Passage 1

Here ends the third āhnika, named The Account of Pramāṇa, Its Fruit and Prameya, in the Kriyādhikāra of the Pratyabhijñāsūtravimarśinī, composed by the venerable master Abhinavagupta.

In the Kriyādhikāra, the fourth āhnika.

We praise that Śiva who, making things appear in the spotless mirror of His own self, is the doer of the wondrous relation of cause and effect as well.

In connection with relation, which is all but the spreading forth of the śakti of action, the truth of the relation of what is made known and what makes it known has been established. Now, to establish the truth of the relation of cause and effect, another āhnika is begun, in twenty-one verses: the passage that begins “And this One” and ends “so will alone is being the cause, being the doer, action”. In it, in one verse, it is put forward that on our own view the relation of cause and effect is just the relation of doer and object. Then, in three verses, the insentient’s being a cause is refuted. Then, in six verses, it is established that being the cause, in the form of being the doer, belongs to the sentient alone. Then it is said by the way, in three verses, that in inference the śakti of niyati must of necessity be drawn on. Then, in three verses, that even the truth of cause and effect the Buddhists speak of leans on our view alone, and if not, it is nothing. In three, that the relation of cause and effect the Sāṃkhya sets out does not hold either, unless the sentient’s being the doer, as we have stated it, is accepted. In two, that this does not fit even the sentient if it is not the Lord. This is the sense in brief. But now the text itself is explained.

Having thus established, by way of the śakti of action, that in dealings the Blessed One is to be spoken of as having the single form of the pramātṛ, he says, to show that His form as doer too is established from this without effort:

And this One, because His śaktis are endless, makes these things appear in this way, by the sway of will. This is action, and that is His being the maker.

“Ca” is for restriction: it is this ancient pramātṛ alone who makes these things, ābhāsas that have appeared before, appear in an unbroken succession. How? By the sway, that is, the power, of will, which is not different from the Lord, whose form is free of vikalpa, and which has no sequence. Where do those things of His abide? He says, “because His śaktis are endless”. For all things abide in Him in the form of His śakti, as one with His svarūpa. So it has been said,

“And of the Master, standing in His own self,”

in that passage. This making appear, which is that will, is action: the Blessed One’s being the maker.

But surely a sprout is seen arising from a seed, and no sentient being is seen entering in there. So how has this been said? With this doubt in view, he says:

But the insentient has no such śakti, that being should come to what is not or to what is. So being cause and effect is, in truth, nothing but being doer and object.

An effect could be thought of as existent or as non-existent. To call it both, or neither, or inexpressible contradicts itself in its own words; so what is the use of that? If the pot is non-existent, then being non-existent is its truth; so how could it take on existence, which goes against its own form? For not even with a hundred fallings at its feet will blue put up with yellowness in itself. But if the pot already exists, then what else is begged of the stick, the wheel and the string? Being the object of a coming to light, being clear and the like must also be weighed in terms of existent and non-existent.

But surely, then, let us simply sit in silence. That too is not right, he says:

and yet it is spoken of.