SrI VishNu PurANam Vs SrImad BhAgavatham

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha

SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaN SatakOpa-

SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESIkAya namaha

 

Dear devotees,

namO nArAyaNa.

 

This posting is regarding certain issues pertaining to

the glories of SrI VishNu purANam and SrImad BhAgavatham in

the light of their merits as evaluated by our AchAryas.

----

 

Why was SrI VishNu PurANam being quoted extensively by Bhagavad

RAmAnuja and not a single quote from SrImad BhAgavatham ?

 

 

Sage ParASara's SrI ViSNu purANam (VP) concentrates a lot

on explaining the tattvas. Many passages in upanishad and

vEdas are being commented here making it an upabrahmana of

a greater value than other purANas. Thats why it had direct

appeal for being quoted in the Brahma sUtras, wherever the

sUtrakAra (Sage VyAsa alias BAdarAyana) refers to Smrutis

to substantiate the siddhAnta he is making.

The passage from Upanishad/vEdas taken for discussion in

an adhikaraNa of Brahma sUtras is identified by the

commentators of Brahma sUtras and when the sUtra itself

says that the point established above is supported by

Smruti, upabrahmanas like SrI VP and Bhagavad Gita has dealt

with the commentry to that passage of Upanishad/vEdas taken

for discussion in that adhikaraNa. So, SrI VP became extremly

important for understanding the siddhAnta made in Brahma

sUtras.

 

Sage ParASara wrote SrI VP to clarify many issues in vEdAnta.

His son Sage VyAsa wrote Brahma sUtras to make a very

systematic and organized presentation of VEdAnta, clarifying

the import of the Upanishads in many difficult issues.

Needless to say, Sage VyAsa had studied SrI VP under his

father and knows the clarity in which his father has handled

many important passages of Upanishads. So, while presenting

the siddhAnta in his Brahma sUtras, Sage VyAsa augments his

arguments with the help of esp. SrI VP as a Smruti text.

Thats why, SrI VP holds a very high place with regard to

the explanation of tattvas and was used by the commentators

of Brahma sUtras.

 

Sage Vyasa's approach to SB, which is written after the Brahma

SUtras (as per the reference in SB), is not to get into deep

issues in VEdAnta for establishing the specific standpoints.

The job was already done through Brahma sutrAs, SrI VP,

Bhagavad GIta (MahAbhArata) etc. It was high time to immerse

oneself more in BrAhmAnubhava, enjoying the Swaroopa, rUpa, guNa

and vibhUtIs of the Brahman that has been well established

already. SB's focus was on these lines and thats why we see

some shallow treatment in explaining tattvas, in comparison with

SrI VP.

 

A vidvAn here at chennai, who is an authority in SB and is

well versed in SrI BhAshya etc re-iterated the point reg.

the superior explanation of tattva in SrI VP. For a sample,

he just made a comment on the way " Jagat Srushti " /

" Jagat kAranatvam of Brahman " is explained in SrI VP and

SB. He told that while SrI VP gets into very good details,

SB is more on the surface level. He added that, similar is

the case with many such issues in VEdAnta dealtwith in these

purANas. But, he by himself is a great admirer of SB and

said that one will get into a different plane of bhagavad

anubhava while reading SB and thats not the case with SrI

VP.

 

The bottomline is that SB is glorified as a great purANa

for its excellence in presenting the rasAnubhavas, drenching

one in great bhagavad anubhavam and SrI VP is hailed as a

great purANa ( " Gem of the purANas " - as per the words of

SrI YAmunAchArya) for its excellent treatment on the

tattvas.

 

 

Additional points :

 

 

1. SrI VishNu purANam has been accepted as an authority by

Adi SankarAchArya and he has quoted it in his works.

Thus, SrI VishNu purANam is well accepted by even the

opponents. Hence, BhAshyakArar quoted from it without

any restrictions.

 

2. Further more, it was hailed as " PurANa Ratnam " (The Gem

amongst purANAs) by SrI YAmunAchArya, because of the

excellent explanation of tattvAs like ISwara Tattva, chit

and achit tattva, SarIra-SarIri bhAvam etc. Especially,

the glories of " SrI " ie.pirAtti are well brought out.

 

For instance, pirAtti's vibhutvam is well stated in

SrI VishNu purANam (1.8.17):

 

" ....yathA sarvagatO VishNuhu tathaivEyam dvijOttamA "

 

" 0h Best of BrAhmanas! SrI is all pervasive, just like

how VishNu is .. " .

 

3. Since SrI VishNu purANam (VP) is much shorter then SrImad

BhAgavatham (SB), its much easier to master the verses and

reproduce them appropriately. Sage ParAsara's VP has been

expanded well by his son Sage VyAsa in his SB.

 

-------------------

 

Controversies

***************

 

1. There are few controversies regarding the authorship of

SB. Some claim that it was not written by Sage VyAsa. But,

our sampradAyam accepts that it was written by Sage VyAsa.

 

 

2. Another objection raised is on the treatment of pirAtti in

SB. Some feel that 60th Chapter of 10th Canto in SB portrays

pirAtti very lowly, equating Her to prakruti and Lord as

someone who is " self-immersed " etc.

 

Reply: While there is no doubt that SrI VishNu purANam is superior

to SrImad BhAgavatham (Or any other purANam for that matter)

with regard to the explanation of tattvas, BhAgavatham

doesn't contradict vEdAnta ie. ViSishtAdvaita.

 

In the 60th chapter of 10th Canto in SrImad BhAgavatham, our

Lord KrishNa is teasing Rukmini pirAtti and makes Her cry. During

that episode of teasing, PerumAL says that He never married Her

out of genuine love, but only to teach a lesson to SisupAlan and

his gang and curb their power etc. He then says that We (the men

of Yadu dynasty) actually never care for wife, children etc and

are self satrisfied with themselves. This made our pirAtti

cry bitterly and faint. Then PerumAL consoles Her and

says that it was simply " hAsya praudhim " ie. jovial in

import and not to be taken seriously. PerumAL says that,

He wanted to see Rukmini dEVi's reaction to His teasings

and in particular enjoy Her face with lips trembling in

loving anger etc. He then concludes by saying that the

greatest pleasure of householders is to tease their

wives in a jovial way and enjoy their reaction. Then,

pirAtti starts performing naichyAnusandAnam that She is

afterall a lowly person with guNAs of prakruti and how

such a fool can be compared with the master of all who

delights in His own glory etc and starts glorifying

PerumAL in many a ways.

 

 

First of all, it is clearly told that its only a

intimate jovial play between PerumAL and pirAtti.

PirAtti is also not making a statement about the

tattva as if She being " SrI " , the consort of Lord NArAyaNa

has only qualities of the prakruti and that Lord NArAyaNa

never cares for Her and His devotees etc. They have first

of all made an avatAram (vibhava) as KrishNa and Rukmini

out of their infinite compassion to us and fulfill the

wishes of great devotees etc by exhibiting their Sowseelya

etc kalyANa guNas and also teach us about various aspects

in tattva,hita and purushArta. When a rich person acts

in a cinema as a beggar, he will act as a beggar. We

shouldn't be upset that he though being rich has acted

as a beggar and delivered a dialogue corresponding to

how a beggar will. Similarly, during the avatAras, its

the avatAra rahasya (secret) that pirAtti will play the

role of a jIva and teach us about prapatti, how to

approach PerumAL etc.

 

Well, we have to actually enjoy the great rasa involved

in that episode and shouldn't conclude something

contradictory to tattva by imposing the known fact that

Rukmini dEvi is not a baddha jIvAtma, but PirAtti Herself.

 

For that matter, SrImad RAmAyanam will become still

worse then. Lord Rama after killing rAvana says to SIta

pirAtti that She can marry anyone of Lakshmana, Vibeeshana

and the like and He is not prepared to accept Her back, for

She has been at some other man's place for 10 months. Does

this mean that we have to reject SrImad rAmAyanam as

something contradictory to ViSishtAdvaita (which has

understood the great glories of " SrI " ), because it

portrays pirAtti very lowly as if She is in separation from

PerumAL, having sharp tongue while yelling at Lakshmana that

He is only after Her and is a partner of bharata for

a conspiracy against Herself and Lord rAma etc ? Ofcourse,

these things are performed by the Divya Dampati, only to

teach us about the great sin of bhAgavata apachAram. Since

sIta piled up untolerable words towards a great Lakshmana

and accused another parama bhAgavata Bharata, and started

beating Her breasts etc as if one is in hysteria, Lakshmana

(a great devotee) was severly hurt esp. the accussation

that he is after Her. The result of this bhAgavatha apachAram

is the 10 month severe punishment for SIta making Her devoid

of the company of Lord and undergo many sufferings and also

finally make Her undergo agni pariksha etc. Thats why, Lord

RAma replied back (after killing rAvana) with strong words

that She (SIta pirAtti) can now marry anyone of Her choice.

The message is that, Lord will be very furious towards those

who commit offense to His devotees and will make them

undergo sufferings and esp. make them devoid of bhagavad

anubhavam.

 

This doesn't mean all of the acts by the Divya Dampati

in their vibhava avatAras are mere " drama " . Its not a mere

" show/drAma " by the Lord in exhibiting His great kalyANa guNas

like Sowseelyam and Sowlabhyam in mingling/moving with the

likes of Guha, Sugreeva, Sabari, Hanuman, Vibeeshana and other

devotees. Its not like a (wicked) politician who just goes to

a village and talks/moves with villagemen for a while, and

puts a drama for the media and the people as if he really cares

for the poor etc. The Divya Dampati's vAtsalyam towards their

devotees are limitless and these are genuinely exhibited in

the vibhava avatAras like RAma, KrishNa, Nrusimha and the like.

 

The bottomline is that, adiyEn doesn't see anything

contradictory to VEdAnta in SrImad BhAgavatham. Infact,

it is filled with great rasAnubhavam. But, SrImad BhAgavatham's

excellence in bhagavad anubhavam has been eclipsed by the

unparalleled beaquty of the Divya Prabandhams of Azhwars

and the outstanding commentries on it by our AchAryas.

But, our AchAryas have certainly taken SrImad BhAgavatham

to be a upabrahmana ie. its a valid pramAna for us. Infact,

it is in SrImad BhAgavatham that prediction of the avatAra

of Azhwars and our SrI Vaishnava AchAryas are there and it

has been quoted by SwAmi dESIkan in His SrImad Rahsya Traya

SAram :

 

" krutAdishu prajA rAjan kalAv icchanti sambhavam

Kalau Khalu bhavishyanti nArAyaNa pArAyaNAha

kvacit kvachin mahAbhAgha dramidEshu ca bhUrishaha

tAmraparNi nadI yatra krutamAlA payasvini

kAvEri ca mahA puNyA pratIcI ca mahAnadi ... " (11.5.38-40)

 

It explicitly states as to how especially in Dramida dESa

(ie. South India) great devotees of Lord nArAyaNa will be

born and in the banks of the rivers tAmraparNi, vaigai,

pAlAr, CauvEri and mahAnadi at Kerala. Since NammAzhwAr

is going to be the primary AchArya for establishing and

propagating VaidIka Matha / VEdAnta for Kali Yuga by

initiating SrI NAthamunigaL into Ubhaya-vEdAnta, Sage

VyAsa ( Or Sage Suka) mentions River TAmraparNi first,

though there were many AzhwrAs before NammAzhwar born at

other places, as far as history goes. Also, BhAgavatham

states that even people from kruta yuga will be willing

to take birth in this kali yuga since one is going to

become most fortunate by coming in contact with these

devotees ( AzhwArs and SrI VaishNava AchAryas). BhAgavatham

is also explicit that these devotees are going to start

the " sankeertanam " which is going to have unparalleled

effects to the extent of attaining moksha. That sankeertanam

is nothing but the Divya Prabandhams of AzhwArs and Stotras

of our AchAryas. This verse also implies that, the movement

of Azhwars through their Divya Prabandhams will make even the

people of kruta yuga desirous to take birth in this kali yuga.

 

Also, SwAmi dESIkan explains by quoting only from SrImad

BhAgavatham that SAyujyam is the perfect description of

moksham and SAlOkyam etc are only partial in the sense that

SAlOkyam etc refers to the attainment of the vibhava lOkas

within the material world.

 

There are around four commentries on SrImad BhAgavatham

by our AchAryas and the latest one " VeerarAghaveeyam " by

VeerarAghavAchArya is famous. SrI Sudarsana SUri of the

SrutaprakASikA fame has commented on the 10th skandam of

SB.

 

SrImad BhAgavatham is certainly a valid pramAna and our

sampradAyam does give a very high status to it.

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.

krishNArpaNam.