365bet娱乐

The aforementioned proclamations (of 艢补办迟颈 as the nature of 艢颈惫补 and as identical with 艢颈惫补) are hardly tenable within the schema of 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻. In fact these speculations certainly lead to the final one i.e., the supreme omnipotent, omniscient and transcendental reality鈥斉毦北共�. 艢颈惫补-centredness of 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 always subordinates 艢补办迟颈 (to an inferior status) even though he remains as 艢颈惫补 and manifests as everything else with the help of 艢补办迟颈.

The 艢aivite concept of freedom could be redefined in this context as autonomy; because, the 鈥�possession of power鈥� is associated with the autonomy (freedom to act in his own will) of power-holder (艢补办迟颈mat).

The 艢颈惫补s奴tra denotes Bhairava as 鈥榰psurge鈥� to establish 艢颈惫补 as the possessor of all the 艢补办迟颈s that act as the sources of all activities;

啶夃う啷嵿く啶�啷� 啶�啷堗ぐ啶掂��

udyamo 产丑补颈谤补惫补岣�^[1]

艢颈惫补 is recognized as the possessor of the powers of action and knowledge. 碍补谤迟峁泃惫补 and J帽膩t峁泃va are presented as clearly transcending the corresponding powers (碍谤颈测腻 and 闯帽腻苍补). 

Just like this, the action of Cit is equated with the possessor of Cit:

啶氞た啶む�嵿�曕�嵿ぐ啶苦く啶� 啶氞た啶むた啶曕ぐ啷嵿い啷冟い啶� 啷�

citkriy膩 citikart峁泃膩 |^[2]

The important discussion about 艢颈惫补鈥檚 transcendence over 艢补办迟颈 subsists in the second and third chapters of 艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱 which were written for the refutation of grammarian鈥檚 idea of 艢补产诲补产谤补丑尘补苍. 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 firmly repudiated Pradyumnabha峁�峁璦 who treated 艢补办迟颈 as the supreme reality.^[3]

David Peter Lawrence precisely scrutinizes the aforesaid tendencies and observes,

鈥淎s the appellation "non-dual 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘" suggests, in this stream of tantric 艢补办迟颈 is encompassed by or, as Sanderson would say, "overcoded" within the metaphysical essence of the God 艢颈惫补. 艢颈惫补 is the 艣aktiman, "possessor of 艢补办迟颈," encompassing her within his androgynous nature as his integral power and consort. According to the predominant non-dual 艢补颈惫补 myth, he out of a kind of play divides himself from 艢补办迟颈 and then in sexual union emanates, embodies himself within, and controls the universe through her.鈥�^[4]

This assumption seemingly leads to the diplomatic concept propounded later on by Abhinavagupta i.e., the concept of pairing (测腻尘补濒补). It is being considered under the portion of the description of fullness (辫奴谤峁嘺迟腻) by some scholars. For instance, Navjivan Rastogi assumes 蝉补峁単丑补峁�峁�补 as a 鈥榮elf-dissolving鈥� fusion between being and its substrate. Both the supreme reality and the power are constituted of fullness.^[5]

Consequently, the 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 thought on the principle of 艢补办迟颈 is assorted likely into the above mentioned attitudes. The primal importance of the 艢补办迟颈 has been slipping as the nature of supreme reality even in the phase of Spanda itself. Correspondingly 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 tried to expose 艢补办迟颈 as indifferent from 艢颈惫补. Further, the approach has been transmitted inventively into the illustration of 艢补办迟颈 as the gateway or tool to the reality.

Thus, to sum up, 艢补办迟颈 has had a prime religious philosophical position in the earliest school called Kula. In the initial stage, 艢补办迟颈 was presented as having the semi-divine or even human forms. Subsequently, the later developments in Kula itself changed 艢补办迟颈 into more divinized form and across which the audial and visual models of goddesses have evolved. Krama, depicts 艢补办迟颈 in relation with the control of the time as well as death. Next two are the branches which gave immense attention to the male supreme reality called 艢颈惫补, by subordinating the position of 艢补办迟颈. There Spanda shows an unconscious allegiance to 艢补办迟颈; whereas 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻 skillfully upholds 艢补办迟颈 in its multifarious doctrinal concepts in accordance with the metaphysics of recognition. In fact the analysis made here reveals the philosophical characteristics and prominence of 艢补办迟颈 in the earlier schools and the shift of 艢补办迟颈鈥檚 position to a demeaned state in later streams.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

艢颈惫补s奴tra, I. 8; cf. 厂辫补苍诲补蝉补峁僤辞丑补, p.5.

[2]:

莫艣惫补谤补辫谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻办腻谤颈办腻, I. 5. 11.

[3]:

See 艢颈惫补d峁涐梗峁璱, III. 1-3.

[4]:

David Peter Lawrence, 鈥淭he Disclosure of 艢补办迟颈 in Aesthetics: Remarks on the Relation of Abhinavagupta鈥檚 Poetics and Nondual Kashmiri 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘鈥�, South East Review of Asian Studies, Vol. 35, 2013, p.92.

[5]:

罢补苍迟谤腻濒辞办补, III. 68: 鈥�tayoryad测腻尘补濒补峁� 谤奴辫补峁� sa 蝉补峁僩丑补峁�峁�补 iti sm峁泃a岣� 触鈥�