________________
XXXV] History and Literature of Vira-saivism 53 fanciful and need not further be discussed. Such a discussion could shed no historical light on the origin and development of the Vīra-saiva philosophy and dogmatics.
We have seen before that there is a tradition which links Agastya, Renuka or Revaņa-siddha, Siddha-rāma and Reņukācārya, the author of the Siddhānta-śikhāmaņi. Śrīpati mainly bases his arguments on the Upanişads and the Purāņas, but he also refers to Agastya-sūtra and Reņukācārya. He does not, however, refer to Basava and the contemporaries who were associated with him, such as Allama-prabhu, Cannabasava, Mācaya, Goga, Siddha-rāma and Mahādevil. This seems to show that the Vīra-saivism had two or more lines of development which later on coalesced and began to be regarded as one system of Vīra-śaiva thought. From Basava's vacanas it is difficult to assess the real philosophical value of the faith that was professed by Basava. In the Prabhu-linga-līlā and the Basava-purāna we find a system of thought which, in the absence of other corroborating materials, may be accepted as approximately outlining the system of thought which was known as Vīra-saivism in Basava's time.
We find that the doctrines of sthala and linga-dhāraṇa were known to the author of the Prabhu-linga-līlā. But though in one place, where instruction was being given to Basava by Allamaprabhu, șaț-sthala is mentioned, yet the entire emphasis throughout the book is on the doctrine of unity of the self with Siva, the ground of the reality. In the above passage it is held that there are double knots associated with the gross, the subtle and the cause, in accordance with which we have the six sthalas in three groups of a pair of each. Thus the two knots associated with the gross go by the name of bhakta and maheśvara; those with the subtle as associated with prāna are called prāna and prasāda-lingi sthalas;
1 Thus it appears from Sripati's statement in the Śrīkara-bhāşya II. 2. 37, p. 234, and III. 3. 3, p. 347, that Revaņa-siddha, Marula-siddha, Rama-siddha, Udbhatārādhya, Vemanārādhya were real teachers who had expressed their views or articles of faith in some distinctive works. But unfortunately no trace of such works can be discovered, nor is it possible to enunciate the actual views propounded by them. Whether Sripati had himself seen them or not is merely a matter of conjecture. He does not quote from the works of those teachers, and it is just possible that he is only making statements on the strength of tradition. In another passage (II. I. 4) Sripati mentions the names of Manu, Vāmadeva. Agastya, Durvāsā, Upamanyu, who are quite mythical purāņic figures along with Revana-siddha and Marula-siddha.
? See Prabhu-linga-lilā, ch. 16, pp. 132-4.
