Part 3: According to the absolute non-dualism of Śri Abhinavgupts: " He, and only He exists in the ever-changing scenes of his presentation. All creation is endowed with a real and eternal existence within God in the form of the divine energy of His pure Consciousness. As soon as the universe becomes manifest as a manifest phenomenal existence, it inevitably has a beginning and an end." Realized yogis see the presence of the Absolute God both in the world of manifestation and in the pure noumenal existence of absolute Consciousness. The Shivaite yogis should not only know this truth, but also truly feel it. Only then can they achieve a perfect and complete realization. God remains God in His noumenal and phenomenal aspects. A poet is a poet even in a deep sleep. The supreme lord, whether he is involved in worldly affairs or is restlessly resting, remains the lord. In the same way, God remains himself perfect in his divine power, even if He appears in his noumenal aspect. Therefore He is God because of his nature, and not because of his connection with the phenomenal world. This is the main difference between the advaitic (non-dual) view of Shankaracharya and Abhinavagupta. Manifesting himself phenomenally, God is not subject to any change and transformation that the Vedantists who lived after Shankaracharya called parinama(result). According to Abhinavagupta, all phenomenal manifestations occur according to the principle of reflection. He preaches realism (satkaryavada), but his realism is not materialistic and does not imply the process of parinama. All creation is only an outward manifestation of divine energies. His energies shine in Him as "I", and their external reflection appears as "this." This is the secret of the reality of all phenomena. In this sense, Satkaryavada Abhinavagupta can be considered a form of spiritual realism. All creation is the materialization of the divine will of God. This is a tremendous divine transformation, carried out by God's own free will. In the playful nature of God there is nothing missing, for He is not only full, but full (papour). All external manifestations of divine power are poured out of this blessed abundance. God projects his energies outward, not because there is a need for this, but because of his nature and unlimited divine ability to do so. One may ask why the nature of God is such, but it is useless to question the essential nature of anything. It would be absurd to ask why the fire is hot, or why it shines, or why it burns, etc. the fire deprived of these qualities would immediately cease to be fire. Unburned coal is just a piece of coal, and it can not be confused with fire. In the same way, God, devoid of the vibrant manifestation of His divine creative power, would be reduced to the position of an inanimate object. According to Abhinavagupta: If Almighty God always kept the same form, He would have to lose His Consciousness and creative power, thus turning into an inanimate thing like a clay pot(Tantraloka, III 100-101). The manifestation of mutually contradictory concepts such as cohesion and liberation, relative unity and diversity, ignorance and knowledge are just parts of the divine drama. Abhinavagupta says: These related concepts of cohesion and liberation are inalienable characteristics of the Almighty Lord, since the concept of differences is essentially nonexistent in Him (Boddhapanchadaśika, 14). Another difference between the views of Advaita Vedanta and Abhinav (śaiva - Paradvaita ) is that the (Śankara) advaitist can survive oneness only in the standing of samadhi, while śaiva yogis experience it in everyday life. Therefore Narasimhagpta, the father of Abhinavagupta, called this the doctrine of pratyakshadwaita, or direct (immediate) non-duality. According to Abhinavagupta: The great teacher Narasimhagpta, who has attained perfection of the mind with the help of the art of correct contemplation, calls this the non-dual perception. (Malinivijayavartika, I. 763) Abhinavagupta applies a special kind of logical argumentation, which he calls the Sattarka. The conventional system of logic (tarka) is based on beliefs built on the everyday experience of people who think in the ordinary mind and emotions (maya). Sattarka also relies on intuitive experiences of yogis that go beyond bounded existence and perceive reality at the level of unity in diversity (vidya). Abhinavagupta shows that an inanimate object can not by itself affirm its existence, it needs help from outside the living entity, in order to say that such an object exists. This is reminiscent of the famous Berkeley dilemma about the tree falling in the forest. If the animate person is not present, does this noise produce a falling tree? The Kashmiri Shaivites would say: "Yes, there is noise, because all this occurs within the Absolute Consciousness and is attested by Him." This teaching believes that only a conscious animate beginning has an independent existence. It goes to some inanimate object, takes its form and appears in the form of this object. Thus, the manifested inanimate object is considered real. Nevertheless, it seems that such an object has a more real and pure form when it shines inside the consciousness of some living being, where, it can be said, it actually exists. Finally, the inanimate object is eternal, and therefore absolutely real (paramarthasat) only within the most infinite Consciousness. Both ultimate and unlimited consciousness can manifest itself as a cognizing subject, as all instruments of cognition, and as a cognizable object. This proves two things: This approach to truth through the intuitive vision of unity in diversity (sattarka) explains the non-duality of Consciousness endowed with divine power, and shows that this Consciousness is able to take the form of unconscious beings, shining through them. As Abhinavagupta says: Therefore, only the Self (I) shines (everywhere), taking the form of the whole objective existence known as the universe, and continuously unfolding like a universe. The object, having the nature of consciousness, is also completely immersed in the light (consciousness); because the main truth is that only this light (of consciousness) is shining, what difference can there be between omniscience and its absence? ("IPVVV" from "Bhaskari", I.51) So Abhinavagupta shows that the supposed difference between a limited and infinite consciousness is usually based on the phenomenal existence of objects of consciousness, such as the body, the senses and the brain. However, since these objects owe their existence to Consciousness, or arise from it, they can hardly have any sensible judgments about this Consciousness. Instead of relying on conventional logic, sattarka relies on the authority of the intuitive experience of higher monism realized in yogic practice. The views and teachings of Abhinavagupta at first may seem illogical to some scholars who are engaged in Western philosophy, but getting acquainted with this method can also lead them to a more careful look at the essence of their own logic, dependent only on the mind and its constructions. As already mentioned in the introduction, there is a significant difference between Indian Darśana and Western philosophy. The Indian philosophical system (darśhan), basically derives from an intuitive comprehension of truth, while books about truth in the form of darśhan are of secondary importance. In the philosophical systems of India, logic is used only in the writings of such a secondary kind of darshan to present for discussion the revelations obtained as a result of yogic experience. In the west, on the contrary, philosophy is a tradition of world wisdom and logic, developed with the help of ordinary intellectual abilities. Since no kind of yoga practice in Western philosophy is applied, its only main method of comprehension remains the use of the mind. Abhinavagupta clarifies the concept of the Para-advaita of Kashmiri Shaivism in his main works, and considers it from different points of view. In his opinion, the texts devoted to this concept do not necessarily have to apply the included / excluded (bhoga-tyaga lakshana) meaning as a comment or explanation. He says: As disciples who are not familiar with certain synonyms, they are taught as follows: "padapa (tree) is bhuruka, and ghata (pot) is kumbha, so we say that the Almighty Lord is the entire universe. (Malinivijayavartika" , I.929). By this he means that the "definition" of God does not introduce a complementary new predicate, but merely substitutes a synonym, just as we say that "palas" is a "carpet". Paradvaita does not accept and does not deny diversity completely. Although diversity is not an absolute reality, yet its roots are in it. According to Abhinavagupta: Absolute monism is a concept that neither denies nor affirms diversity. (Malinivijayvartika, I.621). Adhering to the view of higher non-duality, Abhinavagupta says that parade is a doctrine in which monism, dualism and monodualism are equal manifestations of the same divine reality: True non-duality is a philosophical view that sees only the Truth in various statements such as "This diversity, this is not diversity (that is, unity), and this is diversity and unity " (ibid., I.626). Abhinavagupta believes that a yogi who has established himself in the understanding and experience of higher non-duality sees only one reality shining in all mutually exclusive entities, such as pleasure and pain, connectedness and liberation, animality and inanity, and. etc., just as an ordinary person perceives both ghat and kumbha as one object (pot), described in different words ("Tantraloka", I.92). Further explaining this concept, Abhinavagupta notes that the Lord Himself shines as 1) a naked Truth manifested in different ways, 2) as a hidden Truth and 3) as a partially hidden Truth (ibid., 93). Further, emphasizing the absolute theistic nature of monistic reality, he asks: How can the tank fill with little water? Only abundant (source) can throw jets (water) in all directions(Malinivijayvartika, I.245). Focusing on the principle of higher non-duality, Abhinavagupta says that only the Absolute Consciousness, endowed with an independent creative power, appears in the form of various phenomena (ibid., I.86). In addition to the differences with the advaita Vedanta, discussed earlier, the concept of the observance of Abhinavagupta should also not be confused with the theory of bheda-abheda visishtadvaita of the Shivaite and Vishnuite schools in southern India. The reasons for this are the following: The Para-advaita maintains an absolutist view in its metaphysics and ontology, and such a view is not shared by Shuddhadvaita supporters such as Vallabha, or followers of Visishtadvaites such as Ramanuja, Shrikantha, etc. Nimbaraka and Chaitanya, adherents of bheda-abhedavada, as well as followers of saivasiddhanta, are also not adherents of absolutism. According to Abhinavagupta, Paramashiva is not a personal God living in a higher heavenly abode like Vaikuntha, Goloka, Divya-vrndavana or Rudraloka. All these places of dwelling, together with their divine masters, are just playful creatures of Paramashiva. As we have already noted, He creates these spheres of habitation by reflecting His divine energies. These creatures inevitably have a beginning and an end; Only Paramśiva is eternal. The final liberation from the point of view of Para-advaita is a state of perfect and absolute unity, much deeper than even the highest variety of Sāyujya ( merging in Lord) or Sālokya (living in the abode of Lord ) the forms of liberation known to these schools. The creation of Paramashiva does not imply any transformation (parinama) of neither God himself, nor his creative energy (Shakti). Rather, it is an amazing transformation that does not cause any change in the source. The Paradvaita of Kashmiri Shaivism does not take any form of svagatabheda, or the original variety of Paramashiva, which imposes a restriction on essential unity in the same way as with the followers of vishishatadvaita who admit the possibility of a variety of eternal truth called Narayana. The paradigm of Kashmiri Shaivism is logically built nonduality, because it perceives only one absolute reality in all phenomenal and noumenal entities. She sees perfect unity even in everyday life. The mind of the follower parade becomes double-edged. He performs daily actions with the help of the external side of the mind, and his inner side remains immersed in absolute unity. The great royal sages, such as Janaka and Sri Krishna, are examples of yogis who have established themselves in that state. It can be assumed that the pantheism of some Western thinkers is similar to the concepts of Kashmiri Shaivism, but this assumption is groundless because of the non-absolutist nature of pantheism. Western philosophers-pantheists do not see God standing behind all these phenomena. As we have already noted, in the opinion of Abhinavagupta, all phenomena are but external manifestations of the Absolute, like reflections. They arise and disappear like the ocean waves of a completely pure, independently playful and divine Consciousness, the only absolute and ever existing reality. Philosophy, concealing in itself such valuable discoveries and ideas, almost did not go beyond the small valley of Kashmir. Surprisingly, it has never won real popularity among scientists in cities such as, for example, Varanasi. Only a few Indian scientists showed interest in Kaśmir Śaivism. This fact also complicated research in this area. Most modern scholars followed the views of authors of secondary importance, which led to various misconceptions and philosophical intricacies. Other scholars began to notice some significant differences between the Vedantic form of monism and the Shivaite non-duality. However, Vedanta remains deeply rooted in the faith of most of them, and this naturally affects their work. Sanskritists mainly devote time and energy to the study of Vyakarana, Nyaya and Vedanta. Obviously, they are not attracted by the possibility of Self-realization, offered by the Sattarka of Shivaism. Thus, Shaivism awaits recognition in academic Sanskrit circles even in a place like Varanasi, the city of Shiva. --- B.N. Pandit "Kashmir Shaivism" (V.A. Dmitrieva) —————- Very blessed New Year’s Eve to everyone! ????????️

Thank you for your post. We need to remember that these theories have refined over centuries and none of the questions or criticisms are left unanswered. Simplest answer of existences and non existence doesn't mean that it cannot happen. This website answers for most of the questions that was raised in various articles also below are some of the texts that was specifically created to counter criticism against Advaita, ultimately what matters is to be faithful to your philosophy. Brahma Sūtra Bhāṣya, Upadeśa Sāhasrī, Pañcapādikā Vivaraṇa, Advaita Siddhi, Nyāya Makaranda, Siddhānta Leśa Saṅgraha, Śivārka Maṇi Dīpikā, Khaṇḍanakhaṇḍakhādya

Namaskaram Prince. May I ask for your wisdom and practical guidance about developing Indriya-Ozhukkam ? (particularly in busy modern life and with bad/lazy habits that have been structurally encoded to be more automatic through long periods of reinforcement)

Thank your for your Guidance respected Tivra ji, Does working with the Ishta of the Amatyakaraka lead to the development of all 4 souls simultaneously and how does one only enter with the incomplete caitya purusa will be very grateful if you could expand on these cases

Dear tivra sir , why was yhvh body destroyed? Who destroyed it's body ? How much time will it take for his body to reform? What are the angels doing for him to reform his body again? Was he truly very evil god? Why did any god or being ever attacked or reprimanded yhvh to not to be acting so evil? Why did vishnu and shiva promised not to harm yhvh and persuaded him to act good when they could forcefully do that through other means and methods?

Namaste Tivra ji. You are right. I'll follow your guidance. Is Devi Khadagmala placed in Supramental realm too?

Tivra ji how did the situation of this universe become so bad that lord arutperunjoti had to himself intervene in this matter and no other god or goddess could do anything? How did the situation become so worse?

Dear tivra sir I have a doubt. Is there any state which is even greater than the shiva aikya sukhateeta? Is there any god who is even greater than arutperunjoti or he is the final god?

Namaste Tīvra. Does one need to follow a specific lifestyle to reap the benefits of the Devī Khaḍgamālā? In my experience, its recitation has consistently backfired. Whenever I chant it, I encounter misfortune. For instance, a few months ago, while I was regularly reciting it, a series of unfortunate events occurred simultaneously: my car, the inverter, and my washing machine all broke down. Most distressing, however, was an encounter with a stranger who—for a most trivial cause—nearly physically attacked me; had I not remained silent, he certainly would have. In my heart, I feel these could not be just coincidences; the pattern is too clear to ignore. I also feel that I may have lacked the necessary preparation, leading to an unfavorable response from the Yoginīs, and I have decided to step away from this chant for my own well-being.

Namaste Tīvra. How one can attain all these Puruṣas body with Ānanda State through Kabbalah.Is it Possible?.Enlighten.Grace.