Re:Dasa Avathara- Dasa Maha Vidyas

[Guest guest]

, "M. S. Ravisankar" <ravi@a...> wrote:

> namaste:

> b) Inconsistency

> -----------------

 

Inconsistency isnt particular to tantras. By reading any two

puranas one can come across a lot of inconsistencies.

I mentioned inconsistency in puranas because I am not sure if it is

right to question the authenticity, of a tantra based on its

inconsistency regarding a particular matter.

 

> c) Possible errors

> ------------------

>

> Buddha is not one of the dashavataras. Yes, buddha is one of the

avataras of

> vishhNu, but not in the list of 10. It is balaraama (even though he

is

> largely a amsha of aadisheshha). This is a debated topic.

According to

> vishhNu puraaNa, this buddha avatara had a purpose of misleading

asura-s and

> it is not same as gautama buddha. Hence its inclusion is in poor

taste and

> shows that this works is a later addition. In retrospect, I think

the

> comparison with maatangi is even more in a poor taste. If at all

(logically

> speaking) buddha should be compared to dhuumavati.

 

 

Some Devi sahasranamas include the name of Buddha. Ex: Bala Tripura

Sundari Sahasranama has something which says "bauddha darshana

rUpA...". The matter of including Buddha in the list of 10 is a

matter of choice and not against puranas. Bauddha mantras can be seen

in some Srividya texts.

 

What is the logic behind Buddha - Dhuumaavati equality?

 

>

> d) Support

> -----------

>

> Do you have anything to support this text from a puraaNa or shruti

or

> smriti? What is the basis for comparing dhuumavati with vAmana? Why

is

> nR^isimha in muulaadhaara? If at all considering his rudra nature,

he should

> be in aaj~naa? Can you give me a support for these comparisons from

shruti,

> smriti or puraaNa? Without such a support, I think it is only fair

to

> question the authenticity.

 

 

Does Shruti or Smriti talk about chakras in the first place to

consider support? Do they talk about Dasha maha Vidyas? How can we

compare with Shruti or Smriti when it is not concerned about

DashaMahavidyas or Chakras?

 

>

> Now I even doubt the authorship of shriividyaarNava, for it is

known from

> other works of Swami VidyaaraNya that he rarely gets into tantra

and that

> too vaamachaara.

 

This sounds similar to indologists questioning the authorship of

Saundaryalahari. They use similar arguments.

 

> My view one has to look at each instance and see whether it is in

line with

> shruti. smriti and puraaNa. It is quite important to do this check

if the

> work claims itself to be a tantra.

 

 

Some tantras say this themselves.

 

Rgds

 

> >

> > ganapathy = = vijaya [srividya101]

> > Friday, February 20, 2004 10:28 AM

> >

> > RE: Re: Dasa Avathara of Maha Vishnu and Dasa

Maha

> > Vidyas

> >

> >

> >

> > Pranams.

> >

> > The Aforesaid information is from the Book " Dasa Maha Vidya

> > Rahasyam " published during the Navarathri of 1985 by Shree Gyna

> > Baskara Sangam and authored by

> > Pujya Shree Goda Venkateshwara Sastrygal who has obtained a title

> > from Sringeri Mutt as " AN OCEAN OF KNOWLEDGE ".

> >

> > This relationship between Dasa Avathra of Maha Vishnu and Devi's

> > Dasa Maha Vidya has not been given in any context but in a simple

> > and clear manner as indicated in the mail.

> >

> > The Sri Vidya tradition and sadhana has been given to us and

> > prescribed -- by way of Guru ParamparA -- so that the way may be

> > known to us and the goal is reached by the sadhak by the same

> > means including the understanding of Tantras as putforth by the

> > Guru, and through the same companionship with the Divine Mother's

> > manifest Vibuhuthis as the revealers of the light.

> >

> >

> > Ganapathy --- Vijaya

> >

> >