Sanskrit & Trika Shaivism (Magyar-Főoldal)

JavaScript letiltva! Ellenőrizd ezt a linket!

 Parātrīśikālaghuvṛtti (Paratrishika Laghuvritti) - Nem-duális kashmiri Shaivizm

 Abhinavagupta rövid Parātrīśikā kommentárja


Hi, Gabriel Pradīpaka --wrongly-written Pradipaka-- once more. The present scripture is the Abhinavagupta's short (laghu) commentary (vṛtti) on Parātrīśikā (the last portion of Rudrayāmala). There are 11 Tantra-s that are revered in Trika. Among them, five are the main ones: Mālinīvijaya (also called Mālinīvijayottara), Vijñānabhairava, Svacchanda, Rudrayāmala and Netra (also known as Mṛtyuñjit). This text is also called Parātriṁśaka or Parātriṁśikā. As a result, the Abhinavagupta's short commentary on the last portion of Rudrayāmala can be designated in three different ways: Parātrīśikālaghuvṛtti --wrongly-written Paratrishika Laghuvritti-- or Parātriṁśakalaghuvṛtti or Parātriṁśikālaghuvṛtti. Nonetheless, only the first name is commonly seen.

The Abhinavagupta's long (bṛhat) commentary (vṛtti) on Parātrīśikā is NOT called Parātrīśikābṛhadvṛtti, as one might deduce perhaps. Yes, that is a possible name, but the real title of the long commentary is: Parātrīśikāvivaraṇa --wrongly-written Paratrishika Vivarana-- (an explanation or exposition on Parātrīśikā). As the Tantra being commented is the same one, what I say in my introduction to Parātrīśikāvivaraṇa is mostly valid here too. Be warned that by "short commentary" Abhinavagupta did not mean "easier" but "extremely difficult as always but during less time". I am not joking despite my strange way to describe this book. I never read an "easy" book by Abhinavagupta and the present scripture will be no exception to the rule. This is the constant problem when one deals with massive Masters. The more massive the Master, the faster one will advance to Final Liberation, but at the same time, the more massive his headache will be in the process even if the Master is didactical. Why? Because the magnitude of his knowledge is just... "massive". Unfortunately, Abhinavagupta is not didactical either, in my opinion, which will increase the degree of difficulty... and the respective number of notes of explanation I will have to write to keep the reading "didactical and easy".

In this way, by "short commentary", the reader should understand that I will not have to write zillions of notes of explanation as in the case of Parātrīśikāvivaraṇa but hardly one or two millions if I am lucky enough. I already read the scripture from beginning to end, and that is why I am writing all this. Let us get down to work now!


 Further Information

Gabriel Pradīpaka

