Notes on Kashmir Shaivism

1) The Background

1.1 I run the risk of making a cartoon of Kashmir Shaivism here

because of brevity, but hopefully I can bring out the salient issues,
relevant to the account of creation in ‘Stalking the Strange Serpent’.
Kashmir Shaivism was really a loose amalgamation of doctrines from
different but allied ‘schools’ – the Kula and Krama lineages that
accepted the Shaiva Agamas as source texts, and the later schools of
Pratybhijna and Spanda. There was a great synthesis known as Trika
in which a sage called Abhinavagupta was the main inspiration.
‘Trika’ means ‘three’ and is a reference to the triadic relationships that
occur all over the place in the philosophical expositions. Now
terminology can be a nightmare as the philosophers of ancient
Kashmir (and India generally) loved to make up more and more terms
to cover yet subtler ‘aspects’ of reality. In the parallel ‘schools’ a lot of
these became regarded as equivalent, but not without controversy. At
the risk of huge over-simplification, we can outline three ‘Shastras’
(teachings):

Agama Shastra –
main text = Shiva Sutras,
main concept = Consciousness as Energy, Shiva-Shakti

Pratybhijna Shastra
main text = Pratybhjina –Sutras (the Pratyabhijnahrdayam is a digest)
main concept = Consciousness as Self- Recognition, Prakasha-
Vimarsha

Spanda Shastra
main text = Spanda-Karikas
main concept = Consciousness as Vibration, Spanda

1.2 Now the foundational principle in each of these strands was

usually referred to as ‘Shiva’ – hence Shaivism. But since each
Shastra had slightly different connotations for ‘Shiva’, when it came to
the Trika synthesis the term ‘Paramashiva’ was needed to overcome
the sectarian differences between each strand. Within the core texts
themselves the term ‘Paramashiva’ is hardly, if ever, used. I have in
front of me all three of the texts listed above, and I cannot find even
one use of ‘Paramashiva’ in the sutras. Nonetheless, in the Trika
synthesis the term came to stand for the root foundational principle
so as to be able to incorporate the other strands.

1.3 Now the root foundational principle, howsoever termed in the

Shastras, was always conceived as a primary Unity that nonetheless
contained an integral two-ness or duality. Like the two inseparable
sides of one coin. So the discussion always had a ‘triadic’ feel as it
talked of the Unity and its two ‘aspects’. Now there are very good
reasons as to why any monistic metaphysical system must display this
‘triadic’ quality: If all is only One then we get no manifestation, for this
requires some kind of interplay. We need no more than two players (a
binary code) to generate manifestation. So the foundation is a One-
containing-two.

2) Consciousness/Awareness

2.1 The foundational principle, Paramashiva, needs to display this

One-containing-two-ness. When explaining the nature of
Paramashiva, it is described variously as ‘Cit’ or ‘Caitanya’ or
‘Parasamvit’, which are translated as Consciousness or Awareness.
Now these two English terms are excellent candidates for
Paramashiva, as they seem to contain just the right quality:
Consciousness or Awareness seems to be ‘one’ and yet it contains a
polarisation, a relational ‘conscious of…’or ‘aware of…’.

Because of this common polarisation, the terms ‘Consciousness’ and

‘Awareness’ can often be confused or used interchangeably.
Inextricably bound up with this issue is the self-reflective aspect of
Consciousness/Awareness which gives rise to an ‘I’ sense - a feeling ‘I
am’. There is no ‘right’ use of these terms here; we just have to specify
their use.

2.2 Now Consciousness/Awareness, in general, can exhibit an ‘I’

sense or not. A lot of experimentation has been done by animal
psychologists to determine the level of self-awareness in many species.
Most species of animal, while clearly conscious, do not seem display
any self-awareness. One of the criteria used was whether the animals
displayed signs of recognising themselves in a mirror – apparently only
chimpanzees and dolphins pass this test. Recognition is a crucial
aspect of Consciousness/Awareness when it comes to the ‘I’ sense.

2.3 Now in the ‘Strange Serpent’ I use the term ‘Awareness’ as the
primary term, the quality that all sentient creatures display; and
‘Consciousness’ as the self-reflective aspect which gives rise to the ‘I’-
sense. I use them that way for no other reason than that is how they
are used in a lot of the Advaita discussions, particularly in
Nisargadatta’s famous dialogues - “I am That”. I know, though, that
elsewhere they are used the other way round. The majority of English
commentaries on Shaivism do in fact have it the other way. A better
use than either of these, really, which gels nicely with the Trika
synthesis, would be as follows:
Let ‘Consciousness’ refer to the whole – Paramashiva – One-
containing-two.
Let Awareness be that aspect of Consciousness which illumines that
which it is aware of.
Let Self-Awareness be that reflective aspect of Consciousness that
turns back on itself to create the ‘I’ sense – ‘I AM’

3) Synthesis of Agama and Pratybhijna Shastras

3.1 Now, using the above terminology, the Pratybhijna school has the
following triad:

It refers to Awareness - the illuminating aspect of Consciousness as

‘Prakasha’.
It refers to the ability of Consciousness to Recognise itself i.e. the
aspect of Self-Awareness, as ‘Vimarsha’ – the ‘I’ sense of
Consciousness.
The whole, Consciousness, contains both aspects and is referred to as
‘Prakashavimarshamaya’

3.2 The Agama Shastra has a triad based around Consciousness as

energy:

The ‘potential’ aspect of the energy of Consciousness is ‘Shiva’.

The ‘kinetic’ aspect of the same is ‘Shakti’.
The whole, Consciousness, is ‘Paramashiva’ who is ‘Shiva-Shakti’.

3.3 So the synthesis lines up the triads:

Paramashiva = Prakashavimarshamaya = Consciousness

Shiva = Prakasha = Awareness
Shakti = Vimarsha = ‘I’ sense of Consciousness

4) Synthesis of Spanda Shastra

This, to me, is a profound part of the synthesis. The foundational

principle here is Spanda which is Consciousness as Vibration.
Now a vibration vibrates or oscillates between two poles. So the triad
here is Spanda and its two poles of oscillation. The synthesis here is
obvious: Paramashiva is Spanda and Shiva-Shakti are the poles of its
oscillation. This has a tremendously alive feel..
5) Beginnings of Manifestation

5.1 So Kashmir Shaivism arrives at a Trika synthesis which has as its

foundation the ‘Paramashiva who is Shiva-Shakti’ triad – Paramashiva
and the first two Tattvas. Now from this foundation, there is an
expansion into pure, formless Suddhadhva manifestation. This
obviously happens through the Shakti tattva, being the ‘kinetic’, Self-
Aware aspect of Consciousness – ‘I AM’.

5.2 Now the nature of Shakti = Vimarsha is its reflective quality. This
means that what happens in the manifestation through the expansion
of Shakti is a reflection of what is happening in the source which is
Paramashiva. So just as Paramashiva exhibits the integral duality of
Shiva-Shakti, so Shakti herself starts to exhibit an integral duality:
‘I AM’ expands into ‘I am That’. This is the (third) Sadashiva Tattva,
and it is the first manifestation. What is That? It is simply Shakti =
Vimarsha reflecting on itself as the reflecting principle, regarding itself
as an aspect of Paramashiva that is different to (but not separate
from) Shiva.

5.3 The integral duality that Shakti = Vimarsha now herself exhibits is
referred in the texts as the duality of ‘ahamvimarsha’ and
‘idamvimarsha’ – ‘I/vimarsha’ and ‘That/vimarsha’. So we now have
another triad: Vimarsha and its two aspects. This is the beginning of a
beautiful, recursive fractal pattern that leads, ultimately, to the
creation of all the universes.

5.4 Now we have an interesting situation: when a reflecting principle

reflects on itself, is it reflecting or is it being reflected? Well, both – but
can there be a real difference between these ‘two’? As we follow the
oscillation of Spanda between the two the focus shifts to the opposite
pole. This represents a further development in manifestation: ‘I am
That’ becomes ‘That am I’. This latter is the next (fourth) Isvara
Tattva. This is a further reflection: Vimarsha reflecting on the
Sadashiva Tattva to manifest the Isvara Tattva.

5.5 There is only one more step to make to complete the possibilities
here. When Shakti=Vimarsha rested in itself as ‘I AM’ it considered
neither of its aspects of ‘ahamvimarsha’ and ‘idamvimarsha’. In the
Sadashiva Tattva it reflected on its ‘ahamvimarsha’ – I. The pulsation
of Spanda led the oscillation to the opposite aspect, ‘idamvimarsha’ -
That, reflected on in Isvara Tattva. Reflecting again on the previous
two tattvas leads to an equal reflection as both aspects – ‘I am That’ –
the fifth Suddhavidya Tattva.

Neither, one, then the other, then both.

6) The Dual Play in Unity – A thought experiment

6.1 This can start to get quite abstract, so here is a nice little thought
experiment/exercise to act as a micro-model of the kind of situation
envisaged.

Let your forefinger touch your thumb to form a closed loop. Now close
your eyes and focus on the point of contact between forefinger and
thumb. Let the awareness of that point of touch fill your
consciousness, so that you can actually forget the forefinger and
thumb, and let there only be that point of Touching. Take your time.

Point of Touching = I AM= Shakti = Vimarsha

Now introduce a little ‘spanda’ into the situation – let there be a little
wobble or movement between the finger and thumb pads. This will
stimulate the feeling that there are two elements involved in the
Touching. Awareness of these two elements can expand to feel the
presence of forefinger and thumb. Now in this Touching - which is
doing the Touching and which is Touched?

6.2 Now depending on whether you focus consciousness on the

forefinger or on the thumb, it is possible to have the experience of
being (identifying with) either: I am the forefinger touching the thumb,
which is ‘That’; or: I am the thumb touching the forefinger, which is
‘That’; or: I am both forefinger and thumb touching (Suddhavidya
Tattva); or: I am neither the forefinger nor the thumb, but the
consciousness of, prior to, either – for me there is no dual forefinger
and thumb, only one loop (Shakti Tattva). It should be clear that the
difference in focus of consciousness can represent each of the Tattvas
from 2 to 5 - Shakti to Suddhavidya.

6.3 Now this tiny model only interprets the formal structure of these
tattvas. In reality each contemplation is accompanied by an
experience of all the possible modalities of Shakti – Bliss, Freedom,
Knowledge, Power of Action, respectively, as absolute, limitless and
formless qualities of Paramashiva. This is the main activity of
Paramashiva – absolute Consciousness in contemplation of Its own
nature via its two aspects. This is the original, pure, Suddhadhva
Paradise to which we long to return. The ‘looping’ of Reality’s eternal,
timeless contemplation of Itself – discovering itself ever-anew – was, of
course, imaged by me as a ‘tail-eating serpent’; in terms of the Tattvas
2-5 it would appear as:
 I THAT

THAT I

The arrow represents ‘awareness’ and each turn of the circle reveals
each of the absolute qualities – Bliss, Freedom etc.

6.4 Now an incidental spin-off from this main activity (albeit in some
sense natural - like smoke rising as a by-product of a fire) is that
further iterations of the Shakti reflecting principle should lead to a
complete separation of ‘I’ and ‘That’ – the dual-unity is apparently
shattered. So after Tattva 5 we enter a borderline territory, where
Tattva 6, Maya and her Kanchukas (Tattvas 7-11), operates on the
unity of ‘I am That’ to create full separation and limitation of the
absolute qualities.

7) From Duality to Separation

7.1 This separation and limitation is now fully a creation – it is the

beginning of time, space and forms and individualised consciousness.
The ‘trika’ quality is not so obvious here as, rather illogically, Kashmir
Shaivism, treats each Kanchuka as a distinct tattva – even though the
5 qualities they limit were not so treated (they were, instead, regarded
as modalities of the structural tattvas 1-5). To see the underlying
triadic form, it is best to treat Maya and her Kanchukas as one
conglomerate tattva (just call it Maya) with its two aspects: the
separate, individualised ‘I’ consciousness which is the Purusha Tattva
(tattva 12) which is conscious of, or ‘witnesses’ the Prakriti Tattva
(tattva 13) which is the world of separate objects and forms. So the
triad is Maya who is Purusha-Prakriti. Purusha is the ‘I’
consciousness of Maya, while Prakriti is all objects and form – the
‘That’ aspect of Maya, witnessed by Purusha.

7.2 What happens to consciousness/awareness as a result of this

separation? The axis of separation needs close attention. What we
normally and uncritically think of as ‘consciousness’ – largely the
mind and the senses –are actually part of Prakriti. Only the pure
‘witnessing’ function, the bare ‘I’ or subject, constitutes Purusha.
The other aspects of mind – intellect, ego-sense, memory (Buddhi,
ahamkara, manas) etc are psychic instruments, objects - which only
function when illumined by Purusha – and are that part of Prakriti
which reflect the awareness of Purusha. One instrument in particular
– the ego-sense (ahamkara) – has the function of ‘misappropriating’
the awareness of Purusha to create an objective ‘I’ we call ‘me’. This
‘me’ is an object amongst other objects in Prakriti. It could be
regarded, hopefully without confusion, as the ‘I’ sense of Prakriti - this
formulation is in accordance with the logic of unfolding self-awareness
– the recursive principle that generates all manifestation.
[It is here that the problem of solipsism creeps in, as the objective
‘world’ of Prakriti also includes other apparently conscious subjects –
other ‘me’s’ , whose status is not satisfactorily dealt with in Kashmir
Shaivism. They appear to have, as projections of Purusha, a merely
dream-like status, not on a par with ‘I’ considered as Purusha. But
the ‘Strange Serpent’ cures this problem with the understanding of
‘nested purushas’.

7.3 A brief schema of the process of Manifestation/Creation (up to

separation), according to Kashmir Shaivism and showing the ‘trika’
form, could then look like this:

Tattva Definition Modality

Paramashiva Absolute Consciousness Reality/Truth/Sat

┐
┐┐┐┐┐

Shiva-Shakti (I AM) Awareness/Self Awareness Bliss-

Awareness/Cit/Ananda

┐
┐┐┐┐┐

(I am That) Sadashiva Awareness of Shakti Freedom/Will/Svatantrya/Iccha

┐
┐┐┐┐┐

(That am I) Ishvara Awareness of Sadashiva Knowledge/Jnana

┐
┐┐┐┐┐

(I am That) Suddhavidya Awareness of Ishvara Action/Kriya

Maya Maya Separation Limitation of the above

┐┐┐
Kanchukas

Purusha (‘I’) – Prakriti (‘world’) Awareness of objects/forms Creation