A History of Indian Philosophy Vol. 5

THE earliest Sanskrit philosophical literature in which we find a reference to Saivism is a bhdsya of Sankara (eighth century) on Brahma-sutra n. 2. 37. In the commentary on this sutra, Sankara refers to the doctrines of the Siddhantas as having been written by Lord Mahesvara. The peculiarity of the teachings of the Siddhantas was that they regarded God as being only the instrumental cause of the world. Here and elsewhere Sankara has called the upholders of this view Isvara-karanins. If Siva or God was regarded as both the instrumental and the material cause of the world, according to the different Siddhanta schools of thought, then there would be no point in introducing the sutra under reference, for according to Sankara also, God is both the instrumental and the material cause of the world. Sankara seems to refer here to the Pasupata system which deals with the five categories, such as the cause (kdrana effect (kdrya), communion (yoga rules of conduct (vidhi) and dissolution of sorrow (duhkhdnta) 1 . According to him it also holds that Pasupati (God) is the instrumental cause of the world. In this view the Naiyayikas and the Vaisesikas also attribute the same kind of causality to God, and offer the same kind of arguments, i.e. the inference of the cause from the effect.

Vacaspati Misra (A.D. 840), in commenting on the bhdsya of Sankara, says that the Mahesvaras consist of the Saivas, Pasupatas, the Karunika-siddhantins and the Kapalikas. Madhava of the fourteenth century mentions the Saivas as being Nakullsa-pasupatas who have been elsewhere mentioned as Lakullsa-pasupatas or Lakullsa-pasupatas, and they have been discussed in another section of the present work. Madhava also mentions the Saiva-darsana in which he formulates the philosophical doctrines found in the Saivdgamas and their cognate literature. In addition to this he devotes a section to pratyabhijnd-darsana, commonly

1 The skeleton of this system has already been dealt with in another section as Pdsupata-sdstras.



called Kasmir Saivism. This system will also be dealt with in the present volume. Vacaspati mentions the Karunika-siddhantins and the Kapalikas. Ramanuja in his bhdsya on Brahma-sutra n. 2. 37 mentions the name of Kapalikas and Kalamukhas as being Saiva sects of an anti-Vedic character. But in spite of my best efforts, I have been unable to discover any texts, published or unpublished, which deal with the special features of their systems of thought. We find some references to the Kapalikas in literature like the Mdlati-mddhava of Bhavabhuti (A.D. 700-800) and also in some of the Puranas. Anandagiri, a contemporary of Sahkara and a biographer, speaks of various sects of Saivas with various marks and signs on their bodies and with different kinds of robes to distinguish themselves from one another. He also speaks of two schools of Kapalikas, one Brahmanic and the other non-Brahmanic. In the Atharva-veda we hear of the Vratyas who were devotees of Rudra. The Vratyas evidently did not observe the caste-rules and customs. But the Vratyas of the Atharva-veda were otherwise held in high esteem. But the Kapalikas, whether they were Brahmanic or non-Brahmanic, indulged in horrid practices of drinking and indulging in sex-appetite and living in an unclean manner. It is doubtful whether there is any kind of proper philosophy, excepting the fact that they were worshippers of Bhairava the destroyer, who also created the world and maintained it. They did not believe in karma. They thought that there are minor divinities who perform various functions in world creation and maintenance according to the will of Bhairava. The Sudra Kapalikas did not believe also in the caste-system and all these Kapalikas ate meat and drank wine in skulls as part of their rituals. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar thinks on the authority of Siva-mahdpurdna that the Kalamukhas were the same as the Mahavratadharas. But the present author has not been able to trace any such passage in the ...