See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/337975998

The Relevance of Abhinavagupta's Theory of Reality: Towards a Dialogue

between the Nondualistic Trika Śaivism of Kashmir and Contemporary
Physics

Conference Paper · December 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 1,270

1 author:

Ernst Fürlinger
Danube University Krems
12 PUBLICATIONS 11 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ernst Fürlinger on 17 December 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 (Erscheint in Proceedings of the Abhinavagupta Conference, New Delhi: Indira Gandhi
National Center of the Arts)

The Relevance of Abhinavagupta’s Theory of Reality

Towards a Dialogue between the Nondualistic Trika Śaivism of
Kashmir and Contemporary Physics

Ernst Fürlinger

(Danube University Krems, Austria)

1. Introduction: The surprising puzzle of nature

In the past 100 years, modern physics has made tremendous discoveries, especially
in the fields of astrophysics, quantum theory and theoretical physics. In the mid-
1920s, a revolution in the understanding of the microscopic world took place: the
discovery of the quantum world of the atom and the development of quantum
physics by Max Planck, Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Paul
Dirac, Erwin Schrödinger and others. At the same time, for example, the expansion
of the universe as the consequence of the Big Bang was discovered. In 1998, two
independent research teams measured very distant supernovae and made the radical
find:1 This expansion of the universe is not slowed down by gravity as astronomers
had expected, but accelerates, speeds up. This acceleration is explained with the
repulsive gravitational push of an unknown form of energy, denoted as “dark
energy” which counters the force of gravity (Perlmutter 2003; Krauss and Turner
2004; Riess and Turner 2008).

These and other breathtaking scientific achievements in the past 100 years
have begun to provide responses to age-old questions: What was at the beginning of
the world? How old is the universe? And answers such as the accelerating

1
Team 1: Supernova Cosmology Project (Head: Saul Perlmutter, University of California),
Team 2: High-z Supernova Search Team (Head: Brian P. Schmidt, Australian National
University). Online source: Nobel Prize, Press release, 4 October 2011,
https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/press.html

1
expansion of a “runaway universe” (Appell 2008) are ones we didn’t ask for and
couldn’t have imagined. The puzzling aspect of these developments is: the more
modern physics learns about the phenomenal universe, the more it realizes how
much it doesn’t know about it. One of the results of these enormous advancements
within modern physics is precisely the discovery that the greatest part of reality is
unknown to us. Dan Hooper speaks of the “dark cosmos” (Hooper 2007), Katherine
Freese calls it “the dark side” of our universe which “remains a mystery” (Freese
2014: x). The physical universe consists in the main of an unknown form of matter
(“dark matter”), which is invisible, nonluminous,2 and an unknown form of energy
(“dark energy”) which drives the accelerating expansion of the universe. According
to the findings of the Planck satellite mission on precise measurements of the
Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), the dominant components of the universe
are dark energy (68.3%), and dark matter (26.8%) (Schumann 2015). The ordinary,
visible atomic matter which we know, accounts only for 5% of the universe. Since
it cannot be observed, the existence of dark matter can be inferred from its
gravitational effects on visible matter (Freese 2014: 11), and the existence of dark
energy can be inferred from its anti-gravitational force.3

Currently, huge experimental efforts are being made in the field of high-energy
physics, e.g. in Europe with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the European
Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) near Geneva (see Llewellyn-Smith
4
2000). And yet, despite these giant efforts, the puzzle of dark matter remains
unsolved. Also, the nature and properties of dark energy – the presumed cause of
the observed phenomenon of the accelerating expansion – are unknown, and “there
is no persuasive theoretical explanation for its existence or magnitude” (Albrecht,

2
On the history of the discovery of dark matter, see Freeman and McNamara 2006.

3
On the history of the discovery of dark energy, see Kirshner 2016.
4
In the course of these experiments, during Run 1 of LHC, a new particle, the so-called Higgs
boson or Higgs particle, was discovered on July 4th, 2012. This discovery had been theoretically
predicted 48 years ago (see Wilczek 2008; Carroll 2012; Randall 2013; Sample 2013). The
detection of the Higgs particle confirmed the theory of F. Englert, R. Brout and P.W. Higgs of
the mechanism by which elementary particles – electrons and quarks which constitute matter –
acquire mass (Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2013).

2
Bernstein, Cahn et al. 2006).5 In other words, we do not know the nature of 95% of
the observable universe.

As a result of modern physics and technology, we are coming to realize the

immensity, the magnitude of the size, age and dynamics of the universe – which are
almost inconceivable. Paradoxically, it is the result of the extent of human cognition
that our narrow notions of the world have burst, and we have become aware of the
limits of scientific knowledge and physical understanding. By extending the range
of research further than ever before in the history of science, we realize that we do
not understand the world we live in. It is an almost complete secret, a mystery. We
put pieces of the puzzle together without getting the overall picture. The current
tremendous endeavours of the physics world to solve the puzzle cannot mask this
shocking fact. It is a matter of open questions: Is it just a question of time until
physics is capable of expanding beyond this border of cognition, by improving its
research methods? Or have modern physics and its methods reached their limit? Is
there an intrinsic dimension of reality which represents a principal limit for
physical understanding and is beyond experimental reach? Do contemporary
astrophysical questions concern a dimension of reality which is beyond objective
phenomenal reality, characterized by the epistemological duality of subject and
object in space and time and its corresponding observation and language of
description? In this case, the quest for the nature of reality at the macroscopic level
would meet the same fundamental challenge which modern physics already
encountered 100 years ago in form of the unusual problems of the quantum
phenomena and their description.

1.1 Complementarity: philosophical consideration of quantum physics

In this situation, it could be useful to remember certain philosophical considerations

of the early 20th century pioneers in the field of quantum physics. Werner
Heisenberg was convinced that science cannot describe nature as such. With regard
to the observation of events at the atomic level, he says: “… and we have to
remember that what we observe is not nature in itself but nature which is exposed to

5
In 2016, NASA set in motion a new space telescope project to explore dark energy: the “Wide
Field Infrared Survey Telescope” (WFIRST) which will start its mission in the mid-2020s.
Online source: Berkeley Lab, News Center, February 18, 2016,
https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2016/02/18/berkeley-lab-role-wfirst/

3
our method of questioning” (Heisenberg 1959: 57). The objective reality is limited
to the realm which can be described by man within space and time (Heisenberg
1984: 154). However, this realm is not identical with reality. This becomes clear if
we go behind this realm (of ‘objective reality in space and time’) and enter the sub-
atomic dimension. In his Como-lecture in 1927, Nils Bohr introduced the concept
of “complementarity” for the unusual features of quantum phenomena, their
experimental observation and description. Bohr uses this concept to deal with the
perplexing fact that atomic phenomena cannot be observed objectively, without
external disturbance or interactions with the agency of observation: “Accordingly,
an independent reality in the ordinary physical sense can neither be ascribed to the
phenomena nor to the agencies of observation.” (Bohr 1961: 54) This has far-
reaching consequences: “… according to the quantum postulate, any observation
will be impossible and, above all, the concepts of time and space lose their
immediate sense.” (ibid.) To make causal space-time observation and interpretation
possible at all, Bohr’s solution is a “complementary theory”6 in which the
description unifies mutually exclusive features. Bohr’s example is the nature of
light, which in space-time categories is explained by the wave theory, and from the
perspective of the conservation of energy is expressed by the light quantum. For
Bohr, this contradiction between the wave idea and quantum idea of light – which
are mutually exclusive and yet are both supported by direct experiments, requires a
complementary view. Only by taking both ideas or pictures together can we achieve
a complete description of the nature of light. In the words of Freeman J. Dyson,
Bohr’s principle of complementarity “…says that nature is too subtle to be
described adequately by any single viewpoint. To obtain a true description of nature
you have to use several alternative viewpoints that cannot be seen simultaneously.”
(Dyson 2004: 76) In my view, the principle of complementarity has a more radical
meaning than Dyson’s interpretation in the sense of multiple perspectives. If we go
beyond the limits of ordinary perception and observation, to physical experience at
the atomic and sub-atomic level, we could say that this reality can only be described
in nondual terms which correspond to its coincidence of opposites.

Bohr applied this principle of complementarity not only to atomic physics

but also to the relation between cultures and civilizations (e.g. Bohr 1999: 97f). The

6
From Latin completum – “the whole”.

4
concept of complementarity in Bohr’s terms could function as a comprehensive
conceptual framework for a dialogue between modern physics and Indian
philosophies. In this paper, we will look at the example of the philosophy of
Abhinavagupta and his Trika school in Kashmir. The concept of complementarity
expresses the conviction that no single viewpoint is sufficient to understand,
comprehend and describe the world. Neither an Indian school of thought such as
Trika Śaivism of Kashmir nor modern physics could replace each other as a single
way for understanding reality. I am making this statement to argue against the
attitudes of religious traditionalist streams which are hostile towards modern
science and claim that their religion is superior to science. This claim to superiority
is based on the conviction that the modern scientific findings are already contained
in the centuries-old holy scriptures of the religion in encoded form. This statement
is also made to counteract positions within contemporary physics which strictly
reject philosophical approaches as being outside the realm of true science and
therefore irrelevant for physical research.

1.2 Dialogue between nondualistic Trika Śaivism and modern physics:

Methodological and hermeneutical considerations

What are the requirements for such a dialogue? At this point, we should reflect on
the epistemological status and claim of the Kashmiri Trika tradition compared with
modern physical research. I would like to argue that even though this pre-modern
school of thought follows principles and applies methods which are different from
modern scientific principles, criteria and methods, it can be nonetheless
acknowledged as a source of valid knowledge. Tantric Śaivism in Kashmir is
founded on a particular scriptural body of work called Tantras, which must have
been composed between about 400 and 800 CE (Sanderson 1988: 663). The
elaborate Kashmiri exegesis of these texts began in the middle of the ninth century,
differentiated between the Krama and Trika school on the one hand and the Śaiva
Siddhānta on the other (Sanderson 1988: 690). The main works in this first phase of
the Trika and Krama are the Śivasūtra and the Spandakārikā. The second phase
consists of the philosophical foundation of the schools by Somānanda (c. 900-950)
and his treatise Śivadṛṣṭi (Sanderson 1988: 694f). The scholarly foundation was
further developed and refined in the works of Somānanda’s disciple Utpaladeva (c.
5
925-975) and reached its definitive formulation with Abhinavagupta (c. 975-1025)
and his pupil Kṣemarāja (c. 1000 – 1050). Abhinvagupta’s magisterial
systematization of these philosophical, ritual and yogic Śaiva traditions within
Hindu Tantrism forms the culmination of the Kashmiri Trika and Krama schools.
These schools can be seen as specific knowledge systems and research traditions
based on the exegesis of scriptures, systematic reflection and yogic experience.
Over the centuries it came to form a consistent and detailed teaching system. Of
course, the knowledge of Trika Śaivism does not derive from empirical scientific
testing in a modern sense. In the case of physics, the standard for the verification of
physical knowledge are predictions which are then experimentally confirmed or
refuted under laboratory conditions. Nevertheless, the statements of the Kashmiri
authors are not mere philosophical speculation: they too are based on empirical data
and evidence, on yogic experience. Although this kind of experience is subjective
and cannot be tested in a laboratory experiment and proved in an intersubjective
way, we must keep in mind that physical knowledge does not replace or exclude the
validity of other forms of knowledge. As the physicist, mathematician and
cosmologist George F.R. Ellis says in an interview with John Horgan:

“The belief that all of reality can be fully comprehended in terms of physics
and the equations of physics is a fantasy. As pointed out so well by
Eddington in his Gifford lectures, they are partial and incomplete
representations of physical, biological, psychological, and social reality.”
(Horgan 2014)

Moreover, we need to consider that many models of and assumptions made by

contemporary theoretical physics (e.g. superstring theory) or astrophysics (e.g.
about the inside of black holes) are not testable. The fundamental recognition of
Trika as a genuine knowledge system could motivate a fundamental hermeneutical
trust that the textual tradition – based as it is on standards of empirical evidence and
logical reasoning – in principle provides valid evidence.

This is especially true today, when we see that it is precisely the admirable and
amazing achievements of modern physics that have led to the realization of the
radical limits of the realm of its knowledge and methods: there is an urgent need to
overcome mutual rejection and the strict dividing line drawn between these
completely different knowledge systems and research traditions. It is a situation
which requires a complementary approach. Both systems – a stream of Indian
philosophy which is at the same time a spiritual way (such as the nondualistic
6
Tantric Śaivism of Kashmir) – and modern physics (including quantum physics as
well as astrophysics and cosmology) would benefit from such a mutual exchange.
Both could reach a deeper understanding of its own insights, and develop an overall
framework for the interpretation of reality which combines both perspectives.
Perhaps physics could be inspired in its search for a more complete physical theory
by considering the non-physical perspective of Trika. However, this dialogue has
not yet begun. In this paper, I will try to outline a few possible links between the
world experience and view of Abhinavagupta, and modern physics. I will attempt to
identify some elements of Abhinavagupta’s thought which in my view suggest that
such a dialogue would be possible and could throw fresh light on both approaches.

2. Abhinavagupta’s “Theory of Everything”

In terms of the principle of complementarity, Abhinavagupta’s philosophy itself is

characterized by its complementary nature in a strict sense. Abhinavagupta
developed a “supreme non-duality” (paramādvayam): the “unsurpassable, ultimate”
(anuttaraḥ), the “highest” (paramārtha), which is of the nature of supreme light7,
does not exclude plurality, but contains both plurality/ differentiation and
unity/oneness as modes of its self-representation (see Sanderson 2005: 95;
Fürlinger 2009: 12, 145, 157, 250). The phenomenal, differentiated world in space
and time is not seen as unreal in relation to the one undifferentiated reality beyond
space and time, but rather as its visible, dynamic expression and manifestation, and
not separate from it. The consequence of this supreme non-duality is that every
element of the physical world has a ‘trans-physical’ or ‘deep-dimension’. The
innate nature of everything – light, radiation, energy, matter at both macroscopic
and microscopic level, the dynamism of spacetime, human consciousness,
intelligence, bodily organs, senses, sensory perception, as well as life and the life
force itself and so on – evolves from the ultimate ground. The various elements are
at the same time one with that ultimate ground. From this perspective, we could
think of reality as a dynamic nondual continuum and simultaneousness of
formlessness and form, timelessness and time, emptiness and emergence.8 Higher

7
See Abhinavagupta: Parātrīśikā-Vivaraṇa (transl. Singh 2000: 34).
8
The Kashmirian Trika expresses this continuum and simultaneousness by its system of 36
tattvas (lit. “that-ness; principles”), from the primal spandaḥ (śivatattva) to solid matter (pṛthivī,
7
non-duality expresses the complementary nature of reality: we can only adequately
describe it as a coincidence of exclusive opposites.

This whole view is condensed in the opening benedictory verse of Abhinavagupta’s

major works Mālinīvijayavārttika (=MVV), Parātrīśikā-Vivaraṇa (=PTV),
Tantrāloka (=TĀ) and Tantrasāra (=TS). The repeated use of the verse shows its
importance: it contains the complex ontology of Trika Śaivism in a nutshell.

vimalakalāśrayābhinavasṛṣṭimahā jananī

bharitatanuś ca pañcamukhaguptarucir janakaḥ |

tadubhayayāmalasphuritabhāvavisargamayaṁ

hṛdayam anuttarāmṛtakulaṁ mama saṁsphuratāt ||

(Dwivedi and Rastogi 1987: vol. II, 1).

May my heart (mama hṛdayam), [embodying] the wholeness/totality

(kulam) of the bliss (amṛta, lit. “nectar”) of the ultimate (anuttara), fully
shine forth/expand (saṁsphuratāt), full of the state of absolute potential
(visargaḥ, “emission, creativity”) made manifest in the union (yāmalam) of
the two: the mother (jananī) grounded in pure representation, radiant in
ever-new (abhinava) genesis/emanation (sṛṣṭi), and the father (janakaḥ), all-
enfolding (bharitatanuḥ, lit. “whose form is full), who maintains the light
through his five faces (pañcamukha). (TĀ 1.1)9

In this artful composition, two meanings are intertwined:10 at the ontological level,
the union of “mother” and “father” can be interpreted as the non-duality of the
ultimate (denoted in the system by the names ‘Śiva’, ‘Bhairava’, ‘Maheśvara’ etc.)
and its innate power (‘Śaktiḥ’) which manifests itself in the form of the universe. At
the same time, at the personal human level, “the union of the two” can be read as
the yogic sexual union of Abhinavagupta’s father, Siṁhagupta, and his mother,

“earth”). These levels of reality are not separated, but permeate each other. The highest tattva
(Śiva) is present in all other tattvas, in “earth” – from the perspective of the ordinary human
cognition - in most limited form (see e.g. Abhinavagupta, TS, ch. 8: earth is pervaded by all
tattvas; transl. Chakravarty 2012: 122). At the same time, Abhinavagupta states in his
“Paramārthasāra”: “This world of thirty-six principles is reflected within the ultimate principle,
which, formed of light, is complete (paripūrṇam) …” (PS, verse 10; transl. Bansat-Boudon/
Tripathi 2011: 104). – I would like to thank Dr. Sunthar Visuvalingam and Prof. Lyne Bansat-
Boudon who underlined the importance of the perspective of the system of 36 tattvas for the
topic of the paper (discussion at Abhinavagupta-Conference, IGNCA, Delhi, 16th Dec., 2016).
9
The translation is based on Sanderson 2005: 89 (slightly adapted).
10
See the commentary on TĀ 1.1 by Jayaratha; modern commentaries: Singh 2000; Sanderson
2005; Bäumer 2011: 43ff.

8
Vimalā, who gave birth to Abhinava. This inseparability of both meanings is not
just a poetical and skilful exercise in wordplay; rather, it expresses the
inseparability of the dimensions of reality, our common physical (‘objective’) and
human reality and the ultimate dimension of reality beyond/inside it. Moreover,
Abhinavagupta emphasizes the outstanding place of human sexuality: He seems to
express that the bliss of sexual union from which new life springs forth corresponds
with the supreme bliss and joy (jagadānandaḥ) which is the essence of the ultimate
reality and from which the whole universe in its beauty and incomprehensible
magnitude bursts and shines forth.

Thus, the opening verse crystallizes Abhinavagupta’s nondual vision of the world in
which the triad (trika) of the supreme reality (Śiva), its dynamic power (Śaktiḥ) and
the manifest, visible universe including the human being (Nara), its consciousness,
body, and experience, are inextricably indissolubly intertwined, and permeate each
other. We could say: Abhinava develops a “theory of everything”, of all. Of course,
this is not the same as the ultimate physical explanation which modern physics is
seeking, “which will unite all the laws of nature into a single statement that reveals
the inevitability of everything that was, is, and is to come in the physical world”
(Barrow 2007: vii) through physical and mathematical means. Abhinavagupta’s
works represent a beautiful, non-physical “theory of everything” in so far as they
offer a profound, all-embracing view of reality. Unlike physics, Abhinavagupta
does not identify “everything” only with nature. His examination is not restricted to
the physical universe – he considers it as a mode or expression of the underlying
ultimate reality, which is beyond our ordinary, limited cognition and perception,
and thus by definition outside the realm of physical examination. His is also a
“theory of everything” since it is based on one, central, and unifying principle:
“energy” (śaktiḥ), which in this system is the name for the dynamic creative aspect
of the highest reality. Its immanent-transcendent nature unites the differentiated
universe in time and space and the undifferentiated supreme reality which is light
“not limited by time, space and form.” In Abhinavagupta’s view, the reality of
śaktiḥ is the key to understanding the world: both its visible manifestation as well
its ground (āśrayaḥ) and essential nature. It is the key based not only on an
intellectual, but also an experiential, empirical understanding. The schools of non-
dualistic Śaivism of Kashmir developed a complex system of the different forms,
modes and grades of the energies of the supreme reality, focused on the five main
9
energies – the energies of consciousness, bliss, will, knowledge and action11 –
which are responsible for the continuous, ever-new play of the emergence,
manifestation (sṛṣṭi) and dissolution (saṁhāra) of the universe “within”12 the
supreme reality.13 It is a characteristic aspect of this tantric tradition that the senses
are not devaluated, but rather, the senses, the sensory powers and sensory
impressions are seen as particular manifestations of the śaktiḥ (see Fürlinger 2006).
At the center of the esoteric tradition of the non-dualistic tantric Śaivism of
Kashmir there is the form of the śaktiḥ acting within the human being/body in
different forms (e.g. the innate power of breath), which is denoted as kuṇḍalinī or
kaulikī kuṇḍalinī (see Silburn 1988; Lakshman Joo 2014). It is that vibrating,
rotating power which by its upward rise within the subtle body dissolves the limited
state – the contracted dualistic perception and cognition within time – and finally
realizes its own nature, identical with the supreme reality. Therefore, one of the
names of the śaktiḥ is karṣiṇī (“retractor, devourer”), in the sense of “devourer of
time”, Kālasaṁkarṣiṇī,14 which ‘swallows up’, ends time in the state of absorption
(samāveśa).

Strikingly, the word “energy” is in this system not used as a general term: rather,
the Trika texts present a particular characterization of energy by using dynamic
metaphors such as ūrmiḥ (“wave”), spandaḥ (“subtle vibration”). For example, in
his Mālinīvijayavārttika, Abhinavagupta describes the non-dualistic relation
between ‘Śiva’ and its sixth or “highest face”, the “heart”, that is, Śaktiḥ, and the
nature of Śaktiḥ:

“The supreme awareness that has arisen before [all others] from the
unlimited [ground] that contains all things in their pure non-duality is

11
Cit-śakti, ānanda-śakti, iccha-śakti, jñāna-śakti, kriya-śakti, in the tradition of the non-
dualistic Kashmir Śaivism symbolized by the ‘five mouths’ of Śiva, which are the source of the
Śaiva scriptures, or the five forms of Svacchandanātha (see Hughes 1995: 71).
12
Here the limitations of language conditioned by our experience and orientation in space-time
are visible; it is not fit for expressing a dimension of reality without causality and without space-
time.
13
This cycle or “superposition” of the states of emergence and destruction, the “ever new”
quality and dynamism of reality could be seen from the perspective of quantum physics in a
fresh way if we relate it to matter-anti matter, creation and annihilation: the continuous process
of annihilation when particles and anti-particles, matter and anti-matter meet, and constantly
create something radically new, e.g. a new pair of particles, or light (see Freese 2014: 85).
14
For example in TS (Rāma Shāstri 1918b: 27).

10
 manifested all-pervading in the plenitude of its powers, sharing the nature of
that ground, [still] free of the hierarchy of goals that it will appropriate [at
lower levels], differentiated only inasmuch as the radiance it emits is
diffracted in the process of its expansion. This, whose nature is the power of
representation itself, is the heart (hṛdayam) of Śiva. In this state he attains
the highest non-duality by experiencing intimate union with the power that
is eternally one with his nature. When this occurs, the highest ‘face’ arises,
the ground in which absolute potential (visargaḥ) flows. It is the seed of the
universe, beautiful with the all-embracing bliss (jagadānandaḥ) that surges
up in the expansion of the ultimate, holding in non-duality all the ‘faces’
that will subsequently emerge. It is this that is meant [in the scriptures] by
such terms as the Heart (hṛt), the Subtle Motion (spandaḥ), Apperception
(dṛk), the All-Embracing [power] (parā), the Essence (sāram), the Nameless
(nirnāma), and the Wave (ūrmiḥ).” (MVV 1,15-20ab; transl. Sanderson
2005: 97).

Within nondualistic Śaivism in Kashmir, there developed a distinct spanda-school

focused on the doctrine of vibration which goes back to the Spandakārikā treatise in
the ninth century.15

At the same time, texts of the Trika school combine metaphors expressing
“vibration, oscillation, pulsating, throbbing, trembling”, and “shining, flashing up,
sparkling”. A central role is therefore played by words such as visphuraṇam or
saṁsphuratāt (see TĀ 1.1) derived from the root sphur which comprises both
meanings (“to shine, sparkle, burst out, flash, flash up, vibrate, throb, sprinkle”). In
the short treatise entitled Parāprāveśikā, by Kṣemarāja, Abhinavagupta’s disciple,
the Śaktiḥ is characterized as the flashing up/bursting up/manifesting of the primary
“I” in form of the phenomenal universe:

“We adore saṁvid16 which flashes forth (sphurantīm) in form of the highest
primordial energy, the heart of the highest lord which is identical with the
universe and transcends it. Here [in Trika] the highest lord actually is of the
nature of light (prakāśaḥ) and the light of the nature of vimarśaḥ (“self-
reflection”). Vimarśaḥ is called the flashing up (viśphuraṇam) of the
uncreated/ original I (aham) in form of the universe by the light of the
universe and by the dissolution of the universe. If [the universe would be]
without vimarśaḥ, it would be without lord and liveless. And truly that is
vimarśaḥ: cit (the ultimate), caitanya, parāvāk (“the supreme sound, word”)
which rises out of its own joy (rasa), freedom/autonomy (svātantrya), the

15
On the spanda school see Dyczkowski 1987; 1994.

16
Jaideva Singh renders the the term saṃvid as “divine Consciousness” (Singh 2000: 63), and
explains it as: “nirvikalpa, indeterminate, undifferentiated (…), the I-consciousness of anuttara”.
It is “the divine creative consciousness, the very life of all manifestation” (Singh 2000: 98). This
makes clear that the key-term saṃvid cannot be reduced to a common modern anthropocentric
understanding of consciousness.

11
 primary glory of the highest Self (paramātman), agency (kartṛtvaṁ),
flashing forth (sphurattā), essence (sāram), heart (hṛdayam), vibration
(spandaḥ) – with these and other words vimarśaḥ is declared in the Āgamas.
Therefore the uncreated I means: the highest lord whose reality [consists] in
form of his own light/self-luminosity vibrates and shines with his highest
lady, the energy, [in all tattva, “categories of reality”] beginning with Śiva
to earth, in form of the whole universe.” (Parāprāveśikā; Rāma Shāstrī
1918a: 1ff)

3. Starting points for a dialogue between nondualistic Trika Śaivism and

quantum physics

3.1 Svātantrya and objective accident

With the discovery of the amazing quantum world, physics realized that the world
can no longer be described using categories of the ‘objective’ world of causality or
determinism, in classical physics terms. Contemporary physics discovered at the
atomic and sub-atomic level a fundamental openness and indeterminism.17 Quantum
physics identifies entanglement, superposition and accident as essential principles
(Zeilinger 2003: 207). “Entanglement” denotes the phenomenon that two or more
quantum systems – atoms, photons and other elementary particles – can be
correlated with each other, build a unit, even across great distances, and without a
common local cause or mutual influence.18 These interactions are termed as
“nonlocal correlations”. Measurement of the one particle defines the state of the
other (entangled) particle. For example, by measuring the energy of the one photon
the – originally indeterminate – energy of the other photon is defined.
“Superposition” denotes that different possible positions, energy states, speeds, etc.
of a quantum system co-exist at the same time. There is fundamental, intrinsic
indeterminacy with regard to physical parameters such as position, energy, speed
etc. This means that the quantum world is a realm of probabilities where – unlike in
the world of our ordinary experience – the principle of causality (every effect has a
cause) is not valid, processes do not proceed in a continuous way (Zeilinger 2003:
18f). Rather, with regard to the behaviour of sub-atomic particles, we encounter
pure accident. According to quantum physics, the single quantum-mechanical event

17
Quantum indeterminism is mathematically formulated in Heisenberg’s “principle of
uncertainty” (Heisenberg 1983).
18
See the introductory presentations: Scarani 2006; Gisin 2014.

12
has no cause, and the consequence is that it cannot be described. It is not just a form
of accident which is generated by our current ignorance (Heisenberg: “subjective
accident”); rather, it is a new quality of accident: absolute, irreducible “objective
accident” (Zeilinger 2003: 42ff). The Austrian quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger
understands objective accident as one of the “most important features of quantum
physics” (Zeilinger 2003: 221).

There is a correspondence between the astonishing quality of nature at the quantum

level which is difficult or impossible to imagine, and a characteristics of the
“energy” (śaktiḥ) described by the Trika tradition: svātantrya, “absolute freedom,
perfect autonomy, supreme independence or sovereignty”. The tradition says that
the whole differentiated universe is the energy of absolute freedom
(svātantryaśakti). In his PTV, Abhinavagupta quotes the verse: “There is only one
possessor of Śakti, viz., Maheśvara and the entire phenomenal manifestation is the
varied form of His svātantryaśakti” (transl. Singh 2000: 39). At the same time,
Abhinavagupta explains that the undifferentiated highest (anuttaraḥ) brings forth
the differentiated universe out of absolute freedom:

“It is anuttara itself of the nature of eminent light (mahāprakāśa), which has
implicitly within itself the expansion of the universe as identical with
consciousness, that explicitly evolves diversity through the abundance of the
delight of the power issuing from its own unsurpassed Freedom
(svātantrya).” (PTV, transl. Singh 2000: 34)19

In a later passage of the PTV, Abhinavagupta characterizes śakti in its form of the
“ultimate sound/ word” (parāvāk) which brings forth the manifestation of the
universe, with supreme freedom:

Its (= parāvāk) “…quintessence is autonomy (svātantrya), which is

independent of everything, which is unsurpassable and is able to bring about
what is most difficult to accomplish, and which is not affected even by an
iota of dependence on others.” (PTV, transl. Singh 2000: 108)

The same is said by Kṣemarāja in his treatise entitled Pratyabhijñāhṛdayam:

“It is the divine consciousness alone (cideva bhagavatī) – luminous,

absolute and free-willed (svatantra) as it is, which flashes forth (sphurati) in
the form of innumerable worlds.” (PH, transl. Singh 1998: 48)

19
Singh 2000, Sanskrit text: 13.

13
The innate essence of the universe is free from any limitations, including the
limitations of time, space, causality and locality. In the first chapter of his TS,
Abhinavagupta says that the innate nature of everything is light (prakāśa) which is
“only one”, without differentiation. And he continues:

“However, in the absence of any other light, there is only this single and
‘autonomous’ (svātantra) light. It is precisely because of this independence
that this light is not limited by time, space, or form. (…) The freedom
(svātantrya) belonging to that light is its energy of bliss (ānandaśakti), its
relish of delight (camatkāra) is its energy of will (icchāśakti), its
illumination is its energy of consciousness (citśakti), its cognizance is its
energy of knowledge (jñānaśakti), and its association with all forms is its
energy of activity (kriyāśakti).” (TS, transl. Chakravarty 2012: 57)

The correspondence is striking as it does not concern a marginal aspect, but a

central notion of Trika Śaivism, a central quality of the śaktiḥ, and at the same time
a central aspect of nature described by quantum theory and expressed in the
physical formulation of objective accident, entanglement and superposition. Both
shed a new light on their respective understandings of reality. The svātantrya-
nature of Śakti, which is one with the essential nature of manifestation as described
by the Kashmirian thinkers in the 10th and 11th centuries could be seen in a new,
concrete way. On the other hand, we could understand the insights of quantum
physics and the basic principles of our world in a new, comprehensive framework.
These are not irritating or inadmissible descriptions of nature which contradict our
logical thinking, but can be seen as the expression of the intrinsic freedom and
openness of reality. Einstein, who could not accept the role of accident in physics,
claimed that “God doesn’t play dice”. A hundred years later, the new quantum
physics is empirically confirmed. If we were answering Einstein from the
perspective of nondualistic Śaivism, we might say: Not only does the Goddess, “the
nameless” and “wholeness” (kulaṁ),20 play dice – she is simultaneously the dice and
the one playing dice. The expanding universe, with its billions of galaxies, stars,
black holes and red dwarves is the expression of her exuberant playfulness, joy,
freedom and beauty21 – a central theme in the texts of this tradition.

20
Abhinavagupta: TS (Rāma Shāstri 1918b: 27).
21
On beauty, see Bäumer 2003.

14
3.2 spandaḥ - elementary vibration in quantum fields

As we have seen, “energy” is the central principle in the Kashmiri Trika system.
This Śaiva tradition provides a continuous characterization of the śaktiḥ by means
of dynamism and motion, expressed through notions of vibration (spandaḥ),
pulsation, swinging, throbbing, wave. Abhinavagupta gives an important
characterization of spandaḥ in his TĀ:

“The self-awareness (svavimarśa) in the heart (hṛdaya) from which all

things have fallen away, present in the first and last moment of perception is
called, according to the [Spanda] teachings, the universal vibration and is
the outpouring (ucchalana) within one’s own nature. [It is] the subtle
movement (kiṃciccalana), the radiant pulsation (sphuraṇa) independent of
all else, the wave (ūrmi) of the ocean [of saṃvid]; saṃvid is never without
it.” (TĀ 4, 182b-184a; Dwivedi and Rastogi 1987: vol. III, 828ff; transl.
Dyczkowski 1994: 15, adapted)

At the same time, the energy is characterized as being absolute, unlimited

potentiality and creativity (visargaḥ) and supreme unlimitedness, unrestrainedness,
freedom (svātantrya).22 It simultaneously brings forth spacetime and is without
space-time, manifests all forms and is emptiness. Applying the principle of
hermeneutical trust, we have to consider the possibility that these are not mere
metaphors for the power of the ultimate, but capture the concrete, essential nature
of the śaktiḥ and therefore of the innate nature of reality. Here too, we find a
juncture between the insights of both the Kashmirian Śaiva tradition and quantum
physics into the elementary dimension of the universe. The Quantum Field Theory
(QFT) indicates that space, four-dimensional space-time, is filled with different
invisible fields, e.g. the electromagnetic field. Each field is associated with a
particular matter or energy particle. That brings us to the question: what are
elementary “particles” actually? The word “particle” instantly evokes the mental
idea or visualization of something solid, material on the smallest scale. However,
quantum physics regards a particle as the vibration of its field. For example, an

22
As Kṣemarāja in his commentary (Nirṇaya) on the “Spandakārikās” states: svatantryaśaktiḥ is
spandaḥ or spandaśaktiḥ (Kaul Shāstri 1925: 3; transl. Singh 1994: 10).

15
electron is the vibration of the electron field, a neutrino is the vibration of its
associated neutrino field, etc.23

“In quantum physics, everything is seen as a collection of vibrations in

quantum fields. These vibrations are carried through the field in small
packages, quanta, which appear to us as particles.” (Royal Academy of
Sciences 2013: 2)

Don Lincoln, an experimental particle physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator

Laboratory, comes to the conclusion that: “Everything—and I mean everything—is
just a consequence of many infinitely-large fields vibrating. The entire universe is
made of fields playing a vast, subatomic symphony. Physicists are trying to
understand the melody.” (Lincoln 2013)

The Standard Model (SM) of elementary particle physics includes the

electromagnetic, the weak and the strong interaction, but it does not cover gravity,
the fourth fundamental force in nature. One of the most important versions of a
quantum gravity theory is the superstring theory (abbreviated: string theory, ST), a
physical-mathematical structure which incorporates quantum field theory and the
general theory of relativity. For some, ST and its latest formulation, M-theory, are a
“theory of everything” or a “Worldformula” (Polchinski 2008). String theory offers
a new approach in the description of the elementary components of the universe,24
“a rich new framework for physics which unifies quantum mechanics and gravity”
(Witten 1998: 1129).

In its original form, ST was formulated by Gabriele Veneziano (1968) and the
“Veneziano model” was later interpreted as describing a theory of strings
(Polchinski 2008: 8). The string theory experienced a revival in the 1980s (“first
superstring revolution”) thanks to the pioneering contribution by Green and
Schwarz (1984; “Green-Schwarz mechanism”). At this time, five consistent
variants of the theory were identified, working with different concepts of the
properties of strings, e.g. closed strings (in the form of a loop) and open strings
(with flexible ends, endpoints), oriented and unoriented strings (Witten 1998:

23
On the philosophical discussion of quantum field theory, see the overview: Kuhlmann 2012.
24
On superstring theory, see Greene 1999; Kaku 1999; Green, Schwarz, and Witten 1987;
Polchinski 2005; Becker, Becker, and Schwarz 2007; Zwiebach 2009; Website
http://superstringtheory.com.

16
1127). A lecture by Edward Witten in 1995 provided a next important step: he
formulated a more unified theory of the five string theories which he called “M-
theory” (Witten 1995), “… where M stands for magic, mystery, or matrix,
according to taste” (Witten 1998: 1129). This theoretical step initiated the so-called
“second superstring revolution”.25

Witten describes the introduction of the theory in this way: “Physicists learned
rather unexpectedly (…) that the problem of quantum gravity could be overcome by
introducing a new sort of fuzziness” (Witten 1998: 1127). The basic idea was to
replace point particles (as in the Standard Model) by strings: String theory assumes
that “… elementary particles are one-dimensional objects, strings, rather than points
as in quantum fields theory” (Polchinski 2005: 4). Different particles are “different
vibrating modes of a string” (Becker, Becker, and Schwarz 2007: 3): where, for
example, an electron is a particular mode of vibration of a string. Particles are seen
as “a vibrating, oscillating, dancing filament” (Greene 1999: 11). Greene applies the
metaphor of “an infinitely thin rubber band” (ibid.) which swings, oscillates, and
spins. Electrons and quarks are not the smallest unit in nature, rather are actually at
the smallest, final scale “vibrating loops of string” (ibid.), which have an extremely
high energy (Greene 1999: 70). Under ordinary circumstances strings are “quite
tiny, around 10ˉ³² cm in diameter” (Witten 1996: 25). A string’s particular resonant
patterns of vibration determine the properties of particles and forces, or, in other
words: “the patterns of string vibrations appear to us as the masses and charges of
the elementary particles” (Greene 1999: 95). There is no definitive formulation of
string theory, but there are some general features (see Becker, Becker, and Schwarz
2007: 3ff): it incorporates general relativity, it requires supersymmetry, “a subtle
new kind of symmetry of elementary particles” (Witten 1998: 1128),26 and it is only
consistent in ten-dimensional space-time, in the sixth theory (M-theory) with an
additional eleven-dimensional supergravity (Witten 1997: 31). The theory assumes
that we experience only four large spacetime dimensions, because the other (six or
seven) dimensions are unobservably small, “compactified”, tightly rolled-up into

25
On the history of string theory, see Rickles 2014.
26
Supersymmetry, “the conjectured symmetry between fermions and bosons” (Witten 1997: 29),
is a genuine prediction of string theory. It says that the vibrational patterns of strings (swinging
loops) occur in pairs (“superpartners”) whose respective spins differ by half a unit (Greene 1999:
80ff). One of the goals of Run 1 of the LHC was to verify experimentally that nature is
supersymmetric.
17
extremely complicated forms, denoted as “Calabi-Yau-spaces” (Greene 1999: 96)
or “Calabi-Yau manifolds”, and therefore unobservable.

Again, we discover striking correspondences between Trika and quantum

physics: the innermost elementary dimension of nature is the dynamism of vibration
which brings forth matter and energy. The absolutely unlimited potentiality-
creativity of the śaktiḥ manifests innumerable forms and universes. Can the two
completely distinct perspectives of Abhinavagupta and quantum physics be
reconciled? If we agree, quantum physics, and particularly superstring or M-theory,
seems to show us traces of the śaktiḥ at the most elementary level of nature, and
attempts to touch the realm of the surprising play of svātantryaśakti, where our
everyday conceptions collapse.

Here the metaphor „trace“ is epistemologically significant. The

spandaśaktiḥ, the essential source and nature of all objects, of the realm of
differentiation and of the cognition of the differentiated objects, itself cannot be
objectified. It is beyond time and space, as Utpaladeva puts it: the Śaktiḥ, the
Supreme Sound (parāvāk) is “the luminous vibrating, the absolute being,
unmodified by time and space” (ĪPV I 5.14; transl. Torella 2002: 121). The
Kashmirian Trika tradition makes it clear, that śaktiḥ as spandaḥ is not movement
within the categories of time and space. Abhinavagupta states in his PTV:

“Spanda is defined as slight movement (kiṃciccalanam). If there is a going

forth from oneself to another object it won’t be ‘slight movement’, it would
connote full movement. Otherwise, the very idea of ‘movement’ would
become meaningless. Therefore, it is only because of a slight pulsation
within the essential nature consisting of successionless wondrous delight
(camatkāra) that is has been indicated in the Āgamas by words such as
ucchalattā (jerking up), ūrmi (wave), matsyodari (throbbing stomach of a
fish).” (PTV, transl. Singh 2000: 190, slightly adapted; Sanskrit text: 70).

Also his pupil Kṣemarāja clarifies:

“We shall show that it is only the divine spandaśakti which, though free of
succession (akrama) appears in different aspects as if flashing in view and
as if subsiding.” (Spanda-nirṇaya; transl. Singh 1994: 13; Sanskrit text: 7).

18
My assumption in this paper is, that there are “traces” of the śaktiḥ in the universe,
that is, within spacetime,27 which can be recognized by human expierence -
indications of a reality which itself cannot be grasped as an object. 28

In following this trace, superstring theory applies extremely complex physical and
mathematical formulations. M-theory is eleven-dimensional, requires eleven
dimensions which are unimaginable, and aspects of the theory are still beyond the
reach of mathematics (Witten 1998). Witten, the leading representative of
superstring theory, admits that: “string theory has been discovered in bits and
pieces — over a period that has stretched for nearly four decades — without anyone
really understanding what is behind it.” (Witten 2005). Could a Trika framework
contribute to understanding quantum physics in a deeper, comprehensive way, and
to a new type of research questions? If Trika and contemporary physics really have
something to discuss with each other, the perspective of new quantum physics will
also expand our understanding of the insights of the Kashmiri Trika, and burst a
reductive anthropocentric form of understanding. We begin to realize that the śaktiḥ
is not just the primal power within our visible universe: she is the immense
unfathomable space of the universes/multiverses which bends, stretches, swings,
rotates at the cosmic and at the sub-atomic scale, at the same time evolving out of/
being one with non-space, non-time, and emptiness.

4. Conclusion

The aim of this paper was to argue that there could be a basis for an authentic
dialogue between modern physics (including quantum physics) and the Kashmiri
Trika tradition and its view of the nature of reality. Any such dialogue would
require first and foremost a mutual acknowledgement, and also an addressing of the
challenge of translating the respective language, categories and underlying
philosophical assumptions of each into each other – an elaborated hermeneutics to

27
See Plotinus: Being is the “trace of the One” (Enneads V, 5,5).

28
I am grateful to Prof. Navjivan Rastogi whose precise questions regarding the understanding
of spandaḥ in the Kashmir Shaiva tradition in relation to the notion of vibration in string theory
have motivated this clarificiation (discussion at Abhinavagupta-conference, IGNCA, Delhi, 16th
Dec., 2016).

19
achieve an intercultural conversation and more – a conversation across the borders
of fundamentally different systems of knowledge. The paradigms which govern our
understanding of the universe and of the human person are of the upmost
importance: How we imagine the nature of reality has far-reaching consequences
for our whole orientation and behaviour in the world. Is the universe an abstract
mathematical structure, as the mathematician and physicist Max Tegmark suggests
(Tegmark 2014)? Are we “part of a single mathematical object” in which we live
and whose physical reality is completely independent from us? Is reality nothing
more than a giant computer – as some physicists claim who work in the area of
quantum information processing, and who describe nature in informational terms
(Davies 2004: 18)? Is reality in the end an absurd accident or a meaningless puzzle?
In his book, Tegmark quotes an e-mail from John Archibald Wheeler, one of the
leading physicists of the 20th century, where he talks about his “view that below and
behind quantum mechanics there is a deep and wonderful principle that still has to
be discovered” (Tegmark 2016: 314). In my opinion, a contemporary dialogue
between physics and Abhinavagupta could overcome a fundamentally reductionist
approach, widen our horizons and lead us beyond the search for a mere
mathematical-physical Worldformula. We could realize that the surprising features
of the universe which quantum physics and astrophysics explore at the microscopic
and macroscopic levels, are manifest dimensions of the “nameless”: that
transcendent-immanent dynamism and power, that innate vibrating and shining core
of all, which Trika describes as ultimate beauty, joy and freedom and being one
with supreme light.

References:

Albrecht, Andreas, Bernstein, Gary, Cahn, Robert et al. (2006): Report of the
Dark Energy Task Force. Online source: NASA, WFIRST,
https://wfirst.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/DETF_Report.pdf

Appell, David (2008): Discovering a Dark Universe. A Q&A with Saul

Perlmutter: Scientific American, April 21, 2008. Online source:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/discovering-a-dark-universe/

Bansat-Boudon, Lyne, and Tripathi, Kamaleshadatta (transl.) (2011): An

Introduction to Tantric Philosophy. The Paramārthasāra of Abhinavagupta
20
with the Commentary of Yogarāja (Routledge Studies in Tantric Traditions).
Abingdon, Oxon/ New York: Routledge.

Barrow, John D. (2007): New Theories of Everything; The Quest for

Ultimate Explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Bäumer, Bettina (2003): Beauty as ānandaśakti in Kashmir Śaivism. In:

Saundarya. The Perception and Practice of Beauty in India, ed. Dehejia, H.V.
and Paranjape, M.. New Delhi: Samvad India Foundation, 35-43.

Bäumer, Bettina (2011): Abhinavagupta’s Hermeneutics of the Absolute.

Anuttaraprakriyā. An Interpretation of his Parātriśikā-Vivaraṇa. Shimla:
Institute of Advanced Study, and New Delhi: D.K. Printworld.

Becker, Katrin, Becker, Melanie, and Schwarz, John H. (2007): String

Theory and M-Theory: A Modern Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.

Bohr, Niels (1999): Science and the Unity of Knowledge [1955]. In: David
Favrholdt (ed.), Niels Bohr. Collected Works. Volume 10: Complementarity
Beyond Physics (1928-1962). Amsterdam/ Lausanne/ New York et al.:
Elsevier, 83-98.

Bohr, Niels (1961): The Quantum Postulate and the Recent Development of
Atomic Theory [1927]. In: Niels Bohr, Atomic Theory and the Description
of Nature. Four Essays. London/ New York: Cambridge University Press,
52-91, Reprint. Online source:
https://www3.nd.edu/~dhoward1/The%20Quantum%20Postulate%20and%2
0the%20Recent%20Development%20of%20Atomic%20Theory.pdf

Carroll, Sean (2012): The Particle at the End of the Universe: The Hunt For
The Higgs And The Discovery Of A New World. London: Oneworld
Publications.

Chakravarty, H.N. (transl.) (2012): Tantrasāra of Abhinavagupta. Ed. Boris

Marjanovic. Portland, OR: Rudra Press.

Davies, Paul C.W. (2004): John Archibald Wheeler and the clash of ideas.
In: John D. Barrow, Paul C.W. Davies, Charles L. Harper Jr. (eds.), Science
and Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and
Complexity.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 3-23.

Dwivedi, R.C., and Rastogi, Navajivan (1987): The Tantrāloka of

Abhinavagupta with the Commentary of Jayaratha. Delhi, Varanasi, Patna,
Madras: Motilal Banarsidass, enlarged edition.

Dyczkowski, Mark S. G. (1987): The Doctrine of Vibration. An Analysis of

the Doctrines and Practices Associated with Kashmir Shaivism. Albany:
State University of New York Press.

Dyczkowski, Mark S. G. (1994): The Stanzas on Vibration. The

Spandakārikā with Four Commentaries. Varanasi: Dilip Kumar Publishers.

21
Dyson, Freeman J. (2004): Thought-experiments in honor of John Archibald
Wheeler. In: John D. Barrow, Paul C. Davies, and Charles L. Harper, Jr.
(eds.), Science and Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and
Complexity. Cambridge/ New York: Cambridge University Press, 72-89.

Freeman, Ken, and McNamara Geoff (2006): In Search of Dark Matter

(Springer Praxis Books). Berlin, Heidelberg, and New York: Springer.

Freese, Katherine (2014): The Cosmic Cocktail: Three Parts Dark Matter.
Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

Fürlinger, Ernst (2006): A Spirituality of the Senses in Trika Śaivism of

Kashmir. In: Bäumer, Bettina, Misra, R.N., Prapandvidya, Chirapat, and
Handa, Devendra (eds.), Sahridaya: Studies in Indian and South East Asian
Art. Felicitation Volume R. Nagaswamy. Chennai: Tamil Arts Academy, 29-
44.

Fürlinger, Ernst (2009): The Touch of Śakti. A Study in Nondualistic Trika

Śaivism of Kashmir. New Delhi: D.K. Printworld.

Gisin, Nicolas (2014): Quantum Chance: Nonlocality, Teleportation and

Other Quantum Marvels. Heidelberg/ New York/ Dordecht/ London:
Springer.

Green, Michael B., and Schwarz, John H. (1984): Anomaly cancellations in

supersymmetric D=10 gauge theory and superstring theory: Physics Letters
B. 149, 117-122.

Green, Michael B., Schwarz, John H., and Witten, Edward (1987):
Superstring Theory. 2 vols. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.

Greene, Brian (1999): The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden

Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory. New York: W.W.
Norton & Co.

Heisenberg, Werner (1983): The physical contents of quantum kinematics

and mechanics [1927]. In: Wheeler, John A., and Zurek, Wojchiech H.
(eds.), Quantum Theory and Measurement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 62–84.

Heisenberg, Werner (1959): The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum

Theory. In: Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in
Modern Science (World Perspectives). London: Allen & Unwin, 46-57.

Heisenberg, Werner (1984): Die Entwicklung der Deutung der

Quantentheorie. In: Baumann, Kurt, and Sexl, Roman U. (ed.), Die
Deutungen der Quantentheorie. Wiesbaden: Springer, 140-155.

Hooper, Dan (2007): Dark Cosmos: In Search of Our Universes’s Missing

Mass and Energy. New York: HarperCollins.

Horgan, John (2014): Physicists for Knocking Philosophy, Falsification, Free

Will: Scientific American, July 22, 2014. Online source:
22
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/physicist-george-ellis-
knocks-physicists-for-knocking-philosophy-falsification-free-will/

Hughes, John (1995): Self Realization in Kashmir Shaivism. The Oral

Teachings of Swami Lakshmanjoo. Albany: State University of New York
Press.

Kaku, Michio (1999): Introduction to Superstrings and M-Theory [1988].

New York: Springer, second edition.

Kaul Shāstri, Paṇḍit Madhusudan (ed.) (1925): Spandakarikas of Vasugupta

with the Nirnaya by Ksemaraja (Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies XLII).
Srinagar.

Kirshner, Robert P. (2016): The Extravagant Universe. Exploding Stars,

Dark Energy, and the Accelerating Cosmos [2002]. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.

Krauss, Lawrence M., and Turner, Michael S. (2004): A Cosmic

Conundrum: Scientific American, September 1, 2004.

Kuhlmann, Meinrad (2012): Quantum Field Theory: Stanford Encyclopedia

of Philosophy, September 27, 2012, revised version. Online source:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantum-field-theory/

Lakshman Joo, Swami (2014): Kuṇḍalinī-Vijñāna-Rahasyam: The Secret of

Understanding the Primal Power of Śiva [1965]. In: Kaul “Kamal”,
Jankinath (ed., transl.), The Awakening of Supreme Consciousness. Lectures
of Swami Lakshman Joo. Delhi: Utpal Publications, 84-93.

Lincoln, Don (2013): The Good Vibrations of Quantum Field Theories. Blog
“The Nature of Reality”, 5 August, 2013. Online source:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2013/08/the-good-vibrations-
of-quantum-field-theories/

Llewellyn-Smith, Chris (2000): The Large Hadron Collider: Scientific

American, July 2000, 71-77. Online source:
http://www.nikhef.nl/pub/services/biblio/bib_KR/sciam14405096.pdf

Panek, Richard (2011): The 4 Percent Universe: Dark Matter, Dark Energy,
and the Race to Discover the Rest of Reality. New York: Houghton Mifflin
Harcourt.

Perlmutter, Saul (2003): Supernovae, Dark Energy and the Accelerating

Universe: Physics Today 56, no. 4, 53-60. Online source:
http://supernova.lbl.gov/PDFs/PhysicsTodayArticle.pdf

Polchinski, Joseph (2005): String Theory [1998].2 vols. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press. Online source:
http://stringworld.ru/files/Polchinski_J._String_theory._Vol._1._An_introdu
ction_to_the_bosonic_string.pdf

23
Polchinski, Joseph (2008): M Theory: Uncertainty and Unification (Lecture
originally at the Heisenberg- Centennial Symposium, Munich, Dec. 6-7,
2001). Feb 1, 2008. Online source: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0209105

Randall, Lisa (2013): Higgs Discovery: The Power of Empty Space. New
York: Ecco Press.

Rāma Shāstrī, Paṇḍit Mukunda (ed.) (1918a): The Parā Prāveshikā of

Kṣhemarāja (Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies XV). Bombay.

Rāma Shāstrī, Paṇḍit Mukunda (ed.) (1918b): The Tantrasāra of Abhinava

Gupta (Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies XVII). Bombay: Nirnaya-Sagar
Press.

Rickles, Dean (2014): A Brief History of String Theory: From Dual Models
to M-Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.

Riess, Adam G., and Turner, Michael S. (2008): The Expanding Universe:
From Slowdown to Speedup: Scientific American, September 23, 2008.
Online source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/expanding-
universe-slows-then-speeds/

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2013): The Nobel Prize in Physics

2013: Popular Science Background. Online source:
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/popular-
physicsprize2013.pdf

Sample, Ian (2013): Massive: The Higgs Boson and the Greatest Hunt in
Science [2010]. London: Virgin Books, updated version.

Sanderson, Alexis (1988): Śaivism and the Tantric Traditions. In: The
World’s Religions, ed. Stewart Sutherland, Leslie Houlden, Peter Clarke, and
Friedhelm Hardy. London: Routledge, 660-704.

Sanderson, Alexis (2005): A Commentary on the Opening Verses of the

Tantrasāra of Abhinavagupta. In: Das, Sadananda, and Fürlinger, Ernst (eds.)
Sāmarasya. Studies in Indian Arts, Philosophy, and Interreligious Dialogue.
New Delhi: D.K. Printworld, 89-148.

Scarani, Valerio (2006): Quantum Physics: A First Encounter. Interference,

Entanglement and Reality [2003]. Transl. Rachael Thew. Oxford/ New York:
Oxford University Press.

Schumann, Marc (2015): Dark Matter 2014: EPJ Web of Conferences 96,
01027. Online source: http://www.epj-
conferences.org/articles/epjconf/pdf/2015/15/epjconf_dhf2014_01027.pdf

Silburn, Lilian (1988): Kuṇḍalinī: The Energy of the Depths. A

Comprehensive Study Based on the Scriptures of Nondualistic Kaśmir
Śaivism [1983] (The Suny Series in the Shaiva Traditions of Kashmir).
Transl. Jacques Gontier. Albany: State University of New York Press.

24
 Singh, Jaideva (transl.) (1998): Pratyabhijñāhṛdayam: The Secret of Self-
Recognition. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, reprint of the fourth revised edition
[1982].

Singh, Jaideva (transl.) (2000): Abhinavagupta, Parā-trīśikā-Vivaraṇa. The

Secret of Tantric Mysticism. Ed. Bettina Bäumer. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.

Singh, Jaideva (transl.) (1994): Spanda Kārikās: The Divine Creative

Pulsation. The Kārikās and the Spanda-nirṇaya (1980). Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass. Second reprint.

Tegmark, Max (2014): Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the

Ultimate Nature of Reality. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Torella, Raffaele (ed., transl.) (2002): The Īśvarapratyabhijñākārikā of

Utpaladeva with the Author’s Vṛtti. Critical edition and annotated
translation. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Corrected edition.

Veneziano, Gabriele (1968): Construction of a crossing-symmetric, Regge-

behaved amplitude for linearly rising trajectories: Nuovo Cimento A 57,
190–197.

Wilczek, Frank (2008): The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the
Unification of Forces. Basic Books.

Witten Edward (1995): String Theory Dynamics In Various Dimensions:

Nucl.Phys. B 443, 85-126.

Witten, Edward (1996): Reflections on the Fate of Spacetime: Physics

Today, April 1996, 24-30. Online source: Website Institute for Advanced
Study Princeton, School of Natural Sciences,
https://www.sns.ias.edu/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Reflections(3).pdf

Witten, Edward (1997): Duality, Spacetime, and Quantum Mechanics:

Physics Today, May 1997, 28-33. Online source:
https://www.sns.ias.edu/ckfinder/userfiles/files/duality(3).pdf

Witten, Edward (1998): Magic, Mystery, and Matrix: Notices of the AMS
45, no.9, 1124-1129. Online source:
https://www.sns.ias.edu/ckfinder/userfiles/files/mmm(3).pdf

Witten, Edward (2005): Unravelling string theory: Nature 438, 22 (29 Dec.
2005), 1085.

Zeilinger, Anton (2003): Einsteins Schleier: Die neue Welt der

Quantenphysik. München: Beck.

Zwiebach, Barton (2009): A First Course in String Theory [2004].

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, second edition.

25

View publication stats