Notes On Kashmir Shaivism

Notes on Kashmir Shaivism 1) The Background 1.1 I run the risk of making a cartoon of Kashmir Shaivism here because of brevity, but hopefully I can bring out the salient issues, relevant to the account of creation in ‘Stalking the Strange Serpent’. Kashmir Shaivism was really a loose amalgamation of doctrines from different but allied ‘schools’ – the Kula and Krama lineages that accepted the Shaiva Agamas as source texts, and the later schools of Pratybhijna and Spanda. There was a great synthesis known as Trika in which a sage called Abhinavagupta was the main inspiration. ‘Trika’ means ‘three’ and is a reference to the triadic relationships that occur all over the place in the philosophical expositions. Now terminology can be a nightmare as the philosophers of ancient Kashmir (and India generally) loved to make up more and more terms to cover yet subtler ‘aspects’ of reality. In the parallel ‘schools’ a lot of these became regarded as equivalent, but not without controversy. At the risk of huge over-simplification, we can outline three ‘Shastras’ (teachings): Agama Shastra – main text = Shiva Sutras, main concept = Consciousness as Energy, Shiva-Shakti Pratybhijna Shastra main text = Pratybhjina –Sutras (the Pratyabhijnahrdayam is a digest) main concept = Consciousness as Self- Recognition, PrakashaVimarsha Spanda Shastra main text = Spanda-Karikas main concept = Consciousness as Vibration, Spanda 1.2 Now the foundational principle in each of these strands was usually referred to as ‘Shiva’ – hence Shaivism. But since each Shastra had slightly different connotations for ‘Shiva’, when it came to the Trika synthesis the term ‘Paramashiva’ was needed to overcome the sectarian differences between each strand. Within the core texts themselves the term ‘Paramashiva’ is hardly, if ever, used. I have in front of me all three of the texts listed above, and I cannot find even one use of ‘Paramashiva’ in the sutras. Nonetheless, in the Trika synthesis the term came to stand for the root foundational principle so as to be able to incorporate the other strands. 1.3 Now the root foundational principle, howsoever termed in the Shastras, was always conceived as a primary Unity that nonetheless contained an integral two-ness or duality. Like the two inseparable sides of one coin. So the discussion always had a ‘triadic’ feel as it talked of the Unity and its two ‘aspects’. Now there are very good

reasons as to why any monistic metaphysical system must display this ‘triadic’ quality: If all is only One then we get no manifestation, for this requires some kind of interplay. We need no more than two players (a binary code) to generate manifestation. So the foundation is a Onecontaining-two. 2) Consciousness/Awareness 2.1 The foundational principle, Paramashiva, needs to display this One-containing-two-ness. When explaining the nature of Paramashiva, it is described variously as ‘Cit’ or ‘Caitanya’ or ‘Parasamvit’, which are translated as Consciousness or Awareness. Now these two English terms are excellent candidates for Paramashiva, as they seem to contain just the right quality: Consciousness or Awareness seems to be ‘one’ and yet it contains a polarisation, a relational ‘conscious of…’or ‘aware of…’. Because of this common polarisation, the terms ‘Consciousness’ and ‘Awareness’ can often be confused or used interchangeably. Inextricably bound up with this issue is the self-reflective aspect of Consciousness/Awareness which gives rise to an ‘I’ sense - a feeling ‘I am’. There is no ‘right’ use of these terms here; we just have to specify their use. 2.2 Now Consciousness/Awareness, in general, can exhibit an ‘I’ sense or not. A lot of experimentation has been done by animal psychologists to determine the level of self-awareness in many species. Most species of animal, while clearly conscious, do not seem display any self-awareness. One of the criteria used was whether the animals displayed signs of recognising themselves in a mirror – apparently only chimpanzees and dolphins pass this test. Recognition is a crucial aspect of Consciousness/Awareness when it comes to the ‘I’ sense. 2.3 Now in the ‘Strange Serpent’ I use the term ‘Awareness’ as the primary term, the quality that all sentient creatures display; and ‘Consciousness’ as the self-reflective aspect which gives rise to the ‘I’sense. I use them that way for no other reason than that is how they are used in a lot of the Advaita discussions, particularly in Nisargadatta’s famous dialogues - “I am That”. I know, though, that elsewhere they are used the other way round. The majority of English commentaries on Shaivism do in fact have it the other way. A better use than either of these, really, which gels nicely with the Trika synthesis, would be as follows:

Let ‘Consciousness’ refer to the whole – Paramashiva – Onecontaining-two. Let Awareness be that aspect of Consciousness which illumines that which it is aware of. Let Self-Awareness be that reflective aspect of Consciousness that turns back on itself to create the ‘I’ sense – ‘I AM’ 3) Synthesis of Agama and Pratybhijna Shastras 3.1 Now, using the above terminology, the Pratybhijna school has the following triad: It refers to Awareness - the illuminating aspect of Consciousness as ‘Prakasha’. It refers to the ability of Consciousness to Recognise itself i.e. the aspect of Self-Awareness, as ‘Vimarsha’ – the ‘I’ sense of Consciousness. The whole, Consciousness, contains both aspects and is referred to as ‘Prakashavimarshamaya’ 3.2 The Agama Shastra has a triad based around Consciousness as energy: The ‘potential’ aspect of the energy of Consciousness is ‘Shiva’. The ‘kinetic’ aspect of the same is ‘Shakti’. The whole, Consciousness, is ‘Paramashiva’ who is ‘Shiva-Shakti’. 3.3 So the synthesis lines up the triads: Paramashiva = Prakashavimarshamaya = Consciousness Shiva = Prakasha = Awareness Shakti = Vimarsha = ‘I’ sense of Consciousness

4) Synthesis of Spanda Shastra This, to me, is a profound part of the synthesis. The foundational principle here is Spanda which is Consciousness as Vibration. Now a vibration vibrates or oscillates between two poles. So the triad here is Spanda and its two poles of oscillation. The synthesis here is obvious: Paramashiva is Spanda and Shiva-Shakti are the poles of its oscillation. This has a tremendously alive feel..

5) Beginnings of Manifestation 5.1 So Kashmir Shaivism arrives at a Trika synthesis which has as its foundation the ‘Paramashiva who is Shiva-Shakti’ triad – Paramashiva and the first two Tattvas. Now from this foundation, there is an expansion into pure, formless Suddhadhva manifestation. This obviously happens through the Shakti tattva, being the ‘kinetic’, SelfAware aspect of Consciousness – ‘I AM’. 5.2 Now the nature of Shakti = Vimarsha is its reflective quality. This means that what happens in the manifestation through the expansion of Shakti is a reflection of what is happening in the source which is Paramashiva. So just as Paramashiva exhibits the integral duality of Shiva-Shakti, so Shakti herself starts to exhibit an integral duality: ‘I AM’ expands into ‘I am That’. This is the (third) Sadashiva Tattva, and it is the first manifestation. What is That? It is simply Shakti = Vimarsha reflecting on itself as the reflecting principle, regarding itself as an aspect of Paramashiva that is different to (but not separate from) Shiva. 5.3 The integral duality that Shakti = Vimarsha now herself exhibits is referred in the texts as the duality of ‘ahamvimarsha’ and ‘idamvimarsha’ – ‘I/vimarsha’ and ‘That/vimarsha’. So we now have another triad: Vimarsha and its two aspects. This is the beginning of a beautiful, recursive fractal pattern that leads, ultimately, to the creation of all the universes. 5.4 Now we have an interesting situation: when a reflecting principle reflects on itself, is it reflecting or is it being reflected? Well, both – but can there be a real difference between these ‘two’? As we follow the oscillation of Spanda between the two the focus shifts to the opposite pole. This represents a further development in manifestation: ‘I am That’ becomes ‘That am I’. This latter is the next (fourth) Isvara Tattva. This is a further reflection: Vimarsha reflecting on the Sadashiva Tattva to manifest the Isvara Tattva. 5.5 There is only one more step to make to complete the possibilities here. When Shakti=Vimarsha rested in itself as ‘I AM’ it considered neither of its aspects of ‘ahamvimarsha’ and ‘idamvimarsha’. In the Sadashiva Tattva it reflected on its ‘ahamvimarsha’ – I. The pulsation of Spanda led the oscillation to the opposite aspect, ‘idamvimarsha’ That, reflected on in Isvara Tattva. Reflecting again on the previous two tattvas leads to an equal reflection as both aspects – ‘I am That’ – the fifth Suddhavidya Tattva. Neither, one, then the other, then both.

6) The Dual Play in Unity – A thought experiment 6.1 This can start to get quite abstract, so here is a nice little thought experiment/exercise to act as a micro-model of the kind of situation envisaged. Let your forefinger touch your thumb to form a closed loop. Now close your eyes and focus on the point of contact between forefinger and thumb. Let the awareness of that point of touch fill your consciousness, so that you can actually forget the forefinger and thumb, and let there only be that point of Touching. Take your time. Point of Touching = I AM= Shakti = Vimarsha Now introduce a little ‘spanda’ into the situation – let there be a little wobble or movement between the finger and thumb pads. This will stimulate the feeling that there are two elements involved in the Touching. Awareness of these two elements can expand to feel the presence of forefinger and thumb. Now in this Touching - which is doing the Touching and which is Touched? 6.2 Now depending on whether you focus consciousness on the forefinger or on the thumb, it is possible to have the experience of being (identifying with) either: I am the forefinger touching the thumb, which is ‘That’; or: I am the thumb touching the forefinger, which is ‘That’; or: I am both forefinger and thumb touching (Suddhavidya Tattva); or: I am neither the forefinger nor the thumb, but the consciousness of, prior to, either – for me there is no dual forefinger and thumb, only one loop (Shakti Tattva). It should be clear that the difference in focus of consciousness can represent each of the Tattvas from 2 to 5 - Shakti to Suddhavidya. 6.3 Now this tiny model only interprets the formal structure of these tattvas. In reality each contemplation is accompanied by an experience of all the possible modalities of Shakti – Bliss, Freedom, Knowledge, Power of Action, respectively, as absolute, limitless and formless qualities of Paramashiva. This is the main activity of Paramashiva – absolute Consciousness in contemplation of Its own nature via its two aspects. This is the original, pure, Suddhadhva Paradise to which we long to return. The ‘looping’ of Reality’s eternal, timeless contemplation of Itself – discovering itself ever-anew – was, of course, imaged by me as a ‘tail-eating serpent’; in terms of the Tattvas 2-5 it would appear as:

I

THAT

THAT

I

The arrow represents ‘awareness’ and each turn of the circle reveals each of the absolute qualities – Bliss, Freedom etc. 6.4 Now an incidental spin-off from this main activity (albeit in some sense natural - like smoke rising as a by-product of a fire) is that further iterations of the Shakti reflecting principle should lead to a complete separation of ‘I’ and ‘That’ – the dual-unity is apparently shattered. So after Tattva 5 we enter a borderline territory, where Tattva 6, Maya and her Kanchukas (Tattvas 7-11), operates on the unity of ‘I am That’ to create full separation and limitation of the absolute qualities. 7) From Duality to Separation 7.1 This separation and limitation is now fully a creation – it is the beginning of time, space and forms and individualised consciousness. The ‘trika’ quality is not so obvious here as, rather illogically, Kashmir Shaivism, treats each Kanchuka as a distinct tattva – even though the 5 qualities they limit were not so treated (they were, instead, regarded as modalities of the structural tattvas 1-5). To see the underlying triadic form, it is best to treat Maya and her Kanchukas as one conglomerate tattva (just call it Maya) with its two aspects: the separate, individualised ‘I’ consciousness which is the Purusha Tattva (tattva 12) which is conscious of, or ‘witnesses’ the Prakriti Tattva (tattva 13) which is the world of separate objects and forms. So the triad is Maya who is Purusha-Prakriti. Purusha is the ‘I’ consciousness of Maya, while Prakriti is all objects and form – the ‘That’ aspect of Maya, witnessed by Purusha. 7.2 What happens to consciousness/awareness as a result of this separation? The axis of separation needs close attention. What we normally and uncritically think of as ‘consciousness’ – largely the mind and the senses –are actually part of Prakriti. Only the pure ‘witnessing’ function, the bare ‘I’ or subject, constitutes Purusha. The other aspects of mind – intellect, ego-sense, memory (Buddhi, ahamkara, manas) etc are psychic instruments, objects - which only function when illumined by Purusha – and are that part of Prakriti

which reflect the awareness of Purusha. One instrument in particular – the ego-sense (ahamkara) – has the function of ‘misappropriating’ the awareness of Purusha to create an objective ‘I’ we call ‘me’. This ‘me’ is an object amongst other objects in Prakriti. It could be regarded, hopefully without confusion, as the ‘I’ sense of Prakriti - this formulation is in accordance with the logic of unfolding self-awareness – the recursive principle that generates all manifestation. [It is here that the problem of solipsism creeps in, as the objective ‘world’ of Prakriti also includes other apparently conscious subjects – other ‘me’s’ , whose status is not satisfactorily dealt with in Kashmir Shaivism. They appear to have, as projections of Purusha, a merely dream-like status, not on a par with ‘I’ considered as Purusha. But the ‘Strange Serpent’ cures this problem with the understanding of ‘nested purushas’. 7.3 A brief schema of the process of Manifestation/Creation (up to separation), according to Kashmir Shaivism and showing the ‘trika’ form, could then look like this: Tattva

Definition

Paramashiva

Modality

Absolute Consciousness

Reality/Truth/Sat

┐ ┐┐┐┐┐

Shiva-Shakti (I AM)

Awareness/Self Awareness Bliss-

Awareness/Cit/Ananda ┐ ┐┐┐┐┐

(I am That) Sadashiva Awareness of Shakti Freedom/Will/Svatantrya/Iccha ┐ ┐┐┐┐┐

(That am I) Ishvara Awareness of Sadashiva

Knowledge/Jnana

┐ ┐┐┐┐┐

(I am That) Suddhavidya Awareness of Ishvara

Action/Kriya

┐

Maya ┐┐┐

Maya

Separation

Limitation of the above

Kanchukas

Purusha (‘I’) – Prakriti (‘world’) Awareness of objects/forms Creation