Kaula Jnana Nirnaya (Calcutta Sanskrit Series)

who tears the fetters off. But such an etymology has apparently no basis and the authors had probably the other word Macchaghna in view. Matsya-Maccha in fact is interpreted by the Kashmir school of Śaivism the tradition of Shiva-worship as pāśa fetter/noose or indriya sense organ and Abhinavagupta while speaking of rāgāruṇam jālam a net red with passion was probably thinking of the word matsara envy/jealousy or mātsarya meanness/selfishness of which the etymology is not very clear. But if the word matsya fish ever means "an obstacle to spiritual knowledge" it does so only in a figurative way and only in rare contexts. Prof. Tucci has cited at least one instance from Durjaya-candra's commentary on Catuṣpīṭhatantra Tantra of the Four Seats:

"By the makara-fish and the min-fish of wisdom" means the absence of inherent nature of all entities is wisdom, and similarly, all senses are destroyed by the makara and mina fish of the animal itself; therefore, by parity of reasoning, wisdom itself becomes the makara-fish original: "प्रज्ञामकरमीनकैरिति सर्वभावानाम् निःस्वभावता प्रज्ञा तथा च सर्वेन्द्रियाणि प्राणिनैव मकरमीनकैर्व्यापाद्यन्ते इति साधर्म्यात् प्रज्ञैव मकरमीनायते" (Paṭala chapter III).

But that is no reason to suppose that the word matsya in the name of Matsyendra had originally that figurative sense and that Matsyendra was not a personal name but "an appellative of some Siddhas who have reached a particular stage in the mystic realisation." (J. A. S. B. Vol. XXVI 1930 No. 1., Tucci—Animadversiones Indicae 132 ff.) There is no doubt, as is evident from the verse of the Kaulajñānanirṇaya that matsya either in Matsyendra, Matsyaghna or Macchaghna, had originally no figurative meaning but literally meant "fish" indicating thereby that the name meant a kaivartta fisherman or a fisherman. With the development of the mystic cult taught by him and with his apotheosis and assimilation with Śiva in course of time various interpretations were put on the name. The interpretation suggested in the Tantrāloka of Abhinavagupta, therefore, only marks a stage in that development.

According to some of the sources Mīnanātha is supposed to be different from Matsyendranātha and is said to have been a son of the latter. The two names are, however, synonymous. Besides if the name of Mīnanātha or Mīnapāda had occurred in the colophons of the last chapters of the Kaulajñānanirṇaya we would have been justified in taking him to be a successor of Matsyendra. But the chapters at the end of which his name occurs are in the middle. We should, therefore, think that when the present work was composed the two names were still considered to be syno-