Período 2006-2010

'Śaktivāda'

Doctrine or Practice?

Through the philosophy of advaita vedānta Avalon/Woodroffe positioned Tantra in the mainstream of Hindu life and thought. In a lecture in his series delivered to the Vivekananda Society ['Tantra Śāstra and Veda' SS:70-115], Woodroffe claimed that he had 'never properly understood the Vedānta' until he had studied the Tantras and their ritual [SS:80]. The purpose of the ritual was 'to gain realization' which he called aparoksa jñāna (knowledge of the unseen). In another, shorter, address to the society [SS:457—62] he said that Sādhana brought 'knowledge to gain liberation', and distinguished this from intellectual or book knowledge: it was 'actual immediate experience'

(sāksātkāra) [SS:458]. He called it 'spiritual experience' which one could only

acquire by 'adopting some definite means' [SS:461—2].

This spiritual experience was 'Brahman-knowledge' — the truth, by actual experience, of the great upanishadic sayings: 'Thou art That', 'I am Brahman' [SS:81]. Thus the Śākta Tantra was 'the Sādhana Śāstra of Advaitavāda' [SS:80]. This was its true aim, not the acquiring of occult powers (siddhi) which could be an obstacle [SS:79—80]. Thus the tantric goal was the same as that of general neo-Hinduism, with the emphasis on spiritual experience rather than on moksa, Liberation, as such.6

Woodroffe frequently repeated the formula: 'Tantraśāstra is a Sādhana Śāstra', and moreover 'the chief Sādhana Śāstra for the orthodox Hindu' [SS:80], the vedic rites having mostly passed away [SS:458]. The term

sādhanā covers yoga, meditation and ritual, and its aim is transformation of

the practitioner. Woodroffe quoted his friend P.N. Mukhopādhyāy, who proclaimed that Tantra offered a practical system that 'not merely argues but

experiments' [SS:66, 461]. He also cited 'a Tibetan Buddhist' (in fact

Dawasamdup) who claimed that the Tantras were regarded more as scientific discovery than as revelation [SS:460-1]. He liked to reiterate that the test of truth is experiential:

The authority of a Śāstra is determined by the question whether siddhi is gained through its provisions or not … The test is that of Ayurveda. A medicine is a true one if it cures. The Indian test for

everything is actual experience. It is from Samādhi that the ultimate proof

of Advaitavāda is sought. [SS:142. Emphasis in original]

Avalon/Woodroffe makes this point so frequently and emphatically that it may have influenced later scholars to restrict definitions of Tantra to its ritual or sādhanā and to deny the significance of distinct doctrines. Agehananda Bharati defined Tantra as 'psycho-experimental speculation' and denied that there was any tantric philosophy 'apart from Hindu or Buddhist philosophy, or to be more specific, from Vedāntic or Māhāyāna Buddhism'.7 While it may be true in general that 'what defines Tantra is practice (sādhanā) rather than thought',8 as Padoux has pointed out 'there is

Arthur Avalon

no religious or 'magic' practice that does not reflect an ideology.9 Without the specific doctrinal emphasis that underlies them, there would be no point in the distinctive elements of tantric sādhanā.

It is easy to quote statements from the unsystematic Avalon/Woodroffe works out of context. That the Tantras presented no significant departure in doctrine but merely an innovative form of sādhanā, is an apologetic point, aimed at establishing their orthodoxy before an audience and a readership that would have been inclined to be suspicious of Tantra. Woodroffe devoted many pages of his lectures to the Vivekananda Society to the doctrinal conformity of Tantra with the rest of Hinduism, by which he meant primarily that it was non-dualist but also that it shared many other essential beliefs [SS:89-92]. But even in the lecture on 'Tantra Sāstra and Veda' there are suggestions of doctrines that he found specifically in the Tantras: the 'subtle philosophy' that a friend had written about, which was an exception to his statement that nothing entirely new was to be found in the Tantras [SS:81]; the 'philosophical and religious aspect' which he found personally important [SS:79]; the 'essential concepts' which Louis de la Vallée Poussin was praised for finding to be 'of a metaphysical and subtle character' [SS:77]; and his own discovery that: 'the Tantras contained a remarkable philosophic presentment of religious teaching, profoundly applied in a ritual of psychological worth' [ibid].

In the second edition of Shakti and Shākta, Woodroffe quoted a letter he had received from Sivacandra Vidyarnava just before the guru's death. Philosophy (darśana) declared Sivacandra, was an integral aspect of the Tantra Sāstra, but 'it is scattered through the Tantrik treatises and is dealt with, as occasion arises, in connection with Śādhana and Siddhi'. Woodroffe reveals here that he had suggested to Sivacandra that he should write a third volume of his book Tantratattva, concentrating on these doctrines, but the guru died before this project could begin. The quote from Sivacandra's letter continues:

Could … such parts be collected and arranged, according to the principles of the subject-matter, they would form a vast system of philosophy wonderful, divine, lasting, true, and carrying conviction to men. As a Philosophy it is at the head of all others.' [SS:16]

Woodroffe agrees with him: 'I think that those with knowledge and understanding … will allow that it contains a profoundly conceived doctrine, wonderfully worked out in practice' [SS:17]. It seems he would have agreed with Padoux's point about ritual and doctrine being closely intertwined.

Tantra and Veda

Even so, Woodroffe devoted a large part of the lecture on 'Tantra Śāstra and Veda', to assuring his listeners and readers that doctrinally the Tantras were

'Śaktivāda' in accord with 'Veda'. He cited numerous references from the Tantras to show that these texts claimed to be based on 'Veda' [SS:85-7], and that they regarded themselves as the expression of vedic truth that was suitable for the kāli yuga [SS:90].

While appearing to relate to history, the question of whether the Tantras stood in the tradition of the Vedas really concerned questions of authority, authenticity, and morality. Through the process of 'exotericization' described in the last chapter, deities and scriptures which were once classed as 'tantric' became 'vaidik' in the sense that their followers conformed to varnāśrama dharma and avoided practices considered impure or immoral. Just as the terms 'Tantra' and 'tantric' are rather ambiguous in scope, so 'Veda' and 'vedic' do not necessarily refer strictly to the contents of texts. For Woodroffe's listeners and readers in India, the word vaidik was synonymous with orthodoxy in doctrine and practice and social respectability. To insist that the Tantras were opposed to the Vedas was to declare them heterodox. A letter from a reader which will be discussed in the next chapter, shows how one member of the public protested over an implication that the twenty-eight major Śaiva Āgamas were non-vedic.

Woodroffe brings out in his lecture that by 'Vedic' was meant first and foremost conformity with advaita vedānta, with upanishadic monism. (See SS:85—8 in which he declares (p. 87) 'Advaitavedānta is the whole day and life of the Śākta Sādhaka.') He interprets 'Veda' in the abstract sense of knowledge or 'ultimately Spiritual Experience' [SS:81]. Conformity with

advaita vedānta seems in itself to provide reassurance to his readers that

tantric practice is not immoral, as when he defends the pañcatattva by declaring that it is a practical application of advaitavāda [SS:99-100].

Another line of ' d e f e n c e ' against the 'charges' [SS:99] of heterodoxy or immorality (the two being equated) was to draw parallels between tantric rituals and vedic ones, pointing out that animal sacrifice, consumption of alcohol, and even maithuna can be found in the Vedas and Brahmanas. [See Brajalal Mukherji's appendix SS:103ff].

Questions over the actual historical origins of the Tantra Śāstra and of Śāktism are brushed aside in this lecture [SS:70]. Woodroffe himself seems personally to have accepted the theory favoured by most western orientalists that these were 'non-Aryan'; but he was perhaps aware that this would not be welcome to some of his Indian readers or teachers, especially to tantric 'insiders'. We shall see below how he tackled this issue, in another lecture belonging to the same period.

Tantra and Śāktism

W h e n Avalon did use the word 'Tantra' in his writings he usually qualified it by writing of 'the Śākta Tantra'. We have seen that he did this, not in order to associate the two terms but rather the reverse. We have seen in

Arthur Avalon

chapter 7 how for most orientalists the identification of Tantra with 'extreme Śāktism' tended to increase the notoriety of both. The issue of whether Tantrism and Śāktism are always to be identified with each other is a complex one,10 and Avalon/Woodroffe was not really concerned with it. His aim was to distance what he called śaktivāda or the Religion of the Śāktas, from the notoriety implied by the word 'Tantra', while still defending the distinct ritual and doctrinal elements which are commonly associated with the Tantras. After Avalon scholars were more inclined to distinguish Tantrism from Śāktism in the sense of worship of the Goddess

per se.11

The most famous example of a śākta devotee is of course Ramakrishna, the saintly bhakta of Kālī. Kālī is very much a tantric divinity, being the most important of the ferocious forms of the Goddess. Her gruesome iconography did not prevent her from being also perceived as a benevolent mother and saviouress. Ramakrishna is often classed as a tantric as well as a śākta saint because of his devotion to Kālī and because he practised tantric

sādhanā for a time with a female guru, his bhairavī. There is a suggestion,

however, that this tantric experiment proved distasteful to the young Ramakrishna leading to his strong condemnation of Tantra later on.12 Ramakrishna declared that his exploration of Tantra was motivated by the same quest which led him into exploring other forms of 'sādhanā' including versions of Christian and Islamic devotion. His purpose was to prove the equal validity of all paths to the goal of samādhi. This is more of a neo- vedāntic attitude than a traditional śākta or tantric one.

Another famous example of a śākta saint, whose memory was very much alive at Woodroffe's time, is the eighteenth century poet Rāmprasād Sen. Although he too placed devotion above ritual as the highest means to approach the deity, he is usually classed as a Tantric.13 For an example of someone who was both a śākta devotee and also very definitely a tantric ritualist, we can turn to Sivacandra Vidyarnava himself. Sivacandra displays in his Tantratattva all the characteristics of a fervent bhakta saint in the mould of Ramakrishna, and this is also how he is portrayed in his biography by Pal. But Sivacandra was also very particular as to the importance of ritual and he was known for his performance of elaborate tantric pūjās. He also practised sādhanā in the cremation grounds.

T H E RELIGION OF T H E SĀKTAS

As for Woodroffe himself, he was strongly attracted by the idea of the feminine aspect of God, and we have seen that this may have been what first aroused his interest in Tantra. He talked specifically about Śāktism to the Howrah Literary Association in 1917 in a lecture which subsequently gave its name to his book ['Shakti and Shākta SS: 136-88]: ' … a beautiful

'Śaktivāda' and tender concept of the Śāktas is the Motherhood of God' he says [SS:170] and he shows how the Goddess's fearsome and benevolent aspects can be integrated:

The Divine Mother first appears in and as Her worshipper's earthly mother, then as his wife; thirdly as Kālikā, She reveals Herself in old age, disease and death … Lastly She takes to herself the dead body in the fierce tongues of flame which light the funeral pyre. [SS:171] According to the Ghose family, Woodroffe displayed a deep personal devotion to The Mother: they said he would not even wear sandals which had writing on them, because that required treading upon letters, Her symbols. However, such emotions do not come over in his writings where his interest seems purely intellectual and philosophical. Socially he considered that worship of the feminine aspect of divinity could promote progressive attitudes to women:

A high worship therefore which can be offered to the Mother today consists in getting rid of abuses which have neither the authority of ancient Sāstra, nor of modern social science and to honour, cherish, educate and advance women (Śakti) [SS:172]'

Striyo devās striyah prānah'' he quoted — the same quotation as in his strongly

worded speech to the Mahākālī Pathśāla.14 Yet here he proceeds in the following pages to declaim against associating Śāktism with what he calls 'sociology which is concerned with gross matter'; and he eventually manoeuvres himself into making a sweeping statement that: 'The doctrine of Śakti has no more to do with "Feminism" than it has to do with "old age pensions" or any other sociological movement of the day' [SS:174]. The reason however is that he has been stung by criticism from a reviewer - an 'American Orientalist critic' who had called tantrie philosophy 'religious feminism run mad' [SS:173].15 Reaction to his critic has pushed him into an extreme position that he may not have wanted to stand by.

In this lecture the passage about 'Feminism' is followed by a succinct summary of five 'characteristic features' of the religion of the Śāktas:

The characteristic features of Śākta-dharma are thus its Monism; its concept of the Motherhood of God; its unsectarian spirit and provisions for Sūdras and women, to the latter of whom it renders high honour, recognising that they may be even Gurus; and lastly its Sādhana skilfully designed to realise its teachings. [SS:174]

Although here Woodroffe carefully avoids the word 'Tantra', the Sādhana of which he writes is of course tantric sādhanā, presented as the spiritual practice of a doctrine called 'Śākta dharma! His fourth point ('provisions for Sudras and women') is the closest Woodroffe comes to claiming social egalitarianism as a virtue of tantric tradition. Woodroffe's preceptor