History
Shaivism Series
The Rise and Decline of Shaivism in Ancient India
Not many people are aware that, between the fifth and
thirteenth centuries, Śaivism—or Śiva Dharma—was the most dominant religious
tradition within Hinduism. During this period, most of the Indian kings were
Śaiva and patronized Śaiva institutions. For much of this time, Śaivism was
also the dominant religion in most of south-east Asia, most notably in the
Champa Kingdom of Vietnam and the Khmer Kingdom of Cambodia. Such was the
dominance of Śaivism that even Mahāyana Buddhism modelled itself exclusively on
the lines of Tantric/Agamic Śaivism, and transformed itself into a Tantric
tradition called Vajrayāna. Jainism and Vaiṣṇavism also adopted and adapted
Śaiva ritual techniques to their own tradition. This period of Śaiva dominance
is also called the ‘Śaiva Age.’[fn1] The vast corpus of Śaiva texts composed during
this period and the dizzying variety of Śaivism practiced have now been all but
forgotten (except in western academia, where a massive effort is being made to
research and understand the phenomenon of Śaivism during that period). Interestingly, the rise of Śaivism coincided with the
collapse of the Gupta Dynasty, though we cannot be sure if there is any
connection between the two historical developments. Śaivism, during the age of the
Guptas, was already a very popular religion among the masses, though the Gupta
emperors themselves were followers of the Vaiṣṇava religion, calling themselves
the bhāgavatas. In what follows, rather than delve into the details of
the fascinating ‘Śaiva Age’—which will require multiple essays—we will trace
the rise of Śaiva tradition from its textual and epigraphic emergence before
the common era to its great flowering in the fifth century onwards, especially
the transition from Vaiṣṇavism to Śaivism during those crucial decades of late
fifth and early sixth century.Before discussing the origins of Śaivism, it must be noted
that while Śiva is eternal, its worship began at some finite period of time. By
‘origins of Śaivism’, we simply mean the point at which we find the first
evidence in archaeological and textual sources for the worship of Śiva. This in
no way implies that the worship of Śiva emerged only when we have surviving
material evidence of it. This distinction is often overlooked. Early
ŚaivismAny discussion on the origins of Śaivism begins with the
discovery of the pre-Vedic seal, also called ‘proto-Śiva’. The iconography of
the Indus Valley’s proto-Śiva and the iconography of Śiva that emerged a few
thousand years later is remarkably similar. This has led to a lot of conjecture
of Śiva being a non-Vedic God—be that as it may, our first concrete evidence of
Śiva in the Vedic literature emerges in that famous hymn to Rudra in the Yajur
Veda, also called Śatarudriya. However, there is no agreement that
this Vedic Rudra-Śiva is the same as the Śiva which emerged in the archaeological
and epigraphical sources at the turn of the common era. Despite this
controversy, it is universally accepted that the Śatarudriya was one of
the most important hymns of Śaivism from the very beginning of the Śaiva
textual corpus. According to scholars, the first clear-cut textual evidence
of Śiva worship is found in Patañjali’s, Mahābhāṣya, a monumental text
of Sanskrit grammar written around 2nd century BCE.[fn2] Patañjali speaks
of a group of people who venerate Śiva as the lord (śivabhāgavataḥ). There
is also a reference to small images of deities such as Śiva and Skanda sold to
the householders. This evidence suggests a group of people in about 200 BCE,
with a Śaiva identity conspicuous enough that they were identified as
worshippers of Śiva. The earliest epigraphical evidence for the worship of Śiva
is found in the Swat Valley region, datable to around 65 CE. It records that
one Moïka, son of Urumuja, had a śivasthalam (a place for the worship of
Śiva) made there.[fn3] Notice that the names of Śiva worshippers are Iranian, rather
than Indian, implying that at the turn of the common era Śiva was also
worshipped by people of Persian origin. The next fragmentary evidence, from a
few decades later, is found in Dharwad, Karnataka, on a stone inscription which
records a donation to a Śiva temple of Caṇḍaśivamahādeva during the time of a
Sātavāhana king, Śrī Puḷumāvi (III). There is further evidence during the 3rd
century of a land grant to a Śiva temple in Andhra Pradesh. During this period,
there are many archaeological remains of chaturmukhaliṅga (four-faced
Śiva) found in northern India.[fn4]The epigraphic evidence is indeed sparse before the 3rd
century. However, Alexis Sanderson states that despite the lack of material
evidence for the worship of Śiva between the Maurya and the Gupta period, the
worship of Śiva was common and widespread across the entire Indian
sub-continent. This can be demonstrated by the proliferation of names related
to Śiva—Śivadatta, Śivadāsa, Śivadhara, Śivarakṣita—in the donative
inscriptions found across India from the 2nd century BCE onward.[fn5] Śiva is also mentioned in Jain and Buddhist texts of that period. From the early
common era, there is also evidence of a flourishing temple tradition related to
Śaivism which later became associated with the Pāśupatas. From the 4th
century onwards, epigraphic, archaeological, and textual evidence for the
worship of Śiva is found in abundance.The Dominance of Śaivism from the late 5th
centuryBased on the above, we can say that Śaivism’s rise to being the
predominant religion of India from the 5th century onwards was built
on the widespread tradition of Śaiva worship dating back to before the common
era. But how can Śaivism’s ascendency be reconciled with the fact that the Guptas,
who were the predominant power in Northern India between the 4th-5th
century, were all followers of the Vaiṣṇava faith? The answer lies in the
monumental political development taking place in northern India at the end of
the 5th century. Hans Bakker describes the fifty years 484-534 CE as
a period that changed Bhāratavarṣha.[fn6] Nothing similar would happen to Bhāratavarṣha
till the Islamic onslaught of the 12th century, which eventually led
to the collapse of Śaivism. During this fifty-year period, India faced repeated attacks
from the Huna kingdom, which had already established itself in northwest India.
The mighty Gupta empire which had ruled northern India for two hundred years,
weakened by their wars with the Hunas, finally collapsed in 510 CE when the
Huna King, Toramāṇa, defeated the Gupta king Bhānugupta in the battle of Eran.
Northern India lay in ruins, its most important cities, such as Kaushambhi,
completely sacked by Toramāṇa. After incessant warfare over the next few
decades, the Hunas were finally chased out of India by the confederacy of
post-Gupta kingdoms, led by Aulikara kings of Daśapura. The defeat of Huna king
Mihirkula in 534 CE marked the end of Huna incursions into India.With the fall of the Gupta empire, the state religion of the
Guptas, Vaiṣṇavism, received a great setback, as patronage and devotion to Vaiṣṇavism
dried up. However, during this period, something remarkable happened that
changed the religious landscape of the country. The post-Gupta kingdoms of
Northern India—Aulikara kingdom of Daśapura, Maukhari kingdom of Kanyakubja,
Maitrakas of Valabhī, the Kalacuris of Māhiṣmatī, the Vardhanas of Sthāneśvara,
etc.—all became followers of Śaivism.[fn7] It is during this period that Śaivism
eclipsed Vaiṣṇavism as the dominant religion of Bhāratavarṣa. Even the Huna
King Mihirkula, who finally lost to the post-Gupta kingdoms, had converted to
Śaivism. Here is an inscription from that time that states his Śaiva
affiliation. [Toramāṇa], who had raised his
family to fame, had a son of unequaled prowess, a lord of the earth (patiḥ pṛthvyāḥ),
whose name was Mihirakula, and who, (though) unbent, [was bending to] Paśupati.[fn8]The conversion of all the successor dynasties of the Guptas
during these important years of Indian history is still an enigma. Scholars
have posited multiple theories, but they remain conjectural. We may never know
the complete religious history of this period, unless more material evidence
comes to light. Be that as it may, we must be careful that by using the term
‘dominance of Śaivism’ we imply that all the kings considered Śiva as the
foremost among the gods, and that Śaiva institutions received the most state
patronage. It does not mean that Vaiṣṇavism or other religious traditions
collapsed or stopped receiving patronage. The Śaiva kings also gave grants to
the Vaiṣṇava temples (though nothing comparable to Śaiva grants), and there
were also multiple Vaiṣṇava kingdoms during this period (the Sena Kingdom of
Bengal, the Gādahavāla of Varanasi etc.). If this were not the case, Vaiṣṇavism
would not have been able to establish prominence again, as it did some eight
hundred years later. Conclusion
The Islamic invasion in the 12th century led to
the collapse of Hindu kingship in northern India and, with that, Śaivism ceased
to be the dominant religion (especially the Śaivism as prescribed in the Śaiva
Āgamas). Scholars usually talk of the destruction of Buddhism due to Islamic
invasion, but Śaivism also suffered a similar fate (as did the Saura religion,
connected with the worship of the sun, although scholarship on the history of
the Saura religion is still in its infancy). The destruction of Śaiva temples,
maṭhas, vast troves of manuscripts and, more significantly, the complete
collapse of state patronage in Northern India resulted in a permanent
contraction of Śaivism. Śaiva rituals only survived in a diminished form in
Tamil Nadu, Kashmir, and Nepal, though certain forms of Śaiva asceticism, such
as Haṭha yoga of the Nātha, did gain prominence during the later period. When
Islam became politically dominant in the North, Bhakti-inflected Vaiṣṇavism
would become the most dominant religious tradition—but that is a topic for
another essay!
... Read more
When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.
|| Mahatma Gandhi on History ||
We have our own history exactly as it ought to have been for us. Those who have eyes to see, find a luminous history there, and on the strength of that they know the nation is still alive.
But that history has to be rewritten. It should be restated and suited to the understanding and ways of thinking which our men have acquired in the present age through Western education.