365bet娱乐

The degraded concept of 艢补办迟颈 is extensively seen in the post scriptural works emerged in the ninth century Kashmir. The 膧驳补尘补蝉鈥攖o which all the Tantric traditions resort to as the scriptural authorities鈥攈ad been subjected to a triad of classification in accordance with their philosophical tendencies.^[1] These new models, known as post-scriptural works that succeeded 膧驳补尘补蝉 are the major source of the absolute monistic thoughts of 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 in Kashmir. All the major components of religious-philosophic tendencies in India at that time could be found in the complex cultural panorama of ninth century Kashmir.

Nevertheless, the works composed by different authors hold much variance amongst themselves. The first post-scriptural treatise 艢颈惫补蝉奴迟谤补 which has been attributed to Vasugupta,^[2] is the first work where the principle of 艢补办迟颈 is found as analogous with the Pur膩峁噄c concepts.

艢颈惫补蝉奴迟谤补 says;

啶囙�氞�嵿�涏ぞ啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦ぐ啷佮ぎ啶� 啶曕�佮ぎ啶距ぐ啷�.

颈肠肠丑腻艣补办迟颈谤耻尘腻 办耻尘腻谤墨.

According to Navjivan Rastogi, it is Vasugupta who united the philosophical orientation and mythological images of 艢补办迟颈 seen in 笔耻谤腻峁嘺蝉 by equating Um膩 and Kum膩r墨 with the absolute will.^[3]

Although the tendencies like assimilation of Pur膩峁噄c elements are present, no developed features of post-scriptural works could be found in 艢颈惫补诲峁涐梗峁璱 There after comes the chance of real post-scripturalists viz., 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补, Utpaladeva and Abhinavagupta. Among these Utpala, through his sovereign treatise 莫艣惫补谤补辫谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻办腻谤颈办腻 and other commentarial works, discussed the higher philosophy of 艢aivite monism. He established the theory through the long discourses and refutations of the Buddhist philosophers. Abhinavagupta took successful effort through his exegetical works to fulfil the ultimate purpose i.e., to explicitly lead all humanity to the supreme soteriological realization.

艢颈惫补诲峁涐梗峁璱 written by 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 upholds visible opposition to the launch of 艢补办迟颈 as the supreme principle. For this reason, being the inspirer of the anti-艢腻办迟补 movements of the later theorists of 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻, 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补鈥檚 work should be treated as the chief cause of the evolution of 艢补办迟颈.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

碍腻尘颈办补, Yogaja, Cintya, 碍补谤补峁嘺, Ajita, 顿墨辫迟补, 厂奴办峁�m补, Sahasraka, 础峁兣泆尘补迟, and Suprabheda are the dualistic 膧驳补尘补蝉; Vijaya, 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补, 厂惫腻测补尘产丑耻惫补, Anala, 痴墨谤补, Raurava, 惭补办耻峁璦, Vimala, 颁补苍诲谤补箩帽腻苍补, Mukhabimba, 笔谤辞诲驳墨迟补, Lalita, Siddha, 厂补苍腻迟补苍补, Sarvokta, 笔补谤补尘别艣惫补谤补, 碍颈谤补峁嘺 and 痴腻迟奴濒补 are the dualist-monistic 膧驳补尘补蝉; and Svacchandabhairava, 颁补峁囜笉补产丑补颈谤补惫补, Krodhabhairava, Unmattabhairava, Asitaikabhairava, Rudrabhairava, 碍补辫腻濒墨艣补产丑补颈谤补惫补, Samuccaya, Ghora, 骋丑辞峁�a峁嘺, 狈颈艣腻蝉补帽肠腻谤补, Durmukha, 叠丑墨尘补ka, Damar膩rava, 叠丑墨尘补, 痴别迟腻濒补尘补谤诲补苍补, 鲍肠肠丑耻峁�m补, 痴腻尘补, 碍补辫腻濒补, Bhairava, 笔耻峁�p补, Advaya, Tri艣irobhairava, 贰办补辫腻诲补, Siddhayoge艣vara, 笔补帽肠腻尘峁泃补, 笔谤补辫补帽肠补, 驰辞驳颈苍墨箩腻濒补艣补尘产补谤补, Vi艣vavikantha, 闯丑补峁卥腻谤补 and 罢颈濒补办辞诲测腻苍补产丑补颈谤补惫补 are the monistic 膧驳补尘补蝉.

[2]:

Divergences of opinions are found about the authorship of 艢颈惫补蝉奴迟谤补 and the subsequent 厂辫补苍诲补办腻谤颈办腻 See, Chapter 3 in this study, p.84. Mythological perspectives are also available therein.

[3]:

Navjivan Rastogi, 鈥淣otion of 艢补办迟颈 in Kashmir 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘鈥�, p.26. Shaman Hatley presupposes that this identification suggests the Gupta or late Gupta milieu potentially compared to that of the old 厂办补苍诲补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 dated back to c. 6th or 7th century CE. See,Shaman Hatley, 鈥溑毑拱斐倬� in Early Tantric 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘: Historical Observations on Goddesses, Cosmology and Ritual in 狈颈艣惫腻蝉补tattvasa峁僪it膩鈥�, Bjarne Olsen (Ed.), Goddesses in Tantric Hinduism: History, Doctrine and Practice, Routledge, 2015, pp.2 ff.