|Скачайте и установите необходимые шрифты, чтобы санскрит отображался во всей его красе |
Прочтите Транслитерация (2) (русский), чтобы полностью понять систему транслитерации
Spandanirṇaya (Спанда-нирная) Глава I (афоризмы 3 - 5) - Недвойственный Кашмирский Шиваизм
This is the second set of 3 aphorisms out of 25 aphorisms constituting the first Section (dealing with Svarūpaspanda or Spanda as one's own nature). As you know, the entire work is composed of 53 aphorisms of Spandakārikā-s plus their respective commentaries.
Of course, I will also insert the original aphorisms on which Kṣemarāja is commenting. Even though I will not comment on either the original sūtra-s or the Kṣemarāja's commentary, I will write some notes to make a particular point clear when necessary. If you want a detailed explanation, go to "Scriptures (study)|Spandanirṇaya" in Trika section.
Kṣemarāja's Sanskrit will be in dark green color while the original Vasugupta's aphorisms will be shown in dark red color. In turn, within the transliteration, the original aphorisms will be in brown color, while the Kṣemarāja's comments will be shown in black. Also, within the translation, the original aphorisms by Vasugupta, i.e. the Spandakārikā-s, will be in green and black colors, while the commentary by Kṣemarāja will contain words in both black and red colors.
Read Spandanirṇaya and experience Supreme Ānanda or Divine Bliss, dear Śiva.
Important: All that is in brackets and italicized within the translation has been added by me in order to complete the sense of a particular phrase or sentence. In turn, all that is between double hyphen (--...--) constitutes clarifying further information also added by me.
ननु जागरादिदशास्वीदृशः स्वभावो नानुभूयते यदि चायमुक्तयुक्तिभिर्न केनचिन्निरुध्यते तज्जागराद्यवस्थासु स्वयमेव निरोत्स्यते — इति शङ्कात उक्तमप्यर्थमप्रतिपद्यमानं प्रतिबोधयन्नुपदिशति—
जाग्रदादिविभेदेऽपि तदभिन्ने प्रसर्पति।
निवर्तते निजान्नैव स्वभावादुपलब्धृतः॥३॥
जागरापरपर्यायो जाग्रच्छब्दः शिष्टप्रयुक्तत्वात्। लोकप्रसिद्धे जाग्रत्स्वप्नसुषुप्तानां भेदे योगिप्रसिद्धेऽपि वा धारणाध्यानसमाधिरूपे प्रसर्पति— अन्योन्यरूपे प्रवहति सति अर्थात्तत्तत्त्वं निजादनपायिनः सर्वस्यात्मभूताच्चानुभवितृरूपात्स्वभावान्नैव निवर्तते। यदि हि स्वयं निवर्तेत तज्जाग्रदाद्यपि तत्प्रकाशाविनाकृतं न किञ्चित्प्रकाशेत। उपलब्धृता चैतदीया जागरास्वप्नयोः सर्वस्य स्वसंवेदनसिद्धा। सौषुप्ते यद्यपि सा तथा न चेत्यते तथाप्यौत्तरकालिकस्मृत्यन्यथानुपपत्त्या सिद्धा उपलब्धृत एव च स्वभावान्न निवर्तत उपलभ्यं त्ववस्थादि तन्माहात्म्यान्निवर्ततां कामं कात्र क्षतिः। एवकारोऽप्यर्थे भिन्नक्रमस्तदभावेऽपि न निवर्तत इत्यर्थः। जागरादिविभेदस्य विशेषणद्वारेण हेतुस्तदभिन्न इति तस्माच्छिवस्वभावादभेदेन प्रकाशमानत्वात्प्रकाशरूप इत्यर्थः। यच्च यदेकात्मकं तत्कथं तन्निवृत्ताववतिष्ठते। यद्वा तदिति कर्तृपदम्। अभिन्न इति तु केवलमभिन्नत्वं जागरादेः शिवापेक्षमेव। अर्थात्तत्तत्त्वं जागरादिभेदेऽपि सति प्रसर्पति प्रसरति वैचित्र्यं गृह्णाति तन्नैव स्वभावान्निवर्तत इति योज्यम्। किञ्चायं जाग्रदादिभेदः परिणामो विवर्तो वेति यत्साङ्ख्यपाञ्चरात्रशाब्दिकादयो मन्यन्ते तद्व्युदासायाप्युक्तं तदभिन्न इति। अवस्थाप्रपञ्चोऽपि यदि चिन्मात्रात्परिणामतया मनागप्यतिरिच्येत चिद्रूपं वा तत्परिणतौ मनागतिरिच्येत तन्न किञ्चिच्चकास्यादिति तावन्न परिणामोऽस्ति। यथोक्तम्
परिणामोऽचेतनस्य चेतनस्य न युज्यते।
इति श्रीकिरणे। न च भासमानोऽसावसत्यो ब्रह्मतत्त्वस्यापि तथात्वापत्तेः— इत्यसत्यविभक्तान्यरूपोपग्राहिता विवर्त इत्यपि न सङ्गतम्। अनेन चातिदुर्घटकारित्वमेव भगवतो ध्वनितम्। यस्माज्जागरादिविभेदं च प्रकाशयति तत्रैव च स्वाभेदमिति भेदात्मना तदभेदात्मनोभयात्मना च रुपेणापरापरापरापराशक्तित्रयस्वरूपेण स्फुरतीत्यनुत्तरषडर्धतत्त्वात्मतया भगवानेव स्फुरति। अतश्च जागरादिदशावस्थितोऽपि एवमिमं स्वस्वभावं परिशीलयन् यश्चिनुते स शङ्कर एवेत्युपदिष्टं भवति॥३॥
Nanu jāgarādidaśāsvīdṛśaḥ svabhāvo nānubhūyate yadi cāyamuktayuktibhirna kenacinnirudhyate tajjāgarādyavasthāsu svayameva nirotsyate- iti śaṅkāta uktamapyarthamapratipadyamānaṁ pratibodhayannupadiśati—
Jāgradādivibhede'pi tadabhinne prasarpati|
Nivartate nijānnaiva svabhāvādupalabdhṛtaḥ||3||
Jāgarāparaparyāyo jāgracchabdaḥ śiṣṭaprayuktatvāt| Lokaprasiddhe jāgratsvapnasuṣuptānāṁ bhede yogiprasiddhe'pi vā dhāraṇādhyānasamādhirūpe prasarpati— anyonyarūpe pravahati sati arthāttattattvaṁ nijādanapāyinaḥ sarvasyātmabhūtāccānubhavitṛrūpātsvabhāvānnaiva nivartate| Yadi hi svayaṁ nivarteta tajjāgradādyapi tatprakāśāvinākṛtaṁ na kiñcitprakāśeta| Upalabdhṛtā caitadīyā jāgarāsvapnayoḥ sarvasya svasaṁvedanasiddhā| Sauṣupte yadyapi sā tathā na cetyate tathāpyauttarakālikasmṛtyanyathānupapattyā siddhā upalabdhṛta eva ca svabhāvānna nivartata upalabhyaṁ tvavasthādi tanmāhātmyānnivartatāṁ kāmaṁ kātra kṣatiḥ| Evakāro'pyarthe bhinnakramastadabhāve'pi na nivartata ityarthaḥ| Jāgarādivibhedasya viśeṣaṇadvāreṇa hetustadabhinna iti tasmācchivasvabhāvādabhedena prakāśamānatvātprakāśarūpa ityarthaḥ| Yacca yadekātmakaṁ tatkathaṁ tannivṛttāvavatiṣṭhate| Yadvā taditi kartṛpadam| Abhinna iti tu kevalamabhinnatvaṁ jāgarādeḥ śivāpekṣameva| Arthāttattattvaṁ jāgarādibhede'pi sati prasarpati prasarati vaicitryaṁ gṛhṇāti tannaiva svabhāvānnivartata iti yojyam| Kiñcāyaṁ jāgradādibhedaḥ pariṇāmo vivarto veti yatsāṅkhyapāñcarātraśābdikādayo manyante tadvyudāsāyāpyuktaṁ tadabhinna iti| Avasthāprapañco'pi yadi cinmātrātpariṇāmatayā manāgapyatiricyeta cidrūpaṁ vā tatpariṇatau manāgatiricyeta tanna kiñciccakāsyāditi tāvanna pariṇāmo'sti| Yathoktam
Pariṇāmo'cetanasya cetanasya na yujyate|
Iti śrīkiraṇe| Na ca bhāsamāno'sāvasatyo brahmatattvasyāpi tathātvāpatteḥ- ityasatyavibhaktānyarūpopagrāhitā vivarta ityapi na saṅgatam| Anena cātidurghaṭakāritvameva bhagavato dhvanitam| Yasmājjāgarādivibhedaṁ ca prakāśayati tatraiva ca svābhedamiti bhedātmanā tadabhedātmanobhayātmanā ca rupeṇāparāparāparāparāśaktitrayasvarūpeṇa sphuratītyanuttaraṣaḍardhatattvātmatayā bhagavāneva sphurati| Ataśca jāgarādidaśāvasthito'pi evamimam svasvabhāvaṁ pariśīlayan yaścinute sa śaṅkara evetyupadiṣṭaṁ bhavati||3||
An objection (nanu): "Such (īdṛśaḥ) an essential nature (of Śaṅkara or Śiva) (sva-bhāvaḥ) is not (na) experienced (anubhūyate) during the states (daśāsu) of wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi). And (ca) if (yadi), according to the arguments (yuktibhiḥ) which have been declared (previously) (ukta), this (essential nature) (ayam) is not (na) confined or restrained (nirudhyate) by anything (kena-cid), therefore (tad) it will confine or restrain (nirotsyate) itself (svayam eva) in the states (avasthāsu) of wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi... iti)". (The question is: Is this reasoning valid?). Because of the (existence of such a) doubt (śaṅkātaḥ), (now) the one who instructs and awakens --i.e. the author of Spandakārikā-s-- (pratibodhayan) teaches (upadiśati) the person who does not understand (apratipadyamānam) the meaning (artham) (of what has already been) described (uktam api) (before. He does so by means of the following stanza)—
Even (api) in the variety (of states) (vibhede), (such as) wakefulness (jāgrat), etc. (ādi), which --i.e. "the variety of states"-- is not separate (abhinne) from that (Spanda) (tad), (the principle of Spanda) continues to flow (prasarpati). (Spanda) does not (ever) (na eva) depart (nivartate) from Its own (nijāt) essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) as the Perceiver or Experient --upalabdhṛ-- (upalabdhṛtaḥ)||3||
The term (śabdaḥ) "jāgrat" --i.e. wakefulness-- (jāgrat) (is) synonymous (aparaparyāyaḥ) with "jāgarā" (jāgarā), since it is so used (prayuktatvāt) by the learned men (śiṣṭa)|
(Even though) the variety (of states) (bhede) of wakefulness (jāgrat), dream (svapna) (and) deep sleep --suṣupta-- (suṣuptānām)1 , which is well-known (prasiddhe) among ordinary people (loka), or (vā) even (api) (though the variety) consisting (rūpe) of concentration (dhāraṇā), meditation (dhyāna), (and) perfect concentration (samādhi), which is well-known (prasiddhe) among the yogī-s (yogi), flows (prasarpati); (in other words, although such a variety containing states that appear to be) different from one another (anyonyarūpe), continues to stream (like a river) (pravahati sati), as a matter of fact (arthāt), that (tad) principle (of the Supreme Vibration) (tattvam) does not (na) depart (nivartate) at all (eva) from its own (nijāt) invariable (anapāyinaḥ) essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) which is (bhūtāt) the Self (ātma) of all (sarvasya) and (ca) whose form (rūpāt) (is) the Perceiver or Experient (anubhavitṛ)|
Undoubtedly (hi), if (yadi) that (Principle) (tad) were to depart (nivarteta) on Its own (svayam), (then,) wakefulness (jāgrat), etc. (ādi), being devoid (vinākṛtam) of Its (tad) Light (prakāśa), (would) also (api) (depart. In short,) nothing (na kiñcid) would appear (prakāśeta)|
And (ca) the condition of Perceiver or Experient (upalabdhṛtā) relating to this (Principle) (etadīyā) is proved (siddhā) from own (sva) perception (saṁvedana) of everybody (sarvasya) during wakefulness (jāgarā) (and) dream --svapna-- (svapnayoḥ)2 |
Although (yadi api) in the case of deep sleep (sauṣupte) that (condition of Perceiver of Experient) (sā) is not (na) perceived (cetyate) in a similar way (as in wakefulness and dream) (tathā), nonetheless (tathā api) it is proved (siddhā) from the subsequent (auttarakālika) memory (smṛti), because it cannot be proved (anupapattyā) otherwise (anyathā)3 . (In consequence, the principle of Supreme Vibration) does not (eva ca... na) depart (nivartate) from Its own essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) as the Perceiver or Experient (upalabdhṛtaḥ). However (tu), (let) that which can be perceived (upalabhyam), (such as) the state (of deep sleep) (avasthā), etc. (ādi), depart (nivartatām)4 at their pleasure (kāmam) through the exalted position (māhātmyāt) of that (Perceiver or Experient) (tad)! What (kā) (is) the damage (kṣatiḥ) in this respect (atra)?5 |
The word (kāraḥ) "eva" (in the aphorism) (eva) (might also be taken) as following a different order (than that of the original text) (bhinna-kramaḥ) in the sense (arthe) of "api" --i.e. "even, also"-- (api). (Thus, "eva" might add an additional meaning to enrich the text): "tadabhāve'pi" or "even (api) in the absence (abhāve) of that --i.e. wakefulness, dream and deep sleep-- (tad)". (Therefore, the final statement would read): "tadabhāve'pi na nivartate" or (even in the absence of wakefulness, dream or deep sleep, the principle of Spanda or Supreme Vibration) does not (na) depart (nivartate) (from Its own essential nature as the Perceiver or Experient)". This is sense (iti arthaḥ)|
--Thus, this additional interpretation of "eva" as meaning "api" (even, also) in the sense of "tadabhāve'pi", plus a change of the textual order, would transform the original aphorism and consequently enrich its meaning. Of course, in changing the order of the words, these also change their form sometimes by the Rules of Sandhi. Look:
Jāgradādivibhede'pi tadabhinne prasarpati|
Nijātsvabhāvādupalabdhṛtastadabhāve'pi na nivartate||
Through these changes, the aphorism might also be translated in the following manner according to Kṣemarāja:
"Even (api) in the variety (of states) (vibhede), (such as) wakefulness (jāgrat), etc. (ādi), which --i.e. "the variety of states"-- is not separate (abhinne) from that (Spanda) (tad), (the principle of Spanda) continues to flow (prasarpati). (Spanda) does not (ever) (na) depart (nivartate) from Its own (nijāt) essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) as the Perceiver or Experient --upalabdhṛ-- (upalabdhṛtaḥ), even (api) in the absence (abhāve) of that --i.e. wakefulness, dream and deep sleep-- (tad) (too)."6 --
(The compound) "tadabhinne" --i.e. "in (the variety of states,) which is not separate from that (Spanda)"-- (tad-abhinne iti) (acts as) a "hetu" adjective (hetuḥ)7 that qualifies (viśeṣaṇa-dvāreṇa) the variety (of states) (vibhedasya) (such as) wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi). (By interpreting "tadabhinne" in that way, its literal meaning is greatly enriched): Since (such a variety of states such as wakefulness, etc.) shines forth (prakāśamānatvāt) from that (tasmāt) essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) of Śiva (śiva) as not different (from Himself) (abhedena), it --i.e. the aforesaid variety-- consists (rūpe) of Prakāśa or Light (prakāśa)8 (as well). This is the sense (iti arthaḥ)|
--Thus, this first interpretation states that the compound "tadabhinne" means:
"Since such a variety of states such as wakefulness, etc. shines forth from that essential nature of Śiva as not different from Himself, it --i.e. the aforesaid variety-- consists of Prakāśa or Light as well". In other words, the aphorism might also be translated in the following manner:
"Even (api) in the variety (of states) (vibhede), (such as) wakefulness (jāgrat), etc. (ādi), (the principle of Spanda) continues to flow (prasarpati). (Besides,) since such a variety of states such as wakefulness, etc. shines forth from that essential nature of Śiva as not different from Himself, it --i.e. the aforesaid variety-- consists of Prakāśa or Light as well (tad-abhinne). (Spanda) does not (ever) (na eva) depart (nivartate) from Its own (nijāt) essential nature (sva-bhāvāt) as the Perceiver or Experient --upalabdhṛ-- (upalabdhṛtaḥ)."--
If (the variety of states such as wakefulness, etc.) (yad ca) is identical (eka-ātmakam) with Him --i.e. the Supreme Self-- (yad), (then,) how (katham) (is) that (variety) (tad) going to remain (avatiṣṭhate) in the case of His departure (tad-nivṛttau)?|
Or else (yad vā), (the word) "tad" (in "tadabhinne") (tad iti) (might be considered as) the subject (of the sentence) (kartṛpadam)|
(In turn, the term) "abhinne" (in tadabhinne) (abhinne iti) (might be considered as) only (kevalam) a state or condition of identity (abhinnatvam) of wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādeḥ) in respect (apekṣam eva) to Śiva (śiva) indeed (tu)|
In other words (arthāt), the construction of the phrase (would read) (yojyam): ("Tattattvaṁ jāgarādibhede'pi sati prasarpati prasarati vaicitryaṁ gṛhṇāti tannaiva svabhāvānnivartate" or) "That (tad) principle (of the Supreme Vibration or Spanda) (tattvam), even though (api) there is (sati) a variety (of states) (bhede) (such as) wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi), continues to flow (prasarpati) (and) expands (prasarati), (i.e.) It assumes (grihṇāti) diversity (vaicitryam). (Anyway,) that (Principle) (tad) does not (ever) (na eva) depart (nivartate) from Its own essential nature (sva-bhāvāt... iti)" --this would be a second interpretation of "tadabhinne"--|
Moreover (kiñca), (as) the followers of Sāṅkhya (sāṅkhya) (and) Pañcarātra (pāñcarātra) (along with) the grammarians (śābdika), etc. (ādayaḥ)9 believe (manyante) that (iti yad) this (ayam) variety (of states) (bhedaḥ) (such as) wakefulness (jāgrat), etc. (ādi) (constitute) pariṇāma --i.e. transformation, change, modification-- (pariṇāmaḥ) or (vā) vivartá --illusory appearance-- (vivartaḥ), the phrase (uktam) "tadabhinne" (tad-abhinne iti) (can) also (be used) (api) to reject or refute (vyudāsāya) that (tad)|
If (yadi) even (api) the multiplicity (prapañcaḥ) of states (avasthā), taken as a transformation or "pariṇāma" (of pure Consciousness) (pariṇāmatayā), (was) even (api) slightly (manāk) different (atiricyeta) from pure (mātrāt) Consciousness (cit), (then,) on the transformation (pariṇatau) of that (multiplicity) (tad) Consciousness (cit-rūpam) (would) also (vā) be slightly different --i.e. It would be modified or transformed in the process too-- (manāk atiricyeta), (and) consequently (tad) nothing (na kiñcid) would shine forth (cakāsyāt). Thus (iti), (at least) to such an extent (tāvat), there is no (na... asti) pariṇāma or transformation (pariṇāmaḥ)|
As (yathā) has been stated (uktam) in the venerable (śrī) Kiraṇa (kiraṇe):
"Pariṇāma or transformation (pariṇāmaḥ) is suitably applicable (yujyate) to the insentient (acetanasya) (but) not (na) to the sentient (cetanasya... iti)"|
Also (ca), that (asau) which shines forth (bhāsamānaḥ) is not (na) unreal (asatyaḥ), (because if so,) even (api) the principle --tattva-- (tattvasya) of Brahma --i.e. the Absolute-- (brahma)10 (would) enter into a similar condition (tathātva-āpatteḥ) --i.e. Brahma would also be unreal--. In this manner (iti), (the theory of) "vivartá" --i.e. illusory appearance-- (vivartaḥ iti), (which is related to) unreality (asatya) (and) separation (vibhakta), (and which) makes (the universe) assume --grāhita-- (grāhitāḥ) another (anya) form (rūpa) --i.e. a form that is different from Brahma or the Absolute Reality--, is not (na) appropriate or suitable (saṅgatam) either (api)|
Besides (ca), by this --i.e. the phrase "tadabhinne"-- (anena) the Lord's --lit. of the Fortunate One-- (bhagavataḥ) power to perform (kāritvam) what is very hard to be accomplished (atidurghaṭa) (is) certainly (eva) implied --i.e. alluded-- (dhvanitam)|
Since (yasmāt) He manifests (prakāśayati) the variety (of states) (vibhedam) (such as) wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi) indeed (ca), in (manifesting) that (variety) (tatra eva ca) (the Lord manifests) His (sva) unity (abhedam) (too). Thus (iti), That --i.e. the Lord-- (tad) flashes forth (sphurati) by means of difference or duality (bheda-ātmanā), unity or absence of difference (abheda-ātmanā) ca (ca) that whose form (rūpeṇa) is (ātmanā) both (things) --i.e. duality and unity-- (ubhaya), (in short,) through what is of the nature (sva-rūpeṇa) of the three (traya) powers (śakti) of Aparā (aparā), Parā (parā) (and) Parāparā (parā-aparā). In this way (iti), the very (eva) Fortunate One (bhagavān) becomes brilliantly displayed (sphurati) as (ātmatayā) the excellent (anuttara) principle (tattva) of triad --i.e. the Trika system-- (ṣaḍardha)11 |
Therefore (atas ca), that (saḥ) Śaṅkara --i.e. the Lord-- (śaṅkaraḥ) Himself (eva) (is the One) who (yaḥ) thus (evam) inquires into (cinute) (and) gets in touch (pariśīlayan) with this (imam) essential nature (sva-sva-bhāvam) even (api) while remaining (avasthitaḥ) in the states (daśā) of wakefulness (jāgarā), etc. (ādi). This is what is taught (by the third aphorism of Spandakārikā-s) (iti upadiṣṭam bhavati)||3||
2 The purport here is that "everyone" can "directly" verify the presence of a Perceiver or Experient during wakefulness and dream. This condition of Perceiver or Experient is obviously related to the abovementioned Principle, that is, the principle of Supreme Vibration or Spanda.
3 Only a great being can be "directly" conscious of the void known as deep sleep at the moment it is occurring. The rest of people only are conscious of deep sleep by means of a mere remembrance once they come out of it.
4 The word "nivartatām" means "let it depart!" (Imperative Mood, 3rd person singular, Ātmanepada, of the root "nivṛt"). The conjugation "nivartatām" is in singular number as it is related to "upalabhyam", which is in singular. I had to add "let" nearly at the beginning of the sentence in order to make it understandable in English.
5 The sense is that any of those states (wakefulness, dream or deep sleep) can depart, i.e. disappear or cease, whenever they wish to do so due to the exalted position or majesty of the Supreme Self (the Perceiver), because whether or not they are present, the Perceiver or Experient remains untroubled as the Absolute Reality.
6 The meaning is thus enriched by this alternative Kṣemarāja's interpretation, as the author of Spandakārikā-s would not be only stating that Spanda remains as the Perceiver or Experient during the "presence" of wakefulness, dream and deep sleep, but also during their "absence". In other words, Spanda does not depend at all upon the three ordinary states of consciousness. Got the point? Good!
7 A "hetu" adjective is one that, apart from qualifying (as the vast majority of adjectives does) a noun ("the variety of states such as wakefulness, etc.", in this case), gives a reason as well. "Tadabhinne" or literally "in what is not separate from That" (it refers to the aforesaid variety of states that is not separated from Spanda) certainly qualifies "vibheda" or "variety (of states)", but it also gives a reason: "Since that variety of states is not separate from that Spanda, which is Prakāśa or Light, the nature of such a variety is Light too". This is what Kṣemarāja is about to say now. Keep reading, please.
9 Sāṅkhya is one of the six traditional philosophical system of India, while Pañcarātra is a series of sacred books whose teachings are followed by the Pāñcarātra system (a Vaiṣṇava group that worships Lord Kṛṣṇa and His four vyūha-s or emanations). Pāñcarātra system is also known as Bhāgavata, Nārāyaṇīya, Ekāntika and Sāttvata. In turn, by "śābdika-s" or grammarians, Kṣemarāja is mostly referring to the followers of the celebrated Vākyapadīya composed by the sage Bhartṛhari. See First Steps (1), First Steps (2) and First Steps (3) for more information.
11 Non-dual Shaivism of Kashmir is commonly known as "Trika" (triple) because it mainly deals with the three aspects of the Lord: Parā (Supreme), Aparā (the opposite to Parā, i.e. inferior, lower) and Parāparā (a mixture of Parā and Aparā). Another way to designate these three aspects is the following: Abheda (unity), Bheda (duality) and Bhedābheda (unity in duality).
अथ य एकमेवेदं संविद्रूपं हर्षविषादाद्यनेकाकारविवर्तं पश्याम इत्युक्त्या ज्ञानसन्तान एव तत्त्वमिति सौगता मन्यन्ते ये चाहम्प्रतीतिप्रत्येयः सदैव सुखाद्युपाधितिरस्कृत आत्मेति मीमांसकाः प्रतिपन्नास्तानेकेनैव श्लोकेनापवदति
अहं सुखी च दुःखी च रक्तश्चेत्यादिसंविदः।
सुखाद्यवस्थानुस्यूते वर्तन्तेऽन्यत्र ताः स्फुटम्॥४॥
य एवाहं सुखी स एव दुःखी सुखानुशायिना रागेण युक्तत्वाद्रक्तो दुःखानुशायिना द्वेषेण सम्बन्धाद्द्विष्टश्चेत्यादयः संविदो ज्ञानानि ता अन्यत्रेति अवस्थातर्यात्मतत्त्वे वर्तन्ते तत्रैवान्तर्मुखे विश्राम्यन्ति स्फुटं स्वसाक्षिकं कृत्वा। अन्यथा क्षणिकज्ञानानां स्वात्ममात्रक्षीणत्वात्तत्संस्कारजन्मनामपि विकल्पानामनुभवागोचरे प्रवृत्त्यभावादनुसन्धानमिदं न घटेत। चकारास्तुल्ययोगितापरा अनुसन्धानं द्योतयन्ति। कीदृशेऽन्यत्र सुखाद्यवस्थोदयप्रलयिन्योऽनुस्यूता— दृब्धा यस्मिंस्तस्मिन्सुखाद्यवस्थानुस्यूतेऽन्तःस्रक्सूत्रकल्पतया स्थिते। ता इत्यनेनानुसन्धीयमानावस्थानां स्मर्यमाणतामभिदधत्क्षणिकज्ञानवादिमतेऽनुभवसंस्कारोत्पन्नत्वादर्थाकारारूपितत्वेऽपि स्मृतेः काममनुभवसदृशत्वं भवतु न त्वनुभवानुभूतातीतकालार्यव्यवस्थापकत्वं घटते सर्वसंविदन्तर्मुखे तु प्रमातरि सति सर्वं युज्यत इति सूचितवान् — इत्यलं सुकुमारहृदयोपदेश्यजनवैरस्यदायिनीभिराभिः कथाभिः। एतदर्थिभिः प्रत्यभिज्ञा परीक्ष्या। ग्रन्थकृतैव तु यत इह युक्तिरासूत्रिता ततोऽस्माभिः किञ्चिदुद्घाटितमिति सचेतोभिर्नास्मभ्यमसूययितव्यम्। मीमांसकपरिहाराय त्वेतदित्थं व्याख्यातव्यम्। अहं सुखीत्यादिसंविदो यास्ता अन्यत्रेति पुर्यष्टकस्वरूपे प्रमातरि सुखाद्यवस्थाभिरनुस्यूत ओतप्रोतरूपे स्फुटं लोकप्रतीतिसाक्षिकं वर्तन्ते तिष्ठन्ति न त्वस्मदभ्युपगतेऽस्मिंश्चिदानन्दघने शङ्करात्मनि स्वस्वभावे— इति न सर्वदा सुखाद्युपाधितिरस्कृतोऽयमात्मापि तु चिन्मयः। यदा तु निजाशुद्ध्या वक्ष्यमाणयायं स्वस्वरूपं गूहयित्वा तिष्ठति तदा पुर्यष्टकाद्यवस्थायां सुखित्वादिरूपतास्य तत्रापि न निरोधस्तैः सुखादिभिरस्येत्युक्तमेवेति न तत्तिरस्कृतोऽयं कदाचिदपि। अहं कृशोऽहं स्थूल इत्यादिप्रतीतिपरिहारेणाहं सुखी दुःखीत्यादि वदतोऽयमाशयः— सुखित्वादिप्रतीतिसम्भिन्नां पुर्यष्टकभूमिमन्तर्मुखे पदे निमज्जयंस्तदनुषङ्गेण बाह्यस्यापि देहघटादेर्गलनात्प्रत्यभिजानात्येव स्वं शिवस्वभावत्वमिति सर्वथा पुर्यष्टकशमनायैव यत्न आस्थेय इति॥४॥
Atha ya ekamevedaṁ saṁvidrūpaṁ harṣaviṣādādyanekākāravivartaṁ paśyāma ityuktyā jñānasantāna eva tattvamiti saugatā manyante ye cāhampratītipratyeyaḥ sadaiva sukhādyupādhitiraskṛta ātmeti mīmāṁsakāḥ pratipannāstānekenaiva ślokenāpavadati
Ahaṁ sukhī ca duḥkhī ca raktaścetyādisaṁvidaḥ|
Sukhādyavasthānusyūte vartante'nyatra tāḥ sphuṭam||4||
Ya evāhaṁ sukhī sa eva duḥkhī sukhānuśāyinā rāgeṇa yuktatvādrakto duḥkhānuśāyinā dveṣeṇa sambandhāddviṣṭaścetyādayaḥ saṁvido jñānāni tā anyatreti avasthātaryātmatattve vartante tatraivāntarmukhe viśrāmyanti sphuṭaṁ svasākṣikaṁ kṛtvā| Anyathā kṣaṇikajñānānāṁ svātmamātrakṣīṇatvāttatsaṁskārajanmanāmapi vikalpānāmanubhavāgocare pravṛttyabhāvādanusandhānamidaṁ na ghaṭeta| Cakārāstulyayogitāparā anusandhānaṁ dyotayanti| Kīdṛśe'nyatra sukhādyavasthodayapralayinyo'nusyūtā- dṛbdhā yasmiṁstasminsukhādyavasthānusyūte'ntaḥsraksūtrakalpatayā sthite| Tā ityanenānusandhīyamānāvasthānāṁ smaryamāṇatāmabhidadhatkṣaṇikajñānavādimate'nubhavasaṁskārotpannatvādarthākārārūpitatve'pi smṛteḥ kāmamanubhavasadṛśatvaṁ bhavatu na tvanubhavānubhūtātītakālārthavyavasthāpakatvaṁ ghaṭate sarvasaṁvidantarmukhe tu pramātari sati sarvaṁ yujyata iti sūcitavān- ityalaṁ sukumārahṛdayopadeśyajanavairasyadāyinībhirābhiḥ kathābhiḥ| Etadarthibhiḥ pratyabhijñā parīkṣyā| Granthakṛtaiva tu yata iha yuktirāsūtritā tato'smābhiḥ kiñcidudghāṭitamiti sacetobhirnāsmabhyamasūyayitavyam| Mīmāṁsakaparihārāya tvetaditthaṁ vyākhyātavyam| Ahaṁ sukhītyādisaṁvido yāstā anyatreti puryaṣṭakasvarūpe pramātari sukhādyavasthābhiranusyūta otaprotarūpe sphuṭaṁ lokapratītisākṣikaṁ vartante tiṣṭhanti na tvasmadabhyupagate'smiṁścidānandaghane śaṅkarātmani svasvabhāve- iti na sarvadā sukhādyupādhitiraskṛto'yamātmāpi tu cinmayaḥ| Yadā tu nijāśuddhyā vakṣyamāṇayāyaṁ svasvarūpaṁ gūhayitvā tiṣṭhati tadā puryaṣṭakādyavasthāyāṁ sukhitvādirūpatāsya tatrāpi na nirodhastaiḥ sukhādibhirasyetyuktameveti na tattiraskṛto'yaṁ kadācidapi| Ahaṁ kṛśo'haṁ sthūla ityādipratītiparihāreṇāhaṁ sukhī duḥkhītyādi vadato'yamāśayaḥ- sukhitvādipratītisambhinnāṁ puryaṣṭakabhūmimantarmukhe pade nimajjayaṁstadanuṣaṅgeṇa bāhyasyāpi dehaghaṭādergalanātpratyabhijānātyeva svaṁ śivasvabhāvatvamiti sarvathā puryaṣṭakaśamanāyaiva yatna āstheya iti||4||
Now (atha), (on one hand,) those who (ye) (are) followers of Sugata --an epithet of Buddha-- (saugatāḥ) believe (manyante) (in the following): "The (Supreme) Principle (tattvam) (is) only (eva) a continuous flow (santānaḥ) of knowledges (jñāna... iti)", based on the argument (uktyā) (stating that) "We see (paśyāmaḥ) this (idam) single (ekam eva) Consciousness (saṁvid-rūpam) as a multiform (aneka-ākāra) alteration --i.e. an altered form of that Consciousness-- (vivartam) (consisting of) joy (harṣa), depression (viṣāda), etc. (ādi... iti)"1 . On the other hand (ca), those who (ye) (are) followers of the Mīmāṁsā system (mīmāṁsakāḥ)2 maintain (pratipannāḥ) (the following): "The Self (ātmā) (is) that which is known (pratyeyaḥ) in I-consciousness (aham-pratīti) always (sadā eva) concealed or eclipsed (tiraskṛtaḥ) by the attributes (upādhi) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi... iti)". (The author of the Spandakārikā-s) refutes (apavadati) those (arguments) (tān) by only one (ekena eva) stanza --śloka-- (ślokena):
"I (aham) (am) happy (sukhī ca), I (aham) (am) pained (duḥkhī ca), I (aham) (am) attached (raktaḥ ca)", etc. (iti-ādi). Those (tāḥ) cognitions (saṁvidaḥ) remain (vartante) evidently (sphuṭam) in another (anyatra), in whom the states (avasthā) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi) are strung together (like beads in a necklace) (anusyūte)||4||
The very "I" (eva aham) who (yaḥ) (is) happy (sukhī) (is also) the one (saḥ eva) (who is) pained (duḥkhī) (and) attached (raktaḥ). (These cognitions or knowledges arise) because (that "I") is (somehow) connected (at that moment) (yuktatvāt) with "rāga" or affection (rāgeṇa), which lies or rests --anuśāyī-- (anuśāyinā) in pleasure (sukha). In turn (ca), (such an experience as "I am) hated or odious" (dviṣṭaḥ)3 (occurs) because (that "I") is (somehow) related (at that moment) (sambandhāt) to hatred (dveṣeṇa), which lies or rests --anuśāyī-- (anuśāyinā) in pain (duḥkha), and so on (iti-ādayaḥ). Those (tāḥ) cognitions (saṁvidaḥ) (or) knowledges (jñānāni) remain (vartante) in "another" (anyatra iti), viz. in the principle (tattve) of the Self --ātmā-- (ātma) (who is) the possessor of (such) states --avasthātā-- (avasthātari). (In short,) they rest (viśrāmyanti) evidently (sphuṭam) in that (tatra eva) inner (Self) (antarmukhe) while being witnessed (sākṣikam kṛtvā) by Himself (sva)|
Otherwise (anyathā), since the momentary knowledges --kṣaṇika-jñānāni-- wane --i.e. disappear-- (kṣaṇika-jñānānām... kṣīṇatvāt) merely (mātra) in one's own (sva) Self --which is a Void or Not Self according to the Buddhists-- (ātma), the thoughts or ideas --vikalpās-- (vikalpānām) born (janmanām) from their (tad) latent impressions --i.e. from the latent impressions left behind by those momentary knowledges-- (saṁskāra) also (api) (would wane or disappear. Thus,) this (idam) interconnection (between momentary knowledges and thoughts or ideas arisen from the latent impressions left by the former) (anusandhānam) would not take place (na ghaṭeta) (because,) on (their) not being within the field (agocare) of experience (anubhava), there would absence --abhāva-- (abhāvāt) of manifestation or activity (pravṛtti) (as far as those thoughts or ideas are concerned)4 |
The words (kārāḥ) "ca" (ca)5 , being used (parāḥ) with equal (tulya) relation (yogitā), make clear or evident (dyotayanti) the interconnection (anusandhānam) --i.e. the interconnection between knowledge and thought or idea--|
Of what kind (kīdṛśe) (is that) "another" --anyat-- (anyatra) (referred to in the aphorism)? (The answer is provided by the aphorism itself in the form of "Sukhādyavasthānusyūte vartante", that is), the states (avasthāḥ) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi), which arise (udaya) (and) get dissolved --pralayinyaḥ-- (pralayinyoḥ), are strung together (anusyūtāḥ) (or) tied together (dṛbdhāḥ) in the One (tasmin) who --yaḥ-- (yasmin) stays (sthite) as (kalpatayā) the thread (sūtra) of the inner (antar) wreath (srak) in which such states (avasthā) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi) are strung together (like flowers) (anusyūte)6 |
"Tāḥ" (appears almost at the end of the aphorism) (tāḥ iti). By this (term) (anena), (the sūtra or aphorism) is (also) referring (abhidadhat) to recollection (smaryamāṇatām) of (those) interconnected (anusandhīyamāna) states --avasthāḥ-- (avasthānām). According to the doctrine (mate) proclaiming (vādi) the momentary (kṣaṇika) knowledges (jñāna) --i.e. Buddhism--, since memory (smriteḥ) emerges --utpannā-- (utpannatvāt) from the latent impressions (saṁskāra) (left) by the (previous) experience (anubhava), it appears (rūpitatve) endowed with the form (ākāra) of the thing (which was formerly experienced) (artha) as well (api). Even though (kāmam) there can be (bhavatu) similarity (sadṛśatvam) in the experience (anubhava) --i.e. the recollected thing is "similar" but not "equal" to the one which was actually experienced--, however (tu) it is not possible (na ghaṭate) (a condition in which) the thing (artha) (experienced) in the past (atītakāla) is restored (vyavasthāpakatvam) (at present such as) was perceived (anubhūta) in the (direct) experience (anubhava)7 . But (tu), as pointed out (by the author of this fourth aphorism in an indirect way) (iti sūcitavān): (When) there is (sati) an Experient --pramātā-- (pramātari) within (antar-mukhe) all (sarva) cognitions (saṁvid), the whole thing (sarvam) is right (yujyate)8 . Thus (iti), enough (alam) of these (ābhiḥ) conversations (kathābhiḥ) which give (dāyinībhiḥ) dislike (vairasya) to the students (upadeśya-jana) of very tender (su-kumāra) heart (hṛdaya)9 |
(The scripture known as) Pratyabhijñā --i.e. Īśvarapratyabhijñā composed by the great Utpaladeva-- (pratyabhijñā) should be examined and investigated (parīkṣyā) by those who seek (arthibhiḥ) after this (sort of subtle discussions) (etad)|
Nonetheless (tu), because (yatas) (the aforesaid) reasoning (yuktiḥ) is used here in the aphorism (iha... āsūtritā) by the author (granthakṛtā eva), therefore (tatas) it has been exposed or shown (udghāṭitam) briefly (kiñcid) by us (asmābhiḥ). So (iti), the intelligent people --sacetasas-- (sacetobhiḥ) must not be discontented (na... asūyayitavyam) with us (asmabhyam)10 |
In order to refute (parihārāya) the followers of Pūrvamīmāṁsā --See note 2-- (mīmāṁsaka), this --i.e. that "another" in the word "anyatra" or "in another"-- (etad) must be interpreted (vyākhyātavyam) in this manner (ittham) indeed (tu):
Whatsoever (yāḥ tāḥ) cognitions (saṁvidaḥ), (such as) "I (aham) (am) happy (sukhī), etc. (iti-ādi)", remain (vartante) (or) stand (tiṣṭhanti) evidently (sphuṭam), i.e. (to which) popular (loka) belief (pratīti) attests (sākṣikam), "in another" (anyatra iti). (In other words, they remain) in an experient (pramātari) who has the states --avasthāḥ-- (avasthābhiḥ) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi) strung together --anusyūtaḥ-- (anusyūte), (that is, in an experient) whose form --rūpaḥ-- (rupe) is completely interwoven --lit. sewn lengthwise and crosswise-- (ota-prota) (by those states, and) whose nature (sva-rūpe) (is) Puryaṣṭaka or subtle body (purī-aṣṭaka)11 . (According to this special viewpoint being used to refute the followers of Pūrvamīmāṁsā, such cognitions or saṁvid-s) certainly (tu) do not (remain) (na) in this (asmin) compact mass --ghana-- (ghane) of Consciousness (cit) (and) Bliss (ānanda) which is the Self --ātmā-- (ātmani) of Śaṅkara (śaṅkara) (and) one's own (sva) essential nature --svabhāvaḥ-- (sva-bhāve), as admitted --abhyupagataḥ-- (abhyupagate) by us (asmad)12 . Thus (iti), this (ayam) Self (ātmā) is not (na) always (sarvadā) concealed or eclipsed (tiraskṛtaḥ) by the "upādhi-s" or attributes (upādhi) (such as) happiness (sukha), etc. (ādi) (as affirmed by the Mīmāṁsaka-s or followers of Pūrvamīmāṁsā) but (tu) (He is) also (api) full (mayaḥ) of Consciousness (cit) --i.e. He is pure Consciousness and at the same time assumes the Puryaṣṭaka state or limited experient (i.e. the one identified with his own mind and personality), in which He "appears to be" eclipsed or concealed by the states of happiness, etc.--|
Undoubtedly (tu), when (yadā) this (Self) (ayam) hides or conceals --lit. having hidden or concealed-- (gūhayitvā) His (sva) essential nature (sva-rūpam) by His own impurity (nija-aśuddhyā), which is to be described (later on) (vakṣyamāṇayā), then (tadā) He abides (tiṣṭhati) in the state (avasthāyām) of Puryaṣṭaka or subtle body (puryaṣṭaka), etc. (ādi)13 (and) the condition or state consisting (rūpatā) of happiness (sukhitva), etc. (ādi) --i.e. the experience of happiness, pain, attachment, etc.-- (seems to be) of His (asya). (Nevertheless), as has been said (before, in the second aphorism) (uktam eva): "Even (api) in that (limited condition He assumes voluntarily) (tatra), there is no (na) obstruction (nirodhaḥ) to Him (asya) by those (states) (taiḥ) of happiness (sukha), etc. (ādibhiḥ... iti) --i.e. He cannot be obstructed by happiness, etc. even in the Puryaṣṭaka state, which is a heavily conditioned one--", consequently (iti), this (Supreme Self) (ayam) (is) never (na... kadācid api) eclipsed (tiraskṛtaḥ) by that --i.e. by happiness, etc.-- (tad)|
(So, according to what has been explained above), this (ayam) (is) the intention (iti āśayaḥ) of the one who says --i.e. the author of the fourth aphorism-- (vadataḥ) "I (aham) (am) happy (sukhī), pained (duḥkhī), etc. (iti-ādi)" by abandoning (parihāreṇa) (inferior) beliefs (pratīti) (such as) "I (aham) (am) thin (kṛśaḥ)", "I (aham) (am) fat (sthūlaḥ)", etc. (iti-ādi)14 . (A person) recognizes (pratyabhijānāti eva) his own Self (svam) as having the nature (sva-bhāvatvam) of Śiva (śiva) --i.e. he recognizes that his own Self is Śiva Himself-- by submerging (nimajjayan) the Puryaṣṭaka (puryaṣṭaka) condition (bhūmim), which gets in touch (sambhinnām) with the cognitions (pratīti) of happiness (sukhitva), etc. (ādi), in the inner (antarmukhe) state (pade) --i.e. in the inner Self who is a witness of Puryaṣṭaka and its cognitions--, (and) by also dissolving (api... galanāt) together (anusaṅgena) with that --i.e. with Puryaṣṭaka-- (tad) all that is external --bāhya-- (bāhyasya), e.g. body (deha), jar (ghaṭa), etc. --ādi-- (ādeḥ) (in that very inner state). Thus (iti), "an effort (yatnaḥ) is to be made (āstheyaḥ) in every possible way (sarvathā) for calming down (śamanāya eva) Puryaṣṭaka or subtle body (puryaṣṭaka... iti)" --i.e. intellect, ego, mind and subtle elements, which the subtle body is composed of, should be appeased by all kind of effort--||4||
1 By "a continuous flow of knowledges", Kṣemarāja is referring to the theory of the momentary knowledges, which is supported by the Buddhists. For example: every thought, emotion and the like are knowledges, but between them there is just a Void. On the other hand, Trika states that what is between thoughts, emotions, etc. is not a mere Void but the Supreme Perceiver or Experient. He may appear to be void because He does not contain any object, but in turn He is full of Consciousness, according to the Trika system. This is what Kṣemarāja will attempt to establish later by refuting the theory of the momentary knowledges.
4 This sentence may make a person easily confused, but its purport is simple: if the momentary knowledges are "momentary" i.e. "ephemeral" (such as the Buddhists affirm), they do not leave any saṁskāra or latent impression behind because of their momentariness. Without any saṁskāra-s being left behind, any new thought or idea cannot arise out of them simply because such saṁskāra-s do not exist. Thus, there can be no anusandhāna or interconnection between momentary knowledges and vikalpa-s (the subsequent thoughts or ideas born from the latent impressions left by the former), since these vikalpa-s cannot emerge i.e. manifest and display activity, as they are without their respective saṁskāra-s. Besides, in the absence of saṁskāra-s or latent impressions, no adequate memory is possible either. Oh well, maybe my explanation was more complicated than the gloss of Kṣemarāja, but I did my best, hehe.
5 These "ca" are indeclinable conjunctions (read Adverbial compounds for more information). They are situated in the first line of the fourth aphorism Kṣemarāja is commenting on:
"Ahaṁ sukhī ca duḥkhī ca raktaścetyādisaṁvidaḥ". You can see clearly two of them. The third one is hidden. Let us separate the words and dissolve the Sandhi Rules (combination):
"Aham sukhī ca duḥkhī ca raktaḥ ca iti-ādi-saṁvidaḥ". You can see the third "ca" now. The conjunction "ca" generally means "and", and this is what those three mean in this case (that is why Kṣemarāja says "being used with equal relation"), but I decided not to translate them like that within the aphorism in order not to be redundant: "I am happy and I am pained and I am attached, etc...".
6 The states of happiness, etc. occurring inside a living being are like flowers of an inner wreath, while the Self (i.e. that "another") acts as the thread interconnecting those flowers. Therefore, the Perceiver or Experient is the One in whom such states are strung together. This is the sense.
7 Kṣemarāja states that since memory, according to Buddhism, is based merely on saṁskāra-s or latent impressions left by those momentary knowledges, the thing that was experienced in the past cannot be restored or reproduced exactly as such in the absence of a eternal Perceiver or Experient connecting the aforesaid momentary knowledges. Thus, Kṣemarāja says that such memory can only generate similarity but not sameness regarding the things one experienced previously. According to him, the Buddhism is wrong as memory can indeed "exactly" restore at present any thing perceived in the past. In short, the restored thing is "equal" to that of the past and not just "similar". This point is clear, I think. Keep reading because he is going to explain how to fix that erroneous Buddhist viewpoint.
8 According to Kṣemarāja, the sage Vasugupta was the author of Spandakārikā-s. Thus, Vasugupta himself, through his fourth aphorism would also be insinuating that to include an omnipresent Perceiver or Experient is the final solution for all those problems troubling Buddhism in respect to the interconnection between cognitions (i.e. knowledges) and thoughts or ideas, along with the problem as regards memory. This is the sense.
9 By "students of very tender heart", Kṣemarāja is mentioning those students with very weak intellects. For example, myself, the translator. For God's sake, Kṣemarāja, do not keep writing such long compounds, agglutinating words and discussing on those complex subjects or I will have a heart attack, haha. Now, you understand why "heart" is synonymous with "intellect" in this context. This prose is killing the last residue of pride in me. So you are a proud Sanskrit translator... come and translate these conversations, haha. Obviously, newbies in Sanskrit learning should not take this gloss as a means for practicing their skills except they want to behold the ocean of their Sanskrit ignorance, haha. For those beginners, I recommend Pañcatantra or Hitopadeśa to start with instead. Believe me, to translate Spandanirṇaya is not turning out to be a piece of cake but a journey to insanity, hahahaha.
10 I do not know what the intelligent people will do, but this poor translator praises your brevity, dear Kṣemarāja. Another reasoning like that and my mind was dead, hahahaha. Oh sorry, I cannot stop joking, but I am being sincere at least.
11 Puryaṣṭaka (purī-aṣṭaka) is an epithet of the subtle body (sūkṣmaśarīra). There are four bodies or śarīra-s: sthūla (gross), sūkṣma (subtle), kāraṇa (causal) and mahākāraṇa (supracausal). The subtle body is generally called Puryaṣṭaka [lit. the city (purī) consisting of eight (aṣṭaka); "city" is synonymous with "body" in this context] because it is formed from eight tattva-s or categories of the universal manifestation, viz. Buddhi (intellect), Ahaṅkāra (ego), Manas (mind) and the five Tanmātra-s or subtle elements. Note that the Indriya-s (Jñānendriya-s and Karmendriya-s), because they arise out of Manas and Ahaṅkāra respectively, are tacitly included in Puryaṣṭaka. See Tattvic chart, and in fact the entire Trika section if you wish, for more information about what I have explained previously.
12 What Kṣemarāja means to say is that, in this case, in order to refute the followers of Pūrvamīmāṁsā, the word "anyatra" (in another) in the aphorism he is commenting on should not be taken in the sense of "in the Self of Śaṅkara i.e. Śiva or one's own essential nature", but as merely Puryaṣṭaka or subtle body. Thus, the experiences of "I am happy, etc." rest in Puryaṣṭaka and not in the Supreme Self "directly", who is never eclipsed or obstructed by anything as pointed out by the second aphorism of Spandakārikā-s. Of course, as Puryaṣṭaka stands for a role played by that Supreme Self or "I", the final Experient is always Him i.e. Śiva, indirectly or directly, but to reject the theory maintained by the Mīmāṁsaka-s (the followers of Pūrvamīmāṁsā), Kṣemarāja is indicating an alternative interpretation of "anyatra" as meaning "in Puryaṣṭaka". What the heck are the Mīmāṁsaka-s holding?... if you are wondering this, read the introduction to the present fourth aphorism. Afterward, keep reading the commentary and you will finally understand what I have just said.
14 Kṣemarāja is thus specifying that what was explained by him previously is the intention of Vasugupta --the author of Spandakārikā-s according to him-- in saying in the present aphorism "I am happy", "I am pained", etc. All these cognitions are related to Puryaṣṭaka or subtle body, which is predominantly mental. In turn, the cognitions "I am thin", "I am fat", etc. were not included in the aphorism because they pertain to the gross or physical body, which is inferior to Puryaṣṭaka. That is why Kṣemarāja indicates "by abandoning" (parihāreṇa). Oh well, it is simple, isn't it?... oh my God!, hehe. See note 11 for more information about bodies.
उक्तोपपत्तिसिद्धां समस्तवादानामनुपपन्नतामनुवदन्नुपपत्तिसिद्धं स्पन्दतत्त्वमेवास्तीति प्रतिजानाति युक्त्यनुभवागमज्ञो रहस्यगुरुप्रवरः
न दुःखं न सुखं यत्र न ग्राह्यं ग्राहकं न च।
न चास्ति मूढभावोऽपि तदस्ति परमार्थतः॥५॥
इह यत्किञ्चिद्दुःखसुखाद्यान्तरं नीलपीतादिकं बाह्यं ग्राह्यं यच्चैतद्ग्राहकं पुर्यष्टकशरीरेन्द्रियादि तत्तावत्सौषुप्तवदसञ्चेत्यमानं स्पुटमेव नास्तीति वक्तुं शक्यम्। यदापि तु सञ्चेत्यते तदा सञ्चेत्यमानस्याप्यस्य चैतन्यमयत्वाच्चैतन्यमेवास्तीत्यायातम्। यदाहुः
प्रकाशात्मा प्रकाश्योऽर्थो नाप्रकाशश्च सिध्यति।
इति रहस्यतत्त्वविदोऽस्मत्परमेष्ठिनः श्रीमदुत्पलदेवपादाः श्रीमदीश्वरप्रत्यभिज्ञायाम्। इहापि वक्ष्यते—
इत्यतो दुःखसुखादि नीलादि तद्ग्राहकं च यत्र नास्ति तत्प्रकाशैकघनं तत्त्वमस्ति। नन्वेवं सर्वग्राह्यग्राहकोच्छेदे शून्यात्मैव तत्त्वमित्यायातं नेत्याह न चास्ति मूढभावोऽपि इति। मूढभावो मूढत्वं शून्यरूपतापि यत्र नास्ति सोऽपि हि न प्रथते कथमस्ति प्रथते चेत्तर्हि प्रथात्मकत्वान्नासौ कश्चित्प्रथैवास्ति न च प्रथायाः कदाचिदभावो भवति तदभावे प्रथाभावस्याप्यसिद्धेः। भविष्यति चैतत्
न तु योऽन्तर्मुखो भावः।
इत्यत्र। अपि मूढभाव ऐश्वर्यात्मकविमर्शशून्यप्रकाशमात्रतत्त्वो ब्रह्मरूपोऽपि यत्र नास्ति यच्छ्रुत्यन्तविदः प्रतिपन्नाः विज्ञानं ब्रह्म इति तस्यापि स्वातन्त्र्यात्मकस्पन्दशक्तिं विना जडत्वात्। यथोक्तं प्रत्यभिज्ञायाम्
स्वभावमवभासस्य विमर्शं विदुरन्यथा।
नपुंसकमिदं नाथ परं ब्रह्म फलेत्कियत्।
त्वत्पौरुषी नियोक्त्री चेन्न स्यात्त्वच्छक्तिसुन्दरी॥
इति। एवं च यत्र स्थितम् इत्यतः प्रभृति यत्तत्त्वं विचारितं तदेवास्ति तच्चास्त्येव परमार्थतो युक्त्यनुभवागमसिद्धेन रूपेण परमार्थत एव चाकल्पितेन पूर्णेन रूपेणास्ति न तु नीलादिवत्कल्पितेन। यथोक्तं महागुरुभिः
एवमात्मन्यसत्कल्पाः प्रकाशस्यैव सन्त्यमी।
जडाः प्रकाश एवास्ति स्वात्मनः स्वपरात्मभिः॥
यदादौ च यदन्ते च यन्मध्ये तस्य सत्यता।
न यदाभासते यस्य सत्यत्वं तावदेव हि॥
इति। सावधारणत्वात्सर्ववाक्यानामेवकारोऽत्र त्रिर्योर्ज्यः। एवमनेन सूत्रेण सुखाद्याकारसंवित्सन्तानवादिनां सुखादिकलुषितप्रमातृतत्त्ववादिनां ग्राह्यग्राहकनानात्ववादिनां सर्वेषामभाववादिनां निष्परामर्शप्रकाशब्रह्मवादिनां च मतमनुपपन्नत्वादसत्त्वेनानूद्य पारमार्थिकं स्पन्दशक्तिरूपमेव तत्त्वमस्तीति प्रतिज्ञातम्। अथ च यस्मिन्नस्मिन् सोपदेशसावधानमहानुभावपरिशील्ये स्फुरत्तासारे स्पन्दतत्त्वे स्फुरति दुःखसुखग्राह्यग्राहकतदभावादिकमिदं सदपि न किञ्चिदेव सर्वस्यैतच्चमत्कारैकसारत्वात्तदेवैतदस्तीत्युपदिष्टम्। यन्महागुरवः
दुःखान्यपि सुखायन्ते विषमप्यमृतायते।
मोक्षायते च संसारो यत्र मार्गः स शाङ्करः॥
इति। शाङ्करो मार्गः— शङ्करात्मस्वभावप्राप्तिहेतुः पराशक्तिरूपः प्रसरः॥५॥
Uktopapattisiddhāṁ samastavādānāmanupapannatāmanuvadannupapattisiddhaṁ spandatattvamevāstīti pratijānāti yuktyanubhavāgamajño rahasyagurupravaraḥ
Na duḥkhaṁ na sukhaṁ yatra na grāhyaṁ grāhakaṁ na ca|
Na cāsti mūḍhabhāvo'pi tadasti paramārthataḥ||5||
Iha yatkiñcidduḥkhasukhādyāntaraṁ nīlapītādikaṁ bāhyaṁ grāhyaṁ yaccaitadgrāhakaṁ puryaṣṭakaśarīrendriyādi tattāvatsauṣuptavadasañcetyamānaṁ sphuṭameva nāstīti vaktuṁ śakyam| Yadāpi tu sañcetyate tadā sañcetyamānasyāpyasya caitanyamayatvāccaitanyamevāstītyāyātam| Yadāhuḥ
Prakāśātmā prakāśyo'rtho nāprakāśaśca sidhyati|
Iti rahasyatattvavido'smatparameṣṭhinaḥ śrīmadutpaladevapādāḥ śrīmadīśvarapratyabhijñāyām| Ihāpi vakṣyate—
Ityato duḥkhasukhādi nīlādi tadgrāhakaṁ ca yatra nāsti tatprakāśaikaghanaṁ tattvamasti| Nanvevaṁ sarvagrāhyagrāhakocchede śūnyātmaiva tattvamityāyātaṁ netyāha na cāsti mūḍhabhāvo'pi iti| Mūḍhabhāvo mūḍhatvaṁ śūnyarūpatāpi yatra nāsti so'pi hi na prathate kathamasti prathate cettarhi prathātmakatvānnāsau kaschcitprathaivāsti na ca prathāyāḥ kadācidabhāvo bhavati tadabhāve prathābhāvasyāpyasiddheḥ| Bhaviṣyati caitat
Na tu yo'ntarmukho bhāvaḥ|
Ityatra| Api mūḍhabhāva aiśvaryātmakavimarśaśūnyaprakāśamātratattvo brahmarūpo'pi yatra nāsti yacchrutyantavidaḥ pratipannāḥ vijñānaṁ brahma iti tasyāpi svātantryātmakaspandaśaktiṁ vinā jaḍatvāt| Yathoktaṁ pratyabhijñāyām
Svabhāvamavabhāsasya vimarśaṁ viduranyathā|
Napuṁsakamidaṁ nātha paraṁ brahma phaletkiyat|
Tvatpauruṣī niyoktrī cenna syāttvacchaktisundarī||
Iti| Evaṁ ca yatra sthitam ityataḥ prabhṛti yattattvaṁ vicāritaṁ tadevāsti taccāstyeva paramārthato yuktyanubhavāgamasiddhena rūpeṇa paramārthata eva cākalpitena pūrṇena rūpeṇāsti na tu nīlādivatkalpitena| Yathoktaṁ mahāgurubhiḥ
Evamātmanyasatkalpāḥ prakāśasyaiva santyamī|
Jaḍāḥ prakāśa evāsti svātmanaḥ svaparātmabhiḥ||
Yadādau ca yadante ca yanmadhye tasya satyatā|
Na yadābhāsate yasya satyatvaṁ tāvadeva hi||
Iti| Sāvadhāraṇatvātsarvavākyānāmevakāro'tra triryorjyaḥ| Evamanena sūtreṇa sukhādyākārasaṁvitsantānavādināṁ sukhādikaluṣitapramātṛtattvavādināṁ grāhyagrāhakanānātvavādināṁ sarveṣāmabhāvavādināṁ niṣparāmarśaprakāśabrahmavādināṁ ca matamanupapannatvādasattvenānūdya pāramārthikaṁ spandaśaktirūpameva tattvamastīti pratijñātam| Atha ca yasminnasmin sopadeśasāvadhānamahānubhāvapariśīlye sphurattāsāre spandatattve sphurati duḥkhasukhagrāhyagrāhakatadabhāvādikamidaṁ sadapi na kiñcideva sarvasyaitaccamatkāraikasāratvāttadevaitadastītyupadiṣṭam| Yanmahāguravaḥ
Duḥkhānyapi sukhāyante viṣamapyamṛtāyate|
Mokṣāyate ca saṁsāro yatra mārgaḥ sa śāṅkaraḥ||
Iti| Śāṅkaro mārgaḥ— śaṅkarātmasvabhāvaprāptihetuḥ parāśaktirūpaḥ prasaraḥ||5||
By insisting (anuvadan) upon the impossibility (anupapannatām) of all (samasta) doctrines or theories --vādāḥ-- (vādānām), which has been proven (siddhām) by the aforesaid (ukta) argument (upapatti), the main (pravaraḥ) Guru (guru) of the secret teaching (rahasya) --i.e. the sage Utpaladeva--, who knows (jñaḥ) the Āgama-s or revealed scriptures (āgama) (along with) their arguments (yukti), (and who additionally) has (personal) experience (regarding all that) (anubhava), recognizes (pratijānāti) (that) "only (eva) the principle (tattvam) of the Supreme Vibration (spanda) proved (siddham) by means of arguments (upapatti) is (the Truth) (asti... iti)":
Wherein (yatra) (there is) neither (na) pain (duḥkham) nor (na) pleasure (sukham) nor (na) object (grāhyam) nor (na ca) subject (grāhakam); (wherein) the state (bhāvaḥ) of insentience (mūḍha) does not (na ca) even (api) exist (asti)... that (tad) is (asti), in the highest sense (paramārthatas), (the principle of Spanda)||5||
Here --i.e. in this world-- (iha), whatsoever (yad kiñcid) internal (āntaram) object (grāhyam) (such as) pain (duḥkha), pleasure (sukha), etc. (ādi), (whatsoever) external (bāhyam) object (grāhyam) (such as) blue (nīla), yellow (pīta), etc. (ādikam), and (ca) whatsoever (yad) experient (grāhakam) of this --i.e. of these objects-- (etad) (such as) Puryaṣṭaka --subtle body, see note 11 below the commentary of the previous aphorism-- (puryaṣṭaka), (gross) body (śarīra), Indriya-s (indriya)1 , etc. (ādi) (there may be)... (all) that (tad) is like (vat) deep sleep (sauṣupta). So (iti), it can (śakyam) be said (vaktum) (that) evidently (sphuṭam eva) does not (na) exist (asti) as long as (tāvat) it is not perceived (asañcetyamānam)|
Nonetheless (api tu), when (yadā) (all that, i.e. objects and experients) is perceived (sañcetyate), then (tadā), even (api) this --i.e. objects and experients-- (asya) which is being perceived --sañcetyamāna-- (sañcetyamānasya), since it is full (mayatvāt) of Caitanya or Absolute Consciousness (caitanya), is (asti) just (eva) Absolute Consciousness (caitanyam). This is (the conclusion one) arrives at (iti āyātam)|
(This is) what the most venerable (śrīmat... pādāḥ) Utpaladeva (utpaladeva), our (asmad) great grand Guru (parameṣṭhinaḥ), who knows (vidaḥ) the secret (rahasya) Principle (tattva), said (āhuḥ) in (his) beautiful and holy (śrīmat) Īśvarapratyabhijñā (īśvara-pratyabhijñāyām)2 :
"The object (arthaḥ) being manifested (prakāśyaḥ) is of the nature (ātmā) of Prakāśa or Light --i.e. Śiva-- (prakāśa), and (ca) what is not Prakāśa or Light (aprakāśaḥ) cannot (na) be established (as existent) (sidhyati... iti) --an alternative translation would be "does not come into existence" as the root "sidh" has several meanings (to be established or proved, come into existence, etc.)--"|
Here --i.e. in Īśvarapratyabhijñā of Utpaladeva-- (iha), it will also be said (api vakṣyate):
"On account of having the form (rūpeṇa) of His (tad) perception or knowledge (saṁvedana) (and) due to the acquisition (pratipattitaḥ) of identity (with Him) (tādātmya... iti)"|
Therefore (atas), that (tad) only (eka) compact mass (ghanam) of Prakāśa or Light (prakāśa) in which (yatra) there is neither (na asti) pain (duḥkha), pleasure (sukha), blue (nīla), etc. (ādi... ādi) nor (ca) their (tad) experient (grāhakam), is (asti) the (Supreme) Principle (tattvam)|
An objection (nanu): "Thus (evam), when there is extinguishment (ucchede) of all (sarva) objects (grāhya) (and their respective) experients (grāhaka), the (Supreme) Principle (tattvam) is (ātmā) solely (eva) a Void (śūnya)", this is (the conclusion one) arrives at (iti āyātam). (The author of Spandakārikā-s, i.e. Vasugupta according to Kṣemarāja) said (āha): "No" (na iti). (And he added): "And (ca) there is not (na... asti) even (api) a condition or state (bhāvaḥ) of insentience (mūḍha... iti)"|
The state (bhāvaḥ) of insentience (mūḍha) (appears) as insentience (itself) --i.e. it is manifest as such-- (mūḍhatvam) (or) also (api) (may appear) in the form (rūpatā) of void --i.e. it is not manifest at all-- (śūnya). In the case (yatra) that there is no (insentience being manifest) (na asti), that (state of insentience) (saḥ) doubtless does not (hi na) become manifest (prathate) either (api). (Then,) how (katham) is going to exist (asti)? --i.e. how can be said to there be a state of insentience then?--. (In turn,) if (ced) it becomes manifest (prathate), in that case (tarhi), since it shines forth (prathā-ātmakatvāt), that (state of insentience) (asau) is (asti) nothing (na... kaścid) (but) Light (prathā) indeed (eva). There is (bhavati) never (na ca... kadācid) absence (abhāvaḥ) of Light (prathāyāḥ). In Its (tad) absence --abhāva-- (abhāve), even (api) the absence --abhāva-- (abhāvasya) of Light (prathā) cannot be proved --asiddha-- (asiddheḥ)|
This (subject matter) (etad) will occur (bhaviṣyati ca) here --i.e. in Spandakārikā-s; specifically in I, 16-- (atra) (as well). --Because Kṣemarāja quotes only the beginning of the aphorism, I will not translate his text as such because it does not make any sense without the rest of it, but I will add the entire translation afterward--:
"Na tu yo'ntarmukho bhāvaḥ..."|
--Now the entire sixteenth aphorism of the first section of Spandakārikā-s:
Na tu yo'ntarmukho bhāvaḥ sarvajñatvaguṇāspadam|
Tasya lopaḥ kadācitsyādanyasyānupalambhanāt||16||
There is (syāt) never (na tu... kadācid) cessation (lopaḥ) of that (tasya) inner (antarmukhaḥ) state or nature (bhāvaḥ) which (yaḥ) (is) the abode (āspadam) of the attribute (guṇa) of omniscience (sarvajñatva), on account of the nonperception (anupalambhanāt) of another (anyasya).
Thus, the meaning is now clear. The first part of the following text deals with what the followers of Vedānta [specially Advaitavedānta or Non-dualistic Vedānta, see First Steps (1), First Steps (2) and First Steps (3) for more information] affirm regarding the Absolute Reality, which they call "Brahma". According to them, Brahma is merely Knowledge or Light completely devoid of Power (Vimarśa). This point is discussed by Kṣemarāja to a certain extent as it is extremely complex. Now Kṣemarāja continues to speak... listen to him attentively.--
Moreover (api), the state (bhavaḥ) of insentience (mūḍha) taken as (rūpaḥ) Brahma (brahma), (that is), the principle (tattvaḥ) which is merely (mātra) Prakāśa or Light (prakāśa) devoid (śūnya) of Vimarśa --i.e. Spanda or Śakti-- (vimarśa) consisting (ātmaka) of Lordship and full Power (aiśvarya) --in other words, "Brahma" as conceived by the followers of Advaitavedānta is merely Light or Prakāśa without Power or Śakti-- does not (na) exist (asti) in that case (yatra) either (api) --i.e. such a state of insentience does not even exist in Brahma--. That is to say (yad), the knowers (vidaḥ) of Vedānta --specially Advaitavedānta or Non-dualistic Vedānta in this context-- (śruti-anta) are convinced (pratipannāḥ) (that) "Brahma (brahma) (is only) Knowledge (vijñānam... iti)", (but this cannot be true,) since (if so) even that (Brahma) would be inert or insentient (tasya api... jaḍatvāt) because of His being without (vinā) the Power (śaktim) of the Supreme Vibration or Spanda (spanda) whose nature (ātmaka) is Absolute Freedom (svātantrya)3 |
As (yathā) has been said (uktam) in Pratyabhijñā --in other words, within Utpaladeva's Īśvarapratyabhijñā-- (pratyabhijñāyām):
(The sages) know (viduḥ) that Vimarśa --i.e. Spanda or Śakti-- (vimarśa) (is) the essential nature (sva-bhāvam) of the Supreme Light (avabhāsasya). Otherwise (anyathā), Prakāśa or Light (prakāśaḥ) (would be) as inert (jaḍa-upamaḥ) (as) a crystal (sphaṭika), etc. (ādi), even if (api) colored (uparaktaḥ) by the object (arthaḥ... iti)"||
In the hymn (stotre) (known as) Bhaṭṭanāyaka (bhaṭṭanāyaka) (is) also (api) (stated the same teaching):
"Oh Lord (nātha), how much (kiyat) fruit would be produced (phalet) (by) this (idam) eunuch (napuṁsakam) Supreme (param) Brahma (brahma) if (ced) Your (tvat... tvat) beautiful (sundarī) (and) feminine (paruruṣī) ruling Power (niyoktrī... śakti) would not exist (na syāt... iti)?"||
Thus (evam ca), that (tad) Principle (tattvam) alone (eva) "is or exists " (asti) which (yad) has been discussed (vicāritam) (in the second aphorism of Spandakārikā-s -Section 1-) beginning (prabhṛti) with this (atas): "Yatra sthitam" (yatra sthitam iti) --See Aphorism 2--. And (ca) only (eva) That (tad) exists (asti) in the highest sense (paramārthatas), as is proved (siddhena rūpeṇa) by reasoning (yukti), experience (anubhava) (and) revealed scriptures (āgama). (That) exists (asti) really (paramārthatas eva ca) in a natural (akalpitena), perfect (pūrṇena) form (rūpeṇa), and not (na tu) in an artificial (manner) --i.e. unnatural-- (kalpitena) (such) as (vat) blue (nīla), etc. (ādi)|
As (yathā) has been said (uktam) by the great (mahā) Guru --lit. "Guru-s", keep in mind that what has been specified in note 2 is valid here too-- (gurubhiḥ):
"Thus (evam), those (amī) inert objects (jaḍāḥ) are (santi) only (eva) of Prakāśa or Light --i.e. they belong only to Prakāśa-- (prakāśasya) (and) almost (kalpāḥ) nonexistent (asat) in themselves (ātmani). The Light (prakāśaḥ) of Oneself (sva-ātmanaḥ) alone (eva) exists (asti) (as both) one's own Self (and) that of the others (sva-para-ātmabhiḥ... iti) --to wit, even though there seem to be a lot of selves and objects, all is solely one's own Prakāśa--"4 ||
(As has) also (api) (been expressed by) most venerable (tatrabhavat) Bhartṛhari, (the famous śābdika or grammarian) --See note 9 below the commentary on the third aphorism-- (bhartṛhariṇā):
"Reality (satyatā) does belong to That (tasya) which (yad... yad... yad) (exists) in the beginning (ādau), in the end (ante) and (ca... ca) in the middle (madhye), (and) not (na) to that (tasya) which (yad) (merely) appears (ābhāsate). (This is so), because (hi) Reality (satyatvam) of that (which just appears) (yasya) (exists) only (eva) as long as (tāvat... iti) (such a thing remains manifest)"||
Since there is restriction or limitation (sa-avadhāraṇatvāt) in all (sarva) (previous) sentences (vākyānām), the word (kāraḥ) "eva" --i.e. "only"-- (eva) is to be added (yojyaḥ) thrice (triḥ) here (atra)5 |
In this way (evam), by this (anena) aphorism --i.e. the fifth aphorism of Spandakārikā-s-- (sūtreṇa) it is declared (pratijñātam) (that) "the Highest (pāramārthikam) Principle (tattvam) is (asti) solely (eva) (That) whose form (rūpam) (is) the Power (śakti) of Supreme Vibration (spanda... iti)", by insisting (anūdya) upon "asattva" or "nonexistence, unreality" --read the present fifth aphorism to fully understand this-- (asattvena) because of inapplicability (anupapannatvāt) of the doctrine(s) or viewpoint(s) (matam) of those who proclaim (vādinām... vādinām... vādinām... vādinām... vādinām) the continuous flow (santāna) of cognitions (saṁvid) in the form (ākāra) of pleasure (sukha), etc. (ādi)6 , (or) the principle (tattva) of the experient (pramātṛ) contaminated (kaluṣita) by pleasure (sukha), etc. (ādi)7 , (or) the multiplicity (nānātva) of subjects (grāhaka) (and) objects (grāhya)8 , (or) the absence (abhāva) of all (subjects and objects) (sarveṣām)9 , or --lit. "and"-- (ca) (that) Brahma (brahma) (is) Prakāśa or Light (prakāśa) with no activity --lit. "helpless"-- (niṣparāmarśa)10 |
Moreover (atha ca), (when) this very (yasmin asmin) principle (tattve) of Supreme Vibration (spanda), whose essence is (sāre) Sphurattā --i.e. the flashing and vibrating Śakti or divine Power of Śiva-- (sphurattā), becomes manifest (sphurati) (because it is) pursued (pariśīlye) by an attentive (sa-avadhāna), noble-minded (mahā-anubhāva) (person) endowed with (proper) teaching (sa-upadeśa), (then) even though (api) (all) this (idam), viz. "pain (duḥkha), pleasure (sukha), object (grāhya), subject (grāhaka), absence (abhāva) of that --i.e. of pain, pleasure, object and subject-- (tad), etc. (ādikam)", takes place (sat), (it means) nothing (na kiñcid eva) (to him), since (he considers) all as the quintessence of the delight of this (principle of Supreme Vibration or Spanda) (sarvasya etad-camatkāra-ekasāratvāt)11 . According to what has been taught (iti upadiṣṭam), this (principle of Supreme Vibration) (etad) is (asti) that (which has just been explained) (tad) indeed (eva)|
The great (mahā) Guru --lit. "Guru-s", keep in mind that what has been specified in note 2 is valid here too-- (guravaḥ) (mentioned) that (yad) (too):
"That (saḥ) (is) the path (mārgaḥ) of Śaṅkara --i.e. Śiva-- (śāṅkaraḥ) in which (yatra) even (api... api) pains (duḥkhāni) are pleasant (sukhāyante), poison (viṣam) is turned into nectar (amṛtāyate), and (ca) Saṁsāra or Transmigration --i.e. bondage-- (saṁsāraḥ) becomes a means of Liberation (mokṣāyate... iti)"||
The path (mārgaḥ) of Śaṅkara --i.e. Śiva-- (śāṅkaraḥ) (is) expansion (prasaraḥ) whose form (rūpaḥ) is the Highest (parā) Power (śakti). (And as a result, this expansion is also) the cause or means (hetuḥ) to the attainment (prāpti) of the essential nature (sva-bhāva) of the Śaṅkara's Self (śaṅkara-ātma)||5||
1 Indriya-s are formed from Jñānendriya-s (Powers of perception) and Karmendriya-s (Powers of action). See Tattvic Chart for more information.
2 Although Utpaladeva is one person, the entire phrase is in plural number because "pādāḥ" is in plural. The term "pādāḥ" (added to "śrīmadutpaladeva") comes from "pāda" (foot). The former is sometimes added to proper names or titles in token of respect. In this case, it could be translated as "the venerable". However, because "śrīmat" (holy, venerable, beautiful, etc.) is also included, I decided to interpret the whole thing (śrīmadutpaladevapādāḥ) as: "the most venerable Utpaladeva" in order to avoid redundance (got it?). If "pādāḥ" would not be there, but merely "śrīmadutpaladevaḥ" in singular, the entire phrase would also be in singular. Note that I am not including the Utpaladeva's stanza, obviously:
"Yadāha... Iti rahasyatattvavidasmatparameṣṭhī śrīmadutpaladevaḥ śrīmadīśvarapratyabhijñāyām" or "(This is) what (yad) the venerable (śrīmat) Utpaladeva (utpaladevaḥ), our (asmad) great grand Guru (parameṣṭhī), who knows (vit) the secret (rahasya) Principle (tattva), said (āha) in (his) beautiful and holy (śrīmat) Īśvarapratyabhijñā (īśvara-pratyabhijñāyām)". The word "iti" was not translated here because it indicates the quotation marks of the Utpaladeva's stanza appearing in the form of suspension points in this case. So, "iti" is included within the translation of the stanza, understood? Finally, both "āhuḥ" and "āha" are conjugations in Reduplicative Perfect Tense (a type of past tense) derived from the root "ah" (to say, speak). This root is "defective", i.e. it only conjugates in specific persons and tenses. Most roots conjugate in all persons, tenses, moods, etc., as you surely know.
3 Advaitavedānta postulate the existence of Brahma as the Absolute Reality. Anyway, since this Brahma is merely Knowledge or Prakāśa (Light), the question about how this universe came into manifestation just raises. In order to answer that question, Advaitavedānta introduces the concept of Māyā as the power manifesting, maintaining and dissolving the universe. Still, the presence of Māyā in turn introduces a new problem: Is She Brahma or not? If She is Brahma, then Brahma is not mere Prakāśa or Light but it would also contain Vimarśa or Power, and Power implies "activity". Thus, Brahma would not be the underlying Reality devoid of all types of activity as postulated by Advaitavedānta. On the other hand, if Māyā is not Brahma, consequently there would be two Realities: Brahma and Māyā. Obviously, if this is true, non-dualism in Advaitavedānta (non-dualistic Vedānta) would be destroyed.
To have its problem resolved, Advaitavedānta specifies that Māyā is neither within nor without Brahma, but it is unreal as well as the universe manifested by Her. This theory just does not hold good according to the Trika system. Trika resolves the problem of Brahma and Māyā by declaring that the Absolute Reality contains both Prakāśa (Light or Knowledge) and Vimarśa (Power). Therefore, it is needless to introduce the principle of Māyā to explain the manifestation, etc. of the universe as the Supreme Self is the One who knows and does everything everywhere, and all that is known and done by Him is completely real while lasting. The concept of "complete" unreality in respect of the world is not necessary either. No doubt there is Māyā in Trika as well, but in the form of a tattva or category (the sixth one) of the universal manifestation --See Tattvic Chart for more information--. And this Trika's Māyā is real as the divine Power or Spanda is Her core. OK, enough of these subtleties.
5 Therefore, according to Kṣemarāja, the first line of the Bhartṛhari's stanza should be understood as follows:
"Yadādau ca tasyaiva satyatā yadante ca tasyaiva satyatā yanmadhye ca tasyaiva satyatā" or "Reality (satyatā... satyatā... satyatā) (does) only (eva... eva... eva) belong to That (tasya... tasya... tasya) which (yad... yad... yad) (exists) in the beginning (ādau), in the end (ante) and (ca... ca... ca) in the middle (madhye)".
7 Kṣemarāja is referring to the Cārvāka-s. Cārvāka is the materialistic philosophy of India. The central teaching here is that matter is the only reality. Thus, the Self is identified with the physical body according to this school. This system is also known as Lokāyata [See First Steps (2) for more information].
11 I had to put everything together and add a few words to give some structure to the phrase because the way to write in Sanskrit is not like that of English. Literally: "sarvasyaitaccamatkāraikasāratvāt..." - "of everything (sarvasya), since it is the quintessence (ekasāratvāt) of the delight (camatkāra) of this --i.e. of Spanda-- (etad)". By giving some structure now: "since everything is the quintessence (sarvasya... ekasāratvāt) of the delight (camatkāra) of this (Spanda) (etad)". Well, hopefully you understood. Therefore, remember this: as the Sanskrit structure cannot be "always" translated word for word into English, now and then I have to arrange the phrases a little bit or you will not understand their meanings.
Этот документ был составлен Габриэлем Pradīpaka, одним из двух основателей этого сайта, духовным гуру, экспертом в санскрите и философии Трика.
Для получения дополнительной информации о санскрите, йоге и философии, или если вы просто хотите оставить комментарий, задать вопрос или нашли ошибку, напишите нам: Это наша электронная почта.
|Вернуться I. 1-2||Продолжить чтение I. 6-10|