[sri ramanuja] Question on Bhagavatha Puranam

[Guest guest]

First of all, is it worth reading such a book at all I wonder many

a times what authenticity would such books bring in?!

adiyEn,

rAmAnuja dAsan

 

ramanuja, Vidyalakshmi <vidya_lr wrote:

>

> Sri:

>

> I was reading this week's edition of 'Hindu Maha

> Samuthram' in Thuglak. This talks about Srimad

> Bhagavatham - 2nd Baagam, 42nd Adhiyayam

>

> In this, it is said that Atri Muni's performed

> rigorous penance and prayed to the lord of all worlds

> that he should get a son equivalent to the lord of all

> worlds. Brahma, Vishnu and Sivan appeared before him

> and granted that Atri Maharishi will get three sons as

> the amsam of each of them and that there is no

> difference between the three.

>

> Why is there a contradiction like this in Bhagavatha

> Puranam, in the same series, i was also reading about

> other puranams where such things have been said.

>

> Could someone please explain this.

>

> Regards,

> Vidya.

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Narasimhan Swamin,

 

Srimad Bhagavatha Mahapuram is one of the 6 satvika puranams and per our Sri Vaishhava view it is considered authentic.

 

I am also reading the series in the Thuklaq magazine. what the editor of

Thuklaq is writing is the same way as all advaitins have been talking. It is not out of place to mention here about them as 'Prachanna Saivities' (disguised Saivas)

 

It is true that Dattatreya's account is mentioned . None of our Acharyas would negate this.

 

The very first slokam 'of Srimad Bhagavatam, beginning with 'Janmasyatya' clearly establishes Vishistadvaita.

 

In several places in Srimad Baghavatam, the paratvam of Peruman is clearly established .

 

Most of the quotes of our Alwars are only from Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

The issue here is Sri Cho Ramaswamy (Editor, Thuklaq) chooses to

elaborate only those place where it is convenient to advaitins and establish something such as 'all Mumoorthies are same' (Mumoorthy Samyam)

 

>From the view of Sarira Sariri Bhava of Sri Vishitadvaita, this is true. However, viewing from Seshi/sesha relationship, Srimad Bhagavatam clearly says which God is the primordial God.

 

The blame need to go to the editor and not to the Srimad Bhagavata Mahapurnam.

 

 

Adiyen,

 

Regards

KM Narayanan

---- Lakshmi Narasimhan <nrusimhann > wrote:

> First of all, is it worth reading such a book at all I wonder many

> a times what authenticity would such books bring in?!

> adiyEn,

> rAmAnuja dAsan

>

> ramanuja, Vidyalakshmi <vidya_lr wrote:

> >

> > Sri:

> >

> > I was reading this week's edition of 'Hindu Maha

> > Samuthram' in Thuglak. This talks about Srimad

> > Bhagavatham - 2nd Baagam, 42nd Adhiyayam

> >

> > In this, it is said that Atri Muni's performed

> > rigorous penance and prayed to the lord of all worlds

> > that he should get a son equivalent to the lord of all

> > worlds. Brahma, Vishnu and Sivan appeared before him

> > and granted that Atri Maharishi will get three sons as

> > the amsam of each of them and that there is no

> > difference between the three.

> >

> > Why is there a contradiction like this in Bhagavatha

> > Puranam, in the same series, i was also reading about

> > other puranams where such things have been said.

> >

> > Could someone please explain this.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Vidya.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>