365bet娱乐

In the Post-Virasaiva Period. It is quite possible that with the general adoption of the linga, the original idea associated with its worship underwent a change. In its latest phase, represented by the period of Virasaiva activity, both the development of the bhakti doctrine and the reaction induced by philosophic ideas, made the linga the great object round which a complete system of philosophical thought and ritualistic worship came to be evolved. Siva possesses in himself a sakti, or power, consisting of the rudiments of the individual soul and the material world, and from this sakti develops the whole world.

Evolution of Philosophical Theories. 855 It is this view that provides the groundwork, as it were, for the development of the opposing philosophical theories of Dvaita, Advaita, Visishtadvaita and Dvaitadvaita schools of thought within the ambit of the Saiva fold. The Pasupata School. Historically, the Saiva Dvaita view was first propounded by the Pasupata school, which is mentioned in the Mahabharata.1250 It dates from about the second century B.C. and is referred to in lithic inscriptions and in literary writings dating up to the thirteenth century A.D., text-books on the system being in use in the tenth century A.D.1251 According to this system, the supreme and individual souls are distinct entities, and the Pradhana the constituent cause of the material world. In the delivered condition, the individual soul shakes off its ignorance and weakness and attains boundless knowledge and power of action. The Saiva Siddhanta School. The Saiva (or Saiva Siddhanta) school which represents the early Saiva system known 1252 is also dualistic but differs from the Pasupata school in holding that the individual soul in the delivered condition becomes Siva himself; i.e., attains perfect resemblance with God Siva, though he does not possess the power of creation. of creation. In the Pasupata system, the fruit of deliverance is proximity to God, while in the Saiva, it is resemblance to Siva, sarupya as distinguished from samipya. 16 1250 Mahabharata, Santiparva, Chapter 349, verse 64. According to Bhandarkar a certain historical person (Lakular or Nakula) was the founder of the main Saiva system which was the same as that explained by Madhava as Nakulisa-Pasupata and that three other systems arose out of it in later times." loc. cit., 121. 1251 Bhandarkar, loc. cit., 121, f.n. 2. 1252 The mantras on which the Saiva Siddhanta appears to be based are traced to the Taittiriya Aranyaka, X. 43-47, the Mahanarayaniya Upanishad, 17: the Vayaviya Samhita refers to it as the Siddhanta school.

The Spanda and the Pratyabhijna Schools. Connected with the Saiva school, but which diverged from it somewhat, are the two systems associated with the names of Vasugupta (ninth century A.D.) and Abhinavagupta (tenth century A.D.) and known as the Spandasastra and the Pratyabhijna schools, together familiarly known as Kashmir Saivism. Both these schools hold that God is independent and creates merely by the force of his will all that comes into existence; neither a prompting cause like Karma, nor a material cause like the Pradhana is required, according to them, for creation. Nor do they admit that God himself is the material cause; much less do they allow that Maya generates appearances which are false. God makes the world appear in himself, as if it were distinct from himself, though not so really, as houses or even towns. appear in a mirror, and is as unaffected by it as the mirror is by the images reflected in it. The individual soul is thus, according to this system, identical with the Supreme Soul. According to the Spandasastra school, this identity is not perceived by the individual soul on account of its impurity (mala). This impurity vanishes by means of intense contemplation as the result of which the Highest Being breaks in upon the mind of the devotee and absorbs all finite thought. When this condition becomes stabilized, the individual soul is free and becomes the Supreme Soul. According to the Pratyabhijnasastra, however, the perception of the identity comes through recognition. The individual soul fails to recognize, in its present condition, its real nature, though in its capacity for knowledge and action, it partakes of the nature of God. When it is led to realize its nature by its preceptor, it recognizes God in itself. These two schools thus actually postulate sameness as opposed to absolute non-duality as does the Advaita school. The Virasaiva School. The Virasaiva school, which is based on the older Saiva school and owes its origin to teachers (acharyas) who

preceded Basava, 1253 takes a view somewhat different. Its technique of belief and metaphysical ideology show a course of development which is so entirely different from the older school that it should have required time to develop. Accordingly while the Acharyas developed a theory based on the ancient Saiva school, Basava, who followed them, probably a century or more later, popularised it and made it the religion of a large number of people inhabiting a vast extent of country. The philosophical idea underlying it has been elaborated in different works. Sripati briefly describes it as Dvaitadvaitabhidhana viseshadvaita siddhanta, Dvaitadvaita which connotes a qualified form of Advaita. He also styles it, as we have seen, as Bhedabhedat maka viseshadvaita virasaiva siddhanta, the Virasaiva Siddhanta, which is a qualified form of Advaita which partakes of the character of Bhedabheda. It will be seen, he calls it Dvaitadvaita and Bhedabheda and in both cases gives the alternative description that it is a variety of Advaita of the qualified type. It has been usual, until recently, to describe Virasaivism as Saiva visishtadvaita, Visishtadvaita which makes Siva the Brahman or the Absolute. From the description given by Sripati, we have to reckon it as Bhedabheda or Dvaitadvaita, which is a qualified variety of Advaita. The former description has been largely popularised both by a misapprehension of the true character of Virasaivism and its theory and by a misattribution of the theory of Srikantha to Virasaivism. Bhandarkar's suggestion that Srikantha's view appears to be identical with that of the Virasaivas" has also helped to increase the effect of the misattribution. Srikantha's theory, as we have seen, is confessedly Saiva visishtadvaita, whereas Virasaivism, is admittedly something very different. Virasaivism as taught by the highest exponents of that faith, enunciates the attainment of Siva tattva-the one " 1258 The Panchacharyas have been placed in the eleventh century A.D., though some of them at least must be considerably older, while Basava belongs to the twelfth century A.D.

highest Brahman characterized by Sat, Chit and Ananda; it is called Sthala, because in it exist the Mahat and other principles and they eventually resolve in it; it is the support of the whole world, moveable and immoveable; it holds all the powers, all luminaries, all souls; it is the resting place of all worlds and of all possessions; and it is the highest place to be attained by those who seek the highest happiness; and it is therefore styled the One only and absolute position-Sthala. The sthala, being the essence of Siva, is possessed of Sakti (innate power), which, by agitation, becomes divided into Lingasthala and Angasthala. The former is Siva and is the worshipped; and the latter is the individual soul, the worshipper. Similarly, sakti divides itself into two parts by its own inherent power, one relating itself to Siva and called Kala, and the other to the individual soul and called Bhakti, or devotion. Sakti leads to action and Bhakti to deliverance. Sakti, being with Siva Parabrahman becomes the object of worship and bhakti makes one a worshipper. Sakti exists in the linga, which is Siva himself and not a mere symbol of Him; and Bhakti exists in the Anga or the individual soul. Bhakti, as it leads away from action and from the world, helps the Anga to the attainment of samarasya with Siva. How this is brought about is laid down in many Virasaiva works of note, which also set down detailed descriptions of the conceptions underlying the ideas of Lingasthala and Angasthala. The Lingasthala, being Siva Parabrahman himself, is divided into the triune Bhavalinga, Pranalinga and Ishtalinga. These represent Sat, Chit and Ananda-Existence, Intelligence, and Bliss. The first is without any parts (kala) and is perceived by faith; it is not conditioned by space or time and is higher than the highest. The second is apprehended by the mind and is without parts (kala); while the third is possessed of parts and is visible to the eye. The three lingas are respectively the highest principle, the subtle form and the gross form. They correspond to the soul, the life and the gross form. Characterized by use (prayoga), formula (mantra),

and action (kriya), they form what are called Kala, Nada and Bindu. Again, each of these three lingas-Bhava, Prana and Ishta-is divided into two: the first into Mahalinga and Prasadalinga, the second into Charalinga and Sivalinga, and the third into Gurulinga and Acharalinga. Six different kinds of sakti operate on these six and produce six different forms. These are: (i) Mahalinga, which is formed when the Siva essence is operated on by the power of intelligence (chitsakti); its attributes are the absence of birth and death, freedom from taint, perfection, unity, subtleness, being higher than the highest, incorruptibility, unfathomableness, capability of being apprehended by faith and love and idealistic form (chaitanyarupa). (ii) Prasadalinga which is produced when the Siva essence is permeated with its highest power (Parasakti); the principle called Sadakhya is produced; it is light, eternal, indivisible, imperceptible to the senses, apprehensible by reason, indestructible, and the rudiment which developes. (iii) Charalinga, which is produced when the Siva essence is operated upon by its primeval power (Adisakti); it is infinite and pervades the internal and external worlds, which is full of light, is a Purusha (person), and is higher than Pradhana or Prakriti, and is capable of being contemplated by the mind alone. (iv) Sivalinga, which is produced when the Siva essence is permeated by the will power (Icchasakti); it is a finite principle with a sense of egoism, possessed of knowledge and power, having a celestial refulgence, with one face, and serene. (v) Gurulinga, which is produced when the Siva essence is permeated with the knowledge (Jnanasakti); it possesses energy, presides over every system or science that instructs, is full of light, a boundless. ocean of joy, and dwells in human intelligence. (vi) Acharalinga, which is produced when the Siva essence is influenced by the power of action (Kriyasakti); in the shape of action it serves as the support, for the existence of all things; it is conceivable by the mind, and leads to self-renunciation. In view of the position assigned to Sakti in this conception of the Absolute, Virasaivism has been sometimes called

Sakti visishtadvaita, but such a description would seem to be not quite appropriate, for, the fundamental basis of true Visishtadvaita is lacking in it. The basic idea underlying the Virasaiva conception is that the original entity becomes divided, by reason of its own Sakti, into God and the individual soul, while its six forms represent only six different ways of looking at it. The first is the Infinite by itself; the second is the form in which it is conceived of as creating by its highest power; the third, as distinct from the material world; the fourth, as in its bodily form, the body being celestial in character; the fifth, as knowledge which it imparts to mankind; and the sixth, as guide to the individual soul in its efforts at seeking absolution. It will be seen that the relationship stressed as between the Infinite and the individual soul is one of a personal character and the dvaita aspect of dependence of the individual soul on the Infinite is fundamental to the conception as also the essential difference between the creator and the created. These aspects are even further stressed when we come to realize the extreme emphasis that is laid upon Bhakti as the path to salvation on the part of the individual soul. Bhakti, indeed, is described as natural to the individual soul; it is its characteristic. It is a tendency towards a leaning upon God, which is inherent in the individual soul. There are, according to the Virasaiva school, three stages in the progress of the Bhakti towards God, and corresponding to these three stages, there are three divisions in the Angasthala, the subject of the individual soul. These are Yoganga, Bhoganga and Tyaganga-the means of attaining yoga or union with Siva; the means of enjoyment with Siva; and the means of self-surrender to Siva. Of each of these there are two kinds. Under the first, come Aikya and Sarana. Aikya consists in the partaking of the joys of Siva. This is familiarly called Samarasa Bhakti, in which the individual soul enjoys bliss together with God. In Sarana Bhakti, the individual soul sees the Linga or God, in himself and in everything else. It is a condition of joy to the individual soul by itself. Under the second,

Bhoganga, come Prana and Prasada. Prana consists of selfrenunciation and the concentration of the entire mind on the Linga. Prasada is attained when the individual soul resigns completely all its enjoyment to the Linga and thus acquires serenity. Under the third, Tyaganga, come Mahesvara and Bhakta. Mahesvara indicates firm belief in the existence of God and the unity of the Linga and the maintenance of rigid discipline which has Siva for its objective. Bhakta is one who turns away from this material world and makes to devotion his sole object of life. But in the reverse order, these six stages-Bhakta, Mahesa (or Mahesvara), Prasada, Pranalinga, Sarana and Aikya of life are called collectively Shatsthala, a name by which they are famous in Virasaiva literature. They indicate in the order named the progress of the individual soul from a turning away from the material world through Bhakti, the first step, to Aikya or absolution, the last stage. This last stage is termed as Linganga samarasya, which indicates equality in blissful experience with Siva. This is the highest stage aimed at and its attainment indicates salvation.1254 The attainment of this goal, however, does not involve either the perfect identity of the individual soul with the Supreme Being or the shuffling off of its separateness by the individual soul and thus becoming a simple soul unconscious of itself as is propounded by the Advaita school. Virasaivism thus holds that Siva Parabrahman, by his own sakti, divided 1254 Samarasya, literally means identity in essence. Cf. Paramam samyam upaiti, See Mandukya-upanishad , III. 1. 3. Bhandarkar gives an account of Shatsthala in his work quoted above and says it is based on an abstract of Mayideva's Anubhavasara (1.c. 136, f.n. 1). The doctrine has received the very widest attention from Virasaiva writers, several important works being wholly devoted to its elucidation. Among these may be mentioned Prabhudeva's Shatsthala jnanacharitra Vachana Tika, also called Shatsthala Viveka, which is Mahalingadeva's commentary on Prabhudeva's work; Ekottarasthala by the same author; Jakkanarya's Nurondu-sthala; Mayideva's Shatsthala Gadya, etc. Mayideva wrote about 1430 A.D. and has been famous in later Virasaiva literature as Shatsthala Brahmavadi. (For further information, see Mysore Gazetteer, new edition, Vol. I, 828-331.)

himself into Linga and Anga, Supreme Being and individual soul, and by the influence of other kinds of sakti, became the creator of the world. His sakti is real; and the rudiment of creation is in his sakti. It thus differs from Visishtadvaita, which, according to Ramanuja, holds that there is a real rudiment of the soul and of the material world characterising the Supreme Being which afterwards. developes. Srikantha, who calls himself a Siva Visishtadvaitin, and who was not a Virasaiva by faith, approximates to the Virasaiva philosophical position, though his view is not identical with it. Thus, he suggests that Siva with his sakti is the material cause of the world; then, again, he holds that the individual soul in mukti is similar to the Supreme Soul, i.e., becomes possessed of its attributes; and finally, he agrees that in blissful experience, the individual and Supreme souls are equal. 1255 These similarities in view as between Srikantha and Virasaivism are not to be wondered at when we remember that about the time he wrote-circa 1250 A.D.-Virasaivism had reached the zenith of its power and popularity. To concede that Srikantha's views approximate in some points to the Virasaiva philosophical position is not, however, equivalent to admitting that he was a Virasaiva (or Lingayat) by faith or belief. Much less was Appayya Dikshit, who propounded the Sivadvaita view, a Virasaiva by faith or belief as has been suggested.1258 Thus a rapid review of the different philosophical 1255 Srikantha, Brahma-Sutras, II. 2. 38%; IV. 4. 3; IV. 4. 2. 1256 See Keith, A History of Sanskrit Literature, at page 481, where he says:" Srikantha Sivacharya, who wrote a Saivabhashya (Ed., Pandit VI and VII) on the Brahma-Sutras, belonged to the Virasaiva or Lingayat School of Southern India in which Bhakti is specially inculcated and Appayya Dikshita, the polymath of the 16 th century, was of the same persuasion." It is needless to state that Srikantha was professedly the inculcator of the Sivavisishtadvaita and not the Virasaiva school. As for Appayya, he was the chief exponent in his time of the Sivadvaita school. In modern parlance, Srikantha and Appayya would be classed as Smarthas who, philosophically, taught the Sivavisishtadvaita and Sivadvaita

schools which have grown round the name of Siva shows that they have, during the course of ages, developed varying points of view. While the earlier schools, including the Pasupata and the earlier Saiva, were dvaitic in character, the later schools represented by the great names of Srikantha, Sripati, and Appayya Dikshita developed theories which have been described as Sivavisishtadvaita, Bhedabhedatmaka Viseshadvaita and Sivadvaita.