Are Tantra and Shaktism the Same Thing? ( A repost )

[Guest guest]

devi_bhakta

 

In studying the worship of Devi, I often come across the

term, "Tantric Shaktism" - which makes me ask, "Okay, so what is

*non*-Tantric Shaktism?" Because I've often been told, by a number of

very erudite Hindus, that Tantra and Shaktism are interchangeable

terms for the very same thing.

 

The Hindu scholar (and practicing Shakta) Sarbeswar Satpathy

writes, "In the popular mind, the tantras deal with the worship of

Shakti … Tantra is almost a synonym for Shakti or Devi worship."

 

The American Hindu scholar David Frawley (another practicing Shakta)

has defended Tantra against the "bad reputation" it has gained due to

a sensationalistic focus on "Tantric magic,Tantric sex," and so

on.

 

In reality, Frawley explains, Tantra is a primarily spiritual,

devotional and meditational path, "emphasizing the worship of the

Goddess." Without this grounding, any esoteric practices involving

sex and magical powers are useless and essentially meaningless.

 

I once posed this question to a woman who used to frequent

clubs, "shivdooti", and she replied:

 

"Shakti and Tantra are interconnected and are different [only] for

ignorants. ... On the contrary, Tantra turns our attention to Shakti,

the eternal Mother and tells us how [she] works in the Universe,

[and] how [she] works in our body."

 

So what do you think? Are all Devi devotees Tantrics? Are all

Tantrics Devi devotees? Are Tantra and Shaktism the same thing? And

if not, what's the distinction? Any and all replies, full or partial,

complex or simple, will be greatly appreciated!

 

evil_djinia

 

I love your questions. But I have to answer with another. Aren't

Vishnu and Laxshmi really the same deity? If not then what would the

worship of one and not the other bring you. Aren't Shiva and Parvati

one? In this case yes as Ardanishvara (not sure I spelled right).

What about Brahma-Saraswati? The question being always what

difference would it make to worship one of the pair in terms of

spiritual and other rewards? It is a key theme behind all of the

deities that they are monadic and all take one back to the Self if

worshipped. I'm not sure there's a difference between the Vedas,

yoga, tantra, the body, the universe, or any of the deities, or my

Self.

 

In fact, I don't really understand why the Shining Ones are within us

but it has something to do with DNA (like, hello, we are made of the

same stuff as the cosmos!).

 

I think that while this seems like a trite answer, still the theme of

unity underlies all Indian dieties. I don't think it changed because

someone called it something or another. The benefit and wealth of

Sanatan Dharma is that there's a method of worship for everyone, even

little children. Worship is fun in India. We tried to make it fun in

the West by making it a commercial affair. But boy I wish I was in

India right now. I ate my heart out during Kumbha.

 

I love Siva because he puts all other worship ahead of his own.

Worship any deity and you worship Siva ("Siva is Jiva, Jiva is Siva"-

Skandopanishad)Siva is also the bestower of the benefits of all other

deities or so says Siva Purana. Siva had to destroy the Avatar

Narasimh because Narasimha got too big and was going to fireball the

universe. At the last instant Narasimha recapitulated and so Siva

told everone to worship Narasimha. Of course Siva is the absolute -

kaivalya in Patanjali. The Self.

 

Uh, and also because of Rudraksha beads. No other deity has beads

like Rudraksha. But tulsi is nice.

 

As an aside, someone wrote a book saying that MMY had a vision of

spiritually regenerating the world near the idol of Laxshmi in 1950

something, and her thought was he worships wealth, but this author

didn't understand the Laxshmi is the Goddess of light and the highest

and happiest form of MA. I hope I'm right because all these words

don't do justice to the deities. Laxshmi's comforts are all inclusive

and include spiritual comfort. She is the Virgin Mary figure, the

all compasionate one who gives to all. Just an aside.

 

"Goddess of light," from Siva Samhita near the start. In SS it says

Durga is Tamas awakening, Saraswati is rajas awakening, and Laxshmi

is Sattva awakening.

 

sankarrukku

 

The answer is NO! NO! NO!

 

Sakthism is belief in the Supreme Deity as a Female principle.

 

There are Saiva Tantras (worship of Shiva), Vishnu Tantras (worship

of Vishnu), Buddhist Tantras and Chinese Tantras. The Vajrayana

Buddhism practiced in Tibet is purely Tantric. One of their main

deities MAA TAARA is worshipped by Sakthas also.

 

Tantra Sasthra lays down the general principles of worship, as we

know today. All the temples are constructed as per the Agama Sasthra,

which is a Tantric text. Image worship was not known during the Vedic

times. Image worship came with the Tantra Sasthras.

 

The Images in the temples are made according to the Dhyana Slokas of

the particular Deity. Then Pranaprathista is done bring the Image

alive. The rituals for consecrating an Image are laid down only in

Tantra Sasthra.

 

What most people do not realize is that the ritual of Pooja viz.

Dhyanam.sahasranamam or namavali, Upacharam etc are all as per the

ules laid down in different Tantric texts. Hinduism today is more

Tantric than Vedic.

 

Unfortunately during the colonial rule in India many Western scholars

concentrated only on the esoteric practices of Tantra sashthra. This

made Tantra unpopular and the Hindus in general disowned

Tantra.Unfortunately even after 50 years of Independence we rarely

find books on different aspects of Hinduism by Indian scholars. I owe

my knowledge of the various aspects of Hinduism mostly from Western

scholars. The esoteric practices are part of Tantra but not the whole.

 

Vedic Hinduism has only one Mantra. The Gayatri Mantra, which could

be recited only by Brahmins. All other Mantras in vogue today are

Tantric.The entire Mantra Sasthra is Tantric.

 

Even today most Hindus would not like to admit the Tantric origin of

their worship because of the notoriety of the so-called Tantra.

Search for Tantra in any search engine and you will know what I mean.

 

Soundharya Lahari is a Tantric text. But all the people who recite

the great poem are not Tantrics.

 

Now all Sakthas need not be Tantric. Sakthism is the religion of the

common man in India. Every village in India has its own temple for a

Deity. She could be Mariamman, Elliamman, Drowpathyamman or MAA KAALI

who is the most popular deity in India. Hindu scholars have ignored

these Grama Devathais because they worshipped only by the poor and

the downtrodden. The worshippers in most of these temples are

Bhakthas.

 

I would welcome any queries regarding this.

 

Sangeetajee

 

Good explaination Devibhakta

 

Is it not same Shakta,Shiva, Vishunu,and tantra. There is some link

between them which is unknow to us ?

 

Mother knows

 

happy Navaratri

 

 

 

 

 

 

devi_bakta

 

But let's leave that, and concentrate on the substance of the

discussion (and please correct me if I'm wrong in my summary):

Sankarrukku says Tantrism and Shaktism are *not* the same thing, but

you say they *are* the same thing. He states that not all persons

who worship Devi are Tantrics, and you ask, "Who is a Tantric, then?"

 

It's an excellent question. If I understand him correctly,

Sankarrukku believes Tantric devotional practices have infiltrated

popular Hinduism to such an extent that almost *every* Hindu is, in

a way, a Tantric.

 

But because many of these Hindus are Shaivites or Vaisnavites rather

than Shaktas, Sankarrukku concludes that not all Tantrics are Shaktas.

 

That's correct, I think ... or is it?

 

Megalith6

 

Hello,

 

Jai Durga!

 

Personally I feel any balanced religion has to take account of the

masculine side and the feminine side. This is something which drew me

to Hinduism, before I became a Hindu. Personally again, I happen to

feel that the feminine side of creation is immensely beautiful and

powerful. We can see this illustrated in the Gods having their

actual power - i.e. Shakti - within their Goddess counterparts.

Without Shakti, Godhead is thus, to all intents and purposes,

impotent. Shakti means 'power', and that power is feminine; yet it

requires the masculine principle to fully realise itself, it would

appear. So when the two principles come together, creation occurs on

one level, on another level, sublimation occurs: the two principles

become one and in so doing transcend their duality. But this is a

mystical realisation - in ordinary, mundane reality, it is important

to hold on to the duality of 'male' and 'female', I believe. All the

worthwhile religions/religious systems of the world are going to the

one goal, ultimately, enlightenment. There are merely differing paths

to the one objective.

 

Namaste!

 

Sankarrukku

 

Is Tantra and Sakthism the Same Thing?

 

I am happy for the responses to my message. The idea is to have an

open discussion, which will benefit all the members of the club. The

discussions may generate a lot of Heat, but we should ensure that it

also throws some light on the subject matter.

I have no pretensions to be an erudite scholar either in Tantra or

Hinduism or for that matter in Sakthism. However since I have

devoted the last 15 years of my life to gleaning some knowledge on

Sakthism, Tantra and Hinduism, I responded to the question about

Tantra and Sakthism.

 

I will try to answer some of the queries raised by you and other

members of the Club.

 

I would refer you to a book "Tantra in Practice".(originally

published by the Princeton University Press. Published in India By

Motilal Banarasidass in 2001). This is the eighth volume of

Princeton readings in Religions and the first substantial anthology

of Tantric works ever to appear in English. The thirty-nine

contributors, drawn from around the world, are all leading scholars

of Tantra.

 

The range of works represented in the book spans the continent of

Asia and the traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Islam

over a millennium. As is stated in the preface "With the publication

of this volume, the long disparaged and neglected Tantric Traditions

of Asia receive the attention they so rightly deserve". The book

covers the Tantric traditions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and

Islam.

 

The Nathas who are followers of Saint Goraknath are supreme examples

of pure Tantrics who are not Sakthas.

 

So Tantra is not exclusively Hindu, leave alone exclusively Saktha.

 

Image Worship:

 

The main form of worship during the Vedic period was through Homam.

Temples do not seem to have existed during this period. The main

gods dominating Rug _Veda are Agni, Soma and Indra. Other gods

mentioned are Varuna, Mitra, Surya, Brahaspathi, Viswakarman and

Tvastr. Image worship evolved during the Puranic - Itihasic period of

history in Hinduism. Most of the Gods and Goddesses we worship today

evolved during this period. I would be glad to know in which Veda

Image worship is prescribed. I am referring only to the first three

Vedas. Rug, Yajur and Samaveda though Rig Veda is considered to be

the oldest and is the fountainhead of Hinduism. Krishna Yajur Veda

and Atharva Veda are considered to have evolved much later.

 

Gayatri Mantra.

 

A few years after my marriage in 1973 my wife raised this question

as to why she should not wear the Yagnopaveedam and recite the

Gayatri Mantra. I went around asking various scholars in Vedas and

Hinduism about this. The uniform opinion was that the Gayatri mantra

was proscribed for Women and castes other than Brahmins. We know of

Great Rishis Like Lobomudra, Gargi and Maitreyi. They were all women

considered equal to any male Rishi. But unfortunately over a period

of time this ban has come into being. The Arya Samaj founded by Swami

Dayananda Saraswathi permits all its members to recite the Gayatri

Mantra. The Arya Samaj movement tries to bring back pure Vedic

practices. But their success has been limited.

 

We raised this question again with our Guru who is an Avadhootha. He

told us that women could recite any Mantra other than Gayatri Mantra.

A few years back a group of women have taken up the work of Purohits

in Poona. They have been successful. But this movement has not spread

to other parts of India.

 

So what I stated is the prevalent practice. I have not found any

authority for this prohibition. I do not agree or accept this

prohibition.

 

Unfortunately most of the Pundits of our religion refuse to give us

the authority on which they rely for such prohibitions. Asking for

the authority is considered diso

 

Unfortunately most of the Pundits of our religion refuse to give us

the authority on which they rely for such prohibitions. Asking for

the authority is considered disobedience if not worse.

 

Defamation of Tantra

 

Most of Tantric works that are available today have been written much

later than the time of Buddha, I understood that Buddha was mainly

against the Sacrificial Religion that Hinduism was. Some modern

scholars have tried to prove that Buddha was against Varnashrama

Dharma. I will be glad to know the source of this information that

Buddha was against Tantras. The Golden age of Tantras was the Gupta

period, which was much later.

 

Soundharya Lahari.

 

This is a beautiful poem extolling MAA. At the same time there is a

Prayoga relating to each stanza with its own Yantra and Mantra. This

is a Sree Vidya text. If an Upasaka wants to do the Prayoga then

he/she should have had training in Sree Vidya. It is accepted that

this is Tantric text. (Saundarya- Lahari - Theosophical Publishing

House -Madras)

 

Parayanam is for all. You get the full blessings of MAA. But the

moment you start doing Prayoga you enter the field of Tantra. The

Paramacharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peedam had advised all people

especially women to do Parayanam in around 1970. The text gained wide

popularity after that.

 

The same is the case with DEVI MAHAATMYAM. Parayanam is for all

Bhakthas. But if you start doing Prayoga of Mantras in the text then

Tantra takes over. The older texts talk about getting the Adhikara

for even Parayanam. I received the Adhikara or the right to do

Parayanam when I started. But now a days this is not insisted as many

scholars have not accepted the restriction on this. (The book Durga

Saptha Sati by the Gorakpur Press talks about the restrictions). As I

said earlier this Adhikara business was done away with in the case of

Soundharya Lahari due to the advise of Paramacharya.

 

I believe that there should be no restriction for Parayanam and am

happy to see everyone doing Parayanam of Devi Mahaatmyam now.

 

So people who do Parayanam of Soundharya Lahari and Devi Mahaatmyam

are all Bhakthas of MAA and not Tantrics.

 

Knowledge incomplete and distorted.

 

I do agree that my knowledge is incomplete. In Tamil there is a

saying "karrathu kaiman aavu, karkathathu Ulakalavu" meaning what we

have learnt is only a fistful whereas what we have not learnt is the

size of the whole world. I am learning and will continue to learn

till I die.

 

Please do not blame the Western scholars for what you feel is

mydistorted knowledge. When reading a book or even when hearing a

lecture everyone assimilates the knowledge in his own way. This is

not the mistake of the Book or the Lecture. We are all human beings

and tend to react differently to any stimulus. What is inspiring to

me could be boring to you. So if there are gaps in my knowledge it is

my mistake and my Western Gurus cannot be blamed for that.

 

The subject matters are opinions. It is not like 2+2 = 4. There will

always be different opinions. Even my wife and sons do not agree with

all my views. I do not expect them to agree. We state our views. It

is up to others to accept them or not. Everyone is entitled to

his/her opinion.

 

We are all Bhakthas of MAA. Let us all pray for Her Blessings.

 

Devi_bhakta

 

That was a very informative post! It brings us all a bit closer to

understanding the essence of Shakta, Tantra and the common,

overlapping, and very blurry borders they share ...

 

You state, "Parayanam is for all. You get the full blessings of MAA.

But the moment you start doing Prayoga you enter the field of

Tantra." Would you define your terms and expand upon this point for

our members?

 

Thank you once again ... I note in your Profile that you call

yourself a "Full time Saktha Evangelist." Well, you're certainly off

to a good star here!

 

Also, I note that you signed your post with praise for the Mahavidya

Goddess Bagalamukhi. You might have noticed my post of a few days

ago on the Mahavidya Goddess Maatangi. It got a good response (though

largely via private e-mails, oddly enough ... perhaps Mahavidya

bhaktas are especially secretive!) ... but perhaps you might consider

a similar exposition on Sri Bagalamukhi?

 

Thanks again for your learned contribution to our forum!

 

 

The scholar Sarbeswar Satpathy, in an essay entitled "Tantric

Tradition in India," writes:

 

"The Tantras and Shakta works have much in common. The main point

ofdifference [is] that in the Shakta cult Devi is worshipped as the

Supreme Reality, whereas in the Tantras, she is treated as the same

with Shiva, [reflecting the belief that] there is no difference

between Shakti, the power, and Shaktimaan, the power-holder."

 

Is this correct? Is THAT the difference between Shaktism and Tantric

Hinduism?

 

Or is Satpathy mistaken? He goes on to say that, because Tantra

regards Shakti as being co-equal with Shiva, "therefore the Tantric

conception of Shakti is Vedantic in its philosophical outlook."

 

I'm not at all sure that's true! Can any of you clarify this matter

for ourmembers who are interested?