Shakti (Hindu) Wicca

[David19]

I wasn't sure what forum to post this in, the Wicca forum or this one, so, if you want to move it to somewhere more appropriate, please feel free :).

Anyway, recently, I came across this site, Shakti Wicca (http://shaktiwicca.tripod.com/), and it seems quite interesting, but, I was just wondering, do you think Hinduism and Wicca are compatiable, or do you think they should remain seperate?, there, IMO, are definitely similarities, for example, in some traditions of Hinduism, The Great Goddess is seen as Supreme, and that's very much a Wiccan parallel, and then you add to beliefs of reincarnation, karma, etc (which Gardner probably got from Hindu religions, and probably some other Eastern religions and traditions too, from his time in the East), but, what about you?.

Here's another site on Hindu Wicca which highlights some parallels between Hinduism and Paganism:

http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/4965/hinduwicca.html

Here's one of the pages which details similarities between Celtic and Vedic culture and religion:

http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/4965/arya.htm

Not knowing much about either culture, I can't say whether it's a good article or not, this part interests me:


Departed souls dwelled in refined or hellish lands until their next reincarnation as a human or animal.

At death, souls continue existence in subtle or hellish realms until entry into the next human or animal body

I think I've heard in Hinduism, humans can dwell in either Hell dimensions or Heavenly dimensions or be reincarnated, but, I wasn't too sure about Celtic religions.

From the main page:


In many instances westerners confuse the East VS West dichotomy as having some sort of intrinsic basis in fact, even though East obviously depends on where one is standing at the time. Even Wiccan/neo-Pagan authors have tried to insist that Hindus can't possibly be "Pagans", because of course Paganism was invented in Europe and doesn't exist outside of their cultural groups. (Excuse me?) The very concept of attempting to seperate so called "Western" religions from "Eastern" ones appears to be of Christian origin and intended to show "obvious" Christian superiority. There is no such thing as "Western religions" that are exclusively original and uninfluenced by their "Eastern" ancestors. All of them were strongly influenced by the religious philosophies and theologies of the "near and far East". This fiction of a total split was invented by Christians to put down religions that worship multiple forms of God, worshipped Goddesses, taught karma, harming none, and belief in evolution through reincarnation in order to become more like the Gods/Goddesses. (Gee that interpretation of "Eastern religions" sounds just like Wicca, doesn't it?)

I'm not sure if I'd agree with that, 'cause, Hindus, as far as I'm aware, do not like being called Pagan, at least, not the Indian Hindus, maybe some of the more Western American Hindu's might not see anything wrong with it.

That said going back to the original Shakti Wicca site I linked too, there's this page telling people what Shakti Wicca is (http://shaktiwicca.tripod.com/what.html) and it does seem quite interesting and quite cool.

But, what are your thoughts and opinions on it?.

Edit: Just noticed the title, and I'm not sure what happened, it's just meant to read 'Shakti (Hindu) Wicca', I'm not sure how the internet address for MW got in there?.

[Burning Angel]

I wasn't sure what forum to post this in, the Wicca forum or this one, so, if you want to move it to somewhere more appropriate, please feel free :).

Anyway, recently, I came across this site, Shakti Wicca (http://shaktiwicca.tripod.com/), and it seems quite interesting, but, I was just wondering, do you think Hinduism and Wicca are compatiable, or do you think they should remain seperate?, there, IMO, are definitely similarities, for example, in some traditions of Hinduism, The Great Goddess is seen as Supreme, and that's very much a Wiccan parallel, and then you add to beliefs of reincarnation, karma, etc (which Gardner probably got from Hindu religions, and probably some other Eastern religions and traditions too, from his time in the East), but, what about you?.

Here's another site on Hindu Wicca which highlights some parallels between Hinduism and Paganism:

http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/4965/hinduwicca.html

Here's one of the pages which details similarities between Celtic and Vedic culture and religion:

http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/4965/arya.htm

Not knowing much about either culture, I can't say whether it's a good article or not, this part interests me:



I think I've heard in Hinduism, humans can dwell in either Hell dimensions or Heavenly dimensions or be reincarnated, but, I wasn't too sure about Celtic religions.

From the main page:



I'm not sure if I'd agree with that, 'cause, Hindus, as far as I'm aware, do not like being called Pagan, at least, not the Indian Hindus, maybe some of the more Western American Hindu's might not see anything wrong with it.

That said going back to the original Shakti Wicca site I linked too, there's this page telling people what Shakti Wicca is (http://shaktiwicca.tripod.com/what.html) and it does seem quite interesting and quite cool.

But, what are your thoughts and opinions on it?.

Edit: Just noticed the title, and I'm not sure what happened, it's just meant to read 'Shakti (Hindu) Wicca', I'm not sure how the internet address for MW got in there?.

The tradition itself looks cool - I haven't checked the other sites, but it seems to me that Wicca was basically Eastern anyway :P It's a unique concept, though...the Shakti thing. I wouldn't go for it, but if someone else wants it it's great. Too bad the tradition fell apart, though :(

And yeah...the title thing is weird. I have no idea how that happened either :P

~Jon :boing:

[Dumunzi]

Are they compatible? Softcore polytheism doesn't particularly do it for me, but that's just in my case.

What I can tell you about Hinduism though is this- Kali is considered amongst New Agers & Pagans to be a benevolent mother Goddess. Kali or Kali-Ma in Hinduism is considered to be a deity of change, destruction. She wields with multiple arms weapons and a severed head.

So you can see the view of her in the east and west is very different. In Hinduism however this is not considered cultural missapropriation, or in any way terribly wrong. They, in Hinduism, would just consider it the way the goddess Kali is introducing herself to a society and the way that that particular society understands her. So to them, it may not work for them, but it would be acceptable.

[Toby Stimpson]

I've wanted to comment on this for a long time, but wanted to do a thorough job of representing my feelings on this matter. That and everytime I've sat down to write a post it's been like pages long and I repeated myself quite a lot :foh::goodgrief

I have a love/hate attitude towards this concept of Hindu Wicca. On one hand I think that it's foolish and I cannot understand the need or motivations. But, that being said because it is not one, stabilized tradition... I think I have problems more with the concept than any one particular group. I can think of atleast three different groups that have attempted to synchretize Hinduism and Paganism, Shaktiwicca being among them.

To Shakti Wicca's defense and credit, I think that out of everything I have seen, Devi Spring (who lives in Toronto here and was an active member of this forum for a while) had the right idea and put the effort into creating her tradition. I think also that she was careful and respectful towards both traditions, and did not treat Hinduism as this massive glob of a tradition, instead she focused her attention down onto a specific school and sect. But I certainly do have criticism of it, as I do about the whole idea.

Mixing Hinduism and Paganism is something that I don't think is fully possible, and I think that to try would be to reinvent the wheel and also not fully take up Hinduism as a context, instead taking surface level elements. The links you gave us David show this. The geocities sites show that they don't have their facts stright, that they generalize and manipulate elements to fit, and are raising issues that seemingly doesn't exist.

The first fallacy on this page: http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/Canopy/4965/hinduwicca.html

Attempts to generalize religious grouping, attacks Christianity and mixes up history. Wicca cannot be compared to Hinduism, because a lot of elements that they bring up were originally eastern. Wicca had no concept of Dharma, and yet all religions in the East are classified by that one thing in common... Dharmic religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism). They go on to make claims that cannot be backed up such as "Some people have done this..." and imply that it is worked, but doesn't offer the meat and gravy.

The historical data of Vedics and Celts does not cite any references and this is extremely problematic, and although it is true that Celts and the Vedic peoples shared many common religious elements (as they were all part of the Indo-Aryan cultural group), the list of similarities is so common among most ancient peoples that these could be applied to any grouping. BUT, and this is what annoys me, Celts are not Wiccans and modern Paganism has the veneer of Celtic spirituality only.. it is not the continuation of Celtic spirituality because it so heavily borrows from other cultures.

But I digress, getting back to the main point at hand. There are seven main arguments and criticisms I have of this concept of Hindu Wicca. Although I would be the first to say that I am always changing and may change my mind on this issue, I do think right now I am doubtful that Hinduism and Wicca can or should be mingled together, I just don't think that it should happen.

The issue of validity. Although Hinduism is on the surface a polytheistic religion, validity matters. All Hindu sects ackowledge and venerate the various Gods, but in different ways. Vaishnavas suggest that Shiva is an emanation of Vishnu... Shivites say the opposite. Validity in Hinduism comes from scriptures and Divine authorities. If a scripture is written by a Guru, then that Guru must be an avatar of a God to be valid. In other traditions, validity comes from the upholding of society and continuation of traditions. (although I would be the first say that is a problematic idea). If wiccan is incorporated with Hindu elements, my question would be where are they deriving their validity from? Also, when it comes to being a Priest/Priestess... I would really question the ability of that priest/priestess if they are not fully versed in a particular scripture. After all, Hindu priests are usually versed in sanskrit, they can read or atleast understand it... and since the majority of mantras and Bhajans are in Sanskrit or Hindi, fully understanding it is important. I think also the concept of Jack of all Trades/Master of none comes to mind here.

The issue of sectarian bias. This comes to the point of where the information that the wiccan group is using is taken up. As we know Hinduism is composed of sects, 5 main sects and hundreds of minor ones. Each of these view the scriptures and the Gods in different ways. If a wiccan group is unaware of where their information is coming from, they may begin to mix elements that on a deeper level are contradictory. For example, if a group wishes to use a Devi Yantra with the symbol of Wicca, the pentagram... they may overlook the fact that the five pointed start is a symbol of Shiva. Not really a good example, but here's another... the Bhagavad Gita. If the Bhagavad Gita is taken up literilly, then Krishna is the Ultimate Lord on High. However, depending on what sect or school of thought you're coming from... the interpretation of his words are different. Vaishnavas take this up literilly, because Krishna is an avatar of Vishnu. Other groups take this up as Krishna speaking as Brahman. But all Gods are forms of Brahman and can eqaully say that they are Brahman. So there may be a slight conflict. Not to mention the issue of the schools of thought like Advaita, Dvaita, Samkhya, Yoga...etc,. which all teach different things on moksha.

The cultural context. Hinduism is hgighly cultured. It is very difficult to know sometimes what is and is not a cultural piece, because as an ethnic religion like Judaism, culture and religion are inseperable. So when an individual or group wishes to extract certain elements of Hinduism, how will they (as outsiders) know what is and isn't religious or cultural? South asian culture is not the best when it comes to women's rights, despite them having hundreds of female Gods. If a religion that is also highly influenced by the women's movement, as Neo-Paganism is, wishes to be synchretized with Hinduism what is and is not sexist? Is Sri Ram ordering his wife to burn on the fire oppressive and should be overlooked? or is it an important lesson in Dharma?

The issue of Wicca not being a formulated tradition. I think that to tie in elements of Hinduism with Wicca, would be easy if the form of Wicca being used was already a solidified form like Gardnerian or Alexandrian. Of what I have seen, Wicca is in it's self so all over the place sometimes that it lacks a solidified identity. And so this raises the question for me, how can you incorporate or synchretize two religions if one is highly developed and highly structured, and the other is not? Certain traditions of Wicca and Paganism are... but for the most part when someone says they are Wiccan I doubt they are identifying themself with any one particular group.

The historical issue of Wicca and Paganism being somewhat already derived from western authorities studying religions from Asia. I think that this adds onto the whole point of dilution. Since western individuals like Madame Blavatsky for example, studied Buddhism and Hinduism and other south asian religions and transmitted that information back to Europe in the late 19th/early 20th century... that information made it's way into modern Paganism. The whole idea of karma did not exist before europeans started to venture into south asia... and did not become really impactful and well known in popular culture until these individuals started to make it more well known. Since some of these elements inspired Paganism, then what would the point be trying to incorporate those elements that originally came from Hinduism (but were changed) with Hindu components that will also be somewhat changed to fit in?

The main, conflicting, points of each religion. Hinduism teaches that the world and nature is an illusion... Wicca does not. Hinduism is founded in a collectivist group of cultures that emphasize Dharma, Wicca emphasizes personal freedom and choice. Brahmanical Hinduism is based on scriptures and the interpretations and teachings of those scriptures by Gurus, Wicca prides it's self on not having scriptures or needing them. Hinduism is composed of hundreds, even thousands of different religious traditions... each one sharing some elements with each other, but there also being vast differences between regions. Each of these traditions have structure to them, whether they be based on Brahmanical, Vedic or tribal. Wicca is a primarily synchretic tradition composed of many different elements with seemingly little structure outside of individual groups. It, like Hinduism, cannot be summed up very easily... but where it's strength is in it's vastness, it's weakness is how disorganized it can be. Compared to a highly ordered system like Hinduism, Wicca appears to have no structure at all.

Masters in the west. Of what I have seen, there is a huge mistaking of the simplistic form of Hinduism taught by masters in the west who are often quoted, because they are more well known here. Individuals like Vivekenanda, Yoganananda, Prabhupada, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, even Sathya Sai Baba. People study these masters, and with good reason I'm sure, without realizing that all of these individuals come from specific traditions with specific rules and doctrines. On the ancient oaks website, quotes from these people are strewn through out... and they are very general, generic comments. I think that if synchretization is to happen or wants to happen, this has to be looked at because these masters are not all teaching the same thing, although all of what they say may be true... that question of validity comes back. Furthering this argument, if all of these Masters are working from the point of reference of a specific ancient Text... and the Wiccan tradition draws from them without reference or study of the original ancient text, the context and true meaning of what these individuals are saying becomes lost, or atleast the question is raised whether it is truly understood. Likewise, individual quotes from these Masters are made from the Masters point of view, as influenced by their scriptures and practice. If the new Wiccan tradition doesn't practice this way, then it could possibly be easy to see things out of context. Not to say that a Master's words cannot be understood if you havn't studied Hindu sacred texts... but a greater understanding of meaning can be achieved if you, atleast, look at them.

[Snapdragon]

The religious search is first and last something between the individual and the sacred. It is a relationship of inquiry, of devotion, and of celebration. Because individuals are unique, attempts to package or force uniformity on the religious quest are, at best, simply repressive. At worst, this repression turns into oppression of others.

Having said that, I realize that some individuals are going to emphasize and focus on issues such as authority, traditional lineage, documentation, and the like. That's as valid as focusing on other things. As a polytheist, I have no problem with that. What I have a major problem with, is another polytheist's insisting that it must be this way and no other, for everyone.

So, in the matter of various traditions, my attitude is that it's entirely up to the individual to sort out what works, what appears as valid, what calls to the person who seeks divine relationship. Personally, I'm a long-time Wiccan whose active worship goes all to Kali. I have devised my own ritual and personal modes of worship, and often pray to Her. I've read a number of books about Kali, Wicca, Hinduism, and other religions, and those have been variously interesting and helpful. What they have never been and will never be, is a source of someone's telling me what I may or may not do. That is my decision, as it is my life and my search.

I didn't come over to Wicca to resurrect all the old crap from the religion that so many of us fled. Wicca is first and last, the religion of the free. For better and for worse, that puts it squarely on the individual worshipper to take responsibility for her/his religious life.

That's how it is.

[Toby Stimpson]

I found this at Wikipaganism. It has a good list of the different groups out there and links to them. Who ever wrote this up did a good job finding links.

http://pagan.wikia.com/wiki/IndoPaganism

However what I would like to point out, for the sake of critical awareness, is how this page is written. It's written in a way that, although informative, tries to categorize different groups and people as belonging to certain sects... but in a much more elaborate and terminology filled way than most.

I also found this discussion on Yahoo hat I thought might be interesting to look at.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081026154519AA2lCsI

I also want to respond to Snapdragons post, firstly by saying that I appreciate his opinion and views, however there's something I see as problematic in the logic behind the idea that it is a person's freedom to be able to search. I dont disagree with this... but I think where I am coming from is that an individual is fundamentally flawed and although ultimatly it is the responsibility of the individual... when dealing with a religious tradition that at it's core emphasizes respect for specific things and community, the ability of that individual to be able to understand orthodox elements and make reasonable decisions should be questioned.

This goes far beyond the simple argument that it is up to the individual. This debate is about whether or not it is possible. I think that the ability to reasonably differentiate and sort out what is valid and not valid comes from knowledge of a subject. If someone doesn't do their homework in a subject, they cannot possibly, adequately, differentiate between valid and non-valid things. The background for that person will come from the quality of references they're drawing from... but if they only draw from a couple of sources then I would question your ability to reasonably make a decision. I think that it's a very different thing when someone practices and explores their own spirituality... and teaches that spirituality as a tradition. The moment that begins to happen is the moment that the questions of authenticity and validity come into play because then you're dealing with another person's spirituality.