Dear devotees, I am under the assumption that for us Vedas are the supreme authority (ignoring NDP for the moment). Puranas are also considered authorities as long as they don't contradict shruti vakyas. The same goes for Dharma sutras and smrities. Pancharatra agamas is also added to the list (at this point we diverge from smarthas ?!). Also, for us the vedas are a package deal. We vehemently oppose mimamsakas in this - their claim that shruti vakyas that seem to describe brahman/atman are not necessary to perform flawless yagnyas and hence they are superfluous. All the parts - mantras, brAhmaNam, Aranyakam & upanishads are considered equally valid according to us. We also add to our claim that our Shriman Narayana, the Veda purusha is declared as the supreme one in the Vedas. I am having trouble with all these claims. Let me elaborate. For reference, please also take a look at my previous post, which is taken from fourteenth adhyaya of shathapatha brahmana belonging to shukla yajurveda. I am seeing They say curiosity killed the cat. It sure is true, as my curiosity - a quest to know the contents of the Vedas that started an avalanche effect. In my ideal world, the vedas would declare the prabhAvam of shriman Narayana, the infinite compassion of thayar, the power of Sudarshana, strength of Garuda, exploits of Anantha, Vishnu paramatma's dashavatara and what not. Reality looks very different. Sure, there are bits and pieces of shruti vakyas that proclaim superiority of Vishnu (NarayaNa: param Brahma", "devanam parama:") etc. Vishnu being the excellent of Gods is said in shathapatha brahmaNa - only to find him beheaded in the following verses. The Naryana suktam which categorically states the superiority of Narayana is stated by our own commentators like Sayanacharya as khilani - i.e. addenda & supplement. It wasn't originally part of Taittriya AmnAyam. That shouldn't discourage us though - It is an atharvanic material after all. Actually even the brhigu valli in Taittriya Aranyakam is atharvanic material, recycled in Taittriya Aranyakam. The problem is, in Atharvanic materials, Vishnu isn't all that prominent. Let us forget that for a moment. In the same Taittriya Aranyakam, a few chapters earlier, Rudra Pashupati is lauded in superlative terms. In Brahmagavi hymns, Indra states, "I am he who is worshipped as Brahman. I am the atman". So, there are few other devas claiming superiority and identity with Brahman - the supreme one in the upanishads. The argument that there are a whole lot of Vedic shakhas that has disappeared and probably Vishnu/nArAyaNa's superiority would have been mentioned there is simply wishful thinking. Whatever shakhas are available to us were only available to our acharyas and from these only they have quoted while commenting of vedanta sutras. To claim Vishnu's superiority, we have to go beyond the Vedas and use vaishnava AgamAs and vaishnava purANAs. Likewise, there is nothing to stop the shaivites to use Shaiva AgamAs and Shaiva purANas and claim superiority of Shiva. At least I am aware of some shaivite traditions that ignore vedas altogether and consider the authority of shaiva agamas only. In this scenario, how can we - with a straight face - claim that "Vedas - the entire package" is our authority, or, "VedAs declare NaryaNa's superiority"? Regards, Kasturi Rangan .K
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |