From the study of history, it is known that the Rgveda was composed outside India, mainly in Central Asia and Russia. The Yajurveda was written mostly outside India; only a portion was written in India. And the Atharvaveda was composed in Afghanistan and India. Those three Vedas – Rk, Yaju and Atharva – long afterwards, say about 3500 years ago – were edited and divided into different branches by Maharshi Krishadvaipayana Vyasa. The oldest compositions were named Rgveda, the intermediate portions were called Yajurveda, and the remaining portions were named Atharvaveda. The last-named Veda was named after the great sage, Atharva, the first author of this Veda. And by compiling the musical compositions of the three Vedas, yet another Veda – the Sámaveda, the fourth Veda – was created. Sáma in Sanskrit means “musical composition”. The Sámaveda itself is not a Veda.

Sadáshiva was born at a time when the age of the Rgveda was coming to an end and the Yajurvedic Age was about to begin. The people had not yet invented script. In the days of Shiva, the serious disadvantage was that, although the people were acquainted with the science of phonetics, that is, the intonations of the letters, they did not know how to write [[letters]]. The Bráhmii and Kharośt́hi scripts were invented some time after Shiva. Thus we can generally say that the Vedas and Tantras exercised their mutual influence over each other, through the invention of script, only at the time of the Atharvaveda.

The external form that was given to Tantra by Shiva in His time underwent a slight transformation in subsequent periods. You may raise the question – well, when the goal is the same, when the path is also the same, then why this transformation? The only cause was: there was no written book in those days. All the compositions – both Vedas and Tantras – were handed down orally from one generation to another. As a result, there arose a difference of opinion among the teachers themselves – one teacher or muni [seer] would say one thing, and another muni would say something else.

Now although letters were invented during the age of the Atharvaveda, the Vedas could not be written down due to one obstacle – a peculiar superstition (better to call it a dogma) that the Vedas should not be written down. Maharshi Atharva’s followers – Aungirá, Aungirasa, Satyaváha, Vaedarbhi, etc. – tried for the first time to get the Vedas written down in letters, but they were not courageous enough to do so because it was forbidden. (The very name of Vaedarbhi suggests that he was a resident of Vidarbha, and in India, particularly in the Vidarbha area, the Atharvaveda was partly written. Hence it is not proper to assume that the entire Veda was written outside India.) The Vedas were called shruti because they had to be mastered only by hearing: letters had not yet been invented. But once the script was invented, what could be the reason for not writing down the Vedas? The problem was the superstition, and the scholars did not dare to defy the superstition.

Now the Post-Shiva Tantra that gradually crystallized through the transformation of the original Shiva Tantra had two branches – the Gaod́iiya School and the Káshmiirii School. In East India, that is, Bengal, where the Gaod́iiya School of Tantra was popular, the Vedas had little influence. But in Kashmir, where the Káshmiira branch of Tantra was more dominant, there was the influence of both Tantra and the Vedas. During those days of ascendancy of the Káshmiira branch of Post-Shiva Tantra, the Káshmiira scholars first wrote the Vedas in contemporary Sáradá script; that is, the Vedas were written first in Sáradá script. Later came the age of Buddhism and Jainism; of course Post-Shiva Tantra was running parallel to them. Script had already been invented. The books on Jainism were mostly written in Prákrta, in the Bráhmii script which was a bit transformed; while the books on Buddhism were written in Mágadhii Prákrta, that is, in Pali, in the Bráhmii script of that time. But the Post-Shiva Tantra was written in Sanskrit; of course in Bráhmii script. So this all proves that the invention of scripts removed a great obstacle on the way. At this time there was a mutual exchange of ideas among Jain Tantra, Buddhist Tantra and Post-Shiva Tantra.

When some ideas or schools of thought exist side by side for a long period in a certain country, there is bound to be some sort of mutual exchange, and the result of this type of exchange cannot but be beneficial. It is often found that the result is either good or, at the worst, neither good nor bad. For instance, the Puranic concept of the deity Náráyańa and the Islamic concept of Piirabhakti combined together to give rise to a new concept of Satyapiira in Bengal. Its effect was not bad.

Similarly, those three schools of Tantra – the Jain, the Buddhist, and the Shivottara [Post-Shiva] – began to come to an understanding. All three schools broadly accepted the division of Tantra into sixty-four main branches, considering its various expressions. The only difference that persisted was the external one of differences in terminology: each school retained certain specific terms of its own. But they all generally accepted that human life had sixty-four types of expression, and hence there were sixty-four branches of Tantra. In their internal essence, they were not very far from one another; only certain terms – something external – were used differently by different Tantras. For instance, the Múlá Prajiṋá Shakti [Fundamental Cognitive Principle] was called Jinaratna or Jinaraana in Jain Tantra –

Bhańai Káhńu jina raan bi kaesá
Káleṋ bob samvohia jaesá.

– whereas in Shiva Tantra, rather in Post-Shiva Tantra, the word Shiva was used, and Buddhist Tantra used the various epithets of Buddha. Thus the sixty-four Tantras were running parallel.

For each of these sixty-four Tantras, one particular yoginii-tattva was accepted as the presiding deity (a particular controlling deity of a particular branch of Tantra was called a yoginii). All three Tantras accepted this arrangement. And all three, in order to maintain their popularity, used the name of Shiva – they declared that each Tantric deity was the wife of Shiva. Those of you who have gone to Jabbalpur might have noticed the sixty-four small temples on a hill there dedicated to these sixty-four yoginiis. They are all sixty-four Jain Tantric deities. Similarly, in Buddhist Tantra, particularly in Vajrayánii Buddhist Tantra, sixty-four deities were accepted. Shivottara Tantra followed the same practice.

Interestingly, you will notice how at this stage a silent synthesis was taking place among the different schools. Some of the Jain deities were recognized by Buddhist Tantra (for instance, the Jain deity Báráhii, with a swine’s face, was transformed into Vajrabáráhii in Vajrayánii Buddhist Tantra). Shivottara Tantra gave similar recognition to deities of other Tantras. Conversely, some of the deities of Shivottara Tantra were recognized and accepted by Jain and Buddhist Tantra.

All this proves that the synthesis of these three systems of Tantra charted a new path. This was all made possible by the invention of script. As long as script was unknown or unused, they maintained their distinct separateness; but with the popular use of script, they began to come closer to each other. For example, Ambiká is an accepted deity of Jain Tantra. But then she also became recognized by Shivottara Tantra – she was supposed to be a wife of Shiva. (But as you know, these deities cannot be the wives of Sadáshiva, who is seven thousand years old, whereas these deities are all of comparatively recent origin – about two thousand years old – arising after the invention of script.) This Ambiká Devii has been accepted in a different manner in Paoráńik Sháktácára [the Puranic Shakti Cult], as the goddess Lakśmii, but actually she is a Jain deity.

In Ráŕh, there is a town named Kalna where there is still a temple dedicated to the goddess Ambiká. Once there was a tremendous influence of Jainism in Ráŕh. The town was named Ambiká-Kalna, after the goddess, and is now called Enbo-Kalna. Another instance: the Buddhist goddess Tárá was accepted in Shivottara Tantra, and still later, in the Puranic Shakti Cult. And her changed form was accepted in the Puranic Shakti Cult as the goddess Sarasvatii. The goddess Kálii of Shivottara Tantra was accepted in Buddhist Tantra.

Thus there came an age of synthesis. And following this synthesis, these deities were accepted as gods and goddesses in Paoráńik Shaevácára [the Puranic Shiva Cult] and the Puranic Shakti Cult in somewhat changed form. This form underwent slightly more transformation during the middle of the Pathan Age, whose influence still lingers in a minor form.

Now in the process of synthesis among Jain, Buddhist and Shivottara Tantra, there evolved a new concept, the concept of Dashamahávidyá [Ten Mahávidyás], centring around those deities who had general influence in all three systems of Tantra. The idea of Dashamahávidyá arose out of ten Tantric deities, some from Jain Tantra, some from Buddhist Tantra and some from Shivottara Tantra. These deities, in slightly changed form, were accepted in Paoráńik Sháktácára, Vaeśńavácára, Shaevácára and Gáńapatyácára [the Puranic Shakti Cult, Viśńu Cult, Shiva Cult and Gańapati Cult]. While analysing the history of Dashamahávidyá, it is interesting to see how the concept of each deity evolved – how an idea dawned upon the human mind and gradually expanded in the path of synthesis until finally its basic defects demolished its own fundaments.

These Ten Mahávidyás are Kálii, Tárá, Śod́ashii, Bhuvaneshvarii, Bhaeravii, Chinnamastá, Dhúmávatii, Bagalámukhii, Mátaungii and Kamalá. These deities are present in all three Tantras. Sometimes their biija mantras are the same, sometimes different. For your proper understanding, let me give you a brief idea about these ten deities.

Meghavarńá vigatavasaná shavashivárúd́há Shyámá trinayaná;
Narashirakhad́gavarábhayashobhaná caturbhujá Kálii kálikárúpińii.
Garvitadánavagarvakharvákrti khad́gakharpará Niila Sarasvatii;
Sarvasaobhágyapradáyinii kartrii namaste Tárárúpá tárińii.
Báláruńasamá-ujjvaláuṋgábhá caturbhujá trinayaná;
Tribhuvanamanolobhá pásháḿkusha-sharacápa dhárińii Shivá Śod́ashii rúpá Shivabháviinii.
Hásyamukharitá nishákaravanditá tribhuvanamauṋgala Bhuvaneshvarii mátá;
Raktotpaladhará kot́ibhánuninditá Bhaeravii varábhayá dáyinii.
Vivarńá vidhavá malinámbaradhará kákadhvajá Dhúmávatii shúrpakará;
Bagalámukhii piitavarńá piitámbará mudgara arijihvá dhárińii.
Nijashirachinditá rudhirapánaratá digvásá ratiratá jano parisaḿsthitá;
Chinnamastá mátá d́akiniisamanvitá prabalapátakiikula ghátinii.
Manimayásane shyámakalevará Mátaungiirúpadhará sudháḿshu shekhará;
Káiṋcanakántisudiiptá sumanohará Kamalá harahrdivásinii.

The first of these deities is Káliká. She is one of the controlling deities of Shivottara Tantra, but simultaneously she was accepted in Buddhist Vajrayána. I have said a number of times that Shiva was the most influential personality. Therefore an attempt was made to establish some kind of relationship with Him: it was announced that Káliká was Shiva’s spouse. But one should remember that Shiva was born five thousand years before the age of Káliká; so how could Káliká be His wife? Secondly, Káliká – this controlling deity – is depicted as having four hands. No human structure can have four hands. So Káliká Shakti – Kálii – this deity – is not Shiva’s wife. She is a Tantric deity belonging to subsequent ages.

The second deity is Tárá. Tárá is one of the Tantric deities of Vajrayána Tantra. I have said previously that the Tárá that was worshipped in India was known as Ugratárá, while the deity that was worshipped in China was called Bhrámarii Tárá – “black as a bumblebee” – and the one who was worshipped in Tibet (Kiḿpuruśavarśa, as it was known previously) was blue-coloured. So this Tárá was later than Buddha, and later yet than Shiva; hence Tárá cannot be accepted as the wife of Shiva either. There is not even any similarity in name. Shiva did have one wife whose name was Kálii, so she has at least the similarity in name with Kálii, the deity of Post-Shiva Tantra. But this was not the case with Tárá. Tárá is purely a deity of the Buddhist Vajrayána Tantra. But she is accepted as a deity in Post-Shiva Tantra and the Puranic Shakti Cult.

Even today, you will come across boys with names such as Tárápada, Táráprasáda, etc., and girls with such names as Tárádevii. This is the history behind these names.

Tárá has no relation to Shiva. People wrongly believe that she is the wife of Shiva. I shall say something more about Tárá later, when I discuss Sarasvatii.

Then comes Śod́ashii, the third deity. In this connection, let us say something about biija mantra. At the time of Shiva, there was no use of biija mantra in Shiva Tantra. The people loved Shiva so intimately that they did not think it necessary to worship Him with a particular biija mantra. In subsequent periods the use of biija mantra became an accepted practice. In Buddhist Tantra, the acoustic root of Kálii was raḿ: this was also the acoustic root of energy. This biija mantra signifies the application of energy in action. But in Post-Shiva Tantra the biija mantra for the same purpose was changed into riiḿ. (Ra, the acoustic root of energy, plus ii suffix, indicating feminine gender, equals riiḿ.) This denotes that energy is a female entity. And in still later days, when this deity Kálii was accepted in the Puranic Shakti Cult (the present custom of the worship of the goddess Kálii is derived from the Puranic Shakti Cult), the biija mantra (riiḿ) was further changed into klrḿ: Klrḿ Káliikáyae namah.

Generally in the Post-Buddha days, during the period of the Puranic Shakti Cult, all the Buddhist, Jain and Post-Shiva Tantric deities were declared to be the wives of Shiva, otherwise the society would not recognize and worship them. But they have different biija mantras. In the Puranic Age, the commonly-accepted practice was that the controlling deities derived from Post-Shiva Tantra were designated as “Dakśińá Shakti”, and those derived from Vajrayána Buddhism were designated as “Vámá Shakti”.

For instance, Káliká: she was known as “Vámá Kálii” when worshipped in Buddhist Tantra. When an image was made of her, she would be painted jet-black; her left leg would be placed forward, her right leg behind; and there would be red patches on her left leg. This deity, Vámá Kálii, was not worshipped inside houses or in villages; she was worshipped in the cremation grounds outside the villages. These days, these deities are called by various names: for instance, Vámá Kálii, Shmashána Kálii, Rakśá Kálii and Rat́antii Kálii. These are all deities of the Buddhist Tantra Cult, subsequently declared to be “Vámá Shakti”; and the goddesses of Post-Shiva Tantra who are now accepted in the Puranic Cult are called “Dakśińá Shakti”.

But the images of Dakśińá Shakti are painted black or blue, or light green, and the right leg is placed in front. They are worshipped mainly at home, or inside the villages. The idea is: we may accept the deities of Buddhist Tantra, but not as family deities or village deities. Some sort of distance must be maintained. But in the case of the Dakśińá Shaktis, there is no such distance.

Though both types of deity, dakśińá and vámá, were declared to be the wives of Shiva, historically speaking, they had no relationship with Shiva, because all these deities originated at least five thousand years later than Shiva. Not only that, no human structure can have four hands. They have been selected out of the sixty-four schools of Tantra. Basically, they are not human structures.

An old Bengali poem says,

Ek so padumá caośat́t́i pákhuŕi
Te madhye nácanti d́omnii bápuŕi.

This is very old Bengali. It means, “There is one lotus flower having sixty-four petals, and in the centre of the petals is dancing Naerátma Devii.” In Buddhist Tantra, Prakrti, who is active in all the manifestations and emanations of this universe, is called Naerátma Devii.

Let us come to Śod́ashii of these Ten Mahávidyás. Śod́ashii is also called Shivá – that is, “the wife of Shiva, one whose object of meditation is Shiva”. Śod́ashii, who was originally a deity of Buddhist Vajrayána Tantra, was accepted subsequently in Post-Shiva Tantra with a new name, Rájarájeshvarii. Later, in the Puranic Shákta Cult, this deity Rájarájeshvarii was accepted and worshipped, though she was not very popular among the masses. More recently, towards the end of the Mughal period and the beginning of the British period, Krśńacandra, the king of Nadia, introduced the worship of Rájarájeshvarii, in a slightly changed form and with a new name – Jagaddhátrii. Thus Jagaddhátrii is essentially a Buddhist Tantric deity transformed from Śod́ashii. (You should note carefully that the worship of Jagaddhátrii was especially popular in Krishnanagar. It is comparatively recent in origin, as it started in the early part of British history.) Just as Śod́ashii in Buddhist Tantra was conceived to be the wife of Shiva, Rájarájeshvarii and Jagaddhátrii were also declared to be Shiva’s wives. But how can they be the wives of Shiva, who lived seven thousand years ago?

It may be a bit irrelevant to mention here, but the fact is that the worship of Jagaddhátrii is carried out in both Krishnanagar and Chandannagar with great pomp and pageantry. An inhabitant of Chandannagar – possibly his name was Gauṋgá Govinda Bandyopádhyáya – was the Dewan, the Prime Minister, of Nadia. Following the example of Krishnanagar he introduced the worship of Jagaddhátrii in Chandannagar also. In art, grandeur, pomp and pageantry, Chandannagar lags behind Krishnanagar. But Chandannagar can claim supremacy in one special area: there the Jagaddhátrii idols are of gigantic size.

Anyway, these deities, which originated in the days of medieval Jain Tantra, Buddhist Tantra and Post-Shiva Tantra, were not the wives of Shiva. Some had four hands, some had eight hands, etc., so they were not representations of human beings.

In this connection, one more question may arise. People say that Ramchandra, the king of Ayodhyá, was the first to worship the goddess Durgá: you may have also heard such a story.

Let us discuss this topic. But obviously, before that, we have to say something about the epic Rámáyańa. The story of the Rámáyańa was handed down orally from generation to generation in India, Malaysia and Indonesia, for many thousands of years, not only two thousand or four thousand years. But the story was first written down in the form of a book by Maharshi Valmiki, and that too long after the age of Shiva, even after the age of Buddha.

We have two proofs on hand to substantiate this point: First, that the antiquity of a certain book is proven by its language. If the language is old, the book is also old; if the language is modern, the book is also modern. The language of the Rámáyańa by Valmiki is not at all old; rather it is very simple Sanskrit, the type of simple Sanskrit in which the scriptures of Maháyána Buddhism were written down. The second proof is, the Rámáyańa by Valmiki contains some allegations against Buddha. In the book, Buddha has been castigated for his atheism; he has been branded as an atheist, as a thief and as a hypocrite. This proves conclusively that the Rámáyańa was composed after Buddha; otherwise how could Buddha be criticized in the book? All these castigations are to be found in the “Ayodhyá Káńd́a” of the Rámáyańa.

Let us say a little more about this. So far as the Mahábhárata is concerned, it did not come down orally from ancient days. The event of the Mahábhárata took place some 3500 years ago, in the days of Lord Krśńa, and it was written down at the same time or a little later. In the Mahábhárata also, there are some references to the Rámáyańa. These are not references to the Rámáyańa of Valmiki, but to the oral story of the Rámáyańa prevalent in those days. In any case, in those days when the Rámáyańa was composed by Valmiki, the Márkańd́eya Puráńa was not in existence. The Márkańd́eya Puráńa contains references to the goddess Durgá. This Márkańd́eya Puráńa was composed in the Puranic Age, when the Shakti Cult was developing. The goddess Durgá of those days is described in one place as eight-handed, and in another place as ten-handed; but final recognition was given to the ten-handed goddess.

These are all imaginary creations of the authors of the Puranas [mythological stories]. At the time when the Rámáyańa was being composed by Valmiki, the Márkańd́eya Puráńa was not in existence, hence the story of the goddess Durgá was not known to the people. So the stories in the Rámáyańa that Rama was worshipping the goddess Durgá with one hundred and eight blue lotuses, and that the goddess stole one of them, were unknown to the people. Valmiki’s Rámáyańa contains no reference to these stories.

Then came the Márkańd́eya Puráńa, on the basis of which the Shrii Shrii Cańd́ii was composed. You should know that during the days of the Puranic Shakti Cult, the primeval stage of the Operative Principle was known as Ádyá Shakti, and this Ádyá Shakti at Her fiercest was called Cańd́a Shakti or Cańd́ii. In the Márkańd́eya Puráńa also, whose abridged form was the Shrii Shrii Cańd́ii, which contained stories of the goddess Durgá, King Surath, etc., there are no references to Rama; there is no story that Ramchandra performed the worship of the goddess.

Now, many of you are aware of the fact that Ramchandra was not an historical figure, but a fictional one: he was an imaginary character to represent an ideal king. Maharśi Valmiki was the first person to give proper expression to that character. But the poet Tulsidas tried still harder, in the Mughal period, not very long ago, to accomplish this through the Rámacaritamánasa, written in the Avadhii language. The Rámacaritamánasa is not the complete Rámáyańa. Tulsidas described the character of Rama as he thought Rama should be; he delineated the character of Rama as he conceived of Rama in his own mind. Tulsidas was a truthful person. He did not name his book the Tulasiidásii Rámáyańa, he named it Rámacaritamánasa [“The Life of Rama As Conceived by Tulsidas”].

In this book also, there is no mention of the goddess Durgá being worshipped by Rama. Then where does it occur that Rama worshipped the goddess Durgá? In the early part of the Pathan period, there ruled a king at Taherpur in the district of Rajshahii in the Varendrabhúmi (the present north Bengal). His name was Kaḿsanáráyańa Ráy. That King Kaḿsanáráyańa had enormous wealth – a vast zamindary, or estate. He called the Brahman pandits of the zamindary and expressed his desire to perform either Rájasúya or Ashvamedha Yajiṋa.⁽¹⁾ “Let the people know that I possess abundant wealth. I shall donate liberally to charity during the ceremony.”

On hearing this, the pandits observed, “O noble sir, this is Kali Yuga, when you cannot perform Ashvamedha or Rájasúya Yajiṋa. Instead, you can make liberal expenditures on the occasion of the worship of Durgá as depicted in the Márkańd́eya; you can then organize great pomp and show. So please hold Durgá Pújá according to the description given in the Márkańd́eya Puráńa.”

Then King Kaḿsanáráyańa first introduced the custom of the worship of Durgá by spending 700,000 gold coins (millions of rupees). So you understand that the practice of the worship of Durgá is not at all an old practice; it started only in the early part of the Pathan period of history.

Now following King Kaḿsanáráyańa’s example, Rajá Jagadvallabha (some say “Jagatnáráyańa”), of Ekt́ákiyá, perhaps in Rangpur District of Bangladesh, performed the worship of Durgá with still greater pomp and show by spending 850,000 gold coins; and following their examples, other landowners also thought, “Are we inferior to them? We can also be big spenders!” So they too started worshipping the goddess Durgá with pomp and grandeur. Thus the worship of Durgá became a general practice in every great landowner’s house, and the number of people performing the worship increased. But the worship was always held within a family setting.

At that time some twelve friends in a village called Guptipara or Guptavrndávan at Balágarh Police Station in Hooghly District thought, “Maybe we are not able to perform the worship individually, but we can collectively organize the pújá [worship].” In the Urdu language, a friend is called iyár; thus the worship organized by twelve friends [in Bengali, “twelve” is báro] is báro + iyárii = bároyárii pújá. Previously it had been held in a family setting, but now it became collective. Since in Bároyárii Pújá [Collective Pújá], low-caste people are denied the privilege of offering aiṋjali, Bároyárii Pújá was transformed, in very recent times, into Sárvjaniin Pújá [Everyone’s Pújá], so that everyone could take part in it.

In any case, this Durgá Pújá was an event of the early period of the Pathan rule. Later the poet Krttivása Thákur composed the Bengali Rámáyańa. At that time King Hussain Shah was the Nawab of Bengal. He was a great patron of learning, and he was very keen to have good books written in original Bengali or translated from the Sanskrit language. At his request, the poet Krttivása translated the Rámáyańa from Sanskrit to Bengali. The worship of Durgá had already become a general practice in the houses of landlords in Bengal; so in order to lend greater credence to the worship of Durgá, he mentioned in his book the Bengali Rámáyańa, this incident of Rama worshipping the goddess Durgá. It was not an historical fact, nor was it a very old event: it was merely an event of the Pathan period. Thus the Bengali Rámáyańa, composed by Krttivása, was the source of the information that Rama worshipped the goddess Durgá.

Later on I will say a little more about the periods of Jain Tantra, Buddhist Tantra, Post-Shiva Tantra and the Puranas, which were prevalent about 1300 years ago, and on whose basis evolved the Puranic Shakti Cult, Shiva Cult, Viśńu Cult, Gańapati Cult and Súrya Cult.

Footnotes

(1) A royal sacrificial ceremony. –Trans.