In contrast to the s ́a ̄ktopa ̄yawhich develops a pure thought unsupported by
any practices external to it, the a ̄n.avopa ̄yadevelops thought supported by exter-
nal phenomena, namely mantra, meditation on the body, and external objects.
Thea ̄n.avopa ̄yaalso includes yoga practices. Ma ̄linı ̄vijayottara Tantradefines the
individual means as being supported by the breath, postures, visualization, the
rotation of syllables (varn.a) in the breath, and focusing on an external place.
Abhinavagupta says this external place refers to the body, breath, and external
ritual objects such as the ritual area, the ritual diagram (man.d.ala), the chalice
for offerings (pa ̄tra), the rosary, and flowers (MVT 2.21; TS p. 45). All external
ritual, mantra practice and meditation on the breath are supports of con-
sciousness and means of purifying it to realize the nondistinction between the
self and S ́iva for the monistic S ́aiva. Within the a ̄n.avopa ̄yais also the practice of
Kun.d.alinı ̄ yoga. The Goddess Kun.d.alinı ̄ is the power (s ́akti) dwelling within the
body at the base of a central channel thought to pervade it, who, once awak-
ened, rises up through this vertical axis of power to the crown of the head,
whereupon the yogi awakens to the truth of his identity with S ́iva (Silburn
1988). As she rises, she pierces various centers of power (cakra) located along
the body’s axis. These centers became codified as six or seven (including the
thousand-petaled lotus at the crown) and pervade later Hinduism although
there is a fluidity in the earlier texts; the system of six being probably originally
peculiar to a tradition focused on the goddess Kubjika ̄ (Sanderson 1985: 164).
Thea ̄n.avopa ̄yatherefore develops the faculty of action (kriya ̄) rather than cog-
nition or will.
While the Ma ̄linı ̄vijayottarasays that the ways are identical as to goal but differ
as to method (MVT 2.25a), Abhinavagupta and his commentator Jayaratha
claim that the upa ̄yasform a graded hierarchy (TA 13. 157, upa ̄yayogakramata ̄),
with the individual means at the bottom and the nonmeans at the top. But Abhi-
navagupta also observes elsewhere that because of his extreme monism, there
cannot really be any hierarchical gradation; any hierarchy (uttaratva) contains
the delusion of dualism (PTV p. 8). This idea is reflected in the last method, which
is no method. The anupa ̄yais the realization of the nonduality of self and S ́iva
that is a sudden realization, because the path and the goal are the same. This
realization without any method (other than the guru who is not a method) is
understood as an intense descent of power (s ́aktipa ̄ta) and realization that con-
sciousness was never bound. From this nondual perspective, the very idea of a
path, which implies a journey from one place to another, is erroneous. Even the
idea of a descent of power is problematic in this context. Abhinavagupta writes
in an eloquent passage:
The supreme Lord is the essence of his own light and our own self. By what means
then is he to be achieved? Due to his own light he cannot be known. Due to his
eternity his essence cannot be attained. Due to the non-existence of a covering,
there cannot be the cessation of a covering (of consciousness). What then is
the means? If it is distinct then it cannot be accomplished. Therefore the totality
is a single reality of consciousness only, undivided by time, unlimited by space,
unclouded by constraints, unobstructed by forms, unsignified by word, and
unmanifested by means of knowledge. (TS pp. 8–9)222 gavin flood