' by Dr P. C Chakravarti (1940). Vide Prof. Bagchi's 'Studies in the Tantras' pp 1-3 for the introduction of four Tāntrik texts in Kambuja (Cambodia) about 800 A D. named 'Śiraścheda, Vināśikha, Sammoha and Nayottara and 'Inscriptions from Kambuja' by Dr R C Majumdar (Calcutta, 1953) pp. 362, 373-374 and JRAS for 1950 pp. 163-65 for relics of Śāktism in Moslem Malaya.

v7.c92.46

It is difficult to give a general definition of Tantras. The word 'Tantra' is derived usually from 'Tan' to spread and 'trai' (to save). 'It spreads (dilates upon) many matters including the tattvas and mantras and affords protection;

v7.c92.47.1

therefore it is called Tantra'.¹⁶⁸⁸ They can only be described but one matter is included in almost all of them, viz. the five 'Makāras'. Often they contain an amalgam of religion, philosophy, superstitious dogmas, rites, astronomy, astrology, medicine, prognostications. They resemble the Purāṇas in several respects. The Buddhists deified many important personages of Buddhism and took over in course of time certain Hindu deities like Gaṇeśa and Sarasvatī. Tantras are classified by comparatively later works into three groups, Viṣṇukrānta, Rathakrānta and Aśvakrānta and 64 Tantras are assigned to each of the three groups (vide Tāntrik Texts, vol. I. ed. by Arthur Avalon, Introduction pp. II-IV); but these numbers seem to be fictitious The same Tantra is put in two classes by certain works. The Kulārṇava-tantra (III 6-7) speaks of five *āmnāyas* (East, West, South, North and ūrdhva) as the paths to Mokṣa. The Paraśurāma-kalpasūtra¹⁶⁸⁹ I. 2 does the same. Besides, Tāntrik worshippers are divided into three classes viz. Śaiva, Śākta and Vaiṣṇava. Bagchi states ('Studies in Tantras' p. 3) that Tāntrik literature is classified into *Srotas* (which are three) *Pīṭha* and *Āmnāya*. The Saundaryalaharī, ascribed by some to the great Advaita teacher Śaṅkarācārya, refers to sixty-four Tantras (in verse 31 which begins 'catuṣṣaṣtyā tantraiḥ' which, it is said therein, were declared by God Śaṅkara for deluding¹⁶⁹⁰ the world.

v7.c92.47.2

Several Hindu and Buddhist Tantras have been published and we have now a fair idea of what the numerous Tantras must have been like. Some of the published Hindu Tantras are Kulārnava, Tantrasāra, Nityotsava, Paraśurāmakalpa-sūtra, Pārānandasūtra, Prapañcasāra, Mantra-mahodadhi of Mahīdhara, Mahānirvānatantra, Rudrayāmala, Vāmakeśvaratantra, Śāradātilaka (about 11th century A. D.). Besides, there are works like the Tantrāloka and Mālinīvijaya-vārtika of Abhinava-gupta of Kashmir Tāntrism. They stand somewhat apart from the works enumerated above. Among the published Buddhist tantras are, Advayavajrasangraha, Āryamañjuśrīmūlakalpa, Guhayasamāja-tantra (probably 6th century A. D.), Jñānasiddhi of Indrabhūti (717 A. D.), Nispan-nayogāvalī of Abhayākaragupta (composed between the last quarter of 11th and first of 12th century A. D.), Prajñopāya-viniscaya-siddhi of Anangavajra (about 705 A. D.), Sat-cakra-nirūpana (1577 A. D.), Sādhanamālā (containing 312 small works supposed to be from 3rd to 12th century A. D.). Of the Buddhist Tantras Āryamañjuśrīmūlakalpa and Guhyasamāja-tantra¹⁶⁹¹ are the oldest according to Dr. B. Bhattacharya (Intro. p. XXXVIII. to Guhya-samājatantra). Most of the above works have been published by Arthur Avalon (Sir. John Woodroffe) and in the Gaikwad Oriental Series.

First 54 of 492 passages. Read on

Linked texts (107)