Raja Raja The Great

Author(s): Anantacharya Indological Research Institute
Publisher: Anantacharya Indological Research Institute

Page 10

120
In āgamas there is no established number of tativas It varies from āgama to āgama Rautavāgama's vidyāpada gives several times a list of 30 lattvas. It enumerates 28 material tattvas, the well-known 24 of Sāmkhya school and, above that, rāga, vidyā, kalā and the basic māyā. Two more tastvas are spiritual entities, Siva and Puruşa Rauravāgama knows also several spiritual entities such as Mantreśvaras, Mantras, Rudras headed by Virabhadra, etc. He introduces them as emanating from Siva, Siva being their material cause (upādānakāraṇa). Thus in Rauravagama the difference between matter and Siva is clearly marked. But nothing is told nor can be directly inferned about the relation of Puruşa and Siva
Sadyojyoti an early ācārya (before Somānanda of 9th cent.), has written a Tattvasamgraha which is an exposition of the contents of Rauravāgama on the subject of tativas. He gives the same number and list. He presents a more definite ontological position. He upholds a view according to which there is complete difference between matter and Siva. Siva is made of cit which is kriya and jñana, Cit is that by which a being is animate and has knowledge. Matter or māyā is acit and it is an eternal entity, having the same deree of reality as cit entities. Sadyojyoti is the first ācārya to assert with clarity this realism and dualism.
Chronologically we find next the Tattvaprakāśika of King Bhoja on the same subject. This text gives a list of 36 tattvas, adding kāla and niyati in the material sphere and a few spiritual entities, Śakti, Sadāśiva, Is vara and Suddhavidyā at the top of the scale. Bhoja accepts the dualism of cit and acit, but he admits in the scale of tattvas spiritual entities above the material ones.
Aghoraśiva has commented on these two Prakaraņas. In spite of the difference between the two, in spite of their unequal number of tattvas, he interprets them as presenting the same conception. In addition to this he makes an important modification in the doctrine. He conceives the scale of tattvas as comprising only acit or material entities. His dualism is extreme. The cit principle Siva is only an efficient cause (karty). It cannot be a material cause (upādānakāraṇa) and cannot have any contact with matter. Therefore it cannot have any place in the scale of