Part 2
Chapter 1
1.3. sa yadāste cidāhlādamātrānubhavatallayaḥ tadicchā tāvatī tāvaj jñānaṃ tāvat kriyā hi sā 1.4. susūkṣmaśaktitritayasāmarasyena vartate cidrūpāhlādaparamo nirvibhāgaḥ paras tadā
When he remains absorbed in the experience of nothing but the bliss of consciousness—since his will, cognition, and action are so great —at that time, due to the state of unity of the three very subtle powers, he is paramount in the delight of consciousness, nondistinct, (and) supreme.
Only erroneous nonawareness of (Śiva’s) non-duality is impure, and that does not exist, because it consists merely of a nonperception, and nothing new is manifested.
Footnotes, pg. 117
It is not the case that non-duality is ever absent, though it is true that one sometimes does not see it. However, the failure to see non-duality is in reality nothing whatsoever, because it consists of the absence of correct perception and not the presence of something erroneous.
In other words, everything that appears in the temporal world existed in a premanifested state in the parā condition. Thus, the Pratyabhijñā does not have to explain the manifestation of a new, different, and unreal universe. Instead, the universe is simply Śiva himself, because the nature of consciousness is such that it appears.
Footnotes pg. 130
In other words, the choices made by individuals, according to the Naiyāyikas and Vaiśeṣikas, are made at the level of an individual’s intellectual deliberations. They do not involve a direct access to the very nature of the divine, as does any act of volition, according to the Pratyabhijñā. Unlike in the Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, the Pratyabhijñā maintains that every act is willed and performed by Śiva himself.
Thus, God comes forth in this way at a certain time. Sometimes, he assumes a form, through (the power of) will, in the one possessed of pure power. Sometimes, through the power of cognition, (he assumes) the nature of Sadāśiva, due to an abundance (of that power of cognition). Sometimes, because the power of action rules supreme, (he assumes the form of) the Īśvara state. Sometimes, because perception is coarse, (he assumes) the nature of Vidyā, the Vidyeśvaras, the Mantras, and the Mantreśvaras. Alternatively, māyā, belonging to (Śiva), the one who is somehow playing the game of self-concealment, assumes the nature of the thirty-six tattvas, beginning with that which is called form, and thus assumes as many forms as are discussed, down to the coarse, compact, solid earth, which has an insentient appearance. (1.29cd–33)
Footnotes pg. 130-131
Sadāśiva - This is a reference to the third of the thirty-six tattvas, and there is a slight subject-object distinction at this level. Here, one experiences “I am this,” but “I-ness” is emphasized slightly over “this-ness.”
Īśvara state - The īśvaratattva is the fourth of the thirty-six tattvas. At this level, there is a slight distinction of subject from object, though, unlike at the level of Sadāśiva, “this-ness” is here emphasized slightly over “I-ness.”
Vidyā - Vidyātva here refers to śuddhavidyā, the fifth of the thirty-six tattvas, which is the last of the pure tattvas.
tathā nānāśarīrāṇi bhuvanāni tathā tathā visṛjya rūpaṃ gṛhṇāti protkṛṣṭādhamamadhyamam (1.34)
In like manner, he produces the many bodies,(and) the various worlds and assumes their forms, be they the highest, the lowest, or in between. (1.34)
He alone exists even in hell, etc., as a result of failing to cognize his own true nature. Thus, [Somānanda] says:
1.36. krīḍayā duḥkhavedyāni karmakārīṇi tatphalaiḥ saṃbhatsyamānāni tathā narakārṇavagahvare 1.37. nivāsīni śarīrāṇi gṛhṇāti parameśvaraḥ
Playfully, the Supreme Lord assumes (the form of) the bodies in which suffering will be perceived, which perform (sinful) acts and then, dwelling in the abyss of the ocean of hell, will be consumed by their fruits. (1.36–37ab)
Because it is his nature to play by creating the universe, he assumes(the form of) the bodies here that will be experienced as having a suffering nature in hell; or, they are those in which suffering will be experienced in hell. They perform sinful acts, due to the force of niyatiśakti, the nature of which is māyā, and then, dwelling in the deep, frightening belly of the ocean that is hell, they will reap the fruits of those acts. The Supreme Lord alone exists, even in hell, and no one at all exists except him. Thus, oneness is fully corroborated.
itthaṃ śivo bodhamayaḥ sa eva paranirvṛtiḥ saiva conmukhatāṃ yāti secchājñānakriyātmatām (1.39) saiva śāktaśarīrādinārakāntaṃ hi bhūtatā prasūyate svacidrūpapramukhaṃ pārthivāntakam (1.40) padārthatvena bhagavān sarvatraiva tadātmatā (1.41ab)
Thus, Śiva is made up of consciousness; he alone is supreme delight, and that alone becomes eagerness, which becomes will, cognition, and action. Most assuredly, that is itself the state of existing as a living being, which he produces as those (beings) beginning with bodies that are made of power and down to those dwelling in hell. The Lord (also) produces, as things, that which begins with the one in the form of his consciousness and ends with the earth(-tattva). His nature is truly omnipresent.
Chapter 3
na śivaḥ śaktirahito na śaktir vyatirekiṇī 3.3. śivaḥ śaktas tathā bhāvān icchayā kartum īdṛśān śaktiśaktimator bhedaḥ śaive jātu na varṇyate
Śiva does not exist apart from śakti; śakti is not different (from Śiva). And Śiva is empowered to create such entities at will. In Śaivism, no difference whatsoever between power and the one possessing the power is described. (3.2cd–3)
Footnotes pg. 214
In other words, at the moment of the manifestation of the universe, there is no distinction to be made between Śiva and the powers he uses to manifest reality. The two are one and the same. If there is no distinction between Śiva and his powers in this apparently dualistic condition, then there is never under any circumstances any distinction to be made of the one from the other.
piṇḍe vā kaṭikāyāṃ vā kiṃ suvarṇatvam iṣyate 3.19. na bhūṣaṇe kuṇḍalādau yathā tatra svaśaktitaḥ rūpakatvaṃ gataṃ hema na śaktyaiva svatantrayā 3.20. tathecchayā samāviṣṭas tathā śaktitrayeṇa ca tathā tathā sthito bhāvair ataḥ sarvaṃ śivātmakam
Can one maintain, on the other hand, that the nature of gold may possibly exist in the ball on the (goldsmith’s) mat, but not in the ornament, such as an earring? Just as gold takes form therein by virtue of its own power, not as the result of an absolutely independent power, so also the one penetrated by will and, in like manner, by the triad of powers, exists in various ways as the (many) entities. Hence, everything has Śiva-nature. (3.18cd–20)
sa evetthaṃ svecchayāste tatkartṛtvena bodhyataḥ 3.75. sa eva buddharūpatve tathā bhavati tatkṣaṇam sa eva saṃprajāyeta tadanuṣṭhānatatparaḥ 3.76. phalaṃ vā tadanuṣṭhāne sa eva hi tadā bhavet
He alone, by his will, exists in this way, as that agent, for the one who is to be enlightened, and he alone exists at that moment in the form of the enlightened one. He alone can exist as the one who is totally devoted to being in accordance with it. Also, he alone can arise as the result of according with that [teaching]. (3.74cd–76ab)
vāditvaprativāditve kasmāc cet tasya tatsthiteḥ 3.77. vyavahārāya vā sarvaṃ vyavahāro na vastugaḥ svarūpaṃ vastugaṃ viddhi vyavahāro na jātucit 3.78. tatheśvaravyavasthānād avastvābhāsarūpataḥ
If you ask why truthfulness and erroneousness exist, (we reply:) this is so because he exists as both. However, everything serves the everyday world; (and) the everyday world is not a real thing. Know that his nature is a real thing; the everyday world is nothing at all, because the condition of the Lord is only thus, the form of the appearance of unreal things. (3.76cd–78ab)