The Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ of Utpaladeva: Its Purpose, Relevance, and Relationship to the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā
Abstract
This paper presents a discussion of Utpaladeva’s short text, Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ (APS). It provides a summary of the purpose and arguments of the APS and proposes that this brief text succinctly presents the primary theme of the author’s magnum opus, the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā (ĪPK). APS acknowledges the existence of the limited, individual knower but shows that it is the unlimited knower that is the real knower in all knowing. It uses I-consciousness as the thread that connects the limited and the unlimited knowers, and establishes the unity of the universe with the light of consciousness and of the individual knower with the supreme knower. Establishing the unity of the universe with the light of consciousness and of the individual knower with the supreme knower is also the primary purpose and conclusion of the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā.
The thread of I-consciousness connects the individual knower with the supreme knower and unites the objects of the universe with the light of consciousness.
Abbreviations
APS Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ
ĪS Īśvara-siddhiḥ
SS Sambandha-siddhiḥ
ĪPK Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā
ĪPV Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-vimarśinī
ĪPVV Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-vivṛti-vimarśinī
1. Preface
Utpaladeva, disciple and successor of Somānanda and grand-guru of Abhinavagupta, wrote the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā (ĪPK, Verses on Self-Recognition), setting down the principles of the Pratyabhijñā philosophy, the doctrine of Self-Recognition. Besides this influential work, he was also the author of a commentary, or vṛtti, on Somānanda’s Śiva-dṛṣṭi; two auto-commentaries on the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā; a set of beautiful hymns, Śiva-stotrāvalī; and a corpus called Siddhi-trayī made up of three works called Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ (APS, Proof of the Conscious Knower); Īśvara-siddhiḥ (ĪS, Proof of the Lord); and Sambandha-siddhiḥ (SS, Proof of Relationship).
The Siddhi-trayī is a somewhat enigmatic compendium. Godbole and Mundra (2022) provide an overview of the Siddhi-trayī showing that in Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ, Utpala establishes the knower as being conscious and develops its nature from the limited to the unlimited knower; in Īśvara-siddhiḥ, he establishes the existence of the Lord from the point of view of the limited knower; and in Sambandha-siddhiḥ, he discusses the nature of relationship, which is oneness in difference. However, of the three compositions, APS is somewhat unique. While in the other two components of Siddhi-trayī, Utpala discusses certain limited aspects of his philosophy or discusses them simply from a limited point of view, in APS he provides a succinct presentation of the entire premise of Pratyabhijñā.
The 27 verses of the Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ provide a succinct presentation of the premise of Pratyabhijñā.
This paper is focused on APS. We will try to show that APS presents the main thrusts of the ĪPK. APS is a short text of 27 verses compared to ĪPK’s 190 verses. Naturally, all that APS can do is to present the main themes, not the details. This it does beautifully.
Perhaps it could be questioned why it should be of interest at all that an author presents their philosophy in a short space. After all, many well-known medieval Indian authors who wrote voluminously also wrote many shorter works as well as poems or hymns that could very well be said to represent their worldview. Śankarācārya, for example, is credited with numerous hymns, many of which beautifully showcase his philosophy. Utpala himself wrote sublime poetry, compiled in his Śiva-stotrāvalī, much of which is an extraordinary blend of his philosophy, devotion, and art. As brevity goes, one could probably say that a phrase such as Śivo’ham (I am Śiva) or nāśivam vidyate kvacit (nothing exists that is not Śiva) fully encapsulates or represents Pratyabhijñā. This, of course, is also the concept of sūtra—a pithy presentation of a complex thought, which is precisely why sūtras are accompanied by or followed by commentaries. What we have here in the APS is a somewhat self-contained presentation, somewhere between a single sūtra and an extensive work like the ĪPK. Even though written in verse form, APS is not poetic literature but is rather a didactic philosophical text.
It could be asked if APS is unique in presenting Pratyabhijñā in a brief space. There is, after all, Kṣemarāja’s Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam (the heart of Pratyabhijñā) in which Kṣemarāja presents a summary of Pratyabhijñā in twenty sūtras, that being his explicit goal for the text. However, by the time Kṣemarāja wrote his Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam, Abhinavagupta had added considerably to the dimensions of Pratyabhijñā, and we see Kṣemarāja reflect that in his Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam. The Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam sūtras focus primarily on the cosmological and the upāya (technique) aspects of Pratyabhijñā. Kṣemarāja thus does reflect the cosmological aspect of the ĪPK but the discussion of the upāyas by Kṣemarāja in the Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam reflects the later developments by Abhinavagupta and by Kṣemarāja himself. In contrast, ĪPK is epistemological in its approach. Understanding the text transforms the student. Imbibing through understanding and contemplation is its upāya. The upāyas as specific techniques get only a brief mention in the ĪPK. In fact, we would argue that surprisingly, Kṣemarāja sidesteps a central theme of the ĪPK, aham-vimarśa, or I-consciousness, mentioning it only in his final sūtra in the Pratyabhijñā-hṛdayam. I-consciousness occupies a central place in APS, and APS follows the primary epistemological method the author uses in ĪPK. We think that for these reasons the APS deserves more scholarly attention than it seems to have received, including especially the development of a critical edition.
2. Overview of the APS
A translation of the APS is available by Godbole & Mundra (2022). We first provide here an overview of the APS and then undertake the comparison that is the primary objective of this paper.
This text of twenty-seven verses, which could also be titled Knowing the Conscious Knower, is concerned primarily with the nature of the knower and therefore also with the nature of the world. What is the nature of the world? What constitutes existence and non-existence? What is their relationship to the knower? Who is the knower? The text starts with question regarding the nature of reality, or existence, of things. What distinguishes existence from non-existence, being from non-being, and the living and the conscious from the non-living and the non-conscious? How do we know that something is real? What distinguishes it from the unreal? Is there something inherent in true and untrue things that distinguishes them from each other? If there were, how would one know that the distinguishing factor is even there? To know that, one would need manifestation, which would require consciousness to be aware of it. Regressing in this manner, Utpala finds that the only thing that can distinguish the real from the unreal is consciousness, and that indeed the only benchmark one can possibly find for reality is consciousness. This formulation leads to a verse that observes, “these inert things, that act as if they don’t even exist in or by themselves, exist only for (or in) consciousness.” It is consciousness that confers reality on things. Nothing else is capable of doing so.
Consciousness confers reality on things. Nothing else can do so.
Most of the text then deals with the nature of and the relationship between the seen and the seer, between idam—“this” and aham —“I.” Everything in the universe looks like an idam, “this.” However, if we focus on the nature of this idam, we find that it is based on, or sits in, the awareness of it by the knower. If you stay with this awareness, it leads you directly to aham, “I-consciousness.”
Said another way, while consciousness sees a thing with its power of discursive or differentiated knowing, it can also retrace its steps to come back and resolve the seeing within itself. In Utpala’s words, seeing an object ultimately finds its abode in aham.
What is the nature of this knower, the one that has this I-consciousness? Is this “I,” this self, only the individual “I” or something more? This is the main thrust and objective of the text.
The knower, Utpala says, has a dual nature: limited and unlimited. The limited knower is the individual knower that we all know ourselves to be, the one defined by the usual mind-body complex.
However, Utpala says it is inextricably woven into, or forever anchored in, the unlimited, unbounded knower. All knowing involves both aspects, the limited and the unlimited, and although they are the two aspects of knowing, they are not two knowers; the two aspects are deeply connected and are really one. The reality of things may at first look like it rests in the consciousness provided by the individual, limited self, but really it rests in the supreme, the unlimited Self. This is because the individual self is restricted by knowables like life force, etc. Knowables are inert objects. Unlike consciousness, they must remain contained within themselves; they are incapable of “expanding” outside themselves and “meeting” the other, incapable of the basic capability of knowing, which is to expand yourself to embrace the other. Only prakāśa has that capability (through vimarśa). The fact that there is knowing means it is prakāśa at work—it is prakāśa knowing. Thus, the individual self may look like the (real) knower, but it just looks like one. It parades as one. It itself rests in the supreme knower. It is the supreme knower, prakāśa, that is the real knower.
Since all objects rest in aham-vimarśa, I-consciousness, it is the connecting power and the resting place of everything. Since the knowing itself is taking place in prakāśa, I-consciousness is not the property of the individual self. Utpala says that this aham-vimarśa or aham-bhāva is pure consciousness, prakaśa, at rest in itself.
aham-vimarśa is simply the light of pure consciousness (prakāśa) at rest.
Since all objects depend on and reduce into I-consciousness, I-consciousness itself is not defined or limited by anything. In fact, it is the basis of everything. It needs nothing; it is free. It is the source and the creator of everything. It administers this creative capability through its power of māyā. And since it, or she, is the source of everything we identify as the universe of diverse objects, she is the creator of the universe, the primordial mother.
We started with the world of idams—of this and that, all separated from each other. We wondered about the nature of this idam, what determined whether an idam was true or not true, what existed or did not exist. We found that all that exists, exists in, or owes its reality to consciousness. The differences point to their manifestation, manifestation points to their awareness by a knower. Objects point to their knower. At first that knower appears to be the individual knower. However, as we examine that knowing, we realize it can’t be limited, it has to be rooted in prakāśa. The one that gives reality to everything including ourselves—the individual knowers—and connects everything is aham-vimarśa, pure I-awareness. It is not capable of being limited by anything. What looks like limited consciousness is rooted in the unlimited consciousness. What look like many individual consciousnesses, jivas, are actually that one unlimited knower. And what looks like a world of this and that, of inert and non-inert “things,” ends up resting in that one knower, that one consciousness. That consciousness is what is true (sat), what is conscious (ajaḍa), and is the one and only knower. The world is nothing but this one non-dual consciousness.
The world is nothing but this one non-dual consciousness.
3. Relationship of Ajaḍa-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ to Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā
3.1 APS as presenting the central theme of ĪPK
The manner of presentation of the central themes of Pratyabhijñā is somewhat different in APS than that in ĪPK. Because of its pithy nature, multiple interpretations of its verses are often possible. (See Godbole and Mundra, 2022.) It is therefore especially disappointing that the author’s vṛtti on this text has not yet been found.
Most of what APS has to say is presented in its last seventeen verses, verses 11 to 27. The first ten verses are primarily a refutation of Vijñānavāda and Vedānta, although those verses do present two important concepts of Pratyabhijñā: (1) reality or existence (sattā) follows manifestation and (2) all things find their foundation in consciousness alone.
The core principle of the text is aham-vimarśa, I-consciousness. In verse 11, immediately after the refutations of Vijñānavāda and Vedānta, the text jumps into the relationship of I-consciousness to objects—idam, “this”—saying that the determination of an object as “this” leads directly to I-consciousness; idam-consciousness is transformed into I-consciousness. The APS then deals with the nature of this I-consciousness.
aham-vimarśa, I-consciousness, is the core principle of the APS.
The APS acknowledges that knowing occurs in the limited knower. But, it says, this knowing has a dual nature. One side of the knower is the apparent limited knower and the other side is the unlimited knower, and that they are so deeply connected that they are really one. Thus even though the knowing seems to be taking place in the limited knower, really it is taking place in the unlimited knower (para-pramātṛ). This means that the determination of the object as “this,” which seems to occur in the individual knower, is actually taking place in the one unlimited knower.
Utpala had started with verse 11, saying that the determination of an object, any object, as an object is identical with I-consciousness. Whenever we see anything in the world, we see it as “this.”
In Utpala’s words, what we are experiencing as “this” is the light of consciouness of that thing. If it weren’t, we couldn’t experience it. Our experience is just this consciousness. If we were to stay with that, we would see that this experience of consciousness is indistinguishable from the experience of consciousness we have of ourselves as “I.”
Thus, the awareness “this” transforms into the awareness “I.” Utpala is thus saying that every perception of the world we have is identical with I-consciousness. In verse 22, he says that this I-consciousness is really the unlimited light of consciousness (prakāśa) at rest, establishing the identity of the unlimited light of consciousness and I-consciousness. The thread of I-consciousness thus takes us from the knowledge of the world as “this” (idam) to I-consciousness to knowledge of the world as prakāśa. It also traces the knower’s I-consciousness, his sense of his own self, to being identical with the light of consciousness, thus establishing the unity of the objective world with the knower and the unity of the knower with the unlimited light of consciousness. Understanding this unity of the universe with the unlimited light of consciousness (prakāśa) as well as recognizing one’s unity with that same unlimited light of consciousness, of course, is pratyabhijñā. The APS therefore simply says, in the concluding verse, that “this is why in Pratyabhijñā, it is said that the world is non-dual.”
The thread of I-consciousness takes us from the knowledge of the world as “this” (idam) to I-consciousness (aham-vimarśa) to knowledge of the world as prakāśa.
This, of course, is precisely the project of the Īśvara-pratyabhijñā-kārikā. We now discuss this in detail.
The purpose of the ĪPK is:
to show that the universe, including its creatures, are nothing but a form and expansion of the one supreme consciousness and
to enable people to recognize their own identity with this supreme consciousness, thus helping them accomplish the highest purpose of life.
Supreme consciousness is usually referred to in the ĪPK as Īśvara (the Lord), Maheśvara (the great Lord), and occasionally as Śiva. The opening verse of the final section of the ĪPK concludes: “Supreme consciousness (Maheśvara) is the very Self of all beings. He vibrates eternally in the form of the universe as ‘I-this’ awareness,” meaning his awareness of the universe as “this” is the same as his I-awareness.
As for purpose (b), the first verse of the ĪPK says this Pratyabhijñā text is written for the benefit of people, so that they may acquire everything there is to obtain. His vṛtti on this verse elaborates it in this way: “it is through the attainment of the supreme truth that one can be satisfied.” The vṛtti on the penultimate verse of the ĪPK before the colophon says that “through pratyabhijñā, recognition, one enters into the state of Śiva.” Realizing this identity implies realizing the true import of aham-vimarśa. ĪPK verse IV-14 says: “When the individual subject attains to perfect I-consciousness by dissolving all knowables, he attains to Śivahood.”
According to Pratyabhijñā, when the individual attains to perfect I-consciousness by dissolving all knowables, he attains to Śivahood.
The practitioner attains to Śivahood primarily by understanding this identity as presented in the text. Utpala says in the vrtti on the near-final verse in the ĪPK: “by a close application of this (i.e., of pratyabhijñā) one enters the state of Śiva and becomes liberated even while living.” Abhinavagupta says “at the moment of hearing these ślokas, being overtaken by their meaning, the oneness with supreme Īsvara arises.” The ĪPK thus brings about in the student the desired state of Śivahood primarily by presenting the oneness of the individual self with the supreme Self. Understanding leads to recognition. In Jñānādhikāra, which takes up almost half of ĪPK, Utpala shows that all knowing is done by one unitary consciousness. Jñānādhikāra describes how everything in the universe is internal to, or one with, prakāśa. It is the Lord’s power, māyā, that makes appear what is internal to prakāśa as something that is external. This is the creation of “idam” as separate from and external to the original “aham.” The vṛtti on the penultimate verse of Jñānādhikāra says, “There is only one Self, prakāśa, and it is the one and only knower.” Jñānādhikāra also establishes that aham-vimarśa, I-consciousness, is the essence of prakāśa. In other words, the unitary aham-vimarśa is the one and only knower of all idams.
The Jñānādhikāra concludes by saying that all knowledge and action derive from aham-vimarśa: “vimarśa alone is the Lord’s pure knowledge and action.” The vṛtti on this verse says: “pure knowledge and action exist in the aham-vimarśa of parama-Śiva, the Self of the universe, who is of the form of pure consciousness.”
There is only one Self, prakāśa, and it is the one and only knower.
It is this idea that Utpala then uses to develop, in the next two chapters, how all action and the creation of the universe proceed from the Lord. Kriyādhikāra develops how prakāśa, whose essence is inner reflective awareness, leads to or becomes action, kriyā, in its numerous forms, creating the diversity in the universe, including subject/object division and spatio-temporal successsion. Āgamādhikāra shows how the universe, including its creatures, i.e., limited knowers such as human beings, are an evolution from the one supreme consciousness with its perfect I-consciousness (ahantā) into a world of objects (idantā) through a process of evolution and the creation of duality, through the inherent power of freedom, or svātantrya, of supreme consciousness. Much of this development regarding creation is understood in terms of the dynamics between aham and idam, (or pramātā and prameya—the knower and the known) and the separation of idam from aham. The universe and its jīvas proceed from the stage of full unification in Śiva to a slow evolution of the animate universe by an emerging sense of idam through various stages like sadāśiva and īśvara, leading finally to a world of fully accomplished diversity where individual beings (paśus or jīvas) come to think of themselves as limited individuals separate from Śiva and see the idams as separate from themselves (their “aham”). In the concluding verses in Tattva-saṃgrahādhikāra, Utpala then goes back to showing how, once the practitioner has realized their identity with the Lord, they come to see that all knowables (i.e., all idams) are identical with their self, and thus becomes free. The concluding verse of the ĪPK says that one who has recognized his identity with Śiva knows and creates objects as he wishes.
Thus, the ĪPK establishes both from the point of view of the process of knowing as well as from the perspective of action and evolution, that the individual as well as the universe are identical with the one supreme knower. I-consciousness (aham-vimarśa), occupies a central place in ĪPK. I-consciousness is the essential nature of Śiva, and the recognition by the individual that their (apparently individual) I-consciousness is, in fact, the supreme, perfect I-consciousness of Śiva, is the goal of ĪPK. Everything in the universe, including one’s own body and its life force are knowables, i.e., idams. All these idams, including one’s own individuality, are ultimately seen as the aham of prakāśa, the supreme light of consciousness.
I-consciousness is the essential nature of Śiva. In Pratyabhijñā, the individual recognizes their apparent individual I-consciousness as being the same as the supreme I-consciousness of Śiva.
As described earlier, this is exactly what is presented in the APS, only in a far shorter space. The APS starts with idam and develops its relationship to and identity with the individual aham first and expands it to the universal or unlimited aham. The ĪPK, on the other hand, starts with the universal aham and develops its relationship to the world of idams, showing that the idams are its projection and creation, and that the universal aham, of its own volition, becomes the limited aham.
The action (kriyā) aspect of supreme consciousness, described in detail in Kriyādhikāra in ĪPK, is dealt with in the APS in two and a half verses. After presenting in APS-22 that I-consciousness is prakāśa at rest, the author proceeds to describe its dynamic attributes. This I-consciousness, being “free of all expectations, is (the power of) freedom, doership, and lordship.” He proceeds to describe this creative power in the next two verses, saying that this power is called māyā, responsible for the creation of this world, a world that is full of the ignorance created by her. This māyā śakti, the womb of all, is the connectivity in all knowledge, is one, and is the same as the awareness of the self (sva-saṃvedana). He thus somewhat obliquely refers to the sense of duality and separateness created in the world through this single mention of “ignorance” and remains content in the APS describing māyā’s nature mainly as one with I-consciousness (sva-saṃvedana, same as aham-bhāva) and therefore as one with supreme consciousness.
The APS never explicitly mentions liberation; however, it does develop the unity of the limited individual with the universal or unlimited knower. Understanding this unity is liberation in Pratyabhijñā.
It is for these reasons that we propose that the APS presents the central theme of the ĪPK in a succinct manner, and that it deserves more attention than it has perhaps attracted so far as a complete and independent text in its own right. It would be especially desirable to develop a critical edition and to continue to look for the author’s vṛtti.
3.2 Some ĪPK themes either not addressed in APS or not addressed in much detail
There are several sub-themes of the ĪPK that are either not addressed at all in the APS or not addressed in much detail.
Cosmology and evolution:
ĪPK develops a detailed evolutionary map of the universe, covering the evolution into tattvas of the universe and the evolution of limited beings (jivas) from supreme consciousness. This was certainly an important project of the ĪPK. This is simply referred to in half a verse in the APS by “this evolution is developed in the ĪPK.”
Memory:
A great deal of space is devoted in the ĪPK to the treatment of memory. The purpose of this is to prove that the unitary consciounsess of the true (supreme, one) knower (pramātṛ) is the basis of the unification of knowledge. There is no treatment of memory in the APS. Instead, the APS directly develops the role I-consciounsness as the unifier of experience.
Relationship:
There is an extensive treatment of relationship (saṃbandha) in ĪPK, describing the nature of the conscious knower as providing the unity in diversity. Utpala explores these concepts further and in detail in Sambandha-siddhiḥ. There is a rudimentary use of saṃbandha in the APS, limited to his use of anusaṃdhāna (deep or inherent connection) in describing the oneness of the limited knower with the ultimate knower, the role of prakāśa in providing the underlying unity in the diversity of things, and of the unity of māyā as the common factor in all knowledge. He also touches on the topic of unity in diversity in the concluding verse of the APS, how knowing differences itself implies the unity of prakāśa.
knowing differences itself implies the unity of the light of consciousness
māyā: Besides providing a full and rich description of māyā as the power of veiling and differentiation, the ĪPK includes an elegant description of māyā as the power by which the Lord makes appear what is within him as outside of him (which would be an aspect of differentiation). This is the power of externalization and is the key to why the world to us looks like it is “out there” and we are “in here.” This, according to the ĪPK, is the work of māyā. Even though APS speaks specifically about māyā as the creator of the world, it doesn’t dwell on her powers of veiling, differentiation, and externalization. The APS instead remains satisfied with identifying māyā as the creator of the universe, the connecting power in all knowledge, emphasizing her nature as one-with-self-consciousness (sva-saṃvedana), and only once referring to her “power of ignorance.”
4. Summary and Conclusion
This paper reviews Utpaladeva’s Ajada-pramātṛ-siddhiḥ and compares it to the main thrust of his magnum opus, ĪPK. Two primary purposes of the ĪPK were (a) to show that the universe, including its creatures, are nothing but a form and expansion of the one supreme consciousness, and (b) to enable people to recognize their own identity with this supreme consciousness, thus helping them accomplish the highest purpose of life. I-consciousness (aham-vimarśa) occupies a central place in the ĪPK. It utilizes the concepts of I-ness or I-consciousness (ahantā) and this-ness (idantā) as primary tools for accomplishing these purposes. Everything in the world is an idam—“this.” When the practitioner comes to understand that everything in the universe, all the idams, are identical with himself, his pure aham-bhāva, he comes to see his identity with the unitary light of consciousness and becomes free. The ĪPK also show how the universe is nothing but this universal light of consciousness. This paper describes how APS does the same thing using these very tools—the concepts aham and idam—and arrives at the same goal. The APS shows that an idam leads to and is one with aham-vimarśa, and that aham-vimarśa leads to and is one with the universal light of consciousness, prakāśa. Since everything in the universe is an idam, APS also shows that everything in the universe is the universal light of consciousness. This paper concludes that APS thus succinctly presents the main thrust of the ĪPK, although deriving it in somewhat of a reverse manner. The ĪPK starts with the universal Self and derives its unity with the world and the individual self. The APS starts with the limited individual self and differentiated objects of the world and arrives at their unity with the universal Self.
When the practitioner comes to understand that everything in the universe, all the idams, are identical with himself, his pure aham-bhāva, he comes to see his identity with the unitary light of consciousness and becomes free.
The APS never explicitly mentions liberation; however, it clearly develops the unity of the limited individual with the universal or unlimited knower. Understanding this unity is liberation according to Pratyabhijñā.
APS is brief, spanning only 27 verses, compared to the 190 verses of ĪPK. Naturally APS does not provide the magnificent detail nor the debate that ĪPK provides, leaving out several themes developed in detail in the ĪPK. Notable among the themes not addressed in APS are ĪPK’s expansive treatments of evolution, memory, and relationship. The treatment of māyā in APS is limited compared to the ĪPK. The concept of relationship is developed in another sub-text, Sambandha-siddhiḥ, in the Siddhi-trayī triad of which APS is a part.
It is hoped that a critical edition of the APS will be developed. Pandit says that APS deals with certain themes that were not fully covered in the ĪPK. It would be interesting to study what those might be.
Acknowledgments
I wish to acknowledge my gratitude to my Sanskrit teacher, Madhura Godbole, and my son, Anil, for all their help and review, without which I would not have been able to publish this paper. I am also indebted to Laura Duggan for editing and formatting the paper. Any errors that remain are, of course, mine.
Comments are welcome.
Glossary of Key Terms
aham-bhāva: I-consciousness or I-awareness
aham-vimarśa: same as aham-bhāva
ahantā: I-ness, aham-bhāva
ātman: Self
idam: this
idantā: this-ness
māyā: the concealing power of the supreme Self
paramātman: the supreme Self
prakāśa: the light of consciousness
saṃvid: consciousness
upāya: method or means
vimarśa: the knowing aspect of consciousness
vṛtti: commentary
References
Arnold, Dan. Buddhists, Brahmins and Belief: Epistemology in South Asian Philosophy of Religion. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2008.
Chaturvedi, Radheshyam. The Sivadristi of Sri Somananda Nath with the Vritti of Sri Utpaladeva. Varanasi: Varanaseya Sanskrit Sansthan, 1986. (Sanskrit text with Utpaladeva’s vṛtti and Chaturvedi’s commentary and translation, in Hindi).
Chaturvedi, Radheshyam, Svacchandatantram (Part I, 1-6 Patalas), with the commentary Svacchandodyota by Ācārya Śri Kṣemarāja and Jñānāvatī Hindi Commentary. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Vidyabhawan, 2014.
Dyczkowski, Mark S.G. Self Awareness, Own Being, and Egoity. Varanasi: Ratna Printing Works, 1990.
Godbole, Madhura, and A. Mundra. The Ajaḍa-Pramātṛ-Siddhiḥ of Utpaladeva: A Translation, “Proof of the Conscious Knower.” Academia.edu, 2022.
Kaw, R.K. Pratyabhijna Karika of Utpaladeva. Srinagar: Sharada Peetha Research Centre, 1976.
Lakshman Joo, Swami (Rājānaka Lakṣmaṇa). Śivastorāvalī of Utpaladeva. New Delhi: D.K. Printworld, 2008.
Lakshman Joo, Swami (Rājānaka Lakṣmaṇa). The Śivastotrāvalī of Utpaladevāchārya with the Sanskrit commentary of Kṣemarāja. Edited with Hindi commentary. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Amarabharati Prakashana, 2008.
Lawrence, David Peter. Proof of a Sentient Knower: Utpaladeva’s Ajaḍapramātṛsiddhi with the Vṛtti of Harabhatta Shastri. Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 37, No. 6, December 2009.
Muktananda, Swami. Siddha Meditation. New York: SYDA Foundation, 1975.
Nemec, John. The Ubiquitous Śiva: Somānanda’s Śivadṛṣṭi and His Tantric Interlocutors. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Pandey, K.C. Īśvara-Pratyabhijña-Vimarśinī of Abhinavagupta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1986. First published in 1938.
Pandit, B.N. Īśvara-Pratyabhijñā-Kārikā of Utpaladeva: Verses on the Recognition of the Lord. Delhi: Muktabodha Indological Research Institute with Motilal Banarsidass, 2003.
Ratie, Isabelle. “Utpaladeva’s Proof of God: On the Purpose of the Īśvarasiddhi” in Utpaladeva: Philosopher of Recognition, edited by Raffaele Torella and Bettina Bäumer, 257-340. New Delhi: DK Printworld, 2016.
Rhodes Bailly, Constantina. Shaiva Devotional Songs of Kashmir: A Translation and Study of Utpaladeva’s Shivastotravali. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1987.
Sagar, Shri Krishnanand. Ishwarapratyabhijna with the Vimarshini Commentary of Shri Abhinavaguptacharya. Translation: and commentary in Hindi. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Vidyabhavan and Motilal Banarsidass, 1981.
Sagar, Shri Krishnanand. Śivastotrāvalī. In Hindi. Publisher unknown, 1984.
Shastri, Pt. Madhusudan Kaul. The Siddhitrayi and the Pratyabhijna-karika-vritti of Rajanaka Utpala Deva. In Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No. XXXIV (KSTS-34). Srinagar: Archeological and Research Department of Kashmir, 1921.
Shāstrī, Pt. Mukund Rām. The Īshvara-Pratyabhijñā Vimarshinī of Utapaladeva, with commentary by Abhinava-Gupta. Vol. I, Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No. XXII (KSTS-22), The Research Dept. Jammu and Kashmir State, Srinagar, 1918.
Shāstrī, Pt. Madhusudan Kaul. The Īśwarapratyabhijñā of Utpaladeva with the Vimarsinī by Abhinavagupta. Vol II, Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No XXXIII (KSTS-33), The Research Dept. Jammu and Kashmir State, Srinagar, 1921.
Shāstrī, Pt. Madhusūdan Kaul. The Īśvara Pratyabhijnā Vivrtivimarśini by Abhinavagupta. Vol I, Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No LX (KSTS-60), The Research Dept. Jammu and Kashmir State, Srinagar, 1938.
Shāstrī, Pt. Madhusūdan Kaul. The Īśvara Pratyabhijnā Vivrtivimarśini by Abhinavagupta. Vol. II, Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No. LXII (KSTS-62), The Research Dept. Jammu and Kashmir State, Srinagar, 1941.
Shāstrī, Pt. Madhusūdan Kaul. The Īśvara Pratyabhijnā Vivrtivimarśini by Abhinavagupta. Vol. III, Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies No. LXV (KSTS-65), The Research Dept. Jammu and Kashmir State, Srinagar, 1943.
Torella, Raffaele. The Īśvarpratyabhijñākārikā of Utpaladeva, with the Author’s Vṛtti: Critical edition and annotated translation. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2013. First published in 1994.
Vyas, Surya Prakash. Siddhitrayī of Rājānaka Utpala Deva. In Hindi. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sansthan, 1989.