Apart from this there were many Aryans who married the daughters of these rákśasas and asuras, entranced by their beauty and qualities (those who had a mixture of Mongolian and Dravidian blood had particularly beautiful features). Bhiima married Hid́imbá, a non-Aryan girl; Arjuna married Citráuṋgadá, also a non-Aryan girl. Rávańa, the leader of the rákśasas, had a father from an Aryan Brahman family – Maharśi Vishvashravá, the descendent of Pulasta Rśi – and a non-Aryan mother – Nikaśá, or Kaekasii. In other words, though the Aryans had been proud of their colour and features, that pride faded away within a short time. At that time and also later, even though a few Aryan-proud individuals attempted to defame these rákśasas and asuras, the general mass did not pay much attention to them.
On the one hand the Aryan-proud pandits of Bengal engaged in scurrilous and abusive attacks on the Mongolians and the original Bengalees –
Sarve máḿsaratáh múŕháh
Mleccháh gobrahma ghátakáh,
Kuvacakáh pare múŕhá ete kút́ayonayoh,
Teśaḿ paeshácikii bháśá lokácáro na vidyate.
–Padma Puráńa
[They are all excessive meat eaters. They are fools. Killers of cows and Brahmans, they speak foul and meaningless words. These are foolish people born out of bad women. Their language is gibberish. They don’t follow decent customs.]
– but on the other hand we observe the emergence of a new civilization in Bengal, out of the Austrico-Mongolo-Dravidian combination, at about 1000 BC.
This civilization, though similar to other civilizations in India, had its own customs and rites, language and mode of pronunciation, manners and behaviour, religious and social systems, rights of inheritance and disinheritance under the Dáyabhága code of law, and dress and food habits. Proud of its own speciality and uniqueness, it never agreed to be a part of the Áryávartta [northern India dominated by the Aryan culture]. In order to keep itself free from Aryan subjugation, Bengal rebelled again and again. The northern Indian orthodox Aryans, full of Aryan chauvinism (actually they too were Tantrics, but outwardly displayed an enamel coating of Aryanism), were reluctant to accept the highly Tantric areas such as Auṋga [Monghyr and its adjacent areas], Vauṋga [Bengal]),(8) Kaliuṋga [Orissa], Mithila and Magadha [Bihar] as parts of their Áryavartta. For them Káshii [Benares] served as the eastern border of the Áryavartta.
These orthodox, but internally Tantric, people could not avoid being influenced by the Tantric civilization of eastern India even in their external life. The predominance of the Bengali script of east India (Shrii Harśa Lipi) extended up to Prayága in the far west. Most Sanskrit books on Hindu and Buddhist Tantra were written in this Bengali script. After the Muslim invasion, the influence of east India upon north India began to wane gradually. At about that time some Nagar Brahmans from Vedic Gujarat went to northern India to propagate the Vedas and the Sanskrit language. They used Nágrii script for writing Sanskrit, and under the Brahmans’ influence the Nágrii script too gradually became popular in northern India. The use of Bengali script became confined to eastern India only. It is worth noting that many of the Nágar Brahmans of Gujarat were followers of Tantra, particularly Vaeśńava Tantra.
The greatest difference between the Aryans and the non-Aryans was in their outlook. The Aryans wanted to establish their dominance on the basis of their racial superiority, whereas the non-Aryans, following the precepts of Tantra, did not recognize any distinction among people. The identity of everyone was the same: all belonged to the same family, the family of Shiva. In the first stage of sádhaná, everyone is an animal. To merge in Brahmatva [Cosmic Consciousness], after first elevating themselves to devatva [god-hood], was their sádhaná. But in the first stage, while still rising above crude animality, their adorable Shiva was known as “Pashupati”, “Lord of Animality”.
Here it is necessary to remember that Tantra is not a religion, but a way of life, a system of sádhaná. The fundamental goal of this sádhaná is to awaken the dormant jiivashakti [unit force], known as kulakuńd́alinii, and, after elevating it stage by stage, to merge it in Brahmabháva [Cosmic Consciousness]. Tantra is a science of spiritual meditation or sádhaná which is equally applicable to anyone no matter what their religious affiliation might be. Tantra is certainly older than the Vedas. Just as the shlokas or mantras of the Vedas were handed down from guru to disciple in a genealogical tradition, the Tantra sádhaná of the Mongolo-Dravidian society was handed down from guru to disciple hereditarily. The Vedas are theoretical – full of ritualistic ceremonies and formalisms. It would be incorrect to regard Tantra as a more recent version of those Vedic rituals: Tantra’s esoteric practices had long been known in the society of sádhakas. Its theoretical portion was not as elaborate as that of the Vedas, which took years and years to memorize.
When the Aryans came to India, roughly during the period of the Atharvaveda, they learned Tantra sádhaná to some extent after coming in contact with the Indian Tantrics. This resulted in the Atharvaveda being pervasively influenced by Tantra. Even if the orthodox Vedics try to reject the many Tantra-influenced portions of the Vedas as later interpolations, they will not be too convincing, for Tantra has now infiltrated into the marrow of the so-called Aryans. Although during the post-Vedic Buddhist era as well as the post-Buddhist Brahmanical era changes in the religious outlook of the people were apparent, the process of sádhaná remained Tantric as it does even today, for without Tantra spiritual sádhaná is impossible. Yoga, which is the paramount factor in spiritual practices, is itself based on Tantra. The great Tantric Vashiśt́ha, when he returned from China after learning the Chinese techniques of sádhaná, brought about a great improvement in Tantra sádhaná. He was widely acclaimed as a great yogi. His book Yogaváshiśt́ha is a philosophical exposition of the subtle spirituality of Tantra sádhaná.
There are many who try to make a distinction between Hindu Tantra and Buddhist Tantra. This is absolutely wrong, for as I have said earlier, Tantra is one and only one. It is based on one sentiment, on one idea. The Buddhist and Hindu Tantras express the same thing in different words. For example, Hindu Tantras use the word kulakuńd́alinii for the dormant unit force and id́a, piuṋgalá and suśumná for the three psycho-spiritual channels. They state that the kulakuńd́alinii pierces through the six cakras – (1) múládhára [situated above the perineum], (2) svádhiśt́hána [in the region of the genital organ], (3) mańipura [in the region of the navel], (4) anáhata [in the region of the heart], (5) vishuddha [in the region of the vocal cord] and (6) ájiṋá [between the eyebrows], and finally unites with Paramashiva at the seventh cakra, the sahasrára cakra [at the crown of the head], giving the sádhakas, or intuitional practitioners, the bliss of Cosmic Consciousness. The Buddhist Tantras say the same thing in different words. They have named the mańipura cakra, nirmáńa cakra, the anáhata, dharma cakra, the vishuddha, sambhoga cakra, and the sahasrára, uśniiśa kamala or mahásukha cakra.
Some have named the múládhára, mańipadma. In both the Buddhist and Hindu Tantras, hummm is the acoustic root of the unit force, the kulakuńd́alinii, lying dormant in mańipadma. The so-called Buddhist Tantrics also say, Oṋḿ mańipadme hummm. To them id́á, piuṋgalá and suśumná are lalaná, rasaná and avadhútikárespectively. So where, in reality, is the ideological difference between the Hindu Tantras such as Mahánirváńa Tantra, Kulárńava Tantra, Ajiṋána-bodhinii Tantra, Jiṋána-saḿkalinii Tantra, Rudrayámala Tantra, Bhaerava-yámala Tantra, Niila Tantra, etc., and the Buddhist Tantras such as Hevajra Tantra, Vajra-váráhii Kalpamahá Tantra, Ekallaviira Cańd́arośańa Tantra, D́ákárnava Tantra, Advaya Siddhi Tantra, etc.? Kauṋkalamálinii Tantra cannot be called either a Hindu Tantra or a Buddhist Tantra with any clear certainty.
Even the popular assumption that the Hindus borrowed idolatry from the Buddhists is totally wrong. Although there was a conception of gods and goddesses among the Aryan Vedics, there was no custom of modelling images for worship. But in the lowest stratum of Tantra sádhaná (that is, the lowest of the low grade) idolatry was prescribed:
Uttamo Brahmasadbhávo
Madhyamá dhyána dháŕańá;
Japastúti syádhadhamá
Múrtipújá- dhamádhamá.
–Kulárńav- a Tantra
[Ideation on Brahma is the best, dhyána and dhárańá are second best, repetitious incantation and eulogistic prayer are the worst, and idol worship is the worst of the worst.]
The word uttama in the first line of the shloka is interchangeable with sahajávasthá. Sahajáavasthá, the “tranquil state” of the Buddhists, is no different from the ideation on Brahma of the Hindus.
According to their respective intellectual strata, the primitive non-Aryan Tantrics utilized all the practices, from the lowest-of-the-low image worship to the highest-of-the-high Brahma sádhaná. Thus idolatry is as much a part of Hindu Tantra as it is of Buddhist Tantra. Neither has borrowed it from the other.
I have just referred to the ideological unity of the Hindu and the Buddhist Tantras. So far as the goal is concerned, the ultimate object of both is to merge the unit force in the introversial force and the introversial force in Parama Puruśa. In various places in the Hindu Tantras, Parama Puruśa has been called Paramashiva, Puruśottama and Krśńa, and Paramá Prakrti has been called Kálii, Rádhá, etc. In the Buddhist Tantras Parama Puruśa or Bhagaván Sarveshvara has been called Shriiman Mahásukha, Vajrasatva, Vajradhara, Vajreshvara, Heruka or Hevajra – or in places Cańd́arośańa – and the Maháshakti of Mahákaola has sometimes been called Bhagavatii Sarveshvarii, sometimes Vajraváráhii, sometimes Vajradhátviishvarii, sometimes Prajiṋá Páramitá, and sometimes, in sandhyá bháśá,(9) D́ombii, Cańd́álii, etc.
In both the Hindu and Buddhist Tantras, men and women are permitted to do sádhaná together. In the Hindu Tantras, males are advised to ideate that they are Bhaerava, and sádhikás [female spiritual aspirants] to ideate that they are Bhaeravii. Buddhist Tantras prescribe the same thing. There the sádhaka is Vajradhara and the sádhiká is Vajrayośita.
Naráh Vajradharákáráh śośitah Vajrayośitah.
–Ekallaviira Cańd́arośańa Tantra
[The male aspirants are called Vajradhara, and the female aspirants Vajrayośita.]
Actually Tantra is one. Therefore it is as much a mistake to distinguish between the Hindu and the Buddhist Tantras as it is to grope in vain for any differences in the inner import or final goals of the Hindu Tantras such as Shaeva Tantra, Shákta Tantra, Saora Tantra, Gáńapatya Tantra, Vaeśńaviiya Tantra (Rádhá Tantra), etc.
The similarity between the gods and goddesses of the Hindu Tantras and those of the Buddhist Tantras is also particularly noteworthy. Each Tantra has either absorbed or discarded the other’s gods and goddesses according to its own convenience. Tárá is one of the famous deities of the Buddhist Tantras. The worships of Bhrámarii Tárá in China, Ugratárá or Vajratárá in Mongolia, and Niila Sarasvatii Tárá or Ekajátá Devii in Tibet, date from very ancient times. Tibet’s Niila Sarasvatii Tárá has been absorbed in Hindu Tantra as the second Mahávidyá of the Ten Mahávidyás, and today those Hindus who worship idols do not regard Tárá as a non-Hindu deity.
Káliká Devii, the first Mahávidyá of the so-called Hindu Tantras, has been accepted by Buddhist Tantra. Clad in betel leaves (parńa means “betel leaves” or “turmeric leaves”), Parńa Shavarii Devii of the Buddhist Tantra is one of the names of the goddess Durgá of Hindu Tantra. Prajiṋá Páramitá, the Buddhist deity, continues to be worshipped in post-Buddhist India as Sarasvatii. The bull-mounted Sarasvatii of the Vedas has not even a hint of similarity with the swan-mounted Sarasvatii, either in appearance or in nature.(10)
There are some goddesses whose sources – Buddhist or Hindu – are impossible to determine. That is to say, they are deities common to both schools of Tantra, such as Váráhii, Kaoveŕii, Bhiimá, Kapálinii, Chinnamastá, etc. Goddesses of the Hindu Tantras such as D́ákinii, Rákinii, Lákinii, Kákinii, Shákinii, Hákinii, etc., have been accepted by the Buddhist Tantras.
The savikalpa samádhi [trance of determinate absorption – or vacuity] of the Hindu Tantras is the prabhásvara shúnyatá [luminous vacuity] of the Buddhists. The Hindus’ nirvikalpa [trance of objectless or indeterminate absorption – or vacuity] is the Buddhists’ vajra shúnyatá [complete vacuity]. And the goddess of vajra shúnyatá, of the unmanifest Prakrti, is Vajraváráhii, D́ombii, Naerátma Devii or Naerámańi in the language of the Buddhists. The different stages of savikalpa samádhi related to the upward movement of the kulakuńd́alinii are called sálokya [within the same loka], sámiipya [closest proximity], sárupya [identity], sarśt́hi [the stage between savikalpa and nirvikalpa], etc., in the Hindu Tantras; and in the Buddhist Tantras, viśáyánanda [objective bliss] in the nirmáńa cakra, paramánanda [supreme bliss] in the dharma cakra, virámánanda [intermittent bliss] in the sambhoga cakra and sahajánanda [absolute bliss] in the mahásukha cakra. In this mahásukha cakra, Naerátma Devii is Bhagavatii Prajiṋá Sarveshvarii, an embodiment of sahajánanda [bliss]. This sahajánanda is the Brahmánanda [absolute bliss] of the Hindu Tantras.
COMMENT