Essay name: Svacchandatantra (history and structure)
Author: William James Arraj
The essay represents a study and partial English translation of the Svacchandatantra and its commentary, “Uddyota�, by Kshemaraja. The text, attributed to the deity Svacchanda-bhairava, has various names and demonstrates a complex history of transmission through diverse manuscript traditions in North India, Nepal, and beyond.
Page 407 of: Svacchandatantra (history and structure)
407 (of 511)
External source: Shodhganga (Repository of Indian theses)
Download the PDF file of the original publication
400
various transformations of [her] form," a difference in the ritual
performance [of worshipping the mothers] is established. But,
therein, an inferior form of the lord is discussed; here, in
constrast, a superior form; [this is] the difference, which he will
[also] discuss (Bk. 10, vss.1028b-1029a, p. 422): "But other higher
[forms of] the svacchandā� [goddesses] are established in the
supreme void; they worship Svacchanda� according to a division of
superior and inferior."[31]
Therefore, it is not consistent, that the worship of the matrix
Bhairava�, although it has a separate form of ritual performance,
be [considered] a subsidiary [rite] (angam) [selected] from [those
included in] the extraction of the formulæ.
And this is correct, since he says:
He obtains all his desires, O Goddess; thus Bhairava� said.
But if the worship of the matrix Bhairava� [just described] were a
subsidiary [rite] of the [ritual of] the extraction of the formulæ,
then according to the rule: "A subsidiary [rite is enjoined] in close
proximity to [a main ritual that] has a fruition [specified, and]
has no fruition, "1 [then] this statement [enjoining a fruition]
would be incorrect; [and this statement must refer to the worship
of the matrix Bhairava�, and not to the extraction of the
formulæ,] on account of the inappropriateness of specifying a
fruition for a ritual that has not been completed.
And after he has performed in this way,
At the end of this [worship], he should extract the formulæ
according to [their] application in sequence.
./37/
Of this, i.e., of the worship of the matrix; [according to their use
in sequence, i.e.,] [according to that] application, which is in
sequence, viz., in the sequence of the formula of the seat, the
formula of the form, etc., [and] through which there is the
focusing on the contemplation of the deities expressed by the
1 On this rule v. Jha, Pūrvamimāmsā in its Sources, p.330,
no. 9.
