Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté
The blemish of the individual (human condition) is aṇu - being minute. This mala is is called āṇavamala and is called apūrṇatā meaning non-full, incomplete. In the world of differences, pointing out the best ( or worst) vs. sameness, and wholeness is the condition of seeing only diversity.
praṇām
यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
because you are identical with śiva
_
One explanation is that Vyasa assembled the core of the Puranas before Suta passed on the puranas to the Rishis in Naimisharanya and some questions and answers that appear in the Puranas are directly answered by Suta and are not from Vyasa. Another reason is that the Puranas already existed before Vyasa and he only compiled and edited them.
There is a lot of evidence suggesting that the Bhagavata Purana is the greatest of all the Puranas, but the conclusion that the Bhagavata Purana is therefore also the most authoritive was drawn from a philosophical standpoint by Jiva Goswami and other Vaishnava sects like that of Vallabha. I do not agree with this. The reason the Bhagavata Purana is so elevated is not because it holds more authority than other puranas, but because every sentence is filled with jnana and bhakti. It is a repository of nectar. It is not because other puranas are less authoritve. Jiva Gosvami obviously had an agenda to downplay the authority of other puranas to assert his sectarian beliefs. One thing about the Bhagavatam Purana though is that it has the oldest tradition of commentators and this has helped with the faithful preservation of the text throughout the ages more than with the other puranas.
Last edited by Sahasranama; 29 June 2012 at 08:09 PM.
Actually, we should have no doubts on those points. My wife is the prettiest. My car is the fastest. My house is best.
But... all these things are temporary and don't matter. Spiritual life does matter. So, I hardly think it silly to ask these questions about deities and scriptures, provided we do so in an informed manner.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
Pranam
Thanks that explains a bit although it throws more questions with it.
What was Vaysjis take on it?
If someone did not read Skanda or Padma Purana he/she would not know the glories of Bhagvat Purana, why would the same not be mentioned in the actual and rely on another which may or may not be read by the follower of said purana? Another question that arise is, if Vyas ji is prompted to narrate the glories of Krishna why is this called a purana in the first place? Because this lilas, should that not be recorded as history instead it being called purana indicating it to be of ancient origin, although we know they were contemporary event at the time.
Yes that is well understood i think, thus my query can we call Krishna's lila Purana?Another reason is that the Puranas already existed before Vyasa and he only compiled and edited them.
Jai Shree Krishna
Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.
itihasa and Purana have some overlap. The Mahabharata calls itself a Purana.
Every Purana contains the list of 18 Puranas, which means every Purana is aware of the other seventeen. That way, all Puranas mention the Bhagavatam, though they are all earlier (according to the Bhagavatam).I find this quote strange
Following from this the question arise, having already written other purans, and up to that point he had not thought of Bhagvat puran let alone written it, how then this passage in Skanda or that matter Padma Puran can declare Bhagvat is the best?
Please don’t think I am questioning the greatness of the Purana, rather how it can appear in Skanda or Padma Purana?
Jai Shree Krishna
The traditional defence for this peculiarity is this is possible because they are all authored by one individual. After he completed all eighteen texts, he circled back and inserted the list of eighteen in each text.
The academic position is, there was a formal redaction where a set of eighteen Puranas were selected as major Puranas and these names were inserted into each of them and also in the Mahabharata. This formal redaction was most likely carried out by Vaishnava Brahmanas during the Gupta period or even later. Also, included in this redaction process was the organization of the Mahabharata into eighteen books, the Gita into eighteen chapters, etc.
http://lokayata.info
http://shivsomashekhar.wordpress.com/category/history/
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks