Introduction

The Pratyabhijfia-Saivism, which is the most important system of the Trika philosophy or Kashmir ^aivism, is a monistic school. According to the general view of this system, &va, otherwise called Parama &va, is the Absolute. But Abhi-navagupta ( 10th century A. D. ) distinguishes the Absolute from Parama &va and calls it Anuttara i. e. beyound which there is nothing¹.

&va, the Absolute, is of the nature of sat, cit and frnanda i.e. existence, consciousness and bliss². He is eternally endowed with Para-Sakti or Supreme Power. Accordingly, he is not only consciousness and bliss, but also self-conscious and blissful³. Further, he is omnipotent, omniscient, perfect, infinite and all-pervasive.

During the process of the evolution of different principles from Siva, a principle called mSya-tattva comes out after the manifestation of the five pure principles of giva-tattva, Sakti-tattva, Sadasiva-tattva, Jsvara-tattva and {Wdhavidya-tattva. This mayQ-tattva is nothing but the non-conscious power of &va, which conceals the real nature of Siva and creates the idea of difference⁴. From may& come forth the five kaficukas or coverings : kdla, vidya, raga, kald. and niyati.

156

The Self in Indian Philosophy Nature of the Self

The Self in PratyabhijW Јaivism

transcendental level, the individual selves have no existence, there is only one reality which is advaita or non-dual Siva .

According to Pratyabhijna-S'aivism, S*iva confined by maya-tattva and the five kaficukas is the individual self. When Siva limits his powers with the help of his power maya, his attri­butes of omnipotence, omniscience, perfection, infinity and all-pervasiveness are manifested as kala, vidya, raga, kala, and niyati, respectively. Kala is the cause of the individual self's limited agency ; vidya is the cause of its limited knowledge : raga is the love for particular objects ; kala is the cause of succession or the temporal order of past, present and future among things; and niyati is the principle which regulates the fruition of righteous and unrighteous actions, and connects specific causes to specific effects. These five prin­ciples are the effects of maya, and are called kaftcukas or coverings of the bound self. Abhinavagupta regards maya also as a kaftcuka⁵. And Parama Siva assuming the state of a limited knower and doer by covering his nature by maya and the five kaftcukas, is called purusa or the individual self. This puru$a-tattva is deluded by maya, is guided by merits and demerits, and is subjected to the cycle of birth and death. This is the bound state of the self⁶. This bound self has limited knowledge, limited action and limited bliss. It is the agent of actions and experiencer of the fruits of those actions. It may be regarded as partly insentient, since it wrongly identifies itself with the insentient elements like the vital forces, the internal organs—buddhi or intellect, manas or mind, ahamkara or ago etc.—the sense-organs and the body. The bound self is atomic in magnitude and is different indifferent organisms. When in libera-tionthe self realises its real nature,it becomes identical with Siva, and experiences the world as non-different from itself⁷. The liberated self, being identical with &va, is omnipresent, omni­scient and omnipotent. Further, during the state of liberation, there is no plurality of the selves, since at that time, the finite selves become one with the Absolute. In other words, in the

The Self and S iva

The self in its real nature is identical with Siva, the Absolute. It is Siva who contracts his consciousness and mani­festation by his free will, and assumes the nature of a limited knower conditioned by the subtle body composed of subtle elements, such as, the vital forces and the like.

Abhinavagupta holds that the individual self is nothig but the Absolute limited by the six kaftcukas or coverings, namely, maya, kala, vidya, raga, kala and nityati. It is the Absolute that becomes the limited self bound to the embodied life, just as the ubiquitious akaSa. becomes limited when enclosed in a jar. When Siva assumes the power of maya, his powers of omniscience and omnipotence are concealed, and his nature is sullied by the taints called anava mala, maylya-mala and Karma-mala* all of which are the products of maya. This limi­ted and tainted state of &va is the individual self i. e. puiu$a or jlvatman. The individual or empirical self is called pasu since it is limited by the Kaficukas or coverings and is bound to the embodied life⁹. Thus, it is &va himself who, because of his free will, assumes a self-limitation and becomes the indivi­dual self which is a spiritual atom or monad.

Kssmaraja also holds that the individual self is nothing but

^o^to is of the nature of non-apprehension; it conceals the real nature of the individual self-its universal consciousness, bliss and independence. Mayiya-mala creates the knowledge of difference, limb the knowledge and agency of the self, and gives rise to the experience of pleasure, pain etc. Karma-male, consists in.not know­ing siva as the on,y real agent or doer ; it makes the mdmdual self an impure empirical knower, and causes it to perform good and bad deeds and experience the fruits thereof.

The Self in Indian Philosophy

a contracted state of the Absolute or Parama &va who is of the nature of universal consciousness pervading the whole universe. Thus, in its real nature, the self is identical with the Absolute, since universal consciousness is the real nature of the self, as of the Absolute. But during the state of bondage, the nature of the universal consciousness is not manifested because of the power ofmaya, as a result of which the self appears to be contracted and atomic in magnitude. In liberation, the power of mays having been destroyed, the self realises its nature of universal consciousness, and becomes identical with Parama Siva. The Spanda-Sastra says, 'The individual self is identical with Parama Siva. There is no state in a word, object, or apprehension which is not $iva"^l°.

An objection may be raised that the individual knower or self cannot be identical with Parama Siva, because the indivi­dual subject is of the nature of differentiated consciousness, while Parama &va is of the nature of undifferentiated universal consciousness. Against this, K§emaraja says that the individual consciousness in nothing but the universal consciousness s it is the universal consciousness which conceals its real nature, contracts itself by its free will, and descends to the mental plane to apprehend particular objects. And it is this state of the universal consciousness that is called individual conscious­ness. This individual consciousness is limited by the external objects like jars, cloths etc. as well as by the internal objects like pleasure, pain etc. Now because of the limitations assumed by the Absolute, its powers of knowledge, action and maya be­come sattva, rajas and tamas, respectively¹¹, in the individual self. The limitations manifested in the individual self and the taints resulting therefrom being thus due to the absolutely free will of Siva himself, are not to be regarded as extraneous to the universal consciousness.

Thus, according to Pratyabhijna-^aivism, it is Parama !&va who conceals his nature of infinite consciousness, bliss and freedom by his freewill, and assumes the state of the limited and

The Self in Pratyabhijna Saivism 159

embodied individual self possessing finite knowledge, action and bliss, and experiencing objects through the body and the sense-organs. This is the state of bondage which lies in the non-apprehension of non-difference of the principles from &va¹².

When the self, by pursuing a course of spiritual discipline, destroys all the taints and evils along with their causes, namely, mgya and the kancukas, it experiences all the thirty-six princi­ples as forms of Siva. It then acquires perfect knowledge and bliss, and realises its identity with the Supreme knower endowed with universal consciousness. Also, it realises its freedom, omniscience and omnipotence and also its authorship of the five-fold cosmic acts. This is the state of liberation which consists in the apprehension of non-difference of the principles from Siva¹³.

Actually, however, bondage and liberation are nothing but empirical experiences, and have no ontological reality. The self by its very nature is always identical with Parama &va, the universal consciousness, and is therefore eternally free. It seems to be bound or limited in knowledge and action, only because of the limitations assumed by Parama &va by his free will. Thus, bondage of the self is false ; it is neither intrinsic nor extrinsic to the nature of the self. And bondage being false, liberation is also without any reality . Thus, both bondage and liberation are unreal from the transcendental

point of view¹⁴.

It is objected that if the/tva be identical with Siva, all the ideas of worshipper and the worshipped, teacher and the taught and also the means prescribed in the scriptures for the attain­ment of liberation will be meaningless. To this, Utpaladeva replies that so far as the empirical reality is concerned, these distinctions are not to be denied. The distinction of the selves as well as their reality are denied only from the transcendental point of view¹⁵.

160

1.

2, 3.

4. 5. 6.

7.

9.

10.

11.

12 13. 14.

15.

The Self in Indian Philosophy REFERENCES

anuttaram iti na vidyate uttaram adhikam yatah—Para-trimsikB-vivfti, p. 19 ; K. C. Pandey, Abhinavagupta, p. 321 L. N. Shartna, Kashmir saivism, pp. 183-190. Pandey, op cit., pp. 327-8. See Fw-tionSPK, 416 See ibid, and PH, 7. See Vivr.ti on SPK, 4.16.

visvatma siva evasmi iti...atnia-jnanarh—Stva-sutravitrarsini, 1.17 ; citi-sarhkocama—PH, 4. See Vivrti on SPK, 1. 4. and 4. 21. sarva-dehesv-api sa eva eko.-'pratiprani prthaktvena aham iti prat-yayo mayiyo na tattvikah—Vivrti on SPK, 1. 3. Comt. on PH, 7. SPK, and Vivrti, 1. 3. 4. 5 ; citi-sarrkocatma cetano'pi sariikucita-

visvamayah—PH, 4.

citi-saktir eva jnana-krija-rraya-sakti-iupa pasudfsaysrh sphurati—

Comt. on PH. 5.

tad-fparrSa¹¹⁶ sva-taktithir vjaff.oLitata sarfsaritvatr.—PH, 12. PH, 13 and Comt. on it. tandha-mokgau na blidyete sarvatraiva sivatvatah—i'D, 3.68. See

Vrtti on ibid ; 3. 68. 70 ; svabheda-pratitimatrarii moksalj tad-aprati-tis tu bandhab—Vrtti on sD 3. 70. SD, 4. 7-9.

CHAPTER

23

THE SELF IN gAKTISM