Abstract
Śaṅkara’s Brahma-advaita-vāda and Abhinavagupta’s Śiva-advaita-vāda are well-known non-dualistic systems in Indian philosophy.1In Advaitavedānta, Brahman-Ātman is the sole reality, and there is unanimity about the fact that all the Upaniṣads speak of an attribute-less non-dual reality that is consciousness, existence and bliss. In Trika, Paramaśiva is the only reality with the nature of sat, cit and ānanda.2 This non-dual reality is self-luminous (sva-prakaśa) in both the schools. Both the schools, in different ways, accept the world as an appearance. In Advaitavedānta, the world-illusion is a superimposition on Brahman whereas according to Trika, the world is a spontaneous self-projection of Paramaśiva. Both the systems agree that there is total identity between individual self and the Absolute, ajñāna as the cause of bondage, and jñāna as the means to self-realization. Jīvanmukti as the state of complete freedom and realization of one’s unity with the ultimate reality have been accepted in both the schools. The focus of this paper is to dwell upon the concept of non-dualism (Advaita) from the Trika angle as enunciated by Abhinavagupta and Advaitavedānta as propounded by Śaṅkara. Abhinava has envisaged a non-dualistic dimension of consciousness with the inclusion of prakāśa and vimarśa, which means that within the format of non-dualism, Trika accepts a second in the form of Śakti without compromising the non-dualistic dimension of the school whereas Śaṅkara’s Advaitic non-dualism has no space for anything other than the self, i.e., Brahman-Ātman.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In Advaita, Brahman is svaprakāśa by itself, in Trika Paramaśiva is svaprākāśa but being svaprakāśa, he is eternally associated with his vimarśa-śakti. Here it is relational which is not involving relation in the ordinary sense of the term, it is tādātmya. Abhinava in his Bodhapañcadaśikā – 3 states: śaktiśca śaktimadrūpāṭ vyatirekam na vāñchati, tādātmyam anayoreva vahnidāhikayoriva. Abhinava says: tasmāt aviyuktam jñānam kriyā ca, jñānam vimarśānuprāṇitam, vimarśa eve ca kriyā. Vimarśinī on Īśvarapratyabhijñākārikā, 3.1.1.).
The reality in Trika is essentially one, not in the Advaitavedāntic sense by falsifying the duality, nor in the Viśiśṭādvaitic sense where the reality (Brahman) is conditioned by jīva and jagat.
The acceptance of this limitation by Śiva, the supreme God, himself is said to be his līlā (sportive play) of which the world is a part. Abhinava says: devasya krīḍādimayasya śuddhe pāramārthike jñānakriye, Vimarśinī, 1.8.11.
śabdapravṛtti-hetu-jātyādi-dharma-rahitatvāt, Śāṅkarabhāṣya on Taittīriyopaniṣad, 2.1.1.
evaṁ satyādiśabdāḥ itaretara-sannidhāvanyonya-niyamyaniyamakāḥ santaḥ satyādi-śabdavācyāt, tannivaratakāḥ brahmaṇo lakṣaṇārthaśca bhavanti, Ibid.
vedāt śaivam tato vāmam tato dakṣam tataḥ kulam, tato matam tataścapi trikam sarvottamam param, Quoted by Jayaratha in his commentary on Tantrāloka, 1.18.
Vimarśa is the power of jñāna and kriyā.
.We find similar discussion in the Śrīvidyā Tradition, which has philosophical proximity with Trika. Śaṅkara a great votary of Śrīvidyā portrays such an idea in the Saundaryalaharī.
The metal does not have prakāśa in the sense of consciousness however, this example is given to emphasise that without vimarśa, prakāśa in the sense of consciousness is also not possible. In other words, it is only vimarśa that makes prakāśa conscious and had it been devoid of vimarśa, the consciousness would be like some insentient illumination.
In both the systems consciousness is neither an activity nor a characteristic. It is spoken in this way in a secondary sense only.
In Advaita, sat, cit and ānanda have the same status, in Trika, there is primacy of cit (consciousness) sat and ānanda are included in cit.
The expression of śakti or vimarśa is jñāna and kriyā. It is stated to be three as icchā, jñāna and kriyā; it is also expressed as five: cit ānanda icchā jñāna and kriyā. Tantrasāra, Upodghāta, p.6. (KSTS Edition, 1918).
Utpala says, “svabhāvam avabhāsasya vimarśam viduranyathā, prakāśārthoparokto’pi sphaṭikādijaḍopamaḥ. As Kṣemarāja puts it in Parāpraveśikā, Vimarśa is “akṛtrimāham iti visphuraṇam”. Vimarśa is the non-relational, immediate awareness of “I”. He rightly avers, “yadi nirvimarśaḥ syāt anīśvaro jaḍaśca prasajyeta.” (Parāpraveśikā, p.2).
This is known as vimarśa which is explained in many other words like śakti, parāvak, pratibhā, hṛdaya, parāhantā, svātantrya, etc. The other names used in Trika are svātantrya, aiśvarya, katṛtva, sphuratta, sāra, hṛdaya, spanda, Parāpraveśika, p.2.
With this in view, Śaṅkara says that “na tāvat ayam ekāntena aviṣayaḥ” (Adhyāsabhāṣya of Śaṅkara) which means that Brahman is not an object like the objects of the world, dṛśya as has been stated.
In the Pañcadaśī, 8.15, Vidyāraṇya says that caitanyam dviguṇam kumbhe jñātatvena sphuratyataḥ, anye’nuvyavasāyākhyam āhur etat yathoditam, In another verse “ghaṭo’yamityasāvuktirābhāsasya prasādataḥ, vijñāto ghaṭa ityuktih brahmānubhavato bhavet, Ibid, 8.16.
In Nyāya, knowing the pot involving the subject “ghaṭam aham jānāmi” is spoken of as a case of anuvyavasāya (a cognition following another cognition).
Ahaṁkāra is an evolute of prakṛti according to Sāṅkhya, it is an aspect of antaḥkaraṇa. According to Advaita, the term “aham” essentially stands for consciousness.
Śaṅkara says “consciousness is the basis of proof, and so it is established prior to the process of proof. The self does not depend on a pramāṇa to know it.” It is avedya or unknowable as a category of thought, aparokṣa or self-evident and directly known as the Self and vyavahāra-yogya, which means that it is the basis for all empirical transaction.
This is exemplified in the life of saints and prodigies who without much learning become famous for their thinking and creativity. Pratibhā works in two ways, cognition and creation and helps in achieving through in life.
This is explained with the analogy of the mayūrāṇḍarasanyāya. mayūra-rasa-nyāyena parā, vaṭadhānika-nyāyena paśyanti, māṣa-śamikā-nyāyena madhyamā, etc. Note of Mukundarama Sastri on Tantrasāra, (KSTS Edn. 1918, p.102).
The word abhasa: i.e. isat (sañkocena), bhasaḥ bhāsanam or prakāśanam means manifestation or appearance.
Kriyā is power to act and karma is action.
Muṇḍakopaniṣad, 1.1.7.
In Stavacintāmaṇi, 1.1.2 it is said, pratikṣaṇam aviśrāntas trailokyam kalpanā-śataiḥ, kalpayannapi ko’pyeko nirvikalpo jayatyajaḥ. Some uncreated (Śiva), which is one and unborn, though gets manifested incessantly in innumerable cosmic creations through his imagination remains unaffected in and through the appearances (vikalpas). Abhinava also reiterates this in his Bodhapañcadaśikā says: eṣa devo’nayā devyā nityam krīḍā-rasotsukaḥ, vicitran sṛṣṭisamhārān vidhatte yugapad vibhuḥ: Śiva being eternally associated with Śakti having immersed in the enjoyment of sports simultaneously performs the wonderful acts of creation and dissolution.
An elaborated discussion of this idea is found in the Śaṅkara’s commentary on the Sūtra, janmādyasya yataḥ, Śārīrakasūtra, 1.1.2.
This level of creativity is known as parāpara or bhedābheda (identity in difference) or sṛkṣma (subtle). Mantra is the basic formula tattva; tattva is the principle or source and origin of the subtle structural forms.
Ultimately, it is not content-less. In Advaita in Saguṇa aspect, Brahman is immanent and in nirguṇa aspect, it is transcendent. In Trika, it is viewed as immanent and transcendence all the times, the Paramaśiva is viśvittīrṇam and viśvamayam.
śiva eva gṛhita paśu bhāvaḥ – Paramārtha-sāra, 5.
Tantrāloka, 1.36.
Tantrāloka-viveka 1.24.
Mālinīvijaya-tantra, 2. 21–23. (KSTS. 1922).
For Advaita, Īśvara is also a part of the cosmic illusion which is stated in many important texts: upasānta jagajjīva śiṣyācāryeśvara-bhramāḥ, dīrghasvapnesphurantyete svargamokṣādi-vibhramāḥ, Advaitamakaranda of Lakṣmīdhara, verse-28.
iha īśvarādvaya-darśanasya brahmavādibhyaḥ ayameva viśeṣaḥ …. … sadā pañcavidha-kṛtyakāritvam cidātmano bhagavataḥ. Kṣemarāja’s commentary on Pratyabhijñāhṛdaya-sūtra, 10. Also refer notes on Parāpraveśikā of Kṣemarāja: nanu parameśvaraḥ prakāśa-svabhāvatve api kim sāntabrahmavādinām iva kevala-bodha-svabhāvaḥ syāt iti āśaṅkya āha: prakāśacśeti.
“phalitā cirākāṅkṣitā vedāntibhiḥ sahṛdayatā”, Bhāskarī on Īśvarapratyabhijñā-vimarśinī,
p.15. MLBD Edition, 1986.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
1 There are many schools propounding non-dualism like Śivādvaita of Śrīkaṇṭha later championed by Appayyadīkṣita, Viśiśṭādvaita of Rāmānuja and the like. Here in this article only two schools Advaitavedānta of Śaṅkara and Śaiva-advaita or Trika of Abhinavagupta are taken for analysis.
2 Paramaśiva is eminently spoken of as cit which has other two aspects of sat and ānanda. prakāśataiva vastutvam (Vimarśinī on Īśvarapratyabhijñā, 2.2.3).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mishra, G., Mishra, H. Non-dualism: Vedāntic and Āgamic (Advaita as Expounded by Śaṅkara and Abhinavagupta). J. Indian Counc. Philos. Res. 38, 137–154 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-021-00242-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-021-00242-w