Kṣāttra Rites - 2

The Tattva Behind Abhicāra

Abhicāra is defined as the performance of specific rites directed toward an adversary with the intent of causing harm or neutralisation^[1]. The term has often been mistranslated as "witchcraft" or "black magic," both of which carry modern, culturally dissonant connotations. In truth, abhicāra comprises twelve types^[2]: (1) elimination, (2) expulsion, (3) annihilation, (4) paralysis, (5) stupefying, (6) nailing down, (7) robbing one’s speech, (8) robbing one’s voice, (9) deafening, (10) blinding, (11) making someone impotent, and (12) shapeshifting.

The word pratyabhicāra is also mentioned in the Vedas and Āgamas; these rites are considered more potent and are both defensive and offensive. Notably, these rituals were accessible to women in both Vedic and Āgamic traditions.

The Vedas are the oldest literary creation of the world and are considered the most sacred as well as the source of all knowledge. From the traditional point of view, the initial parts of the Vedas^[3] are meant for performing yāgas. Abhicāras are associated with the mantras and performances in the Vedas. There is a misconception among the Hindus that it is only the Atharvaveda which deals with abhicāra rites. But a deep study of the Vedas reveals that the Ṛgvēda, Yajurvēda and the Sāmaveda also contain abhicāra.

Mīmāṃsā’s Contentious Stance

The Mīmāṃsakas have unfairly criticised abhicāra rituals. Without understanding these rites fully, they completely reject them and deem them as sinful^[4]. They very cleverly limit themselves to optional rites like Śyēna, Vajra and Sandaṃśa but are completely silent on the abhicāras performed as an obligation during the Agnyādheya, Darśapūrṇamāsa, Agniṣṭoma, Jyōtiṣṭoma, etc. Most of the time abhicāras were mandatory and not optional, contrary to the Mīmāṃsā doctrine. The sages Āśvalāyana, Baudhāyana, Āpastamba, Bhāradvāja, and others, who authored the Kalpa-sūtras, prescribe the performance of abhicāras in the Sōma-yāgas, reflecting a divergence from Mīmāṃsā orthodoxy.

Even in ancient texts like the Mahābhārata and Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa, we see that abhicāra was performed by both the warriors^[5] and the sages^[6]. Even in the Purāṇas we often see sages, brāhmāṇas and kṣattriyas performing abhicāra rites. The most notable incident among them is the pratyabhicāra oblation poured in the dakṣiṇāgni^[7] by sage Bhṛgu to the Ṛbhus seeking protection against the attendants of Lord Śiva^[8]. Even Manu, the famed jurist of this nation, whom Mīmāṃsakas consider as an authoritative figure, prescribes abhicāra^[9] against enemies. Therefore, the views of Śabara and Prabhākara do not seem to fit well within the Hindu scriptures. The Mīmāṃsakas define dharma as “That which, being desirable, is indicated by Vaidika injunction”^[10]. Yet they reject abhicāras which are propounded by the Vedas. They completely ignore the essence behind abhicāra and turn quite adamant in their stance.

Therefore, the stance of Mīmāṃsakas regarding abhicāra is not just illogical but highly contradictory to their doctrine. Even historically, there is a plethora of evidence that shows brāhmaṇas and kings performing abhicāras against enemies, thus rejecting the stance of the Mīmāṃsakas. Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, a towering figure in the Mīmāṃsā school, in his Tantra-vārttika, validates abhicāra and pratyabhicāra rituals while establishing the authority of the Atharvaveda, going against Śabarasvāmī’s interpretation^[11]. Later thinkers like Khaṇḍadeva have also attempted to reconcile abhicāra with Mīmāṃsā principles^[12].

Scholarly Misunderstandings

Modern scholars like G. U. Thite and Purna Chandra Sahoo have critiqued the stance of the Mīmāṃsakas, but their own interpretations fall short. Explaining the logic behind abhicāra Purna Chandra Sahoo says –

“People in the then society were not only godfearing and rule-abiding by nature but they were also highly ambitious, envious and covetous towards worldly possessions which led them to cause harm towards others either openly or secretly through their means of magical rituals.”^[13]

He bases this opinion on some abhicāras found in the Atharvaveda. This view disregards abhicāras used for strategic wartime advantage, national defence, or troop empowerment, which clearly reflect a kṣāttra orientation. His understanding of abhicāra is not something which one can agree with, despite his scholarly work in the Vedas.

The majority of abhicāra rites were not born of pettiness, but from the dhārmic need to protect and prevail. Kṣātṭra-driven abhicāras were crucial tools of psychological warfare and spiritual empowerment for the kṣattriyas. Secondary forms of abhicāra, such as those invoking love, potency, or harmony among co-wives, addressed the domains of artha and kāma, and though fewer in number, they too held significant relevance.

Conclusion

This article will focus solely on kṣāttra-related abhicāras—those rooted in enemy neutralisation and the strengthening of martial prowess. Most of the abhicāras contained in the Vedas, Āgamas, and Smṛti texts are related to the destruction of enemies and enhancing the valour, morale and strength of soldiers. The Śata-rudrīyam states that “Him whom we hate and he who hates us, I place him within your jaws”^[14]. The Atharva-veda also states that violence needs to be answered with violence alone^[15].

Many psychological studies^[16] have shown the need and efficacy of rituals: they help in regulating emotions and also connect and unite society. Abhicāras like Śyēna, Ajira, and Vajra are large-scale Soma-yāgas that involve the participation of the entire society, which promote the emotion of valour of the kṣattriyas. From the foregoing it is evident that calling the abhicāras as rituals born out of envy, jealousy, or stating them as primitive is incorrect. We have to bear in mind that these rituals have been promoted throughout the Vedas, Kalpa-sūtras, Āgamas, and Tantras for a very good reason.