365bet娱乐

艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is the fall of power or energy from its possessor鈥攖he supreme divine (in a higher grade) to the individual aspirant (in the lower grade). It is nothing else than the bliss proposed by the mainstream mythological traditions of India.^[1] This is also known as one among the five deeds of 艢颈惫补.^[2] The root thought behind this conception certainly should not only be credited to the philosophy of 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘. The practices of medieval Indian religious systems hold similar ideas to 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补. In the medieval period 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 was in competition with (in the hard strive indeed for the survival) the main stream religious as well as philosophical concepts. Indian orthodox thought systems also speak of such theories in detail.^[3]

It is an important point that the monistic 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 is completely depended upon the principle of 艢补办迟颈 and hence this idea of bliss is also presented in relation with 艢补办迟颈. 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is necessary for the internal realization experience of the Supreme Lord.

Abhinavagupta explains the inevitability of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 in monistic 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 and its divergences from the views of the dualistic 厂颈诲诲丑腻苍迟补 tradition as, 

啶膏�嵿さ啶むえ啷嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶�啶班ぎ啷囙ざ啷嵿さ啶班ぞ啶︵�嵿さ啶�啶掂ぞ啶︵�� 啶む�� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶�啶︵�嵿く啶� 啶忇い啶む�� 啷� 啶�啶ム�� 啶灌た 啶�啶班ぎ啷囙ざ啷嵿さ啶班�� 啶膏�嵿さ啶班�傕お啶距�氞�嵿�涏ぞ啶︵え啶曕�嵿ぐ啷�啶∴く啶� 啶�啶多�佮�� 啶�啷佮う啷嵿�椸げ啷嬥そ啶｀�佮�� 啶膏�傕お啶ㄠ�嵿え啶� 啶� 啶� 啶むじ啷嵿く 啶︵�囙ざ啶曕ぞ啶侧じ啷嵿さ啶班�傕お啶�啷囙う啶掂た啶班�嬥ぇ啶�, 啶むう啷嵿さ啶む�� 啶膏�嵿さ啶班�傕お啶膏�嵿ぅ啶椸え啶掂た啶ㄠた啶掂�冟い啷嵿い啷嵿く啶� 啶膏�嵿さ啶班�傕お啶�啷嵿ぐ啶む�嵿く啶�啶む�嵿い啶苦�� 啶溹す啶距い啷�啶むた 啶掂ぞ 啶膏ぎ啶距ざ啷嵿ぐ啶�啶ㄠ�� 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦お啶距い啶�啶距い啷嵿ぐ啶� 啶呧ぃ啷佮ぐ啷佮�氞�嵿く啶む��, 啶膏�嵿さ啶距い啶ㄠ�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啷嵿く啶�啶距い啷嵿ぐ啶膏ぞ啶班ざ啷嵿�氞ぞ啶膏�� 啶�啶班ぎ啶多た啶掂�� 啶多�曕�嵿い啷囙�� 啶�啶距い啶�啶苦い啶� 啷�

svatantraparame艣var膩dvayav膩de tu prapadyata etat | 测补迟丑腻 hi 辫补谤补尘别艣惫补谤补岣� sva谤奴辫腻肠肠丑腻诲补苍补办谤墨岣峚测腻 辫补艣耻岣� pudgalo'峁嘘岣� 蝉补峁僷补苍苍补岣� na ca tasya de艣ak膩lasvar奴pabhedavirodha岣�, tadvat svar奴pasthaganaviniv峁泃ty膩 svar奴papratyapatti峁� jah膩t墨ti v膩 sam膩艣rayan 艣aktip膩tap膩tra峁� a峁噓rucyate, 蝉惫腻迟补苍迟谤测补尘腻迟谤补蝉腻谤补艣肠腻蝉补耻 辫补谤补尘补艣颈惫补岣� 艣akte岣� p膩tayit膩 | 

(On the other hand, in [our] doctrine of the non-duality with the free Highest Lord, [grace] is possible. For just as the Highest Lord becomes the alienated individual, [i.e. what various religious schools call] the person or the individual, and [yet] he is not afflicted by any contradiction due to the differences between the [various] places, times and natures [in which he manifests himself], exactly in the same way, when he chooses to return鈥攅ither instantly or gradually鈥攖o his [real] nature by putting an end to the concealment of his nature, he is said to be an individual who is a fit vessel for the descent of power [that characterizes grace]; and [yet] he is the Highest Lord, whose essence is nothing but freedom [and] who is the agent of this descent of power).^[4]

Christopher Wallis tries to find out the foremost reference of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 in the usage 鈥渞udrapracodita岣モ�� in Kau峁囜笉inyabh膩峁�ya of P膩supatas奴tra^[5]. 

He remarks, 

鈥淭he key phrase here鈥攔udrapracodita (impelled by, or inspired by Rudra)鈥攊s implying the notion that it was through God鈥檚 grace that he felt the desire to seek a guru and was successful in finding one.鈥�^[6]

But the contextual evidences vividly notify the intentional attempts made to elevate the whole system to a socially popular one鈥攂y the synthesizers. Here it seems appropriate to assign the re-discovery of transcendental reality through devotion to the 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补.

Note: Jayaratha makes the same opinion in this context thus:

啶多た啶掂�� 啶�啶曕�嵿い啶苦ぐ啷囙さ 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦お啶距い 啶囙い啶� 啶侧た啶權�嵿�椸げ啶苦�權�嵿�椸た啶ㄠ�嬥ぐ啶�啷囙う啷嬥お啶氞ぞ啶班ぞ啶む�� 啷� 啶�啶曕�嵿い啶苦ぐ啷嵿す啶� 啶ㄠぞ啶� 啶呧じ啷嵿く 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶距ぅ啶�啶苦�曕�� 啶氞た啶灌�嵿え啶� 啶�啶︵�佮�曕�嵿い啶� 鈥樴い啶む�嵿ぐ啷堗い啶む�� 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶ムぎ啶� 啶氞た啶灌�嵿え啶� 啶班�佮う啷嵿ぐ啷� 啶�啶曕�嵿い啶苦�� 啶膏�佮え啶苦ざ啷嵿�氞げ啶� 啷�

艣ive bhaktireva 艣aktip膩ta iti li峁単ali峁単inorabhedopac膩r膩t | bhaktirhi 苍腻尘补 asya 辫谤腻迟丑补尘颈办补峁� 肠颈丑苍补峁� yadukta峁� 鈥榯atraitat 辫谤补迟丑补尘补峁� 肠颈丑苍补峁� rudre 产丑补办迟颈岣� 蝉耻苍颈艣肠补濒腻 |

Devotion is the key idea that is homologized with the descent of power and it is the highest state of liberation too.

It should be asserted that the origin of the conception of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 might have been accommodated after the intermixing process of bhoga and 尘辞办峁�a in the monistic 艢补颈惫补 system as a necessary change made in order to cooperate with the Br膩hma峁噄c pantheon of devotion. It is the same context in which Abhinavagupta portrayed the difference between bhukti (enjoyment) and mukti (liberation) as the former is generated from 补辫补谤腻 bhakti and the later from the par膩 bhakti. 

He expressed this as,

啶呧え啶�啷囙�曕�嵿し啷嵿�� 啶多た啶掂�� 啶�啶曕�嵿い啶苦�� 啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦お啶距い啷嬥そ啶�啶侧ぞ啶班�嵿ぅ啶苦え啶距ぎ啷� 啷�
啶�啶� 啶�啶侧ぞ啶班�嵿ぅ啶苦い啶�啶� 啶�啶曕�嵿い啶苦�� 啶膏ぞ 啶曕ぐ啷嵿ぎ啶距う啷嵿く啶�啶�啷囙�曕�嵿し啶む�� 啷�
啶むい啷嬥そ啶む�嵿�� 啶膏�嵿く啶距い啷嵿か啶侧�� 啶�啷囙う啷� 啶ㄠぞ啶�啶掂ぐ啷嵿�椸�� 啶む�嵿さ啶膏�� 啶むぅ啶� 啷�
啶�啷嬥�椸ぞ啶�啶掂ぐ啷嵿�椸う啷嵿さ啶苦い啶�啶距き啶苦じ啶ㄠ�嵿ぇ啶距い啷佮ぐ啶�啶� 啶膏�嵿か啷佮�熰ぎ啷� 啷�

anapek峁�ya 艣ive 产丑补办迟颈岣� 艣aktip膩to'phal膩rthin膩m |
y膩 phal膩rthitay膩 产丑补办迟颈岣� s膩 karm膩dyamapek峁�ate ||
tato'tra sy膩tphale bhedo n膩pavarge tvasau tath膩 |
bhog膩pavargadvitay膩bhisandh膩turapi sphu峁璦m ||^[7]

Bhakti has also been classified into four types according to the nature. 

As Navjivan Rastogi ponts out,

The primary devotion is totally absolute of any trace of bhoga but the secondary does carry such traces and accordingly suffers grades. In the third place most of relish that lends uniqueness to it.^[8]

In fact, many scholars equate 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 with the 顿墨办峁Ｄ�. Sometimes 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is defined as the cause of 顿墨办峁Ｄ�, but in some other paces it is explained that it is easy for some people to attain 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 without the help of a guru and vice versa. Hierarchical levels of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 are also postulated as lower is accredited to the gods like 痴颈峁ａ箛耻 and higher to 艢颈惫补. Somewhere 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is equal to the state after it known as 艢补办迟颈sam膩ve艣a. 

There are three types of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 viz., intense, swift and moderate (迟墨惫谤补, madhya, manda):

1. 迟墨惫谤补-艣aktip膩ta is the highest chance to get the way to the Supreme. It will be available to the experienced practitioner.
2. 尘补诲丑测补-艣补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is for middle people, who can use another means after attaining the 艢补办迟颈pata.
3. 尘补苍诲补-艣补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is for lower stream practitioners who has no other choice to attain the divine way.

Each of these is classified into three again and as a result, 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 became nine-fold in nature, says 惭腻濒颈苍墨惫颈箩补测补惫腻谤迟颈办补:

啶多�曕�嵿い啶苦お啶距い啶膏�嵿�� 啶む�囙え啷嬥�曕�嵿い啶� 啶ㄠさ啶оぞ啶む�嵿�� 啶掂�嵿く啶掂じ啷嵿ぅ啶苦い啶苦�� 啷�
啶呧え啷嵿く啶ムぞ 啶ㄠ�囙ざ啷嵿さ啶班じ啷嵿く啶距じ啷嵿い啶� 啶班ぞ啶椸�� 啶︵�嵿さ啷囙し啷嬥そ啶ムさ啶� 啶曕�嵿さ啶氞た啶む�� 啷�

艣aktip膩tasya tenokt膩 navadh膩tra 惫测补惫补蝉迟丑颈迟颈岣� |
an测补迟丑腻 ne艣varasy膩sti r膩go dve峁�o'thav膩 kvacit ||

Note: According 惭腻濒颈苍墨惫颈箩补测补惫腻谤迟颈办补, I. 687, the nine types of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 are: 

1. 迟墨惫谤补迟墨惫谤补 (intensely intense), 
2. madhya迟墨惫谤补 (moderately intense), 
3. manda迟墨惫谤补 (weakly intense), 
4. 迟墨惫谤补madhya (intensely moderate), 
5. madhyamadhya (moderately moderate), 
6. mandamadhya (weakly moderate), 
7. 迟墨惫谤补manda (intensely weak),
8. madhyamanda (moderately weak) and
9. mandamanda (weakly weak).

The actual quality or appropriateness in character and time for the attainment of 艢补办迟颈pata is not vividly discussed even in the direct contexts. 

For eg., 罢补苍迟谤腻濒辞办补, XIII. 204-7 says;

The particular time which is referred to is that of a particular activity (kalana) consisting of awareness, directed towards one鈥檚 own nature. The fitness or appropriateness (yogyata in MVT I. 42) is in our philosophy said to be the quality of worthy for the spiritual process (yoga) of identification with Siva. Thus the question (why did it happen) only then, why not before is not appropriate.^[9]

Christopher Wallis describes this as this is the only place in Abhinavagupta, where 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 becomes a religious aspect, where the recipient draws in him, as opposed to something that happens to him. Thus he deftly disposes of the logical problems of the earlier theories. By analyzing the concept of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 within the framework of 艢aivite non-dualism, it is assumed that there it tries to accomplish the requirements related to the social structure more than a philosophical one. In true sense, it should be perceived as the hardship of philosophy that it has to rephrase itself or its concepts into the popular level of religiosity.

The concept of the fall of power of the Supreme, which situates in the heights, is totally similar to the beliefs on the Supreme god鈥攖he one who situates in the transcendental form. It seems that this must be a contradictorily created aspect in the general ideology of Tantrism, especially of its anti-Br膩hma峁噄c visions. Even though Abhinavagupta himself has succeeded in the usage of the logical concepts like 耻辫腻测补蝉, it was necessitated by the time that needed such popular indefinable, transcendental, mainstream religious aspects for the sustenance of the philosophical systems. Abhinavagupta himself may have noticed this, because there is no reference of descent of power in 厂辞尘腻苍补苍诲补 and Utpaladeva. It would be right if this concept has been connoted as anugraha. It is only because of the social acceptance to the feminine principle made its nomenclature as 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补.

In a vivid sense, 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 is not comprehensive in itself. The complete process of the attainment of the supreme goal i.e., the recognition of the ultimate reality does not get completed with the process of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补. There are subsequent developments as the touching, entering and encompassing of the fallen 艢补办迟颈 to the individual. Both these processes, known as two important aspects of 艢补办迟颈 viz., 艢补办迟颈spar艣a and 碍耻峁囜笉补濒颈苍墨, directly related with the body of the individual aspirant. Just as the religious practices of Tantra, the conceptual schemes are also very much related to the aspect of body. The structure of the body reflects the structure of the universe and provides a framework for the 艢aivite doctrine of consciousness. 

Douglas Renfrew Brooks puts forward an observation about the significance of body in the representation of social alliance of philosophical contexts;

In its role as an image of society, the body鈥檚 main scope is to express the relation of individual to the group. This is done along the dimension of strong, weak, acceptable or not. From total relaxation to the self-control, the body has its wide gamut for expressing the social variable.^[10]

Thus this body-centeredness is the feature that tempted to include 艢补办迟颈 in the context of the social implications.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

碍补峁环辞辫补苍颈峁�a诲, II. 23.

[2]:

Monistic 艢补颈惫补 philosophy assigns five-fold functions to the Supreme, 艢颈惫补.

[3]:

Christopher Wallis, 鈥淭he Descent of Power: Possession, Mysticism and Metaphysics in the 艢补颈惫补 theology of Abhinavagupta鈥�, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2008.

[4]:

莫艣惫补谤补辫谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻惫颈惫峁泃颈惫颈尘补谤艣颈苍墨, Vol.3, p.183; Isabelle Ratie, 鈥淥n Reason and Scripture in 笔谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻鈥�, Vincent Eltschinger and Helmut Krasser (Eds.), Scriptural Authority: Reason and Action, Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 2013, p.438.

[5]:

Refer to 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补蝉奴迟谤补bh膩峁�ya (PSBh), I. 1. 42.

[6]:

Deliberation of the very phrase as the most primitive form of the concept of 艢补办迟颈辫腻迟补 seems to be partially valid for two reasons. One is that as observed by Peter Bisshop, the later rewriting by transmitters definitely made notable changes in the 厂奴迟谤补辫腻峁环补 and obviously in the Kau峁囜笉inyabh膩峁�ya. See, Peter Bisschop, 鈥湷�奴迟谤补辫腻峁环�� of the 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补蝉奴迟谤补鈥�, in Indo-Iranian Journal, Vol. 49, 2006, pp.1-21. The other reason is, there is no trace of 艢补办迟颈 in the whole discussion of rudrapracodana. In the whole history, the replacement of 艢补办迟颈 with the 艢颈惫补 is common; but not inversely. If happened so, then it would be helpful to determine the inevitability of 艢补办迟颈.

[7]:

See 罢补苍迟谤腻濒辞办补, XIII. 119 for Abhinavagupta鈥檚 opinions and various definitions on liberation.

[8]:

Navjivan Rastogi, Kashmir 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘-on Perspective of Liberation, p.12. q. v., 莫艣惫补谤补辫谤补迟测补产丑颈箩帽腻惫颈惫峁泃颈惫颈尘补谤艣颈苍墨, Vol.1, p.24.

[9]:

Christopher Wallis, Op.cit., p.275.

[10]:

Gavin Flood, Body and Cosmology in Kashmir 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘, pp. XII-XIV also discusses about the important position of body in the monistic 艢补颈惫颈蝉尘 of Kashmir. But it actually focuses on the cosmological features of the body rather its role in the recognition process.