On Lokayata

Uncategorized, , , ,

Long time readers would remember our article on Charvaka and how Modern Hindus are in fact just that, despite their professing of Vedic orthodoxy. Ritualistic expression is not only conflated for spirituality, it has become the means through which Chaarvaakas (those of ‘sweet speech’) have hidden among the orthodox Sajjanas and even acharyas themselves.

After all, did not the original Charvaka (a raakshasa) appear in the guise of a venerable Braahmana?

The world today has turned inside out. The values of goodness we humans are supposed to keep on the inside, have been pulled through the vortex of materialism and are only for showcase on the outside. Social structures (varnashrama) devised to preserve truth and order have been pulled through this vortex and reconstituted as tribalism and mafia casteism (jaathivaadha).

The occasional unpleasantness that often surfaced outside in a sincere society is now embedded deep on the inside. He who draws the attention to wrong or danger is “rocking the boat”, he who plays the pied piper is the “peacemaker” because he is “profitable” and is “producing”.

That is the nature of Lokayata, the School of Worldliness or Materialism.

Lokayata

In common parlance today, it is the school of Chaarvaaka which is equated to materialism. However, there is a subtle difference. Chaarvaaka was a raakshasa from the Mahabhaaratha who sought to misguide Yudhisthira by maliciously lying that he had sinned by participating in the Kurukshetra War. He did so in the guise of a Braahmana. In the every day course of things, slaying one’s relatives (or anyone for that matter) is wrong. But in a war, in a righteous war, where the honour of women (Draupadi) was avenged and the perpetrators punished, fighting and slaying enemies is just. The materialist only cares for pleasure and bodily reality, and the chaarvaaka goes one step further by denying the existence of the the Supreme (Paramaathma).

No wonder casteists cannot bear to punish perpetrators from their own caste. Those who question the righteousness of the Kurukshetra war on the basis of “family” will happily extend that privilege to caste (which to them, is nothing but “one big family”).

Lokaayatha is the first step to this. It is the kindergarten to Chaarvaaka philosophy. It’s origin itself is illuminating.

Chaarvaaka, therefore, is the Atheistic School of Materialism whilst Lokaayatha is the Theistic School of Materialism.

“The word Lokayata is as old as the Ramayana. In the Ramayana the word Lokayata means Vitanda (dry arguments or casuistry). It is often used in old Pali text in the same sense. The word is also available in Patanjali’s Mahabhashya. The name Lokayata also occurs in Panini’s Ukthadigana. Lokayata has been recognised by Kautilya as a Darshana”. [2, 4]

Indeed, this last point further impugns the hagiography of Kautilya as an “astika sabiour ob dharma“. He is frequently touted as a materialist, and the Puraanas assert he was hundreds of years before Alexander and had nothing to do with defeating the Greeks. His own Arthasaastra, therefore, was not an original, but a Lokaayatha corruption of the Arthasaastras of Brhaspathi and Narada and ultimately, the Rajyasastra of Brahmadeva himself. As a theistic materialist, Chanakya was not an aasthika—how could he be?

So what then was he?  Kautilya was steeped in rituals, while engaging in political coups so that he could overthrow the Nandas and rule Chandragupta Maurya (himself a Nanda) as a puppet. Jains in the Sthaviravali Charitha assert that Chaanakya was a Jain Braahmana. As such, the effect of theistic-materialism is explained here. The same caste system and ritual status is preserved, but applied for political and economic benefits rather than spiritual ones. A braahmana wielding political power is no braahmana, yet, that was exactly what Chaanakya was and did. Dronacharya was slain for having the same ambitions (having placed his son Ashwattama on the throne in half of Panchaala), and yet Chaanakya today is deified as a hero, when he was not. He was a complicated figure who strayed from Dharma, and that is what materialism does.

“The Buddhists and the Jainas are not Char-vakas. But they are Nastikas”…”According to the Gita, Nastikas are godless people. Kumarila in his Shlokavartika maintains the same view.” [2,7]

Today, we have people justifying Sanyaasis wearing crowns, threatening “will you criticize them?”.

Are Acharyas suddenly above Dharma?

When Kings and Politicians are questioned, when the Devas and even Paramathma himself is questioned, why will Acharyas not be questioned? Was not the conduct of Dronacharya in acquiring a kingdom, questioned?

This is how spiritual power can be used to accrue material gains. The same casteist twitter account then ran a false campaign misleading people into thinking an evangelical christian had done gharwapsi to “Hindutva”, justifying a vote for his party. In the name of caste privilege, what sin can’t be committed? By asserting blanket immunity from criticism, one justifies the acquisition of gold, jewels, and even crowns all in the name of “rituals“. Hence ritualists ally with evangelicals.

In contrast, this how a Sanyaasi (of the same Shankaracharya rank) conducted himself:

That is the danger of materialism. Caste can be preserved, but religion changed (depending on the political winds of the time). Is it any wonder India was colonised by a power half a world away? That is the cost of “caste uber alles“, and nations-within-a-nation.

But this is not about the sins of 1 community. All communities have traitors & opportunists. It is about Hindus as a society (Vaidika/Sanaathana Samaaj). Whatever blame can be allocated to other communities due to history or invaders, Hindus can no longer shirk responsibility for their own karma. It is true, self-flagellation is pointless when international political ideologies (i.e. Marxism) are arrayed towards gaslighting Hindus on the genocides they have suffered. But the exploitation and misbehaviours occurring in other religions also have perpetrators within the Hindu religion. Just as despicable as the code of omerta is outside of Hinduism, it is also despicable within, particularly within the numerous cults of caste narcissism.

The truth of the matter is, Hindus aren’t actually religious, they are ritualist-materialists (kaalpik-lokayaathins).Ritualist-Materialism is the bane of our times.   What does that mean? It means that while people might go to temple or even do daily puja, it is not with the intention of improving themselves, but rather, is done selectively to avoid actual practice of the ethical tenets of the religion itself. Immunity or ‘Get out of Jail Free’ Card, if you will.

Kalpik-Lokayatins

What is Kaalpik-Lokaayatha? What is a ritualist-materialist? A ritualist-materialist is one who preserves the outward look of a venerable Veda Braahmana (or his non-brahmin useful idiot), whilst worshipping malignant deities such as Asuras. Why?—because “he does what works“.

Meanwhile, intoxicated with varna-pride, they turn villains into heroes and worship them as Babas. This is the result of the poison of jaathivaadha. It is not that varnaashrama was not by birth, but rather, it treated all humans as 1 jaathi (maanava-jaathi) but established a division of labour originating in janma (birth) and balanced by guna-karma. Mere janma without guna leads to raakshasa-thatthva (something which suits caste-obsessed Raavan-bhakths).

Why is that the case? Well, simply put, it is because virtually all human beings on the planet believe in materialism. God or spirituality is an afterthought. That is why there can be Atheist and Theist Materialists, or Agnostics in the middle. That is, they are worldly and believe in the school of worldliness (Lokaayatha) which states that we are in this world now, and we should enjoy—albeit intelligently and wisely. This means not only the maximisation of pleasure and minimisation of pain (Epicureanism), but it sets the stage for utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number—allegedly) in which decisions in life are measured on the basis of utils. If there is no gain for me, then why? Mujhe kya mila?

Paganism, Epicureanism & Materialism are not Dharma

Religion as ritual is religion for profit. Duty for the sake of duty, therefore, is not done. There must be some quid pro quo, some deal-sweetener, if not from someone else, then from a deity. “I placate the god, so he grants me my wish”. The net result, of course, is that human beings reduce religion to the behaviour of circus animals, performing tricks like poodles. No wonder sanctimoniously hypocritical poodles rule the political roost, writing ‘polytheistic pagan’ puja prescriptions for the uninitiated. It’s why so many hindus are easily enslaved by indigenous dronas.

One may say, well what is wrong with mukthi and bhukthi? And the answer is, there is nothing wrong in the beginning and intermediate stages with the policy of enjoying both this world and the next. However, as vyakthivaadha (individualism) increases, human beings begin to give only lip service to ethical principles or even sentiment. In such an environment where hedonism comes to the fore, everything can be commoditised, even love. As such, if love is seen as only enjoyment (enjoyment of a spouse, enjoyment of the joy of a child) rather than duty that can result in enjoyment, then everyone is for sale to the highest bidder.

Convenience and expedience rule the day, and support is bought through trading, rather than earned through principled conduct and selflessness. Men and women become pleasure-addled and molly-coddled, even as they do their daily religious bhajaana. Having performed their quota, they are now free for the rest of the day to calculate and cogitate over their next pleasurable experience or purchase or political scheme. And if they have committed any sin, then there is always a puja or indulgence for that. Punya to balance the Paapa, and Paapa balanced by Punya. “A phullll life” as our aging toddlers would pronounce. But this is in fact a fool’s life.  Is it any wonder that people get divorced the moment the fun goes out of the relationship?

Dharma is not just mere ritual. Ritual has its sacred place. But other than naimittika and nithya karma, the majority of ritual (kalpa) is the concern of the Vaidika braahmana. The rest of dharmic society cannot live life in such a regimented, austere fashion. Dharma, therefore, is fundamentally about principles. Principles of virtue to establish harmony and govern powerful feelings, sentiments, and passions so that they may be put to fruitful use rather than waste and dissipation. Not all “rituals” are benevolent. Vedic rituals are different from Pagan rituals.

This is not Dharma! Paganism (Witchcraft) is Asura-upaasana (Demon-worship)

https://twitter.com/firstpost/status/1580464481599385601

This is not a one off case. Notice how perpetrators of this monstrous act cut across religions? That is because as with Marxists, only “the method” matters. They are not united by ideology, but rather, they are united by method. They use the same despicable “rituals” to gain personal power. And make no mistake, this goes to the very top of the world’s religions. Indeed, this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Living an immoral life but hiding behind rituals is not brahmic, let alone dharmic.

Indeed, not all rituals are in fact, sattvic—see what rituals inhumane asura worshippers engage in. The danger of worshipping Asuras is that, in the end, even one’s own loved ones won’t be spared.

Before regionalists get into a tizzy, it is not just Kerala or the South. Such cases are heard throughout India. Remember this horrific and grizzly tragedy? It was in the supposedly “advanced” National Capital Region of the North.

If it is not “Pagan-Polytheism-Witchcraft”, what then is Dharma?

Dharma is first and foremost a system of principled ethics, which foments harmony. This allows individuals and society to live fruitfully and peacefully together. It creates lives of meaning and significance. Pleasure is experienced in due time, not because that is our purpose, but because it is reward for job well-done or an experience to be shared with a loved one. After all, food is best enjoyed when it is shared. It is easy to halve the loaf where there is love.

But in the present time, sentiment has gone for a toss. Families themselves now jockey for position, horse-trading with one’s own parents for advantage over rival siblings. Inheritance and even affection become a matter of shareholder value and corporate branding rather than natural familial love and obligation. That is the danger of materialism. It looks innocuous at first, but slowly and eventually, makes chaarvaakas of us all. Is there any wonder why we are witnessing the Death of Romance. It is due to the dearth of dharma.

Sacred and holy rites, and even whole families can be discarded for convenience of the moment and a passing concupiscence. This becomes all the more feasible in a rancid culture of hedonism where sin is in fact celebrated. “Romances” of the ribald become de rigueur and coitus a mere quotidian handshake. What is the origin of this reprobate reality? Why, materialism, of course. One need not say, “this is all, there is nothing more”, one need only care for that first and foremost (after a morning prayer to impress the masses, of course).

Being worldly-wise is fine, and even important. It is not for nothing that Panchatantra and Hitopadesa are Indic Classics. One must be practical in engaging with the world. But practicality cannot be justification for rampant materialism, which involves enjoying ‘your best life now’. Having your cake and eating it too, results in putting the cart before the horse. Rather than choosing spouses based on sarvaguna sampadha, the wife-as-concubine model has become the norm. After all, what is a girlfriend but a concubine in-all-but-name, perennially in limbo…seeking status as wife. This is not to insult women who have aimed to marry men by being courted by them or innocently seeking relationships in hopes of marriage. It is, however, to point out that you were born into a system and rancid culture that set you up for failure. It is a system that perennially puts you in danger. Even men too are not spared.

How many Forty-something women are there who invested years or even decades in men who strung them along..forever? What is the result?

This is because men (and now women) have the mindset of picking partners based on sensual enjoyment rather than enjoying sensuality with the compatible marital partner. That is why sex is so strongly regulated and regimented. Because de-linking it from marriage results in unwanted children, abortion, or single mothers. Is there any wonder then that society is going off the precipice? Women who experience sensuality with a man in hopes of marriage could once expect men to marry them if they got pregnant by chance. Gandharva vivaaha, and all that…

But in an era of individualism, sensual partners are chosen and discarded based on convenience. If men aren’t sure that the progeny is theirs, why would they seek to raise it? Independent women too must start asking this question. Forever seeking reliance on technology and dna-testing to ascertain paternity is merely blame-shifting. Live responsibly and enjoy pleasure under the auspices of virtue.

It is true that sex was never just about reproduction, but it is not supposed to be a standalone recreational pleasure either. It is about pleasure as by-product stemming from union of man with woman. It is because man has long fixated solely on sex as recreation that he has de-linked sex from loving union—thereby alienating woman. Both subsequently plunged down the rabbit hole of recreation and casual sex, in turn paving the path for demise of society. It is not that ancient prostitutes and their customers did not exist. Of course they did. But world’s oldest profession was heavily regulated and frowned upon. Only men of poor character (like Kovalan) sought them out in place of a noble wife like Kannagi.

Wives were not seen as concubines, though royal men frequently had prerogative to them. Wives-of-pleasure or trophy wives are mere concubines, but the institution of wife was one of society partner and co-equal in producing and raising a family. But with sex on the front end, responsibility was thrown to the back end,  illegitimacy rates sky-rocketed throughout the so-called developed world.

It is due to the cancer of bhogavaadha that not only do men leave their own families, but even women engage in adultery, leaving their husbands for lovers. Both genders are to blame for this behaviour. While abuse and domestic violence should not be tolerated in relationships (and is punishable by law), this cannot become license for individuals to celebrate or establish hedonistic cultures of extra-marital affairs. If marriage becomes about enjoyment, no wonder most men are emotionally unavailable. Sex itself has become about chemical release rather than emotional and physical connection—and women too are now guilty of this (you know what I’m talking about). Digital (pun intended) is now replacing the emotional. As a result, bed-hopping, casual coupling and tinder have become the norm. Auditions are rolled out for ‘marital partners’ prioritising sexual compatibility—it is any wonder that all parties are unhappy and loneliness remains at an all time high?

All this is not to condemn those who experience pre-marital sex. That would be hypocritical in our times. But it is one thing for such things to transpire and admit they were immoral and course-correct, and another to create a lifestyle or even culture legitimating and mandating it. This is the problem, and the ‘Brave New World’ that was created.

Independent women and unattached men have always existed. But both had an expectation of raising and providing for any children who were produced from their unions, legitimated or not. Today, serial infanticide has become the recipe. And society has become so callously indifferent to this that most of their recipes now stem from ‘spirit cooking’ (look that up). The net result is an asuric society masquerading as a ‘dharmic’ one (hence the pagan-polytheist rebrand for digital saffronistas). However, there is no middle ground between asuric or daivic. Per the vedic tradition, one either chooses one or the other.

And yet today, one finds the two being conflated. “In Krishna Mishra’s Prabodhachandradoaya we find—’Having prepared this system of the Lokayata School Brihaspati handed it over to Charvaka’. A Dhishana Darshana is referred to in the Padma Purana. Dhishana is a name of Brihaspati. Hence the reference in the Padma Purana is to Barhaspatya [follower of Brhaspathi]. Somadeva Suri, author of the Yashastikala and his commentator Sulasagara Suri ascribe the Lokayata system to Brihaspati. In the Sarva Darshana Samgraha of Madhavacharya some stanzas of the Lokayata school are quoted and Brishaspati is held respon-sible for their authorship. ” [2, 8]

Barhaspatya Sutra

The School of Lokaayatha (materialism) was nothing but Brhaspathi’s scheme against the Asuras, to weaken their tremendous potential for spiritual power. And that is all that is required. It is not that the preceptor of the Devas was a chaarvaaka—how could he be?? It was that he utilised the scheme of lokaayatha via his Brhaspathi-soothra to weaken his enemies (the asuras) as well as his chief rival (Sukrachaarya). It is time dharmics stop acting as though they can live a religious and dharmic life without actually implementing any principles.

“In the Maitrayani Upanishad we find: ‘Brihaspati having assumed the shape of Shukra brought forth that false knowledge for the safety of Indra and for the destruction of the Asuras.’ By it the Asuras show that good is evil and evil is good and they say that this new law which upsets the Vedas and the other sacred books, should be studied. We may deduce from what has been said above that Brihaspati is a synonym for Lokayata.” [2, 9]

The fact is, the stain of Lokaayatha has proliferated everywhere, to the point of being unrecognisable and all-pervasive. “The views of the Lokayatikas are also discussed in Tattvatika, in Kamasutra, in the Ramayana, in the Mahabharata, in the Vishnu Purana, in the Padma Purana, in Saddarshana Samuchchaya, in Tattva Sam-graha, in Prabodhachandrodaya, in Naisadhacharita, and in Sarvadarshana Samgraha. In Buddhist works like Samannaphalasutta and Payasi Suttanta there is discus-sion of this system.” [2, 11]

Is it any wonder that that false interpretation and wrong interpolation have come to rule the day, and desi & videsi naastikas are treated as vedacharyas who proclaim “beef in vedas”? In a sense, the fault belongs not to Kalnemi, being true to his nature. The fault belongs to the dime-a-dozen casteist idiots who rally around such Kalnemis in the name of caste pride and jaathivaadha. But they should remember the real reason Lokaayatha was postulated.

  • Panthanirpekshata—Secularism
  • Maanavavada/Maanatattva—Humanism/Humanity
  • Lokayata—Theistic Materialism/Worldliness/Epicureanism
  • Vyaktivada—Individualism
  • Bhogavada—Hedonism
  • Charvaka—Atheistic Materialism
  • Asuropaasana—Asura worship
  • Ahamvada—Egotism
  • Ahampanthi—Solipsism/Self-deification
Lokayata & Tantra

“In old works the Lokayatikas are mentioned as a sect distinct from the Kapalikas. Gunaratna, a fourteenth century commentator, however, identifies the Kapalikas with the Lokayatikas. We shall see how these two sects were gradually amalgamated.” [2, 32]

Kaapaalikas are those who practice Kaulachaara(Tantra) for materialist & evil purposes. They gain power through sensual or even demonic ritual, and then cast spells on their opponents. They are egotists to the extreme, and cast caste (jaathi) as the greatest good as it ensures material and political power for themselves. Kaapalikas are therefore natural practicioners of casteism (jaathivaadha). Other castes who abase themselves before them (via madde snaanam or goodness knows what else) can be tolerated as loyal slaves—but the rest are rebels. Veda, Saastra, and all that is sacred can be corrupted by them to ensure their power.

“The wise men who do this are called Tibetans and Kashmiris…they know more of diabolic arts and enchantments than any other men. They do what they do by arts of the Devil; but they make others believe that they do it by great holiness and by the work of God.” [3, 110]

That is how Kaulas and Kaapaalikas masquarade as Veda Braahmanas (in the case of Indians) or as Bauddhas (in the case of Tibetans). Kaapaalika ritual is the method that unites them all—that is why Marxians are always promoting “the method”. They are the charlatans and snake-oil salesmen that bring spiritualists to materialism and then finally to ritualist-materialism (“because that’s what works!“).

People may question whether or not such despicable practices actually work, but that does not matter. All that matters is whether kaapaalikas think that they work, and that is all that it takes for them to commit the most despicable of crimes.

How does one progress from Vedic Purva Mimamsa to Kapalika Puja? How does one proceed from Religion to Non-religion to False Religion?

“There is evidence to show that non-religionists pass through five distinct stages of development in the course of their evolution. In the initial stage they were pure at heart, blameless in action and free from all conventions having neither virtue nor vice. In the second stage they developed a spirit of intolerance and opposition accepting the authority of none, yet having no positive problems of their own to solve. The third stage revealed some positive theories—Svabhavavada, recognition of perception as a source of knowledge and the theory of Dehatmavada. It was at this stage that they came to be known as Lokayatas. In the fourth stage an extreme form of hedonism which was due perhaps to the corruption brought about by their unchartered freedom, formed the most important feature of this school. Gross sensual pleasure superseded pure bliss which the Lokayatikas enjoyed so long. License replaced liberty. It was now that they got the designation of Charvaka and preached the gospel of—“Eat, drink and be merry, for to-morrow we may die…In the fifth stage they came to be at one with the Buddhists and the Jains in opposing the vedicists and got the common designation of Nastika. At this last stage all anti-vedic schools came under one head.” [2, 33-34]

But alas, it does not end there. It is easy to point out and exclude overt Lokaayathins from society. After all, dushta-braahmanas can be easily countered by sat-braahmanas. So Lokaayathins must go into covert mode. That is where the Kaapaalika comes in. Sometimes in the garb of a jyothisha (astrologer).

“The earliest references to the Kapalins, or the skull-bearers, are to be found in the Maitrayani Upanisad. Here the vedicists use freely such abusive epithets as ‘thieves’ with regard to them. They are called—’Taskaras’. This is due, most probably, to the fact that the real purpose of the Kapalins was not to practise religion but to enjoy sensual pleasure under the mask of religion. They are mentioned here along with the Barhaspatyas who are also similarly condemned. Next we meet them as the Shaivas, worshipping Bhairava and Chamunda in their terrific forms wearing garland of human skulls and requiring human sacrifices and offerings of wine for their propitiation; or as the Buddhists worshipping Buddakapala (a Buddhist deity) associated with his Shakti, Chitrasena, held in close embrace.” [2, 35]

The method, therefore, transcends religion (be it overtly Hindu or Buddhist or now Abrahamic). It is the method that unites. And it is not just 1 account. “Huen Tsang, Mahendravikrama, Bhavabhuti, Sankara, Krishna Mishra, Madhavacharyya and Anandagiri, have all left accounts of Kapalikas as a horrible and demoniac sect feared by all.” [2, 36] Though they “appeased the terrible god Mahabhairava” they believed “they could control Harihara and other great and ancient gods, stop the course of the planets in the heavens, submerge in water the earth with its mountains and cities, and drink up waters of the oceans in a moment.” [2, 36] Like Asuras, they worship Harihara to gain boons to “control Harihara“.

So how did these dushta-braahmanas reintegrate back into Vedic Society? “The Kapalikas lost their Kapalas but continued to hold the old designation. The Kalamukhas continued to hold the skull but lost their old designation of Kapalika“. [2, 38] As such, Kaapaalikas came to refer to asuropaasaka Braahmanas masquerading as Veda Braahmanas, and Kaalamukha became the term to refer to the original asuropaasaka of all castes. Indeed, Kaalamukhas are the useful idiots of Kaapalikas (there are many such today).

“The ugly side of the Kalamukhas, when further deve-loped, took a distinct shape and came to be called the Aghorins, the Aghora-panthis or the Keraris, to whom the human brain was the most delicious morsel and who were considered as Epicurean cannibals. Their prede-cessors, the skull-bearing Kapalikas were not apparently as shameless and abominable as these Aghorins. The skull-bearers used to eat flesh and drink wine but always refrained from eating dead carcasses. The Aghorins, on the other hand, used to take delight in eating dead carcasses and surrounding themselves with filth and foul things of the most ugly and revolting nature.”  [2, 40]

Interestingly, the Yavanas (of Afghanistan and Persia) were long accused for such despicable behaviour. They, after all, were Asura worshippers before converting. Perhaps that is why 1 Yavana from CNN was so interested in interviewing an Aghora.

Perhaps this is because said Yavana probably practices himself but aimed to slander all Hindus (including Saattvik Vaidikas) of the sins of this despicable Aghora sect (which influenced his own civilization). Don’t believe this to be true? Wasn’t there a Tom Cruise movie on the topic?

No wonder Tantra and Yoga are all the rage in the West today. How long will sujanaah and sajjanaah and sat-pandithas keep their eyes wide shut to this amalgamated atrocity?

Kaapaalikas and Kaalamukhas spread out long ago and made common cause with Druids (pretending today to be “Reeshees”), and continued their despicable rituals under the banner of “Paganism”. Wasn’t Merlin a Druid?

“Thus it appears that the Lokayatikas, the Vamadevas, the Shishnadevas, the Kapalikas, the Kalamukhas, the Aghorins, the Vamacharins, the Sahajiyas and the Tantrikas all walk along the same track with slight differences.” [2, 42] “There is a very close resemblance between Lokayata and the doctrines of Epicurus ( B. C. 341-270). Both the systems agree in identifying the Body with Soul. According to Epicurus Soul is a corporeal substance, a compound of atoms of four different species distributed throughout the frame but more densely massed in the breast. Lokayata says almost the same“. [2, 45]

Adi Sankarachaarya warned of the existence of such despicable creatures. It is for this reason he went to Kashmir, in order to restore Saiva sampradhaaya to its correct Saathvik roots. But Kaapaalikas are tragically, an all-India phenomenon.

That is how Kauls and other Kaulachaarins have used the system of Tantra for material gain and malignant purpose.It is not that all kauls and kaulachaaras are guilty, but many are. Tantra is the system of Mukthi (spiritual liberation) through Bhukthi (enjoyment); however, it specified enjoyment with one’s own spouse (and only one’s own spouse). Kaapaalikas learned the methods of sincere Kaulachaaryas and used rule-exceptions to pervert it into enjoyment and power acquisition—with anyone. That is why Tantra and vaamachaara gained negative connotation in the Indic parlance, and why karma is manifesting in Kashmir.

It is well and good to seek mukthi and bhukthi. But at some point, whether it is later in life or in later lifetimes, one must begin prioritising mukthi over bhukthi. Then one will recognise that this is done to seek not only an ethical life, but also to seek lok kalyaan, and the benefit of all of society—not just one’s own self or one’s own tribe or one’s own caste. Raavan-bhakths today are not just rumour, but reality, openly proclaiming themselves. How ironic that those most enamoured with varnashrama dharma would violate its tenets by seeking both priesthood and kingship for themselves?

All this is the result of seeing varna as some kind of “merit based” schema. It is as though each person gains a varna purely by exam marks of the karmic sort. What was Duryodhana’s merit? Or Kamsa’s or Jarasandha’s for that matter?

Varna is not only assigned due to one’s store of merit or one’s behaviour in previous birth, but also due to Divine purpose and intent. Vaikunta servants Jaya and Vijaya were tricked into taking birth as Raavana and Kumbhakarna (among others) not because they were sinners, but because Vishnu required antagonists for his Divine Avatar as Maryada Purushottam.

The word “merit” therefore, is losing all value in the parlance of the times. Marks alone do not make merit and karma alone does not make janma. Merit is advanced only as an excuse to enjoy and exploit all others. And “genetic merit” is nothing but elite self-selection via jaathivaadha (casteism). It is not that excellence and exam performance doesn’t matter—it is that the casteist is an expert at circulating cheat sheets and interview tips to his own people. This is anathema for those of us who worked hard in school and were class toppers, but doesn’t “legacy admission” exist, even in the Ivy League?

The same people have no problem pushing for farm laws that have reduced farm income since liberalisation. Isn’t that what is driving demand for rural reservations? So you are so greedy that you want corporate control of farming (so you can get job), but don’t wish to give seats to the same communities whose livelihood your policies are destroying. Hypocrisy much?

That is the problem of the time: the arishadvarga of pride and the materialist desire to enjoy (bhogavaadha) one’s own hierarchical status…for its own sake, rather than for duty.

Was that also “merit”??

“Vedic symbolism has three-fold meaning. The ritual meaning is important, as it helps to achieve the worldly aims. But beyond the worldly aims and desires, there is the spiritual reality which can be achieved by means of knowledge. This is made clear by the spiritual meaning of Vedic symbolism.” [1, 132]

To circle back, materiality is the first step towards materialism and finally hedonism. It is the de-prioritising of a spiritual and moral life (however, many stumbles there may be). It stealthily masquerades behind moral sanctimony, forever condemning others without correcting one’s own character.

Lokaayatha (Materialism) → Vyakthivaadha (Individualism)→ Bhogavaadha (Hedonism) → Chaarvaaka (Atheistic Materialism)→ Asuropaasana (Asura worship) → Ahamvaadha (Egotism) → Ahampanth (Self-deification)

“It is said in the Vishnupurana that a number of Daityas, one day in ancient times, began to practise severe penances following the injunctions of the Vedas. This caused great appre-hension to Indra. At his prayer Mahamaya or ‘Delusion the Great’ was created, who preached to the demons that pernicious doctrines of Brihaspati not for their benefit but for their destruction. They, having been gradually overpowered by that folly, became enemies to Brahmanas, gave up their duties and were averse to the study of the Vedas. Then, as they had strayed from religious observances, Indra killed them.” [2, 23]

No wonder Kerala, once touted as “God’s own Country” has become the “Devil’s own country”. Marxism was the materialist halfway house to Asura (devil) worship. Cinema even celebrates this.

This is the demonic path to solipsism that society has been walking on for the duration of the Kali Age. That is why society has drifted so far from truth. Each whatsapp uncle can live in a contrived reality of his own choosing—just find a new group or twitter cabal, et voila, you can claim every royal dynasty under the sun (even the solar dynasty).

“Sin essentially means violation of Rta, Satya or Dharma. Rta is Satya. It is dharma. It is morality.” [1, 104]

But truth is the foundational principle of Dharmic society. Truth was the path of Nachiketa. It was the hallmark of Satyakama. It was the burden for which Satya Harishchandra suffered. It was the (near) ever present utterance dwelling in the mouth of Yudhisthira.

A society based on untruth can rollick in Rta all it wants, but Rta emerges from Satya, and cosmic and moral order is ultimately impossible without truth.

That is the centrality of Sathya to our society and why Lokaayatha’s time in Bhuloka must now come to an end.

Sa yatha kaamo bhavathi, tat kraathur bhavathi

Yath Kraathur Bhavathi, tat karma kuruthe

Yath karma kuruthe, tat abhisampadhyathe,

http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/gita-126.jpg

References:
  1. Joshi, Shubhaa A. Lokayata—A Critical Study. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications. 1995
  2. Shastri, Dakshinaranjan. Charvaka Philosophy. Calcutta: Rabindra BHarati University. 1967, 1996.
  3. Latham, Ronald. The Travels of Marco Polo. London: Penguin Classics. 1958

Related Posts