Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Obscure Religious Cults as Background of Bengali Literature c23: Chapter XIV: Cosmogonical and Cosmological Theories in Old and Mediaeval Vernacular Literatures

Obscure Religious Cults as Background of Bengali Literature c23

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XIV: Cosmogonical and Cosmological Theories in Old and Mediaeval Vernacular Literatures

(1) A brief Exposition of the Theories

c23.s1.1

In the old and mediaeval vernaculars of India we find various theories about cosmogony and cosmology. Inspite of the differences in details, there is a general similarity in the description. When we shall analyse the ideas found in these theories we shall find that here also, as in other cases, there is a great jumbling of ideas received from various sources of Indian philosophy, theology and mythology. Of all the descriptions found in the vernaculars, the descriptions contained in the literature of the Dharma cult of Bengal seem to be the most detailed and important, and we shall presently see that all the other descriptions found in other types of literature present a striking similarity with the descriptions found in the literature of the Dharma cult. Though the accounts given in the vernaculars are often extremely confused in nature, we must first of all attempt a very brief exposition of these cognate theories and our next and more important task will be to analyse them and to affiliate the constituent elements to the older thoughts and beliefs.¹

c23.s1.2

¹ In this connection see introduction to the *Śūnya-purāṇa* (edited by Mr. C. Banerjee) by Dr. Shahidullah and Mr. B. Chatterjee.

c23.s1.3.1

In the *Śūnya-purāṇa* we find that in the beginning there was nothing,—neither any linear mark, nor any form, nor any colour, nor any trace of anything ; there was neither the sun nor the moon, nor the day nor the night. There was neither water, nor earth, nor the sky, nor the mountains. The universe was not,—neither was anything mobile or immobile, nor were the temples, nor the gods in them,—there were only all-pervading darkness and haze (*dhundhukāra*)—and in the infinite vacuum the Lord alone was moving in the great void having nothing but void as His support. And in his absolute loneliness the Lord was thinking of creating something, and out of the great vacuum there came out the vital air of the Lord, from which came inhalation and exhalation; from these again proceeded great compassion and from that all the principles of illusion. Then there came out a bubble of water on which the Lord made his seat, but the bubble could not withstand the pressure of the Lord and burst into pieces leaving the Lord once more in the vacuum. Then the Lord sat fixed in the vacuum and in and through his compassion another personality of the name of Nirañjana came out of him. The latter, however, had no hands and legs,—neither had he any father and mother, nor was he born of the seed and the ovum, nor had he any other companion in the great void. This Nirañjana or Dharma then sat on the seat of compassion and passed full fourteen ages in the meditation on the Great (*bambha-jāna*).

c23.s1.3.2

After fourteen ages of meditation Nirañjana yawned and from his high breath came out the bird Ullūka. The bird began to flee away from the Lord who was calling it from behind; but Ullūka got tired in the infinite void and came back to the Lord. The Lord then took compassion on Ullūka and made his seat on the back of the bird and once more passed fourteen years in meditation. In the mean time Ullūka became much fatigued with hunger and thirst and asked for some drink from the Lord. The Lord gave a little quantity of fluid from his mouth to the bird to drink. Ullūka drank the fluid, but some portion of it fell outside in the void and water came out of it, and both the Lord and his mount were floating on water. But in the heaving water both of them were being tossed roughly and a feather dropped from the body of the bird and the feather became a swan. The Lord then proposed to have some rest on the back of the swan, and the latter agreed, and the Lord once more passed several ages on the back of the swan. But the swan also got tired and flew away in the void leaving the Lord in water. The Lord then touched water with his lotus-like hand, whereby a tortoise came to being, and the Lord passed several ages in meditation on its back. The tortoise also got tired and flew away leaving the Lord and Ullūka on water. Ullūka then advised the Lord to create the world in water.

c23.s1.3.3

With the instructions of Ullūka the Lord cast off on water his golden sacred-thread, which instantaneously became the serpent Vāsuki of thousand fangs. Then the Lord accumulated a little quantity of dusty substance from his nail and placed it in the form of the world on the head of the serpent Vāsuki. The Lord then went out with Ullūka to visit the world and the world was increasing with the speed of the Lord. By roaming about in the world the Lord became tired and began to perspire and from the sweat of his body was produced the Ādyā-Śakti (the primordial energy). The Lord built a house for her and placed her there and after creating the river Ballukā engaged himself in meditation once more for fourteen ages. In the mean time Ādyā-Śakti grew young and from her youthful desires proceeded forth Kāma (Cupid) who was sent by Ādyā to the Lord. Kāma went to the Lord, aimed his arrow at him and the Lord was disturbed. The Lord came to know everything from Ullūka and put Kāma in an earthen pot and Kāma became transformed into poison. Ādyā, after some time, became unable to bear the burden of her youth and attempted to commit suicide by swallowing the contents of the earthen pot; but to her astonishment she became pregnant thereby. Three gods were then born to Ādyā, viz., Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. Just after their birth all the three went out for penance and meditation, and the Lord also went to test them in the form of a corpse floating on water.

c23.s1.3.4

Brahmā could not recognise the Lord in disguise, Viṣṇu also could not recognise him ; it was only Śiva, who could recognise the Lord. The Lord became pleased with Śiva, and granted him three eyes (for all the three brothers were born blind). Subsequently at the request of Śiva the other two brothers, viz., Brahmā and Viṣṇu also received eye-sight with the sprinkling of the fluid from the mouth of the Lord. All the three brothers then went back to Ādyā, where they were entrusted by the Lord with the task of creation. Ādyā-śakti was asked to be the wife of Śiva and to help him in the work of creation. Thus after entrusting the whole task of creation, preservation and destruction to the triad the Lord once more went to the void and remained for ever seated on his mount Ullūka.¹

c23.s1.4

¹ *Śūnya-purāṇa*, *Sṛṣṭi-pattana*, pp. 1-42. In this connection see the introduction to the *Śūnya-purāṇa* by Dr. Shahidullah and Mr. B. K. Chatterjee.

c23.s1.5

Account given in the Śūnya-purāṇa.

c23.s1.6

The fragmentary accounts of cosmogony found in the *Dharma-pūjā-vidhāna* also tally with those found in the *Śūnya-purāṇa*; the only difference is that Dharma Nirañjana came out of the formless absolute Lord in the form of a luminous body in the void and was asked to create the universe with his three qualities (guṇas), viz., sattva, rajas and tamas, personified as the triad Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva.²

c23.s1.7

² *Dharma-pūjā-vidhāna*, pp. 201-202.

c23.s1.8

In the *Dharma-maṅgalas* detailed accounts of cosmogony are found which, though slightly different in details, are substantially the same as found in the *Śūnya-purāṇa*. Thus almost a similar account of cosmology is found in the *Dharma-maṅgala* of Sahadev Cakravartī.³ The account given in the *Dharma-maṅgala* of Sītā-rām Dās also tallies with the account of the *Śūnya-purāṇa* almost verbatim; the only important deviation is that after the world was created Dharma himself assumed the form of a charming damsel and was then himself in union with her. Through their union three gods of the nature of the three guṇas were born to them.¹

c23.s1.9

³ Vide B.S.P.P., B.S. 1304.

c23.s1.10

¹ Dhm. of Sītārām Dās, Sthāpanā-pāla, MS. (C. U. No. 2469) p. 3 (A).

c23.s1.11

In the Anādi-maṅgala of Rāmdās Ādak² we find that Mahāmāyā was produced from the left side of Dharma. Mahāmāyā or Ādyā-śakti attained her youth. Dharma proposed to Ullūka that as Ādyā was produced from the left part of his body, she should be the wife of the Lord. The proposal appeared obnoxiously repulsive to Ādyā, who tried to flee away in all the directions; but at last she had to give way and the marriage took place in the void through the meditation of Ullūka. Then follows the birth of the triad and the story of Dharma's disguise to test them. Here also it was Śiva, who could recognise the Lord, and the propitiated Lord entrusted Śiva with the charge of creation. But Śiva, with the preponderance of tamas in him, created the Yakṣas, Rakṣas, ghosts, genii, demons and many such other horrible beings. The Lord then put a check to Śiva and asked Brahmā to take the charge of creation. The Lord Himself assumed the form of a bear and brought for him (Brahmā) the earth, which lay hidden in the netherland. Then follows the theory of the self-originated Brahmā and the Manus, the Ditis and the Aditis, etc., as it is found in the Purāṇic literature.³ In Ghana-rāma we find that in the primordial void and darkness the formless supreme Lord first revealed himself in a form which contained the potency of all creation. The Lord desired to create and from his desire for creation was born Prakṛti in the form of the most beautiful and charming woman,—and the mind of the Lord was disturbed at the sight of her beauty, and through the disturbance in his mind Prakṛti was infused with the three guṇas from which again were born the three gods, Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. Then follows the story of their penance and their test by Dharma in the guise of a corpse. Here also, as in the case of Rāmdās's account, Śiva, who was first entrusted with the charge of creation, created all sorts of horrible beings and then the charge was transferred from him to Brahmā. From Prajāpati Brahmā was first produced Ahaṅkāra (egohood), from Ahaṅkāra proceeded the five elements and then the four sons of Brahmā (viz., Sanaka, Sananda, Sanat-kumara and Sanātana) and so on as in the popular Purāṇic accounts.¹ According to the account given by Māṇik Gāṅguli the triad with the essence of the guṇas was produced from the union of the Lord and Śakti and for the triad Śakti again divided herself into three goddesses, viz., Brahmāṇī, Vaiṣṇavī and Śaivī. Then follows the test of the triad. Here we find that all the three gods could recognise the Lord and did welcome him warmly and humbly and the Lord, pleased with the triad, entrusted them with the charge of creation, preservation and destruction. The three Śaktis, viz., Brahmāṇī, Vaiṣṇavī and Śaivī were then united with Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva and the triad with their Śaktis created the manifold universe.² The account given by Narasimha Vasu in his Dharmāyaṇa comes closer to the Sāṃkhya view of cosmology. From the desire of the Lord for creation in the primordial void Prakṛti was born in the form of a beautiful woman, and from the union of Prakṛti and the Lord was born a son of the name of Mahartta (i.e., mahat) and from Mahartta came three Ahaṃkāras of the nature of three guṇas, and from them were born the triad.³ Then follows

c23.s1.12

² Edited by Mr. B. K. Chatterjee, Sāhitya-pariṣat series, No. 82.

c23.s1.13

³ Vide Anādi-maṅgala of Rāmdās Ādak, pp. 7-10.

c23.s1.14

¹ See Dhm. of Ghana-rāma, Sthāpanā-pālā, pp. 5-7.

c23.s1.15

² Dhm. of Māṇik Gāṅguli, pp. 9-11.

c23.s1.16

³ > mahartta haite haila ahaṅkār tin |

c23.s1.17

sartta raja tāmasa trigun bhirnna bhin ||
sartta rūpe birsna rūpa karilā āśray |
rajaguṇe sthiti-kartā brahmār tanay ||
siv tama-gune haila jāhā haite nās |
tāmasa gunete jammila ākās ||
Dharmāyaṇa of Narasimha Vasu, Vol. I.. MS. (C.U. 3224) p. 7 (B).

c23.s1.18

the story of the test of the triad and Śiva was entrusted with the charge of creation. But in actual creation we find the Purāṇic story that the Lord with his mysterious Māyā (i. e. principle of creative illusion) slept on the snake Ananta and from the lotus of his navel proceeded Brahmā, who was always thinking of creation.¹ Brahmā had four sons proceeding from his desire (mānasa-putra), viz., Sanaka, Sanātana, Sananda and Sanat-kumāra. And then came the theory of the Manus, Diti, Aditi and others just as in the Purāṇas.

c23.s1.19

¹ Ibid, MS. pp. 9(A)—9(B).

c23.s1.20

In the Gājana songs of West Bengal and East Bengal we find the same conception of cosmogony. In the verses collected by Mr. Haridās Pālit in his book Ādyer Gambhirā we find that in the beginning there was nothing and the Lord (Gosāñi) was in the form of the void in the boundless void.² Then there was water and the Lord was floating (?) in his void-form.³ He then ordered a crab to sink down and to bring earth from the bottom,—and the crab brought earth for the Lord. According to one version⁴ the Lord made the world with a portion of earth brought by the crab and the world was then placed on the back of a tortoise. According to another version the earth, brought by the crab was of the nature of gold and from it there was an egg and that egg burst into two (one half becoming the earth and the other half the sky ?) and the triad, Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva then created the world.⁵

c23.s1.21

² P. 19.

c23.s1.22

³ Ibid, p. 24.

c23.s1.23

⁴ Ibid, p. 19.

c23.s1.24

⁵ Ibid, pp. 24-25.

c23.s1.25

In the fragmentary verses, which the present writer collected from the district of Bakergunge in East Bengal, and which are sung on the occasion of the Nila-pūjā at the end of the month of Caitra similar cosmogonical ideas are found. In one verse we find,—"In the beginning there was neither any cause, nor reason, nor the sky; neither was there water nor earth; neither the within, nor the without, and the Lord was all alone. The Lord then perspired and from his sweat was created the universe.¹ In another song we find that Dharma-rāja, after travelling long on his mount, perspired, and from his sweat a phantom was produced and the phantom became magically transformed into a girl; she stood before the Lord and the Lord got enamoured with her; she, however, began to flee in the western direction to escape his hands and rebuked the shameless father who was mad after his own daughter; but the Lord paid no heed to her words and pursued her madly.²

c23.s1.26

¹ *hetu buddhi nā chila gagan-maṇḍal |* *nāhi jal nāhi sthal bāhire sthāpan ||* *bhitar bāhir nāhi keval ekeśvar ||* *........carma gharme bhijila |* *chiṭāiya nakṣatra* *ei-rūpa sṛṣṭi haila biśvambhar ||*

c23.s1.27

² *āila re dharma-rāj ulāse (uluke ?) caḍiyā |* *ulāse rāse śṛṅga ghāmila |* *chāyāya āchila kanyā māyāte jammila ||* *piche āchila kanyā sumukhe dāṇḍāla |* *tāhā dekhiyā dharma-citta dharaṇ nā yāy |* *paścim dike kanyā dhāoyāiyā laiyā yāy ||* *etek śuniyā devī balila uttar |* *bāp haiyā jhire karte cāy bar ||* etc.

c23.s1.28

In connection with the travelling of Śiva as a mendicant in the market-place (bājār-sannyāsa), which is also included in the ceremonies on occasion of the Nila-pūjā, we find the following verse :—"Void was the market place, the earth was not,—Sannyāsins (those that have renounced the world), Tapasvins (those who practise penances) and Ṛṣis (sages) there were none; neither was the day, nor the night. How was the Lord at that time ? All the existent was void, the non-existent was also void and the Lord of void was of the body of void; the earth with the seven islands was immersed in water in the void. What was the state of the Lord at that time? He was of the form of an egg. There was no earth, and the boar brought it with the help of his teeth. Lord Śiva then created the earth with the dusty substance of his body." There is also mention of Nila and Anila in the verses in a rather unmeaning and confused manner.¹

c23.s1.29

¹ See B.S.P.P., 1317; also Vaṅga-sāhitya-paricaya, Part I, pp. 300-301.

c23.s1.30

In the Caṇḍī-maṅgalas of Bengal we find almost a similar conception of cosmogony and cosmology. In the Caṇḍī-maṅgala of Māṇik Datta, who flourished in or before the fifteenth century, we find a confused echo of the cosmogonical theory found in the Śūnya-purāṇa.² In the Caṇḍī-maṅgala of Mukundarām Cakravartī (of the sixteenth century) we find that the primordial Lord (Ādi-deva) was thinking of creation in the void, and when he was thus pondering on, Prakṛti came out of his body, and Prakṛti, who was the manifestation of the power (Śakti) of the Ādi-deva, was called the Ādi-devī. The Lord infused his energy in Prakṛti and thereby a son of the name of Mahān (i.e. Mahat) was born to them; the son of Mahat was Ahaṃkāra and from Ahaṃkāra were born the

c23.s1.31

bājāre śūnya sthal sannyāsī tapasī ṛṣi |
nā chila divā niśi ||
śona re bhāi śiver mādār ( ? ) |
takhane āchilā gosāmi keman avatār ||
hay śūnya nay śūnya śūnya śūnya kāy |
sapta-dvip pṛthi śūnya chila jalamay ||
śona re bhāi śiver mādār |
takhane āchila gosāmi ḍimba-avatār ||
hari giri parvat nā chila māṭi |
barāha āniyā tāy dante kāṭi ||
e śiv pāsara āpanā |
aṅger mayalā diyā kare pṛthivī sthāpanā ||
nile āchilā gosāmi anile sut |
nile āchilā gosāmi keman adbhut ||
nile āchilā gosāmi kabhu nahe jāni |
ek ek kalikā ( ? ) diyā sevila medinī ||
māṭi cākā dhariyā phelilām jale |
sthir nā haite ṭal-mal kare ||
deo deo basumātā more deo bar |
bachare bachare haio bālar agrasar ||

c23.s1.32

five (elements), viz., earth, water, fire, air and ether. Again one Lord became three (the Triad) according to the guṇas. Of the Triad Brahmā had four sons born of his desire (mānasa-putra), but all the four went away for penance leaving behind the phenomenal world. Brahmā, however, got angry and from his anger was born Rudra, who was given six female companions (viz. Dhṛti, Vṛddhi, Īśī, Vaśī, Śivā and Aṇimā) and was ordered to create the creatures. Śiva began to create horrible creatures and was at once stopped by Brahmā. For the purpose of creation Brahmā then divided his body into two parts, one as the female and the other as the male (the latter being named as Svayambhuva Manu). This latter was then requested by Brahmā to create progeny, but Svayambhuva Manu wanted land where the created beings might have their abode. At this Brahmā became perturbed and from his nostril came out the boar who went to the netherland and brought back on his long teeth the earth that lay hidden there; and then creation began as it is described in the Purāṇas.¹ The account given in the Caṇḍī-maṅgala of Mādhavācārya, though substantially the same as described above, shows a greater amount of confusion of ideas. Here the Devī was created from the breath of the Lord and Brahmā was born in the navel. Of the triad Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva, the Devī was given to the last for creation. In the Annadā-maṅgala of Bhārata-candra also we find a similar account. The Biṣahari Padmā-purāṇa of Jivan Maitra also contains a cosmogonical account of the same nature.²

c23.s1.33

¹ Kavi-kaṅkaṇa Caṇḍī by Mukundarām.

c23.s1.34

² Vide Baṅgalā Puthir Bivaraṇ, by Har Gopāl Dās Kuṇḍu, B.S.P.P., B.S. 1313. Vol. 3, p. 162.

c23.s1.35

The cosmogonical ideas of the literature of the Nātha cult of Bengal also resemble to a great extent the ideas described above. According to the accounts given in the Anādi-purāṇa or Anādi-caritra, the Hāḍa-mālā-grantha, the Yogi-tantra-kalā

c23.s1.36

Account given in the Nātha literature.

c23.s1.37

etc.,¹ Alek-nātha (the incomprehensible one) or Nirañjana Gosāmī created Anādi Dharma-nātha and from the liquid of the mouth of the former there was water on which Anādi-nātha made his seat. Then Alek-nātha created goddess Kāketukā from the energy of his own body, and she was put to death under the pressure of the feet of Anādi. Ādi-devī, or goddess Kāketukā was then revived through the grace of the Lord and he instructed Anādi to create the beings in union with Ādi. Then the creation began. The serpent Vāsuki was created and was placed in the netherland and on the fang of it was placed the earth of a triangular shape. Then from the fist of Dharma were born the triad, who were deaf and dumb. Then follows a somewhat different version of the test of the triad.

c23.s1.38

¹ Vide Nātha-dharme Sṛṣṭi-tattva by Rāj-mohan Nāth, B.S.P.P., B.S. 1331, No. 2.

c23.s1.39

Gorakṣa-vijaya contains a cosmogonical account, which, inspite of slight differences, presents on the whole the same view as described above. In the beginning there was only the Karatār and nothing else. The Karatār himself was not self-conscious,—it was the potentiality in him that made him self-conscious in the process of manifestation. His manifested form followed his self-consciousness and the principle of change and transformation followed from his manifestation in a form.² And then there was the desire of the Lord to create the world and for the purpose he produced Dharma Nirañjana. Dharma was first in a slumbering state, and when he became awakened he found some shadowy entity by his side, who was none but Ādyā (i.e., Ādyā Śakti). The Lord attempted to capture her, but she tried to escape. She was then captured by force and through the union of the Lord and the Ādyā the sun, the moon, the earth and the stars were produced. From the Huṃkāra of the Lord was born Brahmā and from his mouth was Viṣṇu. Through the mutual attraction and affection of Ādi and Anādi (Ādi represents Śakti who has a beginning and Anādi represents the beginningless principle) there was sweat and soul, the ego, the four Vedas and fourteen scriptures; water and earth and all the other beings were produced from this sweat¹ From the different parts of the body of Anādya emanated Śiva and Gaurī (who is the mother of the universe) and all the other Siddhas. The Lord then proposed that some one of them (i.e., either Śiva, or any of the Siddhas) should accept Gaurī as his wife. At this proposal all bent their head out of shame. The Lord then ordered Śiva to accept Gaurī, who (as Anādya told) was but one with Śiva in her ultimate nature. In accordance with the decree of the Lord, Hara and Gaurī came down on earth and they were accompanied by the Siddhas. In his discussion with Ādyā, Anādya says that he, as the ultimate reality, has an unchanging permanent nature of his own, which is unspeakable, and in that unchanging ultimate nature he remains pervading the whole cosmos in his formless form. As there is the tree from the seed and the seed in the tree, so is the creation from Anādya and Anādya in creation. As cream is produced by the churning of milk, as fire is produced through the rubbing of two logs of wood, so also is the creation. As there is the cycle of the night of the new moon and of the full moon, so there is the process of creation and dissolution. A similar view of cosmogony is found in the Gopi-candrer Sannyās by Sukur Mahammad.²

c23.s1.40

² Gorakṣa-vijaya, edited by Munsi Abdul Karim. Sahitya-pariṣat Series No. 4, p. 1. Also see Appendix of the text. pp. 4-5.

c23.s1.41

¹ Gorakṣa-vijaya, Appendix (ka), alternative readings from MS. No. 5, p. 1.

c23.s1.42

² C. U. Vol. II. pp. 441-444.

c23.s1.43

In some of the Vaiṣṇava Sahajiyā texts also we find a similar theory of cosmology, more confusedly mixed up with Vaiṣṇava theology and mythology.³

c23.s1.44

³ Vide Āgama Grantha (edited by Mr. M. M. Bose. C.U.). Cf. also the Vaiṣṇava text Golaka-saṃhitā, vide B. S. P. P., B. S., 1309.

c23.s1.45

It is interesting to note in this connection that in course of the religious discussion that took place between a Portuguese Christian Missionary on the one hand and an orthodox Brahmin on the other in the *Brāhmaṇ-Romāṅkyāthalik-saṃvād*,¹ of Don Antonio we find ideas of cosmogony and cosmology strikingly similar even in details to the ideas found in the descriptions of the texts belonging to the Dharma cult, Caṇḍī cult and the Nātha cult. This fact clearly indicates that the ideas of cosmogony and cosmology described above are neither provincial nor sectarian in nature; on the other hand they represent the general ideas infiltrated in the mind of the masses.

c23.s1.46

¹ Edited by Dr. S. N. Sen, M.A., Ph.D., B.Lit., and published by the University of Calcutta.

c23.s1.47

The cosmogonical ideas and description found in the literature of some other vernaculars of India also bear striking resemblance to those found in Bengali. The cosmogonical descriptions found in the Vaiṣṇava literature of Orissa of the sixteenth century are almost the same as found in the Dharma-maṅgala literature of Bengal. As the point has been discussed and demonstrated in the work *Modern Buddhism and its Followers in Orissa* by N. N. Bose, we need not repeat it here.

c23.s1.48

The description of the primordial nihil and of the absolute Lord existing all alone in the void is also found in the poems of the Santa poets of Hindi literature. Thus Kabir says,—

c23.s1.49

When there was no air, and no water,
then who created the universe?
Then was no bud, no flower,
then no womb and no generation.
Then was no learning, no Veda,
then no word, no taste.
Then was no body, no dweller,
no regions below, no earth, no sky, no heaven.

c23.s1.50

Then was no Guru, no chela, no fathomable and unfathomable, no worship of Sagun and Nirgun, no two paths.¹

c23.s1.51

¹ *Vide The Bijak of Kabir*, Ahmad Shah, p. 55(7).

c23.s1.52

The creation is due to the activities of Nirañjana, and in the beginning he alone was, and there was nothing else.²

c23.s1.53

² *Kabir-granthāvalī*, edited by Śyāmsundar Dās, p. 162, Padāvalī, 219. *Cf.* also, *Ramaṇī*, No. 6, *Bijak Kabir-dās*, Riwāṃ edition.

c23.s1.54

In the *Ād-maṅgal* of Kabir and in his *Ramaṇīs* we find that in the beginning was the Almighty One (*Samaratha*)—and there was no second to the Lord. There first came consciousness within himself and then proceeded the desire for creation, and six Brahmās were created. The six failed in their task of creation and a seventh was produced by the Lord—and his name was Nirañjana. Nirañjana wanted a *bija-kheta* (a field to sow in) for procreation and the Lord created a woman for him and the woman had to be the wife of Nirañjana against her will. This woman is none but *Māyā*. Through the union of Nirañjana and *Māyā* three sons of the nature of the three *guṇas* were born, they were Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Maheśvara.³

c23.s1.55

³ See *Ād-maṅgal*, *Bijak Kabir-dās*, Riwāṃ edition; also *The Bijak of Kabir*, by Rev. Ahmad Shah, pp. 41-43. *Cf.* also: *Ramaṇī* No. 1, Riwāṃ edition; also *Ramaṇīs*, No. 2, 3.

c23.s1.56

Dādū also says that Nirañjana is never associated with anything else;—water and earth, the static and the dynamic—the earth and the sky, the sun and the moon, water and air, day and night, heat and cold, hunger and thirst—nothing can touch him—nothing can be associated with him.⁴

c23.s1.57

⁴ *Vide Anthology of Dādū*, edited by Mr. K. Sen, p. 590.

c23.s1.58

Sundar-dās also says that in the beginning Nirañjana made out of his own self the five principles (*pañca-tattva*) of the material elements and also the three *guṇas*. From *rajas* was Brahmā, from *sattva* was Viṣṇu and from *tamas* was Śaṅkara, and the three gods had Satya-loka, Vaikuṇṭha and Kailāsa as their respective abode. Three goddesses, viz., Brahmāṇī, Ṭhākurāṇī and Bhavānī were then associated with them. From the triad, in association with their Śaktis, proceeded the universe with all its diversities.¹ As it appears from the glimpses that are found in his works, Tulsī-dās also had a cognate cosmogonical view. The cosmos is produced from the Māyā of the Lord and the Māyā is conceived as the Ādi-śakti.²

c23.s1.59

¹ See the chapter on Guṇa Utpatti Nisāmnī—Sundar-granthāvalī, edited by Purohita Harinārāyaṇa Śarmā, pp. 205-207. Also Cf. the chapter on Rāmāṣṭaka, Ibid, pp. 159-161.

c23.s1.60

² ādi-śakti jehi jag upajāyā | sou avatarihi mori yaha māyā || Rāma-carita-mānasa, Bāla-kāṇḍa. mana māyā sambhava parivārā | jīv carā-car bibidha prakārā || Ibid, Laṅkā-kāṇḍa. sunu rāvaṇ brahmaṇḍa-nikāyā || pāi jāsu bal biracati māyā || jā ke bal biramci hari īsā | pālata srjata harata dasa-sisā || Sundara-kāṇḍa, Nāgari-pracāriṇī edition.

c23.s1.61

(ii) Analysis of the ideas of Cosmogony and Cosmology found in the Vernacular Literature

c23.s1.62

Let us now proceed with the task of analysing and examining the accounts found in the vernaculars and let us also see how far the ideas can be traced back to older theories, legends and myths. There is a marked tendency among some scholars to hold that the cosmogonical and the cosmological views discussed above are Buddhistic in origin. If we proceed on in a critical way we shall see that there is no distinctive nature of the views found in the vernaculars. As we have said, here there is but a popular and confused mixture of the cosmogonical and cosmological ideas found in the Vedic literature, in the Upaniṣads, the Sāṃkhya system, in the Purāṇic literature, in the Hindu Tantras and in the later phase of Mahāyāna Buddhism mainly expressed through the various Buddhist Tantras. Yet, if any character is to be given to them, it will be more correct to say that they are essentially Hindu; and even the Buddhistic elements are introduced in their Hinduised form.¹

c23.s1.63

¹ See some suggestions of Dr. B. M. Barua in B.S.P.P., 1331, No. 2.

(A) The Primordial Nihil

c23.s1.t1.1

Among the various accounts given in the vernaculars the first point to note is that in the beginning there was nothing, and the ultimate Being was floating as the Formless One in the infinite vacuum. The whole universe was then created by him from nothing. Or we shall find that there was the primordial darkness and water and the Lord was there in his formless existence. This idea is, however, to be met with first in the *Rg-veda*. There we find,—

c23.s1.t1.2

"At that time there was neither the aught, nor the naught, neither the earth nor heaven above. What was there to cover all? Wherein was the abode of all? Was there water deep and fathomless?

c23.s1.t1.3

"No death was then, nor immortality, no distinction between day and night. The One alone breathed without any air,—nothing existed other than that One.

c23.s1.t1.4

"In the beginning there was darkness shrouded in darkness, indistinct was all—and water was everywhere. The All-pervading One was covered with all the non-existent, and through the *Tapas* or the divine effort arose the 'One.'"²

c23.s1.t1.5

² (10. 129. 1-3). Cf., also,—*devānām yuge prathame'sataḥ sad ajāyata* | (10.72.3).

c23.s1.t1.6

The same idea is variously described in the Upaniṣadic literature. In the *Śvetāśvataropaniṣat* we find, "When there was neither darkness, nor day, nor night,—neither the existent nor the non-existent—there was only the All-good One (Śiva); He was changeless, He was the Adorable, He was the creator,—and from Him proceeded eternal enlightenment."³ In the *Taittirīyopaniṣat* it is said that the nonexistent (*Asat*) was in the beginning and from the *Asat* arose the *Sat* and the *Sat* produced its own self by itself.¹ The *Aitareyopaniṣat* says that in the beginning was the self (*Ātmā*) alone and nothing else; it observed itself (*tad aikṣata*) and the beings were produced thereby. Again we find that in the beginning the *Asat* alone, and from the *Asat* arose the *Sat* and the *Sat* was one and without a second in the beginning. The *Sat* desired that it would be many and energy (*tejas*) arose from it; from *tejas* was water (*āp*) and from *āp* was produced gross matter (*anna*).² The *Bṛhadāraṇyaka* says that the Brahman was alone in the beginning and from Him arose all gods and the universe in all its varieties.³ Again it is sometimes said that water alone was in the beginning,—from water arose *Satya*, from *Satya* arose the Brahman, from the Brahman Prajāpati (the lord or the creator of the beings) and from the Prajāpati were the gods.⁴ Again we find that water was in the beginning and therein was born Prajāpati in the lotus-leaf. He desired to create the universe and the universe gradually proceeded from his desire.⁵ The conception of the primordial water is as old as the Vedas⁶ and is very popular so far as the Purāṇic literature of India is concerned. A very popular conception found in the Purāṇic literature (and the conception is very old indeed) is that the Supreme Lord was floating in the primordial water and hence is the name *Nārāyaṇa* for him.⁷

c23.s1.t1.7

³ *yadā tamas tan na divā na rātrir na san na cāsac chiva eva kevalaḥ* | *tadakṣaram tat savitur vareṇyam prajñā ca tasmāt prasṛtā purāṇī* | (4.18).

c23.s1.t1.8

¹ (2.7).

c23.s1.t1.9

² *Chāndogya*—(6.2).

c23.s1.t1.10

³ (4.10-11). *Cf.* also *Nārāyaṇopaniṣat*, (1.1).

c23.s1.t1.11

⁴ *Bṛhad-āraṇyaka*, (5.5.1).

c23.s1.t1.12

⁵ *Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa*, (1.1.3), *Taittirīya Saṃhitā*, (7.1.5), *Bṛhad-jābālopaniṣat*, (1.1).

c23.s1.t1.13

⁶ *Yad devā adaḥ salile susaṃraddhā atiṣṭhata* | *Rg-veda*, (10.72.6). *Cf.* also *Ibid*, (10.82.1, 5-6), (10.121.7), (10.190. 1-3); also infra, p. 377

c23.s1.t1.14

⁷ *Cf.* *āpo nārā iti proktā āpo vai nara-sūnavaḥ* | *tā yad asyāyanam pūrvam tena nārāyaṇaḥ smṛtaḥ* || *Manu-saṃhitā*, (1.10) The same verse occurs in many Purāṇic texts.

c23.s1.t1.15

In later Vaiṣṇava literature we frequently find the Lord sleeping on the surface of the sea. This primordial water has often been philosophised as the water of original cause-potency (*kāraṇa-vāri*). With the account given by Māṇik Datta in his *Caṇḍī-maṅgala* that the Lord was floating on the surface of the primordial water with a lotus-leaf as his support, we may compare the following account given in the *Śukla-yajur-veda*,—" In the beginning was water and only water; and Prajāpati transformed him into air and accepted a Puṣkara-leaf as his support; but he was tossing and tossing, etc."¹ As for the account given in many of the Maṅgala-kāvyas that the Lord brought to the surface of water the earth, submerged in water, in the form of a boar, we may refer to the similar description found in the *Śukla-yajur-veda*.²

c23.s1.t1.16

¹ (5.5.6.4), (5.5. 7.5).

c23.s1.t1.17

² (7 7. 1.5).

(B) The Conception Of Nirañjana—a replica of Prajāpati Brahmā

c23.s1.t2.1.1

In the next place we find that the Supreme Being in his state of the Absolute is not the creator of the universe. He produced Dharma or Nirañjana, from whom proceeded the universe, and all the vernacular poets are unanimous on the point. This idea also has its origin in the Vedic and the Upaniṣadic literature. The absolute reality in its unqualified qualitiless form is not the creator of the universe, for the Absolute is neither the 'Ens, nor the non-Ens,—neither existent, nor non-existent. The creator of the universe is, however, Prajāpati, or Brahmā or the Viśva-karmā as he has variously been conceived in the Vedic and Upaniṣadic literature. This Prajāpati or Brahmā, though often described as the most supreme of all the gods, the god of the gods, is never the same as the Absolute Brahman. In the Vedic literature we find that the vast universal process could not be explained with reference to the well-known gods; there was, therefore, naturally the tendency to conceive of a greater god, who represents no particular aspect or force of nature, but an unified conception representing something like the totality of the forces acting behind the universal process. He is the *Hiraṇya-garbha*—the first radiant manifestation of the Supreme Unmanifest,—as the personification of the creative impulse and the creative force of the Unmanifest. It is said in the *Ṛg-veda* (10.121) that the *Hiraṇya-garbha* arose in the beginning; he was the lord of all the existent;

c23.s1.t2.1.2

he was the lord of the earth and the sky and he vested all creatures with life and breath; the gods do not dare disobey him, he is the god of the gods. In the Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas and the Upaniṣads we find ample references to this Prajāpati Brahmā, also spoken of as the *Hiraṇya-garbha*, who was the first created,—the first being,—the first born of all the gods. In the Brāhmaṇas and the Upaniṣads we always find Prajāpati Brahmā performing penance for the purpose of creation. Sometimes it is said that Brahmā was born in the primordial water. The epithet *Hiraṇya-garbha*, applied to Brahmā, points to the fact that he was born of a golden egg supposed to have been formed out of the seed deposited in the water when they were produced as the first creation of the Supreme Lord. In the *Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa* (XI. I, 6. 1-11) we find that Prajāpati was born of a golden egg, which was produced by primordial water through penance. Thus it is said,—"In the beginning there existed here nothing but water, a sea of water. These water desired to propagate their kind. They tortured themselves, they mortified themselves. And when they had mortified themselves a golden egg originated in them. The year did not yet exist at that time; but as long as the duration of a year, this golden egg swam about. After a year a man arose out of it; that was Prajāpati.”¹ In the *Chāndogya-upaniṣat* it is said that in the beginning was the *Asat*;

c23.s1.t2.1.3

from the *Asat* there was the *Sat* and from the *Sat* originated an egg. After one year the egg split up into two and from the golden portion was created the region above and from the silver portion the earth below.² We find somewhat detailed description of this *Hiraṇya-garbha* Brahmā also in the *Manu-saṃhitā*. There it is said that once this universe was shrouded in darkness and everything was imperceptible, indistinct—beyond all understanding and all kinds of intellectual comprehension—as if in deep sleep. Then the Self-existent Unmanifest Lord, with an impulse towards creation, manifested Himself in His radiant form, and that Incomprehensible All-pervading One created Himself in a form. With a view to create various kinds of beings from His own body He first created water and deposited His seed in it. The seed in the water transformed itself into a resplendent egg, from which was born Brahmā, the grand-father of all the worlds (*sarva-loka-pitāmaha*). The first person, created by the unmanifest cause-potency, which is eternal and is of the nature of both Ens and non-Ens, is called Brahmā.³ Brahmā lived in that egg for full one year and after that broke it into two parts through the force of meditation; with the upper part of the egg he made heaven and with the lower part he made the earth, and in between the two regions was created the sky and the eight quarters, etc.

c23.s1.t2.1.4

Then follows the creation from Brahmā, which of course, was in the line of the Sāṃkhya cosmology.⁴ In the vernaculars we find occasional references to this egg; and from what is discussed above about the nature and function of Prajāpati Brahmā, it will be very clear to see that the conception of Nirañjana, as we find variously described in the vernacular literatures, is nothing but a very popular representation of the older conception of Prajāpati Brahmā.

c23.s1.t2.2

¹ A History of Indian Literature, by Winternitz, p 223.

c23.s1.t2.3

² Chāndogya-(3.19)

c23.s1.t2.4

³ yat tat kāraṇam avyaktam nityam sad-asad-ātmakam | tad-visṛṣṭaḥ sa puruṣo loke brahm'eti kīrtyate | Manu-saṃhitā, (1.11).

c23.s1.t2.5

⁴ Vide Manu-saṃhitā, Chapter I.

c23.s1.t2.6

¹ Bṛhad-āraṇyaka (1.4. 1—3).

c23.s1.t2.7

We think, it will not be far wide of the mark to recall in this connection the Vedāntic conception of the two aspects of the ultimate reality or the Brahman, the unqualified inactive absolute aspect, which can only be negatively described; the other aspect is the qualified active aspect which has been described as the Īśvara. The Absolute is in no way related to this illusory world; it is the Īśvara, as associated with Māyā (nescience), that is responsible for the creation of this illusory world.

(C) The Primordial Goddess

c23.s1.t3.1

The next point to notice is that lord Nirañjana, who personified the creative impulse of the Absolute, desired to create the universe and from the desire emanated the primordial goddess, who is called Ādyā or Ādyā-śakti or Prakṛti or simply the Devī. This also is a very well-known theory absorbing in it many traditions derived from various sources. Already in the Bṛhad-āraṇyakopaniṣat we find that in the beginning was the Ātman and it became self-conscious and from its self-consciousness proceeded ‘Egohood’—(ahaṃ-nāmā’bhavat). It never enjoyed, and as it was not possible to enjoy all alone it longed for a companion; it then divided its own self into two as the male and the female, or as the husband and the wife, and from their union proceeded the creation. In another place of the same text we find that the Ātman was alone in the beginning. Desirous of issues the Ātman wished to have a wife.² These two aspects of the Brahman as the male and the female have been variously

c23.s1.t3.2

² Ibid (1.4.17).

c23.s1.t3.3

The Primordial Mithuna.

c23.s1.t3.4

conceived in the Upaniṣads. Here (in the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka), for instance, the mind is said to be the self (ātmā), speech the wife (vāg jāyā) and life (prāṇa) is the issue. In the Praśno-paniṣat we find that Prajāpati, desirous of progeny, had recourse to penance and produced the couple (mithuna) and the couple consisted of Rayi (matter) and Prāṇa (the vital force),—the Sun is the Prāṇa and the moon is the Rayi¹. In the Bahvṛcopaniṣat (which, however, is undoubtedly a text of much later time) it is said that in the beginning was the Goddess (Devī); she created the egg of the world,—and from her were born the gods like Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva.

c23.s1.t3.5

¹ Praśnopaniṣat, (1. 4-5).

c23.s1.t3.6

Though, however, the theory of the female counterpart of the original Lord in connection with cosmogony may be traced back even to the days of the Upaniṣads, this idea, as found in the Purāṇic literature as also in the vernacular literature, seems to have been influenced more by popular Sāṃkhya ideas. Notwithstanding the controversies of the philosophers as to the exact nature of Puruṣa and Prakṛti and the exact relation between them, the general view is that the whole creation proceeds from Prakṛti (or the primordial cosmic substance) in contact with Puruṣa, who is the unchanging principle of pure consciousness. Though some schools of Sāṃkhya hold that creation proceeds from the spontaneous disturbance in the equilibrium of the three qualities in Prakṛti, the more general view is that the creative impulse is supplied to Prakṛti by Puruṣa through his contact just as active power is supplied to inactive iron by magnet through its contact (sānnidhya). Through the association or the contact of Puruṣa with Prakṛti the character of the one is infused in the other and the creative process follows as a result of the process of infusion. From this philosophical idea of the association of Puruṣa and Prakṛti and the infusion of the

c23.s1.t3.7

Prakṛti of Sāṃkhya.

c23.s1.t3.8

character of the one into the other in the process of creation has followed the popular tendency to conceive of Puruṣa as the male and of Prakṛti as the female and of their contact as their union, through which proceeds the visible world. It may be remarked that philosophers also have sometimes taken the analogy of the male and the female in explaining the nature of and the relation between Puruṣa and Prakṛti.

c23.s1.t3.9

The cosmic process, however, proceeds from Prakṛti. Prakṛti is constituted by nature of three qualities (guṇa), viz., sattva or the intelligence-stuff, rajas or energy and tamas or inertia. So long as there is the equilibrium of the three guṇas in Prakṛti there is no cosmic process;—the cosmic process follows from the disturbance in the nature of Prakṛti. From the disturbance in Prakṛti first follows the principle of Mahat or Buddhi, which is "the last limit up to which the subjective and the objective can be assimilated as one indistinguishable point which is neither the one nor the other, but which is the sources of them."¹ From Mahat follows the principle of 'egohood' (ahaṅkāra), which in its turn generates the eleven senses on the one hand and the five Tanmātrās (i.e., the five potentials of the five gross elements) on the other. From these five Tanmātrās again follow the five gross elements of earth, water, fire, air and ether. These principles of Puruṣa, Prakṛti, Mahat, Ahaṅkāra, the eleven senses, the five Tanmātrās and the five gross elements taken together constitute the twenty-five Tattvas or principles of Sāṃkhya metaphysics.

c23.s1.t3.10

¹ The Study of Patañjali, by Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, p. 51.

c23.s1.t3.11

The Gītā, the most popular religio-philosophical literature of India, echoes the Sāṃkhya view of cosmology in a rather popular and synthetic way. There we find the idea of the Absolute (which is known as the Puruṣottama), which approximates the unqualified Brahman of the Vedānta;² but in the active and qualified aspect (i.e., as the Bhagavān) He causes Prakṛti to bear the whole universe.¹ Puruṣa and Prakṛti are frequently called in the Gītā as the Kṣetrajña (literally, the knower of the field) and the Kṣetra (the field), and everything, whatsoever, is created through the union of the Kṣetrajña and the Kṣetra.² Puruṣa and Prakṛti are conceived here just as the original male and the female or the father and the mother.³ This idea of Puruṣa and Prakṛti as the primordial male and the female (or the father and the mother) is to be found in almost all religious systems and literature of India. The same idea of the god and the goddess is to be met with in the Vaiṣṇava literature, in the Śaiva literature and in the Tantras.

c23.s1.t3.12

² Vide Gītā, (15. 16-18).

c23.s1.t3.13

¹ mayā’dhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sacarācaram | hetunā’nena kaunteya jagad viparivartate | Gītā (9.10).

c23.s1.t3.14

² yāvat sañjāyate kiñcit sattvaṃ sthāvara-jaṅgamam | kṣetra-kṣetrajña-saṃyogāt tad viddhi bharatarṣabha || Ibid, (13.27)

c23.s1.t3.15

³ Cf. mama yonir mahad brahma tasmin garbhaṃ dadhāmyaham | sambhavaḥ sarva-bhūtānāṃ tato bhavati bhārata || sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ | tasāṃ brahma mahad-yonir ahaṃ bīja-pradaḥ pitā ||

c23.s1.t3.16

In the Purāṇic literature we find but a hotch-potch of the Upaniṣadic and Sāṃkhya ideas with further modification and innovation. Here we generally find a glimpse of the Upaniṣadic idea of the Absolute and then the first manifestation of the Unmanifest in the form of an active personal god with or without the legend of the egg associated with his origin. Then follows Prakṛti from the creative impulse of the Lord as his Śakti (power), and through this introduction of Prakṛti the Sāṃkhya theory becomes interwoven with the ancient legends. The Sāṃkhya theory generally ends with the origination of the gross matter; for the propagation of the human race these Purāṇas generally follow the accounts given in the Manu-saṃhitā. On some of the accounts the Tāntric line of thoughts (which we shall presently discuss) had palpable influence.¹

c23.s1.t3.17

¹ For specimens of discussions on cosmogony and cosmology in the Purāṇic and such other popular literatures see Bhāgavata-purāṇa, (3.5. 23-38); Garuḍa-purāṇa (Pūrva-khaṇḍa, Ch. IV); Padma-purāṇa (Sṛṣṭi khaṇḍa, Ch. II); Padma-purāṇa (Kriyā-yoga-sāra, Ch. II); Brahma-vaivarta-purāṇa (Brahma-khaṇḍa, Ch. III); Śiva-purāṇa (Jñāna-saṃhitā, Chs. V and VI); Sanat-kumāra-saṃhitā, Ch. III, Vāyavīya-saṃhitā, Ch. VIII; Khila-harivaṃśa (Ch. I, verses 21 et seq.); Devī-purāṇa, (Ch. AXIX), etc.

c23.s1.t3.18

The Sāṃkhya idea of Puruṣa and Prakṛti was inherited by the vernaculars through the medium of the Purāṇas in a more anomalous form. The primordial goddess, originating from the sweat, or the smile of lord Dharma (or Nirañjana, or the Ādi-deva) has frequently been styled as Prakṛti,² and the idea of Prakṛti brought with it the ideas of the guṇas, which were transformed and personified as the triad. We have seen that through the union of lord Nirañjana and the Prakṛti (who is depicted as a very beautiful woman) were produced three sons, Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva of the nature of the three guṇas, viz., sattva, rajas and tamas; and these three sons were then entrusted with the charge of the creation of the world. This, however, represents the general and popular Sāṃkhya view of the contact of Puruṣa with Prakṛti and the creation of the world through the activities of the three qualities of Prakṛti. We have seen that according to the version given in the Dharmāyaṇa of Narasimha Vasu the son born to Prakṛti by Nirañjana was Mahat, and from Mahat originated Ahaṃkāra and the three guṇas. In the version, found in the Caṇḍī-maṅgala of Mukunda-rāma also we find that through the infusion of the energy of the Lord in Prakṛti a son of the name of Mahat was born to them, the son of Mahat was Ahaṃkāra, who again had five sons who represent the five gross elements.

c23.s1.t3.19

² It should be noted in this connection that the word Prakṛti in classical Sanskrit literature as well as in the Purāṇic literature became frankly synonymous with the word Śakti or Ādi-devī, the primordial goddess.

c23.s1.t3.20

It is to be noted that the primordial goddess had emanated from the Lord. The Lord and the goddess have then been conceived in the vernaculars as the Ādi-deva and the Ādi-devī. Sometimes they have been conceived as the Ādi and the Anādi; the Lord is the beginningless eternal One; while the Goddess, emanating from the body of the Lord, is the produced one. The creation, however, proceeds from the Ādi-devī, and the Ādi-deva returns to his meditation after the goddess has been created. In this theory of the Ādi-deva and the Ādi-devī the vernaculars seem to have been more influenced by the Śaiva and Śākta ideas (as they are found in the Śaiva and Śākta texts and in the Tantras in general) than by the Sāṃkhya theory of Puruṣa and Prakṛti.

c23.s1.t3.21

The conceptions of the Ādi-deva and the Ādi-devī of the vernaculars and the conceptions of Śiva and Śakti in the Tantras. We have already pointed out that though in a popular way Puruṣa and Prakṛti of the Sāṃkhya system have somehow been related together in the process of cosmic evolution, metaphysically they are two distinct and self-sufficient realities and it is because of the distinct nature of Puruṣa and Prakṛti that various controversies have arisen as to the exact nature of the relation. In the Tantras and other Śaiva and Śākta literatures the primordial god and the primordial goddess, or Śiva and Śakti, as they are commonly called, are not two distinct ultimate realities; they represent two aspects of the absolute reality and sometimes Śakti is conceived as contained in Śiva as his kinetic energy. The absolute truth is a union of Śiva and Śakti. Śiva represents pure consciousness which is inactive—the static aspect of the ultimate reality;—while Śakti represents the world-force—the dynamic aspect of the ultimate reality; Śiva is *Nivṛtti* (state of rest) and Śakti is *Pravṛtti* (the state of activity) and in the ultimate state they remain in a union of oneness. This is the principle of non-duality (*advaya*) which is explained in the Tāntric texts under the imagery of *maithuna* (conjugal intercourse) or *Kāma-kalā* (as it is called in the texts *Kāma-kalā-vilāsa*, *Devī-upaniṣat* and such other texts).¹ In the *Kāma-kalā-vilāsa* we find that Śiva or Maheśa is pure illumination (*prakāśa-mātra-tanu*) or the abstract self-shining thought with all the principles of activity contracted within it (*antar-līna-vimarśaḥ*); Śakti is the principle of activity or the inherent activity of thought (*vimarśa* or *kriyā-śakti*) and she contains in her the seed of the future worlds (*bhāvi-carācara-bijam*). Śiva, however, realises himself through Śakti, and, therefore, it is said that Śakti is the clear looking-glass in which the form and beauty of Śiva is reflected. The philosophical implication is that pure abstract thought cannot realise its own nature unless it comes back to itself through its own activity, and when thus it returns to itself through *vimarśa*, it becomes ‘egohood’ or *ahaṃkāra*, which is called “the mass produced through the union of Śiva and Śakti” (*śiva-śakti-mithuna-piṇḍa*).² In the gross sense this Śiva is the white-matter (*sita-bindu*) or seed or semen, while Śakti is the red-matter (*śoṇa-bindu*), and I-ness or egohood is the son born to them. This conception of Śiva and Śakti has also been interpreted as matter and energy, which are the two essential component parts of all entity. In everything that exists there must be two things,—that which exists and the power or energy by virtue of which it exists or acts; this matter that exists is the Śiva and the energy of existence is Śakti³ and there is an inseparable relation between them, the one cannot be without the other. Śiva without Śakti is absolutely helpless in doing anything whatsoever,—he himself cannot even vibrate without the help of Śakti.⁴ It is Śakti who creates the

First 114 of 176 passages. Read on

Linked texts (33)