________________
44 Vira-saivism
(CH. rapturous enthusiasm for the God Siva, who to Basava appeared as the Lord Kudala Sangama. These sayings referred to Siva as the supreme Lord, and to Basava himself as his servant or slave. They also contain here and there some biographical allusions which cannot be reconstructed satisfactorily without the help of other contemporary evidence. So far as can be judged from the sayings of Basava, it is not possible to give any definite account of Vīra-saiva thought as having been propounded or systematised by Basava. According to Basava-purāņa, the practice of lingadhāraṇa seems to have been in vogue even before Basava. Basava himself does not say anything about the doctrine of șaț-sthala, and these two are the indispensably necessary items by which Vīrasaivism can be sharply distinguished from the other forms of Saivism, apart from its philosophical peculiarity. On this also Basava does not seem to indicate any definite line of thought wh could be systematised without supplementing it or reconstructing it by the ideas of later Vīra-śaiva writers. Though the kernel of the Vīra-śaiva philosophy may be traced back to the early centuries of the Christian era, and though we find it current in works like Sūta-samhitā of the sixth century A.D., yet we do not know how the name Vīra-saiva came to be given to this type of thought.
In the work Siddhānta-śikhāmaņi, written by Revaņācārya some time between Basava and Srīpati, we find the name 'Vīra-saiva' associated with the doctrine of sthala, and this is probably the earliest use of the term in available literature. Siddhāntasikhāmaņi refers to Basava and is itself referred to by Śrīpati. This shows that the book must have been written between the dates of Basava and Sripati. The Siddhānta-śikhāmaņi gives a fanciful interpretation of the word, 'vīra' as being composed of 'vi' meaning knowledge of identity with Brahman, and 'ra' as meaning someone who takes pleasure in such knowledge. But such an etymology, accepting it to be correct, would give the form 'vira' and not 'vīra.' No explanation is given as to how 'vi' standing for 'vidyā,' would lengthen its vowel into 'vī.' I therefore find it difficult to accept this etymological interpretation as justifying the application of the word 'vīra' to Vīra-śaiva. Moreover, most systems of Vedāntic thought could be called vīra in such an interpretation, for most types of Vedānta would feel enjoyment and bliss in true knowledge of identity. The word 'vīra' would thus not
