365bet娱乐

The possibility for the existence of possessor as distinct from the power is explicitly denied in this context and established that the 艢补办迟颈 is considered to be indifferent from 艢颈惫补 who is also known as 艢补办迟颈mat (艢补办迟颈m膩n). 

Interpreting the 艢颈惫补s奴tra, which expresses that the universe is the aggregate of 艢颈惫补鈥檚 powers is Mark S. G. Dyczkowski opines as;

The universe is 艢颈惫补 in the form of his absolute energy and because the yogi is similar 艢颈惫补 (in all respects), the power of his consciousness is fully expanded鈥� it is one鈥檚 own consciousness alone that manifests itself in this way and that as the wonderful diversity of all things, like one who is free to desire whatever he likes. Thus because the power (of consciousness) and its power are one, it is 艢颈惫补 himself who manifests in this way.^[1]

艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱 pronounces that there is no separate existence for 艢颈惫补 and 艢补办迟颈:

啶� 啶多た啶掂�� 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦ぐ啶灌た啶む�� 啶� 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦ぐ啷嵿さ啷嵿く啶むた啶班�囙�曕た啶｀�� 啷�
啶多た啶掂�� 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦じ啷嵿い啶ムぞ 啶�啶距さ啶距え啶苦�氞�嵿�涏く啶� 啶曕ぐ啷嵿い啷佮ぎ啷�啶︵�冟ざ啶距え啷� 啷�
啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦ざ啶曕�嵿い啶苦ぎ啶む�嬥ぐ啷嵿き啷囙う啶� 啶多�堗さ啷� 啶溹ぞ啶む�� 啶� 啶掂ぐ啷嵿ぃ啷嵿く啶む�� 啷�

na 艣颈惫补岣� 艣aktirahito na 艣aktirvyatireki峁嚹� |
艣颈惫补岣� 艣aktistath膩 bh膩v膩nicchay膩 kartum墨d峁浥浤乶 |
艣akti艣aktimatorbheda岣� 艣补颈惫别 箩腻迟耻 na var峁噛ate || 

(艢颈惫补 does not exist apart from 艢补办迟颈. 艢补办迟颈 is not different (from 艢颈惫补). And 艢颈惫补 is empowered to create such entities at will. In 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘, no difference whatsoever between power and the one possessing the power is described.)^[2]

Following this, 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 answers to the arguments鈥攈ypothesized as that of the opponents鈥欌�攎ade through some analogies.

啶� 啶灌た啶�啶膏�嵿く 啶�啷冟ぅ啶曕�嵿�氞�嵿�涏�堗い啷嵿く啶� 啶ㄠぞ啶椸�嵿え啷囙ぐ啷屶し啷嵿ぃ啷嵿く啶� 啶�啷冟ぅ啶椸�嵿き啶掂�囙い啷� 啷�
啶�啶ㄠ�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶膏�嵿い啶傕き啶ㄠい啶距く啶距�� 啶灌た 啶ㄠぞ啶膏�� 啶掂す啷嵿え啶苦じ啷嵿い啶︵�嬥�氞�嵿く啶む�� 啷�
啶灌�囙ぎ啶距う啶苦さ啶︵�嵿き啶距じ啷嵿さ啶班�� 啶むう啷嵿う啷嵿ぐ啶掂�嵿く啶� 啶む�堗ぐ啷嵿さ啷嵿く啶�啶苦�氞ぞ啶班た啶むぎ啷� 啷�
啶�啶︵�嵿く啷屶し啷嵿ぃ啷嵿く啶掂�嵿く啶むた啶班�囙�曕い啷嵿さ啷� 啶︵�冟し啷嵿�熰ぞ啶ㄠ�嵿い啷� 啶︵ぞ啶灌�曕ぞ啶多�嵿ぐ啶�啶距い啷� 啷�

na himasya p峁泃hakcchaitya峁� n膩gnerau峁ａ箛ya峁� p峁泃hagbhavet |
mantrasta峁僢hanat膩y膩峁� hi n膩sau vahnistadocyate ||
hem膩divadbh膩svara峁� taddravya峁� tairvyabhic膩ritam |
yadyau峁ａ箛yavyatirekatve d峁涐梗峁�膩nto d膩hak膩艣ray膩t ||

(Coldness is not separated from snow; heat cannot be separated from fire. Indeed (one might object that)a fire is not said to be one when in the state of being paralysed by mantra. Like gold etc., it is a brilliant substance. If you argue that these prove the erroneousness of our argument, (we reply:) the example would be a valid one if they were missing their heat, because fire depends on being something that burns.)^[3]

厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 tries to assimilate Var峁嘺devatas (which are the forms of 艢补办迟颈 acquainted in the Kula stream) into 艢颈惫补:

啶多�堗さ啷� 啶掂ぞ啶� 啶囙え啷嵿う啷嵿ぐ啶苦く啶む�嵿さ啶� 啶呧ぅ 啶ㄠぞ啶︵ぞ啶︵た啶ㄠ�嬥う啶苦い啶� 啷�
啶むう啶�啷嵿く啶距じ啷� 啶�啶侧ぞ啶掂ぞ啶�啷嵿い啶苦�� 啶膏�佮�曕�嵿し啷嵿ぎ啶�啶ㄠ�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶膏�嵿さ啶班�傕お啶む�� 啷�

艣补颈惫别 惫腻肠补 颈苍诲谤颈测补迟惫补峁� atha 苍腻诲腻诲颈苍辞诲颈迟腻 |
tadabhy膩se phal膩v膩pti岣� suk峁�mamantrasvar奴pat膩 ||鈥斉欴., III.10.

The estimations such as 鈥榮a ca鈥� mahe艣varar奴pa鈥� also propose the indifference between Siva and 艢补办迟颈.

The fundamental desire to create the universe occurs within 艢颈惫补 and afterwards, the activity originates and finally, the subject rises who recognizes it as the reality. Interestingly, these three forms of 艢补办迟颈s have been identified with 艢颈惫补. 

The remaining two 艢补办迟颈s are also allocated to this context as said by John Nemec;

As long as the erroneous condition of the world of transmigration, in which 艢颈惫补鈥檚 oneness is not recognised, does not arise 艢颈惫补鈥檚 nature is so great i.e.,... Accordingly all the five powers definitely exist, although in a unified form, at that time, since they are able to produce the objects associated with worldly activity.^[4]

However, as formulated by John Nemec, the conception of indifference between 艢颈惫补 and 艢补办迟颈 could absolutely be credited to 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补鈥檚 pantheistic perspective, whereas Utpaladeva, being a panentheist, holds quite different observation in this matter:

厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补鈥檚 reluctance to dichotomizing distinctions between subject and object; between that which is transcendent and that which is immanent or between 艢颈惫补 and the phenomena he creates, is a feature of 艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱, that distinguishes it in the history of 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 philosophy. Utpaladeva鈥檚 monism involving the identification of pairs and poles鈥斺�業鈥檃nd 鈥榯hat鈥�; light and its reflection; agent and object.厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 instead articulates a monism involving a single ubiquitous, cycling vortex of power(s) of activity with which 艢颈惫补 is fully forever identified.

(John Nemec, 鈥淭he Evidence for 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补鈥檚 Pantheism鈥�, Journal of Indian Philosophy, p.12.)

Note: Nemec鈥檚 view in this respect is agreeable partially, because the very approach towards the indifference between 艢颈惫补 and 艢补办迟颈 seems meticulous as he has observed. Some minor suitable attempts are there in Utpaladeva also. 

For instance, see:

啶膏�嬥そ啶�啶�啶苦い啷嵿く啷囙さ啶傕ぐ啷傕お啶む�嵿さ啷囙え 啶�啶班ぞ啶�啷冟ざ啶ㄠ�嵿い啷� 啶呧ぇ啷嵿く啶掂じ啶距く啶� 啶�啶� 啶�啶班ぎ啷囙ざ啷嵿さ啶班ざ啶曕�嵿い啶苦�� 啶掂た啶�啶班�嵿ざ啶班�傕お啶� 啶嗋い啷嵿ぎ啶掂う啷囙さ 啶呧す啶�啶苦い啷嵿く啶ㄠさ啶氞�嵿�涏た啶ㄠ�嵿え啶む�嵿さ啷囙�� 啶�啶距い啶�, 啶� 啶む�� 啶曕う啶距�氞た啶︵た啶︵え啷嵿い啶�啶� 啶掂た啶氞�嵿�涏た啶ㄠ�嵿え啶む�嵿さ啷囙え 啶�啶距い啶�... 啶むじ啷嵿ぎ啶距い啷� 啶膏ぐ啷嵿さ 啶忇さ 啶掂た啶�啶班�嵿ざ啶� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶曕ぞ啶多ぞ啶む�� 啶呧さ啶苦�氞�嵿�涏た啶ㄠ�嵿え 啶忇さ 啶囙い啶� 啷�

so'yamityeva峁價奴patvena par膩m峁浥沘nt墨 adhyavas膩y膩 y膩 parame艣vara艣akti岣� vimar艣ar奴p膩 膩tmavadeva ahamityanavacchinnatvena bh膩ti, na tu kad膩cididantay膩 vicchinnatvena bh膩ti... tasm膩t sarva eva vimar艣a岣� prak膩艣膩t avicchinna eva iti |

鈥斈�艣v补谤补辫谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻惫颈尘补谤艣颈苍墨, I. 5.20, 叠丑腻蝉. Vol.1, p.295.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Mark S. G. Dyczkowski, The Aphorisms of 艢颈惫补, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1992, p.147.

[2]:

艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱, III. 2cd- 3.John Nemec, The Ubiquitous 艢颈惫补, p.214.

[3]:

艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱, III. 7- 8, John Nemec, Op.cit, p.218.

[4]:

See John Nemec, Op.cit., p.123.