AN
INTRODUCTION TO HINDU SYMBOLISM
BY
I. K.
TAIMNI
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
ANYONE who studies Hindu scriptures is struck by
the odd mixture of the highest
philosophical doctrines on the one hand and crude
fetish worship and myths on the other. And
the most remarkable thing which strikes outsiders
who have not studied these things deeply is
how otherwise intelligent people can accept these
things as a matter of course and even take
part in ceremonies in which Divinity is worshipped
in grotesque forms. You will find, for
example, a professor of philosophy lecturing on
Vedanta in a university and explaining to the
students very carefully the subtle conception of
Nirguna-Brahman. The same professor comes
home and in the evening takes part most enthusiastically
in die worship of Kali, the Goddess
with a flaming sword and a garland of sculls round
her neck. You find the same professor
again, next day, offering Ganga water and bel
leaves to an ellipsoid made of stone in a temple.
And the strange thing about this religious life of
the Hindus is that it does not occur to these
people that there is any contradiction involved in
their attitude to the many Gods whom they
worship, sometimes in very strange forms.
Another aspect of the same phenomenon is the ready
acceptance of the innumerable
stories of different gods and goddesses in our
scriptures, specially the Puranas, which are so
popular among the masses. Many of these stories
are absurd in the extreme, some of them are
even revolting and insulting to our intelligence.
And yet, not only illiterate and unintelligent
people, but also educated and highly intelligent
people, read the Puranas with great devotion
and derive real spiritual sustenance and
inspiration from them. When a learned Pandit
(scholar) reads a colourful account of the wedding
of Shiva and Sati with great devotion,
sceptics might feel amused at his credulous
attitude, but he does not see any absurdity in the
apparently absurd story. He knows in his heart of
hearts that he is reading an allegorical
account of a great occult truth. The very
absurdity of the story shows that it is not to be taken
literally and hides a profound truth.
It is true that many common people among the
Hindus take many of these things as
literally true and this has led to the growth of
superstitions and perverted religious ideas. But I
do not think there are many people, even among
those who are illiterate, in whose
subconscious mind there is not a vague conviction
that behind these apparently absurd stories
there are hidden great spiritual truths even
though they may not understand what they are. It is
this intuitive perception or conviction which is
the basis of their faith and not lack of
intelligence, or credulity or superstition, as is
generally supposed.
A close and careful study of the Hindu scriptures
should convince anybody who has
some insight into these things that it is not only
the Vedas, Upanishads, the philosophical
works, and such other high class literature which
are the repository of the highest
philosophical and religious truths, but even
popular literature like the Puranas contains, as an
integral part of it, the highest wisdom though in
a veiled form. In fact, it is this dilution of
wisdom with stories and illustrations which has
made it easily assimilable, and enabled it to
survive the ravages of time and changing
environment, and to be handed on from generation
to generation almost intact. For one person who
can study and understand the highly
philosophical truths in their nakedness, there are
a thousand who study them clothed in the
popular form of stories, and that is how these
truths have continued to influence and inspire
the masses, generation after generation. And the
fact that the wisdom and knowledge have
and have been effective in keeping alive spiritual
traditions and conceptions shows the
wisdom of our Rishis (sages) who devised this
popular method of spreading and transmitting
ideas of great value to humanity. If our spiritual
culture is to survive it is necessary that these
truths and traditions be kept alive among the
people as a whole and not be confined among a
few erudite scholars.
What has been said above with regard to the
presentation of spiritual ideals through
stories holds good also with regard to the
presentation of spiritual and philosophical concepts
in the form of symbols. The deeper truths of
spiritual life are really beyond the grasp of the
lower mind and are matters of direct realization
in the deeper states of consciousness. But a
keen and trained intellect may be able to deal with
these truths, partially and indirectly, in the
form of philosophical conceptions and concepts.
These intellectual interpretations can give a
faint glimpse into the nature of these truths
especially if the mind has been purified and the
light of Buddhi illuminates it to some extent. But
these purely intellectual conceptions are
bound to be abstract and can be grasped only by
people whose higher minds are well
developed. The ordinary man finds it very
difficult to understand them or to take any real
interest in them.
Are the masses then to be deprived completely of
the benefit of knowing these truths?
The art of symbolism was created to enable the
ordinary man to derive at least some
advantage from these ideas, to keep alive his
interest in them and thus make possible the
transmission of these precious ideas from
generation to generation as part of the general
culture and heritage. A symbol is a concrete thing
which every man can see and remember. If
he understands its inner significance well, the
symbolic representation does not interfere with
his understanding of the truth. On the other hand,
it helps him to fix it more easily in his mind.
If he does not understand the inner significance,
he, at least, knows that it represents some
inner truth and has, generally, a vague idea about
it. He can thus maintain, at least, a
superficial contact with the truth and derive some
inspiration from it. Even the most learned
philosopher can, at best, know the truth very
vaguely as long as he has not realized it directly.
Even if he takes the thing literally, which is
hardly possible for any sane person, he carries in
his mind a form which can be invested with life
and meaning quite easily. In fact, it will be
difficult to find an individual in India, in whose
mind these symbols associated with Divine
life are not associated in some degree with
meaning and who does not feel more or less
devotion towards them. We thus see that symbols
and allegories may to a certain extent step
down the truths of the higher life and may even debase
them, but they keep them alive and
thus enable the common people to derive some
measure of inspiration from them.
Most of us do not realize what an important part
symbolism plays in our life.
Language through which we communicate ideas is
purely symbolical in character. We assign
certain meanings to words and then use these words
as coins or counters for the
communication of ideas. There is no natural
relationship between words and the ideas for
which they stand except when they are used for
their sound effect in Mantra Yoga. When, for
example, the word prasannam is used in the
dhyana-mantra of Mahesha we use a sound for
representing the state of ananda (bliss) in which
He lives. When a smile is shown on His face
in a picture we use a visual device for
representing the same idea.
His expression of religious and philosophical
ideas through symbols is not an art
peculiar to Hinduism. It has been practised since
times immemorial in many parts of the
world but perhaps it has never been developed to
such a degree or practised on such a wide
scale as in Hinduism. It is a great pity that the
study of this art has been completely neglected
in modern times with the result that our ideas
regarding religious and philosophical truths
have become confused and a lot of superstition has
crept lotto our life. This ignorance of the
symbolism hidden especially behind the forms of
religious worship is to a great extent
responsible for the declining faith in our
religious ideals and an increasing interest in
materialistic pursuits. In our modern scientific
age what one cannot explain, one is inclined to
relegate to the realm of superstition and the
modern educated Hindu is thus reduced to the
necessity of either believing in these things
blindly or ignoring them as products of fancy or
superstition.
But decline in faith among the modern educated
Hindu is not the only undesirable
result of this lack of knowledge concerning the
symbolical character of religious forms of
worship and the religious lore of Hinduism. It has
prevented the doctrines of Hindu religion
receiving from the Western people the serious
consideration which they deserve on account of
their inherent reasonableness and highly
philosophical character. It is true that Western
scholars have given a lot of their time to the
study of Hindu religion and done much to spread
this knowledge among Western people. But they have
done it in a purely academic spirit,
regarding these things as relics of the phases
through which the Hindu mind has passed in the
past and to which it is clinging rather
credulously in the present. They can study and record
the customs of primitive tribes in the heart of
Africa with the same care and the same
detachment. For lack of the key to symbolism which
lays open the inner meaning, they have
not been able to take these things seriously as
representing the truths of the inner life of the
spirit based upon facts of experience of
spiritually enlightened people.
Many devotional people are afraid to look into
these things because they think that
such a study will undermine their devotion. This
is obviously a mistaken attitude. The truths
hidden behind the symbols are so magnificent and
of such deep import that devotion should
become strengthened and not weakened on
understanding the inner significance of the
symbols. A new understanding dawns in our mind
which not only illumines it and enriches
our conception but also brings out a deeper and
more intelligent kind of devotion. The
understanding of the inner significance of the
symbolic form does not deprive us of the form
to which we may have become attached. It ensouls
that form with a new life. This is a
necessary step in our progressive realisation of
the reality hidden behind the symbol within
ourselves.
CHAPTER II
DEVIS AND DEVATAS AS POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE
ONE
GOD
BEFORE we deal with the symbolism underlying the
many forms in which the Hindu
worships God, it is necessary to say a few words
about the conception of Devis and Devatas
in Hinduism. There is no aspect of Hinduism which
is more misunderstood and
misrepresented than the existence of a large
number of forms, some of them grotesque, in
which different people worship the Divine Being.
People who are superficially acquainted
with the basic conceptions which underlie Hindu
religion and philosophy seriously believe
that the Hindu worships innumerable gods and
goddesses. Nothing is farther from the truth. It
must be said however, that there is some
justification for this gross misunderstanding. The
manner in which the different forms are worshipped,
the large number of superstitions which
have gradually grown round them, the misleading
statements which are some times made in
the Puranas and other similar literature, all
these things can easily give the wrong impression
that Hindus are polytheistic.
The misconceptions and misunderstandings
surrounding this subject are easily
removed if it is understood clearly that the Hindu
worships only one God and the different
gods and goddesses who are included' in the Hindu
pantheon are merely representations of the
functions and powers of that Supreme God in the
manifested Universe. The Universe is not
only a vast, but an extremely complicated
organism, especially when we take into account the
invisible worlds which are hidden within the
visible physical world. If we examine the
machinery of an ordinary modern government or the
complex equilibrium of different natural
forces which is hidden behind an ordinary physical
phenomenon we derive some idea of the
unimaginable complexity of the functions and
powers which must be required for running the
machinery of a universe or solar system. Taking
the simpler unit of a solar system for our
consideration, we find that according to Occult
Doctrine it comes into being periodically out
of the One Supreme Brahman and after functioning
for some time within His consciousness
again disappears into the same Supreme Brahman.
The creation, dissolution and the
preservation of this huge and complicated organism
requires innumerable functions and
powers of greater or lesser importance as in
running the machinery of a government. Even the
creative and destructive functions are not simple
as is generally imagined. Creation does not
come to an end when a solar system comes into
being; destruction is not needed only when it
goes into pralaya (dissolution). These functions
continue throughout the period of
manifestation. And so do all the other functions
which are subordinate to, or are associated
with, these three important functions. It is these
various functions and the powers
corresponding to them which are sought to be
represented in the forms of different gods and
goddesses or Devatas and Devis as they sure called
in Hinduism. According to Hindu
philosophy this Universe is merely an expression
or manifestation of the Supreme Brahman
outside whom nothing can possibly exist. So all
these innumerable functions and powers
exercised in relation to the manifested Universe
must be rooted in that Brahman and must be
ultimately His functions and powers. The Devis and
Devatas can, therefore, be nothing but
representations of His functions and powers.
The Devatas and Devis are shown in male and female
forms because the function and
the corresponding power which enables that
function to be exercised are related to each other
as two poles, or positive and negative principles.
In fact, the existence of the manifested
Universe depends upon the primary differentiation
of the one Reality into two polar aspects,
one positive the other negative, the positive
aspect being the source of all functions and the
negative aspect the source of all powers. Both the
aspects are conscious Principles for in that
transcendent state there can be nothing but
consciousness.
These two opposite aspects are called Shiva and
Shakti and from them arise all the
functions and powers which are required when a
manifested universe comes into existence.
The main functions are, of course, those of
creation, preservation and destruction, but there
are innumerable others which are derived from or
associated with these. It is not possible to
enter here into a detailed discussion of the
relations existing between these various functions
and powers but there are two points which must be
made clear to enable the reader to
understand easily the details of some symbologies
discussed later:
The first point concerns the relations between
Devis and Devatas. It will be seen that
not only are there innumerable functions and
powers in action in the manifested Universe but
that each function must be related to its specific
power which can make it effective, so that the
whole set off functions is matched by a
corresponding set of powers like an object and its
shadow, and the Devis and Devatas can thus be
paired off scientifically. This principle lies at
the basis of the fact that particular Devis are related
to particular Devatas and are called their
consorts. Thus Sarasvati is the consort of Brahma,
Lakshmi that of Vishnu and Kali of Rudra.
A great deal of confusion exists in Hindu
religious literature with regard to this matter owing
to lack of proper differentiation between
functions and powers on a scientific basis, but one
can, at least, understand the general principle.
The second point is concerned with the relation of
Shiva, Mahesha and Rudra. These
three names are used interchangeably in Hindu
scriptures and for popular treatment of many
subjects this does not matter. But from the
strictly philosophical and scientific point of view
this is not correct and leads to confusion. There
are three clearly-defined and distinct
functions we have to take into account in
considering the mechanism of manifestation from
the occult point of view and, for the sake of
clarity and consistency, each of these names
should indicate only one of these functions.
It is not possible to deal here at length with the
subtle but real differences in these
functions. It may be merely pointed out that
taking everything into consideration—the
meaning of the words, tradition, and symbology,
etc.—it is desirable to confine the name
Shiva to that underlying Reality which always remains
unmanifest in polar relationship with
Shakti. It is the hidden source of all functions
which are needed in manifestation and the
repository of all manifested systems when they
pass into a state of pralaya or dissolution. The
name Mahesha—meaning the Supreme Ruler or
Lord—should obviously be used for that
Reality which is called Logos and which lies at
the basis of a manifested system and rules,
controls and energizes it through its three
well-known aspects: Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra. It
is the base of a tetrahedron with its three faces,
the triple bel leaf with its three separate
leaves. The remaining name, Rudra, should thus be
reserved for the more limited function of
destruction. Rudra is thus the third member of the
Trinity, the other two being Brahma and
Vishnu. These three aspects of Divinity called
Shiva, Mahesha and Rudra, though distinct, are
related to each other in a very mysterious manner
and this partially accounts for the prevailing
confusion with regard to their functions and the
names which indicate them. But it is not
possible to go into this subtle question here. The
student should have a clear idea with regard
to the three functions indicated above. It will
then not really matter to him which name is used
for the function involved in a particular Context.
A clear grasp of the fundamental principles
underlying Hindu symbolism will enable
the student not only to have a correct idea with
regard to the essential nature of Devis and
Devatas, but also enable him to avoid the
confusion resulting from the mixing up of these
functions and names. This is rather a
disconcerting aspect of the gradual degeneration and
confusion which has crept into Hindu philosophical
conceptions as a result of the static and
orthodox tendencies which have characterized
philosophic thought in this country for a long
time. The whole subject requires to be studied
carefully so that the fundamental doctrines and
conceptions of Hinduism may become clarified and
order and harmony may be evolved out of
the chaos which Hindu religion appears to an
outsider. This will not be easy and will require
prolonged and painstaking research but this is
very necessary if the ideas of Hindu religion are
to be placed on a rational basis. In these days of
free thinking and scientific enquiry, one
cannot expect to satisfy people with jumbled-up
ideas, but must present them, at least
rationally, if not scientifically.
The preliminary consideration of the points
discussed above has cleared the ground
and we can now take up the subject proper.
CHAPTER III
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF HINDU SYMBOLISM
SYMBOLISM is the art of representing ideas,
objects, processes, etc. through signs or
symbols. A thing which typifies or recalls
something naturally by possession of analogous
qualities is called a symbol. But we are not
concerned in this book with symbolism in general
but with the application of this art in
representing truths of Hindu religion and philosophy. In
the limited context in which we are using the word
we may say that symbolism is the art by
the help of which truths of religion and
philosophy can be represented through forms, signs
and stories. Let us not bother about definitions
and academic aspects of the subject but come
straight to the particular aspect of the subject
which we want to study, namely the
representation of religious and philosophical
ideas through symbols and allegories. The
underlying ideas will become clear only after we
have considered different aspects of the
subject, using a number of examples to illustrate
the principles involved.
It would help us to understand more easily what is
to follow if we first discuss briefly
what may be called the general principles of Hindu
symbolism. These principles, as far as I
know, have not been studied or set forth
systematically and one can only deduce them from a
general study of Hindu religion and philosophy
combined with the deeper knowledge of the
realities of life which is found only in true
Occultism and Mysticism. Symbolism is an art and
not a science and the symbols are selected, except
in the case of natural symbolism, not on a
scientific basis but with a view to convey to the
common man the underlying ideas as easily
and effectively as possible. So, the study of
symbolism is mostly a question of interpretation
and not scientific investigation and presentation.
The interpretation should be such as to
appeal naturally to one's reason and commonsense.
In fact, it is possible to have more than
one interpretation of the same symbol both equally
reasonable and illuminating. It is also
possible that one may not be able to interpret a
particular symbol or may interpret it
incorrectly. The important thing about Hindu
symbolism is not what is the exact meaning of
everything, but that everything has a meaning and
generally a profound significance
connected with spiritual life.
But this does not mean that a person is free to
interpret the symbols according to his
own sweet will. Those who devised the symbols were
men of real knowledge. They had
definite ideas in their mind which they sought to
represent by means of these symbols. True
interpretation means catching those ideas through
intuition and reflecting them as faithfully as
possible for the benefit of others. It is
necessary to point out this fact because there is a
tendency among a certain class of people to make
all kinds of wild suggestions in the way of
interpretation, based on very superficial
considerations. This kind of interpretation makes
confusion worse confounded and further weakens the
faith of the average student in the
profound significance of the symbols.
In considering symbolism as a method of
representing the truths of the inner life, it is
necessary to distinguish first between symbol and
allegory. The two methods corresponding
to these may be called static and dynamic symbolism.
In the first method we use a form to
symbolize the thing to be represented. The form
may be simple or complex. It may symbolize
a particular law or quality or power or it may
symbolize a number of these in an integrated
form. The common characteristic of all such static
symbols is that no movement in time or
apace is involved.
Dynamic symbolism is generally known by the name
of allegory. In this there is a
narrative description under guise of which a moral
law, a natural process or spiritual truth is
sought to be conveyed in an interesting manner.
The story may, or may not, suggest by an
apparent similarity what is sought to be
represented. Generally it does not, and that is why
such stories are taken literally by the unwary.
The general characteristic of dynamic
symbolism is that there is movement in the form of
a story or the unfolding of a gradual
process with different stages.
Static symbolism may be further subdivided into
two classes, which may be called
natural and artificial. An artificial symbol is
chosen arbitrarily to represent a particular thing
because it recalls the thing by virtue of its
possessing analogous qualities or through
association in thought. There is no natural
relation between the two and it is possible to select
another symbol which is equally or more effective
in this respect. A natural symbol, on the
other hand, not only symbolizes the thing in
question but also manifests it in a mysterious
manner on account of some hidden natural relation
between the two. The difference between
the two is like the difference between a name and
a vachaka used in Mantra Yoga. A name is
chosen arbitrarily and has no natural connection
with the object for which it is used. Another
name could serve the purpose equally well. But a
vachaka is a special name which embodies
in a mysterious manner the power and qualities of
the vachya, the thing which it indicates. So
it is possible to establish a relation with, and
draw upon, the power of the latter with the help
of the former, as is done in Mantra Yoga. Similar
is the relation between a natural symbol and
the object it represents. These things will become
clear when we consider illustrative
examples of each.
In considering artificial symbols which are used
in the Hindu religion it appears to be
a fundamental principle that in representing
anything the symbol chosen is such that it
naturally and easily suggests the thing which is
sought to be represented. Symbols were meant
to give to the common man a concrete object which
he could visualize easily and through
which he could associate the truths of the inner
life in his mind in an integrated form. They
were not meant merely for scholars who could grasp
abstract ideas to a certain extent and do
without any concrete representation. It was,
therefore, essential that the symbols used were
those taken from familiar objects and such objects
as would naturally suggest the quality, state
or power which was sought to be represented. Even
when a person could grasp the abstract
ideas and had to a certain extent outgrown the use
of the concrete symbols, these symbols,
were meant to help him to fix the different ideas
in an integrated manner in a composite
mental image. The human mind needs something
concrete to which to hold on. It cannot work
in a vacuum. It also needs to keep before it an
idea of the inner realities. A concrete symbol,
therefore, satisfies very effectively both these
needs and may be considered as a very happy
synthesis of the concrete and the abstract.
The second general principle which we should keep
in mind is that in representing a
Devi or Devata, everything in the form, and
associated with the form, is meant to have a
symbolic significance though we may not be able to
trace the relation between a particular
symbol and the thing symbolized. The complexion of
the skin, the smile on the face, the
object held in the hand, the manner in which the
hand is raised, all these things have their
meaning as well as the more concrete and prominent
objects associated with the form. If,
therefore, the sadhaka (aspirant) keeps in his
mind the total image with all its component
parts and knows also what each part represents, he
can have a very elaborate and
comprehensive idea with regard to the nature and
powers of the Devi or the Devata. The need
for such a concept becomes imperative when he
tries to pass from the worship of the mere
outer form to that of the Reality within. The
bhakta (devotee) usually starts his meditation
with forming an image of the form of his
Ishta-devata (chosen deity) in his mind. But the next
stage is meditation on His qualities or attributes
and this knowledge concerning the
symbology of the Devata helps him a great deal in
this stage. It is only through such a
meditation that he can draw nearer to his
Ishta-devata said prepare himself for the still higher
stage in which he tries to transcend the mental
concept and grasp the Reality by fusing his
consciousness with the consciousness of the
Ishta-devata. The Devata of the mere beginner is
in the external form, that of the advanced sadhaka
(aspirant) in the realm of the higher mind
and that of the siddha (the perfected individual)
in his heart, in the realm of consciousness
which transcends the intellect.
It should be noted that the remarks in the
previous paragraphs are applicable only to
forms which are truly symbolic in character and
not to those forms which represent historical
figures, either Avataras (divine incarnations) or
spiritual teachers of mankind. These forms
are generally the product of the imagination of
artists who try to give expression in those
forms to the traditional ideas with regard to
those historical or mythological figures. Thus the
form of Krishna is not symbolic in character while
that of Vishnu is. The devotee may use
such a form in meditation but he will have to draw
upon historical or mythological accounts
of the life of that Teacher or upon his
imagination for the attributes, etc. associated with him.
Sometimes such a historical figure is taken as ah
Avatara or incarnation of Devata and it is
then permissible to see in the form of the Avatara
the attributes and powers associated with
that Devata.
After considering the general principles of Hindu
symbolism we shall now take a few
examples to illustrate these principles and to
show the profound significance hidden behind
these symbols which most Hindus know and worship
and very few care to understand. We
shall begin with natural symbolism.
CHAPTER IV
NATURAL SYMBOLISM
The Symbology of Shiva-Linga
IT has already been pointed out that in natural
symbolism the thing represented and the
symbol are related naturally and, therefore, the
symbol not only represents the reality which it
symbolizes but also serves, to a certain extent,
as a carrier or vehicle of the power and
qualities of that reality. Natural symbols are mostly
mathematical forms and some knowledge
of mathematics is necessary for full appreciation
of the wonderful relationship which exists
between a reality and the form which symbolizes
that reality.
The most important and fundamental symbol of this
nature is the three-dimensional
sphere which is represented by a circle in two
dimensions. Those who have even as
elementary knowledge of mathematics can understand
that the sphere is the most perfect form
in three dimensions known to us. The distance of
the centre of a sphere from every point on
its surface is the same. If you take any
cross-section of a sphere it will be a circle which is a
perfect figure in two dimensions. In short, it is
a perfect figure all whose parts are
symmetrical and harmoniously balanced. For this
reason the sphere should be a natural
symbol of the Ultimate Reality which is Complete,
Whole, Perfect, and in which all tattoos,
principles, powers, etc. exist in perfect balance.
Why is it, then, not used as a symbol of the
Ultimate Reality which is called Para-
Brahman in Hindu philosophy? Because this Ultimate
Reality cannot be an object of worship
and no kind of relation can be established between
It and the sadhaka (aspirant). On account
of Its very perfection in which all possible
opposites are perfectly neutralized and all different
kinds of principles are perfectly blended. It must
for all practical purposes be a void though it
contains all these opposites and principles within
Itself. As the perfect blending of all colours
of the spectrum results in the production of white
light in which one seeks in vain for any
vestige of colour, so the perfect blending of all
tattvas results in a state in which one seeks in
vain for any point with which to establish contact
from outside. It is, therefore, the Ever-
Unknowable, the Ever-Darkness to those who are in
manifestation and the only way to
approach it is through the Shiva-Shakti tattva
which is the Principle in contact with It from
within.
It will be easy to understand this
unresponsiveness of the Ultimate Reality if we
remember that it is when the primary
differentiation of that Reality into the Shiva-Shakti
Principle takes place that Shakti appears and
response of any kind becomes possible. For
response of any kind presupposes the existence of
power which can meet the aspirations and
devotions of the devotee or the seeker, and a
State in which Power as such, does not exist,
must be a Temple which remains always closed.
It is for this reason that the sphere has never
received recognition as a symbol and has
never been worshipped. But there is no reason why
we should not consider it as a symbol of
that Reality from the philosophical and scientific
point of view, for it plays an important and
significant part in the phenomena of Nature.
The second natural symbol which plays a very
important part in Hindu religion is the
ellipsoid which is derived from the sphere by the
separation of two focii from the one centre.
Everyone can understand how a circle changes into
an ellipse if the centre separates into two
focii. In the same way, a sphere in three
dimensions becomes an ellipsoid when two focii
separate from the one centre of the sphere. If the
two focii of the ellipsoid are progressively
brought closer together it becomes more and more
like a sphere and when they coincide we
again get a perfect sphere; so that roughly we may
say that an ellipsoid is formed when a unifocal
sphere becomes bifocal by separation of two foci.
The moment the two focii separate the
total perfection of the sphere is destroyed and a
kind of vikara (distortion) is introduced in the
perfect balance and harmony which was present in
the sphere. But even with this partial
distortion the ellipsoid retains some of the
perfection of the sphere. For example, a crosssection
of the ellipsoid at right angles to the axis is
always a circle, a cross-section along the
axis is always an ellipse. So that the ellipsoid
stands between the mathematically perfect
sphere and all the imperfect solids which it is
possible to imagine.
It will be seen from what has been said above
about the properties of an ellipsoid that
it is eminently suited for symbolizing the
Shiva-Shakti tattva, the state which comes between
the perfect state of the unmanifest Ultimate
Reality and the imperfect state of the manifested
Universe full of all kinds of distortions and
disharmonies. The Shiva-Shakti tattva is the
result, from the philosophical point of view, of
the primary differentiation of the Ultimate
Reality into two ultimate principles, one
positive, the other negative. These two principles are
not only equal and opposite but bound together by
means of a polar relationship of which
modern science provides many well-known
illustrations. They together provide a kind of
conscious receptacle in which every system which
has been in manifestation rests during the
period of dissolution and from which it emerges
again when manifestation takes place. In this
respect It is somewhat like the Karana-Sharira
(causal body) of a Jivatma (individual soul)
which is the repository, between successive
incarnations, of all the impressions of previous
experiences (samskaras). But of course, the
Shiva-Shakti tattva is a transcendent state of
consciousness at a tremendously high level, and
not a body like the Karana-Sharira.
All these things are well known and have been
pointed out very briefly to show how
the ellipsoid serves as a perfect natural symbol
of that Reality which is known as the Shiva-
Shakti tattva in Hinduism. This ellipsoid is
called a Shiva-linga, the word linga in Sanskrit
meaning symbol or emblem. The two focii of the
ellipsoid correspond to the two poles which
represent the positive principle called Shiva and
the negative principle called Shakti. It is true
that both these principles are in a potential
state but in this potential state is hidden the
tremendous Energy which in its innumerable forms
runs the machinery of the Cosmos as well
as all the manifestations of consciousness from
the Highest to the lowest.
Is there any indication that this form which
symbolizes the Shiva-Shakti tattva plays a
fundamental part in the structure and functioning
of the manifested Universe? Yes. Let us
consider manifested life at three levels: solar,
human and atomic. The solar system consists of
the Sun with the planets going round it. The motion
of a planet around the Sun follows
Kepler's three laws. Each planet describes an
ellipse having the Sun at one focus, the motion
being fastest when the planet is nearest the Sun
and slowest when it is furthest away. Even
comets describe ellipses around the Sun, generally
very elongated ellipses in contrast to the
nearly circular planetary orbits. Now, an ellipse
is merely a cross-section of an ellipsoid, and
the elliptical orbits of the planets show clearly
that the ellipsoid plays a decisive role in the
structure of the solar system on the subtler
planes of higher dimensions. Another significant
fact which may be noted here is that the Sun is at
one focus of these orbits. Where is the other
focus? Obviously, this is invisible and is the
real Moon referred to in Occult literature, the
negative counterpart of the positive Sun.
Let us now come down to the human level.
Clairvoyant research has shown that on the
lower planes where form plays a dominant role, all
the vehicles of the Jivatma (individual
soul) have the form of an ellipsoid. It is true
that the denser part of the body has not this form
but the aura in which this body is embedded, has.
Even the aura of the physical body has this
form, as has been shown by Dr. Kilner by his
researches on the health aura, using certain
chemicals like dicyannin for sensitizing the eyes.
A form is a visible expression of the totality
of invisible forces which work in the background
on the subtler planes. The fact that the
bodies of man in the realm of forms conform to the
ellipsoid as a prototype shows definitely
that this form plays a fundamental role in the
expression of Divine consciousness at the
human level. The fact that among living creatures
it is only in a human being that the Shivatattva
is present adds deeper significance to the
ellipsoidal form of his bodies.
Let us now come to the lowest level, that of the
atom. As is well known, an atom is a
solar system in miniature. There is a nucleus
charged with positive electricity round which
negatively charged electrons whirl at a tremendous
speed. The nature of the orbits in which
the electrons move are ellipses. Bohr in his
famous theory regarding the structure of the atom
had assigned circular orbits to these electrons
but it was shown later by Sommerfeld that the
orbits should be elliptical. Just as in the case
of the macrocosmic Solar System the elliptical
nature of the planetary orbits shows that it is
the ellipsoid which lies at the basis of the Solar
System in the archetypal world, so does the
elliptical nature of the electronic orbits in the
microcosmic atom show that the forces which mould
the atom on the physical plane emanate
from an ellipsoidal archetype.
It will be seen, therefore, that at all the three
levels on which Divine Life finds
expression in a fundamental unit of manifestation,
the ellipsoid plays a definite though
invisible role and the supremacy of this form as a
basis of manifestation is established without
any reasonable doubt.
Is it any wonder then that this form is regarded
as sacred and worshipped as a symbol
of that Dual, Transcendent, Unmanifest Reality
which is referred to as the Shiva-Shakti
tattva? But its claim to be considered as the
highest object of worship on the physical plane is
based on something more significant than its being
merely a prototype of fundamental forms
of manifestation. A full discussion of this
problem will take us too deeply into the mysteries
of inner life and cannot be taken up here. It will
be enough to point out that just as there is a
mysterious relation between sound and
consciousness which forms the basis of Mantra Yoga,
so there is also a similar relation between form
and consciousness which is the basis of the
power which is inherent in such natural symbols.
According to the theory of Mantra Yoga it is
possible to establish communication with a Devata
through a mantra. Similarly, through a
symbolic form of this nature it is possible to
become en rapport with the Reality which it
symbolizes—not artificially but naturally. How
this is done is a question with which we are
not concerned here. It is a mystery relating to
the inner life of man which can be resolved only
in one way—through inner realization.
The discussion of Shiva-linga as a symbol of the
Shiva-Shakti tattva will not be
complete without at least a passing reference to a
development brought about by the
perversity of the human mind which can sometimes
vulgarize and drag down the highest
truths to the lowest levels. Who would believe
after reading what has been said above that this
sacred symbol could be dragged down by perverted
minds to the level of ordinary sex? The
Shiva-Shakti tattva is above the highest levels of
manifestation and sexual generation belongs
to a very low level in the scale of manifestation.
In fact, it developed in the later stages of
evolution both according to Science and Occultism.
Besides, the linga represents the two
Primary tattvas in one, both the tattvas being
potential in this state and so incapable of being
associated with sex in any manner. It is true that
the polarity implied in the Shiva-Shakti tattva
may be the ultimate basis of the polarity inherent
in sex. But in that way it is the ultimate
basis of every kind of polarity in the manifested
Universe. No one associates the polarity
found in an ordinary magnet with the Shiva-Shakti
tattva and starts worshipping it.
In dealing with the symbology of Shiva-linga we
have considered only one natural
symbol based on the well-known mathematical
three-dimensional figure called the ellipsoid.
In Occult Science other mathematical figures like
the triangle, square, etc. are also used as
symbols for different aspects of the One Reality
and as these symbols are natural symbols
based on mathematics they should have some occult
properties. These potential occult
properties should be inherent in the mathematical
figure which embodies, as it were, the
power of the corresponding tattva which it
represents.
Are these occult properties of these figures also
utilized in Hindu worship ? Yes. The
whole science of Yantras is based on this. A Yantra
is nothing but a combination of
mathematical figures in a particular manner which
can be made the vehicle of certain occult
properties in the same manner as a mantra is a
particular combination of sounds and has
certain potencies associated with it. But as in
the case of mantras, there are two conditions for
its becoming an effective instrument of real
power. It must have been constructed on scientific
principles and connection must be established with
the corresponding power on the inner
planes by a person who has the necessary
knowledge. Otherwise, it is a mere geometrical
figure. The real science of Yantras like that of
mantras has disappeared to a great extent and
its outer form is utilized by unscrupulous people
to exploit the credulous and the ignorant.
Om
Tat Sat
(Continued...)
(My humble Thankfulness to Sri
I K Taimni and Hinduism online dot com for
the collection)
Post a Comment