We would like to believe that saints are above mundane rivalries, and have conquered the ego, which means they have no urge to compete or conquer. But the same is not true of their followers who write hagiographies (exaggerated biographies) and fill it with miraculous events and triumphant debates, to make their guru even more fabulous.
As per Shankara’s hagiographies, during his famous debate with Mandan Mishra, garlands were put around the competitors’ necks and the winner was the one whose garland remained fresh, even at the end of the debate. Needless to say, as per his followers, his garland remains fresh. However, in the book of Buddhist “history” written by Taranath in the 16th century, Shankara is defeated by a Buddhist monk called Dharmakirti. Shankara drowns himself in Ganga and takes rebirth to once again debate with the Dharmakirti. This happens three times before Shankara accepts Buddhism as true faith. Now, which version is the true version? The version written by Shankara’s followers that makes him the winner or the version written by Buddhists that makes Shankara the loser?
In Puri Odisha, as per temple lore, Ramanuja tried to change the temple rituals and found himself waking up next morning far away in Seemandhra’s Srikurmam. Here was a rock outcropping that some people claimed was Shiva-linga and others said was Vishnu-kurma. As per one tale from Sri Vaishnava tradition, Ramanuja kept the Vishnu symbols (conch and wheel) in front of the deity, while his rivals placed Shiva symbols (trident and pellet-drum). The temple door was closed. In the morning when the doors were open, the deity had adorned himself with the conch shell and the wheel. A miracle that cannot be challenged, established the Vaishnava identity of the deity, in a Vaishnava tale.
In Puri’s Jagannath temple, Jayadeva’s poetry was challenged by the local king who also happened to be a poet. Both their manuscripts are placed in the Sanctum Sanctorum. The following day, when the temple doors opened, the manuscript of Jaideva’s poetry was placed above the manuscript of the king. A miracle is used to establish supremacy of a poetic work. Thus, the temple lore explains why Jayadeva’s work is integral to temple rituals.
In Karnataka’s Lingayat literature, we hear of how devotees of Shiva beheaded themselves and then resurrected themselves and triumphed over Jain monks, who could not do the same. In Tamil Nayanmar literature, a Sri Lankan Buddhist king is converted to Shaivism when Manikavasagar not only defeats Buddhist rivals in a debate, but also gets the Sri Lankan princess, who was born deaf and dumb, to speak Tamil verses in praise of Shiva. A miracle transforms the victory into a spiritually approved, divinely endorsed act.
Such stories are found not just in Hinduism. In Buddhist tradition, we learn that when challenged by heretics, Buddha proved his superhuman state of awareness, in the presence of a large crowd at Sravasti, by levitating his body from the ground and sprouting flames and water from his shoulders and his feet. All those assembled then accepted his supremacy and apologised for doubting him. Such spiritual duels, involving miracles, to establish one faith as superior to another, become history for the believers, but not for those who follow scientific historiography.
