Chapter 2 - The Rift between the God Śiva and Dakṣa

[Sanskrit text for this chapter is available]

Introductory:

Chapters 2 to 7 (both inclusive) treat of the legend of Dakṣa’s sacrifice. It is a very popular legend and is found in Mahābhārata Shānti. 284 (283 is a different episode), the Va. P. chapter 30 (which repeats verbatim the Mahābhārata text), to mention a few pre-Bhāgavata texts.

The development of the conception of Dakṣa in the Vedic period is traced in Bhāratavarṣīya Prācīna Caritra Kośa 407 and MP-a Study 54-8. This solar deity of the Vedic age seems to have developed into two Dakṣas in the Purāṇic period: (1) Dakṣa Prajāpati of the Svāyambhuva Era (Manvantara) and (2) Dakṣa Prācetasa of the Sāvarṇi Era. The Mahābhārata and subsequently Va.P. mix up these two Dakṣas and the story of the destruction of the sacrifice of the first Dakṣa is described to have happened in the case of the second (Prācetasa) Dakṣa.

According to the BH.P. the cause of rift between Dakṣa and Śiva is due to Dakṣa’s insult by Śiva (Bhāgavata Purāṇa IV. 2, Br. P. I.1.64). But in Mahābhārata and Va.P. it is the argument between Dakṣa and Dadhīci as to the relative superiority of Śiva and Viṣṇu which led Dakṣa to ignore Śiva during the sacrifice.

It is possible that this legend represents the conflict between the pravṛtti dharma characterised by the orthodox sacrificial culture and the nivṛtti dharma emphasizing renunciation and Yoga. The latter may be pre-Aryan as the relics of Yogins and Śiva worship are found in the Indus valley. But it is an overstatement to say that this legend is a symbol of the struggle between monarchy and republics as stated by Dr. T.S. Rukmani (A Critical Study of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa. 100-2).

Vidura said:

1. Dakṣa was affectionate to his daughter. Why did he disregard his own daughter Satī and cherish hatred towards Śiva who was the foremost among the virtuous?

2. Who would and how could one hate the god Śiva who is a great divinity to the world of the movables and immovables; who bears enmity towards none, and who is tranquillity incarnate; and who is delighted in his own blissful self?

3. Oh Brahman! Narrate to me what led to the enmity between the son-in-law (Śiva) and the father-in-law (Dakṣa) which made Satī give up her life with which it is difficult to part.

Maitreya said:

4. Formerly during the sacrificial session of the Prajāpatis (progenitors of the world) were assembled great seers and sages, all classes of gods including divinities presiding over the sacred fires, along with their attendants.

5-6. When Dakṣa who was brilliant like the Sun entered, he dispelled the darkness of the great assembly-hall by his splendour. Seeing him, all the members of the assembly, including the presiding deities of fire, were overwhelmed with his brilliance, and stood up from their seats. Only Brahmā and god Śiva did not stand up.

7. The leaders of the assembly reverentially received Lord Dakṣa. He bowed down to god Brahmā, the creator of the universe and with Brahmā’s permission, he took his seat.

8. Finding that Śiva (the Delighter of the world) was already seated and had ignored him, Dakṣa did not tolerate this. Looking askance at him, as if to consume him with the fire (of his wrath), he burst forth:

9. “Listen to me, Oh Brāhmaṇa Sages, along with gods and divinities of fire, I explain to you the mode of behaviour of good people. This is not out of jealousy or ignorance (that I speak).

10. This (god Śiva) is shameless, and has detracted the glory of the protectors of the world. This haughty fellow who does not know what should appropriately be done, has polluted the path followed by the good.

11.^[1] He has been like a disciple unto me, as he, like a virtuous person, took the hand of my daughter who is like Sāvitrī, in the presence of Brāhmaṇas and sacrificial fire.

12.^[2] Having married (lit. taken the hand of) my daughter, this monkey-eyed fellow did not show due courtesy, even by words, to me whom he should have respected by standing and by bowing.

13.^[3] To this proud, impious fellow who has given up performance of religious acts, and has violated all the bounds (of religious propriety), I gave my young daughter though reluctant to do so, as one would be to impart the sacred beautiful word (Vedas) to a Śūdra (who is not eligible to receive Vedic lore).

14.^[4] Surrounded by spirits and hosts of goblins, and with his hair scattered, he wanders in nudity, laughing and crying like a madman, in the terrible abodes of ghosts (crematories).

15.^[5] He is bathed in the ashes of funeral pyres, and is adorned with the garlands on corpses and with human bones. He is Śiva (auspicious) in name only, but is (actually) inauspicious. He is (always) intoxicated and loved by drunken people. He is surely the Lord of devilish spirits (pramathas), and ghosts which are the personification of tamo-guṇa.

16.^[6] Alas! It was at the instance of god Brahmā, that I gave my virtuous daughter to such a fellow who is destitute of purity (and cleanliness), and of wicked heart, the lord of goblins (called unmāda).

Maitreya said:

17. Having thus reproached Śiva who sat all the while quiet (without retaliation), the enraged Dakṣa touched water (sipped it in ācamana) and proceeded to curse him.

18. “When sacrifices are offered to gods, this Śiva, accursed of the gods, shall not (henceforth) get his share (in the sacrificial offerings) along with Indra, Upendra (Viṣṇu) and other gods”.

19. Oh Vidura, though Dakṣa was prohibited (from, uttering the curse) by prominent members of the assembly, he pronounced it, on Śiva (the Lord of the mountains). In great rage, he left the place and retired to his abode.

20. Having come to know about the curse, Nandīśvara, the leader of Śiva’s followers, with his eyes reddened with anger, uttered a terrible curse upon Dakṣa and the Brāhmaṇas who approvingly listened to Śiva’s denunciation.

21. “He who, being ignorant, highly thinks of this mortal frame, and hates the Lord (Śiva) who does not bear enmity against anybody, cherishes the notion of difference, and has his face turned away from the Truth.

22. With the desire of gratifying low sensual pleasure, he (Dakṣa) is attached to householder’s life which is full of deceptive psuedo-religious practices. His intellect is confused by arthavāda in the Vedas, and he is engrossed in kārmic ritual (pertaining to sacrifices and other such acts).

23. With his intellect wrongly concentrated on the body as the Soul, and having forgotten the real nature of the Soul, Dakṣa is as good as a beast. He will be intensely addicted to women, and will soon have the head (face) of a goat.

24. This dullard (Dakṣa), who regards the avidyā (ignorance) consisting of performing of sacrifices and other religious acts, as the real knowledge, and those who followed him (approved of him) in his censure of Śiva, shall continue in the saṃsāra (the cycle of births and deaths).

25. The enemies of Hara (Śiva) shall be infatuated with (and attached to) karmas, as their minds will be agitated by the churning (rod) of rich promises (viz. happy life in heaven) alluring like the smell of wine given in the flowery language of the Vedas.

26. Brāhmaṇas will eat anything and everything (without considering whether it is permitted by Śāstras). They will be devoted to learning, tapas (penance) and vratas (vows) for the sake of their own livelihood. They shall wander a-begging in this world, taking delight in property, (pleasure of) the body and sense organs.”

27. Hearing him pronounce this curse upon the Brāh- maṇa community (as a whole), Bhṛgu uttered a counter-curse which is an irrevocable punishment inflicted by Brahmanical power.

28. “Those who observe the vows to propitiate god Śiva, and those that follow them, shall be the heretics and the opponents of true Śāstras.

29. They shall lose their (sense of) purity, shall be dull- witted. They shall wear matted locks of hair and bones, and smear themselves with ashes. They shall enter the cult of Śiva worship where wine shall be the divinity.

30. As you denounce the Vedas and Brāhmaṇas who, like protective dams, lay down fixed laws restricting men (for preservation of the society), you have embraced hereticism.

31. This is the only auspicious, ancient path for the people (viz. the path laid down by the Vedas). The ancients (our forefathers) have followed it, and Janārdana is its standard authority.

32. It (Veda) is the Supreme Brahman, absolutely pure. It is the eternal path of the good. Condemning this, you shall embrace hereticism wherein the Lord of goblins is the divinity”.

Maitreya said:

33. While Bhṛgu was uttering the curse, Lord Śiva, being slightly disconsolate at heart (for what had happened), left (the assembly hall), along with his followers.

34. The progenitors of the world also completed the sacrificial session of one thousand years-sacrifice in which Lord Hari was the deity to be propitiated.

35. At the conclusion of the session, they took their concluding bath, (avabhṛtha) in the confluence of the Gaṅgā and the Yamunā. Purifying themselves thus, they returned to their respective homes.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Some annotators interpret this as the praise of Śiva.

(i) Conforming to the traditional religious practice (at the time of his marriage), he took the hand of my daughter who is pure like Sāvitrī, in the presence of Brāhmaṇas and the sacred fire. He is, however, of the status of non-disciple i.e. worth bowing. He is a jīvan-mukta, and is, therefore, above formalities—Bālaprabodhini

(ii) Being omniscient, Śiva knew from the beginning my unworthiness which remained undisclosed till today. Hence he did not pay respect to me who am like (but not really) a good person. It is due to the virtuousness of my daughter like Sāvitrī that he married her, in the presence of Brāhmaṇas and the sacred fire—VC. & Bhāvārtha-dīpikā-prakāśa

[2]:

Out of his grace, he (Śiva) satisfies the desires of persons who are passionate etc., like monkeys. He deserves to be respected by us, by standing and paying obeisance. But fie upon me! I ḍid not show even verbal courtesy to him—VC. & Bhāvārtha-dīpikā-prakāśa

(ii) He is anxious about the redemption of people who, like a monkey, take interest in sensual pleasures. To remove the pride of the egotist Dakṣa, he established relationship with him by marrying his daughter. To eliminate his ego, Śiva incited him by not paying even verbal respect to him, though Dakṣa, as a father-in-law, should have been shown due courtesy—Bālaprabodhini

[3]:

(i) All religious activities are lost in Śiva as he is the Brahman. Nothing is more pure than he. He is not proud nor has he crossed any bound of propriety—VC.

VC. presumes an avagraha before mānine and bhinna-setave.

(ii) He is so great that even the desire to give my daughter in marriage to him ḍid not occur to me, as comparatively my daughter was not worthy of him. It was due to the advice of Brahmā that I overcame that shyness. Śiva accepted her out of respect to Brahmā’s word. Śiva is Śūdra i.e. one who removes grief by his favour and advice (śucaṃ śokaṃ kṛpayā jñāna-bhaktyādyupadeśena drāvayatīti śūdraḥ / As this belongs to ‘pṛṣodarādi’ group ‘c’ in ‘śuc’ is lost and -u- is lengthened as -ū-. As to violation of etiquettes, Śiva being the Brahman, all kriyās (religious and other actions) are lost in him. He is absolutely pure and worthy of the highest respect. He is beyond the limits of ordinary jīvas. Hence the duties prescribed by the Vedas, do not apply to him.

[4]:

VC. states that Śiva’s behaviour like a mad person is his līlā (sports) out of godly ecstasy.

(ii) Bālaprabodhini: The bounds of Vedic injunctions are not applicable to a votary who has realized the Brahman. The show of madness is for the purpose of teaching the world, to renounce worldly bonds of wife, sons, property etc. Rudra performs penance, while he externally behaves like a mad person.

Cf. Supra III. 14.26.

[5]:

Bhāvāratha Dīpikā explains the eulogistic aspect thus:

He, being the Brahman, no kriyās are possible in him. There is nobody more pure than he. I was diffident about offering my daughter (a human being) to this great god, but did so to establish relationship. There is none mere auspicious than he. That he is the Lord of goblins, evil spirits etc. shows how kind he is to his devotees. He removes their tāmasic nature and protects. He is compassionate to the wicked in his heart. Hence he is dur-hṛd. I am glad (bata) that as per advice of Brahmā, I overcame shyness, fear etc., and gave my daughter to him.

[6]:

Bhāgavata Candrikā rightly criticises the absurdity of giving double, i.e. contrary interpretations, one a praise, the other a censure of Śiva. Pertinently he asks the propriety of uttering a curse on Śiva if Dakṣa praised him so highly.