Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vedāntic Analogies Expressing Oneness and Multiplicity and their Bearing on the History of the Śaiva Corpus. Part I: Pariṇāmavāda

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article, divided into two parts, traces and discusses two pairs of analogies invoked in Sanskrit(ic) literature to articulate the paradox of God’s oneness and multiplicity vis-à-vis the souls and the manifest world, reflecting the philosophical positions of pariṇāmavāda (and bhedābheda/dvaitādvaita or, in some cases, viśiṣṭādvaita) and vivartavāda (and abheda/advaita). These are, respectively, the analogies of fire in wood and dairy products in milk, and moon/sun in pools of water and space in pots. In Part I, having introduced prevalent ideas about the status of the supreme principle(s) vis-à-vis creation in Śaivism, Sāṅkhya, and Vedānta, I investigate instances of the first pair of analogies in multiple textual genres, and especially in Śaiva literature from South and Southeast Asia, to highlight the influence of pariṇāma-Vedānta on the Śaiva textual corpus. Arguing that the distribution of the two pairs of analogies may cast some light on the relationship between different strands of dualistic and non-dualistic scriptures, I propose that the first pair could be traced back to the “formative” period of Śaivism—that is, prior to the emergence of the fully dualistic Śaiva Saiddhāntika corpus known to us.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Potter (1963, p. 106) calls some of those analogies “root metaphors”, each epitomizing a specific theory of causation. Cf. especially ibid., 1981, pp. 81–85, for their occurrences in Vedāntic literature.

  2. All translations from Sanskrit and Old Javanese are my own unless otherwise specified.

  3. My discussion cannot be considered but preliminary and tentative: a comprehensive inventory and analysis of even this limited set of analogies both within and without the Śaiva corpus would require a much larger project. For the purpose of this article, I have limited my scope to representative published sources and a few unpublished Śaiva texts, e-texts of which are accessible on GRETIL and the Digital Library of the Muktabodha Indological Research Institute (the online collection of the transcripts of the French Institute of Pondicherry has been most useful to access the original sources). I have also restricted the upper limit of the chronological scope of this inquiry to the 12th–13th century (with sporadic exceptions, such as the works of the South Indian Śrīkaṇṭha and Śivāgrayogin, as well as probably post-13th-century Sanskrit-Old Javanese sources from Bali).

  4. An attempt to justify on doctrinal grounds the paradoxical character of God as the Absolute, which is transcendent yet immanent in creation, immaterial yet material, impersonal yet personal, is reflected by the tripartite division encountered in the Śaiva Saiddhāntika textual corpus into the levels of Paramaśiva, Sadāśiva, and Śiva/Īśvara, in turn corresponding to the aspects “endowed with parts” (sakala), “both endowed with and devoid of parts” (sakalaniṣkala), and “devoid of parts” (niṣkala).

  5. Goodall (2015a, p. 39) regards the absence of any discussion of duality and non-duality, which is one of the defining features of mature Śaiva Siddhānta, as a criterion to establish the antiquity of a scripture, for instance the Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā: “the redactors of the sūtras of the Niśvāsa appear not to have seen the need to choose between philosophical dualism and non-dualism, perhaps because the issue had not yet been raised as a matter of importance in Śaiva circles”. Cf. also p. 341, where he argues that, by the time in which the Uttarasūtra was composed, “a clear doctrinal split between philosophical dualism and non-dualism had probably not yet emerged as a fault-line separating different tantric schools from each other.”

  6. Cf. Kaṭha Upaniṣad 5.9–13.

  7. eko devaḥ sarvabhūteṣu gūḍhaḥ sarvavyāpī sarvabhūtāntarātmā | karmādhyakṣaḥ sarvabhūtādhivāsaḥ sākṣī cetā kevalo nirguṇaś ca || eko vaśī niṣkriyāṇāṃ bahūṇām ekaṃ bījaṃ bahudhā yaḥ karoti | tam ātmasthaṃ ye ’nupaśyanti dhīrās teṣāṃ sukhaṃ śāśvataṃ netareṣāṃ || nityo ’nityānāṃ cetanaś cetanānām eko bahūnāṃ yo vidadhāti kāmān | tat kāraṇaṃ sāṅkhyayogādhigamyaṃ jñātvā devaṃ mucyate sarvapāśaiḥ. Some pādas are similar, or identical, to Kaṭha Upaniṣad 5.9–13.

  8. A notable exception is the study by Isayeva (1995).

  9. Cf. Goodall (2004, pp. xxvi–xxvii) (with the relevant qualifications by Duquette 2015, p. 22, fn. 9), (2006), and (2015b) on the Śaiva Saiddhāntika canon; Mallinson (2014) on the combination of Śaiva yoga and Vedāntic metaphysic found in the Vivekamārtaṇḍa, Yogabīja, and Gorakṣaśataka; and Duquette (2015) on the relationship between Vedānta, Śaiva Siddhānta, and the śivādvaitavāda of Śrīkaṇṭha and subsequent South Indian Śaiva authors. Compare the relevant reflections by Fisher: “Śaiva scriptures such as the Sūtasaṃhitā gradually conformed to the south Indian religious landscape […] and adopted a notably Vedānticized inflection to hybridize, perhaps for the first time, Śaiva religiosity with the teachings of the Upaniṣads” (2017a, p. 105); “By the seventeenth century, Advaita had so thoroughly permeated the philosophy and theological commitments of Śaivas across lineage boundaries that even India’s most staunchly dualistic Śaiva tradition, the Śaiva Siddhānta, had abandoned its prior commitments in favor of a new theistic monism” (2017b, p. 320).

  10. Cf., e.g., Goodall (2016, p. 82) on the homologization, in the Uttarasūtra of the Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā, of the tattvas of the macrocosm with the elements of the mantra nāvātman: “expressing Śiva is therefore a means of expressing Śiva’s pervasion of, and perhaps identity with, the universe”.

  11. Hacker (1953, p. 213) speaks about the bhedābheda system as the monistic form of the realistic pariṇāmavāda, and about Sāṅkhya as its dualistic or pluralistic form. Both of them are inseparably bound up with satkāryavāda.

  12. For the Siddhānta, liberation is an identity between the soul and Śiva in quality, and not in number.

  13. Wallis (2016) speculates, to my mind not unconvincingly, that there are “some early texts that seem to be sources for the formation of the Śaiva scriptures”, and that “the Maitrāyanīya and the Śaiva sources both drew on a common yogic milieu of the classical period, which must have included many texts now lost to us.”

  14. This is often the case in non-dialectical Siddhāntatantras, as well as of later sources whose primary concerns were not philosophical or theological. Cf., for instance, Svātmārāma’s Haṭhapradīpikā, which includes verses from texts of different Vedāntic persuasions, such as the bhedābhedavādin Vasiṣṭhasaṃhitā and the kevalādvaita Uttaragītā, and even of Vaiṣṇava persuasion (Mallinson 2014, p. 236, fn. 37). Mallinson (ibid.) further notes: “Svātmārāma, while rarely borrowing verses that teach metaphysical doctrine and being somewhat indiscriminate in his choice of those, continued and contributed to a process that was already underway, in which vedantic and Śaiva non-dualism were synthesised, albeit with the vedantic brahman ultimately winning out as the accepted understanding of the absolute.”

  15. In spite of the fact that bhedābhedavāda may be one the oldest extant tradition of Vedānta, there is a surprising lack of English-language secondary literature on this school from historians of Indian philosophy, which may be due to the influence by 20th century Indian nationalists and Hindu reformers, claiming that “Advaita Vedānta is the authentic philosophy of India” (Nicholson 2007, p. 373). Apart from Bādarāyaṇa, the alleged author of the Brahmasūtras (ca. 4th century CE), other influential masters associated with bhedābheda/pariṇāmavāda positions were Bhartr̥prapañca (prob. mid-6th century? Cf. Nakamura 2004, p. 131), whose works have been lost except for short fragments quoted by Śaṅkara and other Vedāntins, as well as Bhāskara, the author of a commentary to the Brahmasūtras, who was probably a younger contemporary of Śaṅkara, and who openly refused the latter’s advaitavāda. Cf. below, fn. 36.

  16. Cf. Part II, Conclusion.

  17. Useful observations on the art of churning different varieties of dairy products out of milk, and its metaphorical application to the myth of the churning of the ocean of amr̥ta as told in the Mahābhārata, may be found in Parrott (1983). He suggests that the metaphor “may also serve as solid ground on which to stand in illustrating a somewhat more abstract, metaphysical notion. In the process of churning the butter, no new substances are produced in the milk. By this I mean that no physical changes (e.g., water to ice) or chemical changes (e.g., lead to gold) take place. ‘Making’ butter is simply a collecting together of fat globules into lumps, which rise to the surface: Nothing new is created. One could say that the butter is ‘found’ in the milk through churning” (ibid., p. 21). On the association with Vedic ritualism, see Śatapathabrāhmaṇa 2.2.4.1–18, where milk products are described as the prototypical offerings for Agni, who had just been generated from Prajāpati: rubbing his hands together, “He then obtained (viveda, found) either a butter offering or a milk offering: but indeed they are both milk” (ibid., p. 26).

  18. “Penetrating this body up to the very nailtips, he remains there like a razor within a case or a fire within the receptacle of fire (i.e. wood)”, sa eṣa iha praviṣṭa ā nakhāgrebhyo yathā kṣūraḥ kṣuradhāne ’vahitaḥ syād viśvambharakulāye […]. Olivelle (1998, pp. 47, 493), noting the ambiguity of the term viśvambhara, among whose meanings are “fire”, “insect” and “scorpion”, translates the expression viśvambharo vā viśvambharakulāye as “or a termite within a termite-hill”. However, on the basis of the context of the passage (see 1.4.6, about the production of fire from the mouth of the primeval Man-Puruṣa, through “churning”), I think that the most appropriate translation is “fire” (and note that Monier-Williams [1899, henceforth MW] glosses kulāya as “the body as the dwelling-place of the soul”). Indeed, Deussen (1897, p. 394) regarded this passage and similar ones as describing the Brahman concealed in the body as fire in wood, and translated viśvāmbharakulāye as “das allerhaltende (Feuer) in dem feuerbewahrenden (Holze).” Compare Kaṭha Upaniṣad 5.9, associating the presence of a single soul within multiple bodies with the single fire entering living beings: “As the single fire, entering living beings, adapts its appearance to match that of each; So the single self within every being adapts its appearance to match that of each, yet remains quite distinct” (trans. Olivelle 1998, p. 397), agnir yathaiko bhuvanaṃ praviṣṭo rūpaṃ rūpaṃ pratirūpo babhūva | ekas tathā sarvabhūtāntarātmā rūpaṃ rūpaṃ pratirūpo bahiś ca.

  19. Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad 4.20 (= Śāṅkhāyaṇāraṇyaka 6.20): “And when he awakens these scatter—as from a blazing fire sparks fly off in every direction, so from this self the vital functions fly off to their respective stations, and from the vital functions, the gods, and from the gods, the worlds. This very breath, which is the self consisting of intelligence, penetrates this bodily self up to the very hairs of the body, up to the very nails. Just as a razor within a case or a termite within a termite hill [or: fire within the receptacle of fire, i.e. wood, A.A.], so this self consisting of intelligence penetrates this bodily self up to the very hairs of the body, up to the very nails” (trans. Olivelle 1998, p. 361), yathāgner jvalataḥ sarvā diśo visphuliṅgā vipratiṣṭheran evam evaitasmād ātmanaḥ prāṇā yathāyatanaṃ vipratiṣṭhante prāṇebhyo devāḥ devebhyo lokāḥ | sa eṣa prāṇa eva prajñātmedaṃ śarīram ātmānam anupraviṣṭa ā lomabhya ā nakhebhyaḥ | tad yathā kṣuraḥ kṣuradhāne vopahito viśvaṃbharo vā viśvaṃbharakulāya evam evaiṣa prajñātmedaṃ śarīram ātmānam anupraviṣṭa ā lomabhya ā nakhebhyaḥ.

  20. That is, the Lord and unevolved matter mentioned in verse 1.9.

  21. On the possible sexual/reproductive overtones of the image of the production of fire from the friction of kindling-sticks, cf. Br̥hadāraṇyaka 1.4.6 (on which Olivelle 1998, p. 492 remarks: “The depression on the slab is often compared to a vagina, and the churning stick to a penis. The entire production of fire by this method has highly sexual connotations”) and Kaṭha Upaniṣad 4.8: araṇyor nihito jātavedā garbha iva subhr̥to garbhiṇībhiḥ, “Jātavedas (i.e., fire) is hidden within the two fire-drills, fostered, as a foetus by women with child”. In the Uttarakāṇḍa (51.5.205–209; cf. Goldman and Sutherland Goldman 2017, pp. 356, 929), Janaka is born from the rotation of fire-sticks on the invisible body of his “father”, Nimi.

  22. Commenting on pseudo-Śaṅkara’s interpretation (in his Vivaraṇa) of Śvetāśvatara 2.6—a verse, occurring in a passage preceding the actual description of yoga in vv. 8–13, set against the backdrop of Vedic ritual and evoking the image of the mind arising from the churning of the fire-sticks and the flowing of the Soma-juice—, Schwartz (2017, pp. 375–376) notes that the author elucidates the meaning of the fire as the supreme self that burns away ignorance, and of the human body as the kindling stick (araṇi): “Just as the force of friction ignites the fire, so too does meditation set ablaze a human being. Our commentator tells us that the mechanism by which this process commences, is none other than breath control, which encompasses different approaches to filling, holding, and expelling the breath through the nasal cavities.”

  23. The use of anugraha as an equivalent of sthiti rather than prasāda (“grace”) in the Pañcārthabhāṣya (ca. 5th century) and in the Sanskrit-Old Javanese Vr̥haspatitattva has been suggested by Nihom (1995, pp. 660–661, fn. 30; cf. Acri 20172, pp. 355–356, fn. 30). It is, therefore, not impossible that this passage of the Amr̥tabindu reflects a discourse influenced by early Śaiva theology, of the kind we also find in the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad, a text which bears clear affinities with some of the Pāśupata doctrines attested in the Pañcārthabhāṣya. Cf. also the verse quoted by Śaṅkara as śruti in his commentary to the BSB, which features in the medieval Brahmabindu Upaniṣad as verse 12 (cf. Part II).

  24. Dhyānabindu Upaniṣad 5–7: puṣpamadhye yathā gandhaḥ payomadhye yathā ghr̥tam | tilamadhye yathā tailaṃ pāṣāṇeṣv iva kāñcanam || evaṃ sarvāṇi bhūtāni maṇau sūtra ivātmani | sthirabuddhir asaṃmūḍho brahmavid brahmaṇi sthitaḥ || tilānāṃ tu yathā tailaṃ puṣpe gandha ivāśritaḥ | puruṣasya śarīre tu sabāhyābhyantare sthitaḥ.

  25. With the caveat that, Brahman being changeless, the universe would be merely a manifestation ([abhi]vyakti) of the latent principle as an effect through Māyā. Does mantravat here imply that Brahman is effective as mantras, insofar as mantras/language “manifest” (vyañj) meaning/a higher reality?

  26. “The soul experiences passion, darkness and purity—the third—in the forms of the various objects of existence. Thus the soul enters into the sense faculties, just like wind enters into the fire that lies dormant in its kindling sticks” (trans. Wynne 2009, p. 267), rajas tamaḥ sattvam atho tr̥tīyaṃ gacchaty asau sthānaguṇān virūpān | tathendriyāṇy āviśate śarīrī hutāśanaṃ vāyur ivendhanastham.

  27. “In sesame is oil, in cow milk, in wood finally is fire; with one's own intelligence one should intelligently know the means to effect it; and it is on this accomplishment of their acts that creatures live here” (trans van Buitenen 1975, p. 284), tile tailaṃ gavi kṣīraṃ kāṣṭhe pāvakam antataḥ | dhiyā dhīro vijānīyād upāyaṃ cāsya siddhaye || tataḥ pravartate paścāt karaṇeṣv asya siddhaye | tāṃ siddhim upajīvanti karmaṇām iha jantavaḥ.

  28. Cf., e.g., Sāṅkhyasaptativr̥tti (and Suvarṇasaptati) ad Sāṅkhyakārikā (SK) 9: sesame oil exists in the seed (cf. infra) and milk must be used to produce curd to prove that buddhi preexists in prakr̥ti and is a product thereof; the material cause must be appropriate and agent should be capable; ad SK 16: the mode of production of evolutes from prakr̥ti involves significant transformation (pariṇāma), like when milk produces cream, as opposed to generation of children by man and woman; Sāṅkhyavr̥tti and Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya ad SK 15: unmanifest is existent and is the cause of the uniformity of the three worlds, so milk must necessarily give curds; Sāṅkhyavr̥tti ad SK 16: one primordial materiality produces a multiple world through the interactions and modification of guṇas, not like parents producing a child, but like milk produced from curds; Sāṅkhyasaptativr̥tti ad SK 9: intellect exists in prakr̥ti, one desirous of curds should use an appropriate cause—milk (cf. Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya); Māṭharavr̥tti ad SK 9 (oil in seed and butter in milk) and 16 (butter in milk); Sāṅkhyatattvakaumudī ad SK 3 (the sixteen productions are non-modifiable and of the same essence as prakr̥ti, as curd is a modification of milk) and SK 7 (the curd exists in milk even if it is not perceived).

  29. Indeed, his work also contains the reflection analogy (cf. Part II).

  30. “There is an analogy for that: just as the fire, even though possessing the power to burn and to illuminate, has its burning and illumination obscured when it remains [concealed] in the fire-stick or when it is covered with ashes, in the same manner, the obscurement of the Knowledge and Lordship of the individual Self results from the confusion arising from the absence of discrimination caused by the contact with limiting adjuncts such as names and forms, the body etc., which are manifested by ignorance”, asti cātropamā yathāgner dahanaprakāśanasaṃpannasyāpy araṇi tasya dahanaprakāśane tirohite bhavato yathā vā bhasmacchannasya | evam avidyāpratyupasthāpitanāmarūpakr̥tadehādyupādhiyogāt tadavivekabhramakr̥to jīvasya jñānaiśvaryatirobhāvaḥ.

  31. Cf. BSB 2.3.17; Br̥hadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.1.20; Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 2.1.1.

  32. In 1.4.22 Śaṅkara, referring to the presence of this analogy in the scriptures, remarks that the origination should be understood to abide in the limiting adjuncts only.

  33. A similar argument is invoked by Bhāskara, a pariṇāma-Vedāntin, who in his Śārīrakamīmāṃsābhāṣya ad BS 2.1.24 uses the analogy of milk changing into curds to describe Brahman’s transformation into the world (cf. comm. ad 1.4.25, p. 85, and 2.1.14, p. 97). Bhāskara regards this transformation to be due to the intrinsic power of Brahman, which undergoes transformation while remaining unchanged. This position resembles the one espoused by later Śaiva authors who championed either unqualified or qualified non-dualism (like, e.g., Śrīkaṇṭha).

  34. Cf. BSB ad 2.3.7, where Śaṅkara accepts pariṇāmavāda and mentions the example of the curd from milk and tree from seed, but specifies that there is a gradual transformation of one cause without contact and without an assemblage of means, citing BS 2.1.24.

  35. On the other hand, the Ātmabodha (108–109)—whose authorship by Śaṅkara, it is worth stressing here, has been seriously questioned (Potter 1981, p. 323)—states that all existing entities and practical affairs are united with Brahman and imbued with consciousness; Brahman pervades everything, as milk pervades butter.

  36. It is beyond doubt that the BS and other pre-Śaṅkara Vedānta sources (e.g. the lost commentary on the Br̥hadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad by Bhartr̥prapañca) upheld bhedābhedavāda, i.e. a theory of simultaneous transcendence and immanence of Brahman (Nakamura 1989, p. 500). This might even have extended to Śaṅkara himself (although somewhat inconsistently), who is otherwise known for his advaita and vivartavāda position (id. 2004, p. 42). Some scholars have argued that the commentaries of Śaṅkara and Bhāskara were based on earlier bhedābhedavādin sources, and that many of the non-illusionistic similes found in Śaṅkara’s BSB, which do not fit his illusionistic doctrine, must have derived from an older and authoritative bhedābhedavāda/pariṇāmavāda commentary on the BS: cf. Andrijanić 2017. Potter (1963, p. 165) sees Śaṅkara’s use of the pariṇāma analogy of milk and curd unproblematic, in the sense that he “uses the word ‘vivarta’ hardly at all and doesn’t seem to mind talking in terms of pariṇāma—although in the last analysis he will perhaps have no causal theory at all.”

  37. On the abhivyakti theory as formulated by Sāṅkhya and Śaiva schools, cf. Ratié 2014.

  38. Em.; nāśakyaṃ ms.

  39. Em.; prayoyogeṇa ms.

  40. I take this to be a compound whose first member (dadhi/dadhan) retains the instrumental case ending.

  41. Em.; rajjusaṃdhānasaṃyutam ms.

  42. This is also the case in the Vr̥haspatitattva, a Sanskrit-Old Javanese text from Java (cf. infra).

  43. Em.; hutārānaḥ ms. (tā is added in the margin).

  44. Em.; kṣīrasthasya ms.

  45. Paṭala 10, f. 46a: “When a woman generates a child without man, only then Śiva is obtained through the [mere] knowledge of the fetters, o son of the Kr̥ttikās (i.e., Kumāra). Further, when the milk is produced from clarified butter, o Guha, only then what is called “bound soul” in the Tantras becomes the embodiment of knowledge. When the people make a cloth by joining together a lump of clay, and a pot by [waving] threads, only then Śiva [will be obtained] by the logicians, o son”, puruṣeṇa vinā nāri yadā janayate sutam | tadā śivaṃ paśujñānaiḥ prāpyate kr̥ttikāsuta || sarpiṣā tu yadā kṣīraṃ punaḥ sambhavate guha | tadā paśūktaṃ tantreṣu bhavate jñānadehitām || mr̥tpiṇḍā tu yadā lokāḥ paṭaṃ kurvanti saṃhitam | tantubhyo vā ghaṭaṃ vatsa tadā hetuvidaiḥ śivam.

  46. This is a relatively late, and apparently multi-layered, Siddhāntatantra, whose date of compilation may perhaps be ascribed to the period between the 7th and the 10th century (cf. Goodall 2015a, p. 26).

  47. Em.; dr̥śyati ms.

  48. Brahmayāmala, p. 36: kṣetraṃ kṣetrajña [ms: kṣetrasya] rūpeṇa vibhedā paṭhyate mayā | tilamadhye sthitaṃ tailaṃ kṣīramadhye yathā dhruvam || tilavat kṣetram ity āhuḥ tailaṃ kṣetrajña [em.; ms. kṣetrasya] ucyate. This text, on which cf. Sanderson 2007, p. 277, is not to be confused with the northern Brahmayāmala/Picumata.

  49. dadhimadhye yathā sarpiḥ kāṣṭhe cāgniḥ sthito yathā | puṣpe gandhas tile tailaṃ vr̥kṣe chāyā samāśritā.

  50. For evidence of plagiarism of the Jayākhya by the Śaiva Br̥hatkālottara, cf. Sanderson 2001, pp. 38–41.

  51. It is no doubt significant that Rāmakaṇṭha in his Sarvāgamaprāmāṇyopanyāsa places the Pāñcarātrikas in the level of prakr̥ti along with pariṇāma-Vedāntins (Goodall 2015b, p. 276).

  52. Vv. 6–7ab (trans. Gupta 2000): yathā hi sarpir āsiñcet kṣīre tanmathanodbhavam | sarpir anyatra ca kṣīre tatsarpir api cānyakam || evam ā prakr̥teḥ śaktim adhiṣṭhātrīṃ smared budhaḥ.

  53. Both the Vivekamārtaṇḍa and its 101-verse précis Gorakṣaśataka, two Haṭhayogic sources, feature the possibly related image of pouring milk into milk, clarified butter into clarified butter, and fire into fire, to metaphorize the achievement of non-duality with the paramount reality by the yogin: dugdhe kṣīraṃ ghr̥te sarpir agnau vahnir ivārpitaḥ | advayatvaṃ vrajen nityaṃ yogavit parame pade (Gorakṣaśataka 100 ≈ Vivekamārtaṇḍa 172). (For other non-dualistic analogies in the former text, cf. Part II, fn. 33).

  54. Kiraṇa, VP 5.30cd–31ab: “It is not however the case that such a power [i.e., Śiva’s śakti] is subject to transformation, as milk is, because the power of Śiva is differentiated [only nominally] by the nature of its function” (trans. Goodall 1998, p. 354), na punas tādr̥śī śaktiḥ kṣīravatpariṇāminī || yataḥ śaktimataḥ śaktiḥ kr̥tyasaṃsthānabhedagā.

  55. “It is not the case the Māyā of herself (svataḥ) performs the sullying of souls, because, since she exists as potential and therefore not in manifest form, she is inactive, just as curds and fresh butter and other[ dairy product]s exist [only] as potential in milk” (trans. Goodall 1998, p. 237), naiva māyāyāḥ svataḥ puṃ malinīkaraṇam upapadyate śaktirūpatvenāvyaktarūpatve satyakriyāvattvāt kṣīrādyavasthitadadhinavanītādiśaktivat.

  56. kartr̥tve ’pi prayojyatvam ity āgamāntaram | ayam arthaḥ jñātr̥tvavat kartr̥tvam api puṃsaḥ svabhāva eva | na tu prakr̥teḥ kartr̥tvaṃ yuktam, kāraṇatvāt tasyāḥ | anyad dhi kāraṇatvaṃ svarūpānyathābhāvarūpaṃ jaḍavastuṣu svabhāvatayaiva pariṇāmitvādyavyabhicāri kṣīradadhyādiṣv adhyakṣasiddham.

  57. tad apy ayuktaṃ virodhāsiddheḥ. akṣaṇikasyaiva ghaṭādeḥ kṣīraghṛtadhāraṇādyarthakriyā krameṇa (ed. Watson et al. 2013, p. 391, fn. 635).

  58. This is virtually identical to Paramokṣanirāsakārikāvr̥tti ad 3c (anyad … adhyakṣasiddham).

  59. dharmaś cāyam akṣaṇikasyaiva ghaṭādeḥ krameṇa kṣīradadhidhāraṇādikaḥ pradīpādeś ca yugapad vartidāhatailakṣapaṇādiko ’rthakriyākāritvalakṣaṇaḥ pratyakṣeṇa siddhaḥ (ed. Watson et al. 2013, p. 391).

  60. ata evedaṃ na kṣīradadhinyāyena sarvātmanā pariṇāmi | kintu ghr̥takīṭanyāyenaikadeśenaiva binduvad iti mantavyam.

  61. This is traditionally, but almost certainly spuriously, attributed to Sureśvara, being a commentary on the Dakṣiṇāmūrtistotra, traditionally attributed to Śaṅkara.

  62. 2.11: “When the flower becomes the fruit, when milk becomes curd, properties—such as form, taste and the like—of a distinct class from those of the cause are cognized,” puṣpe phalatvam āpanne kṣīre ca dadhitāṃ gate | vijātīyāḥ pratīyante guṇā rūparasādayaḥ.

  63. “Through his Power of Action assuming the form of time, milk is transformed into curd. Through his Power of Knowledge the universe comes into being as made up of the perceiver and the objects of perception,” kālarūpakriyāśaktyā kṣīrāt pariṇamed dadhi | jñātr̥jñānajñeyarūpaṃ jñānaśaktyā bhavej jagat. Compare fn. 33 supra on Bhāskara.

  64. Cf. Duquette 2021, pp. 19–21.

  65. ekasyāpi kāryarūpeṇa pariṇāmaḥ sambhavati, yathā kṣīrasyaikasyaiva dadhibhāvena | tasmād brahmaikakāraṇakaṃ jagatkāryam.

  66. tasya kṣīrasyaiva dadhirūpeṇa sarvātmanā jagadākāreṇa pariṇāme kr̥tsnasyāpi kāryatvaprasaktiḥ, brahma nāvaśiśyeta.

  67. According to Śrīkaṇṭha, Śiva “is not merely the possessor of māyā, or the māyin: He is qualified by it (māyāviśiṣṭa)” (Duquette 2015, p. 11).

  68. kiṃ tu āvaraṇavaśāt tadā anabhivyaktaṃ āvaraṇāpagame muktāv abhivyajyate | yathā hy araṇiprabhr̥tiṣu kāṣṭheṣu tādātmyenāvasthita eva kāṣṭhākāratirohito vahniḥ paścān mathanakriyādagdhāvārakagurukaṭhinadravapārthivāpy āvayavarūpakāṣṭhākāratvenābhivyajyate tadvat.

  69. Just like revealed tantric scriptures from the Indian Subcontinent, these texts are notoriously difficult to date, all the more so because they have apparently undergone various stages of compilation. Generally speaking, most of them might have achieved their current form between the 8th (but this lower limit is purely speculative) and the 16th or 17th century.

  70. The simile of oil in seed is used in the Liṅgapurāṇa (1.70–74), just as in the Vr̥haspatitattva, to demonstrate the existence of the (three) guṇas: “As oil is in the sesame seed or butter resides in milk, so the universe follows from tamas, sattva and rajas,” tile yathā bhavet tailaṃ ghr̥taṃ payasi vā sthitam | tathā tamasi sattve ca rajasy anusr̥taṃ jagat. The same simile is paired with that of fire in wood in Brahmapurāṇa 23.28: īdr̥śānāṃ tathā tatra koṭikoṭiśatāni ca |dāruṇy agnir yathā tailaṃ tile tadvat pumān iha. The mention of the guṇas may denote antiquity, and/or Sāṅkhya influence.

  71. yathā ghr̥taṃ payasi vāri ca dāruṣu | kṣitaṃ jalaṃ nabha ca savargo ’nilaḥ | rajas tamo vr̥ttimana (?) guṇāni ca | tathaiva sarvagaṃ ca nopalabhyate. Soebadio (1971, pp. 240–241), having emended pari in the mss. to vāri, translates it as “juice” (in the trees); however, the parallel in the Vr̥haspatitattva suggests that the correct reading is hari, which, according to Sanskrit lexicons, means “fire”.

  72. Compare Niśvāsamūla 6.8 and Sārdhatriśatikālottaratantra 19.4.

  73. tad eva hi sarvaṃ vyāpi sarpiḥ kṣīravad iṣyate […] vyāpaka riṅ sarvabhāva, paḍanira kadi miñak vyāpaka riṅ pәhan asin, “It is said that that only pervades all, like clarified butter the milk […]. It pervades all that exists, like butter pervading sour milk”.

  74. Cf. Vr̥haspatitattva 30; Tattvajñāna 5, 30, 34

  75. Cf. Vr̥haspatitattva 14; Dharma Pātañjala 214.3–4.

  76. Cf. Nakamura 2004, pp. 206–207, 568. Cf. Vākyapadīya 3.3.40–41; Śaṅkara’s BSB 1.3.19; Maṇḍanamiśra’s Brahmasiddhi pp. 13, 15–16, 37, 119–121.

  77. Cf. Māṭharavr̥tti, p. 22 (contrasted to the analogy of reflection of moon, on which cf. Part II); Suvarṇasaptati (Takakusu 1904, p. 1003); Gauḍapāda’s Sāṅkhakārikābhāṣya, introduction ad SK 18.

  78. To Nakamura (1989, p. 335), the use of the word vedavādin instead of vedāntavādin suggests that by that time “the independence of the Vedānta school had not yet been generally accepted”. Cf. Māṭharavr̥tti ad SK 61 (the vedavādins are associated with verse 3.15 of the Śvetāśvatara); Nareśvaraparīkṣā ad 3.80, placing the vedavids in puruṣa; Sarvajñānottara 14.3 (brahmavedins in puruṣa); Mṛgendravṛttidīpikā ad VP 2.11; Mokṣakārikāvṛtti ad 148c–150b (Watson et al. 2013, p. 445).

  79. Nayasūtra 4.146ab (≈ Niśvāsakārikā 37.11cd, Nāradaparivrājaka Upaniṣad p. 152, Brahma Upaṇiṣad p. 86, Liṅgapurāṇa 2.16.12–13).

References

Primary Sources in Sanskrit and Old Javanese

  • Akulavīratantra: Kaulajñānanirṇaya and Some Minor Texts of the School of Matsyendranātha, ed. P.C. Bagchi. Calcutta: Metropolitan Printing and Publishing House, 1934.

  • Amr̥tabindu Upaniṣad: The Yoga Upanishads: With the Commentary of Sri Upanishad-Brahma-Yogin, ed. A. Mahadeva Shastri. Madras: The Adyar Library, 1920.

  • Āraṇyakaparvan (Mahābhārata 3): e-text (GRETIL) by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, 1999, on the basis of the text entered by Muneo Tokunaga et al., revised by John Smith, et al.

  • Arjunavivāha: Arjunawiwāha: The Marriage of Arjuna of Mpu Kaṇwa, ed. Stuart Robson. Leiden: KITLV, 2008.

  • Ātmabodha: Atma Bodha of Sri Sankaracharya, ed. P.N. Menon, Palghat, 1964. [2d edition]

  • Bhogakārikā: Aṣṭaprakaraṇam: Tattvaprakāśa, Tattvasaṅgraha, Tattvatrayanirṇaya, Ratnatraya, Bhogakārikā, Nādakārikā, Mokṣakārikā, Paramokṣanirāsakārikā, ed. Brajavallabha Dvivedi. Varanasi: Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, 1988.

  • Bhogakārikāvr̥tti of Aghoraśiva: Cf. Bhogakārikā.

  • Bhuvanakośa: [1] Lontar ms. Leiden Cod. Or. 5022, 1878 CE; [2] Lontar ms. from the collection of Ida Dewa Gede Catra [bearing a colophon dated 1625 CE/Śaka 1547, but probably last copied in the 19th or 20th century].

  • Brahmabindu Upaniṣad: The Atharvana-Upanishads, ed. Ramamaya Tarkaratna. Calcutta: Ganesha Press, 1872.

  • Brahmapurāṇa: e-text (GRETIL) of Ādhyāyas 1–246, input by Peter Schreiner and Renate Soehnen-Thieme for the Tübingen Purana-Project.

  • Brahmasiddhi: Brahmasiddhi by Ācārya Maṇḍanamiśra, with Commentary by Śaṅkhapāni, ed. S. Kuppuswami Sastri. Madras: The Superintendent, Government Press, 1937.

  • BS—Brahmasūtra: Cf. Brahmasūtrabhāṣya.

  • BSB—Brahmasūtrabhāsya of Śaṅkara: Brahmasūtra-Śāṅkarabhāṣya with the Commentaries: Bhāṣyaratnaprabhā of Govindānanda, Bhāmatī of Vācaspatimiśra, Nyāyanirṇaya of Ānandagiri, ed. J.L.Shastri. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980. [Revised and reprinted from the edition of M.S. Bakre, Nirnṇayasāgar Press, Bombay, 1934]

  • Brahmasūtrabhāsya of Śrīkaṇṭha (Brahmamīmāṃsābhāṣya): The Brahma Sūtra Bhāṣya of Śrīkaṇṭhācārya with the Commentary Śivārkamaṇi Dīpikā by the Famous Appaya Dīkṣita, ed. R. Halasyanatha Sastri, 2 Vols. New Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1986 [reprint of 1908 edition].

  • Brahmayāmala: IFP paper transcript (Devanāgarī) T522, copied from a ms. belonging to Candraśekhara Gurukkal, Tirukkalikkundram.

  • Br̥hadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: Cf. Olivelle 1998.

  • Dakṣiṇamūrtivārttika/Mānasollāsa: Dakshinamurti stotra of Sri Sankaracharya; and Dakshinamurti Upanishad with Sri Sureswaracharya’s Manasollasa and Pranava vartika; with the introductory essay The Vedanta doctrine of Sankaracharya, ed. Alladi Mahadeva Sastry. Madras: Samata Books, 1978.

  • Dharma Pātañjala, Cf. Acri 20172.

  • Dharma Śūnya kakavin: Dharma Śūnya: Memuja dan Meneliti Śiwa, ed. Ida Bagus Made Dharma Palguna. PhD dissertation, Leiden University, 1999.

  • Dhyānabindu Upaniṣad: The A’tharvaṇa Upanishads, with the Commentary of Na’ra’yaṇa, ed. Ra’mamaya Tarkaratna. Calcutta: Ganeśa Press, 1872.

  • Gorakṣaśataka: Gorakṣaśatakam, ed. Swāmī Kuvalayānanda & S.A. Shukla, in Yoga-Mīmāṃsā, 7, 4. Kaivalyadhāma: S.M.Y.M. Samiti, 1958.

  • Jayākhyasaṃhitā: Jayākhyasaṁhitā of Pāñcarātra Āgama, ed. Embar Krishnamacharya. Baroda: Oriental Institute Baroda, 1967.

  • Jñānasiddhānta: Cf. Soebadio 1971.

  • Kaṭha Upaniṣad: Cf. Olivelle 1998.

  • Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad: Cf. Olivelle 1998.

  • Kiraṇatantra (VP): Cf. Goodall 1998.

  • Kubjikāmatatantra: Kubjikāmatatantra, Kulālikāmnāya Version, ed. Teun Goudriaan and Jan Schoterman. Leiden: Brill, 1998.

  • Kumāratattva (II): Romanized transcript K.IIIc 2256 by I Gusti Nyoman Agung (1941), of a lontar from Singaraja.

  • Lakṣmītantra: Lakṣmī-tantra: A Pāñcarātra Āgama, ed. Pandit V. Krishnamacharya, Adyar: The Adyar Library and Research Centre, 1959.

  • Liṅgapurāṇa: Liṅgapurāṇa. Bombay: Śrī Veṅkateśvara Steam Press, 1906.

  • Māṇḍukyakārikā/Āgamaśāstra: The Āgamaśāstra of Gauḍapāda, ed. Vidhushekhara Bhattacharya. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1943.

  • Mataṅgavr̥tti (VP): Mataṅgapārameśvarāgama (Vidyāpāda) avec le commentaire de Bhaṭṭa Rāmakaṇṭha, ed. N.R. Bhatt. Pondicherry: IFI, 1977.

  • Māṭharavr̥tti: Sāṃkhyakārikā of Śrīmad Īsvarakṛṣṇa: With the Māṭharavṛtti of Māṭharācārya, ed. Vishnu Prasada Sharma. Varanasi: The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, 1970. [1st ed. 1922]

  • Mokṣaparvan (Śāntiparvan 3, Mahābhārata 12): [187, 202] Cf. Wynne 2009. [331] The Śāntiparvan (Vol. 4 [16 of the Critical Edition of the Mahābhārata]), ed. S.K. Belvalkar. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1954.

  • Mr̥gendravr̥tti: Śrī Mṛgendra Tantram (Vidyāpāda and Yogapāda) with the Commentary of Nārāyaṇakaṇṭha, ed. Madhusudan Kaul Shāstrī. Srinagar, 1930.

  • Mr̥gendravr̥ttidīpikā: Śrī mr̥gendram kāmikopāgamam vidyāyogapādādvayamilitaṃ śrībhaṭṭanārāyaṇakaṇṭhaviracitayā vr̥ttyā tadvyākhyayāghoraśivācāryaviracitayā dīpikayā cālaṅkr̥tam, ed. Kṛṣṇaśāstrī and K.M. Subrahmaṇyaśāstrī. Devakottai, 1928.

  • Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad: The Principal Upaniṣads, ed., intro. and trans. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Delhi/Bombay/Calcutta: Oxford University Press, 1953.

  • Nāradaparivrājaka Upaniṣad: In F.O. Schrader (ed.), The Minor Upaniṣads. Vol. 1: Saṃnyāsa-upaniṣads. Madras: Adyar Library, 1912.

  • Nareśvaraparīkṣāprakāśa: Nareśvaraparīkşā of Sadyojyotis with the Commentary (-prakāśa) of Bhaṭṭa Rāmakaṇṭha, ed. Madhusūdan Kaul Śāstrī. Srinagar, 1926.

  • Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā (Mūlasūtra, Nayasūtra, Uttarasūtra): Cf. Goodall 2015a.

  • Niśvāsakārikā: [1] Paper transcript, Devanāgarī, IFP MS T. 17, from a MS belonging to M.K.S. Bhattar Madurai; 188 leaves / 635 pp. [2] Devanāgarī transcript, IFP MS T. 127, from MS GOML R. No. 16804; 506 pp. [3] Devanāgarī transcript, IFP MS T. 150, from MS GOML R. No. 14403; 353 pp. [4] e-texts of the above transcripts, typed principally by S.A. Sarma and Nibedita Rout (T. 17), R. Sathyanarayanan (T. 127), Nibedita Rout (T. 150). [The verse and chapter numeration used here is that of the e-text of T. 17]

  • Paramokṣanirāsakārikāvr̥tti: Cf. Watson et al. 2013.

  • Śaivaparibhāṣā: The Śaivapraibhāṣā of Śivāgrayogin, ed. R. Balasubramanan and V.K.S.N Raghavan, trans. S.S. Suryanarayana Sastri. Madras: The Dr. S. Radhakrishnan Institute of Advanced Study in Philosophy, 1982.

  • SK—Sāṅkhyakārikā: The Sāṃkhyakārikā: Īśvarakṛṣṇa’s Memorable Verses of Sāṃkhya Philosophy with the Commentary of Gauḍapādācārya, ed. and trans. H. Dutt Sharma. Poona: The Oriental Book Agency, 1933.

  • Sāṅkhyakārikābhāṣya: Cf. Sāṅkhyakārikā.

  • Sāṅkhyatattvakaumudī: The Sāṁkhya-Tattva-Kaumudī: Vācaspati Miśra’s Commentary on the Sāṁkhyakārikā, ed. and trans. Mahāmahopādhyāya Ganganatha Jha (with Introduction and Critical Notes by Har Dutt Sharma, revised and reedited by M.M. Patkar). Delhi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan, 2004.

  • Sāṅkhyavr̥tti: Sāṅkhyavṛtti: A Commentary on the Sāṅkhya Kārikā, ed. E.A. Solomon. Ahmedabad: Gujarat University, 1973.

  • Sāṅkhyasaptativr̥tti: Sāṃkhyasaptativṛtti (V1), ed. E.A. Solomon. Ahmedabad: Gujarat University, 1973.

  • Śāntiparvan: The Śāntiparvan (4 Vols.), ed S.K. Belvalkar. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1954.

  • Sārdhatriśatikālottaratantra: Sārdhatriśatikālottara with the Commentary (-vṛtti) of Bhaţţa Rāmakaṇṭha, ed. N.R. Bhatt. Pondicherry: Institut Français de Pondichéry, 1979.

  • Śārīrakamīmāṃsābhāṣya: The First Two Chapters of Bhāskara’s Śārīrakamīmāṃsābhāṣya—Critically Edited with an Introduction, Notes and an Appendix, ed. Takahiro Kato. PhD Dissesrtation, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, 2011.

  • Sarvajñānottara (VP): Sarvajñānottarāgamaḥ vidyāpāda and yogapāda, ed. K. Ramachandra Sarma, Adyar Library Bulletin 62, 1998, pp. 181–232. 


  • Suvarṇasaptati: Cf. Takakusu 1904.

  • Svacchandatantra: The Svacchandatantram; With Commentary ‘Uddyota’ by Kṣemarājācārya, ed. Vraj Vallabh Dvivedi. Delhi: Parimal, 1985.

  • Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad: Cf. Olivelle 1998.

  • Tantrāloka: The Tantrāloka of Abhinava Gupta: With Commentary by Rājānaka Jayaratha, ed. Madhusudān Kaul Śāstrī (12 vols.). Allahabad/Bombay/Srinagar, 1918–38.

  • Tattvajñāna: Tattwajñāna and Mahājñāna, ed. Sudarshana Devi Singhal. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1962.

  • Trayodaśaśatikakālottara: paper Ms, Devanāgarī, NAK 5-4632, NGMPP Reel No. B 118/7 (Kālottaratantra).

  • Upadeśasahasrī: Śaṅkara’s Upadeśasahasrī, ed. Sengaku Mayeda. Tokyo: Hokuseido Press, 1973.

  • Vākyapadīya: Bhartṛharis Vākyapadīya. Die Mūlakārikās nach den Handschriften herausgegeben und mit einem Pāda-index versehen. Wiesbaden: Komissionsverlag Frans Steiner, 1977.

  • Vivekamārtaṇḍa: e-text by James Mallinson 2009, based on ms. Central Library, Baroda Acc. No. 4110.

  • Vr̥haspatitattva: Wṛhaspati-tattwa: An Old Javanese Philosophical Text, ed. Sudarshana Devi. Nagpur: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1957.

Secondary Sources

  • Acri, A. (20172). Dharma Pātañjala: A Śaiva Scripture from Ancient Java Studied in the Light of Related Old Javanese and Sanskrit Texts. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan [1st Edition Groningen: Egbert Forsten Publishing/Brill, 2011].

  • Andrijanić, I. (2017). “Traces of Reuse in Śaṅkara’s Commentary on the Brahmasūtra”, in E. Freschi and P.A. Maas (eds.), Adaptive Reuse: Aspects of Creativity in South Asian Cultural History, pp. 109–134. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deussen, P. (1897). Sechzig Upanishad’s des Veda. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duquette, J. (2015). “Is Śivādvaita Vedānta a Saiddhāntika School? Pariṇāmavāda in the Brahmamamīmāṃsābhāṣya”. The Journal of Hindu Studies, 8(1), 16–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duquette, J. (2021). Defending God in Sixteenth-Century India: The Śaiva Oeuvre of Appaya Dīkṣita. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrante, M. (2015). “Vṛṣabhadeva on the Status of Ordinary Phenomena: Between Bhartṛhari and Advaita Vedānta”. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 43(1), 61–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, E. (2017a). Hindu Pluralism: Religion and the Public Sphere in Early Modern South India. Oakland: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, E. (2017b). “Remaking South Indian Śaivism: Greater Śaiva Advaita and the Legacy of the Śaktiviśiṣṭādvaita Vīraśaiva Tradition”. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 21(3), 319–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, R.P., and Sutherland Goldman, S.J. (2017). The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki: An Epic of Ancient India, Volume VII, Uttarakāṇḍa; Introduction, Translation, and Annotation. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.

  • Goodall, D. (1998). Bhaṭṭa Rāmakaṇṭha’s Commentary on the Kiraṇatantra. Vol. I: Chapters 1–6. Critical Edition and Annotated Translation. Pondicherry: Institut français de Pondichéry/École française d’Extrême-Orient.

  • Goodall, D. (2004). The Parākhyatantra: A Scripture of the Śaiva Siddhānta. A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation. Pondicherry: Institut français de Pondichéry/École française d’Extrême-Orient.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodall, D. (2006). “Initiation et délivrance selon le Śaiva Siddhānta”, in G. Tarabout and G. Colas (eds.), Rites hindous: Transferts et transformations, pp. 93–116. Paris: Éditions de l’École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales.

  • Goodall, D. (2015a). Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā: The Earliest Surviving Śaiva Tantra. Volume 1. A Critical Edition & Annotated Translation of the Mūlasūtra, Uttarasūtra & Nayasūtra, edited by D. Goodall in collaboration with A. Sanderson & H. Isaacson, with contributions of N. Kafle, D. Acharya & others. Pondicherry/Hamburg: Institut Français de Pondichéry/École Française d’Extrême-Orient/Asien-Afrika-Institut, Universität Hamburg.

  • Goodall, D. (2015b). “The Śaiva Siddhānta and the Vivartavāda of the Aupaniṣadas” in G. Mishra (ed.), Vedānta Without Māyā? A Debate on Saptavidha-Anupapatti, pp. 269–285. Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research & Motilal Banarsidass.

  • Goodall, D. 2016. “How the Tattvas of Tantric Śaivism Came to Be 36: The Evidence of the Niśvāsatattvasaṃhita”, in D. Goodall and H. Isaacson (eds.), Tantric Studies: Fruits of a Franco-German Collaboration on Early Tantra, pp. 77–111. Pondicherry/Hamburg: Institut Français de Pondichéry/École Française d’Extrême-Orient/Asien-Afrika-Institut, Universität Hamburg.

  • Gupta, S. (2000). Lakṣmī Tantra: A Pāñcarātra Text. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, P. (1953). Vivarta: Studien zur Geschichte der illusionistischen Kosmologie und Erkenntnistherorie der Inder. Mainz, Wiesbaden: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isayeva, N. (1995). From Early Vedānta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gauḍapāda, Bhartṛhari and Abhinavagupta. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallinson, J. (2007). The Khecarīvidyā of Ādinātha. A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of an Early Text of Haṭhayoga. London: Routledge.

  • Mallinson, J. (2014). “Haṭhayoga’s Philosophy: A Fortuitous Union of Non-Dualities”. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 42, 225–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • (MW) Monier-Williams, M. (1899). Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, H. (1989). A History of Early Vedānta Philosophy, Part I. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, H. (2004). A History of Early Vedānta Philosophy, Part II. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, A.J. (2007). “Reconciling Dualism and Non-Dualism: Three Arguments in Vijñānabhikṣu’s Bhedābheda Vedānta”. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 35, 371–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nihom, M. (1995). “Old Javanese Rāmāyaṇa 25.25 and 24.117ab: A Study in Literature and Pāśupata Śaivism”. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques, 39, 653–671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olivelle, P. (1998). The Early Upaniṣads; Annotated Text and Translation. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parrott, R. (1983). “A Discussion of Two Metaphors in the ‘Churning of the Oceans’ From the Mahābhārata”. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 64, 17–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, K.H. (1963). Presuppositions of India’s Philosophies. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, K.H. (1981). Encyclopedia of the Indian Philosophies, Volume III: Advaita Vedānta up to Śaṃkara and His Pupils. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

  • Rastelli, M. (1999). Philosophisch-theologische Grundanschauungen der Jayakhyasaṃhitā: mit einer Darstellung des täglichen Rituals. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratié, I. (2014). “A Śaiva Interpretation of the Satkāryavāda: The Sāṃkhya Notion of Abhivyakti and Its Transformation in the Pratyabhijñā Treatise”. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 42, 127–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, A. (2001). “History through Textual Criticism in the Study of Śaivism, the Pañcarātra and the Buddhist Yoginītantras”, in F. Grimal (ed.), Les sources et le temps; A colloquium. Pondicherry, 11–13 January 1997, pp. 1–47. Pondicherry: Institut Français de Pondichéry/École française d’Extrême-Orient.

  • Sanderson, A. (2007). “Atharvavedins in Tantric Territory: The Āngirasakalpa Texts of the Oriya Paippalādins and their Connection with the Trika and the Kālīkula, with Critical Editions of the Parājapavidhi, the Parāmantravidhi, and the *Bhadrakālī-mantravidhiprakarana”. in Arlo Griffiths & Annette Schmiedchen (eds.), The Atharvaveda and its Paippalāda Śākhā: Historical and Philological Papers on a Vedic Tradition, pp. 195–311. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, A. (2014). “The Śaiva Literature”. Journal of Indological Studies (Kyoto), 24–25(2012–2013), 1–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. (2017). “Parabrahman Among the Yogins”. International Journal of Hindu Studies, 21, 345–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soebadio, H. (1971). Jñānasiddhānta; Secret Lore of the Balinese Śaiva Priest. The Hague: Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takakusu, J. (1904). “La Sāṃkhyakārikā, étudiée à la lumière de sa version chinoise”, Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient, 4, 1–65 and 978–1064.

  • Torella, R. (1999). “Sāṃkhya as Sāmānyaśāstra”. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques, 53, 553–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torella, R. (2016). “A Vaiṣṇava Paramādvaita in 10th-Century Kashmir? The Work of Vāmanadatta”. in Eli Franco & Isabelle Ratié (eds.), Around Abhinavagupta: Aspects of the Intellectual History of Kashmir from the Ninth to the Eleventh Century, pp. 425–450. Berlin: Lit Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Buitenen, J.A.B. (1975). The Mahābhārata: The Book of the Assembly Hall; The Book of the Forest. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, C. (2016). “The Śaiva Religion and its Philosophy in Context, Part Two: Shaivism’s Sources and Influences”, Sutra Journal [http://www.sutrajournal.com/the-śaiva-religion-and-its-philosophy-in-context-part-two-by-christopher-wallis].

  • Watson, A., D. Goodall, and S.L.P. Anjaneya Sarma. (2013). An Enquiry into the Nature of Liberation: Bhaṭṭa Rāmakaṇṭha’s Paramokṣanirāsakārikāvṛtti, a Commentary on Sadyojyotiḥ’s Refutation of Twenty Conceptions of the Liberated State (mokṣa), for the First Time Critically Edited, Translated into English and Annotated. Pondicherry: Institut Français de Pondichéry/École française d’Extrême-Orient.

  • Wynne, A. (2009). Mahābhārata, Book Twelve, Peace; Volume Three the Book of Liberation. New York: New York University Press, JJC Foundation.

  • Zoetmulder, P.J. (1982). Old Javanese-English Dictionary. (With the collaboration of S.O. Robson; 2 vols.). ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. EPHE, PSL University, Paris, France

    Andrea Acri

Authors
  1. Andrea Acri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Acri.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Acri, A. Vedāntic Analogies Expressing Oneness and Multiplicity and their Bearing on the History of the Śaiva Corpus. Part I: Pariṇāmavāda. J Indian Philos 49, 535–569 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09475-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10781-021-09475-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation