Do Aghoris have a plausible take on Hinduism

[Aupmanyav]

There is no right or wrong in views. They are individual perceptions. A person in one stream may want to include something different as part of their own, when it is really not. I see Tantra and Aghora as two different distinct sets of philosophies. Just one page on internet is not going to make me change my views.

 

[Spirit_Warrior]

There is no right or wrong in views. They are individual perceptions.

And is this view itself right? You do not realise, as I have pointed out many times, postmodern garbage statements like this themselves make a truth claim about their own truth being true.

A person in one stream may want to include something different as part of their own, when it is really not. I see Tantra and Aghora

I really don't even understand why you would have even a problem accepting Aghora as a school of Tantra

Here our course of study is ‘Aghora’ not terrific but truly interpreted as ‘deeper than deep’ or as ‘gentle’ or ‘filled with light, illumined’. Aghora is the apotheosis of Tantra, the Indian religion whose supreme deity is the Mother Goddess. As we say before even more so far an Aghori, the entire world is his playground and his temple.​

WHAT IS AGHORA TANTRA ?​

Jnana Sankalini Tantra


Although akin to the Kapalika ascetics of medieval Kashmir, as well as the Kalamukhas, with whom there may be a historical connection, the Aghoris trace their origin to Baba Keenaram, an ascetic who is said to have lived 150 years, dying during the second half of the 18th century.[7] Dattatreya the avadhuta, to whom has been attributed the esteemed nondual medieval song, the Avadhuta Gita, was a founding adi guru of the Aghor tradition according to Barrett (2008: p. 33):

Lord Dattatreya, an antinomian form of Shiva closely associated with the cremation ground, who appeared to Baba Keenaram atop Girnar Mountain in Gujarat. Considered to be the adi guru (ancient spiritual teacher) and founding deity of Aghor, Lord Dattatreya offered his own flesh to the young ascetic as prasād (a kind of blessing), conferring upon him the power of clairvoyance and establishing a guru-disciple relationship between them.[8]

Aghoris also hold sacred the Hindu deity Dattatreya as a predecessor to the Aghori Tantric tradition. Dattatreya was believed to be an incarnation of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva united in the same singular physical body. Dattatreya is revered in all schools of Tantra, which is the philosophy followed by the Aghora tradition, and he is often depicted in Hindu artwork and its holy scriptures of folk narratives, the Puranas, indulging in Aghori "left-hand" Tantric worship as his prime practice.

Aghori - Wikipedia

​

The word "Tantra" is used by religious scholars to differentiate the form of religion that developed from the middle ages in India involving rituals, mantra, mudras, bandhas yantras, kriyas, pujas, temples, diksha which was strongly involved with shaktism, the worship of the mother goddess or the using of Shakti as a means to achieve Shiva. It also has its own class of texts which were composed during this time period known as Agamas and Tantras which contain these themes. The Aghora tradition, considered a part of the vamamarga are a part of this wider movement recognised as "Tantra"

Just one page on internet is not going to make me change my views.

But you never change your views Aupmanyav no matter how much anybody tells you anything. This initially can seem like having a skeptical mind, but when you keep insisting on not listening to others and not correcting your understandings, it becomes just ignorance. Words have meanings assigned to them by convention and when used you refer to their conventional meaning and not make them meaning whatever you want them to mean. Although what I find funny is you tell me "That is Tantra, not Aghora" and when I correct you, you reply "Views. We have different views. Nothing is right or wrong" In that case, if nothing is right or wrong, then why tell me I am wrong in the first place? LOL You constantly contradict yourself because how you keep changing meaning of words to suit yourself. It is no longer coming across as wisdom from a senior to me, but just plain ignorance.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I do not believe there are any practices necessary for Aghora. It is a matter of understanding things in a particular way. All this eating flesh of dead, living in funeral grounds, applying funeral ash is not required. Aghora philosophy can be understood even while sitting in one's living room. Why should you insist that I understand Aghora in your way?

 

[Spirit_Warrior]

I do not believe there are any practices necessary for Aghora. It is a matter of understanding things in a particular way. All this eating flesh of dead, living in funeral grounds, applying funeral ash is not required. Aghora philosophy can be understood even while sitting in one's living room. Why should you insist that I understand Aghora in your way?

Again, you don't get to decide what "Aghora" is and what it isn't. It decided by convention. Aghora is not just a philosophy it is a living religious tradition that is a part of the wider Tantra tradition, and it has integral practices like meditating on dead corpses. Furthermore, you can't be an aghori sitting at home, you need to be formally initiated(diksha) into the Aghora path.

Stop making things up and passing them off as "another view"

 

[Aupmanyav]

"Aghora" like any other, is an experience of non-duality. "Shivo'ham" establishes one in "Aghor".

 

[Chakra]

You shouldn't take the literal meaning of Aghori and twist it from its original tradition, just like you do with Advaita.

 

[Kapalika]

And is this view itself right? You do not realise, as I have pointed out many times, postmodern garbage statements like this themselves make a truth claim about their own truth being true.



I really don't even understand why you would have even a problem accepting Aghora as a school of Tantra

Here our course of study is ‘Aghora’ not terrific but truly interpreted as ‘deeper than deep’ or as ‘gentle’ or ‘filled with light, illumined’. Aghora is the apotheosis of Tantra, the Indian religion whose supreme deity is the Mother Goddess. As we say before even more so far an Aghori, the entire world is his playground and his temple.​

WHAT IS AGHORA TANTRA ?​

Jnana Sankalini Tantra


Although akin to the Kapalika ascetics of medieval Kashmir, as well as the Kalamukhas, with whom there may be a historical connection, the Aghoris trace their origin to Baba Keenaram, an ascetic who is said to have lived 150 years, dying during the second half of the 18th century.[7] Dattatreya the avadhuta, to whom has been attributed the esteemed nondual medieval song, the Avadhuta Gita, was a founding adi guru of the Aghor tradition according to Barrett (2008: p. 33):

Lord Dattatreya, an antinomian form of Shiva closely associated with the cremation ground, who appeared to Baba Keenaram atop Girnar Mountain in Gujarat. Considered to be the adi guru (ancient spiritual teacher) and founding deity of Aghor, Lord Dattatreya offered his own flesh to the young ascetic as prasād (a kind of blessing), conferring upon him the power of clairvoyance and establishing a guru-disciple relationship between them.[8]

Aghoris also hold sacred the Hindu deity Dattatreya as a predecessor to the Aghori Tantric tradition. Dattatreya was believed to be an incarnation of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva united in the same singular physical body. Dattatreya is revered in all schools of Tantra, which is the philosophy followed by the Aghora tradition, and he is often depicted in Hindu artwork and its holy scriptures of folk narratives, the Puranas, indulging in Aghori "left-hand" Tantric worship as his prime practice.

Aghori - Wikipedia

​

The word "Tantra" is used by religious scholars to differentiate the form of religion that developed from the middle ages in India involving rituals, mantra, mudras, bandhas yantras, kriyas, pujas, temples, diksha which was strongly involved with shaktism, the worship of the mother goddess or the using of Shakti as a means to achieve Shiva. It also has its own class of texts which were composed during this time period known as Agamas and Tantras which contain these themes. The Aghora tradition, considered a part of the vamamarga are a part of this wider movement recognised as "Tantra"

This is a very fascinating subject and right up my alley of interests and so I find it unfortunate that the original poster found this appropriate for debate as opposed to discussion. I wish I could see more of you two discussing your understandings intellectually rather than arguing who is right or wrong.

 

[Kapalika]

I do not believe there are any practices necessary for Aghora. It is a matter of understanding things in a particular way. All this eating flesh of dead, living in funeral grounds, applying funeral ash is not required. Aghora philosophy can be understood even while sitting in one's living room. Why should you insist that I understand Aghora in your way?

A question, but would that make one Aghori even if they agreed with their views? From my understanding to be Aghori one must be initiated. I do believe that there are lay-followers of the Aghora understanding but they themselves are not Aghori. How else would one later in life choose to become an Aghori if not?

The one who would live in their own living room but believe very similarly to the Aghori would be another kind of Tantric like Kaula (for example) from what I understand. I don't think that would make them Aghora even if they are very similar. Aghori isn't a householder path and so I don't think that is possible for one to do when in one's living room. The philosophy and the initiated practice are two different things from my understanding.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I do believe that there are lay-followers of the Aghora understanding but they themselves are not Aghori. How else would one later in life choose to become an Aghori if not? .. The philosophy and the initiated practice are two different things from my understanding.

I am not one for initiation. But I agree with you that there have always been lay follower of Tantra and Aghora. I agree to your last statement also.

 

[Vinayaka]

Out of curiousity, does anyone know just who becomes aghori? (There is no attached householder group to produce progeny?) Do they just come from all walks of life, any other group where the individual is so inclined?

 

[Kirran]

Out of curiousity, does anyone know just who becomes aghori? (There is no attached householder group to produce progeny?) Do they just come from all walks of life, any other group where the individual is so inclined?

It seems so, yeah. Tend to be lower-caste individuals, but not always. Like 'who becomes a sadhu', you know?

 

[Vinayaka]

It seems so, yeah. Tend to be lower-caste individuals, but not always. Like 'who becomes a sadhu', you know?

Thanks. They speak Hindi only, is there a unique dialect? Could a non-Hindi speaker 'join'?

 

[Kirran]

Thanks. They speak Hindi only, is there a unique dialect? Could a non-Hindi speaker 'join'?

I don't that they speak Hindi only, there are aghoris in Bengal etc. It's like, what unique dialect does Saiva Siddhanta speak?

 

[Vinayaka]

It's like, what unique dialect does Saiva Siddhanta speak?

These days? Probably 95% Tamil. I was just wondering if the Aghoris could be considered to have a linguistic ethnicity, like most other Hindus do. Pretty hard to join something without the language.

 

[Kirran]

These days? Probably 95% Tamil. I was just wondering if the Aghoris could be considered to have a linguistic ethnicity, like most other Hindus do. Pretty hard to join something without the language.

I was kinda making the point that it's not really about that. They're a very anti-establishment group in all ways, so while simply as a matter of circumstances most are Hindi-speaking, either as a first or second language, it isn't intrinsically tied to some language or other. AFAIK.

 

[Vinayaka]

I was kinda making the point that it's not really about that. They're a very anti-establishment group in all ways, so while simply as a matter of circumstances most are Hindi-speaking, either as a first or second language, it isn't intrinsically tied to some language or other. AFAIK.

That's what I meant too ... not philosophically, but functionally. Same as with temples in the west. As you said, most North Indian style temples in Britain are run by Gujarati speaking people. So non-Gujarati people might find a different temple they prefer. Language is important functionally, although I see it as being far less so for the Aghori sadhus, as they most likely don't talk all that much anyway.

 

[Kirran]

That's what I meant too ... not philosophically, but functionally. Same as with temples in the west. As you said, most North Indian style temples in Britain are run by Gujarati speaking people. So non-Gujarati people might find a different temple they prefer. Language is important functionally, although I see it as being far less so for the Aghori sadhus, as they most likely don't talk all that much anyway.

There isn't really that conscious divide of North Indian and South Indian temples in the UK as there is in North America. Perhaps in London there is. But elsewhere every temple has a core of Gujaratis anyway. Manchester has 5 temples, if you include the ISKCON temple, and they're all Gujarati-dominated (well, one may not be, but I think it probably is).

 

[Vinayaka]

There isn't really that conscious divide of North Indian and South Indian temples in the UK as there is in North America. Perhaps in London there is. But elsewhere every temple has a core of Gujaratis anyway. Manchester has 5 temples, if you include the ISKCON temple, and they're all Gujarati-dominated (well, one may not be, but I think it probably is).

From the pictures I look at on line, they are indeed very different.

 

[Kapalika]

From a documentary I saw years ago, if it was Scythian to go by, you just need to find someone willing to initiate you. Though in this documentary the guy was pretty young and so an outlier and it was mentioned they needed to make sure he wanted to do it for the spiritual aspect and not to escape debts as apparently some young people try to become Sadhus for that reason. Anyways my point is it seems hard to join, and of those who are able to join they are a bit' selective. It doesn't help that the practice has been slowly dying out too.

 

[Kirran]

I read a story of an aghori which someone had interviewed, and basically as a kid (like 13 or something) this aghori had come up to him, and with tears in his eyes placed a garland over his neck. Never seen him over, but that was it, he went and became an aghori immediately.