e aberrations of Indian religion are due not to its
inherent depravity, but to its universality. In Europe those who
follow disreputable occupations rarely suppose that they have anything
to do with the Church. In India, robbers, murderers, gamblers,
prostitutes, and maniacs all have their appropriate gods, and had the
Marquis de Sade been a Hindu he would probably have founded a new
tantric sect. But though the details of Saktism are an unprofitable
study, it is of some importance to ascertain when it first invaded
Buddhism and to what extent it superseded older ideas.

Some critics[304] seem to imply--for their statements are not very
explicit--that Saktism formed part if not of the teaching of the
Buddha, at least of the medley of beliefs held by his disciples. But I
see no proof that Saktist beliefs--that is to say erotic mysticism
founded on the worship of goddesses--were prevalent in Magadha or
Kosala before the Christian era. Although Siri, the goddess of luck,
is mentioned in the Pitakas, the popular deities whom they bring on
the scene are almost exclusively masculine.[305] And though in the
older Brahmanic books there are passages which might easily become
tantric, yet the transition is not made and the important truths of
religion are kept distinct from unclean rites and thoughts. The
Brihad-aranyaka contains a chapter which hardly admits of
translation but the object of the practices inculcated is simply to
ensure the birth of a son. The same work (not without analogies in the
ecstatic utterances of Christian saints) boldly compares union with
the Atman to the bliss of one who is embraced by a beloved wife, but
this is a mere illustration and there is no hint of the doctrine that
the goal of the religious life is obtainable by _maithuna_. Still such
passages, though innocent in themselves, make it easy to see how
degrading superstitions found an easy entrance into the noblest
edifices of Indian thought and possibly some heresies condemned in the
Kathavatthu[306] indicate that even at this early date the Buddhist
Church was contaminated by erotic fancies. But, if so, there is no
evidence that such malpractices were widespread. The appendices to the
Lotus[307] show that the worship of a many-named goddess, invoked as a
defender of the faith, was beginning to be a recognized feature of
Buddhism. But they contain no indications of left-handed Tantrism and
the best proof that it did not become prevalent until muc