Shakti and Shâkta : essays and addresses on the Shâkta Tantrashâstra

SHAKTI AND SHAKTA

Shakti. “ Aham stri” as the Advaitabhava Upanishad says, A high worship therefore which can be offered to the Mother to-day consists in getting rid of abuses which have neither the authority of ancient Shastra, nor of modern social science and to honour, cherish, educate and advance women (Shakti). Striyodevah striyah pranah. Gautamiya Tantra says Sarvavarnddhikérashcha narindm yogya eva cha ; that is the Tantra Shastra is for all castes and for women : and the MahAanirvana says that the low Kaula who refuses to initiate a Chandala or Yavana or a woman out of disrespect goes the downward path. No one is excluded from anything except on the grounds of a real and not artificial or imagined incompetency.

An American Orientalist critic, in speaking of “ the worthlessness of Tantrik philosophy,” said that it was ‘“ Religious Feminism run mad,” adding “ What is all this but the feminisation of orthodox Vedanta? It is a doctrine for suffragette Monists: the dogma unsupported by any evidence that the female principle antedates and includes the male principle, and that this female principle is supreme Divinity.” The “ worthlessness” of the Tantrik philosophy is a personal opinion on which nothing need be said, the more particularly that Orientalists who, with insufficient knowledge, have already committed themselves to this view are not likely to easily abandon it. The present criticism, however, in disclosing the grounds on which it is based, has shown that they are without worth. Were it not for such ignorant notions, it would be unnecessary to say that the Shakta Sadhaka does not believe that there is a Woman Suffragette or otherwise, in the sky, surrounded by the members of some celestial feminist association who rules the male members of the universe. As the Yamala says for the benefit of the ignorant “ neyam yoshit na cha pumadn na shando na jadah smritah.” That is God is neither female, male, hermaphrodite or unconscious thing. Nor is his doctrine concerned with the theories of the American Professor