18 Kāşmir śaivism

Syamala K

Introduction

Whenever great revolutions took place in the history of Indian philosophy, the philosophers sought for guidance in the Upanişads. The period of the Upanişads, after that of the Vedas, was one of the most revolutionary periods in the history of Indian philosophy. After the Upanişads, came the Gītā which was an effort to present a practical treatise embodying the essence of the Upanişads. After the Gītā , the great edifice of the Vedānta philosophy was founded upon Upanişads. Following this, there arose a desire in some thinkers to combine the theistic creeds with the Upanişadic doctrine. Theism, as we all know, had developed mainly into two directions, namely, Vaişņavism and Śaivism. The amalgamation of Vedānta with Vaişņavism led to the philosophy Rāmānuja, Madhva etc. There was a corresponding effort made with regard to Śaivism also and the resulting system was Śaiva Siddhānta. Among the worshippers of Śiva, the notable cults are those of Pāśupata, Kapālika or Kālamukha, Veera Śaiva or Liṅgāyat cult, Kāşmir Śaiva and Śiva Siddhānta. Here we will deal with the important aspects of Kāşmir Śaivism.

Śaivism has its own ancient tradition and it was the native faith of Kāşmir. The system is called Kāşmir Śaivism because the writers who enriched its literature belonged to flourished in this area. But there has been a tremendous influence of Buddhism upon its development because prior to the advent of Buddhism in Kāşmir, Śaivism was confined to a simple form of worship. It is the Buddhist concept of sūnyata which provided the metaphysical foundation for the growth of integral Advaitism within the Śaiva tradition. Hence we can say that Kāşmir Śaivism represents the absolutistic development of Śaiva tradition and is described as theistic absolutism or īśvardvayavāda. According to Chandradhar Sharma, “…… there are four main systems of advaitavada in Indian philosophy, namely the Mādhyamika, Vijňānavāda, Advaita Vedānta and Kāşmir Śaivism. Of these the Advaita Vedānta in its initial form as the central philosophy of the Upanişads is the earliest. It has influenced the Buddha and thorough him the Mādhyamika and Vijňānavāda absolutism. The development of the dialectic as criticism of relational thought and the elucidation of ajātivāda in the Mādhyamika system, and the trenchant criticism of realism in Vijňānavāda, in turn, influenced Advaita Vedānta as developed by Acārya Gaudapāda and Śaṅkara. Kāşmir Śaivism is influenced by Advaita Vedānta and Vijňānavāda.” Śaṅkara’s influence on Kāşmir Śaivism can be noticed from the fact that this system could develop only after Śaṅkara’s visit to Kāşmir. We cannot deny the fact that this great master of Advaita Vedānta cleared the way for the rise and advancement of Śaiva absolutism in Kāşmir.

2. History and Literature of Kāşmir Śaivism

Kāşmir Śaivism is the fourth main system of Advaita is based on Śaiva-āgamas or taṅtras which are accorded the same authority and status as the Vedas. Vasugupta, Somānanda, Utpaladeva, Abhinava Gupta, and Kşemarāja are most eminent writers of this system and it has a voluminous literature. Kāşmir Śaivism is also known as Spaňda or Trika system. The Trika is so called either because it accepts as most important triad, Siddha, Namaka and Malini, out of the ninety-two āgamas recognized by it or because it explains three modes of knowledge of Reality, i.e., non-dual (abheda) non-dual-cum-dual (bedhābheda) and dual (bheda). The Trika is a rational exposition of a view of reality obtained primarily through more-than-normal experiences. It is also called the Pratyabhijňa system. The literature of Trika system known as Trikaśāstra, Trikaśāsana or Rahasyasampradāya can be broadly classified as- Āgamaśāstra, Spaṅdaśāstra and Pratyabhijňaśastra. According to Trika, the śāstras has eternal existence. It means wisdom, self-existent and impersonal. The āgamas or śāstras exist originally and eternally as the pravaca and then as Pasyaṅti. The wisdom set forth in the Trika philosophy is originally the self-knowledge of Reality expressing itself. And this basic or original knowledge is obtainable by men only through revelation, which means that it is self manifest (svayamprakāśa).

2.1. Āgamaśāstra

Āgamaśāstra is believed to have been revealed and it is regarded as of super human authorship. Among the Āgamas the chief ones are Mālinivijaya, Svacchaṅda, Vijňānabhairava, Migeṅdra, Mātaṅga, Netra, Naisvasa, Svayambhuva and Rudrayāmala. It lays down both the doctrine (jňāna) and the practices (Kriyā) of the system as revelations which are believed to have come down (āgama) through the ages, being handed down from teacher to pupil. It comprises of eleven Taṅtras including Mālinivijaya and Rudrayamāla. In the early stages, these works were interpreted from the dualistic and even pluralistic stand points. It was to stop the spread of this dualistic teaching and to show that the highest form of the Śivāgama taught only the pure Advaita. Tattva-Idealistic Monism-that they were revealed the Śivasūtras which forms the most important part of the Āgamaśāstra. The authorship of this attributed to Śiva himself and it is said to have revealed to the sage Vasugupta who must have lived towards the end of the eight or the beginning of the ninth Christian century. This work is called Śivopanişad-saṅgraha. On the Sūtras of this work there are, (1) Vŗtti (the authorship of which is doubtful) (2) the Vārtika by Bhāskara and (3) the commentary called Vimarśini by Kşemarāja. Śaṅkarācārya is said to have visited Kāşmir during the 9th century and his visit supplied the impetus which resulted in the formulations of Śivasūtras. Of the commentaries on the Sūtras, the well known are the Vārtika of Bhāskara (11th century) and the Vimarśini of Kşemarāja. The scholars who contributed to the development of Śaivism is Kashmir include Vasugupta, Kallata, Somānada, Utpala, Bhāskara, Abhinava Gupta, Kşemaraja and Jayaratha.

2.2. Spaṅdaśāstra

Spaṅdaśāstra lays down the main principles of the system in greater detail and in a more amplified form than the Śivasūtras, without entering into the philosophical reasoning in their support. The treatises belonging to this sāstra are Spaṅdasūtras or Spaṅdakārikas, and the Vŗtti by Kallata. The vŗtti together with sutras or kārakas is called the Spaṅda Sarvasva. The Spaṅdasūtras are based on the Śivasūtras. It is in the form of commentary which only enunciates the principles in full detail. On the Spaṅdasūtra, there are the following commentaries- Vivŗti by Ramākānta, The Pradīpika by Utpala, The Spaṅda Sandoha by Kşemarāja and Spaṅda Nirņaya also by Kşemarāja.

2.3. Pratyabhijňaśāstra

Pratyabhijňaśāstra may be regarded as the manana or the philosophy proper of the Trika. It deals rationally with the doctrines, tries to support them by reasoning and refutes the views of opponents. The Pratyabhijňaśāstra represents the stage of philosophical systematization. The texts belonging to this period deal with the concept of recognition and the problems connected with it. This stage may be regarded as the central philosophy of monistic Śaivism of Kāşmir. Advaitism was explicitly established by the authors of Prataybhijňa period. While Vasugupta propagated the monistic doctrine merely as a revelation or as faith, it was Somānanda who laid the philosophical foundation of Śaiva Advaitism. Indeed, the method of the founder of this śāstra, Siddha Somānanda is said to have been ‘the exhaustive treatment of the doctrines of his own system as well as of those of opponents.’ Somānanda, a pupil of Vasugupta is considered as the originator of reasoning in support of the Trika. The other important works based on these branches include- Śivadŗsţi by Somānanda himself and the īśvara Pratyabhijňa or Pratyabhijňasūtras by Utpala. In his Śivadŗsţi, Somānanda provides the ontological and epistemological basis for Śaiva Absolutism. The Śaiva View of metaphysics is well conveyed by the term dŗsţi. According to the Śaivite, different metaphysical theories represent different visions or dŗsţis of reality. Accordingly each system has its own unique vision of reality. But ultimately the absolutistic Śaiva view alone is real. Utpaladeva’s commentary on Śivadrsti and his īśvara Pratyabhijňakārikas are significant works. While facing the opponent on two fronts, the ātmavāda and anātamavāda, the Pratyabhijňa writers jealously guard the theistic spirit of Śaivism. In his own sūtras or verses, Utpala summarized the teachings of his master Somānanda. So Pratyabhijňa is regarded as only ‘the reflection of the wisdom taught by Somananda. The karakas and the works relating to them are primarily aimed at establishing the absoluteness of god (īśvaradvayavāda). It is a short and compact work and has assumed such an important position that the whole system of the Kāşmir Śaivism have come to be known as the Pratyabhijňa Darśana, outside Kashmir. It is under this name that Mādhvācārya treats Trika in his Sarva-darśana-samgraha. Of these three branches of the Kashmir Śaiva literature, the first is that of Āgamaśāstra. It is attributed to Lord Śiva himself and in the Taṅtra section of this śāstra Śiva is explaining the doctrines and practices of Śaivism as answers to Pārvati to her questions. He laid down the principles in a compact form and were revealed to Vasugupta. The second was originated either by Vasugutpa himself or by his pupil Kallata. The third was founded by Siddha Somānanda. Hence Vasugupta and Somānanda can be regarded as the human founders of Kashmir Śaivism. Of these two, while Vasugupta gave out the doctrines merely as revelations and articles of faith, it is Somānanda who laid the foundations of their philosophy.

3. Three Branches of Kāşmir Śaivism

Kāşmir Śaivism has been referred to as Pratyabhijna Darsana by Madhva. But according to K.C. Pandey and some other modern writers, the Śaiva Monism also includes Krama and Kaula as branches of Kāşmir Śaivism along with Pratyabhijňa.

3.1. Krama

In the Krama system, the worship of Śakti occupies an important place. The means adopted here are called śāktopāya. While Kaulism might be described as the path of the will and Pratyabhijňa as the path of recognition, the Krama is essentially a path of knowledge or reflection. According to this system, the universe is nothing but a manifestation of consciousness and exists in it in an ideal form. The absolute might be described both as Śiva and as Śakti. But some followers of the Krama consider Kāli to be the absolute. As it regards Kāli to be the highest reality, the Krama is also called Kālinaija, Mahānaija, Devīnaya etc., and the conception of twelve forms of Kāli occupies an important place in Krama.

3.2. Kaulism

Lord Śiva is supposed to be the real originator of all forms of Kaulism. As the terms ‘kula’ and ‘akula’ means Śakti and Śiva, Kaulism might be described as the path in which attempts are made to unite kula and akula. Kaulism has close affinity with the Krama and Pratyabhijňa. Such as Krama, it also recommends the worship of the cakras. Anupāya or Pratyabhijňopāya is the highest state of Sambhavopāya, the path adopted in Kaulism. Accordingly Kaulism in its final state is identical with the Pratyabhijňa. Jagcidānanda is the highest state of bliss in Kaulism. The experience of the highest bliss, the Jagacindānanda, becomes possible when all forms of ‘vital air’ enter into the central nerve (śuşumna). It is the experience of the perfect unity of Siva and Śakti, the realization of anuttara. Release has been described as khecarisamya or kaulika siddhi. In the state of release the kaula attains union with Bhairava. The entire objectivity appears as bliss to the sādhaka who has realized kaulika siddhi. In the state of khecarisamya, he looks upon the different states of mind and causes which induce them as identical with the self or anuttara.

3.3. Pratyabhijňa

The doctrine of Pratyabhijňa is an important contribution of Kashmir Śaivism to Indian philosophy. Though Krama and Kaula were prevailing in some form or other in different places in India, Pratayabhijňa is altogether a new concept in philosophy and religion. That is why the entire Kashmir Śaivism has often been called Pratyabhijňa darśana.

The Pratyabhijňa has also been referred to as the Trika system or as the Sadardhakrama-vijňāna kaulism merges in the Pratyabhijňa and the differences between them are mostly confined to attitudes and practices. Unlike kaulism, the sādhaka has perfect freedom in Pratyabhijňa.

The Krama system reflects the emergence of the śākta tendencies in the monistic Śaivism of Kāşmir while the Pratyabhijňa and kula systems are concerned with reality as a unity or the transcendent aspect of Reality, Krama system is concerned with the immanent reality. According to it, immanence is an essential expression of transcendence. Another distinguishing feature of the Krama School is its belief in spiritual progression, the gradual realization of the supreme Reality.

4. The Main Doctrines of the Trika System

Here we shall have an account of the philosophy of Kāşmira Śaivism in a nut shell.

4.1. Epistemology

According to Absolutistic Śaivism the attainment of the highest self is possible only through an investigation of the ultimate source of the knowledge of objects, such as ‘blue’ and ‘pleasure’ etc. All objective consciousness ultimately ends in the Universal self. The aim of this system is to help the individual in attaining self realization. Final release is possible only when the veil of ignorance is removed. Knowledge is significant even in practical life. The practical life of those who have not recognized the essential nature of self is impure; it is pure in case of those persons who have realized the true self. The absoluteness of the knowing subject (para- pramāta) is established by them on the analogy of knowledge-situation in the case of ‘Recognition.’

4.2. Recognition

Recognition is an act of cognition which consists in the unification of past and present experiences. It differs from memory in the sense that while the object of previous experience is absent in the case of memory, it is present in the case of recognition. It is the knowledge that the object given in the present perception is identical with the object known previously. The identification is possible only if the veil of ignorance is removed. Similarly, in the case fo recognition of the highest self there are two images in the mind of the individual. The first is the image of the finite self derived from self-experience; it is the knowledge which everybody has of himself. The other image of the self is formed after a serious study and reflection upon the scripture. Ultimate recognition of the highest self, which consists in the identification of the two images, depends upon spiritual instruction (dīkşa). According to L.N Sharma, “the recognition in the case of self is nothing but noticing the powers of the self. Though everybody has some knowledge of the self, it is not fully realized, as its real nature is obscured by the veil of ignorance. Recognition is the realization of the true nature of self.” However, an identification of the two images is not always dependent upon the word of authority or instruction. Pratyabhijňa is that faculty which enables individual to attain self-realization without the help of dīkşa. According to Pratyabhijňa doctrine all knowledge or action whether in Sadāśiva or in a worm, really belongs to the absolute subject. Unless willed by the absolute, no action or knowledge is possible. Pramāņa is ultimately is nothing but the light of the self.

4.3. Nature of Knowledge

Knowledge is nothing but self-consciousness being affected by the variety of manifestation brought about by the subject himself. And freedom in relation to these manifestations is freedom of power of knowledge. Power of knowledge is essentially the light of consciousness, and action is nothing but vimarśa which is essentially freedom and has its being in prakāśa. Freedom is the essence of light of consciousness. The powers of knowledge and action, therefore at the transcendental level, are nothing more than freewill. And ultimately all knower-ship belongs to the absolute non-dual subject (para-pramāta). He is the real knower in all acts of knowing, the ultimate subject of every judgment. Knowledge is the union of subjective and objective waves of consciousness. It is also called anubhava, which implies the subject becoming what the object is.

4.4. Pramāņa

In order to justify their view that the empirical knowledge is not erroneous, the Śaiva Absolutist discusses the real nature of the well known means of right knowledge (pramāņa) and their effect (pramita). Pramāņa is self luminous and rises afresh at every moment. According to the Śaiva Absolutism an object does not shine, with its essential characteristics, by itself as separate from others. All pramāņas, being dependent upon the self, really depend upon Siva in producing the knowledge of the object. The chief characteristic of pramāņa is its power to produce the determinate knowledge which essentially consists in the use of words.

Pramāņa may be described as the means of right knowledge which is not proved to be false later on by an experience of opposite nature. It is the cause of the production of determinate knowledge which continues till the accomplishment of its fixed purpose. It is related to the object and springs from the essential nature of the subject. It is essentially the light of consciousness. Ultimately samvid or cit is the only pramāņa. The various means of right knowledge and the intellect etc are nothing but different manifestations of the activity of cit-śakti. The efficacy of pramāņas consists merely in removing the veil of ignorance. But in reality both ignorance and the removal of it are manifestations of absolute consciousness. Hence, Kāşmiri Śaivaite holds that cit is the only pramāņa.

Perceptual knowledge takes place when the light, which proceeds from the self towards the object, is reflected back in the intellect in the form of an image. This activity of external projection and internal reflection arises anew at every moment. Perception involves many acts and will of them are taken to be one as they lead to one result, namely the judgment. The various perceptions which take place within a particular perceptual experience, which prompts the perceiver to some kind of activity, are not generally known or conceived separately. According to the Śaivate, inference, like perception is also dependent upon the light of the self. However, inference is confined to the spatiotemporal limits within which the invariable concomitance (vyāpti) is established. Ultimately, all relations are dependent upon the power of arrangement (Niyati-śakti) of the Lord. Āgama is the strongest determinate thought of the absolute self at the transcendental level. The collection of such thought in language is secondarily called so, as it may serve as a means of arousing such thought. And any collection of such thought in language, which is helpful in arousing such thought in the believer, is also a valid pramāņa, e.g. the Vedas, the Siddhānta. Only those who believe in them are entitled to follow them. They are invalid only to those who do not believe in them.

According to Kāşmir Śaivism, knowledge would not be possible without memory and memory itself could not be possible without a permanent experiencing subject. Memory is not a form of error, but a form of knowledge. The fact that memory arises out of residual trace merely makes it similar to direct experience. It is the same light would shines in direct experience as well as memory. As all transactions depend upon memory, there would be no practical life if memory were erroneous.

The phenomenon of knowledge is nothing but the power of self-manifestation of consciousness according to Kāşmir Śaivism. This power of knowledge has three aspects-the power of knowing (jňāna-śakti), the power of remembrance (smŗti-śakti) and the power of differentiation (apohana-śakti). The whole of practical life depends upon this triad of powers. It is due to this triad that the manifestation of the finite subjects and objects becomes possible. These powers are manifestation in various ways; the capacity of such manifestation is the power of freedom.

4.5. Ābhāsavāda

The Śaiva theory of knowledge is also the theory of creation or manifestation and is called ābhāsavāda. Ābhāsavāda is both an epistemological and an ontological theory. Knowledge is nothing but ‘I’ consciousness being affected by the variety of manifestations (ābhāsas) brought about by the subject himself. The subject manifests itself as the object of knowledge; the object has no existence independently of the subject. Again, the mutual relationship of the objects can be explained only if they are supposed to have their being in the subject. Both the subject and the object are manifestations of absolute consciousness. We are all confined to our own individual worlds and they are real objective worlds being constituted of real objects or abhāsas existing independently of us. All changes or becoming is confined to the realm of union or separation of these ābhāsas. The manifestation and the union of these abhāsas is controlled by the power of niyati or order of universal consciousness. An event or object is nothing but an ābhāsa or appearance on the mirror-like surface of universal consciousness. It is Lord alone who has the power to unite or separate the various abhāsa. In order to realize the absolute, the ultimate unity, one should try to see non-difference among the different abhāsas. One should attempt at realizing that all abhāsas are essentially one with samivid.

Thus, we see that Kāşmir Śaivism accepts the self to be the ultimate subject (para- pramāta) in all knowing and acting and so this attempts to establish the ultimate dependence of everything upon the self.

5. Metaphysics

In Kāşmir Śaivism, reality is conceived both as transcendent and immanent. As transcendent, it is described as Śiva and as immanent, it is Śakti. Śiva and Śakti are not two separate realities, but two phases or aspects of the same Reality. Śakti is always in the state of perfect identity with Śiva, but for the purpose of clear understanding the two are distinguished in thought only. Like fire and its burning power, Siva and Śakti are the same identical fact, though they are spoken of as distinct. Cit or Caitanya is the Śakti aspect of Reality and is compared to a clear mirror in which reality sees itself. Caitanya is regarded as feminine though Reality in Itself is neither masculine nor feminine. Thus consciousness is self-consciousness. Śakti is Siva’s power of turning upon Himself. This is called Cit-Sakti, the power of Cit to reveal itself and to know itself. The Trika makes a fivefold distinction of the fundamental modes of Śakti. These aspects of Śakti are cit, ānanda, iccha, jňāna and kriyā. Cit is the power of self awareness. Ānanda is the power of absolute bliss or self-enjoying, without having to depend on anything extraneous. Iccha is Siva’s power of absolute will to manifest the universe out of Himself. Jňāna is the power of knowing the inherent relations of all manifested or manifestable things among themselves and with His own self. Kriyā is the power to assume any form. These five are only aspects of the self same Śakti and not five different entities.

When there is the reflection of Śiva in Śakti, there emerges in the heart of Reality the sense fo ‘I’ which is described as aham-vimarśa. This is the original bimba or reflection, of which everything in the universe is pratibimba or ābhāsa, a secondary reflection or shadow. Now we can talk about universe in this stage for the first time because universe in the Trika conception is a system of subjects and objects or grāhakas and grāhyas. All subjects or knower are reflections of the original subject, the integral ‘I’ which is Siva. The grāhakas or the subject must have grāhya, the object or the apprehensible. That is why vimarśa is also described as the throb of the ‘I’ holding within itself and visioning within itself the world of object.

Once the conceptual difference between Śiva and Śakti is made, the latter is regarded as dharma, an attribute of the former. The relation between the two is one of tādātmya (identity) or sāmaraśya (perfect equilibrium) also, while they are regarded as two in one. Śakti is prakāśa-vimarśamaya. ‘Prakāśa’ can be taken to be Siva, placid and transcendent and vimarsa or sakti as dynamic and immanent. The more of self-consciousness one has, the more vimarsa also one has, and is thus nearer to Siva or pure consciousness. Thus, while vimarśa is taken to be the cause of the manifestation and dissolution of the universe, it is so only in the wider sense of being sakti and not as the reflection as ‘I’. The individual self is also said to be prakāśa-vimarśamaya. It is also of the nature of consciousness and has self consciousness also. We can say that in the case of individual, prakāśa is the shining intelligence and the ideas, desires, memories etc are its manifestations and vimarśa is the individual’s awareness that ‘those are mine.’

Since there is nothing apart from or independent of Śiva, the elements of the universe can be nothing but Siva Himself. These constituent elements of the universe, which are ‘constants’ through śŗşţi i and pralaya are called tattvas or categories. Śŗşţi, which is nothing but self-manifestation is described as opening out (unmesa) and pralaya as closing down (nimesa). It is like a bud opening out as a flower and the petals of the blooming flower closing down as the bud. Śŗşţi and pralaya follow each other in a never-ending process, each successive universe being determined in its character by its predecessor by a kind of causal necessity.

Śiva is said to have five eternal functions. They are tirodhana, śŗşţi, sthithi, samhāra or pralaya and anugraha i.e., limitation or disappearance, creation, preservation, dissolution and compassion or grace. The universe, which is the system of limited subjects and objects, cannot come into manifestation unless Siva assumes limitation. It is only by coercing His infinitude and transcendent character that Śiva can manifest the universe out of Himself. This power of obscuration or self-limitation is called tirodhana and it takes the form of aņutva or atomicity. It is also called saṅkoca or contraction and because of this contraction there in effected a dichotomy in Śiva, who is consciousness power. The dichotomy is that of bodha or consciousness on the one side and svataṅtrya or power of independence on the other. Śiva does not see the universe to be identical with himself. And since the universe is Śakti originally, we can say consciousness becomes static and sterile of His creative power and power becomes blind without awareness of her being truly consciousness. The situation is well described as ‘an inert soul and a ‘somnambulist force.’ Atomically or aņutva is therefore the condition of powerless awareness and senseless power. After the primary, limitation of anutva or atomicity, Śiva undergoes a secondary limitation with the help of Māyā and then is described as Puruşa. Though Śiva in His own nature is eternal, all pervasive, omnipotent, omniscient and all-enjoying consciousness, as Puruşa, He is limited in time and space and has limited knowledge, authorship and interest or enjoyment. This fivefold limitation is derived from Māyā which also provides both location and object to the Puruşa by evolving the physical universe.

The atomic Śiva which is in asuddha-māyā is shrouded by the five kaṅchukas or covers. This Māyā is vedya pratha, the knowledge of difference, the creative of the Māyākāla, vidyā, rāga, kāla and niyati, divorce between the subject and the object. Māyā and the five kaṅchukas together with the twenty five tattvas including Puruşa, make up the thirty one categories that constitute the empirical world of finites. The five higher categories of suddha-māyā represent the stages of this progressive unification and make up the total of thirty six categories of the system. The atomic limitation or impurity of the bound self, aņutva or āņavamala is responsible for non-intuition and akhyāti of the true nature of the self.

The basic limitation āņavamala, is reinforced by two other impurities i.e., māyīyamala and karmamala. Māyīyamala represents the whole series of categories, beginning from the covers or kaṅchukas that create the physical organism on the subjective side and evolves the physical world down to earth, the last of the mahābūthas, on the objective side. Karmamala is responsible for continuing the fetters of embodiment, and it is due of this impurity or mala that the Puruşa becomes subject to good and bad acts, and becomes entangled in repeated births and deaths.

The Trika accepts mahāpralaya or great dissolution during which all the tattvas or categories lower than Māyā are absorbed into Māyā, their cause. In this state all bond souls become disembodied and without organs, and are pralayakālas. But because of the persistence of the karmamala, they become embodied again. Souls free from both the karma and mayiya-malas transcend asuddha-māyā, but do not realize their identity with Śiva. It is not possible for these souls to attain Śivahood unless and until then impurity of atomicity or āņavamala is removed.

6. Bondage and Liberation

In Trika system, three types of soul in bondage are recognized. When a soul has only the āņavamala, it is called Vijňānakāla. When it has both the āņava and karma-malas, it is known as pralayakāla and when it has all the three malas, it is designated sakāla. The stages of removal of atomicity are (1) sad or suddhāvidyā (2) īśvara (3) sadakhya or sadāśiva (4) Śakti and (5) Śiva. These stages represent the progressive union of consciousness and power of bodha and svatantrya.

The limited individual is subject to ignorance (ajňāna) which, according to Kāşhmir Śaivism, is twofold i.e., pauruşa and bauddha. Pauruşa-ajňāna is the innate ignorance in the very soul of man. It is the primal limitation, the original impurity or āņavamala. This is the consequence of the limitation taken willingly and playfully by Śiva upon himself, and is not removable by the bound soul’s efforts. Śiva alone can liquidate it. Anugraha or dispensation of grace, technically called śaktipata ,or the descent of Siva’s force, breaks this limitation. The descent of the force of grace achieves two purposes- first, pāśa-kşaya, the destruction of fetters and secondly, śivatva-yojana, the restoration of Śivahood, which in effect means the removal of the atomic impurity. Śivatva-yojana only means that the soul is given by its own higher self i.e., Siva, it’s lost or hidden essence of divinity. The becoming of Siva in essence is accomplished by the removal of the atomic impurity, which alone can achieve full Śivahood. Here the souls achieves likeness to Siva and becomes qualified to know Reality fully and completely.

To attain integral Śivahood, the jīva must recapture the all-inclusive pure ‘I’ which has no idea of the object, by adopting appropriate means. The most important of these is dīkşa or initiation. Dīkşa awakens the kriyāśakti in the limited souls which is devoid of svatantrya. The development of kriyāśakti ultimately means the souls ability to absorb and integrate the object, seemingly separate from itself, within its own self. The consummation of this development is the soul’s recognition and realization of itself as the integral ‘I’, the enjoyment of the rapture and the bliss of pūrņahanta. This is the dawning of paurusajňāna, the true knowledge about the real and the ultimate nature of the Puruşa. In order to enjoy this inherent, reawakened Śivahood in life, we must attain baudha-jňāna or knowledge which is veiled so long. This depends on the purification of buddhi through the study of the śāstra, vicāra etc. Baudha-jňāna is not intellectual knowledge or philosophy. It is a deeper discipline than mere mental understanding. With the rise of bauddha-jňāna, there dawns knowledge even in the state of liberation. This is jīvanmukti. This was clearly stated by Subodh Kapoor, “This school recognizes jīvanmukti. Through possessing body, the jīvanmukti is one with the supreme in feeling and faculty. He continues his body until his past karma is exhausted and the deeds of the intervening period are consumed by the grace of God.” Even without jivanmukti the soul’s liberation is accomplished with the liquidation of the innate ignorance of the atomic impurity.

There are four upāyas or means of attaining the supreme goal. They are anupāya sambhavas, śāktas and āņava-upāya. Through any of these means, the limited individual attains the rich treasure of his own true self. As a matter of fact, the individual all the time experiences nothing but Śiva. In the state of Paramaśiva, there is no emergence, nor any absorption of the universe. To recognize, oneself as the sthita-sāmya, the perfect harmony of being and becoming, is what the soul should seek after and realize.

To sum up we can say that the Trika philosophy promises to satisfy almost all sides of human nature of knowledge, love and well. Śiva being unitary consciousness as such, the realization of Śiva gives knowledge of everything by identity with everything. Siva being at constant play with His own Śakti, there is ample scope for bhakti, devotion or love. To recognize oneself as Paramaśiva means mastery and lordship of Śakti and this implies sovereign and unrestricted will.

Summary

Kāşmir Śaivism represents the absolutistic development of Śaiva tradition. It represents a novel world-affirming attitude which rejects all dualities, bipolarities and conflicts and harmonizes them in the supreme vision of Śiva. In this Trika system, the Absolute Siva is not only consciousness but is at once self-consciousness. It is Śiva and Śakti rolled into one. The absolute Śiva integrally contains within himself creativity, negation and immanent manifestation. Śiva is not only Being but also agent or karta actively and freely unfolding himself and yet is transcendent. Thus Śaiva absolutists hold that they had successfully resolved the problem of the world process without having recourse to the illusion theory by lodging the principle of differentiation within Śiva.

Web links

• www.iep.utm.edu/kashmiri/
• www.realitysandwich.com/170364/170364/secrets_kashmir_shaivism
• www.shaivism.net
• www.anuartarikula.org/
• www.themovementcenter.com/about/philosophicalfoundations/
• www.siddhayoga.org/teachings/kashmirshaivism/ www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/kashmir_shavism

Bibliography

• Bhattacharya, Haridas. (ed.) The Cultural Heritage of India. Vol. IV. Calcutta: The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture, 2006.
• Chatterji, J.C. Kashmir Saivism. Delhi: Parimal Publications, 2004.
• Kapoor, Subhodh. (ed.), The Philosophy of Saivism. Vol. I & II. New Delhi: Cosmo publications, 2004.
• Pandey, K.C. Abhinavagupta-An Historical and Philosophical Study. Varanasi: Chaukamba Series, 1935.
• Sharma. C.D. The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1996.
• Sharma. L.N. Kashmir Saivism. Delhi: Bharatiya Vidya Prakashan, 2006.