212

11. COMPARISON

1 1.0. The comparative study of in and Sakti in Saivism, chiefly concerns with the comparison of the two theories of creation propounded in these two philosophies. It deals with the topics like, “why, what, how etc.” of the creation and with the relation between matter and consciousness. The subject' why of creation” has always been interesting, no matter how many times it has been answered since the hoary past days from the time of Naciketas'. Paramahansa Yogananda while spread­ ing Yoga in U.S.A., speaks, 'No matter how many times you hear me speak on the subject of why God crcated the world, you will always find something new; through infinite concentration one receives ever new light on this enigma. Somehow, God has all the power of the Universe at His command, but why does He have this power. Why is God God? Why are not you God ? You will rack your brain when you try to think in this way”^ This problem is elaborated in this Chapter on the Section 11.3.1., in the comparison of the t cause of creation with regard to Maya and Sakti.

11.1. Roles of maya and sakti with regard to the prameyas

The prameya o f Advaita Vedanta is quiescent consciousness, “never taking any part in any fact or act”. It is frequently termed as witness­ ing consciousness. It is pure which means without having any function, con­ sciousness is as it is in itsell'. It does not function; it simply is by its is*ness or mere existence. The function of observation or witnessing “is supposed on it when it comes in contact with another. Even then it is quiescent, when attraction for the other is generated in it, it becomes the agent-consciousness and loses its quiescence..... Really speaking, it is, under all circumstances. 213 whether in the subject-objcct state or in the objectless state, a contentless state, always quiestent, never taking any part in any fact or act’’^ Whatever other than consciousness is nonexistent, or rriaya. Whereas the prameya of Kashmir Saivism is always reflective. It can never be free from its nature of vibration which is called initiative act of aware­ ness. Spanda or thrill is innate to It. Consciousness is self-deliberative. Sen­ tience or autonomy (vitnarsa) cannot be separated from ^iva. Existence is not free from autonomy, the freedom or the sovereignty. It is the power to know its existence. The Comparison of the states of amani or atmavyapti in the Vadanta and unmani or Sivavyapti in the Saivism as discussed in the Ch. 10.0.3-4, can be presanted here in the following table together with a Com­ parison of the state described in the Patanjala yoga.

Name of Freedom Individual Universal State of System from bliss & worldly citta bondage bliss

remergence (prati prasava) into prakfti Yoga yes no no not to precincts

of Purusa.•

Vedanta yes yes no diluted bliss

citta is regeneratec Saivism yes yes yes and turns into Cit 214

11.1.1. Niicala and spandax quiescence and vibrating

When niaya, as the limiting adjunct or upadhi is removed, the reality according to Advaita Vedanta is observable as silence (santa), niicalatauva or static. It is restful, throbless, unattached, and asanga-iox this reason, it is inactive, harmonious, nirguna or niskriya* satsahgatva nihsangatvam nihsangatve nirmohatvam/ nirmohqtve niscalatattvam ni/calatattve jivan^uktih//^ The state of niscalatattva is possible only by removing all the traces of movement^called nTayS, the duality^from the non-dual state. Since maya is the cause of activity, its removal naturally leads to the Reality which is throbless, vibrationless and free from deliberation, "caitanyam sbsvatam santam vyomatitam niranjonam ". Reality is santa, rather supra^antah*’, su­ premely tranquil in Advaita Vedanta. ^akti on the other hand makes the reality in the advaita Saivism ever vibrating, pulsating, manifesting, reflecting, expressing or deliberating. As the essence or ‘heart’ of the reality (hrdayam paramesthina^), Spada in con­ sciousness is the power of self-awareness, without which consciousness turns to be inert; asthasyad ekarupena vapusAcen mahe/varah/ W maheivaratvam samvilvam tadatyaksadghatadivat// This is the reflective awareness, the will or desire (iksitrtva or unmukhata) of consciousness, the throb (spanda) which manifests itself into the limited being and matter. Consciousness is not away from experience. This concludes that knowledge includes experience. Awareness is not merely a 'noun', but an action within a noun. Mark S.G.Dyczkoski writes in the Doc­ trine o f Vibration: 215

"In the transition fron^ experience to a concept of reality, we oniy carry with us ideas symbolic of the original experience. Philosophy from this point of view, can only serve a descriptive function. It is a systematic symbolism' which serves primarily to generate insight into the nature of reality.... Phi­ losophy is an elaboration of different kinds of spiritual experience. The Ob­ structions of high-grade metaphysics are based on spiritual experience and desire their whole value from the experience they symbolize. No metaphysi­ cal concept is entirely intelligible without reference to the spirit"’. In Indian philosophy, mysticism or experience and metaphysics or theory (of the reality) are blended into one. Theory is experience. It is unlike the Western philosophy where philosopher sits on an armchair just for imagination. That is why the English Dictionaries define ‘theory’ in con­ trast with practice*. Theory Is not siddh'anta as it is translated. Siddhanta is the end of siddha or accomplished act. It no more remains to be verified or observed. Siddhanta is not a saddhya, for activity is implicit in knowledge: "caitanyam atmano rupam siddham jnancnkriyatmakam"^.Thxxs^ when the prameya in Advaita Vedantii is quiscent, it is vibrating in Kashmir Saivism.

11.1.2. Inactivity and activity

Owing to the doctrincs of maya and sakti^X\iQ two descriptions of the non-dual Reality forwarded by Advaita Vedanta and Sivadvaita^seem self­ contradictory to each other. It is because one is ni^calatva , suprahanta, A inactive and perfectly equipoised. The other is ever vibrating, pulsating, ac­ tive, manifesting etc. {sadd pancavidhakrtya-karilvam paramatmanah). Apparently though these seem contradictory, infact they are same. In Kashmir Saivism, the reality always pulsates with vibration. Still it is a perfect balance of the two ; prokasa and vimaria, light and delight. 21C

Paramahva is blended in one reality which is perfectly harmonious and rests in an equilibrium state. Praka/a or vimar/a is not predominance of

_ _ _ / one over other. Rather it i.s tattvatita or paradvaita. Vibration or Sakti de­ scribes the nature of consciousness. “svabhavamavabhasasya vimarsani biduh". The two are blended like the moon and the emitting of its light {candracandrikaoriva). Predominance of one over other causes dissolution and creation. Paramakiva in the state of full awareness is not a thought- construct, but full of experience. "Thought constructs are the products of the power of consciousness, and they are not the products of the objects they represent’’"’. Bliss manifests only when action continues, for creativity is the very Es­ sence of divinity. In the Upanisad this same thing is expressed "isa vasyatnidam sarvant '■ Vasyam " is the activity, the manifestation of the Lord. Action is in sacrifice 0^ / (visarga). It is a Yajna, "visargah karma sangitah’’" . Visarga is the vimarsa o/Siva. It is the abandonment, renunciation, relinquishment or sacrifice which connotes a karma. The action in visarga is bhutabhavodbhavakara— a cre­ ation of elements. It is the abandonment of all activity—sarvarambha parityagl. In the neo-vedanta it is action in relaxation and relaxation in ac­ tion— "karmani akarma and akarmani karma". Therefore, vasyam is the manifestation, or vimar/a of the Lord, who has the power of will {'iksitrtva), the supreme freedom or svatantryasakti. Since the manifestation of the Lord is His body, therefore any dross, dirt or blemish that appears in the action or speech taints his nature of consciousness. Nothing can be taken, nothing could exist, nothing could be extended outside his nature. So, nothing could be­ long outside one’s own consciousness, "ma grdhah kasyasvid dhanam” or tena sabdarthacintasu na savastha na yah sivah/ bhoktaiva bhogyarupena sada sarvatro samsthitah//'-. 217

According to the doctrine of mayavada, all problem arises out of ex­ cess (maya) which makes one restless. Restful condition (^antavastha) is achieved by calming down the excess, by throwing away the unbalanced ones. Thus restful condition or relaxation is obtainable through action. Just the carbon deposited on the plug is thrown away by pulling and pushing a pin into it, similarly the ni/calatattva or calm condition is obtainable by throwing away the tension through vital, physical and emotional activity i.e. by performing yogic postures, pranayatna etc^i.e. by bending the body, mehd- ing the mind and tending (observing) the breath. Action is the manifestatiohof the blissful consciousnessf'wo livah sakti rahito): matter reverberates vtfith energy. The same is also expounded in the kakti-vada. In the Spandavivarana / we find the role of Sakti playing for the cause of a total tranquility. Calm­ ness or permanent peace is the real state of consciousness, Supreme quietness is achievable by destroying the duality (maya) of mental distur­ bances. Such destruction is called liberation from restlessness. It is one’s own real state; “nirvanam nirvrttih dvaitapratyayalakTnaksobhapariksayad alyantiki prasantih samvidcih svasvabhavavyavasthitih'^ . / All the above discussion reveals that the Santabrahmavadin had to accept activity in order to attend the tranquil reality and the Spandasaktivadin had to accept “tranquility” for the ever vibrating supreme reality. The doctrine of spanda clarifies the throbless reality (nispanda tatl\>a) of the Vedantins as discussed in the last pages. The absolute calmness (supraianta or niscalatattva) of the ^anta^brahmaYadin is understood from the doctrine of maya. It also clarifies the ever vibrating reality of the Sivadvaitins. Thus, it seems that the later Advaita Vedantins were influenced by the philosophy of the Tdniric doctrines for which Vidyaranya writes: "Sakti is not different from the power holder”. saktih saktat prthah nasi tadvat drsterna cabhida.'^ 218

/ ^ Kenopanisad describes the roles of Sakti. In absence of sakii, fire is able to burn nothing. Of course that power is consciousness. It is inherent in all - writes Vidyaranya.” In the Vedantasara it is also mentioned that Sutratma, Hiranyagarbha or Prajna is immanent everywhere and it identifies it­ self with the five great uncompounded elements. It is endowed with the pow­ ers of knowledge and activity.'* Thus in both the Advaitism, consciousne$s, the supreme reality^is ever blissful. Bliss is the activity, a thrilling. Knowl­ edge and experience are not different in India. “The essential nature of things is knowledge and action, inseparable from each other”’’: anyonyaviyukje jnanakarmani.'^ Activity triinsforms the world into bliss by melting mattier into consciousness. This has been practised in the Kriya-yoga o/Tantra and in the pancagni-sadhana of the Upanisads. Woodroffe translates “Object is consciousness embodied in solid manQr"''* {taradavyamayi), which is the essence of both the advaitins; kevaladvaita and paradvaita.

11.1.3. ^iva Vrs. Purusa

The concept of ^iva (the prameya) can be compared by considering the concept of purusa prevalent in the Vedic literature.^®, “^iva is the immu­ table essence in all transitories. The root 's i\ to 'lie in’ is common in both the words, ^iva and Purusa. All the essentials of ^iva, viz., consciousness, pervasiveness, eternity, infinity etc.^completely concur with the concept of purusa. The three forms of ^iva, viz., apara, parapara and para realities comprising the tryambaka concept, known as pasa, pa^u and pad, fully correspond with the three forms of purusa viz, ksara, aksara and purusottama tattvas described in the Bhagavadgita. Purusa or ^iva concept thus shines 219

as the highest and culminalion of Indian wisdom. The concept of purusa in ^ / the Vedic literature, like Purusasukta might have developed to Siva of Kash­ mir saivism. In explaining the Purusasukta of the Rgveda, Mangalacaya com­ ments that purusa is that existence which lies in every entity. ^"Purusa cre­ ates everything and takes each and every form”^'. Acarya l^ankara explains "puri iete", that which lies in (every) body or everywhere. In all such expla­ nations of purusa, the root "'sadlr" (visarana-gaty-vasadanesu), which ex­ ists in the word ' Upanisad', functions very well in comprehending the inner meaning oipurusa and ^iva. 'Vis'arana ’ implies the destruction of ignorance, gati' implies landing on the state of Brahman and avasadana is the cessa­ tion of the wheel of birth and death, the dual world i.e. maya. The concept of purusa interpreted in accordance with the Advaita Vedantic lines, causes the destruction of the body awareness and up-brings our real awareness. It im­ plies to experience that body does not exist. Whatever exists is purusa or 6iva. The purusa concept of the Vedas developed to the Brahman concept in / Advaita Vedanta, and made all but consciousness unreal. Whereas the Siva concept rises one step further in making the unreal real. It not only empha­ sizes on the “existence” {sat) aspect of the reality, but also holds that exist- f ence is implicit in consciousness and bliss. The doctrine ot Siva in the Bhairava concept expands the concept of cit (consciousness). Conscious­ ness is not only self-illumining but it is self manifesting (yimar^a) which distinguishes the non-dualism of Vedanta from the non-dualism of ^aiva.

/ 11.2. Maya and Sakti with regard to the world

Maya and ^akti refer to creation. It is in this context the two doctrines are compared. This^answers to the question,"how the unreal maya is com­ pared with the real iakti" . In the two apparently contradictory systems of 220

the advaita tradition of Vedanta and that o f the Tantra, the reality and the contradictory natures of the world are explained by Maya and Sakti respec­ tively.

11.2.1. M a y a as power { / a k t i ) : A correspondence with

^ a k t i of the Saiva

Vedantin’s great affinity with the Saivites lies in ascribing Maya aS an energy of Brahman. Upaisads declare that the sages perceived that many are the aspects of this divine power which is manifested as action, knowledge and will, "parasva sakti rividha ca irt^te ... jnanavalakriya ca " Action of knowledge can give rise to effect. These two being predominantly tamasika and s^tvika^rcquiTQ the help of will which is rajasika. This will is power, bala or niaya. This completely corresponds with the Saiva doctrine of ^akti. Vidyaranya, quoting Yoga-Vnsistha, draws the same illustration as that of the famous illustration of the Saivites, known as the mayuranda. He says as a huge serpant^^ is latent in its egg, so also the world is hitent in the Self. Vidyaranya also depicts the seed and tree-illustration of the Saivites^"*. He says, “just as a tree with its fruit, leaf, tendril, flower, branches, twig and root,is latent in the seed, so does the world in Brahman^’”. These illustra­ tions are common in both the systems. Maya is svatantra (like sakti) be­ cause it makes attached to an unattached. Again it is asvatantra for in the absence of cognising faculty its effect can be explained. It is the power of cit (cit/akti iarigesupulabhyate). In more conformity with the Saivites, Vidyaranya progresses in describing that due to variations in space and time, some where and some times, some power emanates from Brahman, just as varieties of paddy from earth’*. Such power of maya inherent in Brahman creates many things like the power inherent in clay. This is illustrated with 221

the sleep and the dream conditions of living beings also^’. In deep sleep there is no creation; in dream innumerable of things and beings are created. Maya unmanifest and Maya manifest are exactly like our deep sleep and drcuni states. Vidyaranya says, "just like the power in sleep inherent in jiva renders impossible, so also Maya inherent in Brahman, projects, maintains and de­ stroys the universe”. In dream a man may see himself flying in the sky or being de-headed. In a moment he may live through the experience of ma(ny years.....If such is the glory of the power of sleep and dream, why is to won­ der at the unimaginable glory of the power of MayaT'^^ This suffices to con­ clude that Vidyaranya’s exposition of Vedanta is not only consonant with Kashmir^aivisrr^but he develops a great affinity between the two. This i( a juncture point which blended the two traditions viz, vedic rituals and tantric rituals into one stream which is now followed in the present India. We do not come across now with the tradition which is pure ^edic nor pure Tantric. This is natural, for the goal of Vedanta cannot come down into the level of action. When action or kriya as a tantric practice joins with Vedanta, we get what is called yoga. Sw. Satyananda Saraswati spoke “Tantra wedded with Vedanta, gives birth to Yoga”.

11.2.2. Unreality vrs. reality

Maya is the logical consequence deduced from the non-dual reality.

Brahman. Consciousness, the reality in the Advaita Vedanta is only self- revealing, i.e., without depending upon anything else for its own revelation, it never stands unrevealed. It is indivisible, homogenous, non-temporary and

non-contradicted. Whatever is other than consciousness, is negated. Vidyaranya explains, “The entire world (severally and collectively) that can be referred to as 'this’ can be negated, but the thing which is not ^this’ can

never be negated. 222

So, maya is caused owing to the self-luminatin . of consciousness. It is non- existent^whereas ^akti is the very core of the reality in Kashmir Saivism. It is the essential manifestation of consciousness. Due to sakti. ^iva is self-mani- festing as well as self-revealing. Thus the world is real as it is the expansion of ^iva-consciousness. The difference of maya and sakti is learnt from the two famous defini­ tions of the reality forwarded by the two philosophies. The Vedantin defines the reality, “prajnanam brahma’’ whereas the Saivites defihe "caitanyamatma " which have been explained already in the earlier chapters.

11.2.3. Maya and saktii the gross and subtle principles

While ascertaining the cause of creation, the Advaita Vedantin postu­ lates a principle called maya, which without affecting the eternal reality, becomes the cause of creation. Since maya does not have any relation with the supreme consciousness but simply becomes the cause of the gross cre­ ation, it may therefore be called a gross cause of creation. Whereas ^akti in Kashmir Saivism is not only related with the supreme reality, rather it functions as the essence of consciousness. Without Sakti, consciousness is not conscious, but inert. Therefore, it stands for both the sides; the cause (Siva) and the effect (world). In this way it is a subtle cause of creation. The gross maya turns to be subtle ^akti by increasing her potency. This is what paraphrased by Abhinavaguptcv'. mayapade atidurghatatvam pratibhati, tat sampadane yat apratihatam

sv^tantryam tadeva punah saktirityucyaie In Advaita Vedanta, prakrti is of two kinds: maya and . Prakrti is that in which there is the reflection of Brahman. It is composed of sattva, rajas and tamas ( in a state of homogeneity). When the element o1 sattva is » '| I o ,1/.. O

pure, prakrti is known as tiiaya, when impure (being mixed up with rajas and tamas) it is called avidya^'^. Brahman as consciousness, wills to create or to become (apparently). Becoming ‘maya’. It controls ‘creation’. Therefore, Isvara is that conscious­ ness which is in the process of creation, becoming, and (naturally) owning or controlling maya. He is not something above maya. He is the involved controller of consciousness. The power and process of becoming i.e., the becoming itself, is maya. Isvara is omniscient, and maya, the process of be­ coming, is a process, running unobstructed. Even the consciousness of its being pure c/7 is not really obstructed, "brahmano ‘ham pratisthiaham " (Gita^. That which is prataistha of something cannot be ignorant of it, especially when the pratistha is itself consciousness^'.

11.3. and as the causes of creation

The question “why of creation” concerns with “why of mayh", since maya is the nature as well as the cause of creation. In starting to answering the why of niaya the Vedanlins receed back and reply that one should not ask such question, because here is being explained the cause of creation. So, it is

answered that intelligence is dumb-founded to explore the cause of maya or the cause of creation. That is why Paramahansa yogananda while starting to answer the why of creation in his talky‘why god created the world”, has to close the topic without a straight forward answer. It is the termination of Advaita Vedanta for which the unanswerable maya has been attacked by many a schools of Indian philosophy. All such philosophers have tried to solve the enigma of creation forwarded by the mayavadin, since the time of Acarya Sankara. The first such reestimation has been taken up in his time by the philosophers of Kashmir Saivism. They answered it with the doctrine of Sakti, keeping the non-duality intact, the doctrine of sakti properly stands 2H4

as the superb excellence in answering the why of creation. According to the mayavada, the creation such as the mind and intelli­ gence etc. though in themselves are unconscious, yet they appear to be con­ scious through cidabhasa. "All the creations like the mind, the sense-organs and so on, are illumined by atman alone, as ajar or pot by a lamp is illu- mined“ . Through maya, Acarya Sankara keeps Brahman free from transfor­ mation ivikrti) but “thereby he seems to many that he is not fully justified in his stand that "All is Brahman, since he has to admit another unconscious entity (m^ya) just connected with Brahman in a remote way”^^ In order to attribute a false consciousness to the really unconscious ones, the Vedantin explains the cidabhasa by means of two opposites: (1) unconsciousness which is unreal and consciousness acting as an efficient cause to produce the ap­ pearance. “Thus mayavada’s way of explaining the world brings in a second principle namely unconsciousness and even a third, cidabhasa which is not required to be adopted in the Tantric Advaitavada”.^"* ^aktivada of Kashmir Saivism reverses the process of Mayavada ac­ cording to which^mind, matter etc. are in themselves unconscious but appear to be conscious. In daktivada there is nothing unconscious. The mind, mat­ ter etc. are in themselves conscious^ but appear to be unconscious or limited conscious by virtue of the veiling power of consciousness to itself. One of the functions of sakti is to negate itself (nisedhavy'apara-rupa ^akti). “Sakti doctrine admits All this is Brah­ man’ in its literal sense by admitting that even created universe is ^iva in His kinetic or ^akti aspect by the veiling operation of maya^akti which is

not a cidabhasa but cidrupini"^^ Consciousness appears as unconscious in varying degrees. Imperfec­ tion of consciousness is due to its suppression of its own light to itself. Thus this power of ^iva functions as the apohanasakti^^, which is known as ananda/akti, the vimars'a, the frfiiedom of*'Siva, the very core of conscious- 2::!5

ness. It answers the why of creation in a very convincing manner. The aspect of Bliss or concealment, is not away from consciousness by virtue of which the absolute consciousness takes the form of the world.

11.3.1. Svatantryavdda and vivartavada

Upon the substratum of the sublime consciousness^the creation plays its role. It is like the screen on a cinema hall or the floor of the pendal of a theatre on which all actors and actresses exhibit their roles. The screen ap­ pears colourful and the floor of the pendal carries the plays of a number of actors. All these plays of the actors and the colourful wavings on the screen, are nothing but the superimpositions of the colours on the screen. They can­ not change the screen nor the floor. In the Vedantic terms it is illustrated as the colour acquired by a Crystal (sphatika) stone placed nearby a red hibiscious. This is called upadhi for which the crystal acquires a red colour momentarily. Similarly, owing to the presence of maya or avidya the su­ preme consciousness acquires an auxiliary role to appear as Isvara or jiva. Rather every appearance bespeaks consciousness and whatever fleeting colourful existence like inertness, momentariness, unhappiness and the en­ tire dualies that the world exhibits, are nothing but maya, nonexistent and appears on the permanent screen of consciousness. On the contrary, the Svatantryavada, the chief doctrine of the Advaita Saiva philosophy, explains^ : “The creative thought is the very life (nature) of sentience (citih pratyavamo^atma). It is the transcendental word (para-vak, vakti visvant alapati pratyavamarserja iti ca vak) which ever shines with its self-depen- dent sentient nature (svarasodita,, svarasena cidrupataya anastamita- sadodita). It is the freedom of consciousness. It is the chief power of the supreme self (mukhyam tad-aiivaryam). 2:^G

So sings the revered Acarya - citih pratyavamarsatma para-vaksvarasodita/ svatantryametanmukhyam tcuJai^varya’m paramatmanah//^'' It is the essential nature of consciousness that it wills to manifest or expresses itself. The nature of consciousness lies in its unobstructed mani­ festation. If the self-manifesting nature of consciousness is obstructed, then consciousness will no more remain as self-illuminating; but it will be turned into inert. Moreover, everything appears on account of consciousness. Noth^ ing can be sensed independent of consciousness. So,everything is filled with consciousness^*. Worldly affairs cannot be possible without a unification of cognitions. Their unification is due to their oneness with the light of con­ sciousness^’. The grasp ol' subjects, the various means of knowledge, the multiple kinds of knowledge and the objccts of knowledge - all is conscious­ ness aionc'”’’ In the apprehension of all objects and enjoyments in whichever condi­ tion the’Yogi may remain, ttiere is no condition where ^iva is not felt: tena sabdarihacintasu na savastha nayah sivah*\ It is the autonomy of consciousness which conceals its full conscious nature and solidifies itself into an inert object'—as steam solidifies to ice. Without such power of autonomy ( sakti) consciousness cannot reveal nor conceal itself and it woul^l be turned as inert as a crystal (sphatika).

J hu.v I ' .a xvt itO' svabhdvamavabhasasya vimarsam viduranyatha/ prakaso 'rtho parakto ’pi sjfthatikadijadopamah//^- “Sentiency of consciousness is the very nature of illumination, for oth­ erwise, though there be the reflection of external objects in it, yet this light would be merely like insentient crystal and the like”. Due to throw er of freedom, the absolute is said conscious. Ksemaraja defines. 2^:!'

'anuttaravimar/amayi ^iva-hhaUarakabhinna Since the absolute is the cause of the creation, preservation and destruction of the world, therefore She is Free: "yata^ca iyam vi^vasya jananahetuh tata eva svatantra". This power of freedom distinguishes the Saivism from Vedantins and it functions as the essence of ^i\a: "svaianlrasabddh brahmavadavailaksanyamacaksamanah citah maheivarasaratdfh vrte This concept of self-awareness of the consciousness is also implicit in the Vedantin’s notion of awareness. They did not make it more explicit an account of its implied meaning'*'*.

1.3.2. Anirvacaniya and purnakartrtva: Indescribability and complete activity

The ^akti concept of liie Saivism is known as the power of freedom by dint of which the absolute functions Its activity. Such activity includes inac* tivity, because the acceptance of any one i.e. either activity or inactivity leads to imperfection. So the Saivites hold a combination of both activity and inactivity which is ascribed as complete activity orpurna kartrtva. What the Saivite ascribes as purnakartrtva, it is termed in the Vedanta as indescribability. Causal Relation is not in succession but in simultaneous expression or manifestation. It is evident (hat though ^iva is the absolute Reality in Kash­ mir Saivism and in this way it differs from ^akta School where ^akti is the Absolute, yet ^iva is not different from ^akti as power. Power and the power- holder in Kashmir Saivism are one. Therefore, power here is considered as real. The examples of flame and its burning power are shown as different from each other by the Vedantin, and are dealt in detail by Vidyaranya,"*’ but they are considered identical in this system. This shows a main difference between the two systems. The relation of identity is termed in Tantra as 228

abheda, taddtmya or samarasya. Though the Saivite conceives this abheda as bhedasahistju abheda, unity in difference, yet this concept is not as logi­ cal as it is found in the Advaita Vedanta. Causal relation according to the Tantra, is of the highest type, where there is no succession but simultaneous expression of the cause which effects simultaneous manifestation of the uni­ verse^*. So the relation is bheda sahisnu abheda, and the doership is noh- doership cum doorship which the Saivite says as total doership, pur^akartroitva'. The two aspects are like the two sides of a coin. A question arises that L.N.Sharma denies even in the “Contents” of his book, Kashmir Saivism, that power is not absolute. He writes; “According to the Saivites it is wrong to assume either that §akti is the Supreme Reality in Itself or that It is merely an illusorn. In order to arrive at the true concep­ tion of ^akti, we have to avoid these two extreme views. These extremes can be reconciled on the view that ^akti is the manifestation of absolute con- sciousness"''’. / [: From these lines and from the description of Siva as the absolute, as is discussed in Chapter Nine, one may draw that what actually Dr. Sharma means to say is that Sakti, as separate from ^iva, can-not be regarded as the absolute Reality. Of course, the emphasis on Dr. Sharma’s writing would be on the word “In Itself’. Truily ,^akti cannot be different from ^iva. But Sakti would be nothing without ^iva . Another question may arise here that ^akti being the inseparable ai- pect of the absolute, it is not possible to compare it with Maya, on the con­ trary, it should be compared with Brahman of the Vedanta. So, the question, “How is the niitatva maya compared with the absolute ^akti of the Saivites?'.’ • t is clear from the fact that Maya and ^akti both are the two principles in rendering the multiple worldly objects from one, non-dual Absolute. It is in this aspect that they are compared. says exactly the same: 2,*^ 9

•“If dualistic doctrines were given up by the so called Agamikas, if Maya were to be taken as the Power of Brahman by the Vedantins and if^ yijnctno... all difference between the on the one hand, and the Agamikas, the Vedantins and the Bau4*^has on the other, disappear. The latter becomes the exponent of the Pratyabhijffa philosophy”."** But it should be remembered that one (maya) is only the essence of the world, not of the Absolute; whereas, the other (^akii) is both. Both of the doctrines are true and inevitable so far as the explanations aim to describe the world as unreal and real, siddha and sadhana, jiva and iiva points of view respectively. Kartrtva of Sakti corresponds with Maya, whereas / cinmayatya of Sakti leads to Brahmart. Nature of Maya and J>^:ikti in the two systems compared in the follow­ ing figures :

(A) Doctrine Phenomenal Transcendental

Maya A

r Sakti

(B)

The two middle lines are equal but appear unequal due to the adjuncts(|p|AjpiJ, one adjunct is converging and another diverging . They symbolise Mayo and

^akti respectively. 230

^akti as Love, a development of Maya

If moyavada causes the reality inactive, svatantrayvada makes It Ac­ tive, because the casual relation here is not in succession but simultaneous expression of the cause. One maya makes the non-dual Reality inactive, an- _ f other more power called Mahamaya or SvdtantryoSakii, the autonomy, em­ powers the Lord as the most powerful. This is the power of freedom, the delight aspect of Light which makes temporarily a distinction between the prameya and pramata. This is the vibration, the throb of the bliss nature, abhispandana, or spanda, pulsation, the heart of Existence "hrdayant paramesthinah". This is the Love, the desire, i§kana of the Lord, for which He is called //a. Without potency, light becomes darkness. Similarly, with­ out ^akti, ^iva will be a corpse. It is the reflective awareness where will transforms into action. We could raise our hands only due to our will power."If the rays of consciousness of one’s own self is lauded, the Lord is also wor­ shipped by that, because there is no other form of the Supreme Deity except it; as fire has no other form except burning lightening, cooking or flaming etc"; jvaladrupam bhasvat pacanantatha daha 'm prakatanath vimucyanyad vahneh kimapi ghatate naiva hi vapuh/ stuve samvinrasmin yadi nijanijamstena sa nuto bhevennanyah kascid bhavali paramesasya vibhavah//^'* Every particle of the universe is a dance of ^iva, who painted the pic­ ture of the world on his own self with the brush of His own will (Will is His svafantryalakti) and He appraises Himself by looking at Himself jagaccitram samalikhy svecchaya tulikayatmani/ svayameva samalokya prinati parame£varah//^" 231

11.3.3. Abhasavada of the two systems compared

Abhasavada of the Saivism does not accept any reflection. Abhasa here is the manifestation of Lord. So abhasa, here is known in the literal mean­ ing, where the root bhasa means to shine. Just as the rays of the moon and the sun are their parts and are emitted from them and as the light of fire spreads everywhere, similarly the world as the abhasa of ^iva, shines frorti Him as well as rests on Him. It may be compared with the limbs of a tortoise which stretches and conceals its limbs as per its wish. So Sri Utpala com­ poses; There is no other form of fire except shining, burning, warming and manifesting etc. Ksemaraja aphorises " svecchaya svabhitlati viJvamunmilayati . He comments'on this aphorism that the world is like a city reflected on a mirror ' vis'vam darpane. nagaravat". This reflection is neither indeterminate nor unreal as the Vedantin.holds it. The reflectioti '^ h a sa ' accepted by the Vedantin is unreal as Vidyaranya writes : yatha cetanabhasah kutasthe bhrantikalpitalf/ acetani ghatadi/ca tatha lairaiva kalpilah//^-. “Just as the conscious jiva is created by illusion based on kutastha, even so, on it the inanimate objects are created by avidya"^^. But Vidyaranya, like the Tahtrikas, accepted the continuity of the su­ preme consciousness termed by him as kutastha in the jJvas in order to en­ able the jlva for its liberation. Similarly, the Tahtrikas accepted the limita­ tion of ^iva in the jiva as the avacchirnavadin expounds it. The Abhasavada can better be studied when it is compared with the Parinamavada and Vivartavada. According to the parinama-vada, the ef­ fect, which preexists in the cause, is merely a transformation of it. In the vivartavada, the cause does not abandon its prior state, but appears as a dif­ ferent stale. The effect is known as an illusory manifestation. Whereas in 23d

~abhasavada, the effect is not illusory manifestation but limited manifesta­ tion. It retains the reality of the cause. These three Vadas can be compared in the following chart.

Name of the Cause Effecl Figurative doctrine remains the remains the expressions same or not same or not

Satkarya X X Cause changes. vada no no effect differs.

Vivarta X Cause remains vada yes no the same, effect completely differs.

Abhasa v / Cause remains va'da yes yes the same, effect does not differ.

I'rom the above table, it can be studied that if vivartavada is a devel­ opment on the parinaniavada, the abhasavdda is a further development of

the vivartavada. The two are compared from a different point of viev\ as follows- "In Tantrism. in contrast to the vivarta-v^da, the parinania vada is pre­ sented, according to it the creation has proceeded out of an actual, gradual change of Brahman. Indeed, all this happens exclusively in the Sakti-sidt of / God. The Siva-side of Brahman remains as before untouched or intact. Only from a particular standpoint God has negated himself gradually and thus cre­ ated the world r Jeen from another stand point, God himself has never changed

and no change will ever happen in future. 233

11.3.4. Avidya contrasts with ^akti ^

Avidya which is a synonym of maya and adhyasa in /vdvaita Vedanta, is a primary, epistemological category of the philosophical postulation. In another word, avidya or nescience is the subjective stand point of ma^a. This is a deviation from the concept of maya accepted by the Saivaite, who refutes ajnana vigorously/' For the Saivate, maya is metaphysical only; In Vedanta, power is inert and ignorance, which produces delusion. The evi­ dence for such statement as he holds, is experience itself. People call that power maya which defies their rational power. The product or prakrti is ex­ perienced to be inert and delusive by all people, the wise as well as the igno­ rant. Since a person says “I am ignorant” of the nature of Nature, there the intellect fades to comprehend it, and that’s why it is called delusion.’* “Igno­ rance is not a particular object or the absence of knowledge; it should not be identified with belief with a state proceeding, but terminated by any con­ scious employment of reason”” . An argument advanced by a modern S^ivite against the concept of ignorance may be refuted here. B.N.Pandit comments: “In susupti, if there exists a ^akti, for the reason that he says, I could not know anything’, then a person remaining in one room when says, I could not know anything what was happening in other room or house or city’, does it mean that he was also present in the other room or city ?”’* This can be refuted by the understanding that Dr.Pandit has confused between the bhavarupa and abhavarupa of ajnana. The ignorance of susupti is existent in the sense that the person has realized ‘what was present there’. Ajnana is the belief, the material cause, the stuff from which illusion is made (Brahmopadana). Vedanta which declares the world illusory^speaksy on two categories only: Brahman and ajnana. Neither is to be known by 234

empirical means of knowledge, but by the implication of experience” . Ulti* mately, the world is made intelligible employing the category of avidya, whose special function is adhyasa or superimposition*“, which is discussed in all other philosophies including Kashmir Saivism.

11.4. M aya and ^akti with regard to the means of Freedom:

While comparing the roles of maya and iakti played for the practices of the two systems, we find that ni^calatattva is the unagitated state which not only implies quiescent state, peace, balance, equilibrium, tranquility, equipoised, unqualified state (gunatita) but also as Swami Vivekananda ex­ plains, it is the state of action in inaction or relaxation. For such state, mind is automatically dropped. Action is the renunciation (visargah karmasaj^nitah). Enjoyment lies in sacrifice (tyaktena bhunjithdh). Mind is a product of prakrti which is a complex of qualities (guna). Guntitita or niscalatattva is above mind or above creation. The whole work of Goudapada deals with amani, a means without mentation, caWed Amanaska Yoga. Acarya Sankara also writes, “There is no such thing as peace or liberation that has to be brought about. For anything done can have no meaning for one that is ever of the same order*'. This is what is paraphrased in Abhinava’s words:- sansarosti na tattvatah taniibhrtam''^.

11.4.1. Trika and tritayi

Maya and ^akti both are tritayi in the sense ^akti has three aspects and maya has three gunas. In descerning the nature of reality, the Advaita Vedantin discoverers that consciousness is the true reality. What ever appears other 235

than consciousness, is false, inert and causes misery. The world of objects being other than consciousness, is called mayci. So, rnaya has three forms: nonexistence, inert and misery. The Advaita Saivites further searches the nature of consciousness arid finds that there is nothing as inert, for everything is conscious. He unveils that consciousness has three essential characteristics. In consciousness thefe are three innate powers: (1) to know all, (2) the freedom or will to know a|l, where it is irrelevant to ask why to know (vide. Ch.6.1.2.) and (3) the activ­ ity of knowing. These three characteristics are called Jt^na-iakii, iccha-sakti and kriya-sakti respectively. These three aspects of consciousness are col­ lectively called vimar/a, svcftantrya or ananda iakti which is the heart, es­ sence or hidden property of consciousness. So Somananda composes: “susnksjuaiakti-tritaya-samaresyena vartate . The Advaita Saivism of Kashmir is famous by the name TRIKA. In the Tantra ^astras the three forms of power have been represented in a triangular form where the primary power, svaiantrya-sakli rests in the middle and the three powers rest on its three ends. These are represented in various narrjes such as (I) pramata, pranieya and pramana, (2) Sun, moon and Fire (3) prakasaka, prakaiya and prakasa etc.'’^ Sakti

Maya Brahman

vastavi (•""I , luccha sat at ananda vacaniva 236

These are the three corners of the heart of the supreme Being: "hrdayatrikonamacihumamsaloUasa". In the Upanisads these powers have been described as knowledge, strength and action "parasya /aktirvividha ca sryate svabhaviki jriana bala kriya ca For the Advaita Vedantins niaya is exactly opposed to the three nature of consciousness, which is existence, consciousness and bliss. So maya stands for nonexistence, inertness and unhappiness. Maya is vasta\>i, anirvacaniya and tuccha with reference to the phenomenal, rational and transcendental levels. In the context of ^akti, the concept of Tritaya is quite comprehensive. The three powers viz., will, knowledge and action of the supreme conscious­ ness (^iva) are transformed into sattva, raja and tamas in the case of an individual jiva at the time when the Lord descends to the objective realities. Thus says UtpalScarya; svangarupesu bhavesu palyurgjndnakriya ca jd/ mdya Irtiye te eva pasoh sattvam rajastamah// In the most resourceful works of Kashmir Saivism viz. the Bhairava Agamas, the Non-dual Reality namely Bhairava has three heads. “The three heads of god, Bhairava are the symbolic representations of the three Saktis of the divine, viz. para, parapara'and apar'a. The para is the supreme State in which there is no distinction or difference whatsoever between ^iva and ^akti. Parapara is that state (of manifestation) in which there is identity-in- distinction. Par'S is that state in which there is complete difference”*’. These states in Vedanta are called purusottama, aksara-purusa and ksarapurusa respectively, discussed in the section of comparison between ^iva and Ptfrusa in this chapter. Like purusa, Siva has three aspects; ( 1) illuminator (prakdJakaJ, the illuminated universe (prakasya) and the light of illumina­ 237

tion (prakasa, knowledge) which illuminates it. The Universe, Light and self are one**. The group of subjects, the various means of knowledge, the mul­ tiple kinds of objects, the various means of knowledge, the multiple kinds of knowledge and the object of knowledge-all this consciousness alone*''. The three powers considered as the three heads (Triiira Bhairava) of the Lord developed to build an independent school of Agama call&d Bhairavagama. Bhairava having three heads is known as Tryambaka, the Lord who has three eyes, three mothers (Amba, Ambika and AmbSlikp) through a process of self-limitation (samkoca). He assumes three aspects (prakasa, etc.), the three principles: mind, vital energy (prana) and matter, as stated in the ^atapatha-^rahman "etam mayo va ayam 'atma vahmayo, manomayah pranamayah”

11.4.2. Tritayi and Tridosa

The three forces which constitute the three elements of prakrti viz. sattva. rajas and tamas and which are called the three qualities (triguna) to create mind, intelligence and ego from which the five subtle elements and five gross elements including the sense organs are created, have a relevance with both the systems of non-dualism: Vedanta and Tantra (as well as I' ). These three forces transform into ida, pingala and susumna, »nd create the fluid which in the modern medical science is named as Neuro- humorous. In the science of Ayurveda, this neuro-humorous is the caus« of

the three dosas viz, vata, pitta and kapha. Formed out of these three powers, psychic, vital and physical, neuro-humorous can be compared with the Cerebro-spinal fluid which is extracted from the blood in the brain. It passes through the "spinal cord up to prostrate gland and keeps the neuron motors working. In about every 5 1/2 hours 125 mi. of cerebro spinal fluid is pro­ 238 duced i.e. about 545 ml. cerebro spinal fluid and 200-250 ml. of glucose is produced and consumed by the body in every 24 hours and gives vital en­ ergy to all the organs to function efficiently. The cerebro spinal Huid does not get mixed with blood. However, with certain special yogic exercises, the yogis are able to suck a little of this cerebro spinal fluid through the uppef- part of mouth - this is called "amrta-kriya" - drinking of Nectar. In such cases, the thirst and hunger are considerably reduced. The Yogis are knowtn to live on minimum of food and drink’”'. In the basic texts of Kashmir Saivism, such as the Spando'karikas, the process of such amrta-kriya or drinking of cerebro-spinal fluid and thereby

subduing hunger and thirst has been described as follows:- c/urbalo 'pi tadakramya yatoh karyam pravartate/ acchadayed bubhuksam ca tatha yo ’ti bubhuksitah//^^ ‘"Just as a feeble person addresses himself to his own duty by catching hold of that strength (^akti), so does he^ who is exceedingly hungry, subd»e hunger”’\ In Advaita Vedanta the three forces work for karma, upasana (yoga),

^ _ _ ___ f or adhibhautika, adhi 'daivika and adhyatmika planes. The anava, sakta iambhava means of liberation are founded on these powers. Both Advaita Vedanta and Kashmir Saivism are co-related to form the path of yoga. In both the non-dualistic systems a number of such powers have been described which now a days are not only being applied with clinical purposes at many Medical Colleges, but Parapsychology wbirdx> testifies the truths of these mystic schools. 239

11.4.3. Right and Left Paths :

The comparison of the doctrines of maya and s^akti reveals the differ­ ence of the two paths shown by the Vedanta and the Tantra. The uncovering - _ / of maya is consciousness and the expansion of Saicti is matter. Vedanta un­ covers consciousness as the essence of ourselves. It examined the matter and discovered consciousness in it. Whereas Tantra expounded that clon- sciousness is throbbing and playing the role of universe. It examined con­ sciousness and discovered matter in it. Both can be depicted in the following diagram:

Figure

If matter and consciousness are represented by the left and right nos­ trils. then the journey of the Vedanta is from consciousness (right nosttil) to matter (left nostril), and the journey of the Tantra is from matter (left) to consciousness (right). Both of them accept the eye as the abode of supreme contemplation. The Chandogya upanisad'^ describes eye as the abode of Brah­ man. The Brahmasutras also expounds it in the aphorism “antar upapatteh Abhinavagupta describes the four orbits {mandala) of the eye with four colours; while, red. white and black as the four powers predominating in 240

each orbit. These orbits represent the pramey, pramana, pramatd and praniiti'’\ when the pranieyci. pramata andpramatja are differentiated from pramiti, such discrimination is said to occur due to maya - ihe right harid path. Whereas when the prakasaka, the prakasya and prakasa are unifieid into one illumination, such synthesis is called sakti. The left hand path re­ verses the flow of energy flowing from the consciousness laying in the head and channeled to the sense organs and outside. Through the technique, knovi'n as kriya which is a practice of kundalini. the energy flowing outside is made reversed, and kriya leads the energy inside, up the spine into the higher cakras where the divine consciousness once again becomes dynamic to our percep­ tion*”’. This cuts the connection of mind from senses and links it with intel­ ligence reflected with the self. It'caterizes’ the brain-cell grooves in which past tendencies are hidden. It burns the desire for karma and frees from im­ pending karma, enabling the practitioner to the supreme consciousness in him. At this stage there is no hunger but the yogi becomes omnipotent. When maya differentiates the three (matd, mOya and mdna), sakti uni­ fies the three (prakasaka, prakasya and prakasa). Thus these two {maya and sakti) are ascribed as leading to the right hand and left hand paths. Maylt transferred consciousness into matter and s'akti transforms matter (wofld) into bliss, the manifestation of consciousness.