[Advaita-l] Re: bhAgavata purANa (Jaldhar H. Vyas)
Dr. Yadu Moharir
ymoharir at yahoo.com
Mon Aug 21 12:10:47 CDT 2006
How does it really matter when it was written? Do we really have concrete evidence of such authentic statements? One of the serious limitation being the verbally communicated knowledge through various traditions. To main such integrity our ancestors created various trick, such as, ghana paaTha, jaTaapaaTha ..... etc.
Most of the scholars agree that that mahhabhaarata was written long after the death of lomaharShaNa at the hands of balaraama. The task for narrating the stories was then undertaken by his son sauti, who expanded the original text.
IMHO - It does not mater when things were written but what should matter to us now is why they may have said, what they said. Thus understanding the significance will be more helpful for future generations rather than the futile academic discussions of "DATES", yugga ... etc. All this then becomes nothing more than an exercise similar to "chewing gum" that only can possibly deliver the flavor without the fruit. At the same time may increase acidity of the person who chews the Gum. The only real benefit to the individual is that his mouth does get purified to some extent ("mukha shuddhi" - as evidence from the smell from the mouth). The real knowledge is there and it is our duty to explore and try to understand it to the best of our ability.
Shri Jaldhar Vyas ji,
PraNAms ! I differ on your statement, for placing BAgavatha mahA purAna late
to the age of kali yuga. It is mentioned that after vyAsa composed
mahAbAratha, he was not fully satisfied about the manner in which it dealt
with bagavath swarUpA's and was thus worried. Then came nArada who advised
vyAsa to compose the purAna that which would speak about the greatness of
lord and his divya lIla. vyAsa recorded the suka prakshit samvAdham
thereafter. As prof. shri krishamurti ji rightly pointed out & also with
above information, it is quite evident and tenable to proclaim that Shrimad
BAgavatham belongs to the period of mahAbArata and not kali Yuga.
Moreover, there is no particular reference to Srimad BAgavatha
in Adi SankarA's Visnu sahasranAma bAshyA. Neither, rAmAnuja quotes any such
reference to this purANa. This is simply because the purANa is reputed
(intentionally) only to explain the saguna attributes to the lord and not
meant for Brahma tatva or Atma tatva vicAra and not since it is against
advaita principles. So long it deals with krishNa lIla, advaita regards it
as the qualities of saguNa brahmam. It was interesting to know about the
advaitin commentary on bAgavatha mahA purANa which would greatly serve the
students of contemporary advaita.s
There is yet another misconception; to ascribe vyAsa authoring
all the 18 purANa's which is completely absurd. vyAsa composed only
MahAbArata and shrimad BAgavatha. It is He who compiled and categorized the
18 purANa's vide., satva, rajas and tamas.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
Do you Yahoo!?
Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list