History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.214

v7.c91.214

In spite of the doctrine that God is one¹⁵⁹³ and the doctrine that whatever form of the deity one may worship, the worship reaches the Supreme Being, Vaiṣṇavas and Śaivas have been wrangling and abusing one another For example, the Varāhapurāṇa makes Rudra declare the supremacy of Viṣṇu (chap.¹⁵⁹⁴ 70. 14 Nārāyaṇaḥ paro devaḥ), denounce Śaiva-siddhāntas that are outside the pale of the Vedas and put forward the outstanding view 'that such non-Vedic views were promulgated by Śiva himself at the request of Viṣṇu in order to delude people'. Some Purāṇas started by saying that the Bauddhas and Jainas¹⁵⁹⁵ were asuras and enemies of gods that were purposely deluded by god. For example, the Matsya (24. 43-49) says that the sons of Raji deprived Indra of his kingdom and share in sacrifices, that Bṛhaspati, at Indra's request, deluded the sons of Raji by composing a treatise of Jina-dharma which was opposed to the Veda and then Indra killed them. Vāyu 96. 230-32, Matsya 47. 11-12, Bhāgavata I. 3 24 appear to suggest that Viṣṇu himself deluded the people The Agni (16. 1-4) also says with reference to the Bauddhas that Viṣṇu deluded them. The Viṣṇupurāṇa¹⁵⁹⁶ (III 17-18) narrates that when the gods were defeated by the asuras (who also practised tapas and studied the Veda) they approached Viṣṇu and prayed to him to help them and to destroy the asuras and that then Viṣṇu produced from his body Māyā-moha (lit. who causes delusion by wiles) and made him over to the gods. Māyāmoha, who was naked, had shaved his head and held a bunch of peacock feathers in his hand, went to the asuras that were practising tapas on the banks of the Narmadā (III. 18. 1-2) and told them that if they followed his words they would secure *mukti*, led them away from the path of the Veda, taught them formulas of sceptical reasoning and weaned them away from their dharma. Then he approached other asuras and taught them that sacrificing animals was sinful, taught them nirvāṇa and the doctrines of *vijñānavāda*. Some of the passages are very striking 'In a short time the asuras were deluded by Māyāmoha and abandoned all concern with the path depending on the three Vedas. Some condemned the Vedas, some condemned the gods, while others condemned the body of sacrificial rites and brāhmaṇas. (They thought or said) The statement that killing an animal (in sacrifices) is desirable for the sake of Dharma (for accumulating merit) does not stand to reason; to say that offerings burnt by fire would conduce to reward (in the next world) is childish talk; (if it be said that) Indra attained the position of God by means of many sacrifices and enjoys the fuel-sticks of the śamī tree, then an animal (that subsists on leaves) is superior to Indra (who enjoys hard and thorny śamī *samidhs*) If it is desired (by the Veda) that the animal killed in a sacrifice attains heaven, then why does not the sacrificer kill his own father in a sacrifice (and send him to heaven)? If one (the son) performs śrāddha (with the thought) that what is eaten by one (brāhmaṇa diner at śrāddha) tends to give satisfaction to another (i. e. the deceased father of the offerer of śrāddha), then travellers would not carry food (on their backs) which causes weariness to them.' These are the arguments used by atheists (cārvākas). It is remarkable that even *tāntrik* works like the Kulārṇavatantra make Śiva say that he declared certain śāstras purely for deluding certain bad people who did not know the Kaula dharma.¹⁵⁹⁷