4

Here is what Devi says in 7th skanda, 39th chapter. https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/devi-bhagavata-purana/d/doc57430.html

The Śāstras that are extant, as contrary to the Śrutis and Smritis, are all Tāmasa Śāstras, Mahādeva has framed these Vāma, Kāpālak, Kaulaks, Bhairava and such like Śastras for fascinating the people; else he has no object in framing them.

Sanskrit verse is as follows: enter image description here

Why does Devi say that Vāma, Kāpālak, Kaulaks, Bhairava agamas are tamasic in nature. How do they contradict shruti? Why Lord Shiva has to delude the people? Which agamas fall under each of the above categories?

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    Many puranas are full of secterian views.These could very well be interpolations.
    – user17294
    Mar 11 '19 at 12:34
  • And Brahmasutra also brands these as Anti-Vedas by the way.
    – user17294
    Mar 11 '19 at 12:35
  • 1
    Devi Bhagavtam talks against many other Tantras too .. Like Vaishnava Agama is also criticized as saying followers will go to dreaded hells .. the branding of hot metal marks on body is censured
    – Rickross
    Mar 11 '19 at 13:12
1

Devi herself has revealed many of these same tantras as Mahakaali, Shakti, Bhairavi as supreme truth so is she contradicting herself? No. Remember this is just a Puraan. There is debate on whether or not Devi Bhagvat is authentic. Puraan is also not Shruti unlike Tantra. Bhairava and Kapaalik are most special in Shiv Shakti worship in present day so there is no point in this.

Also these Taamsik shastr are explained in many Shaiv shastr. For example Shiv Puraan:

Vishnu is of Sattva attribute, I (Brahma) am of Rajas attribute and Rudra is of Tamas attribute. This is only in the view of activities in this world. But in fact in name it is otherwise. Vishnu is Taamasik nature within. Goddess of speech is Rajasic nature; Sati is of Saattvika nature and Lakshmi is of Taamasika nature; the great Goddess Sivaa is of three natures.

Improve this answer
2
  • Hi, no offence, but can you explain how is this answer answering the question? I don't understand how this answer of yours is answering the question even in the slightest possibility? It looks more of like your personal opinion in the first half, while the second half is just a reproduction of Śhiva Purana verses. Further, you must try to cite the chapter, section, verse number, etc., of any verse you're using in your answers.
    – peace
    May 18 at 3:55
  • It's okay you didn't understand - I've already said that Devi Bhaagvat may not be authentic and it is just Puraan so it again probably has mistakes. Because everyone knows Puraan is not perfect sacred scripture. The sruti already shows that Shakti is revealing the very same shastra (called Tamasic here) are supreme over all other shastra. So it is either mistake and if not there is also more complete view offered in second half
    – R. Kaushik
    May 18 at 9:39

You must log in to answer this question.