On Mahanirvana Tantra and Red Beards

mahAnirvANa tantra (MT) or the Tantra of Great Liberation as Arthur Avalon so aptly called it, is an excellent non-sectarian tantra extolling the greatness of non-duality (in a shAkta kind of way). Considered to be a later work, the unique feature of this text is worship of the non-dual parabrahma (the vedic brahmaNa) and the prAkRRitic manifestation in the form of AdyA kAlI. In fact many of the non-duality based mantras have been subsequently used by the brAhmo samaja. Some people even go so far as saying that the text of MT was actually composed by the guru of rAjA rAmamohana rAya in the 18th century C.E, although proof of such a claim has so far not been forthcoming. However, it is generally held that it was composed somewhere between the 17th century and 18th century in the region of Greater Bengal (West Bengal, Islamic Bangladesh, Assam)

Whatever be the situation regarding its antiquity, even a cursory reading of the text reveals some curious facts about the author as well as the social background of the times of its composition. While a lot has been talked about by different people on the refined, middle-class, modern and possibly western influenced sensibility of the author, little has been talked about the authors clear and natural bias against the followers of religion of peace.

In Chapter 5, one finds the following curious verse:
इत्थं विलाप्य मतिमान् वामकुक्षौ विचिन्तयेत् ।
पुरुषं कृष्णवर्णञ्च रक्तश्मश्रुविलोचनम् ॥ ९८ ॥
रक्तचर्मधरं क्रुद्धमङ्गुष्ठपरिमाणकम् ।
सर्वपापस्वरूपञ्च सर्वदाऽधोमुखस्थितम् ॥ ९९ ॥

To use Arthur Avalon's translation:
Let the wise one, having thus dissolved (the twenty-four) tattvas, then think of an angry black man in the left side of the cavity of his abdomen of the size of his thumb with red beard and eyes, holding a sword and shield, with his head ever held low, the very image of all sins (सर्वपापस्वरूप).

There are again constant references to the slaying of brAhmaNas (Brahmins) in context of a great crime - 2.11, 2.13, 3.93, 3.151 and so on

So if we put all this together we get the following picture. The very personification of evil as per the author is:
a. angry (and possibly violent)
b. dark complexioned
c. blood shot eyes
d. red beard
e. holding a sword and shield
f. slayers of brAhmaNas

The violence, red beard, sword, shield and killing of brAhmaNas are obvious clues as to "Religion of Peace" origin of the "evil men". Moreover the dark-complexion and blood-shor eyes is a likely reference to either converts or more likely to "Religion of Peace" men of African origin (many of whom were converted slaves of the Religion of Peace imperialists).

Now as regards the slaying of brAhmanas, it was a pecuilar stratgey used by the Religion of Peace invaders of India. In Hindu India, the temples were typically the centre of the village or town - it was the basis on which the social fabric and lives of people in the society revolved (dharma); and brAhmaNas were the glue of dharma-based society as they were the ones who regulated the temples. The Religion of Peace followers figured out that if they waged jihAd on the brAhmaNas (and their wives, children, friends and neighbours and so on) and killed them in the name of their creed, then there would be no one to uphold "infidel" rule and social structures would collapse automatically. And the collapse of social structure would weaken society and enable the easy conquest (and conversion) by the follwers of Religion of Peace.

I am sure that if we were to scan in an unbiased way our middle-ages books (10th century onwards), we will definitely come across many direct or indirect instances of how the average Hindu viewed the Religion of Peace conquerers and converts.

Comments