Aghoris

The Aghorīs represent a broad collection of Indian religious traditions that seek to achieve a psycho-spiritual state of nondiscrimination in which there is no fear of or aversion to any person or object (Barrett, 2008). Aghorī commonly believe that this state, this teaching, this tradition, known as Aghor (lit. non-terrible), is natural and universal, but that it is usually lost by socialization into culturally specific prejudices, such as those associated with ritual pollution/impurity and caste, and the acquisition of core anxieties, especially those associated with human mortality. To overcome these prejudices and anxieties, the Aghorī have historically engaged in antinomian ritual practices (Parry, 1982). The Aghorī have been known to wander naked on cremation grounds, carrying little more than a human skull as a begging bowl. Aghor sādhanā (practice) has sometimes involved meditation on corpses, the use of intoxicants, and the consumption of ritually polluted substances such as human feces and human flesh.

In recent decades, many Aghorī have reformed their practices to better engage with main-stream Indian communities. Instead of embracing untouchable substances, these postreform Aghorī have come to embrace untouchable people through social service and healing. Once known for their fierce outward appearance, many contemporary Aghor sādhus present a peaceful visage in keeping with those of conventional Indian renunciates. Once solitary and nomadic, the reformed Aghorī have organized hundreds of aśrams, medical clinics, and schools. As a result of these changes, the Aghorī have attracted a large number of upper-caste, upper-class, and Western disciples. In these ways, they have become indistinguishable from many popular Indian religious movements. 

Issues of Representation 

Despite recent reforms, the Aghorī continue to be misunderstood and misrepresented by their surrounding communities. Popular media continue to emphasize and exaggerate their more exotic practices. In turn, these exaggerations are often perpetuated by self-styled Aghorī who emulate extreme practices without guidance from an established lineage of teachers. The situation is further confused by disciples from non-Aghor traditions who refer to themselves as Aghorī only while undergoing certain antinomian phases of their initiation. There continues to be a mixed presence of pre- and postreform Aghor disciples who often identify themselves using the English terms “old style” and “new style,” respectively. Even the new-style disciples continue to maintain symbolic associations with death and cremation grounds. Faced with these many representations, it is difficult to determine who is a genuine Aghorī and what constitutes genuine Aghor tradition. 

The extreme asceticism of early Aghor traditions has long presented challenges to understanding their beliefs and practices. The earliest historical accounts of Aghor-like traditions can be found in references to the Kāpālikas (from kapālin, “one who carries a skull”), who were present in northern India between the 7th and 11th centuries CE. Early texts depict the Kāpālikas as nomadic wanderers who scavenged cremation grounds and engaged in antinomian ritual practices (Lorenzen, 21991). But the nomadic nature of these ascetics precluded monastic organization and the accumulation of their own written records. It is not known whether the Kāpālikas represented a single lineage or a broader movement of like-minded ascetics. What little is known about the Kāpālikas is based on the writings of nonadherents – many of which depict them as ghouls, sadists, and sexual hedonists – external accounts that may not reflect accurate observations so much as the orthodox agendas of Brahman authors. 

The old-style Aghorī present the same challenges of definition and interpretation as the Kāpālikas who preceded them. In the absence of internal documentation, representations of these Aghorī have defaulted to British colonial and orthodox Indian accounts that often accuse them of criminal practices and malicious intent (Lorenzen, 21991). In recent years, a trilogy of popular books has presented Aghor in a more sympathetic light, linking antinomian practices to its underlying philosophy of nondiscrimination (Svaboda, 1986; 1993; 1998). Written by a Western disciple, these books present the teachings of a self-styled Aghorī with the pseudonym Swami Vimalananda. Yet in contrast to the asceticism of most Aghorī teachers, Swami Vimalananda lives the cosmopolitan life of an upper-class urban Indian, indulging in worldly vices under the auspices of Aghor sādhanā. Many Aghorī are suspicious of these representations or dismiss them outright. However, in the absence of historical evidence, it is difficult to determine who is an Aghorī and what constitutes Aghor beliefs and practices. 

Hagiography of the Kina Ram Aghori 

The Kina Ram Aghor Sampradāya is the only known Aghor lineage with a monastic base and historical records; it is therefore the most reliable source regarding Aghor traditions. The lineage was established in the late 18th century by Baba Kina Ram in the northern Indian pilgrimage city of Banaras. Written by his disciples and recounted by his successors, the hagiography of Baba Kina Ram provides key allegories of Aghor cosmology and social philosophy. 

Like many Indian devotional stories, those of Baba Kina Ram describe his life as a series of miraculous events (Ram, 1997; Asthana, 1994a; 1994b). These miracles appear in the travels that led the guru on the path to Aghor in Banaras, stories that evoke the complex interplay between masculine and feminine principles as embodied by different avatār s of Śiva and Śakti. They recount his first encounter with the goddess Hiṅglāj Devī in northwestern India (for Hiṅglāj Devī, see also Pakistan). There, the goddess directed him to meet her again in Banaras. Along the way, Kina Ram travelled to Mount Girnar in the western Indian state of Gujarat, where he encountered Lord Dattātreya, a three-faced avatār of Śiva often considered the founding deity of Aghor (see Rigopoulos, 1998). Lord Dattātreya reiterated Hiṅglāj Devi’s directive that he travel to Banaras. Upon his arrival at the sacred city, Kina Ram encountered Lord Dattātreya once again at Harishchandra Ghat, one of the two major cremation grounds located along the banks of the Gaṅgā. This time, the deity took the form of Baba Kalu Ram, who became his guru after testing Kina Ram with a sequence of miraculous tasks related to death and resurrection. Theguru then accompanied his disciple to the nearby dwelling of Hiṅglāj Devī, a sacred bathing tank beside which Baba Kina Ram established his dhūnī (sacred fire) and the Aghor lineage. 

These events exemplify the relationships between Aghor disciples and the male and female aspects of the divine. While nonadherents often describe the Aghorī as Śaivas, this label is not entirely accurate. Indeed, Kina Ram’s disciples consider Aghor to be one of the five faces of Śiva, to whom they aspire as the original and ideal Aghorī. Yet just as Śiva worships Śakti, the Kina Ram Aghorī primarily focus their ritual attention on different representations of the Great Goddess (Mahādevī). These dynamics are reflected in Baba Kina Ram’s hagiography, in which he sought to emulate Lord Dattātreya (Śiva) by taking Baba Kalu Ram as his guru. However, it was Hiṅglāj Devī (Śakti) who provided the direction and destination for his ritual attentions. 

Having established his seat in Banaras, Baba Kina became well known as a healer and social reformer, central roles for Aghorī renunciates in the lineage. In one of his most famous miracles, he cured a woman with leprosy by having her bathe in the sacred tank after charging it with a few grains of rice with the kālīmantra (kṛṃ), stating that all manner of afflictions could be cured for whoever bathed in the tank on five consecutive Tuesdays and Sundays. The tank since became known as Krim Kund, where many people continue to bathe and receive the medicinal blessings of ashes from the fires of Baba Kina Ram’s dhūnī, which has perpetually burned for the last three centuries with wood leftover from the cremation pyres of Harishchandra Ghat. 

As an Aghorī, Baba Kina Ram resisted the Brahmanical orthodoxy of his day and its associated political and socioeconomic structures. He was especially critical of Maharaja Chet Singh, who rose to power as a tax collector for the British and then legitimized his rule through the selective patronage of priests, scholars, and artisans. In a story reminiscent of Dakṣa’s sacrifice (seePārvatī), Baba Kina Ram crashed the Maharaja Chet Singh fire ceremony for dedicating his new fortress in Banaras. Riding into the fortress on a donkey, he insulted the Brahman priests by having the animal chant the Vedas and cursed Maharaja Chet Singh that he and his successors would never occupy the fortress nor father sons of their own – events that have since come to pass. Perhaps more importantly, these actions continue to serve as allegory of Aghorī resistance to ritual orthodoxy and social hierarchy. 

The Reformation of Aghor 

Baba Kina Ram’s successors maintained their social resistance and continued with their antinomian ritual practices until the death of Baba Rajeshwar Ram (also known as Burhau Baba) in 1978. One of the most controversial Aghorī of the 20th century, Burhau Baba was a large and intimidating figure who blessed his visitors with expletives and unexpected blows of his staff. He was also known for consuming large quantities of cannabis and country liquor, which he freely shared among his disciples, many of whom belonged to the Dom sweeper caste who worked in the nearby cremation grounds. In many ways, Burhau Baba exemplified popular images of the old-style Aghorī. 

Burhau Baba’s chief disciple was a charismatic ascetic who became a saint and major reformer of the lineage. Trained in the old-style practices of his guru, Awadhut Bhagwan Ram (also known as Sarkar Baba; 1937–1992) grew concerned that his disciples had become too attached to their worldly vices and subsequently banned intoxicants in his āśram. Inspired by Baba Kina Ram’s example, he established a clinic for the treatment of leprosy and other stigmatized diseases with modified ayurvedic medicines (see āyurveda ). The clinic grew into a large social-service organization with numerous āśrams providing health and educational services to poor and socially marginalized communities. Pragmatic in his approach, Sarkar Baba taught the principles of nondiscrimination while presenting Aghor in a more socially acceptable light. 

Subsequent to these reforms, the Kina Ram Aghorī attracted thousands of middle- and upper-class disciples, to include three state governors and an Indian prime minister, Chandrashekhar Singh. He also trained the most recent head of the lineage, Baba Siddharth Gautam Ram, and at least six other renunciates. One of these renunciates, Baba Harihar Ram, established an āśramin the United States with the blessing of his guru. This expansion was consistent with the belief that, if nondiscrimination is a universal human state, then Aghor teachings should be available to all societies. 

Although largely well received, the reformation of Aghor is not without its critics. Disciples of Burhau Baba who continue with the old-style practices sometimes point to an increasing materialism in the lineage. Some lower-caste disciples complain of discrimination and displacement by upper-caste disciples. And Indians from all these groups occasionally voice their ambivalence toward Western disciples and their influence as they struggle to maintain their traditions against growing forces of multinationalism and modernity. 

Lord Dattātreya, the first Aghorī, is typically presented with three faces. Aghor itself is considered to be one of the five faces of Śiva, but Aghor disciples present many more, be they affiliated or nonaffiliated; old style or new style; Indian, Western, or unlabeled. As such, Aghor has been subject to the same dynamics of cultural pluralism that can be found in many Indian religious traditions. Aside from the many misrepresentations of Aghor, such pluralism would seem appropriate to a shared philosophy of nondiscrimination.