Namaste Isavasya,
Veda also mean vidyA i.e. knowledge. ved-anta (vedAnta) means end of vidya meaning 'where knowledge ends'.[/YOUTUBE]
There is no end to knowledge, which is the knowledge of Brahman's infinite attributes. Vedanta means the goal of knowledge and not the end of knowledge.
E.g. of OM Namah Shivaya is found in any purana, though it is a vedic mantra, this mantra can be changed by all.
The panchAkSharI occurs in the vishNu sahasranAma, which is an ithihAsa and hence is addressed to vishNu as "Om ShivAya namaha". Furthermore, the same occurs without the praNava in the narasimha purAna as a praise of Narasimha by Rishi mArkandEya as follows:
prasIdAdhya mahAdEva prasIda mama kEshavaH: jaya kAla jayEshAna jaya sarva namOstutE|jaya shankara dEvEsha jaya shrIsha namOstutE jaya sarvagurO| jayE jaya shambhO namOstutE||lOkanAtha namOstutE vIrabhadra namOstutE| namas shivAya dEvAya namOstutE bhuvanEshwara||tvaM shivasa tvaM vasurdhAta tvaM brahma tvaM surEshvara: | tvaM yamasa tvaM ravirvAyur tvaM jalaM tvaM dhanEshwara nAthOsmI manasA nityaM nArAyaNamanAmayaM varadaM kAmadaM kAnthaManantaM sRnutaM shivam||
Meaning: Narasimha! Purify me, O great Lord for whom the devas are mere playthings (mahAdEva) and delight me with your auspicious attributes, O Master of Brahma and Rudra (kEshava). Salutations to the destroyer (kAla), to the controller of all (iShAna), to the supremely omniscient One who is the creator and destroyer of all (sarva). Salutations to One who provides bliss to his devotees (Shankara) as the Lord of his devotees (dEvEsha). Salutations to the Lord of SrI mahAlakshmi (shrIsha). Salutations to the best of teachers (sarvaguru). Salutations to One who is of the form of victory (jaya) and to the One who causes happiness by his beauty (Shambhu). Salutations to the Lord of the Vedas (lOkanAtha) and to One who possesses auspicious ability to change others while himself remaining unchanged (vIrabhadra) . Salutations to the conferrer of auspiciousness (shivAya), to the affectionate (dEvAya) and to the Lord of the worlds (bhuvanEshwara).
You are Shiva, You are Kashyapa, You are Brahma, You are Indra, You are Yama, You are Surya, You are vAyu, You are the waters, You are Kubera (ie, you have them as your body, yasya Atma sarIram). You are the ruler of my mind, which is always immersed in nArAyaNa, the bestower of desirable boons, that are of a nature of unbounded bliss, the destroyer of ignorance and of an auspicious nature.
Note: namas shivAya dEvAya is addressed to vishNu here.
Puranas are not sectarian. They do not exclusively glorify one deity.
The suddha sAttvika purAnAs (vishNu and bhAgavata) are sectarian and vaidika. The mishra sattva purAnAs like padma purana, etc, the rAjasa purAnas and the tAmasa purAnAs indeed glorify several other deities, including vishNu. The portions glorifying vishNu are miniscule sAttvik portions and accepted. Others are rejected.
Bhagavad Purana also glorifies lord shiva,
No, it doesn't according to Sridhara Swami, Veeraraghavacharya and Vijayadhwaja Tirtha. Only vishNu is praised. Read the link, we have already covered it:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/sh...hagavatam.html
Kurma Purana also glorifies both Vishnu and Shiva. Shiva purana also glorify Vishnu.
Precisely. Even in rAjasic and tAmasic as well as mishra sattva purAnAs supposedly glorifying other dieties, it is vishNu who is praised. And every acharya right down from Adi Shankara only quotes those vaiShNava sections of these purAnAs (Shankara and Bhattar quote from Linga Purana and SHiva Purana as well, but only the vishNu para portions).
The explanation is given here in detail:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_9.html
Padma Purana also glorify Shiva and talks about holy places like Kasi.
Those are avaidika portions in a mishra sattva purAna
According to Maharshi Suta, all the Puranas are nothing but the mediums through which Sri Hari manifests himself
एकं पुराण रुप वै तत्र पाद्मं परं महत् । ब्रह्मं मूर्धा हरेरेव ह्रदयं पद्मसंज्ञकम्॥
वैष्णवं दक्षिणो बाहुः शैव वामो महेशितुः । उरु भागवतं प्रोक्तं नाभिः स्यान्नारदीयकम्॥
मार्कण्डेयं च दक्षांग्रिर्वामो ह्याग्रेयमुच्यते । भविष्यं दक्षिणो जानुर्विष्णोरेव महात्मन: ॥
ब्रह्मवैवर्तसंज्ञं तु वामज्जानुस्नदाहृतः । लैऽगैं तु गुल्फकं दर्क्ष वाराहं वामगुल्फकम् ॥
स्कान्दं पुराण लोमानित्वगस्य वामनं स्मृतम् । कौर्म पृष्ठं समाख्यातं मात्स्यं मेदः प्रकी्र्तितम् ॥
मज्जा तु गारुडं प्रोक्तं ब्रह्माण्डमस्थि गीयते । एवमेवाभवद्विष्णुः पुराणाव्यवो हरिः ॥
पद्म पुराण, स्वर्ग खण्ड (६२।२-७)
Brahma Purana is said to be the 'forehead' of Sri Hari,
Padma Purana is said to be the 'heart' of Sri Hari,
Vishnu Purana is said to be the 'right arm' of Sri Hari.
Shiva Purana is said to be the 'left arm' of Sri Hari.
Srimad Bhagawat is said to be his 'thigh',
Narada Purana is said to be his 'navel',
Markendeya Purana is said to be his 'right-foot'.
Agni Purana is said to be his 'left foot',
Bhavishya Purana is said to be his 'right-knee',
Brahma Vaivrata Purana is said to be his 'left-knee'.
Linga Purana is said to be his 'right ankle',
Varaha Purana is said to be his 'left ankle',
Skanda Purana is said to be the hair on the body of 'Sri Hari'.
Vamana Purana is said to be his 'skin'.
Kurma Purana is said to be his 'back'.
Matsya Purana is said to be his 'stomach'.
Garuda Purana is said to be his 'bone-marrow'.
Brahmanda Purana is said to be his 'bone'.
Padma Purana, svarga khaNDa (62.2-7)
Note: These verses are found in both south Indian version with 5 khanda and bengali version with 7 khanda.
Glad you pointed out this. Yes, it is indeed srIman nArAyaNa who is parabrahman.
So, all the Puranas being manifestation of different parts of Sri Hari's body are very sacred and capable of bestowing salvation.
Correction: Only sattvika purAnAs and the sAttvika content in rAjasa/tAmasa purAnas is capable of granting salvation. Just because everything is from srI hari doesn't mean everything is pavitram. This particular slOka is a mode of meditation, for it is indeed srI hari who propagates boudha sAstra, pAsupata sAstra and tAmasa purAnAs to delude those unworthy of knowing him.
For a body to function properly, all parts are important.
True. The tAmasa purAnAs ensure that the kudRshtIs are given a road to follow, upon which they will eventually learn from their respectie deities they worship that nArAyaNa alone is Parabrahman.
According to Padma Purana, there was just one purana, which was split into 18 by Bhagavan Veda Vyasa.
Indeed that is true. When the purAna was One, it was just One with sattvika, rajasa and tAmasa as well as mishra sattva portions. These were created into separat purAnAs by vyAsa for the sake of classification.
Sampradayas give sectarian touch to these puranas and smriti-s and shruti-s. Puranas themselves do not say such a thing. Those verses in padma purnas which vaishnavas gladly adhere to to prove Vishnu supremacy are, IMO, interpolated. I have already given another classification above, which looks more apt.
SrI rAmAnuja quotes the classification openly in his vedArtha sangraha. Certainly, you wouldn't dare to say that a 11th century AchArya quoted an interpolation. Besides, in the link I gave above, the classification stands proven.
As a further proof, here is our analysis of certain kUrma purAna vAkyas which show its tAmasic content:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/th...retations.html
(NOTE: Just because its named after vishNu doesn't make it a sAttvika. The reason is only because kUrma avatara is described there.
Also note that no such classification is found either in mahabharata or in vedas. There is no such part in MBh or in vedas which is considered as tamasic, rajasik or sattvik. There are no upanishads which ar classified as sAttvik, rAjasik or tAmasik.
What relevance does that play. It is precisely because of this that all vaidikas follow the veda > ithihAsa > purAna ideology.
there are saint like GYAneSvara, TukAram, Meerabai, KalidAsa, pAnini, patanjalI, madhusudan sarasvatI, appaya dikSita, upniSad brahmendra, and even rAdhA rAnI, who has never ever denigrated status of any deity.
The words of bhaktas need to be assessed with shAstra. And appaya dIkshIta as well as upanishad brahmEndra's views have been defeated.
Madhusudhana Saraswati, Amalananda, SarvajnAtma Muni, Sridhara Swami, and Adi Shankara as well as his sishyas were vaishnavas only. Proof:
Refer the links:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012...hari-hara.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2014...araswatis.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012...aka-lucid.html
Note what SarvajnAtma Muni, an ancient advaitin who was a follower of Adi Shankara, says regarding Shiva in his refutation of the shaiva doctrine:
The Lord of sages such as kaNAda and akShapAda, who is inferred as the Lord by virtue of creatorship of earth and the rest of the universe according to their philosophy, who bears the bull as his flag, who is called Shankara (i.e., Shiva/Rudra), is excellent in his knowledge compared to us and in our opinion. However, he does not possess unbounded prowess, rulership, or knowledge. Hence, he cannot have established the connection between the words of the Veda and the sense/object conveyed by the words. The Purvapakshin replies as follows: Then, as per your siddhAnta, by what reasoon is the omniscient Lord proven, and how does the connection between names and forms come from Him? The answer is that we only conclude all these things from the statements of the shruti, such as yaH sarvaj~naH sarvavit and satyaM j~nAnaM anantaM
So much for the theory. Note that Adi Shankara interprets both Dhananjaya and Shiva namas in the sahasranAma as "Arjuna and Shiva, who are vibhUtIs of vishNu". An explanation of Shankara's views and his sahasranAma bhAshya (parts of which are already on the blog), will be coming up shortly.
Even Lord rAma and kruShNa worshipped Shiva.
rAma never worshipped Shiva. Krishna worshipped the antaryAmin of Shiva. Refer to the following links for proof:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/pr...-to-shiva.html
rAma worshipped Siva linga is mentioned in AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa. kruShNa taking paSupata dixA is mentioned in kurma purANa. kruShNa also tells Siva sahasranAma in Mahabharata.
AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa is not valid as a pramAna. Only vAlmiki rAmAyaNa is valid.
And Shiva SahasranAma is an interpolated section that has never been referred to by ancient vedANtins. Furthermore, it contradicts events in the mahAbhArata itself. In contrast, there are over 40 commentaries on the vishNu sahasranAma. Proof is here:
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_17.html
The likes of Amrut will never learn, and it is a case of the blind misleading the blind. However, it is also true that the majority will hesitate to accept the truth. Follow your own path, stop spewing venom on true vaidikas like Adi Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva who advocated only vaiShnava siddhAntha unnecessarily.
Bookmarks