Part 3 - Śaivism in Kaśmīra [Kashmir]

The orign of Śaiva schools in Kāśhmīr can be considered from two different standpoints, viz., traditional and historical, Traditional speaking, four distinct schools of Śaiva thought flourished in Kāśhmīr in ancient times–three of them were purely Śaiva schools, and the remaining one was the Śākta-oriented Śaiva school. It is held that in the beginning of Satyayuga, Lord Śiva appeared as Svacchandanātha and from his five mouths named as Īśāna, Tatpuruṣa, Sadyojāta and Vāmadeva emanated all the Śaiva Tantras-ten dualistic Śaiva Tantras, eighteen monistic-cum-dualistic Rudra Tantras and sixty-four purely monistic Bhairava Tantras. The ten dualistic Śaiva Tantras are Kāmika, Yogaja, Cintya, Kārana, Ajita, Sudīpta, Sūkṣma, Sahasra, Suprabheda, and Amsumana. The eighteen Rudrāgamas propagating monistic-cum–dualistic Śaiva thought, according to the Kiranāgama are Vijaya, Parameśvara, Niḥśvāsa, Prodgita, Mukhabimba, Siddha, Santana, Narasimha, Candrahasa, Bhadra, Svayambhuva,Virāja, Kauravya, Makuta, Kirana, Lalita and Agneya. These names also figure in the Niḥśvāsa Tantra(an unpublished Tantric text) deposited in the Nepal Durbar Library and the Brahmayāmala with some variations.

The names of 64 Bhairava Tantras propagating purely monistic Śaiva thought are given in in the Śrīkaṇṭhi Saṃhitā under eight heads viz. Bhairavaṣṭaka (group of eight Bhairava Tantras), Yamalastaka (group of eight Yamala Tantras), Mataṣṭaka, (Mangalaṣṭaka, Cakraṣṭaka, Bahurupaṣṭaka, Vagisaṣṭaka, and ŚIkhāṣṭaka.) The Vamakeśvara Tantra, Todalottara Tantra quoted in the sarvollāsa Tantra, and Bhjaskararaya in his commentary Setubandha have mentioned 64 Bhairava Tantras with some variations.

Historically speaking, dualistic school of Śaiva thought which probably had its origin in south, came to Kāśmīr in the 9^th century A.D. Sadyajyoti in his Mokṣa Kārikā mentions that the dualistic Śaiva tradition preserved mainly in the Rauravagama persisted unbroken from Ruru a mythical exponent through Ātreya to Sadyajyoti.

The conception of 36 Tattvas described in different texts of dualist Śaivas is broadly similar to that of Trika Śaivas with some minor differences here and there.

The purely monistic school Śaivaism, which is variously given the name, Trika Śaiva or Kāśhmīr Śaiva, had its origin in 9^th century A.D.

The Pratyābhijiñā branch of monistic Śaivism was founded by Siddha Somananda (850 A.D.), probably a disciple of Vasugupta. His only work Śaiva dṛṣṭi is the most important contribution to the whole of Kāśmīr Śaivism wherein he has made an attempt to rationalize the metaphysical by introducing dialectics into the system. The three currents of monistic Śaivism mentioned above not only have identical philosophical outlook, their metaphysical theories are also overlapping.

The philosophical genius of Śaivites of Kāśhmīr consists in the fact that they transformed the earlier monistic tendencies within their tradition into a systematic and well developed Absolutism. They were able to provide logical and epistemological basis for the growth of absolutistic Śaivism.

Kāśmīr Śaivism is a well developed system. It rightly deserves a place amongst the great philosophies of the world. However, it is unfortunate that at present we do not have a sufficient knowledge of its history and its background. This is primarily due to lack of interest in the subject and, secondly, due to the absence of contact with the tradition, which is almost dead now. It is only during the past few decades that the system has been brought to light.

The development of Śaiva thought in Kāśmīr, especially Kaulism, has been influenced by the teaching of the Upaniṣads, There is also a close affinity between Kāśmīr Śaivism and Gītā.

Śaṅkara’s influence on Kāśmir Śaivism can very well be judged from the fact that this system could develop only after Śaṅkara has visited Kāśmīr. The visit of Śaṅkara proved to be great help of the local Śaivites in their struggle against Buddhism, which has been a serious challenge to them. It appears as if the great Master of Vedānta cleared the way for the riser and advancement of Śaiva Absolutism.

The absolutistic development of the Śaiva tradition in Kāśmīr is not opposed to the spirit of Śaivism. In fact, advaitism seems to be the very essence of the Āgamas. The brilliant jewel of the Śaiva Advaitism (of Kāśmīr) could be discovered only through a churning of the Āgamas, such as Svacchanda, mālinī vijaya etc., and of the Nigamas such as the Taittriya Saṃhitā.

Abhinavagupta has given an account of the Āgamic tradition in his Tantrāloka. The Āgamas originally consisted of nine crore (ninety million) verses. They disappeared in Kaliyuga (the last of the four periods of the world cycle, the period in which we are living now.) However, at the instruction of Srīkaṅtha sage Durbāsā imparted Āgamic thought to his mind-born sons, Trambyaka, Āmardaka and Śrīnātha, after dividing it into three classes,viz. monism, dualism and dualistic monism, respectively. The Śaiva absolutism of Kāśmīr is based upon the 64 monistic Śaiva Āgamas. It is difficult to determine the exact nature of the development of monistic Śaivism at present, as many of these Āgamas are not available, nor is it the task of the present work.

Kāśmīr Śaivism has been referred to as Pratyabhijñā Darśana by Madhva in Sarva Darśana Saṃgraha. Some modern writers also prefer to call it by this name. But the entire Śaiva monism of Kāśmīr cannot be identified with the Pratyabhijñā. The Śaiva monism of Kāśmīr includes many important branches or systems among which the Pratyabhijñā is one of them.

There are three clearly distinct branches of thought within Kāśmīr Śaivism, viz. Krama, Kaula and Pratyabhijñā. In the Krama system, the worship of Śakti occupies an important place. The means adopted here are called Śāktopāya. Since there is a greater emphasis upon the will in Kula system, Accordingly the means adopted in Kaulism may be described as Śāmbhavopāya. However, there is no restriction whatsoever with regards to the object of worship as well as the means to be adopted for worship in Pratyabhijñā. Because there is no restriction about the means in this system, it prescribes the path called anupāya or Pratyabhijñā.

The term “trika’ is often used for the entire Śaiva thought of Kāśmīr. The term refers to both the authority on which it is based and the subject matter which forms the distinctive feature of the system. The system is called Trika also because the chief authority on which it is based is the triad of Āgamas, viz. Siddha,Nāmakaand mālinī. Moreover, the system admits three triads, called the parā or the higher, the Aparā or lower, and the Parāparā or combination of both the higher and the lower. Parā consists of lord Śiva, Śakti and their union; Aparā includes Śiva, Śakti and Nara. It is also called Trika as it deals with identity, identity-cum-difference and difference. This term seems to have been used mostly for the Pratyabhijñā branch of Kāśmīr Śaivism.

There were three Monist sects: One propagated by Vasugupta, known as Trika Śāstra here. The second is the Kaula system of Śaiva Yoga. B.N. Pandit states that one present-day Kaulas of Kāśmīr belive that one Maheśvarānanda their ancestor who came from Maharastra and settled in Kāśmīr.

The matter needs further investigation as little trace of Kaula-mata is found in Maharastra.

The third monistic Śaiva system is the Krama system. But firstly it is a Tāntrika system. Secondly it is a monistic Śaiva system. Thirdly it marks the emergence of the Śākta tendency in the Śaiva philosophy. As Navjivan Rastogi puts it, “It (the Krama system) developed into a synthetic and complex whole in which the Śaiva philosophy, the Śākta esotericism and the Tāntraic synoptic view of life are inter-knitted together” (The Krama Tantricism of Kāśmir Vol.1, Preface,p.x).

Here we restrict ourselves to the first monistic school of Vasugupta as it is popularly a generally accepted as “the Kāśmīr Śaivism’.

These schools (and the other two schools) are based on Āgamas as constrasted with Pāśupatism which is Vedic in nature. Due to their emphasis on three tattvas, Pati, Paśu and Pāśa, this school is popularly known as trika system. Though Āgamic, the followers of these schools call themselves superior to other systems.

The gradation of Superiorty is claimed as follows:

“Śaiva school is superior to the Vedic school.”

The Superiorty grows on as follows: Śaiva Vāma Dakṣa Kula (Kaula). “But the Trika is the best of all”.

Thought Īśvara-Pratyabhijñā-Vimarśīnī claims that this sect is open to all yasya kasyacit jantoriti nātra jātyādi apekṣā kācit), the necessity of Vedic Saṃskāras shows that it is open only to three varṇas.

The influence of orthodox Hinduism was so great that before being initiated into Śaivism, all Vedic saṃskāras from inception (garbhādhāna) to marriage must be performed. The Kāśmīr Śaivism is taken here to imply Trika Śāstra. It may be roughly divided as Āgama Śāstra, Spanda Śāstra and Pratryabhijñā Śāstra.

Emphasis upon Krama or the different stages of manifestation of consciousness constitutes the chief characteristic of the Krama system. Unlike the other systems of the Kāśmīr Śaivism, the Krama pays greater attention to different psychological stages in the process of realization and the corresponding mystic categories. It is primarily confined to a detailed consideration of the various states of consciousness.

Spanda is “Vibration”. “an apparent movement” But here it is used in the sense of “The Divine Creative Pulsation”.

The Individual Self or jīvātman is Śiva but forgetting his divine nature identifies himself with his Psychophysical mechanism called śarīra or body. The recognition that “I am God or Śiva” is pratyabhijñā. It is polemic and interprets logically the main doctrines of the system. Hence it is called Manana Śāstra or Vicāra Śāstra.

As stated already, Vasugupta’s school, is called Trika, the triad being Pati, Paśu and Pāśa. The concept of Pati in Trika Śaivism and in other schools are discussed from a comparative point of view in the chapter 1 (Some Fundamental Concepts).

According to Trika Śaivism, pati, the Ultimate Principle, is Para Śiva. Its other designations are: cit, citi, parā saṃvit (The ultimate knowledge) Parameśvara (The Supreme Lord or sovereign God etc.). The English renderings are inadequate. For example, cit or citi is translated as “Consciousness”—a word implying subject-object relation, a duality. But cit is non-relational.

As Pratyabhijñā-hṛdaya states:

It is both immanent and transcendent to the Universe. The universe is God’s manifestation within himself.

Out of all the (36) Tattvas (Principles, categories) Tattva from Śiva to Pṛthvī is within him. He is luminous and illuminating and full of Bliss.

Para-Śiva is endowed with prakāśa (knowledge).

As Kaṭhaopaniṣad puts it:

It shining, everything else is illuminated. In addition to prakāśa, Śiva has vimarśa, the power to create, destroy or do anything without depending on any outside agency, by sheer will-power.

On this point Śiva appears more powerful that Śaṅkarite Brahman which cannot create unless it is united with avidyā.

Kṣemarāja says:

If Śiva be vimarśa-less he would be powerless and inert.

Vimarśa or Śakti is an inalienable integral part of Śiva. To state briefly, Śiva is Śakti, Śakti is Śiva.

Kalidasa seems to have anticipated this relation between Śiva and Śakti (Pārvatī) when he compares their oneness “as between word and its meaning” (vagarthāviva samprktau). Infinite are the powers of Śiva.

But Abhinavagupta mentions the following as more prominent:

1. cit,
2. ānanda,
3. icchā,
4. jñāna and
5. kriyā.

General view is that-Hinduism of which Śaivism forms one of the important sects, owes its orign to pre-Vedic, non-aryan Indus or pre-Indus religion, supposed to be characterized by iconolatry and that Vedicism incidentally occurred more or less like an interlude, leaving influence of flimsy character over Hinduism with its avowed allegiance. On the other hand, the reflections of earlier Hinduism could be found mirrored in Vedicism.

This conjecture, especially in case of Śaivism, is based mainly on a seal discovered at Mahenjodaro-depicting a three-faced nude male figure, having horns, seated on a stool, in so called Yogic posture, with penis crectus, surrounded by a few animals, etc. Though the inscription of six or seven syllables appearing on the top of seal cannot be satisfactorily explained, it is connected by some scholars with Śiva of classical Hinduism.

In this state of affairs, we have to examine as to what reflections of Śaivism, if it is earlier, have been mirrored in the Vedic interlude, which may now form the Vedic foundation of Śaivism.

In earlier Vedic hymns the word “Śiva” is used not as a proper noun of any deity, but as an attribute to more than one deity. It is stated that in the Yajurveda Saṃhitā the word Śiva occurs as a proper name of a deity.

However, according to the tradition preserved by Kātyāyana which is based on Śataptha Brāmaṇa, the word Śiva in this formula is addressed to a razor utilized for sacrifice’s shaving and not any deity.

The tribes named Viṣāninaḥ and Śivāsaḥ are referred to, side by side in Ṛgveda, as being antagonist to Sudās and Bharata in Dāśarājñā war. If it is tenable that Śiva as a name of a deity earlier to the name of a tribe viz, Śivāsaḥ, this verse may suggest the existence of Śiva cult, contemporary to Sudās and Bharata of Ṛgveda.

The term Viṣāṇinaḥ meaning -bearing horns-is also connected by some scholars with the Indus image decorated with horns. These two terms taken together therefore may suggest that the tribes following the Śiva–cult may be using the horns for decoration.

Besides stray references to Rudra, there are about six sūktas in Ṛgveda which are exclusively or partly devoted to Rudra. One sūkta is devoted to soma and Rudra, where in Rudra is held as a fierce God. However, “he” combines in himself the Malevolent as well as benevolent, terrific and pacific, demonic and angelic aspects. It is held that but for his healing aspect he could have hardly been accepted as a God.

The “Muni-sūkta’ of the Ṛgveda again shows the ascetic-yogic atmosphere and may be related to Śaivite tradition of Yoga.

The Purāṇas are regarded to be propounders of different sects of Hinduism. It is also believed that the Purāṇas established some links with the Vedic mythology. The maxim viz, itihāsa-purāṇābhyāṃ vedaṃ samupabṛṃhayet’-therefore came into existence. The Śaiva Purāṇas may therefore help us in establishing such relations with the Vedas in regard to foundation of Śaivism in Vedic Literature.

Out of many Śaiva Purāṇas, we may here, by way of specimen, refer to Kūrma Purāṇa only for our purpose.

Kūrma-Purāṇa narrates the story of Suśila, a son of Śikhaṇḍin Suśīla happens to meet mahāmuni named Śvetāśvatara-the best of Mahā-Pāśupata, besmeared with ashes, who narrated to his disciple the lore saturated with Vedic knowledge for releasing the paśu-pāśas, Śvetaśvatara Muni said-“Oh Yogins, having studied the Vedic school patronage by me, contemplated on Niṣkala Śiva and reach Mahādev.

According to Śaivāgāma, the anugraha or grace is one of the eternal activities of Lord Śiva. ŚvetāŚvatara here refers to devaprasāda-God’s grace.

In its last verse also this Upaniṣad refers to the God’s grace revealing the illumination, saying—

He who has the highest faith in God, Just as in God, so also in the teacher, to him who is high-minded these teachings will be illuminating.

“The School of Śaivism” means the particular relationship between Pati, Paśu and Pāśa adopted or believed by certain thinkers and their followers. At first the school called Pāśupatism (Pāś.) is considered, as that is the ancient–most and the only Veda-based school of Śaivism.

What is Pāśupatism—

The term Pāśupata means “Pāśupati’ Paśūpati is “The Lord of Paśus’ (bound or enchained Jīvas). In Vedic literature, Paśupati or Paśūnām Patiḥ is the name of Śiva and obeisance is paid to him. The Āśvalāyana Gṛhya Sūtra specifically mentions that Śiva, Paśupati and Śaṅkara are the names of the same deity.

Worship of Śiva as liṅga, the practice of trying the Śiva as liṅga, on the arm as per the stone edict of the king Pravarasena, Śiva liṅgas discovered in Cambodia (now Kampuchia) and assigned to the period A.D. 550-all these confirmed this belief.

The Pāśupata (cult) is based mainly on the Śaivāgamas, certain Purāṇas and a few minor Upaniṣads of the Post Vedic period. Some of the āgamas are: Kāmika, Ajita, Aṃśūmān, Suprabheda, Svayambhuva, Raurava mṛgendra, Pauṣkara and Vatula. The Purāṇas are: Vāyu, Kūrma and Śiva.The topics dealt with in Pāśupata literature are technically called Pañcarthas, the five basic subjects. They are Karaṇa, Kārya, yoga, vidhi and dukhanta.

The Pāśupatas are the important sects of Śaivas. The sect is familer as the Lakuliśa Pāśupata. Lakuliśa the Progeny of kayarohono in north India, is considered as a personified of Lord Śiva. The Paśupata rite as described as consisting of besmearing the intiate’s body with ashes conjoining with the muttering of a hymn. By performing this Vow, the worshipper of Rudra Śiva has overcome the bindings and he is released from the fetters of his individual existence. Varahamihira refers to the Pāśupata & as Śabhasma-dvija and Hiuen-tsang describes the same sect as the ash besmeared pilgrims.

Sarvadarśana Saṅgraha says about the tenets of the Lakuliśa Pāśupatas as follows.

A kārya (effect) is defined as that, which follows a cause (karaṇa), according to Pāśupatas, all objects are effect.

In consistency with this their definition of kārya, they bring Jīvātman or Pāśu which they admit as per-petual, under the category of kārya because it is dependent upon the Pati (Paramātman). In persuence of the Pāśupata philosophy,the Lord Parameśvara is known as the karaṇa (cause). Jñānaśakti and kriyā, śakti, both belong eternally with him. The Pāśupatas belive in divide injuction, which has no need of base of good or evil works of soul.

The origin of Śaivism in India is traced back to the period of Vedas, wherein the cry is found to be deitied as “Rudra”.

Śāyaṇa in commenting on the word “Rudra” occurring in RV., give two explanations, one of which is to the point:

“ṛud duḥkha duḥkhaheturvā pāpādiḥ tasya drayita etatrāmako devo’si’

“Rud means misery or its cause, the sin. He who roots out the misery and its cause too, is the god called Rudra”

Rudra was considered to cause diseases in order to make people weep and he was prayed for appeasement and was consequently spoken of as possessing healing remedies. Gradually Rudra was also considered to be a protector of the cattle and became Paśū-pa. His benignant form was realised in the Śatarudrīya as Śiva -tanuḥ’. Different appellation that we get in the Śatarudrīya speak high of his divine qualities ever in the benefit of mankind. In the Purāṇas eight forms of Śiva were realised as Sarva, Bhava, Rudra, Ugra, Bhīma, Paśupati, Īśāna and Mahādeva which consequently led Kālidāsa to see Śiva in all directions in the forms of the earth, the water, the fire, the air, the ether, the sun, the moon and sacrifice and thus says “there are few to know him”.

In the Purāṇa we get anecdotes with regard to the phallic worship of Śiva. It is nothing but worship of phallus as a generative power in then society, when population was needed for the subsistence of society. Later on, a philosophical interpretation was offered in support of the worship of “Liṅgaṃ’ as a symbol of Śiva.

Archaeological remains at Indus valley indicates that Śaivism is a pre-Aryan concept which seems to have spread in different parts of India from the 3^rd millennium B.C. As regard Orissa, we get information from the numismatic sources from the findings of Kuśāṇa Śiśupālagarh near Bhubaneswar, That Śiva was worshipped in his phallic form in the 2^nd Century A.D. during the reign of Hubiska.

The earliest Śaiva temple Gokarṇeśvar on the summit of Mahendragiri belongs to 6^th or 7^th century A.D. Mahendragiri was the seat of adoration of the early Gaṅgas, who continued to rule Kaliṅga from 498A.D. From the Visakhapattam plates of Anantavarman Codagaṅgadeva, we come to know that five brothers from the Gaṅga lineage came to Kaliṅga from Kolāhalapur. One of them Danarnava, was succeeded by his Kamarnava, who founded his capital at Kaliṅganagar and constructed a magnificent temple of Madhukeśvara at Mukhaliṅgaṃ (now in the śrīkākulam district of Andhra Pradesh) which was the capital of Kaliṅganagar, identified with Nagar-Kaṭakaṃ near Mukhaliṅga [mukhaliṅgaṃ].

On stylistic consideration the Madbukeśvara temple is said to be later than the temple of Parśurāmeśvar and is assigned to 9^th or the 10^th century A.D. The Silodbhava kings, who left their cradle land Mahendragiri and came down to the valley of river Ṛṣikulyā, constructed a number of temples dedicated to Lord Śiva near thiss valley. Kṛṣṇagiriviṣaya is found to have been mentioned in the Ganjam copper plate inscription of Mādhava Varman. The Paraśurāmeśvara temple (650 A.D.) built during this period in Bhubaneswar has two Lakuliśa images as a proof of the influence and popularity of the Pāśupate School of Śaivism in Orissa.

In the Kailāsa-saṃhitā of the Śiva-mahāpurāṇa the view of Śaivism is described as being the Śivadvaita system or the monistic theory of Śaivism. It is said here that since all living beings are constituted of a male and a female part, the original cause must also be represented by a male and a female principle united. Kāśmīr Śaivism, which though a monism, is largely different from the monism as expressed herein. We also find here a reference to the spanda theory of Kāśmīr Śaivism. But in spite of this we need not think that the monistic Śaivism was first enunciated in this purāṇa or in this chapter.

We shall have occasion to show that some form of distinctly monistic Śaivism with relative bias could be traced to the beginnings of the Christian era. The Kāśmīr Śaivism flourished probably from the seventh to eleventh century A.D. It may, therefore, be thought that the chapter under reference of the Śivamahāpurāṇa was probably written somewhere about the ninth or the tenth century A.D., which may also be regarded as the time of Śrīkaṇṭhha, though we are not sure if he flourished somewhere at the eleventh century A.D., after Ramanuja. We discuss these matters further in the appropriate sections.

In the second chapter of the Rudra-saṃhitā of the Śiva mahāpurāṇa, Śiva is supposed to say that the highest reality, the knowledge of which brings liberation, is pure consciousness, and in that consciousness there is no differentiation between the self and the Brahman. But strangely enough Śiva seems to identify bhakti or devotion with knowledge. There can be no knowledge without bhakti. When there is bhakti or devotion, there is no distinction of caste in the way of attaining the grace of God. Śiva then classifies the different types of bhakti. The nature of devotion, as described in this chapter under consideration, shows that bhakti was not regarded as an emotional outburst, as we find in the Caitanya school of bhakti. Here bhakti is regarded as listening to the name of Śiva, chanting it, and meditating on him as well as worshipping him and regarding oneself as the servitor to Śiva?., and also to develop the spirit of friendship through which one can surrender oneself to God

Śiva. The chanting of the name of Śiva is to be associated with the legendary biography of Śiva as given in the Purāṇas. The meditation on Śiva is regarded as amounting to the development of the idea that Śiva is all-pervasive and is omnipresent. And this makes the devotee fearless. It is through bhakti that true knownledge and the disinclination to worldly things can occur.

Four types of liberations are described as sārūpya, sālokya, sānnidhya and sāyujya. We have already discussed in the fourth volume the nature of those types of liberatior which are also admitted by the followers of the Mādhva school of Vaiṣṇavas. And this liberation is only granted by Śiva who is beyond all the guṇas of prakṛti. We thus see that in this school of Śaivism as described in the Śiva-mahāpurāṇa iv.43, we have a monistic system of Śaivism which is very much like the monistic system of Śaṅkara. It believes that the plurality of appearance is false, and that the only reality is Brahman or Śiva. It also believes that this false appearance is due to the interference of nescience. It does not admit any difference between cause and effect, but yet it seems to adhere to the monotheistic faith that God Śiva can bestow liberation on those who are devoted to him, though it does not deny that the Brahman can be attained by the way indicated in the Upaniṣads. It says that jñāna comes from bhakti or devotion, from bhakti comes love (prema) and from prema one gets into the habit of listening to episodes about the gratness of Śiva, and from that one comes into contact with saintly people, and from that one can attain one’s preceptor. When in this way true knowledge is attained, one becomes liberated. The practice of the worship of the preceptor is also introduced here. It is said that if one gets a good and saintly preceptor, one should worship him as if he were Śiva himself, and in this way the impurities of the body will be removed, and it will be possible for such a devotee to attain knowledge.

We have already seen the nature of the pāśu and the pāśa. The pāśa is the energy of Śakti of Śiva manifesting itself as prakṛti, It evolves the material world, the subjective world, as well as pleasures and pains, which fetter the universal soul, the pāśu appearing as many under different conditions and circumstances. We cannot fail to note that the puruṣa or Ātman here is not many as the puruṣas of the Sāṃkhya or the Ātman of the Nyāya, or of some other systems of Śaiva thought. The idea of Vedantic monism is eclectically introduced here, and we are faced with the conception of one puruṣa which appears as many in different bodies under different conditions. This one puruṣa is all pervading, and it is on account of its being reflected through various conditions that it appears in various divergent forms of things, ranging from brahma to a blade of grass.

But the supreme Lord who possesses an infinite number of excellent and attractive qualities is the creator of both the paśu and the pāśa. Without Him there could not be any creation of the universe, for both the paśu and the pāśa are inanimate and without knowledge. We must remember that according to Sāṃkhya the puruṣas are nothing but pure consciousness, but here they are regarded as the reflection of one conscious entity appearing as many through its being reflected in various conditions or environments. Beginning from the prakṛti down to the atoms, we have only the inanimate things entering into various modifications. This could not have been if they were not created and moulded by an intelligent creator. This world consisting of parts is an effect, and must therefore have an agent to fashion it. The agency as the supreme Lord, the creator, belongs to Śiva and not to the soul or to the bondage. The soul itself is moved into activity by the motivity of God. When an individual thinks of himself as the agent of his action, it is only a wrong impression of the nature of causality (ayathākaraṇa-jñāna). It is only when one knows oneself to be different from the true motivating agent that one may ultimately attain immortality. The kṣara and akṣara, that is, the pāśa and the paśu, are all associated with each other and they are both maintained by the supreme Lord in their manifested and unmanifested forms. The so-called plurality itself is pervaded by the supreme Lord. God alone is the Lord of all and the refuge of all. Though one, He can uphold the universe by his manifold energies.

Śiva always helps all beings and never does harm to anyone. When it seem apparent that he has punished somebody, it is only for the good of others. In many cases the punishment awarded by Śiva is for purging the impurities of the beings concerned. The basis of all good and evil deeds is to be found in the ordinance of God, that one must behave in this way and not in the other way. Goodness means abidance in accordance with his will. He who is engaged always in doing good to others is following the commandment of God, and he cannot be made impure. God only punishes those who could not be brought to the right path by any other course, but his punishment is never due to any spirit of anger or resentment. He is like the father who chastises the son to teach him the proper course. He who tyrannies over others deserve to be chastened. God does not injure others to cause them pain, but only to chasten them and make them fitter for the right path. He is like a doctor who gives bitter medicine for curing a malady. If God remained in different to the vices and sins of beings, then that would also be improper for him, for that would be a way of encouraging people to follow the wrong path; and that also would be denying the proper protection to persons who ought to be protected and whom God is able to protected and whom God is able to protect. The Lord Śiva is like; on contact with him will impurities are resolved. When a piece of iron is put into fire, it is the fire that burns and not the iron; so all the inanimate objects of the world are pervaded by Śiva, the supreme Lord, and He alone shines through all the appearances.