Cit-Shakti (The Consciousness Aspect of the Universe)
Cit-Shakti (The Consciousness Aspect of the Universe)
SHAKTI AND SHAKTA
by Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe), [1918]
Cit-Shakti is Cit, as Shakti, that is as Power, or that aspect of
Cit in which it is, through its associated Maya-Shakti, operative to
create the universe. It is a commonly accepted doctrine that the
ultimate Reality is Samvid, Caitanya or Cit.
But what is Cit? There is no word in the English language which
adequately describes it. It is not mind: for mind is a limited
instrument through which Cit is manifested. It is that which is
behind the mind and by which the mind itself is thought, that is
created. The Brahman is mindless (Amanah). If we exclude mind we
also exclude all forms of mental process, conception, perception,
thought, reason, will, memory, particular sensation and the like. We
are then left with three available words, namely, Consciousness,
Feeling, Experience. To the first term there are several objections.
For if we use an English word, we must understand it according to
its generally received meaning. Generally by"Consciousness"Is
meant self-consciousness, or at least something particular, having
direction and form, which is concrete and conditioned; an evolved
product marking the higher stages of Evolution. According to some,
it is a mere function of experience, an epiphenomenon, a mere
accident of mental process. In this sense it belongs only to the
highly developed organism and involves a subject attending to an
object of which, as of itself, it is conscious. We are thus said to
have most consciousness when we are awake (Jagrat avastha) and have
full experience of all objects presented to us; less so when
dreaming (Svapna avastha) and deep anesthesia in true dreamless
sleep (Sushupti). I may here observe that recent researches show
that this last state is not so common as is generally supposed. That
is complete dreamlessness is rare; there being generally some trace
of dream. In the last state it is commonly said that consciousness
has disappeared, and so of course it has, if we first define
consciousness in terms of the waking state and of knowledge of
objects. According to Indian notions there is a form of conscious
experience in the deepest sleep expressed in the well-known
phrase"Happily I slept, I knew nothing.” The sleeper recollects on
waking that his state has been one of happiness. And he cannot
recollect unless there has been a previous experience (Anubhava)
which is the subject-matter of memory. In ordinary parlance we do
not regard some low animal forms, plants or mineral as"conscious.”
It is true that now in the West there is (due to the spread of ideas
long current in India) growing up a wider use of the
term"consciousness"In connection not only with animal but
vegetable and mineral life, but it cannot be said the
term"consciousness"has yet generally acquired this wide
signification. If then we use (as for convenience we do) the
term"Consciousness"for Cit, we must give it a content different
from that which is attributed to the term in ordinary English
parlance. Nextly, it is to be remembered that what in either view we
understand by consciousness is something manifested, and therefore
limited, and derived from our finite experience. The Brahman as Cit
is the infinite substratum of that. Cit in itself (Svarupa) is not
particular nor conditioned and concrete. Particularity is that
aspect in which it manifests as, and through, Maya-Shakti. Cit
manifests as J—ana-Shakti which, when used otherwise than as a loose
synonym for Cit, means knowledge of objects. Cit-Svarupa is neither
knowledge of objects nor self-consciousness in the phenomenal sense.
Waking, dreaming and dreamless slumber are all phenomenal states in
which experience varies; such variance being due not to Cit but to
the operation or cessation of particular operation of the vehicles
of mind (Antahkarana) and sense (Indriya). But Cit never disappears
nor varies in either of the three states, but remains one and the
same through all. Though Cit-Svarupa is not a knowledge of objects
in the phenomenal sense, it is not, according to Shaiva-Shakta views
(I refer always to Advaita Shaiva-darshana), a mere abstract knowing
(J—ana) wholly devoid of content. It contains within itself the
Vimarsha-Shakti which is the cause of phenomenal objects, then
existing in the form of Cit (Cidrupini). The Self then knows the
Self. Still less can we speak of mere 'wareness"As the equivalent
of Cit. A worm or meaner form of animal may be said to be vaguely
aware. In fact mere"Awareness" (as we understand that term) is a
state of Cit in which it is seemingly overwhelmed by obscuring Maya-
Shakti in the form of Tamoguna. Unless therefore we give
to"Awareness," as also to consciousness, a content, other than that
with which our experience furnishes us, both terms are unsuitable.
In some respects Cit can be more closely described by Feeling, which
seems to have been the most ancient meaning of the term Cit. Feeling
is more primary, in that it is only after we have been first
affected by something that we become conscious of it. Feeling has
thus been said to be the raw material of thought, the essential
element in the Self, what we call personality being a particular
form of feeling. Thus in Samkhya, the Gunas are said to be in the
nature of happiness (Sukha), sorrow (Dukha) and illusion (Moha) as
they are experienced by the Purusha-Consciousness. And in Vedanta,
Cit and Ananda or Bliss or Love are one. For Consciousness then is
not consciousness of being (Sat) but Being-Consciousness (Sat-Cit);
nor a Being which is conscious of Bliss (Ananda) but Being-
Consciousness-Bliss (Sacchidananda). Further," feeling"has this
advantage that it is associated with all forms of organic existence
even according to popular usage, and may scientifically be aptly
applied to inorganic matter. Thus whilst most consider it to be an
unusual and strained use of language, to speak of the consciousness
of a plant or stone, we can and do speak of the feeling or sentiency
of a plant. Further the response which inorganic matter makes to
stimuli is evidence of the existence therein of that vital germ of
life and sentiency (and therefore Cit) which expands into the
sentiency of plants, and the feelings and emotions of animals and
men. It is possible for any form of unintelligent being to feel,
however obscurely. And it must do so, if its ultimate basis is Cit
and Ananda, however veiled by Maya-Shakti these may be. The response
which inorganic matter makes to stimuli is the manifestation of Cit
through the Sattvaguna of Maya-Shakti, or Shakti in its form as
Prakriti-Shakti. The manifestation is slight and apparently
mechanical because of the extreme predominance of the Tamoguna in
the same Prakriti-Shakti. Because of the limited and extremely
regulated character of the movement which seems to exclude all
volitional process as known to us, it is currently assumed that we
have merely to deal with what is an unconscious mechanical energy.
Because vitality is so circumscribed and seemingly identified with
the apparent mechanical process, we are apt to assume mere
unconscious mechanism. But as a fact this latter is but the form
assumed by the conscious Vital Power which is in and works in all
matter whatever it be. To the eye, however, unassisted by scientific
instruments, which extend our capacity for experience, establishing
artificial organs for the gaining thereof, the matter appears Jada
(or unconscious); and both in common English and Indian parlance we
call that alone living or Jiva which, as organized matter, is
endowed with body and senses. Philosophically, however, as well as
scientifically, all is Jivatma which is not Paramatma: everything in
fact with form, whether the form exists as the simple molecule of
matter, or as the combination of these simple forms into cells and
greater organisms. The response of metallic matter is a form of
sentiency—its germinal form—a manifestation of Cit intensely
obscured by the Tamoguna of Prakriti-Shakti.
In plants Cit is less obscured, and there is the sentient life which
gradually expands in animals and men, according as Cit gains freedom
of manifestation through the increased operation of Sattvaguna in
the vehicles of Cit; which vehicles are the mind and senses and the
more elaborate organization of the bodily particles. What is thus
mere incipient or germinal sentiency, simulating unconscious
mechanical movement in inorganic matter, expands by degrees into
feeling akin, though at first remotely, to our own, and into all the
other psychic functions of consciousness, perception, reasoning,
memory and will. The matter has been very clearly put in a Paper
on"The Four Cosmic Elements"by C. G. Sander which (subject to
certain reservations stated) aptly describes the Indian views on the
subject in hand. He rightly says that sentiency is an integrant
constituent of all existence, physical as well as metaphysical and
its manifestation can be traced throughout the mineral and chemical
as well as vegetable and animal worlds. It essentially comprises the
functions of relationship to environment, response to stimuli, and
atomic memory in the lower or inorganic plane; whilst in the higher
or organic planes it includes all the psychic functions such as
consciousness, perception, thought, reason, volition and individual
memory. Inorganic matter through the inherent element of sentiency
is endowed with aesthesia or capacity of feeling and response to
physical and chemical stimuli such as light, temperature, sound,
electricity, magnetism and the action of chemicals. All such
phenomena are examples of the faculty of perception and response to
outside stimuli of matter. We must here include chemical sentiency
and memory; that is the atom's and molecule's remembrance of its own
identity and behavior therewith. Atomic memory does not, of course,
imply self-consciousness, but only inherent group-spirit which
responds in a characteristic way to given outside stimuli. We may
call it atomic or physical consciousness. The consciousness of
plants is only trance-like (what the Hindu books call 'Comatose')
though some of the higher aspects of sentiency (and we may here use
the word 'consciousness') of the vegetable world are highly
interesting: such as the turning of flowers to the sun; the opening
and shutting of leaves and petals at certain times, sensitiveness to
the temperature and the obvious signs of consciousness shewn by the
sensitive and insectivorous plants, such as the Sundew, the Venus
Flytrap, and others. The micro-organisms which dwell on the
borderland between the vegetable and animal worlds have no sense
organs, but are only endowed with tactile irritability, yet they are
possessed of psychic life, sentiency, and inclination, whereby they
perceive their environment and position, approach, attack and devour
food, flee from harmful substances and reproduce by division. Their
movements appear to be positive, not reflex. Every cell, both
vegetable and animal, possesses a biological or vegetative
consciousness, which in health is polarized or subordinate to the
government of the total organism of which it forms an integral part;
but which is locally impaired in disease and ceases altogether at
the death of the organism. In plants, however, (unlike animals) the
cellular consciousness is diffused or distributed amongst the
tissues or fibers; there being apparently no special conducting or
centralizing organs of consciousness such as we find in higher
evolutionary forms. Animal consciousness in its highest modes
becomes self-consciousness. The psychology of the lower animals is
still the field of much controversy; some regarding these as
Cartesian machines and others ascribing to them a high degree of
psychic development. In the animals there is an endeavor at
centralization of consciousness which reaches its most complex stage
in man, the possessor of the most highly organized system of
consciousness, consisting of the nervous system and its centers and
functions, such as the brain and solar plexus, the site of Aj—a and
upper centers, and of the Manipura Cakra. Sentiency or feeling is a
constituent of all existence. We may call it consciousness however,
if we understand (with the author cited) the term"consciousness"to
include atomic or physical consciousness, the trance consciousness
of plant life, animal consciousness and man's completed self-
consciousness.
The term Sentiency or Feeling, as the equivalent of manifested Cit,
has, however, this disadvantage: whereas intelligence and
consciousness are terms for the highest attributes of man's nature,
mere sentiency, though more inclusive and common to all, is that
which we share with the lowest manifestions. In the case of both
terms, however, it is necessary to remember that they do not
represent Cit-Svarupa or Cit as It is in itself. The term Svarupa
(own form) is employed to convey the notion of what constitutes
anything what it is, namely, its true nature as it is in itself.
Thus, though the Brahman or Shiva manifests in the form of the world
as Maya-Shakti, its Svarupa is pure Cit.
Neither sentiency nor consciousness, as known to us, is Cit-Svarupa.
They are only limited manifestations of Cit just as reason, will,
emotion and memory, their modes are. Cit is the background of all
forms of experience which are its modes, that is Cit veiled by Maya-
Shakti; Cit-Svarupa is never to be confounded with, or limited to,
its particular modes. Nor is it their totality, for whilst it
manifests in these modes It yet, in Its own nature, infinitely
transcends them. Neither sentiency, consciousness, nor any other
term borrowed from a limited and dual universe can adequately
describe what Cit is in Itself (Svarupa). Vitality, mind, matter are
its limited manifestations in form. These forms are ceaselessly
changing, but the undifferentiated substratum of which they are
particularized modes is changeless. That eternal, changeless,
substratum is Cit,, which may thus be defined as the changeless
principle of all our changing experience. All is Cit, clothing
itself in forms by its own Power of Cit-Shakti and Maya-Shakti: and
that Power is not different from Itself. Cit is not the subject of
knowledge or speech. For as the Varaha Upanishad (Chap. IV) says it
is"The Reality which remains after all thoughts are given up.”What
it is in Itself, is unknown but to those who become It. It is fully
realized only in the highest state of Ecstasy (Samadhi) and in
bodiless liberation (Videha Mukti) when Spirit is free of its
vehicles of mind and matter. A Modern Indian Philosopher has
(See"Approaches to Truth"And the"Patent Wonder"by Professor
Pramathanatha Mukhyopadhyaya) very admirably analyzed the notion of
the universal Ether of Consciousness (Cidakasha) and the particular
Stress formed in it by the action of Maya-Shakti. In the first
place, he points out that logical thought is inherently dualistic
and therefore pre-supposes a subject and object. Therefore to the
pragmatic eye of the western, viewing the only experience known to
him, consciousness is always particular having a particular form and
direction. Hence where no direction or form is discernible, they
have been apt to imagine that consciousness as such has also ceased.
Thus if it were conceded that in profounded sleep there were no
dreams, or if in perfect anesthesia it were granted that nothing
particular was felt, it was thereby considered to be conceded that
consciousness may sometimes cease to exist in us. What does in fact
cease is the consciousness of objects which we have in the waking
and dreaming states. Consciousness as such is neither subjective nor
objective and is not identical with intelligence or understanding —
that is with directed or informed consciousness. Any form of
unintelligent being which feels, however chaotically it may be, is
yet, though obscurely so (in the sense here meant) conscious. Pure
consciousness, that is consciousness as such, is the background of
every form of experience.
In practical life and in Science and Philosophy when swayed by
pragmatic ends, formless experience has no interest, but only
certain forms and tones of life and consciousness. Where these are
missed we are apt to fancy that we miss life and feeling-
consciousness also. Hence the essential basis of existence or Cit
has been commonly looked upon as a very much specialized and
peculiar manifestation in nature.
On the contrary, Cit is Being or Reality itself. Cit as such is
identical with Being as such. The Brahman is both Cit and Sat.
Though in ordinary experience Being and Feeling-Consciousness are
essentially bound up together, they still seem to diverge from each
other. Man by his very constitution inveterately believes in an
objective existence beyond and independent of his self. And this is
so, so long as he is subject to the veil (Maya-Shakti). But in that
ultimate basis of experience which is the Paramatma the divergence
has gone; for the same boundless substratum which is the continuous
mass of experience is also that which is experienced. The self is
its own object. To the exalted Yogin the whole universe is not
different from himself as Atma. This is the path of the"upward-
going"Kundali (Urddhva-Kundalini).
Further, there has been a tendency in fact to look upon
consciousness as a mere function of experience; and the philosophy
of unconscious ideas and mind-stuff would even go so far as to
regard it as a mere accident of mental process. This is to reverse
the actual facts.
Consciousness should rather be taken as an original datum than as a
later development and peculiar manifestation. We should begin with
it in its lowest forms, and explain its apparent pulse-life by
extending the principle of veiling (Maya-Shakti) which is
ceaselessly working in man, reducing his life to an apparent series
of pulses also. An explanation which does not start with this
primordial extensity of experience cannot expect to end with it. For
if it be not positive at the beginning, it cannot be derived at the
end.
But what, it may be asked, is the proof of such pure experience?
Psychology which only knows changing states does not tell us of it.
This is so. Yet from those states, some of which approach
indifferentiation, inferences may be drawn; and experience is not
limited to such states, for it may transcend them.
It is true that ordinarily we do not meet with a condition of
consciousness which is without a direction or form; but tests drawn
from the incidents of ordinary normal life are insufficient, it has
been argued, to prove that there is no consciousness at all when
this direction and form are supposed to have gone. Though a logical
intuition will not tell its own story, we can make reflection on
intuition render us some sort of account, so that the intuitive fact
appears in review, when it will appear that consciousness is the
basis of, indeed, existence itself, and not merely an attendant
circumstance. But the only proof of pure consciousness is an
instance of it. This cannot be established by mere reflection. The
bare consciousness of this or that, the experience of just going to
sleep and just waking, and even the consciousness of being as such,
are but approximations to the state of consciousness as such, that
is pure consciousness, but are not identical with it. Then, what
evidence, it may be asked, have we of the fact that pure
consciousness is an actual state of being? In normal life as well as
in abnormal pathological states, we have occasional stretches of
experience in which simplicity of feature or determination has
advanced near to indifferentiation, in which experience has become
almost structureless. But the limit of pure experience is not there
reached. On the other hand, there is no conclusive proof that we
have ever had a real lapse of consciousness in our life, and the
extinction of consciousness as such is inconceivable in any case.
The claim, however, that consciousness as such exists, rests not so
much on logical argument as on intuitive grounds, on revelation
(Shruti) and spiritual experience of the truth of that revelation.
According to Indian Monism, a Pure Principle of Experience not only
is, but is the one and only ultimate permanent being or reality. It
does not regard Cit as a mere function, accident, or epiphenomenon,
but holds it to be the ever existing plenum which sustains and
vitalizes all phenomenal existence, and is the very basis on which
all forms of multiple experience, whether of sensation, instinct,
will, understanding, or reason, rest. It is, in short, the unity and
unchanging Reality behind all these various changing forms which, by
the veil or Maya-Shakti, Jiva assumes.
The Cit-Svarupa, inadequately described as mere blissful awareness
of feeling, exists, as the basis and appears in the form of, that is
clothed with, mind; a term which in its general sense is not used
merely in the sense of the purely mental function of reason but in
the sense of all the forms in which consciousness is displayed, as
distinguished from Cit Itself, which is the unity behind all these
forms whether reason, sensation, emotion, instinct, or will. All
these are modes wherein the plastic unformed clay of life is
determined. For every conception or volition is essentially an
apparent circumscription or limitation of that Sat which is the
basis of phenomenal life.
Professor P. N. Mukhyopadhyaya has described pure consciousness to
be an infinitude of"Awareness," lacking name and form and every
kind of determination, which is a state of complete quiescence where
the potential is zero or infinity—a condition without strain or
tension which is at once introduced when the slightest construction
is put upon it, resulting in a consciousness of bare"This"
and"that.” It is not a consciousness of anything. It is an
experience of nothing in particular. But this must not be confounded
with no experience. The former is taken to be the latter because
life is pragmatic, interest being shown in particular modes of
awareness. To man's life, which is little else than a system of
partialities, pure experience in which there is nothing particular
to observe or shun, love or hate seems practically to be no
experience at all. Pure Consciousness is impartial. There is no
difference (Bheda) so far as pure Awareness is concerned. Pure
Consciousness is a kind of experience which stands above all
antithesis of motion and rest. It does not know Itself either as
changing or statical, since it is consciousness as such without any
determinations or mode whatever. To know itself as changing or
permanent, it must conceal its illogical and unspeakable nature in a
veil (Maya). Every determination or form makes experience a
directive magnitude. Consciousness then assumes a direction or
special reference. It is not possible to direct and refer in a
special way without inducing such a feeling of strain or tension,
whether the conditions be physiological or psychological. Pure
consciousness has, thus, been compared to an equipotential surface
of electrical distribution. There is no difference of potentials
between any two points A and R over this surface. It is a stretch of
consciousness, in which there is, apparently, no sensible diversity
of features, no preference, no differential incidence of subjective
regard. Like the equipotential surface, such consciousness is also
quiescent. To secure a flow on it. there must be a difference of
potentials between any two points. Similarly, to have a reference, a
direction, a movement of attention, there must be a determination in
the total experience of the moment in the given mass of
consciousness. Absolute quiescence is a state of consciousness.
which is pure being with no special subjective direction and
reference; with no difference of level and potential between one
part of the experience and another. Experience will show special
subjective direction and reference if it assumes at least form or
determination, such as"This"or"that"; to have no difference of
level or potential, experience must be strictly undifferentiated —
that is to say, must not involve the least ideal or representative
structure. Absolute quiescence exists only with that Consciousness
which is pure Being, or Paramatma.
With regard, however, to all descriptions of this state, it must be
borne in mind that they only negatively correspond with their
subject-matter by the elimination of characteristics which are
peculiar to, and constitute the human consciousness of, the Jiva,
and are therefore alien to the Supreme Consciousness. They give us
no positive information as to the nature of pure Cit, for this is
only known in Yoga by the removal of ignorance (Avidya) under which
all logical thinking and speaking is done. This"Ignorance"Is
nothing but a term for those limitations which make the creature
what he is. It is a commonplace in Indian religion and philosophy
that the Brahman as It exists in itself is beyond all thought and
words, and is known only by the Samadhi of Yoga. As the Mahanirvana
Tantra says (III. V. 6 et seq.): "The Brahman is known in two ways:
from His manifestations which are the object of Sadhana or as It is
in itself in Samadhiyoga": for, as Ch. XIV, V. 135 Ibid., says,
Atmaj—ana is the one means of liberation in which Its nature is
realized. It is, perhaps in part at least, because the merely
negative and imperfect character of such description is not
sufficiently noted that pure consciousness, as the author cited
points out, has in general awakened no serious interest in the
practical West; though it has been the crown of glory for some of,
what have been said to be, the stateliest forms of Eastern thought,
which asserts itself to be in possession of an experimental method
by which the condition of pure consciousness may be realized. The
question is, thus, not one of mere speculation, but of
demonstration. This state, again, is believed by the East to be not
a dull and dreary condition, a dry abstraction or reductio ad
absurdum of all which imparts to our living its worth and
significance. Not at all; since it is the first Principle in which
as Power all existence is potential and from which it proceeds. It
is reasonable, therefore, it is contended, to assume that all which
life possesses of real worth exists in the Source of life itself.
Life is only a mode of infinite Supremacy with beatitude, which is
Being and Consciousness in all its metaphysical grandeur, an
absolutely understandable condition which no imagination can depict
and no categories can reach and possess.
Owing to the necessarily negative character of some of the
descriptions of the Supreme Brahman we find such questions"How can
it differ from a nullity?” (Dialogues on Hindu Philosophy, 259, by
Rev. K. M. Banerjee): and the statement of the English Orientalist
Colonel Jacob (whose views are akin to those of others)
that"Nirvana is an unconscious (sic) and stone-like (sic)
existence.” Such a misconception is the more extraordinary in that
it occurs in the work of an author who was engaged in the
translation of a Vedantic treatise. These and many similar
statements seem to establish that it is possible to make a special
study of Vedanta and yet to misunderstand its primary concepts. It
is true that the Brahman is unconscious in the sense that It is not
our consciousness; for, if so, It would be Jiva and not Paramatma.
But this is only to say that it has not our limitations. It is
unlimited Cit. A stone represents its most veiled existence. In its
Self it is all light and self-illumining (Svaprakasha). As Shruti
says (Katha Up. 5-15)"All things shed luster by His luster. All
things shine because He shines.”All things depend on It: but It has
not to depend on anything else for Its manifestation. It is
therefore better to say with the Hamsopanishad and the Christian
Gospel that It is the Peace beyond all understanding. It has been
dryly remarked that"The idea that Yoga means a dull state is due,
perhaps, to the misunderstanding of Pata—jali's definition of it.
Man, however, ordinarily and by his nature craves for modes and
forms (Bhaumananda); and though all enjoyment comes from the pure
Supreme Consciousness, it is supposed that dualistic variety and
polarity are necessary for enjoyment. What, thus, in its plenitude
belongs to the sustaining spirit of all life is transferred to life
alone. All knowledge and existence are identified with variety,
change, polarity. Whilst skimming over the checkered surface of the
sea, we thus, it is said, ignore the unfathomed depths which are in
respose and which nothing stirs, wherein is the Supreme Peace
(Santa) and Bliss (Paramananda).
The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad says: "Other beings live on a fraction
of this great Bliss.”The Bliss of Shiva and Shakti are one, for
they are inseparate. Hence she is called (Trishati II. 32) Ekabhoga:
for Eka = Ishvara and Bhoga = Svasvarupananda.
Nyaya and Samkhya say that the chief end of man is the absolute
cessation of pain, but Vedantins, going beyond this negative
definition, say that, all pain having surceased on Unity with the
Supreme, the chief end is that positive Bliss which is of its
essence. The Devi Kalyani, The Mother of all, is Herself Bliss —
that is, all bliss from earthly bliss (Bhaumananda) to Brahman-Bliss
(Brahmananda). As the Commentator Shamkara in his commentary on the
Trishati says (citing Shruti): "Who else can make us breathe, who
else can make us live, if this blissful Ether were not?”
If, further, it be asked what is pure Experience which manifests
itself in all these diverse forms, it must be said that from Its
very definition pure Cit, or the Supreme Brahman (Parabrahman), is
that about which nothing in particular can be predicated: for
predication is possible only in relation to determinations or modes
in consciousness. And in this sense Yogatattva Upanishad says that
those who seek a knowledge of it in Shastras are deluded;"How can
that which is self-shining be illuminated by the Shastras? Not even
the Devas can describe that indescribable state.”The Mandukya
Upanishad, speaking of the fourth aspect (Pada) of Atma, says that
it is the non-dual Shiva which is not an object which can be sensed,
used, taken, determined (by any marks), or of which an account can
be given, but is unthinkable and knowable only by the realization of
Atma. Negative predication may, however, clear away improper
notions. It is really inscrutable Being upon which no category can
be fastened. This must always be borne in mind in any attempted
definition of this transcendent state. It is of a self-existent
(Niradhara), unending (Nitya), changeless (Avikari),
undifferentiated (Abhinna), spaceless (Purna), timeless (Shasvata),
all-pervading (Sarvatravastha), self-illumining (Svayamjyotih), pure
(Shuddha) experience. As the Kularnava Tantra says (I—6,
7): "Shiva is the impartite Supreme Brahman, the all-knowing Creator
of all.”He is the stainless One and the Lord of all. He is one
without a second (Advaya). He is light itself. He changes not, and
is without beginning or end. He is without attribute and above the
highest. He is Being (Sat), Consciousness (Cit), and Bliss (Ananda).
As Sat, It is unity of being beyond the opposites of"This"
and"that.”"here and there," "Then and now.” As Cit, It is an
experiencing beyond the opposites of worldly knowledge and
ignorance. As Supreme Ananda, It is the Bliss which is known upon
the dissolution of the dualistic state which fluctuates between, and
is composed of, happiness and sorrow; for created happiness is only
an impermanent change of state (Vikara) or Becoming, but the Supreme
Bliss (Paramananda) endures. Bliss is the very Nature (Svarupa) of
this Supreme Consciousness, and not, as with the creature, a mere
changing attribute of some form of Becoming. Supreme Being (Sat) is
a unity without parts (Nishkala). Supreme Feeling-Consciousness
(Cit) is immediacy of experience. In the Jiva, Consciousness of Self
is set over against the not-Self; for logical thought establishes a
polarity of subject. Thus the undifferentiated Supreme Consciousness
transcends, and the Supreme Bliss (Paramananda) is beyond, the
changing feelings of happiness and sorrow. It is the great Peace
(Santa) which, in the words of the Hamsopanishad (V. 12, Ed.
Anandashrama, XXIX, p. 593) as of the New Testament, passes all
worldly understanding. Sacchidananda, or Pure Being, persists in all
the states of Becoming which are its manifestation as Shakti. It may
be compared to a continuous, partless, undifferentiated Unity
universally pervading the manifested world like ether or space, as
opposed to the limited, discontinuous, discrete character of the
forms of"matter"Which are the products of its power of Shakti. It
is a state of quiescence free of all motion (Nishpanda), and of that
vibration (Spandana) which operating as the Primordial Energy,
evolves the phenomenal world of names and forms. It is, in short,
said to be the innermost Self in every being—a changeless Reality
of the nature of a purely experiencing principle (Caitanyam Atma) as
distinguished from whatever may assume the form of either the
experienced, or of the means of experience. This Cit in bodies
underlies as their innermost Self all beings. The Cit or Atma as the
underlying Reality in all is, according to Vedanta, one, and the
same in all: undivided and unlimited by any of them, however much
they may be separated in time and space. It is not only all-
pervading, but all-transcending. It has thus a two-fold aspect: an
immanent aspect as Shakti (Power), in which It pervades the
universes (Saguna Brahman); and a transcendental aspect, in which It
exists beyond all Its worldly manifestations (Nirguna Brahman). Cit,
as it is in itself, is spaceless and timeless, extending beyond all
limitations of time and space and all other categories of existence.
We live in the Infinite. All limits exist in Cit. But these limits
are also another aspect of It that is Shakti. It is a boundless
tranquil ocean on the surface of which countless varied modes, like
waves, are rising, tossing and sinking. Though It is the one Cause
of the universe of relations, in itself It is neither a relation nor
a totality of relations, but a completely relationless Self-identity
unknowable by any logical process whatever.
Cit is the boundless permanent plenum which sustains and vitalizes
everything. It is the universal Spirit, all-pervading like the
Ether, which is, sustains, and illumines all experience and all
process in the continuum of experience. In it the universe is born,
grows and dies. This plenum or continuum is as such all-pervading,
eternal, unproduced, and indestructible: for production and
destruction involve the existence and bringing together and
separation of parts which in an absolute partless continuum is
impossible. It is necessarily in itself, that is as Cit, motionless,
for no parts of an all-filling continuum can move from one place to
another. Nor can such a continuum have any other form of motion,
such as expansion, contraction or undulation, since all these
phenomena involve the existence of parts and their displacement. Cit
is one undifferentiated, partless, all-pervading, eternal, spiritual
substance. In Sanskrit, this plenum is called Cidakasha; that is,
just as all material things exist in the all-pervading physical
Ether, so do they and the latter exist in the infinitely extending
Spiritual"Ether"Which is Cit. The Supreme Consciousness is thought
of as a kind of permanent spiritual"Space" (Cidakasha) which makes
room for and contains all varieties and forms appearing and
disappearing. Space itself is an aspect of spiritual substance. It
is a special posture of that stress in life which takes place in
unchanging consciousness (P. Mukhyopadhyaya"The Patent Wonder," 21 -
- 24). In this Ocean of Being-Consciousness we live, move and have
our being. Consciousness as such (that is as distinguished from the
products of Its power or Shakti), is never finite. Like space, it
cannot be limited, though, through the operation of its power of
self-negation or Maya-Shakti, it may appear as determined. But such
apparent determinations do not ever for us express or exhaust the
whole consciousness, any more than space is exhausted by the objects
in it. Experience is taken to be limited because the Experiencer is
swayed by a pragmatic interest which draws his attention only to
particular features in the continuum. Though what is thus
experienced is a part of the whole experience, the latter is felt to
be an infinite expanse of consciousness or awareness in which is
distinguished a definite mass of especially determined feeling.
As Cit is the infinite plenum, all limited being exists in it, and
it is in all such beings as the Spirit or innermost Self and as Maya-
Shakti it is their mind and body. When the existence of anything is
affirmed, the Brahman is affirmed, for the Brahman is Being itself.
This pure Consciousness or Cit is the Paramatma Nirguna Shiva who is
Being-Consciousness-Bliss (Sacchidananda). Consciousness is Being.
Paramatma, according to Advaita Vedanta, is not a consciousness of
being, but Being-Consciousness. Nor is it a consciousness of Bliss,
but it is Bliss. All these are one in pure Consciousness. That which
is the nature of Paramatma never changes, notwithstanding the
creative ideation (Srishtikalpana) which is the manifestation of
Shakti as Cit-Shakti and Maya-Shakti. It is this latter Shakti
which, according to the Sakta Tantra, evolves. To adopt a European
analogy which is yet not complete, Nishkala Paramatma is Godhead
(Brahmatva), Sakala, or Saguna Atma, is God (Ishvara). Each of the
three systems Samkhya, Mayavada Vedanta, and Sakta monism agrees in
holding the reality of pure consciousness (Cit). The question upon
which they differ is as to whether unconsciousness is a second
independent reality, as Samkhya alleges; and, if not, how the
admitted appearance of unconsciousness as the Forms is to be
explained consistently with the unity of the Brahman.
Such then is Cit, truly known as it is in Itself only in completed
Yoga or Moksha; known only through Its manifestations in our
ordinary experience, just as to use the simile of the Kaivalya
Kalika Tantra, we realize the presence of Rahu or Bhucchaya (the
Eclipse) by his actions on the sun and moon. The Eclipse is seen but
not the cause of it. Cit-Shakti is a name for the same changeless
Cit when associated in creation with its operating Maya-Shakti. The
Supreme Cit is called Parasamvit in the scheme of the Thirty-six
Tattvas which is adopted by both the Shaiva and Shakta Agamas.
According to Shamkara, the Supreme Brahman is defined as pure J—ana
without the slightest trace of either actual or potential
objectivity. The Advaita Shaiva-Shaktas regard this matter
differently in accordance with an essential principle of the Agamic
School with which I now deal.
All occultism whether of East or West posits the principle that
there is nothing in any one state or plane which is not in some
other way, actual or potential, in another state or plane. The
Western Hermetic maxim runs"As above, so below.” This is not always
understood. The saying does not mean that what exists in one plane
exists in that form in another plane. Obviously if it did the planes
would be the same and not different. If Ishvara thought and felt and
saw objects, in the human way, and if he was loving and wrathful,
just as men are, He, would not be Ishvara but Jiva. The saying cited
means that a thing which exists on one plane exists on all other
planes, according either to the form of each plane, if it be an
intermediate causal body (Karanavantarasharira) or ultimately as the
mere potentiality of becoming which exists in Atma in its aspect as
Shakti. The Hermetic maxim is given in another form in the Visvasara
Tantra: "What is here is elsewhere. What is not here is nowhere"
(Yadihasti tad anyatra. Yannehasti na tat kvacit). Similarly the
northern Shaiva Shastra says that what appears without only so
appears because it exists within. One can only take out of a
receptacle what is first assumed to be within it. What is in us must
in some form be in our cause. If we are living, though finite forms,
it is because that cause is infinite Being. If we have knowledge,
though limited, it is because our essential substance is Cit the
Illuminator. If we have bliss, though united with sorrow, it is
because It is Supreme Bliss. In short, our experience must exist in
germ in it. This is because in the Sakta Agama, there is for the
worshiper a real creation and, therefore, a real nexus between the
Brahman as cause and the world as effect. According to the
transcendent method of Shamkara, there is not in the absolute sense
any such nexus. The notion of creation by Brahman is as much Maya as
the notion of the world created.
Applying these principles we find in our dual experience an"I"
(Aham) or subject which experiences an object a"This" (Idam): that
is the universe or any particular object of the collectively which
composes it. Now it is said that the duality of"I"And"This"comes
from the One which is in its essential nature (Svarupa) an unitary
experience without such conscious distinction. For Vedanta, whether
in its Mayavada or Sakta form, agrees in holding that in the Supreme
there is no consciousness of objects such as exists on this plane.
The Supreme does not see objects outside Itself, for it is the whole
and the experience of the whole as Ishvara. It sees all that is as
Itself. It is Purna or the Whole. How then, it may be asked, can a
supreme, unchanging, partless, formless, Consciousness produce from
Itself something which is so different from Itself, something which
is changing, with parts, form and so forth. Shamkara's answer is
that transcendentally, it does not produce anything. The notion that
it does so is Maya. What then is his Maya? This I have more fully
explained in my papers on"Maya-Shakti"And on"Maya and Shakti.” I
will only here say that his Maya is an unexplainable (anirvacaniya)
principle of unconsciousness which is not real, not unreal, and
partly either; which is an eternal falsity (Mithyabhuta sanatani),
which, though not Brahman, is inseparably associated with It in Its
aspect as Ishvara; which Maya has Brahman for its support (Maya
Brahmashrita); from which support it draws appearance of separate
independent reality which in truth it does not possess. The
Parabrahman aspect of the One is not associated with Maya.
According to the Sakta exposition of Advaitavada, Maya is not an
unconscious (jada) principle but a particular Shakti of Brahman.
Being Shakti, it is at base consciousness, but as Maya-Shakti it is
Consciousness veiling Itself. Shakti and Shaktiman are one and the
same: that is, Power and its Possessor (Shaktiman). Therefore Maya-
Shakti is Shiva or Cit in that particular aspect which He assumes as
the material cause (Upadanakarana) in creation. Creation is real;
that is, there is a direct causal nexus between Shiva as Shakti (Cit-
Shakti and Maya-Shakti) and the universe. In short Shiva as Shakti
is the cause of the universe, and as Shakti, in the form of Jiva
(all manifested forms, He actually evolves. Comparing these two
views;—Shamkara says that there is in absolute truth no creation
and therefore there can be no question how it arose. This is because
he views the problem from the transcendental (Paramarthika)
standpoint of self-realization or Siddhi. The Sakta Shastra, on the
other hand, being a practical Sadhana Shastra views the matter from
our, that is the Jiva, standpoint. To us the universe and ourselves
are real. And Ishvara the Creator is real. Therefore there is a
creation, and Shiva as Shakti creates by evolving into the Universe,
and then appearing as all Jivas. This is the old Upanishadic
doctrine of the spider actually evolving the web from itself, the
web being its substance in that form. A flower cannot be raised from
seed unless the flower was in some way already there. Therefore as
there is an"Aham"And"Idam"In our experience, in some way it is
in the supreme experience of Parashiva or Parasamvit. But the Idam
or Universe is not there as with us; otherwise It would be Jiva.
Therefore it is said that there are two principles or aspects in the
Brahman, namely, that Prakasha or Cit aspect, and Vimarsha Shakti,
the potential Idam, which in creation explicates into the Universe.
But in the supreme experience or Amarsha, Vimarsha Shakti (which has
two states) is in Its supreme form. The subtler state is in the form
of consciousness (Cidrupini); the gross state is in the form of the
Universe (Vishvarupini). The former is beyond the universe
(Vishvottirna). But if Vimarsha Shakti is there in the form of
consciousness (Cidrupini), it is one with Cit. Therefore it is said
that the Aham and Idam, without ceasing to be in the supreme
experience, are in supreme Shiva in undistinguishable union as Cit
and Cidrupini. This is the Nirguna state of Shivashakti. As She is
then in undistinguishable union with Shiva, She is then also simple
unmanifested Cit. She is then Caitanya-rupa or Cidrupini: a subtle
Sanskrit expression which denotes that She is the same as Cit and
yet suggests that though in a present sense She is one with Him, She
is yet in a sense (with reference to Her potentiality of future
manifestation) different from Him. She is Sacchidanandamayi and He
is Sacchidananda. She is then the unmanifested universe in the form
of undifferentiated Cit. The mutual relation, whether in
manifestation or beyond it, whether as the imperfect or Ideal
universe, is one of inseparable connection or inherence (Avinabhava-
sambandha, Samanvaya) such as that between"I-ness" (Ahanta) and"I"
(Aham), existence and that which exists (Bhava, Bhavat), an
attribute and that in which it inheres (Dharma, Dharmin), sunshine
and the sun and so forth. The Pa—caratra School of the Vaishnava
Agama or Tantra, speaking of the Mahashakti Lakshmi says, that in
Her supreme state She is undistinguishable from the"Windless
Atmosphere" (Vasudeva) existing only as it were in the form
of"darkness"And"emptiness" (that is of unmanifested
formlessness). So the Mahanirvana Tantra speaks of Her"dark
formlessness.” In the Kulacudamani Nigama, Devi says (I. 16-24) —
"I, though in the form of Prakriti, rest in consciousness-bliss'
(Aham prakritirupa cet cidanandaparayana). Raghava Bhatta in his
commentary on the Sharada Tilaka (Ch. I) says," She who is eternal
existed in a subtle (that is unmanifested) state, as consciousness,
during the final dissolution" (Ya anadirupa caitanyadhyasena
mahapralaye sukshma sthita). It would be simpler to say that She is
then what She is (Svarupa) namely Consciousness, but in creation
that consciousness veils itself. These
terms"formless," "subtle," "dark," "empty," all denote the same
unmanifested state in which Shakti is in undistinguishable union
with Shiva, the formless consciousness. The Pa—caratra (Ahirbudhnya
Samhita, Ch. IV), in manner similar to that of the other Agamas,
describes the supreme state of Shakti in the dissolution of the
Universe as one in which manifested Shakti"returns to the condition
of Brahman" (Brahmabhavam brajate).”Owing to complete intensity of
embrace" (Atisankleshat) the two all-pervading ones, Narayana and
His Shakti, become as it were a single principle (Ekam tattvam iva).
This return to the Brahman condition is said to take place in the
same way as a conflagration, when there is no more combustible
matter, returns to the latent condition of fire (Vahni-bhava). There
is the same fire in both cases but in one case there is the activity
of combustion and in the other there is not. It follows from this
that the Supreme Brahman is not a mere knowing with out trace of
objectivity. In It the Aham is the Self as Cit and the Idam is
provided by Cidrupini-shakti. There is Atmarama or play of the Self
with the Self in which the Self knows and enjoys the Self, not in
the form of external objects, but as that aspect of consciousness
whose projection all objects are. Shakti is always the object of the
Self and one with it. For the object is always the Self, since there
is nothing but the Self. But in the supreme experience the object is
one in nature with Shiva being Caitanya-rupa; in the universe the
object seems to the Jiva, the creation of and subject to Maya, to be
different from the Self as mind and matter.
The next point is the nature of creation or rather emanation
(Abhasa) for the former term is associated with dualistic notions of
an extra-Cosmic God, who produces a world which is as separate from
Himself as is the pot from the potter. According to this doctrine
there is an Evolution of Consciousness or Cit-Shakti (associated
with Maya-Shakti) into certain forms. This is not to say that the
Brahman is wholly transformed into its emanations, that is exhausted
by them. The Brahman is infinite and can never, therefore, be wholly
held in this sense in any form, or in the universe as a whole. It
always transcends the universe. Therefore when Consciousness
evolves, it nevertheless does not cease to be what it was, is, and
will be. The Supreme Cit becomes as Shakti the universe but still
remains supreme Cit. In the same way every stage of the emanation-
process prior to the real evolution (Parinama of Prakriti) remains
what it is, whilst giving birth to a new Evolution. In Parinama or
Evolution as known to us on this plane, when one thing is evolved
into another, it ceases to be what it was. Thus when milk is changed
into curd, it ceases to be milk. The Evolution from Shiva-Shakti of
the Pure Tattvas is not of this kind. It is an Abhasa or"shining
forth," adopting the simile of the sun which shines without (it was
supposed) change in, or diminution of, its light. This
unaffectedness in spite of its being the material cause is called in
the Pa—caratra by the term Virya, a condition which, the Vaishnava
Lakshmi Tantra says, is not found in the world"Where milk quickly
loses its nature when curds appear.”It is a process in which one
flame springs from another flame. Hence it is called"Flame to
Flame.” There is a second Flame but the first from which it comes is
unexhausted and still there. The cause remains what it was and yet
appears differently in the effect. God is never"emptied"As it is
said wholly into the world. Brahman is ever changeless in one
aspect; in another It changes, such change being as it were a mere
point of stress in the infinite Ether of Cit. This Abhasa,
therefore, is a form of Vivartta, distinguishable however from the
Vivartta of Mayavada, because in the Agama, whether Vaishnava, or
Shakta, the effect is regarded as real, whereas according to
Shamkara, it is only empirically so. Hence the latter system is
called Sat-karanavada or the doctrine of the reality of the original
source or basis of things, and not also of the apparent effects of
the cause. This Abhasa has been called Sadrisha Parinama (See
Introduction to Principles of Tantra, Part II), a term borrowed from
the Samkhya but which is not altogether appropriate. In the latter
Philosophy, the term is used in connection with the state of the
Gunas of Prakriti in dissolution when nothing is produced. Here on
the contrary we are dealing with creation and an evolving Power-
Consciousness. It is only appropriate to this extent that, as in
Shadrisa Parinama there is no real evolution or objectivity, so also
there is none in the evolution of the Tattvas until Maya intervenes
and Prakriti really evolves the objective universe.
This being the nature of the Supreme Shiva and of the evolution of
consciousness, this doctrine assumes, with all others,. a
transcendent and a creative or immanent aspect of Brahman. The first
is Nishkala Shiva; the second Sakala Shiva; or Nirguna Saguna;
Parama, Apara (in Shamkara's parlance); Paramatma, Ishvara; and
Paramabrahman, Shabdabrahman. From the second or changing aspect the
universe is born. Birth means 'manifestation'. Manifestation to
what'? The answer is to consciousness. But there is nothing but Cit.
Creation is then the evolution whereby the changeless Cit through
the power of its Maya-Shakti appears to Itself in the form of
limited objects. All is Shiva whether as subject or object.
This evolution of consciousness is described in the scheme of the
Thirty-six Tattvas.
Shamkara and Samkhya speak of the 24 Tattvas from Prakriti to
Prithivi. Both Shaivas and Shaktas speak of the Thirty-six Tattvas,
showing, by the extra number of Tattvas, how Purusha and Prakriti
themselves originated. The northern or Advaita Shaiva Agama and the
Sakta Agama are allied, though all Shaiva Scriptures adopt the same
Tattvas. In all the Agamas whether Vaishnava, Shaiva, or Shakta,
there are points of doctrine which are the same or similar. The
Vaishnava Pa—caratra, however, moves in a different sphere of
thought. It speaks in lieu of the Abhasa here described of four
Vyuha or forms of Narayana, viz., Vasudeva, Samkarshana, Pradyumna
and Aniruddha. The Thirty-six Tattvas are the 24 from Prithivi to
Prakriti together with (proceeding upwards) Purusha, Maya and the
five Ka—cukas (Kala, Kala, Niyati, Vidya, Raga), Shuddhavidya (or
Sad-vidya), Shakti, Shiva. These are divided into three groups named
Shiva Tattva, Vidya Tattva, Atma Tattva, and Shuddha,
Shuddhashuddha, Ashuddha Tattvas. The Shuddha or Pure Tattvas are
all the Tattvas from Shiva-Shakti Tattvas to and including Sadvidya
Tattva. The Pure-Impure or Mixed (Shuddha-ashuddha) Tattvas are
those between the first and third group which are the Impure Tattvas
(Ashuddha Tattva) of the world of duality, namely, the 24 Tattvas
from Prakriti to Prithivi. The other group of three is as follows:
Shiva Tattva includes Shiva Tattva and Shakti Tattva, Vidya Tattva
includes all Tattvas from Sadashiva to Sadvidya, and Atma Tattva
includes all Tattvas from Maya and the Ka—cukas to Prithivi. The
particular description here of the 36 Tattvas, held by both Shaivas
and Shaktas, is taken from the northern Shaiva Kashmir philosophical
school, itself based on the older Agamas such as Malinivijaya Tantra
and others.
It is common doctrine of Advaitavada that the One is of dual aspect;
the first static (Shiva) and the other kinetic (Shakti). This
doctrine of aspects is a device whereby it is sought to reconcile
the fact that there is changelessness and change. Philosophically it
is an evasion of the problem and not a solution. The solution is to
be found in revelation (Veda) and in direct Spiritual Experience
(Samadhi). These states vary in different men and in different races
and creeds. But in support of Advaitavada, reliance may be placed on
the fact that Samadhi or ecstasy, in all parts of the world and in
all faiths, tends towards some kind of unity, more or less complete.
All seek union with God. But the dispute is as to the nature of that
union. Pure Advaitavada is complete identity. The scheme now
outlined shows how that unitary experience, without ceasing to be
what it is, assumes limited forms.
Parasamvit shown on top of the Diagram is Nishkala Shiva or the
changeless Brahman aspect; and Shiva-Shakti below is the aspect of
the supreme Brahman from which change comes and which appears as its
products or changing forms. Both are Shiva-Shakti. When, however,
Shiva is kinetic, He is called Shakti. Regarding the matter from the
Shakti aspect both are Shakti. Neither ever exists without the
other, though Shakti is in one aspect Cidrupini, and in the other in
the form of the Universe (Vishvarupini). In themselves and
throughout they are one. The divergence takes place in
consciousness, after it has been subjected to the operation of Maya,
the effect of which is to polarize consciousness into an apparently
separate"I"And"This.” Parasamvit is not accounted a Tattva, for
It is beyond all Tattvas (Tattvatita). Shiva Tattva and Shakti
Tattva are counted separately, though Shakti Tattva is merely the
negative aspect of Shiva Tattva. Shiva Tattva and Shakti Tattva are
not produced. They thus are, even in dissolution. They are Saguna-
Brahman; and Parasamvit is the Nirguna-Brahman. The first evolved
Tattva is Sadashiva of Sadakhya Tattva of which the meaning is Sat
akhya yatah, or that state in which there is the first notion of
Being; for here is the first incipiency of the world-experience as
the notion"I am this"Which ultimately becomes a separate"I"
and"This.” In my Garland of Letters I have with more technical
detail described the evolution of Jiva-consciousness. Here I will
only shortly summarize the process.
As already stated, the Aham and Idam exist in an unitary state which
is indescribable in Parasamvit. Shakti Tattva is called negative
because negation is the function of Shakti (Nishedha-vyapara-rupa
Shaktih). Negation of what P The answer is negation of
consciousness. The universe is thus a product of negation. Where
there is pure experience there is no manifested universe. Shakti
negates the pure experience or consciousness to the extent, that it
appears to itself limited. Shakti disengages the unified elements
(Aham and Idam) which are latent in the Supreme Experience as an
undistinguishable unity. How? The answer is one of great subtlety.
Of the Shiva-Shakti Tattvas, Shiva represents the Prakasha and
Shakti the Vimarsha aspect, which contains potentially within it,
the seed of the Universe to be. The result is that the Prakasha
aspect is left standing alone. The Shiva Tattva is Prakasha-matra,
that is, to use the imagery of our plane, an"I"Without a"This.”
This is a state in which the unitary consciousness is broken up to
this extent, that it is no longer a Perfect Experience in which the
Aham and Idam exist in undistinguishable union, but there is one
Supreme Aham Consciousness only, which is the root of all limited
subjectivity To this Aham or Shiva Tattva, Shakti gradually unveils
Herself as the Idam or Vimarsha aspect of consciousness. The result
is that from Shiva and Shakti (in which the latter takes the playful
part) there is evolved the first produced consciousness called
Sadakhya Tattva. There is then an Aham and Idam aspect of
experience. But that experience is not like the Jiva's, which arises
at a later stage after the intervention of Maya-Shakti. In the Jiva
consciousness (Jivatma) the object (Idam) is seen as something
outside and different from itself. In Sadakhya Tattva and all the
subsequent pure Tattvas, that is Ishvara Tattva and Shuddhavidya
Tattva, the"This"Is experienced as part of the Self and not as
separate from it. There is (as will appear from the Diagram) no
outer and inner. The circle which represents the one Consciousness
is. divided into"I"And"This"Which are yet parts of the same
figure. The"This"Is at first only by degree and hazily (Dhyamala
prayam) presented to the Aham like a picture just forming itself
(Unmilitamatra-citrakalpam). For this reason it is said that there
is emphasis on the Aham which is indicated in the Diagram by the
arrow-head. This is called the"Nimesha"or"closing of the eyes"of
Shakti. It is so called because it is the last stage in dissolution
before all effects are withdrawn into their first cause. Being the
last stage in dissolution it is the first in creation. Then the Idam
side becomes clear in the next evolved Ishvara Tattva in which the
emphasis is therefore said to be on the"This"Which the Aham
subjectifies. This is the"Unmesha"or"opening of the eyes"state
of Shakti; for this is the state of consciousness when it is first
fully equipped to create and does so. The result again of this is
the evolved consciousness called Shuddhavidya Tattva in which the
emphasis is equal on the"I"And"This.” Consciousness is now in the
state in which the two halves of experience are ready to be broken
up and experienced separately. It is at this state that Maya-Shakti
intervenes and does so through its power and the Ka—cukas which are
forms of it. Maya-Shakti is thus defined as the sense of difference
(Bhedabuddhi); that is the power by which things are seen as
different from the Self in the dual manifested world. The Ka—cukas
which are evolved from, and are particular forms of, the operation
of Maya are limitations of the natural perfections of the Supreme
Consciousness. These are Kala which produces division (Pariccheda)
in the partless and unlimited; Niyati which affects independence
(Svatantrata); Raga which produces interest in, and then attachment
to, objects in that which wanted nothing (Purna); Vidya which makes
the Purusha a"little knower"In lieu of being all-knower (Sarva-
j—ata) and Kala which makes Purusha a"little doer," whereas the
Supreme was in its Kartrittva or power action of almighty. The
result of Maya and its offshoots which are the Ka—cukas is the
production of the Purusha and Prakriti Tattvas. At this stage the
Aham and Idam are completely severed. Each consciousness regards
itself as a separate 'I' looking upon the"This"Whether its own
body or that of others as outside its consciousness. Each Purusha
(and they are numberless) is mutually exclusive the one of the
other. Prakriti is the collectivity of all Shaktis in contracted
(Sankucadrupa) undifferentiated form. She is Feeling in the form of
the undifferentiated mass of Buddhi and the rest and of the three
Gunas in equilibrium. The Purusha or Self experiences Her as object.
Then on the disturbance of the Gunas in Prakriti the latter evolves
the Vikritis of mind and matter. The Purusha at this stage has
experience of the multiple world of the twenty-four impure Tattvas.
Thus from the supreme"I" (Parahanta) which is the creative Shiva-
Shakti aspect of Parasamvit which changelessly endures as
Sacchidananda, Consciousness experiences Itself as object (Sadakhya,
Ishvara, Sadvidya Tattvas) and then through Maya and the limitations
or contractions which are the Ka—cukas or Samkocas it loses the
knowledge that it is itself its own object. It sees the
separate"other"; and the one Consciousness becomes the limited
experiencers which are the multiple selves and their objects of the
dual universe. Shakti who in Herself (Svarupa) is Feeling-
Consciousness (Cidrupini) becomes more and more gross until physical
energy assumes the form and becomes embedded in the"crust"of
matter vitalized by Herself as the Life-Principle of all things.
Throughout all forms it is the same Shakti who works and appears as
Cit-Shakti and Maya-Shakti, the Spirit and Matter aspect of the
Power of the Self-Illumining Pure Super-Consciousness or Cit.
Cit-Shakti (The Consciousness Aspect of the Universe)
http://www.sacred-texts.com/tantra/sas/sas14.htm
SHAKTI AND SHAKTA
by Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe), [1918]
Chapter 1: Indian Religion As Bharata Dharma
Chapter 2: Shakti: The World as Power
Chapter 3: What Are the Tantras and Their Significance?
Chapter 4: Tantra Shastra and Veda
Chapter 5: The Tantras and Religion of the Shaktas
Chapter 6: Shakti and Shakta
Chapter 7: Is Shakti Force?
Chapter 8: Cinacara (Vashishtha and Buddha)
Chapter 9: The Tantra Shastras in China
Chapter 10: A Tibetan Tantra
Chapter 11: Shakti in Taoism
Chapter 12: Alleged Conflict of Shastras
Chapter 13: Sarvanandanatha
Chapter 14: Cit-Shakti (The Consciousness Aspect of the Universe)
Chapter 15: Maya-Shakti (The Psycho-Physical Aspect of the Universe)
Chapter 16: Matter and Consciousness
Chapter 17: Shakti and Maya
Chapter 18: Shakta Advaitavada
Chapter 19: Creation as Explained in the Non-dualist Tantras
Chapter 20: The Indian Magna Mater
Chapter 21: Hindu Ritual
Chapter 22: Vedanta and Tantra Shastra
Chapter 23: The Psychology of Hindu Religious Ritual
Chapter 24: Shakti as Mantra (Mantramayi Shakti)
Chapter 25: Varnamala (The Garland of Letters)
Chapter 26: Shakta Sadhana (The Ordinary Ritual)
Chapter 27: The Pa—catattva (The Secret Ritual)
Chapter 28: Matam Rutra (The Right and Wrong Interpretation)
Chapter 29: Kundalini Shakta (Yoga)
Chapter 30: Conclusions
Disclaimer: Our material may be copied, printed and distributed by referring to this site. This site also contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the education and research provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance freedom of inquiry for a better understanding of religious, spiritual and inter-faith issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.