advaitam and Kashmir shaivam

[Gregory Goode]

Anand,

I was pleased to read this clear and well-written posting!  There are
others who know much more about the relation between these two philosophies
than I do.  But I would guess that one source of advaita's difference from
Kashmir Shaivism would be based on the Mandukya Upanishad, specifically the
Gaudapada Karika, a text often accused of having Buddhist influences.

Specifically, your question

>  But in Kashmir Shaivism, kriyaa (activity) is allowed in Brahman. Now a
>  crucial question may be raised: If Shiva is active and is engaged in the
>  creation, etc. of the world, is the world real?

This question is a good one to point up the difference between the two
philosophies.  I'll take

The GK argues against causation roughly as follows (I don't have the book
at hand, will consult it this evening and clarify tomorrow if someone else
hasn't done so already):  An effect (E) either exists or it doesn't.  If E
exists, then it cannot be brought into existence by cause (C).  If E
doesn't exist, then C can't bring it about either.  The same holds whether
cause C exists or not.  Therefore there is no causation.  If there is no
causation, then Shiva cannot be said to create the world, since nothing
creates anything.  Shiva is part of maya too.

--Greg Goode