Why Do Shaktas Worship the Divine Mother?

[Guest guest]

In my previous post, I quoted the late Satguru Sivaya

Subramuniyaswami's explanation that: "In philosophy and practice,

Shaktism greatly resembles Shaivism. But Shaktas worship Shakti as the

Supreme Being exclusively, as the dynamic aspect of Divinity, while

Shiva is considered solely transcendent and is not worshiped."

 

To clarify that conception, here is a brilliant excerpt from a 1926

essay entitled, "The Indian Magna Mater," by Sir John Woodroffe, a

Sanskrit scholar and initiated Shakta, widely recognized as the

foremost translator and interpreter of the Tantras in English. His

work drew upon detailed studies of the texts, combined with

unprecented access and in-depth discussions with the foremost gurus

and Shakta practitioners of his day. So rather than attempting to

summarize, I will let him speak for himself and perhaps (he says

wistfully) clear up this misunderstanding once and for all. It's a

little lengthy and takes some careful attention, but -- I promise you

-- it is worth the effort:

 

WHY DOES SHAKTISM FOCUS ON THE DIVINE MOTHER?

 

Why does the Shakta lay stress on the Power or Mother aspect of

Reality? Like all other Hindus, he believes in Shiva (a Static Real as

Immutable Being-Consciousness), which is the ground of and serves to

maintain Shakti (which, in this system, is the Dynamic Real).

 

The Shakta will point out, however, that the Mother is also, in one of

Her aspects, of the same nature as Shiva (the Static Real). But it is

She who does work. She alone moves as material cause. He, as Immutable

Being, does and can do nothing without Her as His Power. Hence, the

Kaula Shakta symbolism shows Shiva as lying inert -- nothing but a

corpse (shava) if deprived of His Power.

 

Even when associated with his Shakti as efficient cause, Shiva does

not move. A not uncommon picture (counted obscene) is [shakti seating

atop a prone Shiva, engaged in copulation] -- which is merely the

pictorial symbol of the fact that Being, even when associated with its

active Power, is Immutable. It is She, as Power, who takes the active

part in generation -- as also in conceiving, bearing and giving birth

to the World Child. All of this is the function of the Divine -- as it

is of the human -- Mother. In such work, the male is but a helper

(sahakari) only. (In other Hindu systems, it is the Mother who is the

helper of Shiva).

 

It is thus to the Mother that man owes the World of Form, or Universe.

Without Her as material cause, Being cannot display itself. It is but

a corpse (shava). Both Shiva and Shakti give that supreme beyond-world

Joy which is liberation (Mukti; Paramananda). They are each Supreme

Consciousness and Bliss. (In this role, the Mother is Ananda-Lahari,

or the Wave of Bliss.) But Shakti the Mother is alone the Giver of

World-Joy (Bhukti; Bhumananda), since it is She who becomes the

Universe. As such, She is the Wave of Beauty (Soundarya-Lahari).

 

Further, it is through Her form as World that She, as also Shiva, are

in their Formless Self attained. However, if union is sought directly

with Shiva (reality in its non-world aspect), it must necessarily be

by renunciation, denial of the World.

 

Shaktism, on the other hand, teaches that Liberation may also be

attained by acceptance of the World, and through the World -- which

is, after all, the other aspect of the Real. In the Shakta method, it

is not by denial of the World, but by and through the World (when

known as Mother) that Liberation is attained. World enjoyment is made

the means and instrument of Liberation (Mokshaayate Samsara). The

Shakta has both Bhukti (World-Joy) and Mukti (Spiritual Liberation).

 

This essential unity of the World and Beyond-World -- and passage

through and by means of the former to the latter -- is one of the most

profound doctrines of the Shakta. (And is none the less profound just

because [mis]application of these principles has sometimes led to

abuse of the doctrine.)

 

For these and other reasons, in Shaktism primacy is given to the

Mother, and it is said: "What care I for the Father if I may but be on

the lap of the Mother?"

 

Aum Maatangyai Namahe

[Guest guest]

OM Devi Bhakta

 

"Shaktism, on the other hand, teaches that Liberation may also

be attained by acceptance of the World, and through the World --

which is, after all, the other aspect of the Real. In the Shakta

method, it is not by denial of the World, but by and through the

World (when known as Mother) that Liberation is attained. World

enjoyment is made the means and instrument of Liberation"

 

 

Viveka-cudamani says (translation by Swami Turiyananda):

 

Antah svayam c'api bahih svayam ca

svayam purastat svayam eva pascat:

svayam hy avacyam svayam apy'udicyam

tatho'uparistat svayam apy'adhastat (389)

 

Internally I am, externally I am; I am before, I am after;

I am above, I am below.

 

 

Sad'ev'edam sarvam jagad-avagatam van-manasayoh

sato'anyan nasty'eva prakrti-para-simni sthitavatah;

prthak kim mrtsnayah kalasa-ghata-kumbhady'avagatam

vadaty'esa bhrantas tvam aham iti maya-madiraya. (391)

 

All this is but Existence Itself, which is beyond word and mind.

There is nothing beyond pure existence in what is seen in

Nature. Is there anything separate from the earth in the pitcher,

jar, etc., which are made from the earth? If anyone says it is

separate, he is deluded, like one drunk with the wine of Maya.

And one drunk with the wine of Maya sees Maya, sees `thou'' `I',

etc.

 

Kriya-samabhiharena yatra n'anyad iti srutih;

braviti dvaita-rahityam mithy'adhyasa-nivrtttaye. (392)

 

The sruti commands to do away with the false belief of

separation and says that there is nothing but One - Brahman

alone.

 

 

Jahi mala-maya-kose'aham-dhiy'otthapita' asam

prasabham anila-kalpe lingadehe'api pascat;

nigama-gadita-kirtim nityam'ananda-murtim

svayam iti pariciya brahma-rupena tistha. (395)

 

Give up the idea of the self in this sheath of food [Annamaya

kosa], then in the subtle body which is composed of the prana

[Pranamaya kosa], and mind, [Manomaya kosa]. And recognize

thine own Self in Brahman, which is full of blissfulness - whose

glory has been extolled in the scriptures - and stay as Brahman.

 

 

Paths are many, Truth is One. It matters not what our starting

point is or how we conceptualize the Divine because in the end

we all have a common Vision of the Divine with which we identify.

 

OM Namah Sivaya

 

Omprem

[Guest guest]

Namaskar, OmPremji:

 

I just finished writing a long response to Colin, which has gone up

as Post #2029, which addresses, I think, many of your points.

 

You concluded: *** It matters not what our starting point is or how

we conceptualize the Divine because in the end we all have a common

Vision of the Divine with which we identify.***

 

I agree with you that the Divine is what It is, however individual

devotees may conceptualize it. But I do not agree that "it matters

not how we conceptualize the Divine." In my opinion, it is important

to know you path and honor it, so as to avoid the kind of "belief-

hopping" that so characterizes the New Age and certain other

spiritual movements.

 

If you're into Native American paganism this week, Kaballah next

week, and Wicca the week after that, you're not going to get anywhere

spiritually. Likewise a Christian,, having chosen to be a Christian,

should "stay the course" (sticking to Catholicism, Evangelism or

whatever specific path is chosen), and a Hindu should be a Hindu

(sticking to Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism, or whatever path they

choose or are initiated into).

 

While each tradition, when viewed from a high spiritual vantage

point, feed and complement all each of the others, a

base "conceptualization," to my mind at least, seems a necessary

ground. Is my view too narrow? I would appreciate your thoughts on

this.

 

Aum Maatangyai Namahe