least the indigenous account of tradition shows how the transmission of know-
ledge was perceived in a particular social context. It is also not precisely clear
what the relation is between S ́aiva accounts of tradition, that is, the S ́aiva self-
descriptions, and the historical reality of which they are an index. It is therefore
important and necessary – particularly in view of the lack of other sources – to
begin with the S ́aiva concept of tradition. It is largely, but not only, these indige-
nous self-descriptions that inform my account of the historical trajectory of the
traditions, but this account is nevertheless from an external perspective, using
the indigenous account to construct a coherent historical narrative.
The S ́aiva understanding of tradition has been to see it in terms of a “stream”
(srotas) or line of transmission of texts and practices, flowing through the
generations from teacher to disciple. Another term used is S ́aivaa ̄mna ̄ya, a S ́aiva
classification associating traditions of scripture with the four directions or a clas-
sification of five emanating from the five mouths of S ́iva (Padoux 1994: 35–40;
Brunner et al. 2000: 200; Dyczkowski 1988: 66–85). Such a tradition is trans-
mitted through textual commentary and exegesis and through the lineage of
teachers, the guru santa ̄naorsantati. Another term used in S ́a ̄kta or Kula texts
isovalli, initiatory lineages (six in number) which are “currents of conscious-
ness” (jña ̄naprava ̄ha) flowing from a transcendent source through the founder of
the particular lineage (Brunner et al. 2000: 258). The source of such a stream
or torrent of transmission in the case of the a ̄mnaya is believed to be S ́iva. From
him the teachings are generally transmitted to the Goddess and from her
through a series of divine and semi-divine intermediaries to the human world,
for the kind of knowledge revealed through revelation is adapted to the abilities
of beings to receive it (MVT 1.24). For example, the ninth- or tenth-century root
text of the Kashmiri S ́aiva tradition, the Ma ̄linı ̄vijayottara Tantradeclares itself to
be derived from the “mouth of the supreme Lord” (parames ́amukha) (MVT 1.7),
from where it is transmitted through a series of intermediaries, namely the Lord
Pares ́a to the Goddess (Devı ̄), thence to her son Kuma ̄ra, who in turn transmits
the teachings to Brahma ̄’s four sons who transmit it to the human world (MVT
1.2–4, 14). The tenth-century Kashmiri theologian Abhinavagupta, likewise
traces the guru lineage of the esoteric “family” (kula) tradition to the four my-
thical figures, the Lords Khagendra, Ku ̄rma, Mes.a, and Macchanda, and thence
to S ́iva (TA 29.29–32; Dyczkowski 1988: 62, 68–9; Goudriaan and Gupta 1981:
5). Similarly, the sage Vasugupta, having received a system of teachings from
numerous perfected male and female beings (siddhasandyoginı ̄s) who made his
heart pure, received teachings from S ́iva who revealed in a dream that they were
inscribed upon a stone on the Maha ̄deva mountain (namely the S ́iva Su ̄tras) (SSV:
p. 1). During this transmission process the teachings are believed to become con-
densed and accessible to the limited understanding of the receivers.
Other examples could be cited, but the point is that tradition in S ́aivism is
derived from a divine source and is understood in cosmological terms. Indeed,
S ́aivism could be said to be a cosmological religion in which tradition is not a
human construction but is given through a process of transformation through
levels of a hierarchical cosmos to the human world. It is the guru who is the
202 gavin flood