A FRIEND of mine who read the first edition of this book suggested that I should add to it an opening Chapter, stating the most general and fundamental principles of the subject as a guide to the understanding of what follows, together with an outline of the latter in which the relation of the several parts should be shown. I have not at present the time, nor in the present book the space, to give effect to my friend’s wishes in the way I would have desired, but will not altogether neglect them.

To the Western, Indian Religion generally seems a “jungle” of contradictory beliefs amidst which he is lost. Only those who have understood its main principles can show them the path.

It has been asserted that there is no such thing as Indian Religion, though there are many Religions in India. This is not so. As I have already pointed out (“Is India Civilized?”) there is a common Indian religion which I have called Bhārata Dharma, which is an Aryan religion (Āryadharma) held by all Āryas whether Brahmanic, Buddhist or Jaina. These are the three main divisions of the Bhārata Dharma. 1 exclude other religions in India, namely, the Semitic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Not that all these are purely Semitic. Christianity became in part Āryanized when it was adopted by the Western Āryans, as also happened with Islam when accepted by such Eastern Āryans as the Persians and the Āryanized peoples of India.

Thus Sufism is either a form of Vedānta or indebted to it.

The general Indian Religion or Bhārata Dharma holds that the world is an Order or Cosmos. It is not a Chaos of things and beings thrown haphazard together, in which there is no binding relation or rule. The worldorder is Dharma, which is that by which the universe is upheld (Dhāryate). Without Dharma it would fall to pieces and disolve into nothingness. But this is not possible, for though there is Disorder (Adharma), it exists, and can exist only locally, for a time, and in particular parts of the whole. Order however will and, from the nature of things, must ultimately assert itself. And this is the meaning of the saying that Righteousness or Dharma prevails. This is in the nature of things, for Dharma is not a law imposed from without by the Ukase of some Celestial Czar. It is the nature of things; that which constitutes them what they are (Svalakśaṇadhāraṇāt Dharma). It is the expression of their true being and can only cease to be, when they themselves cease to be. Belief in righteousness is then in something not arbitrarily imposed from without by a Law-giver, but belief in a Principle of Reason which all men can recognize for themselves if they will. Again Dharma is not only the law of each being but necessarily also of the whole, and expresses the right relations of each part to the whole. This whole is again harmonious, otherwise it would dissolve. The principle which holds it together as one mighty organism is Dharma. The particular Dharma calls for such recognition and action in accordance therewith. Religion, therefore, which etymologically means that which obliges or binds together, is in its most fundamental sense the recognition that the world is an Order, of which each man, being, and thing, is a part, and to which each man stands in a definite, established relation; together with action based on, and consistent with, such recognition, and in harmony with the whole cosmic activity. Whilst therefore the religious man is he who feels that he is bound in varying ways to all being, the irreligious man is he who egoistically considers everything from the standpoint of his limited self and its interests, without regard for his fellows, or the world at large. The essentially irreligious character of such an attitude is shown by the fact that, if it were adopted by all, it would lead to the negation of Cosmos, that is Chaos. Therefore all Religions are agreed in the essentials of morality and hold that selfishness, in its widest sense, is the root of all sin (Adharma). Morality is thus the true nature of man. The general Dharma (Sāmānya Dharma) is the universal law governing all, just as the particular Dharma (Viśeṣa Dharmi) varies with, and is peculiar to, each class of being. It follows from what is above stated that disharmony is suffering. This is an obvious fact. Wrong conduct is productive of ill, as right conduct is productive of good. As a man sows, so he will reap. There is an Immanent Justice. But these results, though they may appear at once, do not always do so. The fruit of no action is lost. It must, according to the law of causality, which is a law of reason, bear effect. If its author does not suffer for it here and now in the present life, he will do so in some future one. Birth and death mean the creation and destruction of bodies. The spirits so embodied are infinite in number and eternal. The material universe comes and goes. This in Brahmanism has been said (see Sanātana Vaidika Dharma by Bhagavān Das) to be “the Systole and Diastole of the one Universal Heart, Itself at rest—the moveless play of Consciousness”. The appearance and disappearance of the Universe is the nature or Svabhāva of That which it ultimately is. Its immediate cause is Desire, which Buddhism calls Tṛṣṇā—or Thirst, that is desire or thirst for world-enjoyment in the universe of form. Action (Karma) is prompted by desire and breeds again desire. This action may be good (Dharma) or bad (Adharma) leading to enjopent or suffering. Each embodied soul (Jīvātmā) will be reborn and reborn into the world until it is freed from all desire. This involves the doctrine of Re-incarnation. These multiple births and deaths in the transmigratory worlds are called Saṃsāra or Wandering. The world is a Dvandva, that is a composite of happiness and suffering. Happiness of a transitory kind may be had therein by adherence to Dharma in following Kāma (Desire) and Artha (the means) by which lawful desires may be given effect. These constitute what Brahmanism calls the Trivarga of the Puruṣārtha, or three aims of sentient being. But just as desire leads to manifestation in form, so desirelessness leads away from it. Those who reach this state seek Mokṣa or Nirvāṇa (the fourth Puruṣārtha): which is a state of Bliss beyond the worlds of changing forms. For there is a rest from suffering which Desire (together with a natural tendency to pass its right limits) brings upon men. They must, therefore, either live with desire in harmony with the universal order, or if desireless, they may (for each is master of his future) pass beyond the manifest and become That which is Mokṣa or Nirvāṇa. Religion, and therefore true civilization, consists in the upholding of Dharma as the individual and general good, and the fostering of spiritual progress, so that, with justice to all beings, true happiness, which is the immediate and ultimate end of all Humanity, and indeed of all being, may be attained.

Anyone who holds these beliefs follows the Bhārata Dharma or common principles of all Āryan beliefs. Thus as regards God we may either deny His existence (Atheism) or affirm it (Theism) or say we have no sufficient proof one way or another (Agnosticism). It is possible to accept the concept of an eternal Law (Dharma) and its sanctions in a self-governed universe without belief in a personal Lord (Īśvara). So Sāṅkhya, which proceeds on intellectual proof only, does not deny God but holds that the being of a Lord is “not proved”.

There are then based on this common foundation three main religions, Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism. .Of the second, a great and universal faith, it has been said that, with each fresh acquirement of knowledge, it seems more difficult to separate it from the Hinduism out of which it emerged and into which (in Northern Buddhism) it relapsed. This is of course not to say that there are no differences between the two, but that they share in certain general and common principles as their base. Brahmanism, of which the Śākta doctrine and practice is a particular form, accepts Veda as its ultimate authority. By this, in its form as the four Vedas, is revealed the doctrine of the Brahman, the “All-pervader,” the infinite Substance which is in Itself (Svarūpa) Conscioumess (Caitanya or Cit) from Which comes creation, maintenance and withdrawal, commonly called destruction (though man, not God, destroys), and Which in Its relation to the universe which the Brahman controls is known as Īśvara, the Ruling Lord or Personal God. Veda both as spiritual experience and the word “which is heard” (Shruti) is the warrant for this. But Shruti, as the ultimate authority, has received various interpretations and so we find in Brahmanism, as in Christianity, differing schools and sects adopting various interpretations of the Revealed Word. Veda says “All this (that is, the Universe) is Brahman.” All are agreed that Brahman or Spirit is, relatively to us, Being (Sat), Consciousness (Cit) and Bliss (Ānanda). It is Saccidānanda. But in what sense is “This” (Idaṃ) Brahman? The Monistic interpretation (Advaitavāda), as given for instance by the great scholastic Śaṅkarācārya, is that there is a complete identity in essence of both. There is one Spirit (Ātmā) with two aspects; as transcendent supreme (Paramātmā), and as immanent and embodied (Jivātmā). The two are at base one when we eliminate Avidyā in the form of mind and body. According to the qualified Monism (Viśiṣṭādvaita) of the great scholastic Rāmānuja, “This” is Brahman in the sense that it is the body of the Brahman, just as we distinguish our body from our inner self. According to the Dualists (Dvaitavāda) the saying is interpreted in tern of nearness (Sāmīpya) and likeness (Sādṛśya) for, though God and man are distinct, the former so pervades and is so unextricably involved in the universe as creator and maintainer, that the latter, in this sense, seems to be Brahman through proximity.

Then again there is the Śuddhādvaita of that branch of the Āgamas which is called Śaivasiddhānta, the Vaiṣṇava Pañcarātra doctrine, the Advaita of the Kashmirian Śaivāgama (Trika), the followers of which, though Advaitins, have very subtly criticized Śaṅkara’s doctrine on several points. Difference of views upon this question and that of the nature of Māyā, which the world is said to be, necessarily implies difference upon other matters of doctrine. Then there are, with many resemblances, some differences in ritual practice. Thus it comes about that Brahmanism includes many divisions of worshippers calling themselves by different names. There are Smārtas who are the present-day representatives of the old Vaidik doctrine and ritual practice, and on the other hand a number of divisions of worshippers calling themselves Śāktas, Śaivas, Vaiṣṇavas and so forth with sub-divisions of these. It is not possible to make hard and fast distinctions between the sects which share much in common and have been influenced the one by the other. Indeed the universality of much of religious doctrine and practice is an established fact. What exists in India as elsewhere today has in other times and places been in varying degrees anticipated. “In Religion” it has been said (“Gnostics and their Remains” viii) “there is no new thing. The same ideas are worked up over and over again.” In India as elsewhere, but particularly in India where religious activity has been syncretistic rather than by way of supersession, there is much which is common to all sects and more again which is common between particular groups of sects. These latter are governed in general, that is, in their older forms, by the Āgamas or Tantra-Śāstras, which, at any rate today and for centuries past (whatever may have, been their origin), admit the authority of the Vedas and recognize other Scriptures. (As to these, see the Introduction to the Kaulācārya Sadā– nanda’s Commentary on the Īśa Upanishad which I have published.)

The meaning of Veda is not commonly rightly understood. But this is a vast subject which underlies all others, touching as it does the seat of all authority and knowledge into which I have not the space to enter here. There are four main classes of Brahmanical Scripture, namely, Veda or Śruti, Smṛti, Purāṇa, and Āgama. There are also four ages or Yuga the latter being a fraction of a Kalpa or Day of Brahmā of 4,320,000 years. This period is the life of an universe, on the expiration of which all reenters Brahman and thereafter issues from it. A Mahāyuga is composed of the Four Ages called Satya, Tretā, Dvāpara, Kali, the first being the golden agc of righteousness since when all has gradually declined physically, morally, and spiritually. For each of the ages a suitable Śāstra is given, for Satya or Kṛta the Vedas, for Tretā the Smṛtśāstra, for Dvāpara the Purāṇas, and for Kaliyuga the Āgama or Tantra Śāstra.

So the Kulārṇava Tantra says:—

Krite śrutyukta ācārastretāyāṃ smṛti-sambhavaḥ

Dvāpare tu purānoktaḥ, kalāvāgamasammataḥ



(see also Mahāṇirvāna Tantra I—28 et seq.) and the Tārā– pradīpa says that in the Kaliyuga (the supposed present age) the Tāntrika and not the Vaidika Dharma, in the sense of mode of life end ritual, is to be followed (see “Principles of Tantra,” Ed. A. Avalon). When it is said that the Āgama is the peculiar Scripture of the Kali age, this does not mean (at any rate to any particular division of its followers) that something is presented which is opposed to Veda. It is true however that, as between these followers, there is sometimes a conflict on the question whether a particular form of the Āgama is unvedic, (Avaidika) or not. The Āgama, however, as a whole, purports to be a presentment of the teaching of Veda, just as the Purāṇas and Smṛtis are. It is that presentment of Vaidik truth which is suitable for the Kali age. Indeed the Śākta followers of the Āgama claim that its Tantras contain the very core of the Veda to which it is described to bear the same relation as the Supreme Spirit (Paramātmā) to the embodied spirit (Jīvātmā). In a similar way, in the seven Tantrik Ācāras (see Ch. IV post), Kaulācāra is the controlling, informing life of the gross body called Vedācāra, each of the Ācāras, which follow the latter up to Kaulācāra, being more and more subtle sheaths. The Tantra Śāstra is thus that presentment of Vedantic truth which is modelled, as regards mode of life and ritual, to meet the characteristics and infirmities of the Kaliyuga. As men have no longer the capacity, longevity and moral strength required to carry out the Vaidika Karmakāṇḍa (ritual section), the Tantra Śātra prescribes a Sādhanā of its own for the attainment of the common end of all Śāstra, that is, a happy life on earth, Heaven thereafter, and at length Liberation. Religion is in fact the true pursuit of happiness.

As explained in the next and following Chapters, this Āgama, which governs according to its followers the Kaliyuga, is itself divided into several schools or communities of worshippers. One of these divisions is the Śākta. It is with Śākta doctrine and worship, one of the forms of Brahmanism, which is again a form of the general Bhārata Dharma, that this book deals.

The Śākta is so called because he is a worshipper of Śakti (Power), that is, God in Mother-form as the Supreme Power which creates, sustains and withdraws the universe. His rule of life is Śāktadharma, his doctrine of Śakti is Śaktivāda or Śākta Darśana. God is worshipped as the Great Mother because, in this aspect, God is active, and produces, nourishes, and maintains all. Theological Godhead is no more female than male or neuter. God is Mother to the Sādhaka who worships Her Lotus Feet, the dust on which are millions of universes. The Power, or active aspect of the immanent God, is thus called Śakti. In Her static transcendent aspect the Mother or Śakti or Śivā is of the same nature as Śiva or “the Good”. That is, philosophically speaking, Śiva is the unchanging Consciousness, and Śakti is its changing Power appearing as mind and matter. Śiva-Śakti is therefore Consciousness and Its Power. This then is the doctrine of dual aspects of the one Brahman acting through Its Trinity of Powers (Icchā, Will; Jñāna, Knowledge; Kriyā, Action). In the static transcendent aspect (Śiva) the one Brahman does not change, and in the kinetic immanent aspect (Śivā or Śakti) It does. There is thus changelessness in change. The individual or embodied Spirit (Jivātmā) is one with the transcendent spirit (Paramātmā). The former is a part (Aṃśa) of the latter, and the enveloping mind and body are manifestations of Supreme Power. Śākta Darśana is therefore a form of Monism (Advaitavāda). In creation an effect is produced without change in the Producer. In creation the Power (Śakti) “goes forth” (Prasarati) in a series of emanations or transformations, which are called, in the Śaiva and Śākta Tantras, the 36 Tattvas. These mark the various stages through which Śiva, the Supreme Consciousness, as Śakti, presents Itself as object to Itself as subject, the latter at first experiencing the former as part of the Self, and then through the operation of Māyā Śakti as different from the Self. This is the final stage in which every Self (Puruṣa) is mutually exclusive of every other. Māyā which achieves this, is one of the Powers of the Mother or Devī. The Will-to-become-many (Bahu syām prajāyeya) is the creative impulse which not only creates but reproduces an eternal order. The Lord remembers the diversities latent in His own Māyā Śakti due to the previou Karmas of Jīvas and allows them to unfold themselves by His volition. It is that Power by which infinite formless Consciousness veils Itself to Itself and negates and limits Itself in order that it may experience Itself as Form.

This Māyā Śakti assumes the form of Prakṛti Tattva, which is composed of three Guṇas or Factors called Sattva, Rajas, Tamas. The function of Prakṛti is to veil, limit, or finitise pure infinite formless Consciousness, so as to produce form, for without such limitation there cannot be the appearance of form. These Guṇas work by mutual suppression. The function of Tamas is to veil Consciousness, of Sattva to reveal it, and of Rajas the active principle to make either Tamas suppress Sattva or Sattva suppress Tamas. These Guṇas are present in all particular existence, as in the general cause or Prakṛti Śakti. Evolution means the increased operation of Sattva Guṇa. Thus the mineral world is more subject to Tamas than the rest. There is less Tamas and more Sattva in the vegetable world. In the animal world Sattva is increased, and still more so in man, who may rise through the cultivation of the Sattva Guṇa to Pure Consciousness (Mokṣa) Itself. To use Western parlance Consciousness more and more appears as forms evolve and rise to man. Consciousness does not in itself change, but its mental and material envelopes do, thus releasing and giving Consciousness more play. As Pure Consciousness is Spirit, the release of It from the bonds of matter means that Forms which issue from the Power of Spirit (Śakti) become more and more Sāttvik. A truly Sāttvik man is therefore a spiritual man. The aim of Sādhanā is therefore the cultivation of the Sattva Guṇa. Nature (Prakṛti) is thus the Veil of Spirit as Tamas Guṇa, the Revealer of Spirit as Sattva Guṇa, and the Activity (Rajas Guṇa) which makes either work. Thus the upward or revealing movement from the predominance of Tamas to that of Sattva represents the spiritual progress of the embodied Spirit or Jivātmā.

It is the desire for the life of form which produces the universe. This desire exists in the collective Vāsanā, held like all else, in inchoate state in the Mother-Power, which passing from its own (Svarūpa) formless state gives effect to them. Upon the expiration of the vast length of time which constitutes a day of Brahmā the whole universe is withdrawn into the great Causal Womb (Yoni) which produced it. The limited selves are withdrawn into it, and again, when the creative throes are felt, are put forth from it, each appearing in that form and state which its previous Karma had made for it. Those who do good Karma but with desire and self-regard (Sakāma) go, on death, to Heaven and thereafter reap their reward in good future birth on earth—for Heaven is also a transitory state. The bad are punished by evil births on earth and suffering in the Hells which are also transitory. Those however who have rid themselves of all self-regarding desire and work selflessly (Niṣkāma Karma) realize the Brahman nature which is Saccidānanda. Such are liberated, that is never appear again in the world of Form, which is the world of suffering, and enter into the infinite ocean of Bliss Itself. This is Mokṣa or Mukti or Liberation. As it is freedom from the universe of form, it can only be attained through detachment from the world and desirelessness. For those who desire the world of form cannot be freed of it. Life, therefore, is a field in which man, who has gradually ascended through lower forms of mineral, vegetable and animal life, is given the opportunity of heaven-life and Liberation. The universe has a moral purpose, namely the affording to all existence of a field wherein it may reap the fruit of its actions. The forms of life are therefore the stairs (Sopāna) on which man mounts to the state of infinite, eternal, and formless Bliss. This then is the origin and the end of man. He has made for himself his own past and present condition and will make his future one. His essential nature is free. If wise, he adopts the means (Sādhanā) which lead to lasting happiness, for that of the world is not to be had by all, and even when attained is perishable and mixed with suffering. This Sādhanā consists of various means and disciplines employed to produce purity of mind (Cittaśuddhi), and devotion to, and worship of, the Magna Mater of all. It is with these means that the religious Tantra Śāstras are mainly concerned. The Śākta Tantra Śāstra contains a most elaborate and wonderful ritual, partly its own, partly of Vaidik origin. To a ritualist it is of absorbing interest.

Ritual is an art, the art of religion. Art is the outward material expression of ideas intellectually held and emotionally felt. Ritual art is concerned with the expression of those ideas and feelings which are specifically called religious. It is a mode by which religious truth is presented, and made intelligible in material forms and symbols to the mind. It appeals to all natures passionately sensible of that Beauty in which, to some, God most manifests Himself. But it is more than this. For it is the means by which the mind ie transformed and purified. In particular according to Indian principles it is the instrument whereby the consciousness of the worshipper (Sādhaka) is shaped in actual fact into forms of experience which embody the truths which Scripture teaches. The Śākta is thus taught that he is one with Śiva and His Power or Śakti. This is not a matter of mere argument. It is a matter for experience. It is ritual and Yoga-practice which secure that experience for him. How profound Indian ritual is, will be admitted by those who have understood the general principles of all ritual and symbolism, and have studied it in its Indian form, with a knowledge of the principles of which it is an expression. Those who speak of “mummery,” “'gibberish” and “superstition” betray both their incapacity and ignorance.

The Āgamas are not themselves treatises on Philosophy, though they impliedly contain a particular theory of life. They are what is called Sādhanā Śāstras, that is, practical Scriptures prescribing the means by which happiness, the quest of all mankind, may be attained. And as lasting happiness is God, they teach how man by worship and by practice of the disciplines prescribed, may attain a divine experience. From incidental statements and the practices described the philosophy is extracted.

The speaker of the Tantras and the revealer of the Śākta Tantra is Śiva Himself or Śivā the Devī Herself. Now it is the first who teaches and the second who listens (Āgama). Now again the latter assumes the role of Guru and answers the questions of Śiva (Nigama). For the two are one. Sometimes there are other interlocuters. Thus one of the Tantras is called Īśvarakārtikeya-saṃvāda, for there the Lord addresses his son Kārtikeya. The Tantra Śāstra therefore claims to be a Revelation, and of the same essential truths as those contained in the Eternal Veda which is an authority to itself (Svataḥsiddha).

Those who have had experience of the truths recorded in Śāstra, have also proclaimed the practical means whereby their experience was gained. “Adopt those means” they say, “and you will also have for yourself our experience.” This is the importance of Sādhanā and all Sādhanā Śāstras. The Guru says: “Do as I tell you. Follow the method prescribed by Scripture. Curb your desires. Attain a pure disposition, and then and thus only will you obtain that certainty, that experience which will render any questionings unnecessary.” The practical importance of the Āgama lies in its assumption of these principles and in the methods which it enjoins for the attainment of that state in which the truth is realized. The following Chapters shortly explain some of the main features of both the philosophy and practice of the Śākta division of the Āgama. For their full development many volumes are necessary. What is here said is a mere sketch in a popular form of a vast subject.

I will conclude this Chapter with extracts from a Bengali letter written to me shortly before his death, now many years ago, by Pandit Śiva-chandra Vidārṇava, the Śākta author of the “Tantratattva” which I have published under the title “Principles of Tantra”. The words in brackets are my own.

“At the present time the general public are ignorant of the principles of the Tantra Śāstra. The cause of this ignorance is the fact that the Tantra Śāstra is a SādhanāŚāstra, the greater part of which becomes intelligible only by Sādhanā. For this reason the Śāstra and its Teachers prohibit their general promulgation. So long as the Śāstra was learnt from Gurus only, this golden rule was of immense good. In course of time the old Sādhanā has become almost extinct, and along with it, the knowledge of the deep and mighty principles of the Śāstra is almost lost. Nevertheless some faint shadowings of these principles (which can be thoroughly known by Sādhanā only) have been put before thc public partly with the view to preserve Śāstric knowledge from destruction, and partly for commercial reasons. When I commenced to write Tantratattva some 25 years ago (some 37 years from date) Bengali society was in a perilous state owing to the influx of other religions, want of faith and a spirit of disputation. Shortly before this a number of English books had appeared on the Tantra Śāstra which, whilst ignorant of Dharma, Sādhanāand Siddhi, contained some hideous and outrageous pictures drawn by the Bengali historians and novelists ignorant of, and unfaithful to, Śāstric principles. The English books by English writers contained merely a reflection of what Englisheducated Bengalis of those days had written. Both are even to-day equally ignorant of the Tantra Śāstra. For this reason in writing Tantratattva I could not go deeply into the subject as my heart wished. I had to spend my time in removing thorns (objections and charges) from the path by reasoning and argument. I could not therefore deal in my book with most of the subjects which, when I brought out the first volume, I promised to discuss. The Tantra Śāstra is broadly divided into three parts, namely Sādhanā, Siddhi (that which is gained by Sādhanā) and Philosophy (Darshana). Unlike other syatems it is not narrow nor does it generate doubt by setting forth conflicting views. For its speaker is One and not many and He is omniscient. The philosophy is however scattered throughout the Tantrik treatises and is dealt with, as occasion arises; in connection with Sādhanā and Siddhi. Could (as I had suggested to him) 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. You have prayed to Parameśvara (God) for my long life, and my desire to carry out my project makes me also pray for it. But the state of my body makes me doubt whether the prayer will be granted. By the grace therefore of the Mother the sooner the work is done the better. You say ‘that those who worship Parameśvara, He makes of one family. Let therefore all distinctions be put aside for all Sādhakas are, as such, one.’ This noble principle is the final word of all Śāstras, all communities, and all religions. All distinctions which arise from differences in the physical body are distinctions for the human world only. They have no place in the world of worship of Parameśvara. The more therefore that we shall approach Him the more will the differences between you and me vanish. It is because both of us pray for the removal of all such differences, that I am led to rely on your encouragement and help and am bold to take up this difficult and daring work. If by your grace the gate of this Tantrik philosophy is opened in the third part of Tantratattva I dare to say that the learned in all countries will gaze and be astonished for it is pure truth, and for this reason I shall be able to place it before them with perfect clearness.”

Unfortunately this project of a third part of the Tantratattva could not be carried out owing to the lamented death of its author, which followed not long after the receipt of this letter. Naturally, like all believers throughout the whole world, he claimed for his Scripture the possession in all its details of what was true or good. Whilst others may not concede this; I think that those with knowledge and understanding and free from prejudice will allow that it contains a profoundly conceived doctrine, wonderfully worked out in practice. Some of its ideas and principles are shared (though it be under other names and forms) by all religious men, and others either by all or some Indian communities, who are not Śāktas. Leaving therefore for the moment aside what may be said to be peculiar to itself it cannot be that wholly absurd, repulsive, and infamous system (“lust, mummery and magic” as Brian Hodgson called it) which it has been said to be. An impartial criticism may be summed up in the few words that together with what has value, it contains some practices which are not generally approved and which have led to abuse. As to these the reader is referred to the Chapter on the Pañcatattva or Secret Ritual.

I conclude with.a translation of an article in Bengali by a well-known writer, (P. Bandyopādhyāya, in the “Sāhitya”, Shrabun 1320, Calcutta, July-August 1913). It was evoked by the publication of Arthur Avalon’s Translation of, and Introduction to, the Mahānirvāṇa Tantra. It is an interesting statement as regards the Śākta Tantra and Bengali views thereon. Omitting here some commendatory statements touching A. Avalon's work and the writer’s “thanks a hundred times” for the English version, the article continues as follows:—