Sambodhi 2002 Vol 25

SR No.: 520775
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2002
Total Pages: 234
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 5 MB

Page 17

P. R. VORA
SAMBODHI Abhinava110 and, following in his foot steps, Mammata111, have used several terms and phrases which are technical to the Kasmir saivism. e.g.
(1) parimita pramātā 112; (2) na parimitam sādhāranyam, api tu vitatam 113; (3) bhuñjānasyādbhutabhoga-spandāvistasya manah karanam camatkārah 114; (4) Sphurann astu santāna-vrtteņ115 etc.
As I have already said these and many other traces of Kashmir Saiva philosophy are already pointed out by Dr. K. C. Pandey.
It is worth noting that this śaiva influence on the great Acharya's interpretation was well known to Bhatta Gopāl, the learned author of the Sāhityacudāmaņi a commentary on the Kavya Prakāśa. At least five hundred years from now Bhatta Gopāla interpreted Abhinava's doctrine, as given in the Kavya Prakāśa, in the light of Kashmir Saivism. He even quotes three verses116 from the Spanda Kārikās to corroborate his explanation of the terms parimita and aparimita pramātā.
Who is an aparimita pramātā ? The individual is a mere manifestation of the Absolute and as such he is related to temporal and spatial limitations; he is therefore called a parimita pramātā, as a cogniser with utilitarian out-look. But when he is witnessing a drama (nātya) the practical, utilitarian approach is absent, therefore he is freed from the temporal and spatial limitations. 117 He can, therefore, witness the drama and cognise the Vibhāvas etc. and the sthāyi in a universalised way, as Abhinava remarks : na parimitam sādhāranyam api tu vitatam/118 (i. e. aparimitamor universalised). This is what they call 'Sādhāraṇīkaraņa.
The absence of Savikalpa and nirvikalpa pratyaksa pramāna119 also can be more suitably explained on the basis of Kashmir Saivism. Vikalpa is determinancy which has reference to the object related to temporal and spatial limitations as distinct from the subject. 120 But since the Absolute of Saivism, unlike the Brahman of Vedānta, is unity in multiplicity, we can account for this alaukila condition of Rasa in so far as it is neither perceived by Savikalpa nor by nirvikalpa pramāņa, for Sadāśiva too is self-conscious yet nirvikalpa121.
The word sphuran suggests sphurattā122 or sattā a power of the Absolute also called Kriyā, which appears in the individual in a limited way as Sattva.
The word bhunjāna is explained as suggesting a person who 'attains to the state of rest on self, when he sees a good drama presented on the stage'. 123 Dr. Pandey points out that 'the impediment in the form of object is totally absent 124 in the case of the aesthetic experience, whereas in the case of the experience of flavour this impediment is present.