-6-
(This part, which ‘digests’ pp.675 to 686 of
the original, is entitled: “The title: ‘Ananda-lahari’ – advaitam and ShAktam”.
The matter was rather terse to me. But the Paramacharya himself concludes by
saying: “What is finally to be
understood as the
essence is the following: ….” I use this summary of his own and mostly translate it as closely as I can. VK)
The shAkta philosophy (ShAktam) talks of
‘Shivam’ in place
of the actionless substratum ‘Brahman’. Even if it is actionless, it is Cit, knowledge,
says advaita. In place
of this Cit, ShAktam talks of Cit-Shakti or simply, Shakti. The Brahman of advaita peacefully
rests in itself. In ShAktam, on the other hand, the peaceful Shivam has the
Shakti, power or energy, that manifests as knowledge potential (Cit-Shakti) and
this manifestation is its play as the
multiplicity of the universe. In advaita there is no second. What appears as the universe is only an
appearance created by mAyA. MAyA has no
relationship with Brahman. What it is, and how it came – all this is
inexplainable. That research is not necessary. What is
needed is how to get out of it and obtain the
personal realisation of the basic Brahman behind. And
hence the path of jnAna. In
ShAktam, it is claimed that the play of duality starts by the Will of Shivam
coupled with Shakti. Even here there is a role of mAyA-Shakti. But we shall
dwell on it later.
It is Brahman that appears as jIva, through
the effect of mAyA. If one follows the path of jnAna and transcends mAyA, then
jIva realises itself as Brahman, says advaita. In ShAktam also it says that the
jIva and Shivam are basically the same and actually become the same in the
state of moksha; particularly in the Shri-vidyA scriptures it is specifically
accepted so. Dvaitam, VishishhTAdvaitam, SiddhAnta-shaivam
(Shaiva-siddhantam), ShrIkaNTa-shaivam (ShivAdvaitam), Kashmiri Saivism – in
this order, the philosophies start from a concept totally distinct from
advaita, gradually nearing and ultimately becoming very near to advaita.
And
in ShrIvidyA the identity of jiva with Brahman is clearly stipulated. The two
philosophies differ only in the concept of creation. In advaita, duality is
said to be only an imagination and so is to be totally negated. In shAkta philosophies, duality is said to be created by
parA-Shakti, the energy of Brahman. It is also the parA-Shakti that grants the
moksha, which is the identity of Brahman and jIva in eternal peaceful bliss.
This bliss is called shivAnandam and/or shAntAnandam in the shaivite schools, and cidAnandam
in the shAkta schools.
There is no difference in the concept of moksha as
the realisation of the one-ness of jIva and Brahman, between advaita schools
and the Shri-vidyA tantra of the shAkta schools. The philosophy of advaita
takes creation as a ‘vivarta’ (a false
appearance, manifestation,
of reality) whereas the Shri-vidyA school takes it as ‘AbhAsa’ (an effulgence of a ‘reflection’). That the
sun appears as a reflection in water is ‘AbhAsa’.
In the same way the universal Cit-Shakti reflects itself with a limitation and
becomes the jIva as well as the universe -- this is the shAkta concept of
creation. But without the original object called the Sun there could be no
reflection. So in basics it comes back to the advaita concept. But the shAkta holds that to the extent there is an object with its
reflection, there is a phenomenal reality for jIva and the universe. It does
not hold that it is ‘mithyA’ which is the advaitin’s contention.
It is the latter part of Soundaryalahari
that dwells on the
beauty (saundaryam) of ambaal’s form.The former part dwells on Her Shakti. It
is called Ananda-lahari. The identity between Shakti and Cit is referred to in
the word ‘cidAnandalaharI’ in verse no.8 of
Anandalahari. “bhajanti tvAm dhanyAH katicana cidAnanda-laharIm”, meaning,
‘Only the most fortunate few (recognize you and) worship you as the flood of knowledge-bliss (cidAnanda)’.
Note here that while for
every reader of the
Soundaryalahari portion the whole beauty of Mother Goddess is fully experiential,
in the Anandalahari portion the people
who can experience the bliss of the Shakti-lahari, that is, the
cidAnanda-lahari, are only the few fortunate (katicana
dhanyAH) !
The close correlation between advaita and
the various shAkta schools, particularly the Shri-vidyA tantra school, has been used by
our Acharya who is aware that many cannot follow the abstract path of jnAna.
And that is why perhaps he
chalks out a path whereby one starts from the ‘leela’ of creation
of duality and goes forward along the path of Shri-vidyA and finally ends up in
advaita itself. In accordance with this, even when he composed many stotras on
Shiva and VishNu, he never goes deep into the shivAgama or vaishNava-Agama
nuances but dwells mainly on the bhakti and consequent emotions only. On the other hand when he worked on
Soundarya-lahari, the first part, Anandalahari, – even though it is said that
he only ‘brought’ it (from
In fact, Shri-vidyA is the connecting cord
between advaita and all that is dvaita. It unifies the shAntam-Shivam-advaitam
with Shakti, the creator of duality, and therefore, of the universe. In LalitA-sahasranAma also, the last name is lalitAmbikA and the last but one is shiva-shakty-aikya-rUpiNI. And this takes us to the
very beginning sloka of Soundarya-lahari !
-7-
Shivas-ShaktyA
yukto yadi bhavati shaktaH prabhavitum
na
ced-evam devo na khalu kushalaH spanditum-api /
atas-tvAm-ArAdhyAm hari-hara-virinchAdibhir-api
praNantum
stotum vA katham-akRtapuNyaH prabhavati // 1 //
(The Paramacharya stays on
this sloka
from p.687 to p.806
in the original.
So we are likely to have
several sections,
upto DPDS – 17, on this.
VK)
ShaktyA yuktaH bhavati yadi – Only if
yoked with shakti
ShivaH devaH – (even) Lord shiva
shaktaH – has the ability
prabhavitum – to create the world;
evam na cet -- if not so (yoked),
kushalaH na –
(He) is not capable
spanditum api –
even to make a move.
khalu –
Isn’t it so?
ataH –
Therefore,
katham prabhavati
– how is it possible
akRta-puNyaH – (for) one who has not accrued any (spiritual) merits
praNantum – to do
prostrations to
stotum vA
-- >or to praise (by hymns)
tvAm – You
hari-hara-virinchAdibhir-api ArAdhyAm
–
who are
worshipped even by Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma and the like?
(To get the total meaning, please read the
English portions above in the order in which they are presented above. The
Paramacharya does the same thing, but presents it in the order in which it will
make sense in the Tamil language. He usually does not give the total meaning in
one go. VK)
Here is embedded the most important ShAkta
doctrine that the parAshakti is higher than the Triad of Brahma, Vishnu and
Shiva. It is only by Her will and action that even the actionless nirguNa
Shivam gets into action through the Triad and the cosmic process of presentation of
Duality starts. “Everything in the universe moves because of You, Oh parAshakti; when that is so, even the prostration
to you or praise of you by a devotee does not happen by itself”. And then by
implication our Acharya brings out the point that when ambaal grants the power
to somebody of praising Her, She does not give it to all and sundry but only to
those who have spiritual merits.
And again then, by one more implication,
one can take it to mean that the one who is doing the stotra now, namely, the
Acharya himself, must, ipso facto, be of great spiritual merit. Is that what he means? Is he so devoid of
humility that he praises himself by implication? No. Later in sloka 57 he is
going to say: ‘snapaya kRpayA mAm-api’ ( that is, pour your glance of compassion, even on poor me) and again in sloka 84,
‘mamApi shirasi dayayA dehi caraNau’ (even on my head please place your
feet). So the
only way we should interpret the present sloka is: “You can move even the
immutable Shivam into action. It is You therefore who have given even me, who
does not have any spiritual merit, the capability that you usually grant only
to the meritorious ! It is You who have moved my
senses of speech into the action of hymnising You !”
Prostration is by the body (kAyam). Praising through a hymn is by speech (vAk). By implication the mind (manas) is also
mentioned. Thus in the very first sloka the dedication to Her
by manas, vAk and kAyam
has been done. And naturally, the completeion of this dedication in the form of ‘Atma-samarpaNam’ – dedication of one’s self in fullness
– comes in the very last sloka (#100).
There is a parallel observation in the very
first sloka of Viveka-chUDAmaNi. “muktir-no-shata-koTi-janma-sukRtaiH puNyair-vinA labhyate”, meaning, ‘Unless one has
earned spiritual merit in 100 crores of births, one cannot go the jnAna mArga and obtain moksha’. But note: our Acharya does not say
explicitly, in this major work of bhakti, that only by spiritual merit you can
go along the path of Bhakti or jnAna or for that matter any noble path.
Whereas, in the Viveka chUDAmaNi, which is a work on the path of jnAna, -- mistakenly appropriated by people who
think that that is the way to avoid the traditional worship of deities !--
right in the 3rd sloka, he says that ‘Seeking a proper guru and
starting on the path of jnAna occurs only by the Grace of God’ – “deivAnugraha-hetukam”!
The bottom line of this sloka is that Shiva
earns His place and prestige only when He is united with Shakti. But the words
Shiva and Shakti have been placed in the sloka in that order, with Shiva first.
This indicates that the dependence is mutual; neither of them is to be lower in
hierarchy or glory. There is no higher
or lower between this original divine couple.
They have an equality, ‘samam’ in Sanskrit
and this is the origin for the word ‘samaya’
to get the meaning of
‘religion’ or ‘tradition’ in Hindu culture. In the ShAkta and Shaiva scriptures the word
‘samayAcAra’ is used to denote the path of
worship, that is done mentally through the noblest attitude of devotion arising
from the bottom of the heart. The reason for the word ‘samaya’
therein is that there are five categories in which Shiva and Shakti are
considered ‘equal’ in that regimen of worship.
One: In their names. Shiva
and ShivA; hamsa and hamsI; bhairava and bhairavI; even, samaya and samayA.
Two: In their forms: KAmeshwara and
KAmeshwari are both maroon in colour, each has four hands, three eyes, the
half-moon adorning their heads, the same four weapons – bow, arrow, pAsha (noose) and ankusha
(spear) -- in the four hands.
Three: In their location: the same
Four:
In their function: It is the same
five-fold function – called pancha-kRtya –
namely, Creation, Protection, Dissolution, tirodhAna
or mAyA, Grace or anugraha leading to moksha.
Five:
In their
benediction to the world.
-8-
But, though the work begins with the name
of Shiva, the ShAkta school will still find in the very name of Shiva itself,
the dominance of the feminine Shakti ! In the very
word ‘Shiva’ there is the vowel ‘i’ along with the consonant ‘sh’. The vowels
‘I’ (as in ‘feel’) and ‘i’
(as in ‘fit’) are themselves names of ambaal. All consonants are
letters pertaining to Shiva and all vowels pertain to Shakti. This is a general
rule. In addition the letters ‘I’ and ‘i’ are supposed to be the very forms of
ambaal. Just as the actionless immutable brahman has a symbolic praNava or ‘
There is Vedic authority for this. Also in the
ShrI sUkta the form of ambaal as Lakshmi who resides in the heart-lotus is
mentioned as manifesting in the vowel ‘I’ and the surrender is made to that
manifestation. Note that one of the many
sanctities of the word ‘ShrI’ is derived from this.
Thus the first word of
of the first sloka, though it begins with Shiva is actually a
propitiation to the feminine Shakti. For, from the word ‘Shiva’ if we
remove the vowel ‘i’
and bring the consonant ‘sh’ to its first position ‘sha’, the
word becomes ‘shava’ meaning ‘a dead body’ ! Thus the word ‘shiva’ gets its
life from the vowel ‘i’ , which is the seed letter for
Shakti. Also note that the popular word for ‘saguNa-brahman’
in Vedanta is ‘Ishwara’, which begins with
the sound ‘I’. This is quite in accordance with its role as the dynamic active
Lord who takes care of the creation and propels the entire universe.
(For those who
know the Tamil language
here
are two more interesting observations: VK)
In Tamil the consonants and vowels are
known as ‘body-letters’ (mey-ezhuttu) and
‘life-letters’ (uyir-ezhuttu) respectively . So in the praNava of Shiva-Shakti, the Lord
corresponds to the ‘body-letter’ and the Goddess corresponds to the
‘life-letter’. And this coordinates with the thought that Shiva is the body and
Shakti is the soul.
Secondly, in Tamil parlance it is common to
say: ‘If you have the power (shakti) to do this, do it; otherwise stay quiet as
‘shiva’ (‘shivane-enRu iru’)
! This again coordinates with the thought that Shiva is the actionless
substratum and Shakti is the switch that switches everything into action!
Throughout his bhAshyas and all his minor works, our
Acharya is never tired of repeating: All worldly activities are mAyA; one
should aspire to realise and become the changeless and actionless nirguNa
brahman. Thus the immutable Shivam is the object of all his writing and
advice. What produces movement out of that brahman was
called mAyA by him and he spared no pains to paint that mAyA in uncomplimentary
colors and warn us strongly against getting into her clutches.
But the very same Acharya, now, in the
first sloka of Soundaryalahari, exclaims with great admiration of Shakti (that
very same mAyA): Oh, Goddess, without you even Shiva cannot move!
How can the same person talk in two contradictory ways like
this? Which is true? If one of them is not true, can the Acharya tarnish his
name by speaking an untruth?
If you look at these things only by logic,
you will not get anywhere. The definition of Truth does not come by logic. Whatever will do good to whomsoever it is intended, that should be stated lovingly;
that is Truth (satyam). For those who can tread the path of jnAna, he
recommended retirement from the world.
For those who have yet to evolve to that stage of spiritual maturity, he
recommended the path of Bhakti and Karma; this will make them reach the
kArya-brahman through worldly actions of
work and worship. When one does not have an evolved attitude to a certain path,
it is counterproductive to advise him go that path. So it is not a question of
being logical; it is a question of seeing the psycho-logical (!) perspective.
The ancients called it ‘adhikAri-bheda’, that
is, difference in prerequisite qualifications.
Secondly, it is not just that he understood the psychology of
different types of seekers of spirituality and preached accordingly. It is more. Both the
advices he gave, though seemingly opposite, are ‘true’, each at a particular
stage of evolution. In the phenomenal world, creation and the universe and the
activator of all of them, namely, Ishwara, are all ‘real’ certainly. But when we
enquire into the root cause of all this, we find that the more basic Reality is
the Existent Self-in-itself that is actionless but through a miraculous magic
wand of mAya brings about all this
moving world.
Thus, when an Acharya or the scripture
compares two paths or two objects of worship and speaks of one as the better or
greater of the two, it does not always mean that the other thing, that had a
lower estimate, is worthless. That which
our Acharya talked about as the thing to be discarded, namely, perception of duality, in all his
works – that very same thing he now praises to the sky, saying that this is
what you have to hold steadfastly in the bhakti-mArga. In one case it is duality, in the other case
it is ‘sva-svarUpa-anu-sandhAnaM’ (remaining
steadfast in one’s own Self).
-9-
There are two statements. One says: Even
Shiva, only
when united with you, Oh Shakti, is able to monitor the whole world. And the
other statement says: The Triad formed of Hari, Hara and BrahmA worship
Shakti. Both these statements are
contained in the 1st sloka. Are Shiva and Hara different? Are they not the two names of the same deity?
Why two names, and two actions? Is one the Prime Mover (corresponding to the word ‘spanditum’) and the other the one who worships (corresponding to the
word ‘ArAdhyAm’)? Are they not both the same?
Of course, advaita says all are the same
One. But the very origin of this stotra is not to stay at the level of advaita.
Everything may be the same One ultimately, but on the surface, they are seen to
be different. So Hara is one, Shiva is another. The Shiva who is said to be
‘moved’ is the Shivam
enunciated as the first principle
in the scriptures of the ShAkta and Shaiva schools. Hara is the ‘Rudra’
who is in charge of the function of dissolution among the five functions of the
Almighty. ‘Hara’ comes from the root verb ‘har’ to destroy, to eradicate, to
nullify.
(At this point, the Paramacharya begins to
explain at length
the technicalities about the ‘five cosmic functions’.
What follows is a much-condensed digest. –
VK)
It is the same paramAtmA who became the
three members of the Triad for the discharge of the three functions of
Creation, Sustenance and Dissolution. For all the three functions the power
source is ambaaL, the parA- Shakti. It is the explicitly expressed power of brahman. So we may call it para-brahma-Sakti. It is not only
the power for the Triad but it is the power source for the entire universe of
the animate and the inanimate. By calling it para-brahma-Shakti, let us not think it
is different from para-brahman itself. For, when the shakti of an entity is separated
from it, whatever it be, the very fact
of its being that entity is lost. To give a mundane example, a ten-horsepower
motor loses the very fact of motorship if the horsepower is taken away from
it. Therefore the para-brahma-shakti is
para-brahman itself. But the para-brahman can also remain in itself without
‘exhibiting’ or ‘exploiting’ or ‘manifesting’ its power. When the parabrahman so rests
in itself by itself as itself, it is known in ShAkta parlance as ‘Shivam’.
It is from that calm nirvikAra (changeless)
state of the First Principle that we have all come to this jIva state with a
mind and all its
runaway associates called the senses. Only when we merge in that ShAnti (Peace)
back again it may be said that we have reached our true state and transcended
the mAyA effect, the bondage of samsAra. That blissful state of moksha is so calm and peaceful because
it is now the same as being brahman, which naturally, is calm and actionless
without exhibiting its latent shakti. In our daily life we may observe that if somebody is totally
inactive, unresponsive and unaffected by anything, we refer to him jocularly
(at least in the Tamil world) as ‘para-brahmam’ !
Thus we are constrained to view Shiva as ‘para-brahman’ and ambaaL as ‘para-brahma-shakti’. Though neither of them exists
without the other, we may allow ourselves the privilege of speaking of them AS IF they are
different. Without para-brahma-shakti, the world would not be there. Now we have to consider two more cosmic
functions in addition to the three well-known to all of us. We were nothing but
the calm Shiva-svarUpa once; from that state somehow the real nature has been forgotten and
we have arrived at this ignorant state
of a jIva and we find ourselves in a revolving cycle of samsAra without the
knowledge of our true state. The power which has done this to us must also be
the same para-brahma-shakti. And by the example of several sages and saints
who, though thrown into the vortex of samsAra like ourselves, have obtained the
Enlightenment which took them back to that moksha state, beyond the mAyA
enchantment, it is clear that this function of gracing the spiritually merited
ones with moksha is also done by the para-brahma-shakti.
These two functions are called ‘tirodhAna’ and ‘anugraha’
respectively. The meaning of the root verb ‘tiras’ is to be
secretive or to hide. It is from the verb ‘tiras’ that the Tamil word
‘tirai’ (meaning, ‘curtain’) has come. It is mAyA that blinds the real thing
from us by a ‘tirai’ (curtain). Just as the three functions of creation,
sustenance and dissolution have been assigned (by the para-brahma-shakti)
to BrahmA, Vishnu and Rudra (Hara), so also Her assignee for the tirodhAna
function is called ‘Ishvara’ (also ‘maheshvara’) and that for the anugraha
function is called ‘SadAshiva’. The first three functions are subject to mAyA.
This mayic activity is in the control of Ishvara. Release from mAyA is granted
by SadAshiva.
These are the five cosmic functions.
Together they are called the five-fold activity (pancha-kRtyam)
of the Lord. This concept of pancha-kRtyam is also mentioned by the Shaiva
schools. The very word panca-kRtyam means and involves activity. And as we
know, no activity is possible without the kArya-brahman
(para-brahma-shakti) coming in. So we can
take it that the original source is parAshakti. She does it through the
five agents of Hers, namely the five forms of divinity
mentioned above. The shAnta (calm)
Shivam in its nascent state cannot act. When action takes place it takes place through parAshakti in
the form of the five-fold functions. Shivam by itself does not produce the
action. But it is in Shivam, the parabrahman, that the
first vibration for action sprouts, by its own Shakti. But even before the
action there must have been a will. This will is called the icchA-Shakti. On the basis of this
icchA -- the
first wish, as it may be called, and the Upanishad also says: ‘akAmayata’ –the kriyA-shakti
(the power of Action) begins the pancha-kRtya-leelA.
Thus, what was the parabrahman by itself in itself, willed to ‘become’. It is for this divine will
that the Upanishad uses the word ‘
-10-
The first evolute from brahman
is the ‘desire’ (kAmam) that the leela of the
manifestation of the universe should take place. So the ‘Kameshvara-Kameshvari’
evolute is the first couple. She (Kameshvari) might later be called
‘Lalitambaal’ or ‘Raja-Rajeshvari’ but He (Kameshvara) is never called
‘Laliteshvara’ or ‘Raja-Rajeshvara’. Again She is ‘Tripura-sundari’ – which
name is the origin for the titling of this composition as ‘Soundaryalahari’
, but there is no
‘Tripurasundara’ .
All
these latter names of Shakti have come because She is
the Creator, Monitor and Queen of this entire universe. That is why, as soon as
the lalitA-sahasranAma begins with the name ‘ShrI-mAta’, the next two names are ‘Shri-mahArAjnI’,
and ‘ShrImat-simhAsaneshvarI’. For these
two names there is no masculine counterpart of the name.
When
brahman ‘chose’ to become saguNa-brahman, the initial
spark was that ‘desire’ to become. So the Kameshvari-Kameshvara couple arose and is rightly named so.
The panchakRtya is for the world to arise and
go on from there. Thus the desire to produce multiplicity out of Herself is the kAmam. But along with this desire is also the
act (in the form of mAyA) of ‘separating’ the created multiplicity from the
reality of the Creator. Is this not then a cruel desire? No. The ultimate aim
is to bring back everything into the source. Then why do it at all? That is the
Cosmic Play. The very ‘desire’ to exhibit into a multiplicity is based on the
joy of bringing back everything together into the one and only source.
The para-brahma-Shakti
exhibits itself into five functions. Thus we have a five-fold aspect of
brahma-Shakti, created by itself from itself. So these five aspects are
represented in a peculiar form where Kameshvari is sitting on the left lap of
Kameshvara. The seat on which they are sitting facing the East, has four legs,
namely Brahma (Creation), Vishnu (Sustenance), Shiva (Dissolution), and Ishvara
(mAyic curtain); the seat itself is SadAshiva
(moksha-anugraha). These five are called the five ‘brahman-s’
. And this explains the name ‘panca-brahma-Asana-sthitA’ for the
Goddess.
There is also another name
‘panca-preta-Asana-Aseena’ meaning ‘She who is seated
on the seat of five ‘preta-s’ – preta, meaning ‘dead body’ --. The ‘brahman-s’
of the earlier name are here called ‘preta-s, because, if the five functions
had not been assigned to them, they are nothing, - like the motor without the
horsepower ! Even for Kameshvara, she is the life-giving Shakti and therefore
the name ‘Kameshvara-prANa-nADI’ which occurs both in Lalita-sahasranama and in
Trishati.
Now let us come to the word ‘spanditum’.
The hara-rudra has been assigned the duty of samhAra,
this is a ‘full duty’, so to say. On the other hand, the Shiva that is the
absolute brahman has just been ‘moved’ – moved from
within! This movement is the
‘spandanam’. The Shivam was like a calm, ripple-less, vibration-less peaceful
lake; and in that lake, the first ripple, the first vibration, the first movement took place
in the form of ‘kAmam’. The agent for this
was the cit-Shakti of brahman itself. She, the
cit-Shakti, not only became two, namely the willing power (icchA-Shakti), and the acting power (kriyA-Shakti), but made the icchA rise in brahman itself and this ‘making’ was itself Her
first act of creation!
Let us analyze this still further. Before someone ‘desires’ he should first recognize that he ‘is’.
When we are in deep sleep we don’t desire. So the event of ‘desire’ rising in brahman, must be preceded by the awareness of
self-existence. Brahman was just existing in itself,
but was it ‘aware’ that it was existing as such? The very event of cognition – by brahman, as
it were - that ‘I am brahman’
is itself an act of the ‘spandana’-effect
of Shakti.
This ‘experience’ of brahman of the act of
recognizing itself has
a technical name in Vedanta. It is ‘parAhantA’. ‘ahantA’
is the thought ‘I am’. When we wrongly think that our real ‘I’ is
body-mind-intellect, it is called ‘ahantA’ – the word derived from ‘aham’. When the supreme Absolute, which is the
origin of all the ‘aham’s in the world, thinks of itself as ‘I’ it is supreme ‘ahantA’, that is, para-ahantA. In devotional literature, it is customary to
call parAShakti the parAhantA form of Shivam
and thus arises the name
‘parAhantA-svarUpiNI’ for ambaal.
Indeed the ‘feeling
of I-ness’ that arises in the immutable brahman, is the spandana
caused by Shakti and that is what personifies her. Our Acharya brings this
effectively by using the word ‘Aho-purushhikA’
in Sloka No.7. The word means that She is the personification of the thought ‘I
am brahman’ of brahman !
The ShAkta school conception of Shiva and Shakti sometimes appears
to involve a duality there. Thus they contend that it is Shakti that caused the
movement. Acharya’s sloka also seems to say so. But the Acharya, while
appearing to be talking ‘dvaita’ he has built his advaita into it by using the
word spandanam. In what was Knowledge-Absolute, the thought of ‘I’ arose from
within. This internal pulsation is the spandanam. The word is very precisely
placed here. Because ‘spandanam’ by its very meaning negates
anything external. It is internally caused. Something like what
you say in modern science about the central nucleus bursting of its own accord.
But even the ShAkta schools cannot place
Shiva and Shakti as two separate things. Because Shiva and Shakti are like the
lamp and its light, the flower and its fragrance, honey and its sweetness, milk
and its whiteness, word and its meaning. Thus they cannot be separated from
each other. Even though the credit for the spandanam is given to Shakti, it is
not as if She and He are separate. This mutual
dependence of the two should be kept in our mind always.
Previous Next Back to Contents of
DPDS
Acknowledgement of Source Material:
Ra. Ganapthy’s ‘Deivathin Kural’ (Vol.6) in Tamil published
by Vanathi Publishers, 4th edn. 1998
Ó Copyright of English summary. V. Krishnamurthy
Aug.29, 2003
V. Krishnamurthy