परमार्थसार (महामाहेश्वर अभिनवगुप्त - त्रिक-दर्शन, अद्वैत शैव साधना एवं सान्वय सटीक)

Introduction 9 Siddhā, Mālinī and Vāmaka (Nāmaka) Tantras which constitute the trinity of the main Trika scriptures. This Trinity of scriptures gave the name Trika to the mostly popular practical system of Kashmir Śaivism of the school of Tryambaka. The other important scrip- tures of the school are Svacchanda, Netra and the well known Rudrayāmala Tantras, Śivasūtra, a special type of scriptural work, was revealed to Vasugupta sometime in the beginning of the 9th century AD. His chief disciple, Bhaṭṭa Kallaṭa flourished during the reign of king Avantivarman in the later part of the ninth cen- tury. He is the only author of Śaivism who has been praised by Kalhaṇa in his Rājataraṅgiṇī as a siddha descended to earth for the spiritual uplift of people. (See RT, V-66). The other Śaiva author who has been mentioned by him by name is Somānanda. He had built a Śiva temple named Someśvara where king Harṣa- deva took refuge for a day before his death when he was chased by his enemies. Somānanda's name has been mentioned in connec- tion with such event in political history. But it appears that spiri- tual attainments of Bhaṭṭa Kallaṭa had made him so famous and popular as to attract the attention and interest of the writer of that political history of Kashmir. His religio philosophical and acade- mic activities made the school of Tryamkala sufficiently popular in the valley. He wrote several works, most of which are known now only through references and quotations. His Spandakārikā and Spandavṛtti, both known together as Spandasarvasva, are still available. In Tantrāloka there is such a quotation from one of his works which describes the importance of "dūtī" and proves thus his mastery over the Kula system of Tantrism as well. Some of his works like Svasvabhāva-sambodhana and Tattvavicāra are known from quotations alone. One of his highly important works was Tattvārthacintāmaṇi which has been referred to and quoted by several authors. He wrote a commentary named Madhuvāhinī on Śivasūtra, but that work has also been lost. His works must have been highly mystic in style and character and may have remained out of the scope of ordinary readers and therefore may not have earned the interest of copyists and got consequently lost in obli- vion. Influence of Kṣemarāja, who was prejudiced against him, may also have been a cause of disregard for them in the institu- tion in later centuries. Spandakārikā was wrongly ascribed by Kṣemarāja to Vasugupta and most of the scholars of the present age have been wrongly