365bet娱乐

The dialogue (p.1) beginning this book further specifies its topic as the sixfold portion (amsakah). Elaborating on the gloss given at the start of the preceding book, Kshemaraja explains that the arsakah or sub-portion properly designates the subjective aspect of the portion (amsah), which refers to the fractional manifestations of the supreme lord in the form of other deities such as Brahma, Visnuh, and so forth. 1 These sub-portions specifically refer to the possible ways in which the adept becomes matched with a particular portion, i. e. comes to focus his special service on one of these partial manifestations in the quest for a correlated power. The text first (p.2) enumerates and then describes these six sub-portions. The adept may first (p.2-3) be inclined to the service of a particular deity by bhavah, or a innate disposition inherited, Kshemaraja explains, from past births. Second (p. 3-7), the adept's svabhavah, i.e., nature or activity may match him with a specific deity; for example, the adept matched with Kamah is handsome, lucky, and loved. At this point (p.6), the text interrupts the enumeration of sub-portions with a parenthetical declaration that all these deities are in fact the limbs of bhairava and bestow powers in this fashion. After lifting this discussion of the sub-portions from another source, redactors probably interpolated this assimilating verse in order to supply the superficial signature of a Bhairava practice. For immediately after, the text states the end of the description of the nature sub-portion, and the beginning of the flower toss sub-portion. Selecting a deity by a flower toss (pp. 7- 1 V. Ksemaraja's commentary, pp.1-2: "parasya bodhabhairavasya saktibhih brahmyadibhiradhisthita brahmadyasta thavabhasita arsah tatastadanugrahya api tadarsa ityucyante/ato 'msanaradhyatvena sthitan kayati ayam brahmamso 'yam visnvamsa ityadikramena yo vaksyamano bhavasvabhavadih so arsaka ityucyate. "F

205 8), though discussed only in elliptical fashion by this text, formed a common part of the tantric ritual of many traditions. 1 Explaining the interrelationship among the sub-portions, Kshemaraja comments that selection of the deity in this fashion occurred for those not already predisposed by disposition or nature. Then reversing the sequence set out in the preliminary enumeration, the text next (pp. 8-10) discusses the twofold effecting (apadanam) of a sub-portion, instead of the expected subportion of the formula. 2 If the adept desires to employ some formula whose sub-portion has not been assigned in one of the three prior ways, or whose assignment is impossible because its deity is unknown, then he can still resort to either of two procedures to effect this assignment. 3 In the first (pp. 8-9), the adept oblates with heroic substances (viradravya-), such as the flesh of a hanged or impaled man, and thereby effects a subportion or participation that enables him to productively use even normally inefficacious or inappropriate formula. 4 In the second (pp. 9-10), intended, according to Kshemaraja, for adepts unqualified to undertake the rituals of a hero or higher level adept, the master specifically initiates the adept in order to empower him to use the desired formula. Kshemaraja interprets the brief instructions of the text, which seem to prescribe only an 1 Cf. the notes to the summary of bk. 3, p.210; bk. 4, pp. 24-25. 2 Kshemaraja also recognizes (p.8) this break in the stated sequence: "kramapraptam mantrarsakamadhikavaktavyatvat sampratyanuktva .......... 鈽� 3 Kserarajah first explains this on p.2: "amsakapadanamarsasyanirupitasyapi mantrasya viradravyadihomena sadhakadiksakramena va .......... "V. also his commentary before vss. 15-16, which describes these procedures. - 4 Either another master or adept, Kserarajah adds (p.8), may execute this oblation: "sadhaka ityaradhaka acaryastatprayukto 'nyo 'pi va sadhako homayet

206 initiatory joining through a single oblation, as enjoining the complete formal ritual for the consecration of an adept. 1 Finally, coming to the sub-portion of the formula (pp. 10- 15), the text describes a technique for determining the suitability of any formula for a particular adept. When employed by a particular adept, formula may prove to be either very efficacious (susiddha-), efficacious (siddha-), somewhat efficacious (sadhya-), or even inefficacious, or dangerous (ari-). After lining up the name of the adept and the formula that have been separated into their individual letters, the master counts off series of four letters. His resting place in the final series determines the formula's relative efficaciousness for the adept. Then, the text concludes, the master should give to the adept only those formula that are very efficacious or efficacious, and which therefore can bestow powers and liberation. In the description of this technique, the word portion (arsah) appears, in contrast to its previous meaning, to designate the parts or individual letters of the formula. 2 This contrast indicates that compilers, using the same term as an organizing link, have collected, from various sources, different methods of assigning formula to adepts. The redundancy of methods, especially of the last technique that incorporates the popular fourfold classification of formula, and the repeated dialogue links inserted throughout the section, furnish additional evidence of this compilation. 3 1 Cf. the full liturgical consecration of the adept in Bk.4, pp.298-301, and the brief initiation for the adept in Bk.13, p.12, which Kshemaraja similary interprets as implying the performance of the full liturgy. 2 V. p. 10, vs.18 a: "mantrarsam ganayitva tu " 3 For this common tantric classification of formula cf. the Padarthadarsah commentary of Raghavabhattah to the Saradatilakam, in M.M. Pandit Sri Mukunda Jha Bakshi, ed., The

207 Concluding this section (pp. 15-16), the text, praising bhairava as the pervasive reality underlying any portion or partial manifestation, enjoins his worship in the center of his retinue of bhairavas. These verses clearly continue an earlier verse in this section (p.6) that had identified the various portions or deities with the bhairava. 1 Thus, this earlier verse, which now seerns like an isolated interpolation, actually belongs here and must have become separated from the others during the compilation of this section or during the transmission of the text prior to Kshemaraja. Whether taken singly or together, however, the intent of these verses remains the same. As noted before, they reflect the concern of redactors, who were devotees of bhairava, to definitively stamp these disparate practices of adepts as their own. Transitional dialogue then introduces a new section (pp. 17- 26) that describes the revelation of the text. This short account, filled out, however, by Ksemaraja's extensive commentary, first presents the Saiva theology of revelation, in which, for the sake of men, the supreme vibrational Shiva assumes the gross and discursive sonic manifestation that is the Saiva scripture. Then it charts the transmission of this scripture, again only in general steps, from Sadasivah to men. In this sequence, the account gives, following the standard Saiva view, an important role to Srikanthah, and stresses that initiation forms the indispensable Saradatikalam By Laksmanadesikendra With the Padarthadarsa Commentary By Raghavabhatta. Kashi Sanskrit Granthamala 107 (Varanasi: The Chowkhambha Sanskrit Series Office, 1963), pp.60-61. Note the inserted dialogue, (p.11, vs. 18 b) "kathayari samasatah, which may indicate the work of compilers. 1 V. vss.11 b-12 a (p.6), ("bhairavangasamalabdhah sarvasiddhiphalapradah") which equate the formula with the bhairava, and which have a closing panegryic coda, and thus apparently should follow vss.24 b-26 a, (pp. 15-16) ("yas tu ... na varnah paramarthatah"), which describe the pervasion by the supreme Svacchandah of all the bhairava and formula. "

208 prerequisite for receiving this revelation. Accordingly, even the putative narrator of this text, Umapati, must assert that he has received initiation. 1 A final injunction to reserve this secret revelation for the qualified, then closes this section and the book. This section, recognized as a separate and additional topic by Kshemaraja, may have been constructed by later redactors or interpolated from another source in order to make Svacchandatantram conform to the structure of other scriptures. Z It presents the scriptural Saiva view of revelation, that complements the short and more properly Bhairava view given in the first book. 3 Perhaps compilers placed this section here because they recognized the similarity between the notion of portion, presented in the first part of this book, and this view of revelation. Just as the first considers the different deities to be fractional manifestations of a supreme lord, so the second considers scriptures to be lower manifestations of the supreme lord. In his introductory commentary to the first book, Kshemaraja apparently refers to this section as the "book on the promulgation of the text."4 Since the introductory dialogue to book seven mentions both time and the portion as topics, at one time, they presumably formed a single textual unit. Later redactors, however, when dividing or continuing the division of Svacchandatantram into 1 V. p. 23, vs.35 b: "mamapi ca pura diksa tatha caivabhisecanam. J 2 V. bk.9, p. 27, where Kshemaraja recognizes that this material represents a parenthetical discussion: prasargattantravataro darsitah. "On these self-characterizing sections, common to many scriptures, v. supra section 1.1.1 on traditional views of scripture. 3 V. bk.1, pp. 9 ff. Cf. bk.11, pp.7 ff, for similar material on the manifestation of the supreme Shiva as sound. 4 V. bk.1, p.8: pradarsitah.' " 鈥� vyanjitastantravatarapatalena

209 books, placed these topics in separate books. Perhaps the increase in the size of book seven through repeated interpolation, led to this displacement, and left a short book eight that could easily accommodate another section on revelation, that otherwise might have formed an independent book.