परमार्थसार (महामाहेश्वर अभिनवगुप्त - त्रिक-दर्शन, अद्वैत शैव साधना एवं सान्वय सटीक)

Introduction 9
Siddhā, Mālinī and Vāmaka (Nāmaka) Tantras which constitute the
trinity of the main Trika scriptures. This Trinity of scriptures gave
the name Trika to the mostly popular practical system of Kashmir
Śaivism of the school of Tryambaka. The other important scrip-
tures of the school are Svacchanda, Netra and the well known
Rudrayāmala Tantras, Śivasūtra, a special type of scriptural work,
was revealed to Vasugupta sometime in the beginning of the 9th
century AD. His chief disciple, Bhaṭṭa Kallaṭa flourished during
the reign of king Avantivarman in the later part of the ninth cen-
tury. He is the only author of Śaivism who has been praised by
Kalhaṇa in his Rājataraṅgiṇī as a siddha descended to earth for
the spiritual uplift of people. (See RT, V-66). The other Śaiva
author who has been mentioned by him by name is Somānanda.
He had built a Śiva temple named Someśvara where king Harṣa-
deva took refuge for a day before his death when he was chased
by his enemies. Somānanda's name has been mentioned in connec-
tion with such event in political history. But it appears that spiri-
tual attainments of Bhaṭṭa Kallaṭa had made him so famous and
popular as to attract the attention and interest of the writer of that
political history of Kashmir. His religio philosophical and acade-
mic activities made the school of Tryamkala sufficiently popular
in the valley. He wrote several works, most of which are known
now only through references and quotations. His Spandakārikā
and Spandavṛtti, both known together as Spandasarvasva, are still
available. In Tantrāloka there is such a quotation from one of his
works which describes the importance of "dūtī" and proves thus
his mastery over the Kula system of Tantrism as well. Some of his
works like Svasvabhāva-sambodhana and Tattvavicāra are known
from quotations alone. One of his highly important works was
Tattvārthacintāmaṇi which has been referred to and quoted by
several authors. He wrote a commentary named Madhuvāhinī on
Śivasūtra, but that work has also been lost. His works must have
been highly mystic in style and character and may have remained
out of the scope of ordinary readers and therefore may not have
earned the interest of copyists and got consequently lost in obli-
vion. Influence of Kṣemarāja, who was prejudiced against him,
may also have been a cause of disregard for them in the institu-
tion in later centuries.
Spandakārikā was wrongly ascribed by Kṣemarāja to Vasugupta
and most of the scholars of the present age have been wrongly