Question for the Kashmir Shaivism experts

[Harry Spier]

Dear list members,

I need the source of the following verse quoted in translation in Mark
Dyczkowski's "The Doctrine of Vibration",SUNY 1987 page 63.  But I'm
confused by his footnote to the verse.

"Nothing perceived is independent of perception and perception differs not
from the perceiver, therefore the universe is nothing but the perceiver
[himself]."

With the following footnote:
I.P.V.V., I, p. 710, saMvitprakAza quoted in M.M. p. 20 and Sp.Pra. p.114:
jJAtRtaiva uktA .

Where: I.P.V.V. = IzvarapratyabhijJAvivRtivimarzinI
M.M. = mahArthamaJjarI
Sp.Pra. = spandapradIpikA

I think that what he's saying is that the verse is quoted in the
mahArthamaJjarI as coming from the saMvitprakAza.  But the verse is quoted
in the spandapradIpikA and attributed there to the Atmasaptati .  See Mark
Dyczkowski's "The Stanza's on Vibration",SUNY,1992, page 164 where the verse
occurs in his translation of spandapradIpikA.

Is it the case that:
1) The verse comes from the Atmasaptati and is wrongly attributed to
saMvitprakAza in the mahArthamaJjarI .
or
2) The verse comes from saMvitprakAza and is wrongly attributed to
Atmasaptati in the spandapradIpikA .

Note that Dyczowski in his notes to his translation of spandapradIpika in
"The Stanza's on Vibration" indicates an occurance where another verse
quoted in spandapradIpika is attributed in that text to the Atmasaptati but
is in fact from saMvitprakAza .  See page 143 "The Stanza's on Vibration"
and footnotes 47 and 48 on that page.  He attributes this error to the fact
that chapter II of saMvitprakAza is called AtmasaMstuti .  See page 288
under section "AtmasaMstuti" .

Also do we know anything about the Atmasaptati? Who its author is or if its
quoted elsewhere?

Many thanks in advance,


Harry Spier
371 Brickman Rd.
Hurleyville, New York
USA 12747

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com