The period
between 8
th and 12
th Century was a period of cultural
renaissance in Kashmir.In a period spanning four hundred years
Kashmir produced some of the greatest scholars, who were
instrumental in shaping Indian thought and Philosophy. It was in this time that
we see the resurgence of Agama and Tantra in
Kashmir.
The revelation of Siva Sutras could be termed as a milestone in the
re-establishment of the Shaivate philosophy. K.C.Pandey
[1]
writes ”We shall, therefore not be wrong if we say that Vasugupta gave a
systematic form to the philosophical ideas of the monistic Tantras in his Siva
Sutras in the next decade after Shankaracharya’s visit to
Kashmir
towards the end of the second decade of the 9
th century A.D.” On the
basis of this statement one could infer that Shankaracharya did visit
Kashmir but then there are scholars who claim otherwise. Shankaracharya’s
visit to
Kashmir has always been a matter of
debate and no conclusive evidence has ever been presented to prove to prove it.
In the context
of the above I would like to go into various extant and oral sources to understand
whether Shankaracharya visited Kashmir at all and if he did was he in any way influenced
by the existing tantric lore of Kashmir.I shall also try and see how
Shankaracharya’s writings (post his visit to Kashmir) reflected the impact of
Shaivagamic and Shakta aspects of Kashmiri philosophical systems. I will also
look at various historical and empirical evidences which seem to suggest that
Shankaracharya did indeed visit Kashmir.
Sources for
the History of Shankaracharya
Before we begin
to analyze the various sources available to us for understanding
Shankaracharya’s life and times we need to keep reminding ourselves that a
historical biography in the modern sense did not exist in ancient India.
Exasperating as it may be, we will essentially be dealing with hagiographical
accounts of Shankaracharya’s life and philosophy. The extant legendary
biographies of Shankaracharya date from the 14th to the 18th
centuries, i.e. they are posterior to the Acharya by at least half a millennium
to a millennium. Although they have certain broad similarities, they have
numerous contradictions in detail, and they are full of miracles and
exaggerations.
The sources for
the historical reconstruction of Shankaracharya’s life and work can be
primarily divided into three sections.
1.Traditional
Biographic Literature
a).Lost
Biographies
b).Biographical
accounts or references in “Puranic or semi-Puranic Literature”.
c).Extant
Biographies.
2.Monastic
Traditions or Records
3.Miscellaneous
Literary Sources.
All the above
sources tell us a lot about the times in which Shankaracharya lived but a
biography in the ordinary sense eludes us. In what may termed as philosophical
despair, Prof Belvalkar
[2]
was thus led to declare that “It is the works of Shankara which constitute his
best biography.” Notwithstanding the hagiographical or fictional nature of the
above works especially the biographical and Puranic literature, we have no
option but to dive deep into them to churn out history out of hagiography.
The Date and
Times of Shankaracharya
The controversy
surrounding the date of Shankaracharya has led to the appearance of more than
forty articles and books on the subject. What is worth noting is that the
traditional date or dates upheld by most of the Shankara monastries even today
widely diverge from the critical scholarly opinions which are also not
unanimous. While the traditional view maintains that Shankaracharya lived
somewhere between 5th to 2nd century BC, most historians
and modern Orientalists are of the opinion that the Acharya lived in 8th
or 9th century AD. Most historians however seem to agree that Shankara
lived from AD 788 to 820.
Shnakaracharya’s
period is the period which followed the death of the great Harshavardhana of
Kannauj in the north and Pulakesin II in the Deccan.The fall of Guptas and the
Vakatakas led to the collapse of the great and stable empires.Thus this age
witnessed a struggle for power which eventually led to the emergence of small
feudal states.The emergence of small feudal states led to political anarchy and
thus paving a way for growing disorder in traditional social systems.This can
be easily testified by the following comment that Shankaracharya makes on Brahmasutram:”Idanim
iva kalantare pyavyavasthitaprayan varnasramadharman pratijanita” ‘One
might suppose that varnashramadharma was in disorder earlier also just
as it is now’.
Philosophically
it was however a golden era, characterized by the proliferation of different
schools of thought.Almost all schools of philosophy had their close ties with
one religious sect or another.There was however a dichotomy in the way the
schools accepted the authority of the Vedas.While Mimamsakas and
Nyaya-Vaisesika accepted the authority of Vedas the Buddhists and Jainas simply
rejected them. It needs no mention that cultural changes in India before the advent of Islam
were gradual and never radical or violent. Heterodoxy also seemed to prosper in
this era. The popularity of Kapalikas,Pashupats,Tantarikas,Kalamukhas,Kaulas,Ajivikas
and Pachrataras was also on the upswing. The relaxation of rigid social rules
in the Tantric,Yogic and other ascetic communities were probably a source of
their popularity. The writings of Bana, Bhavabhuti and the Bhratkatha-sloka-samagraha
are eloquent testimony of these tendencies.In my opinion Shankaracharya lived
in the transitional phase between the classical and post-classical era. This
era represented a meeting point between the orthodoxy and heterodoxy, Brahmanical
and Sramanic, Karma and Jnana.
Shankaracharya’s
Philosophy
When I started
reading about Shankaracharya’s philosophy it seemed it was all Maya.I
could hardly get a hang of what Shankara exactly stood for. On one hand he did
not loathe polytheism while on the other he did not approve of the ways of
Buddhists and Jainas or the Sankhyas for that matter.I almost seemed to have
reached a dead end until I read “The System of Shankara” by Will Durant.I will
try and reproduce in my own words on what dawned on me after reading this
article. It was as if Bhartrihari had just proved his theory of sphota
to me.
Basing his approach on Badarayana’s
Brahmasutras, Shankaracharya composed commentaries on Vedanta. Shankara laid emphasis
not on logic but on insight. In Shankaracharya’s own words,” It is not logic
that we need, it is insight, the faculty (akin to art) of grasping at once the
essential out of the irrelevant, the eternal out of the temporal, the whole out
of the part”.Immanuel Kant in his
”Critique of Pure Reason” asks ,How is knowledge possible? Whatever we
know or learn is never free form the boundaries of time, space and causation. Thus
what we seem to know is not real but is our perception of the real. The world
exists, but it is maya not in the sense of delusion, but as phenomenon,
an appearance created partly by our own thought. Behind the veil of maya
or the principle of change, to be reached not by knowledge and intellect but
only by insight and intuition, is the one universal reality, Brahman. Only when
we forget the limits of time, cause and space does our Atman become identical
with Brahman or God. Brahman is the cause and effect, the timeless and secret
essence of the world. The aim of the philosophy is to find that secret.
Finally Kashmir…..
That brings us to the moot
question of whether Shankaracharya visited Kashmir
or not. There is a strong oral tradition among Pandits of Kashmir that
Shankaracharya did visit Kashmir.Call it folklore/belief/myth or whatever you
like, I will begin with what I have heard as a part of my bedtime story.This is
how it goes.
There is a
place called Vichar Nag in Kashmir which Shankaracharya is believed to have visited.As
the name would suggest it was a place for congregation of great minds or great
thoughts. Shankaracharya in the course of the discussion suggests that the idol
is but a representation of God and nothing more, while the Kashmiri scholars stick
to their point of view that the idol of the deity is a manifestation of the
deity.In the process of proving his point he slaps the idol of Shakti to show
that it is bereft of any life but to his utter surprise blood starts oozing out
of the forehead of the deity. It is then that Shankarachrya tears out a piece
of cloth and ties it on to the forehead of the Shakti. It is believed that the
process of wearing a taranga (a headgear that Pandit women wear) has
started from this day.
Another belief that survives
till this day is that Shankaracharya along with his disciples was camping on
the outskirts of the Srinagar
city.It is believed that their hosts provided them with all the ingredients for
preparation of food. What they however forgot to give them was a device to
light fire. When the lady of the house wakes up next morning she is surprised
to see that uncooked food and unused wood is lying as it was given to the
Shankaracharya. On enquiring from them as to why they did not cook she receives
this answer that they had nothing to lit the fire. She exclaims “Oh learned
ones, is that what kept you hungry?” and she throws a few drops of water on the
wood and it catches fire. There are other variants of this story wherein it is
believed that a virgin girl replaces the lady of the house. In my opinion the
lady of the house seems more plausible and appropriate, taking into account
various hymns that Shankaracharya wrote to the glory of the mother goddess. The
use of Tatanka to describe the iconography of the mother goddess lends credence
to the view that Shakti in Shankaracharya’s hymns was not a virgin but a
Sumangali(a women whose husband was alive).
That takes us to a different set
of observations, mostly empirical but nonetheless important. Wearing of Tatanka
or the ear-rings is common to most feminine deities.In some images of Ardhnarishwara
Shiva is seen to be wearing a Tatanka on the naree half thereby
signifying the importance of the ornament. Tatanka is understood by some as the
Mangalsutra which is the privilege of the Sumangalis(women who have their
husbands alive).It is believed that they are the outward symbols of married
women who are enjoined not to forsake their Tatanka-s by any means, as their
doing so would amount to assuming their husbands are not alive.
Sumangalis wearing outward
symbols of their marriage (like Mangala-sutra) is a pan-Indian phenomenon but women
wearing Tatanka(as outward symbol of their marriage) survives till date, in its
true form only among the Pandit women of Kashmir. One can conclusively say that
wearing of Tatankas (or Dejhour as they are popularly called in Kashmir) was in vogue even in the times of
Shankaracharya. This can be easily testified by the way Shankaracharya
describes Goddess Sharda in “Sharda Bhujanga PraytAshtaka” Ref Sloka 8
bhavAmbhOjnetraAjasam-poojayamAnam,lasanmandahAsa
prabhAvaktraciham;
calaccancalAcAru tATanka-karNam,bhaje SaradAmbAmajasram
madAmbAm
I always pray to Sharadamaba, my
mother, who is being worshipped by Lord Shiva,Vishnu and Brahma.She bears the
mark of gentle beautiful smile on her face,her eyes beautified by the swinging
of charming ear ornaments.
Everytime I read this Sloka the
image of married Kashmiri Pandit woman
flashes infront of my eyes.The catch here is the swinging ear rings.The
ear rings worn by Kashmiri Pandit women are longer and hence tend to swing
unlike ear rings worn by Hindu women(which are far shorter) outside Kashmir.
We will now read this very
important verse from Saundarya Lahiri which many believe was composed in Kashmir by Shankaracharya.Refer,Verse 28.
Sudham apy asvadya
pratibhaya-jara-mrytu-harinum,Vipadyante visve vidhi-satamakhadya divisadah;
Karalam yat ksvelam kabalitavatah
kala-kalana na sambohos tan-mulam tava janani tattanka-mahima
O Mother!all the denizens of the
celestial regions, such as Vidhi, Satamakha and other, perish even after
drinking nectar, which is known to confer immunity from the terrible old age
and death.If the period of life of Sambhu, who has swallowed virulent poison,
is beyond computation, it is all due to the peculiar virtue of Thy
Tatankas(ear-ornaments).
Was Shankaracharya so enamoured
by the aesthetic beauty of the taTanka and so mesmerized by its philosophy &
power that he established the concept outside Kashmir or is it he who brought
this ornament to Kashmir are questions to be pondered over. Is it a mere
coincidence that the deity in Lalita Sahasranama (composed by Shankaracharya)
also wears Tatanka much like the mother goddess of Bhavani Sahasranama (which
is Kashmiri equivalent of the Lalita Sahasranama). Could he have been inspired
by Bhavani Sahasranama to write Lalita Sahasranama?Could it be that Shankaracharya
adorned non-Kashmiri Goddesses with a Kashmiri ear-ornament? Incidentally during varahalakShmI vratam and
other functions like sumangali prArthana (in Andhra Pradesh) - the sumangalis
are presented with 'ear-leaf' even today. It is another question that they
don’t know what to do of it.
Sharda…the connecting Link
I always harboured this desire
to travel to Sringeri Sharda Peeth.In a way I was searching for my roots in a
place as far as some remote corner of Karnataka.The travel through the scenic wild
life sanctuary of Tungbhadra took me to the picturesque location where the
temple of Sharda is located.My first observation upon reaching the temple was
that the location of the temple bore striking similarity to the original abode
of Sharda at Shardi.Both stood at the confluence of two rivers and both are
almost on a mound or a hill.I bowed to the goddess, Shardambal as she is called
there. Soon I started looking for the original sandalwood idol which
Shankaracharya is believed to have brought from Kashmir and installed at
Sringeri.I asked priests and guides about the idol and the Sri-chakra, the
Sri-chakra Shankarachrya is believed (according to the Sringeri Math records)
to have carved before installing the idol of Sharda on it.One more similarity I
thought,even at the temple of Sharda at Shardi the goddess was installed on top
of the Sri-chakra.What was however to surprise me more was the close
resemblance of the ear-rings(taTanka) of the sandalwood idol with that of a
Dej-hour.
Madhava’s Shankara Digvijaya
[3]
tells us that it was Mandana’s wife Ubhaya-Bharati who Shankaracharya requests
to manifest in temples at Risyasringa(Sringeri) after he accepts her as an
incarnation of Saraswati.The Shankara-Vijaya-Vilasa of Cidvilasamuni
[4]
states that Shankara met Mandana in Kashmir.G.C.Pande mentions that “It
may,however be recalled that according to one tradition Suresvara was
originally Mandana Misra who hailed from Kashmir”
The Guru-Vyasa-Kavya of Kasi
Lakshmana Sastri totally omits the debate between Shankarachraya and Ubhaya
Bharati.In fact it goes on to say that this debate takes place between Sharda
and Shankaracharya.The goddess Sharda is pleased with Shanakaracharya and
accepts his request to accompany him to the banks of Tungbhadara
[5].
This observation by G.C.Pande is
worth noting in the context of the debate that Shankaracharya is believed to
have entered with Sharda or Bharati.“Perhaps Kashmir would be the most likely
place since it would reconcile the confusion of debating in front of Sarada in
Kashmir with that of debating with the wife of Mandana
identified with Bharati”
[6]. Needless
to say, whether it was goddess Sharda or Ubhaya Bharati,there is no doubt that
it is a Kashmiri feminine figure that adorns the seat at the temple of Sharda
Peeth at Sringeri.
Shankaracharya’s accession to
the Sarvajnapitha(throne of Omniscience) at the temple
of Sharda has been a matter of some
debate.There are differing sources some of whom claim that Shankaracharya
ascended the Sarvajnapitha at Kanchi and not Kashmir.
Madhava’s
Shankara Digvijaya
tells us very clearly that Shankaracharya ascended the throne of Omniscience at
the
Temple of
Sharda
at
Kashmir[7].He
details how Shankaracharya defeats various scholars of different schools.
Jagad-guru-ratna-mala-stava,
of Parama Sivendram, mentions Shankarachrya’s Sarvajina-pitha-rohana at Kanchi
[8].
Govindanatha’s
Shankaracharya-Carita
mentions in its 9
th chapter,the accession of Shankaracharya to the
Saravjinapitha
[9].
The
Shankara-Vijaya-Vilasa
of Cidavilasamuni mentions that the Shankaracharya ascended the Sarvajinapitha
at Kanch
[10].
The
Guru-Vamsa-Kavya of
Kasi Lakshmana Sastri in its third canto mentions Shankaracharya ascending the
Sarvajinapitha at
Kashmir[11].
Nilakantha’s
Sankarabhyudaya,in
its sixth canto,talks of Shankara visiting
Kashmir
to the Sarvajinapitha.
[12].
So clearly the biographers are
divided over the question of Shankaracharya visiting Kashmir or ascending the
Sarvajinapitha at Kashmir.Based on my understanding of the texts mentioned
above it seems biographers who believe that Shankara established the Kanchi
Mutt are the ones who claim that though Shankaracharya did ascend the
Sarvajinapitha but it was Kanchi and not Kashmir where this honour was bestowed
on him.
Shankaracharya and Kashmir-The philosophical osmosis
By the arrival of the 8th
century Buddhism was clearly a waning philosophy on the horizon of Kashmir.The
local faith which had hitherto been greatly influenced by Buddhist thought and
philosophy, was fast returning to its Tantric, Shaivite and Agamic roots. Such
was the time when Shankaracharya is believed to have set foot on the pious land of Sharda.
In the pursuit of demystifying
Shankaracharya reanimating the corpse of the dead king
[13]. G.C.Pande
makes the following observation” Presumably the legend arose from a
misunderstanding.
Kama-kala did not merely mean erotics, but had a
technical significance in
Tantra-sastra for which Kashmir was
famous.This sense may be seen in
Kama-kala-vilasa.Shankara could have
acquired a knowledge of the strongly
Advaiatic Tantra-sastras in Kashmir,which
would fit in with the tradition that ascribes the
Saundaraya-Lahiri and
the
Prapanchsara to him as also the fact of the currency of
Srividya among
his followers.A commentary of the
Prapanchsara records that the work was
compiled by Shankara in Kashmir”
[14].
Prapanchsara Tantra is in
a way an endorsement of Tantricism.The vivarna written by the Padampada records
that it is a summary of the Prapanchagama,which was a vaster and older
compendium of Tantra existing in Kashmir. The
author of the sub-commentary Prayoga-kama-dipika states that the work
was compiled by Shankaracharya while residing in Kashmir.He explains this by
the fact that Shankaracharya pays obeisance to Goddess Sharda at the very
beginning of the work.
In most of his commentaries
Shankaracharya makes no mention of Siva and wherever he does it is mainly to
criticize the dualistic theism of prevailing Saiva system at South
India.However there is a marked shift in his stand which can be observed in the
Daksinamurti-strota which finds close echoes to non-dual Saiva
philosophy of Kashmir.It cannot be denied that the remarkable development of
Kashmir Saivism dates from the time Shankaracharya is believed to have visited
Kashmir
[15].K.C.Pandey
observes”If we compare the philosophical ideas of Shankara,as contained in his
Daksina Murti Strota and explained by his pupil Survesvaracharya in his
commentary on the above Strota,we find that Sankara’s conception of the
ultimate reality is the same as that of the Pratyabhijna.In fact he uses all
the important technical expressions in the same sense in which they are used in
the Pratybhijna.”
In the course of his travel to
Kashmir and Himalyas it is most likely that he came in contact with varieties
of theistic monism which were prevalent there.While the basic philosophy of Shankaracharya
might have stayed the same it is very much possible that his acquaintance with
diverse modes of worship may have led to his acceptance of their theistic
beliefs. This is reflected in the strotas devoted to the Devi in
Saundaraya-lahiri.For
once his devotional fervour overcomes his epistemological caution as he sings
to the majesty and glory of the mother goddess.It clearly emanates as a text
wherein the “freedom or dynamism” of the consciousness (as in Shakta Advaita)
overtakes the “passive and actionless” attribute of consciousness (as in
Shakara’s Advaita).This verse from Saundaraya-Lahiri,”
Catuhsasthya tantraih
saklam abhisandhaya bhuvanam”clearly establishes his inclination towards
the Tantric practices of Kashmir.The epithet”
sarvatantras-vatantara” in
his
virudavali indicates that the Tantras,the authority of which he
accepts were sixty-four in number.The Tanttraraja which is a later Tantra in
the Kaula system of Kashmir Saivism,according to some authorities is recognized
by Shankaracharya as the 65
th Tantra in his Saundarya Lahiri verse
31 which runs as follows;
[16]
Catuh-sastya tantraih saklam atisamdhaya
bhuvanam
Sthitas
tat-tat-siddhi-pravasa-para-tantraih pasupatih;
Punas tvan-nirbandhad akhila-purusarth’aika
ghatana
Svatantram te tantram ksiti-talam
avatitarad idam.
Pasupati(Siva) at first
remained satisfied after ‘deluding’(atisandhaya) the world,by giving out the
sixty-four tantaras,which expound practices conferring only one or another of
the various psychic powers and the wordly fulfillments.Afterwards,on Thy
special insistence,He revealed this Thy own Tantra to the world,independent of
all the others and capable of conferring all the Purusarthas-Dharma,Artha,Kama
and Moksha-on the votaries,by itself.
The unanimity with which both
the traditions (Kanchi and Sringeri) admit to the fact that Sankaracharya set
up the Sricakra-yantra for worship lends credence to the fact that Shankara had
clearly imbibed the Shakta advaita which keeping his own intact.
Shankaracharya’s visit to Kashmir is corroborated by local legends as well as most
of the biographies written on this great master. Although Kalhana makes no
mention of his visit to Kashmir but then considering the nature of Rajatarangni
as a chronicle it shouldn’t surprise us.Kalhana makes no mention of
Abhinavagupt either so one can reconcile with Shankaracharya not finding a
mention in Rajatarangni.Besides we have to bear in mind the fact that
Shankarachrya’s visit did not invite any royal attention and thus could have
gone un-noticed by chroniclers of kings.
All that we have discussed so
far in this paper would seem incomplete without the mandatory reference to the
temple of Shankaracharya in the centre of Srinagar city.This is to my mind is a
living example of the impact of Shankara on Kashmir.The reference to the temple
is by Kalhana in the verse 341 of 1
st Taranga of Rajatarangni
wherein he mentions that Gopaditya (369-309 BC) consecrated the shrine of
Jyesthesvara on the Gopa-hill(Gopadari).
The hillock,
according to
Tarikh-i-Hassan[17],
and (
Waquiai Kashmir of Mulla Ahmed) was known originally as
Anjana
and later as
Jeth Ludrak and the temple was built by King Sandhiman of
the Gonanda dynasty of Kashmir (471-536 Laukek Era), corresponding to 2605-2540
B.C. He gave the name
Jeshteshwara to the temple and the hillock came
to be known as
Sandhiman Parbat after the name of the King. This name
Jeshteshwara
for the temple prevailed till the arrival of Adi Shankaracharya, who is
believed to have visited
Kashmir and stayed at
the temple complex. This is confirmed by
Tarikh-i-Hassan[18]
[1] Page
No.154.Abhnivagupta by K.C.Pandey published by Chaukhamba Amarbharti Prakashan,Varanasi,2002,Third
Edition
[2] Page
No.4,Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande,published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[3] Verse
61-72,Madhava’s Shankara-Digvijiya by Madhava Vidyarana(Trs by Swami
Tapasyananda) published by Ramakrishna Matha,2003.
[4] Page
No.125, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by
MLBD,2004,2nd Edition
[5] Page
No.28, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[6] Page
No.349, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by
MLBD,2004,2nd Edition
[7] Verse
54-92, Madhava’s Shankara-Digvijiya, by Madhava Vidyarana(Trs by Swami
Tapasyananda) published by Ramakrishna Matha,2003.
[8] Page 21,
Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[9] Page 22,
Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[10] Page
23, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[11] Page
27,page 341, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by
MLBD,2004,2nd Edition
[12] Page
29,page 345. Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by
MLBD,2004,2nd Edition
[13] Verse
73-109, Madhava’s Shankara Digvijiya, by Madhava Vidyarana(Trs by Swami
Tapasyananda) published by Ramakrishna Matha,2003.
[14] Page
348, Life and Thought of Shankaracharya by G.C.Pande published by MLBD,2004,2nd
Edition
[15] Page
151, Abhnivagupta by K.C.Pandey published by Chaukhamba Amarbharti Prakashan,Varanasi,2002,Third
Edition
[16] Page
575,Abhinavagupta by K.C.P,K.C.Pandey makes erroneous reference to Anand
Lahiri,pp 79-82 Saundaraya Lahiri translated by Tapasayaanada published by Rama
Krishna Matha.
[17] Page
394-396,Vol-II Tarikh-i-Hassan.by Hassan Khuihami Published by Oriental
Research Department,Srinagar,1954
[18] Page
80-82,Vol-I Tarikh-i-Hassan. by Hassan Khuihami Published by Oriental Research
Department,Srinagar,1954
