8/12/2019 The Tattvas of Kashmir Shaivism and Samkhya

1/2

The tattvas of Kashmir Shaivism, as well as Sankhya and Vedanta, enumerate 5

elements - Anthroposophy enumerates 4. The great elements, the Mahabutas

of

Kashmir Shaivism, are earth, water, fire, air, space. For Anthroposophy they are

earth,water, air, fire.

The West starting with Aristotle starts from the ground upman as earthly being.

To

include space, the starting point has to be outside it. That means that the issue

goes

back to the foundational principles in each. The positing of space as the 5th

element not

only originates in the East, but goes back thousands of years to Sankhya. Man

now liveswithin space, lost in space. The East saw the Cosmic man, the west the earthly

man.

The issue goes back to the foundational principles in each. The exclusion of space

in

Anthroposophy can be seen as related to its experience and emphasis on beings.

This

basic philosophic orientation goes right into the 'substance' of what and how one

sees.

The 'rounding', of the moon, for example, closed off within itself is a visual'metaphor'

for 'being', though not being as such. It shows man as a being within space, an

object

in space along with others. Consciousness encapsulated becomes a being.

It might easily be said and is often implied in Anthroposophy that the 'being

principle'

results because we have grown in knowledge and the 'consciousness principle'

belonged to an older, less 'mature' human being. However modern man has not

arrived at the 'being principle' because he has attained maturity, rather he hasattained

'maturity' because of the 'being principle' which 'rounded out' the planets and

brought

man down to earth.

8/12/2019 The Tattvas of Kashmir Shaivism and Samkhya

2/2

When we speak of 'being principle' vs 'consciousness principle', it can be likened

as

metaphor to the experience of major and minor in music. Experience of the

major

involves an opening out, an expansion. In the experience of the minor there is akind

of diminishment, the above is closed off. Dissonance rounds out the triad when

'major' and 'minor' clash. Thus, the dissonance when some expressions of

Anthroposophy are heard to some-one imbued with Kashmir Shaivism and vice-

versa.

Speaking in terms of music, 'major' belongs to the East and 'minor' to the West. It

wasntirrelevant that the 'stream of evolution', as Rudolf Steiner relates it, moved

to

the West. In doing so it brings man to the 'minor' experience which then gives riseto

the 'being principle' in philosophy imbuing all thought and activity.

The following question arises. Can we speak of 'consciousness' without 'beings',

or, are

the 'transcendent' and the 'immanent' (beings) BOTH eternal? When does the

time

arrive to overcome the 'one-sidedness' of each, the onesidedness of East and the

onesidedness of West? The older focus of the east was one-sided - thus the very

common belief that liberation meant a withdrawal from the world. In this sense,the

'being' focus of Anthroposophy is also one-sided, it is a science of beings.

Kashmir

Shaivism sees liberation differently than Advaita Vedanta. Where is there to go?

asks

Abhinavagupta, there is only one reality.

If the immanent aspect of the universe (beings) is developed further, in greater

detail,

than in Kashmir Shaivism, and if Anthroposophy sees how beings areencapsulated

consciousness, a consciousness which in itself is one, a 'new conceptualization',

can be

found with expressions dissonant to neither.