Apparent Monotheism

Now the question arises how exactly the pasupata system is different from other schools if it preaches almost the same concepts. The difference as far as I have understood lies in the total theistic flavor of the system as opposed to full or partial philosophical nature of other systems.

Trying to put the history of Indian theism in a simple perspective Swami Hiranmayananda³⁵ observes that Vedic polytheism soon developed into sort of Henotheism, where each god was elevated to a supreme position by his devotees. In the due course this led to a kind of Monotheism which on further philosophical speculations culminated in Monism. One can probably place Lakulisa-Pasupata system somewhere in the transition period between monotheism to monism as its philiosophy is neither completely dualistic nor monistic. It has been classified by scholars as “dual cum non dual Saiva system”

As noted philosophers and scholars have observed early Samkhya system is primarily atheistic (nirisvara) in its outlook. The eternal existence of souls or Purusas who are permanent and supreme is inconsistent with the infinity and creatorship of God. The Samkhya admits the godhead of certain released souls and does accept the popular gods, but they are also believed to be subjected to laws of samsara.

In Yoga-sutra of Patanjali that one gets a glimpse of the God in these lines^[1]

“He in whom pre-eminence reaches the zenith is god. he is not a different category but is a singular type of Purusa. He is the first teacher because unlike other teachers he is not limited by time.Though he has no desire yet out of his grace towards all beings He saves people immersed in samsara by imparting kowledge and virtue to them. He is made up of pure sattva; He is ever free and ever the preeminent and he is Omnicient” (Vyasa’s bhasya on Yoga-sutra i. 23-26).

Use of terms like “grace” and “teacher” has glimpses of Pasupata concept of God.

Another school of philososphy which seem to have direct links with pasupata school is the theistic (Sasvrya) school of Naiyayikas. God in Their system is omnipotent. He is a particular kind of atman possessing benign attributes, devoid of vice,wrong knowledge and mistakes and is eternally endowed with what are known as asht siddhis (eight supernatural powers). The great Naiyayika Udayanacarya has written an elaborate logical thesis on the proofs of the existence of God in his famous treatise “Kusumanjali”³⁷.

At the beginning of his book, he says,

“What doubt can there be in God, experience of whom is admitted throughout the world?

Thus, stressing that any proof of his existence is unnecessary and redundant from the standpoint of Naiyayikas.

Regarding his works he says,

“This logical consideration of God is tantamount to thinking (manana) about Him. It follows hearing (sravana) about Him and is undertaken as a form of worship (upasana)”

In putting forward the various inferential proofs, the author writes,

From effects, conjunction, support etc. from the use of things, from the authoritativeness of the Vedas,from the composition of the Vedas, from sentences and from particular numbers, an immutable all-knowing God can be deduced. The first of these is the casual argument-from consideration of effects (karya) God can be deduced. The earth etc. must have a maker since they are effects like the pot. Everything that is composite must possess an intelligent cause. Without such a cause, the material causes cannot produce definite effects. Everything that is composite must possess an intelligent cause. Without such a cause, the material causes cannot produce definite effects. To be this cause entails possessing direct knowledge of the material causes, a desire to realize some aim, and power of will to accomplish this aim. God must be such a cause.

The second proof is from conjunction (ayojana) At the beginning of creation two atoms must join to form a molecule. All works require an intelligent agent. At the beginning of creation, when two atoms join together to form a dyad, even that, being a work,must requite an intelligent agent, who must be God.

The third proof arises from the consideration of inhibition of celestial bodies from fall. Just as a piece of wood is supported in space by a bird, so also the universe is withheld from falling down by someone’s support. And that someone is God.

The word etc. (adi) signifies dissolution. God is the author of the destruction of the world.

From the phrase “use of things” (padat) it can be inferred that there must be a teacher for imparting the knowledge of using the things. As teachers are required to teach the students the crux of modern art so for the traditional arts which are current from endless time, there must be an instructor. And that instructor must be God

The next proof is to have from the authoritativeness of Vedas (prtyayatah).This knowledge is authoritative like all true knowledge. So that authoritativeness must have a cause which is God.

The Vedas are composed by somebody. Now as the authorship of Vedas cannot be ascribed to any human being, its author must be God. The further argument “from sentences (vakyat) denotes that since the Vedas contain sentences so they must have been composed by someone

Then comes the argument “from number (sankhya visesat). According to this argument, the magnitude of dyad is not caused by individual atoms; it depends on number because atomic magnitude is eternal and insignificantly minute. But number requires the distinguishing perception (apeksa buddhi) which must be God’s

Kanada³⁸ in Kanada-Sutra state that Udayana accepts that scriptures independently prove the existence of God.Thus Vaisesika system believes inference and scriptures to be the valid means of the knowledge of God.

The need to discuss these statements in detail is to show that theism had to be justified and established and lot of other systems had to be proved wrong. The scriptures were considered an authority to justify the same and that is the reason for considering them (vedas or agamas) as “other worldly”. According to Sankara, the vedas are the only means of the knowledge of God.Reason in itself is futile.(Brahma-sutra, Ramanuja Bhasya I. 1. 3)

Thus it is in this time of debate and questioning that Kaundinaya must have written his commentary and his treatment of Pasupata-sutra as a tantra (as often mentioned in Pancharthabhasya) clearly shows that he wanted to give another worldly and supernatural status to the text.

According to Lakulisa Pasupata system God is seed cause, the instrumental cause of the world and his will is at the root of all activities of this pasu world. Siva is also considered to be the absolute cause and the actions of the pasus (individuals) are effective only insofar as they are in conformity with the will of Siva. Hence theory of Karma so important in later Indian thought is not given any importance in this system. The pasus are but His manifestations, all effects of the same God who is omnipotent and omniscient. He grants liberation to all who properly undergo the Pasupata discipline. The final duhkkhanta” (final deliverance from sorrow) is attained only when the pasupata ascetic passes through the different stages of sadhana and reaches Rudra. What is “mukti” to other systems is “Sayujya” to the pasupata.The liberated souls do not get merged in God, as the Vedantins aim but become united i.e., eternally associated with Siva. They remain by their mental steadiness, in perpetual contact with Siva and they never return to the cycle of birth and death.

It is important to note that the pasupata system of the Pasupata-sutra hardly considers the importance of prakrti (the female principal) as energy (sakti), as we find in Puranic pasupata system. None of the categories of Samkhya appear to be of any relevance regarding the creation of the world.Even the concept of yoga in Pasupata-sutra is different from the Puranic concept or Yoga-sutra of Patanjali. Here in Pasupata-sutra as we have seen the word yoga itself has been used in the sense of continous contact with the almighty while in the Patanjali yoga-sutras it is taken as suppression of all mental states (citta-vrttinirodha) which precedes Kaivalya. The yogasutras of Patanjali do not try to establish Isvara of God but only accepted it as one of its necessary postulates.Rather interestingly none of the Indian philosophical systems have tried to establish God by any logical means except Naiyayikas who according to tradition are Saivas.Hence such an overarching importance given to the supreme deity in the Pasupata system comes across as an interesting point for speculation.

The overarching role of Pasupati the protector of all is envisaged in Kaundinya’s^[2] remark that the liberation from sorrow ie dukhanta cannot be attained by knowledge (jnana), disinclination or total renunciation (vairagya), virtue (dharma) and giving up of ones miraculous powers (aishvarya tyaga) but only by the grace (prasada) alone. While on one hand such a statement points at complete monotheistic nature of the sect on the other it covertly criticizes the other ascetic systems like jains and Buddhists. This ultimate image of Pasupati reminds one of the so called pasupati seals from Indus valley wherewe see various animals flanking a horned, in some cases an ithyphallic figure identified by scholars as Proto siva. Are the animals aspiring for the divine grace which would lead them to final redemption from all kinds of sorrow is worth asking?

While discussing “duhkhanta” the final ideal of the pasupata doctrine Kaundinya states:

“tasmat prasadat sa dukhantah prapyate /na tu jnana-vairagya-dharmaisvaryatyagamatrad ity arthah” (Pancharthabhasya p6 line 1-2)

“From this grace of god the end of suffering is attained and not from mere knowledge,dispassion,merit, sovereignty or their opposites..this is the meaning”

Here Prasada (Grace) is of the primary importance and outshines the philosophical concepts peculiar to Samkhya philosophy. So ultimately it lies in the hands of that final absolute to redeem the aspirant from all the miseries

A similar theistic flavor according to which God has priority to the philosophical ideas is met in Kaundinya’s etymological explanation of the word “bhava”

“Because they are created by a process of becoming (bhavana) and of causing to become (bhavana), each cattle (pasu) becomes a god, human or animal and the lord causes them so to become..” ^[3] Pancharthabhasya p54 line 7-9

Almighty’s power is not limited to obstructing the eight aspects of buddhi given in Samkhya philosophy but also is extended to transforming them.In his commentary on Kala-vikrana (an epithet of Siva), Kaundinya says:

Pancharthabhasya p74 lines 9-12

“His being able to transform the material components means that he has the ability to join the individual souls to the material components which are called effect and instrument and join them to merit, knowledge, dispassion, lack of sovereignty etc., through a process of distributing the souls to (their respective) plaxes (of birth), bodies, bodily organs and their objects etc. and this ability is exerted in a general way, an analytical way and a specific way. Thus in view of the superiority of the Lord and inferiority of other individual souls, it is rightly said, homage to Him who transforms the material components”

Thus one realises the eight aspects of buddhi,4 Satvikka ones viz. Dharma, Jnana, Vairagya, Aisvarya and 4 tamasic ones viz Adharma, Ajnana, Avairagya and Anaisvarya, as enumeratd in Samkhaya Karika appear in Pancharthabhasya with no differentiation between first and second group.Moreover there is no reference or importance given to jnana as distinct from and superior to rest of the aspects ie. one of the most crucial teachings of Samkhaya as taught in Samkhya Karika 63,65 & 67. Here it is the Almighty who can be seen standing far above these eight aspects while the latter though philosophical concepts are alloted an inferior rank. Even the final ideal of Pasupata, dhukhanta is attained not by dharma, jnana or so forth but simply by the grace of god (prasada)

Perhaps the apparent antagonism held against the other philosophical and theological systems to uphold the superiority to their God seems to have been best illustrated by an inscription at Balagami dated 1035 AD.

In the inscription which registers grants that were made over to “Lakulisvarapandita deva, a pasupata ascetic of great note, we read^[4] ,

“(to the holy Lakulisvarapandita) who is a saw to cleave asunder the great trees that are the Lokayatas; he who is a great Vainateya (Son of Vinita i.e., Garuda) to the large serpent that is Samkya doctrine; he who is an axe to the trees that are those who propound the Advaita philosophy; he who is a very Trinetra (siva) to burn the three cities in shape of Akalanka.”

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Yoga-sutra Vyasa’s bhasya on Yoga-sutra i.23-26).

[2]:

Pancharthabhasya p.6

[3]:

Pancharthabhasya p74 lines 9-12

[4]:

Fleet J.F. ‘Inscriptions at Ablur,EI,vol 5 (1899) p227)