Differences between Vedanta & Kashmir Shaivism II - Three Gunas (attributes)
The 3 gunas of sattva (purity), rajas (activity) and tamas (inertia) are a notable feature and a key fundamental concept of the samkhya, vedanta systems and several other Hindu systems and philosophies. However these systems do not clearly explain the source of these 3 attributes as pointed out in the quote below. Kashmir Shaivism and some other tantric sects have a different take on this subject of 3 attributes. These attributes do not hold the same importance or meaning as in the system of Vedanta. While this may look like a minor thing, these 3 gunas are basic building blocks of everything in the universe in these systems. Changing the significance of these 3 gunas and the way purusha, prakriti and maya are defined sets the KS philosophy clearly apart from Vedanta. The basic foundation of these 2 systems are themselves vastly different. Just because there are some superficial similarities at the surface level, some people are entirely confused or motivated into believing these two systems are essentially the same.
Quote:
5. Three Gunas (attributes)
Vedanta describes Prakriti as a combination of three Gunas – Satvic, Rajas, and Tamas. Further it describes the nature of these gunas. Thus Satva is enlightenment and pleasure; Rajas is turbulence and pain; and Tamas is ignorance and lethargy. It does not explain the source of the nature of these gunas.
Kashmir Shaivism has examined this issue. In their view, Paramshiva possesses limitless power to know, to do, and to diversify. These powers are known as jnana, kriya, and maya. By the limitations brought about by maya, the Infinite Consciousness is reduced to finite consciousness – purusha (the limited being, anu or pashu).Here they view these experiences as pleasure, pain, and ignorance.
|
For someone that has studied various Hindu systems and vedanta, when they initially approach the KS or other tantric systems, they may tend to interpret or believe that some of the concepts are the same. Trying to compare Brahman with Shiva in KS or Brahman with Vishnu in the Vaishnava systems. Since many of these systems also talk a lot about óneness' and nondual, this adds to the confusion and leading to the wrong conclusion that the ultimate reality described by these systems are all one and the same. It cannot be further from the truth. A very careful study and a clear understanding is needed to see and understand the fundamental differences. For instance, the concept of Brahman is fundamentally different from Param Shiva in Savitie systems or Maha Vishnu as described in the Vaishnava systems. There are similarities between how Shiva is defined in Shaivite systems and how Vishnu is described in Vaishnava systems. We can find more similarities ironically between two competing systems (In ancient India) of Shaiva and Vaishnava systems even though one is primarily based on Monism and the other is mainly based on qualified-nondual or dualistic philosophies rather than entirely non-dual philosophy. It is interesting to note even the Saivite systems and tantra initially started as dualistic systems. Shiva is the top deity or the Óne'to first mysteriously appear as infinite light at the beginning of creation in the Saivite systems, and it is Vishnu who is the Óne'or the first to appear in the Vaishnava systems. Shaiva Siddhanta system of southern India which is popular even to this day is the an example of a Saivite tradition that started entirely with dualistic philosophies in the beginning and later with the influence of Kashmir Shaivism and other traditions adopted the Monistic principles.