Paradvaita Doctrine of Kashmiri Shaivism

[Arjuna]

Namaste Arjuna,
Vaishvanara = Kriya
Taijasa = Iccha = Vimarsha
Prajna = Jnana = Prakasha
Turiya = Ananda = Anuttara

Namaste Sarabhanga,

Standard KSh (Trika etc. and half of Krama tradition) holds a view of 5 functions of Samvit, and thus Chit (or ahAsA) and Ananda (or anAkhyA) are differentiated as Prakasha and Vimarsha.
There is another view (Krama-chatushtaya), which unites Ananda with Chit (anAkhyA with bhAsA), but in this case again Anuttara stands for Atattva, above all 36 principles. Perhaps, Anuttara might be Turyatita of Vedanta.

Turiya and Anuttara appear to be equivalent concepts; but if Vimarsha and Prakasha are coeternal with Anuttara, then Paradvaita is akin to Vishishtadvaita, although Trika raises Trimurti to the next level and makes Turiya (as Anuttara) the ultimate Lord of Creation ~ and this is contrary to the Mandukyopanishad (which knows Prajna as the only Creator) and contrary to Ajativada (which denies the unborn eternity of ANY diversity in Turiya).
Shankaracarya’s Advaita and Abhinavagupta’s Paradvaita serve exactly the same purpose; however, “Mayavada” follows Ajativada, whereas “Trika” follows Jativada.

I cannot say anything now about Jati and Ajati Vadas, this i have to examine first.

But yes, in Trika Anuttara is Maheshvara (not to confuse with Maheshvara as a face of tirobhAva-shakti, Tatpurusha), the Absolute Lord, Self-aware, alone existing and free.

Details of Monism of Trika and of Vedanta may differ, for their origins are independent and even developed they quite separately. However essentially they must be similar. As soon as Maya is accepted as a potency of Brahman, AV becomes not far from Trika. Other differences are non-essential.

[atanu]

Oh I see, that reference is not Mahabaratha, but BrihadAranyaka Up . I cited the verse number itself on this thread and in your enthusiasm to hold on to your illogical beleifs, you bypassed that. Read a few posts before this again.

You do not appear to have read any classics of advaita. Nor have you read the prastAna works of either advaita or VA. You do not know proper scripture and simple things such as quotes from Brihad Aranyaka. This discussion is pointless and this is my last post on this thread. Ignorance is bliss.

I also note that you did not address 16.8, nor the Svet up mukti, which should speak for itself. Rest are just irrelvant rehashes.

Thanks for the compliments. You, unknowingly state a truth. I wish you will know this much for yourself also. I truly have not read anything.

I am a spirit. What can I read and where can I go? (my variation)
I am a spirit. What can I think and where can I go? (Gopala Tapaniya).


As for the Br. Up. reference, Sarabhanga Ji has shown what it is (which of course my Pragnya has known). Mandukya describing Turiya as shivo advaitam, indescribable, not consciousness or not non-consciousness, into which the world dissappers --- which is known in identity and which must be known --- stands perfect.

It must be known and unlearning is required.

[Sudarshan]

With incorrect understanding of attributes, Advaita says that Exsitance=Knowledge=Bliss= Brahman each by itself.

Repsonse by Satay:

I am not an advaitan but even I know that this equation is wrong!

where are you getting your information about advaita!

Now, from Sarabhanga-ji

The Turiya is the foundation of visibility ~ i.e. the Turiya is Conciousness itself!

So I was right after all. Existance=Knowledge=Bliss=Visibility= Brahman each by itself.

[sarabhanga]

Brahman is pure Wisdom, and the ultimate Wisdom is knowledge of Existence, and the experience of pure (eternal) Existence is remembered as Bliss, and the very Self of all of this is the essence of “Consciousness”.

At the point of extremity all words fail, and it must be remembered that all these terms are only approximate descriptions of that which is ultimately beyond any definition.

Existence = Knowledge = Bliss = Consciousness = Turiya = Atman = Brahman; all of this simultaneously!

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Arjuna,

Of course all Shaiva systems prefer a five-fold divine plan, but I have used the four-fold Brahmanic arrangement (especially as given most plainly in the Mandukyopanishad) to allow some useful comparisons to be made.

Since all Hinduism originates from the Trayi, most philosophies have an ultimate Trinity; and so with only three essential categories, most philosophies look almost identical.

The Turiya’s creative formula is “1/1 divided by 3/3 remains equal to 1” ~ God is eternally unified, and yet always triple in expression ~ and 1 + 3 = 4.

In Ajativada, only the Turiya exists as an intrinsic eternal verity.

In Jativada, a degree of subdivision is allowed as being eternally true in Creation, and thus (for all practical purposes) these are considered as equally eternal verities.

Dvaita proposes that some degree of duality is absolutely eternal, and this division may be considered as two-fold and/or three-fold.

Vaishnava Vishishtadvaita knows Vaishvanara, Taijasa, and Prajna, as created divisions of Prajna, and this undivided Prajna is Narayana (who remains always Saguna, with Nirguna Brahman ignored, or denied as merely Void).

Paradvaita has Anuttara (expressed as Anuttara, Prakasha, and Vimarsha) as the highest (unborn) reality; and while the Vishva realm is excluded from truly eternal existence, it is included in the “lower” (created) triunity of Jnana, Iccha and Kriya. And thereby the Trika system neatly incorporates a double trinity into the four-dimensional framework.

[Arjuna]

Brahman is pure Wisdom, and the ultimate Wisdom is knowledge of Existence, and the experience of pure (eternal) Existence is remembered as Bliss, and the very Self of all of this is the essence of “Consciousness”.

At the point of extremity all words fail, and it must be remembered that all these terms are only approximate descriptions of that which is ultimately beyond any definition.

Existence = Knowledge = Bliss = Consciousness = Turiya = Atman = Brahman; all of this simultaneously!

Fully agree

BTW Mandukya does call the fourth pada as Shiva...

[sarabhanga]

अ*इ*उण ऋऌक ए*ओङ ऐ*औच हयवरट लण
ञमङणनम झभञ घढधष जबगडदश खफछठथचटतव कपय शषसर हल


aiuṇa ṛḷka eoṅa aiauca hayavaraṭa laṇa
ñamaṅaṇanama jhabhaña ghaḍhadhaṣa jabagaḍadaśa khaphachaṭhathacaṭatava kapaya śaṣasara hala

[Znanna]

Namaste,

One of the references cited by Agnideva's definition of Paradvaita:

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1386

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Trika/emanation.htm

...led me to an illustration which reminded me of two others I have on file, one of which I post below. The notion I have is that each chakra has its own chakra system, and each of those its own reflections as well and all of those as well are mirrored, perfectly balanced in inverse proportion in infinite series.

Just a thought


ZN

[Sahasranama]

Given that “Kashmiri Shaivism” is not based on the Brahmasutras, or even on the Upanishads, but rather on the Shivasutras of Vasugupta (c. 900 AD) it is not Vedanta. And Vasugupta’s dream seems to have been elaborated by subsequent disciples with the same Vishishtadvaita that was promoted by Ramanuja (c. 1100 AD). Abhinavagupta (c. 1000 AD) predates Ramanuja, however, and if Abhinavagupta had justified his Paradvaita through a commentary on the Brahmasutras then we could say that he was the first Acarya of Vishishtadvaita Vedanta. His disciples (such as Kshemaraja) would have been contemporaries of Ramanuja, who applied the same philosophy (but with a Vaishnava perspective) to the Brahmasutras, thus firmly establishing the philosophy of his Shri Vaishnava Sampradaya.

Interesting fact. I have seen in a movie of Ramanuja's life that he went to Kashmir to obtain important texts on philosophy before writing his commentary on the brahma sutras.

[Sudarshan]

Interesting fact. I have seen in a movie of Ramanuja's life that he went to Kashmir to obtain important texts on philosophy before writing his commentary on the brahma sutras.

That is right. Ramanuja is known to have referred to the elaborate commentary on the brahma sUtras by sage bodhAyana at kashmir. The authoritative and the most ancient commentary by bodhAyana is now lost and it appears that nobody other than Ramanuja was in possession of it at any point of time.

The story has it that Ramanuja went to kashmir in search of this commentary. The kashmiris were unwilling to let him have a copy of the text and instead gave him one day to go through it. Ramanuja's premier disciple known as kUreSha committed the entire work to memory in a single night and that is how Ramanuja managed to possess the entire text even though he was given only one day.