Tantric Bodies in the Traditions of Kāmeśvarī and Tripurasundarī

In this paper, I examine dynamic conceptions of the tantric bodies in tantras, stotras, and commentaries of two related goddess traditions in the first half of the second millennium. The first is the Nityā cult, which worshiped Kāmeśvarī and was designated in classifications of Kaula systems as the tradition of the southern transmission. The second—a later tradition of the zenith, which developed into Vedicized Śrīvidyā—worshipped Tripurasundarī. Examining scriptural and devotional texts and their commentaries, I interrogate permeable boundaries between Yoga, Tantra, and popular worship. Far from being static, tantric constructions of the body reflected changes in doctrine and the range of goals and aspirations of their practitioners. Correlating techniques for internalized practices for specific results, rituals for attaining special powers, detailed visualizations of goddesses, and yogic practices aimed at a realization of non-dual awareness, this paper diachronically charts distinctive conceptions of tantric bodies within these traditions.

The last several decades of scholarship have seen important contributions to the fields of yoga and tantra. Scholars working on The Haṭha Yoga project funded by the European Research Council charted the history of physical yoga practice by means of textual study and ethnography. Innovative work by scholars within the American Academy of Religion has shed light on the emergence of modern yoga out of the encounter between Indian and European cultures. And the work of many scholars of tantric traditions made the significance of early tantra better known to scholars of South Asian religions. However, scholars in the field of the academic study of religion are only beginning to explore a connection between Yoga and Tantra. Far from being separate and clearly delineated phenomena, yogic and tantric traditions intersected and developed within a multivalent dialogue between religious practices of ascetics and householders. Mallinson and Singleton provided us with an important sourcebook, Roots of Yoga (2017), which draws on a number of lesser-known texts, including tantric sources. These and other authors (Sanderson 1988, Heilijgers-Seelen 1994, and Dyczkowski 2009) investigated the well-known system of six cakras (wheels) in the cult of the goddess Kubjikā. Furthermore, Gavin Flood’s The Tantric Body: The Secret Tradition of Hindu Religion (2006) provided a compelling argument for the tantric body as the uniting metaphor of diverse tantric systems. However, our understanding of conceptions of tantric bodies in traditions that identified themselves as Kaula—i.e., influenced by the emergence of the path of the Goddess Clans (Kulamārga)—is still nascent. Furthermore, Flood’s model of the tantric body does not account for the diversity, expansion, and changes within tantric traditions over time. This paper provides a diachronic view of the multiplicity of conceptions of tantric bodies within Kaula traditions that worshipped Kāmeśvarī and Tripurasundarī, drawing on primary sources in Sanskrit from the first half of the second millennium CE. 

Sources examined in this paper include tantras (scriptural texts in the form of the dialogue between Bhairava and the Goddess), commentaries written by learned exegetes, and versified devotional compositions. While tantras (e.g., the Nityākaula, the Ciñcinīmatasārasamucchaya, the Vāmakeśvarīmata, and the Yoginīhṛdaya) recorded ritual and meditation techniques that were meant to lead to the attainment of bhukti and mukti (enjoyment and liberation), commentators updated the existing body of knowledge with their understanding of ritual performance within the context of their lineages and reinterpreted it according to dominant doctrinal and philosophical positions within their milieus. Prose commentaries differed in style, ranging from highly erudite exegetical texts (e.g., Jayaratha’s Vāmakeśvarīmatavivāraṇa) to accessible explanations of literal meanings and decoding of technical information contained in the tantras (e.g., Vidyānanda’s Artharatnāvalī). Despite differences in style, the intended audience for tantras and commentaries consisted of gurus and initiated practitioners. In contrast, stotras (e.g., the Lalitāsahasranāma, Lalitātriśatī, and Khaḍgamāla) collected and preserved this specialized body of knowledge accreted in tantras and commentaries over a number of centuries. Their memorable verses were meant for a devotional practice of chanting by a broader audience and did not require initiation. Analysis of this textual evidence uncovers increasingly complex blueprints of the body, which included padmas (lotuses), ādhāras (supports), cakras (wheels), kūṭas (peaks), granthis (knots), and kuṇḍala (coil) or Kuṇḍalinī. Practices included visualizations of the physical form of the Goddess and the dynamic process of her cosmic emanation, encoded in the ritual diagram and the principal mantra. Furthermore, visualizations of the Goddess and her unfolding within the universe were transposed and meditated upon within the body of the ritualist. Thus, an embodied realization of Tripurasundarī in the later tantras (e.g., the Yoginīhṛdaya) rested upon the identity of the Goddess, yantra (ritual diagram), vidyā (mantra of a feminine divinity), and the ritually and doctrinally constructed models of tantric bodies.