It is a recognised fact that philosophy very often in an outgrowth of religion. It is particularly true of some of the prominent systems of Indian thought, such as Buddhism, Jainism, Vaisnavism, Säktism and Saivaism. Saivaism, as the very word indicates, is an outgrowth of the Religion, which recognised Śiva to be the highest God. This God is referred to in the Vedic passages by various names such as Sambhava, Mayobhava, Sankara, Mayaskara, Śiva and Rudra etc. This God, Siva, has been discovered to be the object of worship in the hoary past in India in the finds of Harappa and Mohenjodaro, which are recognised to be the earliest archaeological finds of this country. Saivaism is even now one of the great living religions. Some of the biggest religious monuments are dedicated to Śiva. Religion leads to philosophy, and philosophy that grows out of religion may still employ the words, commonly used in the religious literature, giving them new meanings and interpreting the religious myths and beliefs philosophically. as has been done by the two eminent systems of thought, Saivaism and Vaisnavism: or it may completely cut itself off from religion and become purely speculative, as has been done by rationalism in the West. Saivaism has not cut itself off from religion. In the Agamic literature, on which the Saiva Philosophy is based, there are generally four sections in each Agama, (I) Vidja (II) Kriya (III) Yoga and (IV) Carys. The first deals with the categories and other purely philosophical matters. The second is occupied with various forms of spiritual initiation and the soupsaying tune. And because the self-resilisation is not pomitile without Togs, thenfire, the third discumes different types of Tops. But the practice of Toga is not positie vithout maintaining the highest ethical standard The found, therefine, gives the rules of conduct. Saivaism is thus, not concerned with pure speculative thought. ameamed with pure speculative thought. It is a synthesis of religion, philosphy and ethics. If we take for instance, the vimarsini of Abhirnavagupta and the Bhaskari of Bhaskara kantha, we find that they assert the view that religion presents the same Ultimate Reality mythically as philosophy establishes rationally and Yoga reveals inmediately. As a concrete instance we may take the benedictory verse at the beginning of the Kriyadhikara, with which the presest volume begins. Here Abhinavagupta gives a popular and figurative presentation of the abstruse Saiva philosophical doctrine of Kriausakti. Here he uses the word Gauripati, which in the content of religon is used for the mythical God siva, as the husband of Gauri, and gives it philosophical meaning. This fact is clearly pointed out by Bhaskara in his commentary. It may be stated here by the way that the benedictory verse or verses, which Abhinava puts at the beginning of each chapter of his Vimarsini, are of grest importates in as much as therein he states the subject-matter of the chapter briefly, clearly and poetically. This practice is followed by Bhaskars also in his commentary. Theee ave popular and figurative presentatious of the abetruse philosophical doctrinse. In fact, if we study the iswara Pratyabhijna carefully, we find that it is concerned with nothing more than the philosophical presentation of the general religious conception of the God, as omaiscient and omnipotent, in the light of the monistic philosophy. For, the Mahesvara, with the exposition of the Saiva conception of which the work is concerned, is represented to be such in the very first verse of the work, 'Kartari jñātari' etc. The Saiva conception of omniscience and omnipotence of the Maheśvara is different from a verbally similar conception of the God of the Naiyayika. In the latter case the Iśvara is not free (Svatantra); because He depends upon the atoms for the creation of the world. Further, the Nyaya conception is based upon the pluralistic philosophy. But in the former case He is free and the conception is based upon the monistic philosophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]