[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Pāśupata, Pāncharātra, etc. composed by Śiva and Viṣṇu as mohaka śāstra
dvnsarma at gmail.com
Fri Feb 17 23:09:31 EST 2017
But the protection appears to be extended to vaidika papis and not
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 9:35 AM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
> The bhAShya doesn't talk about vedabAhya-s, that doesn't mean that it is
> not in that purANa shloka. For bhAShya only vimohakatva was needed, since
> such was the pratiGYA and only that part needed to explain in the context.
> That's why he explained about vaidika-s who stray away, and not about
> vedabAhya-s, who are already out of vaidika fold.
> The same person can't be vaidika with pApa and vedabAhya at the same time!
> On Sat 18 Feb, 2017, 09:10 D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ, <dvnsarma at gmail.com>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:52 PM, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ <dvnsarma@
>> gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>So tantras are created to delude papi vaidikas. Tantras are created to
>> protect vedabahyas and not to delude them.
>> >>This is correct.
>> But according to the Sri Rudra bhashya there is no place in this sloka
>> for vedabahyas.
>> By the word vedabahya, only vaidikas who strayed from vedic path are
>> ये वैदिका एव सन्तः
>> पापवशाद्वेदेष्वविश्वासं कुर्वन्ति, तान्विमोहयितुम्, तच्च विमोहनं
>> तेषामनुग्रहायैव । ते हि वेदद्विषः तन्त्रेषु स्थितां वेदनिन्दामुपश्रुत्य
>> बहुमन्यमाना वेदं विहाय तान्त्रिकमार्गमनुप्रविश्य तेन विधिना
>> तत्पुण्यक्षतवेदद्वेषदोषाः क्रमेण जन्मान्तरे वेदनिष्ठां प्रतिपद्य कृतकृत्या
>> भवन्ति । अत एव वैदिकस्यैव सतः शाण्डिल्यस्य वेदनिष्ठां विहाय
>> पाञ्चरात्रादिदीक्षाविधिना विष्णुमाराधितवतो निन्दापूर्वकं तं प्रति चिराय
>> वेदमार्गं गमिष्यसीति भगवता वासुदेवेन वरो दत्त इति वासिष्ठलैङ्गे
>> श्रूयते - मत्तन्त्राश्रयणेनैव
>> मत्पूजा च कृता त्वया । तपसा प्रीतवानस्मि तव शाण्डिल्य मे प्रिय ।।
>> शाण्डिल्य! मम पूजा त्वया कृता । अतः कालेन महता वेदमार्गं गमिष्यसि ॥
>> Therefore the delusion as well as protection are meant for vaidikas only.
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 8:34 AM, D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ <
>> dvnsarma at gmail.com> wrote:
>> None of us are perfect. Since we are discussing non-advaitic Saiva
>> sectarian purana
>> I thought that there can be some motive in depicting advaitic proponent
>> as vedabahya.
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 7:48 AM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaalaalitah@
>> lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
>> I don't understand why shANDilya is assumed prefect just because he wrote
>> some aphorisms on bhakti at one point of his life?
>> Do you have some other information to prove that he was never vedatyAgI?
>> Only then we'll entertain your idea that vyAsa had some 'motive'?
>> On Sat 18 Feb, 2017, 05:03 D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ via Advaita-l, <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> Sandilya is the author of Bhakti Sutras with an advaitic bias.
>> Does somebody see a motive in depicting him as a non-vaidic tantric.
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:49 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> > These verses are also stated in the Rudrabhashyam (that has been cited)
>> > discussing the composing of the doctrines:
>> > मत्तन्त्राश्रयणेनैव मत्पूजा च कृता त्वया । तपसा प्रीतवानस्मि तव
>> > मे प्रिय ।।
>> > [Lord Viṣṇu addresses Śāṇḍilya: Only by adhering to My doctrine
>> > (Pāncharātra), you have performed My worship. My dear Śāṇḍilya, I am
>> > pleased by your austerities.]
>> > कुमार्गेणापि शाण्डिल्य मम पूजा त्वया कृता । अतः कालेन महता वेदमार्गं
>> > गमिष्यसि ॥
>> > [Even by adhering to *this inferior path* (Pāncharātra), O Śāṇḍilya, you
>> > have performed My worship. As a result of this, over time, you will
>> come to
>> > be included in the vedic fold.]
>> > The above make it clear that the practice of puja, tapas alone was
>> > performed and the resultant coming to the vedic fold is also specified.
>> > That shows that the puja, etc is not sufficient to gain mokṣa.
>> > Moreover, the smrtis are grouped and put in one place by Veda Vyasa in
>> > Brahmasutras. That is to show that there is no contradiction, avirodha,
>> > the Vedanta from the smrtis that are non-Veda. The pāncharātra is in
>> > group of smrtis. Hence alone while refuting it, along with other schools
>> > mentioned in that group, whatever does not conflict with the Vedanta is
>> > admitted: paramatam apratiṣiddham anumatam. From the above verses it is
>> > also clear that those practices are not contradictory to the Vedanta and
>> > hence admitted. This can be clearly witnessed in the
>> > where Shankara accepts explicitly the practices of worship,
>> > the Lord, etc. (At one place even the Bauddha is admitted for the fact
>> > he too admits the ephemerality of sense objects.) Only doctrinal
>> > differences are pointed out and refuted. It can also be seen from the
>> > bhashyas that all these schools that are refuted are non-advaitic, that
>> > un-vedāntic. We can see this also implicitly in the above verses where
>> > puja, etc. is not endorsed as sufficient for moksa and a further stint
>> > the vedic path is shown as wanting.
>> > regards
>> > subbu
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> > http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> > For assistance, contact:
>> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list