Hans Koester: "Lastly, within the highly developed organism of man She, for the first time, is inherent in her essential being."

The eternal, ageless Divine Feminine "Where they intersect, there is Shakti, so to speak, in Herself. But Her influence, Her being spreads into the whole realm of matter as well as that of mind. Nowhere is She absent, but Her presence is less distinct, is somehow veiled in those parts, which are further from the centre, where She is in Herself. Thus, for the sake of linear explanation, the mineral world—the solid matter—would have to be situated the furthest from Her, because there, as for instance in stone, she—Life Herself vis, much veiled, stone to the ordinary human view appearing to be dead. Nearer to Her is the realm of plants, where, with their growing and blossoming, She already becomes more apparent. I need hardly remind you of the well-known researches by Sir Jagadish Bhose of the University of Calcutta, who is endeavouring to make visible the actual heartbeat of plant life. Then, in due order with regard to Her would come the world of animals, which being animated have within their life although perhaps still unconsciously—some access to Her. Lastly, within the highly developed organism of man She, for the first time, is inherent in her essential being. There She finds the possibility of being consciously awakened, so that she appears to him, who is looking and striving for her, in Her true nature as Shakti herself."

The Great Adi Shakti Shri Mataji Nirmala Devi

Shri Mataji

Dear devotees of the Great Mother,

Namaste - i bow to the Shakti who resides in you!

The universe began as an explosion from an infinite density and temperature; expanding, thinning and cooling since. It was an extra- extraordinary explosion. Unlike normal blasts, where debris fly into the surrounding nonmoving space, this was totally different. In fact it's conception staggers the imagination: there was no surrounding space for it to move into as all the universe was compressed into the subatomic sized origin — all existing space being part of it. Nothing existed before the Big Bang!

The universe was only about 0.000,000,001 seconds old when its material temperature was 100,000,000,000,000 degrees. Most of the properties of this universe was determined during this period and earlier still. Any attempt to go back into time would entail speculation. However, if the grand unified theories are correct then their most fascinating effects would have taken place when the universe was .000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 seconds old!

The essence of the inflationary universe model is that, immediately after the big bang, the newly born universe underwent a very brief and extremely rapid expansion, before slowing down to the pace of the standard big bang model. By the time the universe was about .000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 seconds old, expansion was over. Within this extremely short period it had already expanded and stretched from an infinitesimal small pinpoint to a size much larger than today's observable universe.

To illuminate this fact we will assume that the expansion began when the universe was exactly .000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000, 000,001 seconds old, and ended when it was only .000,000,000, 000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,001 seconds old. At the beginning of expansion the largest area was about .000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,01 centimeters, a size far smaller than the nucleus of an atom. Within that nano-second it had expanded to something like 1,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000, 0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,000 0000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,000000 0000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,000000000 0,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,000000000,00 0000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,000000 0000,0000000000,0000000000 light years!

And one light year covers about 6,000,000,000,000 miles! And this is just a fraction of the area that the most advanced telescopes can detect from ancient light still coming from the initial Big Bang. The universe is infinitely larger than is visible. In fact humans will never know the actual size of the universe as it is still expanding 15,000,000,000,000 years later!

The Planck density, a measure of weight, is about 10000000000, 0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000,0000000000, 0000000000 kilos per cubic centimeter. Our universe had this enormous density when it was precisely .0000000000,0000000000, 0000000000,0000000 000,0001 seconds old! It should be noted that the maximum size of the universe at this time was .000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,01 centimeters. This tiny fraction of an atom was already weighing billions of trillions of quadrillions of quintillions of tons! It takes a while for the sheer enormousness of this astounding Truth to sink in. It defies logic and eludes comprehension. The more the mind ponders the less it comprehends. The brilliant scientists, whom the civilized world cherished for their hair-splitting, or we could say, atom-splitting accuracy, have hit a colossal cosmic Reality. They have now to prove how did the pinpoint produce a universe that is now found to be vastly larger. The ubiquitous questions of this century: How, why and what was that primeval atom that formed an entire universe within a split second? The question of the next millennium: "Who made this awesome atom?"

The more the human mind visualizes this brain-boggling nature and awesome grandeur of creation the more humble it will become. There will never be any scientific explanation to the origin of the universe and if there is going to any at all, it will be preposterous, to say the least. Science's finest atheist minds are already beginning to whisper ever so softly that there is something else — the Almighty Creator!

Others are beginning to believe that humanity's quest for Truth through science is over. John Horgan, a 43-year-old senior writer with Scientific American magazine is one of them. His book The End of Science caused a commotion among scientists for its essence that "pure science, the quest for knowledge about what we are and where we came from, has already entered an area of diminishing returns."

For those who have depended on science to disprove the myths of the scriptures it is time to turn back at these very early stages of admission that science cannot enlighten anymore. It has reached its natural limits. Now only the Spirit can take Homo sapiens beyond — far, far beyond — the limitations of their minds. And it has begun to do so!

Humans have done enormous damage to Nature in this blind pursuit of materialism. Science bears a disappropriately larger responsibility in trying to establish the superiority and dominance of humans over all Nature, and placed a premium on mastering matter. This scientific search began when Copernicus peered through his telescope and found that the Earth was not the center of the universe, in stark contrast to the holy, perfect symmetry that the Church had, in its ignorance, infallibly asserted. Ever since then there has been a relentless rape of the divine origin of creation and Western civilization has been wandering in the maze of mathematics and matter.

The cold, calculating core of science (not scientists) lacks the human qualities of love, compassion, tenderness, and emotion. Science is all mental, mathematical, material, logic and tangibility. Science cannot detect Spirit, vibrations, chakras, consciousness, thoughtless awareness, the Kingdom of God. All the laws of matter, physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics are devoid of divinity and lead humankind further and further from the Absolute Truth. For decades they have stripped away the masks of this mysterious universe, expecting to find the mathematical mantra that would have etched their names in atheist eternity. Instead they have hit a colossal celestial Truth. Some of the greatest scientific minds on Earth are now beginning to hint that the answer to the origin of the universe will never ever be found or proven by their grandest theories. They are also admitting that there has to be a Creator!

The search for the origin of the universe has ended for science: the Truth lies elsewhere. As more and more theories flounder and crash in their quest to prove an atheist origin, the Ultimate Truth of the Almighty Creator will slowly but surely be recognized by His atheist adversaries. Even Stephen Hawkings, probably the most eminent theoretical physicist in the world today, while recalling his childhood fantasy on why the universe came into being, could only say, "But I still do not understand why." As long as he denies that he lives in His creation there will be no answer.

Humans have probed and peered far enough into the universe. For millennia they have projected all their senses outwards and yet found no answer to the fundamental mysteries of life. Isn't it time to separate scientific facts from spiritual Reality, and try a new approach by seeking from within? Simple logic and the law of averages point to that direction.

regards to all,

jagbir

Goldilocks and the riddle of the prfect universe
The Sunday Times October 08, 2006

Why is the cosmos ideally set up to support life? Physicist Paul Davies tells Stuart Wavell about the point where science meets religion.

Why is the universe, like the porridge in the tale of Goldilocks and the three bears, "just right" for life? Even cosmologists have said it looks like a fix or a put-up job. Is it a fluke or providence that it appears set up expressly for the purpose of spawning sentient beings?

Until recently the Goldilocks question was almost completely ignored by scientists. But dramatic developments in our understanding are propelling the issue to the forefront of the agenda, according to the acclaimed British physicist and bestselling author Paul Davies. To stoke the fire, he is to chair a debate between advocates of alternative theories at Oxford on Friday.

Anyone expecting Davies to recant his non-religious views and join the intelligent design lobby will be disappointed. "We can't dump all this in the lap of an arbitrary god and say we can't inquire any further," he says. "The universe looks ingenious, it looks like a fix, and words like meaning and purpose come to mind. But it doesn't mean that we're going to have a miracle-working cosmic magician meddling with events."

What concerns him in his new book The Goldilocks Enigma is science and the universe's stringent conditions for existence, so finely tuned that even the slightest twiddle of the dials would wreck any hope of life emerging in the universe. "No scientific explanation of the universe can be deemed complete unless it accounts for this appearance of judicious design," he says.

Beyond the obvious prerequisites such as water, the sun's energy and the various chemical elements (oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc) needed to make biomass, there's the tricky stuff. If protons were a tiny bit heavier they would decay into neutrons, and atoms would disintegrate. No carbon would have been formed by nuclear reactions inside stars if the nuclear force varied by more than a scintilla.

This is where the acrimony starts. Some cosmologists claim the bio- friendliness of the universe is explained by a multitude of universes, known as the "multiverse". Lord Rees, a leading proponent and president of the Royal Society, believes the laws of physics are merely local bylaws that hold good for our universe but will be different among our neighbours.

Such speculation has infuriated some particle physicists, particularly adherents of string theory, who aspire to a final theory that will unify all physical laws and tie up the loose ends.

Their scorn for the multiverse theory is echoed by Frank Close, professor of theoretical physics at Oxford and a participant in Friday's debate, although he is no string theorist: "It's a cop-out. To my mind it's no different from the idea that God did it. If we cannot do any scientific experiments to prove what one of these other universes would be like, it's beyond science. It's just giving up."

Then there's the viewpoint of Richard Dawkins, the ardent Darwinist and recent author of The God Delusion, who holds that life is essentially pointless and came about by chance before natural selection took over. Close compares Dawkins to religious fundamentalists, "who know they are right in their position, just as Richard knows he is right in his position".

Davies wants to rise above such bickering. "I want to get away from this notion that something has to be accepted on faith," he says. "That just becomes a sterile argument. These people can argue all night, but you're never going to prove or disprove the other person's position."

He is fascinated by an alternative answer to the Goldilocks question. "Somehow," he writes, "the universe has engineered, not just its own awareness, but its own comprehension. Mindless, blundering atoms have conspired to make, not just life, not just mind, but understanding. The evolving cosmos has spawned beings who are able not merely to watch the show, but to unravel the plot."

What exactly is Davies saying? His starting point is the "highly significant" fact that the universe supports people who understand its laws. "I wanted to get away from the feeling in so many scientific quarters that life and human beings are a completely irrelevant embellishment, a side issue of no significance. I don't think we're the centre of the universe or the pinnacle of creation, but the fact that human beings have the ability to understand how the world is put together is something that cries out for explanation."

Davies's big idea goes back to the Big Bang. According to the standard picture, the laws of physics were already in place at the explosive origin of the universe. But he contends that perhaps the universe and its laws emerged together in malleable form: "We would expect that these laws were not infinitely precise mathematical statements, but they would have a certain sloppiness or ambiguity that could lead to observable effects from the earliest universe, when these laws were still congealing."

So how did compatible life and mind come into being? Davies's explanation, involving quantum mechanics and something called backwards causation, is impossible to compress without sounding "ludicrous", he confesses. He's right: it's impenetrable.

But this scenario requires an act of faith as great as that of any religious believer. So hasn't he sidestepped the God question? Science can meet religion on middle ground, he says, but a superbeing who intervenes in events is anathema to most scientists. "You have to understand that science deals with hypotheses that can be tested, and religion proceeds from acts of faith that can't be tested."

Davies has just left an academic job in Australia to delve further into the origins of things at the provisionally named Blue Sky think tank in Phoenix, Arizona. One of his first projects is to investigate the possibility that life emerged not just once on Earth, but thousands of times. The accepted wisdom is that all the planet's life derives from a common ancestor, ranged on the tree of life.

"The question is whether there's just one tree in the forest. If life is easy to get going, we might expect many trees of life but maybe only one tree survived. But maybe there are members of other trees under our noses, but we don't appreciate what they are." He conjectures a fertile phase starting four billion years ago when ferocious cataclysms caused by comets and asteroids repeatedly zapped emerging life on Earth before the present "tree" took root 3.5 billion years ago.

In writing his book, Davies was struck by how "ridiculous" all the theories and options seemed. Perhaps, he muses, we have evolved to think about the world in a certain way and we are posing the wrong questions. "I wonder if we're just stuck in certain patterns of thought and we're doomed to forever have these discussions and arguments. Perhaps the real answers lie utterly beyond our ken."

The Goldilocks Enigma: Why is the Universe Just Right for Life? by Paul Davies is published by Allen Lane, £22. A debate, Confronting the Goldilocks Enigma, will be held at the Oxford Playhouse at 5pm on Friday (www.oxfordplayhouse.com)

David R. Kinsley, Hindu goddesses: visions of the divine feminine in the Hindu religious tradition

The Mahadevi
Central Theological and Philosophical Characteristics

An underlying theological assumption in texts celebrating the Mahadevi is that the ultimate reality in the universe is a powerful, creative, active, transcendent female being. The Lalita-sahasranama gives many names of the Mahadevi, and several of her epithets express this assumption. She is called, for example, the root of the world (Jagatikanda, name 325), she who transcends the universe (Visvadhika, 334), she who has no equal (Nirupama, 389), supreme ruler (Paramesvari, 396), she who pervades all (Vyapini, 400), she who is immeasurable (Aprameya, 413), she who creates innumerable universes (Anekakotibrahmandajanani, 620), she whose womb contains the universe (Visvagarbha, 637), she who is the support of all (Sarvadhara, 659), she who is omnipresent (Sarvaga, 702), she who is the ruler of all worlds (Sarvalokesi, 758), and she who supports the universe (Visvadharini, 759). In the Devi-bhagavata-purana, which also assumes the ultimate priority of the Mahadevi, she is said to be the mother of all, to pervade the three worlds, to be the support of all (1.5.47-50), to be the life force of all beings, to be the ruler of all beings (1.5.51-54), to be the only cause of the universe (1.7.27), to create Brahma, Visnu, and Siva and to command them to perform their cosmic tasks (3.5.4.), to be the root of the tree of the universe (3.10.15), and to be she who is supreme knowledge (4.15.12). The text describes her by many other names and phrases as it exalts her to a position of cosmic supremacy.

One of the central philosophic ideas underlying the Mahadevi, an idea that in many ways captures her essential nature, is sakti. Sakti means "power"; in Hindu philosophy and theology sakti is understood to be the active dimension of the godhead, the divine power that underlies the godhead's ability to create the world and to display itself. Within the totality of the godhead, sakti is the complementary pole of the divine tendency towards quiescence and stillness. It is quite common, furthermore, to identify sakti with a female being, a goddess, and to identify the other pole with her male consort. The two poles are understood to be interdependent and to have relatively equal status in terms of divine economy.

Texts of contexts exalting the Mahadevi, however, usually affirm sakti to be a power, or the power, underlying ultimate reality, or to be the ultimate reality itself. Instead of being understood as one or two poles or as one dimension of a bipolar conception of the divine, sakti as it applies to the Mahadevi is often identified with the essence of reality. If the Mahadevi as sakti is related to another dimension of the divine in the form of a male deity, he will tend to play a subservient role in relation to her. In focussing on the centrality of sakti as constituting the essence of the divine, texts usually describe the Mahadevi as a powerful, active, dynamic being who creates, pervades, governs, and protects the universe. As sakti, she is not aloof from the world but attentive to the cosmic rhythms and the needs of her devotees.

In a similar vein the Mahadevi is often identified with prakrti and maya. Indeed, two of her most common epithets are Mulaprakrti (she who is primordial matter) and Mahamaya (she who is great maya)... In the quest for liberation prakrti represents that from which one seeks freedom. Similarly, most schools of Hindu philosophy identify maya with that which prevents one from seeing things as they really are. Maya is the process of superimposition by which one projects one's own ignorance on the world and thus obscures ultimate truth. To wake up to the truth of things necessarily involves counteracting or overcoming maya, which is grounded in ignorance and self-infatuation. Liberation in Hindu philosophy means to a great extent the transcendence of embodied, finite, phenomenal existence. And maya is often equated precisely with finite, phenomenal existence. To be in the phenomenal world, to be an individual creature, is to live enveloped in maya.

When the Mahadevi is associated with prakrti or maya, certain negative overtones sometimes persist. As prakrti or maya she is sometimes referred to as the great power that preoccupies individuals with phenomenal existence or as the cosmic force that impels even the gods to unconsciousness and sleep. But the overall result of the Mahadevi's identification with prakrti and maya is to infuse both ideas with positive dimensions. As prakrti or maya, the Devi is identified with existence itself, or with that which underlies all existent things. The emphasis is not on the binding aspects of matter or the created world but on the Devi as the ground of all things. Because it is she who pervades the material world as prakrti or maya, the phenomenal world tends to take on positive qualities. Or perhaps we could say that a positive attitude toward the world, which is evident in much of popular Hinduism, is affirmed when the Devi is identified with prakrti and maya. The central theological point here is that the Mahadevi is the world, she is all this creation, she is one with her creatures and her creation. Although a person's spiritual destiny ultimately may involve transcendence of the creation, the Devi's identification with existence per se is clearly intended to be a positive philosophical assertion. She is life, and to the extent that life is cherished and revered, she is cherished and revered.

As sakti, prakrti, and maya, the Devi is portrayed as an overwhelming presence that overflows itself, spilling forth into the creation, suffusing the world with vitality, energy, and power. When the Devi is identified with these well-known philosophical ideas, then, a positive point is being made: the Devi creates the world, she is the world. and she enlivens the world with creative power. As sakti, prakrti, and maya, she is not understood so much as binding creatures to finite existence as being the very source and vitality of creatures. She is the source of creatures—their mother—and as such her awesome, vital power is revered.

The idea of brahman is another central idea with which the Devi is associated. Ever since the time of the Upanishads, brahman has been the most commonly accepted term or designation for the ultimate reality in Hinduism. In the Upanishads, and throughout the Hindu tradition, brahman is described in two ways: as nirguna (having no qualities or beyond all qualities) and saguna (having qualities). As nirguna, which is usually affirmed to be the superior way of thinking about brahman, ultimate reality transcends all qualities, categories, and limitations. As nirguna, brahman transcends all attempts to circumscribe it. It is beyond all name and form (nama-rupa). As the ground of all things, as the fundamental principle of existence, however, brahman is also spoken of as having qualities, indeed, as manifesting itself in a multiplicity of deities, universes, and beings. As saguna, brahman reveals itself especially as the various deities of the Hindu pantheon. The main philosophical point asserted in the idea of saguna brahman is that underlying all the different gods is a unifying essence, namely, brahman. Each individual deity is understood to be a partial manifestation of brahman, which ultimately is beyond all specifying attributes, functions, and qualities.

The idea of brahman serves well the attempts in many texts devoted to the Devi to affirm her superior position in the Hindu pantheon. The idea of brahman makes two central philosophical points congenial to the theology of the Mahadevi: (1) she is ultimate reality itself, and (2) she is the source of all divine manifestations, male and female (but especially female). As saguna brahman, the Devi is portrayed as a great cosmic queen enthroned in the highest heaven, with a multitude of deities as the agents through which she governs the infinite universes. In her ultimate essence, however, some texts, despite their clear preference for the Devi's feminine characteristics, assert in traditional fashion that she is beyond all qualities, beyond male and female."

David R. Kinsley, Hindu goddesses: visions of the divine feminine in the Hindu religious tradition
University of California Press; 1 edition (July 19, 1988) , Pages 133-37
ISBN-10: 0520063392
ISBN-13: 978-0520063396

The whole Universe of mind and matter is created by Her, the Powerful Goddess Shakti

"The follower of Sakthism, the worshipper of Shakti, is called Shakta. His conception of the Goddess is described in the Shakti Tantra Shastras, i.e., the holy scriptures of Sakthism, often in a very poetical way. Whereas we speak of Mother Nature only in a comparative manner, for the Shakta it is absolute reality. Nature is Her body. Her presence is personally felt by him, when he is standing on the fertile ground of the earth; he touches Her life in the blossoms of the pure lotus-flower. She animates all living creatures. His own body is a part of Her great body. Worshipping Her in all Her different forms, he will find Her light, too, within his mind and consciousness. Thus, to the Shakta the whole universe of mind and matter reveals itself in its unity; he see before him Her great body which he adores; Her sacred feet, Her heart, Her mind.

It might be useful to describe this poetical view, which is at once physical and transcendental, by means of another diagram. We may for this purpose represent matter and mind by two circles , which intersect each other.

Where they intersect, there is Shakti, so to speak, in Herself. But Her influence, Her being spreads into the whole realm of matter as well as that of mind. Nowhere is She absent, but Her presence is less distinct, is somehow veiled in those parts, which are further from the centre, where She is in Herself. Thus, for the sake of linear explanation, the mineral world—the solid matter—would have to be situated the furthest from Her, because there, as for instance in stone, she—Life Herself vis, much veiled, stone to the ordinary human view appearing to be dead. Nearer to Her is the realm of plants, where, with their growing and blossoming, She already becomes more apparent. I need hardly remind you of the well-known researches by Sir Jagadish Bhose of the University of Calcutta, who is endeavouring to make visible the actual heartbeat of plant life. Then, in due order with regard to Her would come the world of animals, which being animated have within their life although perhaps still unconsciously—some access to Her. Lastly, within the highly developed organism of man She, for the first time, is inherent in her essential being. There She finds the possibility of being consciously awakened, so that she appears to him, who is looking and striving for her, in Her true nature as Shakti herself. The other side—the mind circle—comprises the mental faculties of man such as consciousness, will, feeling and logical perception, which, with regard to their aptitude for Her realisation, may be put in such order. The directions of development therefore go in the matter-circle from left to right— from stone, vegetable, animal to man, where Shakti will be realised; in the mind-circle, from right to left—from mere logical thinking to feeling, will-power, consciousness to man— where Shakti may be realised. Thus, as you can see from this diagram, everywhere there is Shakti. She is inherent in everything and at the same time transcends every thing; by meditation and religious ceremonies She may be realized everywhere, being inherent in the whole physical universe as it is given to us. And, moreover, above this we may touch Her in Her transcendental aspect as well. When She appears in Her true nature, then there is no more mind or matter, but only She Herself, in no sense bounded by such limitations. As such a one She may well be represented by a circle, the universe in its true aspect.

To the European it may perhaps at first sight appear to be a mere poetical presentment and but little different from the theory of vitalism of modern natural science or from ancient animism in the religious aspect. But with regard to Vitalism, even if there be similarities the essential difference seems to me, that the Vitalism of the natural sciences is based principally upon the conception of a material world which is regarded as being animated by, for instance, the "lan vitale" of Bergson. But Sakthism holds its standpoint entirely on the spiritual side. She, the great mother, exists, and what in the material world is vitalised or animated, certainly comes from Her, but is only a veiled appearance of Her, who in Her true being can be experienced spiritually. And Sakthism is also not animism, if by animism may be understood the primitive idea of everything being ghost-like, being animated by "Phi" or spirits, resulting in as many ghostly spirits as there are different things. Sakthism represents a spiritual unity, all different things being united within Her always-greater aspect.

The principal doctrine of "Sakthism", that the whole Universe of mind and matter is created by Her, the Powerful Goddess Shakti, is described in full detail, with Indian accuracy in spiritual matters, in the Cosmogony of Sakthism. It must be understood that every great Indian philosophical system has its own Cosmo-Genesis, that is, its special conception of the evolution of the world and its beginning. As a matter of fact, every conception of life and the Universe requires such a foundation to give it the necessary firm hold. For Sakthism this source, out of which the Universe as mind and matter has evolved, is the female spiritual Power, Shakti, who is the Great Mother of the Universe. In Her most concentrated form, when Her Power is just ready to expand, She is represented by a point called Bindu. This Bindu Point is mere Spirit. Everything manifested and created in this Universe has Spirit. Everything manifested and created in this Universe has Spirit as its source and essence. In the Christian Cosmo-Genesis of the Gospel of St. John it is called "logos" or "the word". By expansion the Spiritual Power Shakti becomes, going through many different stages, Mind, Life, and Matter. She—the Goddess—is contained, in all the manifestations of the universe, but She remains, so to speak, unexhausted by being the material cause of the Universe. She in Her essence remains unaffected and greater than all the created world.

In a diagrammatic way this cosmogenetic evolution can be represented like this. The active, most concentrated Point Bindu is red, the colour of activity. From this point the lines of evolution expand through the stages of mind and life towards matter, the mineral world. So the material world stands not first but last in the evolution of the Universe.

According to the general doctrine of Indian metaphysics, this whole created universe is not everlasting but will one day be dissolved. The life or appearance of the universe lasts, as it is figuratively expressed, one day of Brahma, the Almighty, that is, millions and millions of years. After that the whole expansion contracts again in the opposite direction; first, matter will be dissolved, then life and mind will disappear till it reaches the state of the beginning, the spiritual Point, Bindu, where it will find its rest; until the dawn of a new day of Brahma, when a new creation will start. This Bindu Point is the great Goddess, the universal mother—womb—yoni—the creator and receiver of the Universe, which, as Shakti, is worshipped by the followers of Sakthism.

The Indian Religion of the Goddess Shakti
Dr. Hans Koester
THE JOURNAL OF THE SIAM SOCIETY
Vol.23, part 1
1929 July

NOTE: If this page was accessed during a web search you may wish to browse the sites listed below where this topic or related issues are discussed in detail to promote global peace, religious harmony, and spiritual development of humanity:

www.adishakti.org/
www.al-qiyamah.org/
www.adi-shakti.org/  — Divine Feminine (Hinduism)
www.holyspirit-shekinah.org/  — Divine Feminine (Christianity)
www.ruach-elohim.org/  — Divine Feminine (Judaism)
www.ruh-allah.org/  — Divine Feminine (Islam)
www.tao-mother.org/  — Divine Feminine (Taoism)
www.prajnaaparamita.org/  — Divine Feminine (Buddhism)
www.aykaa-mayee.org/  — Divine Feminine (Sikhism)
www.great-spirit-mother.org/  — Divine Feminine (Native Traditions)

"Now, the principle of Mother is in every, every scripture - has to be there." Shri Mataji, Radio Interview 1983 Oct 01, Santa Cruz, USA