Guest guest Posted November 25, 2008 Report Share Posted November 25, 2008 Dear satish,  There are 3 aspects in Sastra. Veda, Agama and Tantra.  Out of these, Veda is the Sastra which is swatah pramANAs / parama pramANAs / ApoursheyA.  Agama is Poursheya. Some of the agamas take Veda / Sruti as the PramaNa and some are not based on the Sruti PramaNa but written out of Intuition..  They are Avaidika. However, the Agama which conforms to the Sruti is acceptable and the rest is abandoned.  Tantra is the Upasana Prakriya which is based on Symbolic Representations or “Sanketa Prakriyaâ€.  Though, certain aspects of Tantra are found in Mimamsa Sastra, the basic and cardinal principle behind the Tantra is the “upAsaka-upAsya abhEdha bhAvana†or the mode of upasana where the upAsaka identifies himself with the upAsya devata through mudras, nyasas etc. Tantra is just a prakriya or methodology which again is a part of Agama Sastra. Hence, Poursheya.  The siva-parvati samvada or the dialogue between Siva and Parvati is a medium through which the tantrikas compiled the works. Nevertheless, they are some of the wonderful works, but it cannot be considered as Swatah Pramanas / Parama Pramanas or Apoursheyas.  Regs, sriram  Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger./invite/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 , venkata sriram <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > > Dear satish, >  > There are 3 aspects in Sastra. Veda, Agama and Tantra. Namaste Please see statement in the vaiShNava bhAgavata where it says " >The bhagavatha puraanam, says that > >Shruthir dwividou prokthaha >taantriki vaidiki chaethi.... -- From an old post in Ambaa-l The mantra-s found in tantra-shAstra are not pauruSheya but the rituals and the sanketa can in a sense be thought of as pauruSheya. Same is the case with the shrauta rituals. The vadika mantra-s are seen but the rituals which utilise them look composed/refined/changed over a period of time. Tantra has svataH prAmANya in its area i.e. in the sphere of tAntrika initiation rituals etc. The shrauta works have no business there. However vaidika-s/smArta-s avoid those that intersect their value systems which ofcourse makes sense. >  > Out of these, Veda is the Sastra which is swatah pramANAs / parama pramANAs / ApoursheyA. >  > Agama is Poursheya. Some of the agamas take Veda / Sruti as the >PramaNa and some are not based on the Sruti PramaNa but written out >of Intuition..  They are Avaidika. avaidika is not the same as vedaviruddha. People work for a software company but there is nothing vaidika about it right? So people dont just abandon it because they dont find " working for a software co " as prescribed in shruti or smriti. It will equally seem ridiculous if someone says that the norms of a software co should conform to say for example dakSha smriti. >However, the Agama which conforms to the Sruti is acceptable and >the rest is abandoned. > Tantra is just a prakriya or methodology which again is a part of >Agama Sastra. Hence, Poursheya. In tantra there are mantra-s, related yantra-s and then a tantra involving mantra and yantra. Mantra-s(tAntric) are apauruSheya but the rituals are probably not. Then the same can be said of vadika rituals(not the seen mantra-s) no?  > The siva-parvati samvada or the dialogue between Siva and Parvati >is a medium through which the tantrikas compiled the works. >Nevertheless, they are some of the wonderful works, but it cannot be >considered as Swatah Pramanas / Parama Pramanas or Apoursheyas. So for example if you want to know(yes one will ask a Guru but what does he refer to) how to perform the prAsAda mantra japa where do you look for a pramANa? a)taittarIya saMhita, b)sAma vidhAna brAhmaNa c)or the shaiva Agama by name sArdha-trishati-kAlottarAgama? No cookies for the right answer :-) From above it will be clear to you that tantra-s are svataH pramANya in their sphere just like the sharuta/smArta works are valid for their sphere. It is not that the veda is something higher than tantra but both address different but very similar things and are valid in their own spheres. Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 Namaste, Shruthir dwividou prokthaha > >taantriki vaidiki chaethi.... >> Can you specify exact skandha alongwith and the chapter and under which context. I have a copy of mula patha of Srimad Bhagavatha with the commentary of Shri Sridhara. I will refer it. It think it is archana dwividha. Vaidika and tantrika archana. As regards the sroutha ritual, entire thing is apoursheya. But not is the case with Tantra. Tantra originating from adhah srotas of Siva is abandoned and Urdhwa srotas could be accepted (if conforms to sruti). Moreover, my words are Bodhayana Prokta who compiled the Mahanyasa. Rishi Bodhyana while compiling the Mahanyasa explains what is nigama, agama and tantra. <<In tantra there are mantra-s, related yantra-s and then a tantra > involving mantra and yantra.>> This is a circular statement. The tantra is just a methodology which involves the upasana of mantra. This methodology is poursheya. However, a learned friend of mine said that the tantrika bijas are also " poursheya " which implies it is not sruti (not revealed and heard in antarmukha avastha). The Bija mantras are not revealed but coined by tantrikas. However, if these tantrika bijas refer and accept the pramana of veda can be accepted. For example, the panchadasi finds its reference in upanishad as Kamo yonih....... sriram. , " Satish " <satisharigela wrote: > > , venkata sriram > <sriram_sapthasathi@> wrote: > > > > Dear satish, > >  > > There are 3 aspects in Sastra. Veda, Agama and Tantra. > > Namaste > > Please see statement in the vaiShNava bhAgavata where it says " > > >The bhagavatha puraanam, says that > > > >Shruthir dwividou prokthaha > >taantriki vaidiki chaethi.... -- From an old post in Ambaa-l > > The mantra-s found in tantra-shAstra are not pauruSheya but the > rituals and the sanketa can in a sense be thought of as pauruSheya. > > Same is the case with the shrauta rituals. The vadika mantra-s are > seen but the rituals which utilise them look composed/refined/changed > over a period of time. > > Tantra has svataH prAmANya in its area i.e. in the sphere of tAntrika > initiation rituals etc. The shrauta works have no business there. > > However vaidika-s/smArta-s avoid those that intersect their value > systems which ofcourse makes sense. > > >  > > Out of these, Veda is the Sastra which is swatah pramANAs / parama > pramANAs / ApoursheyA. > >  > > Agama is Poursheya. Some of the agamas take Veda / Sruti as the > >PramaNa and some are not based on the Sruti PramaNa but written out > >of Intuition..  They are Avaidika. > > avaidika is not the same as vedaviruddha. > > People work for a software company but there is nothing vaidika about > it right? So people dont just abandon it because they dont > find " working for a software co " as prescribed in shruti or smriti. > > It will equally seem ridiculous if someone says that the norms of a > software co should conform to say for example dakSha smriti. > > > >However, the Agama which conforms to the Sruti is acceptable and > >the rest is abandoned. > > > > Tantra is just a prakriya or methodology which again is a part of > >Agama Sastra. Hence, Poursheya. > > > In tantra there are mantra-s, related yantra-s and then a tantra > involving mantra and yantra. > > Mantra-s(tAntric) are apauruSheya but the rituals are probably not. > > Then the same can be said of vadika rituals(not the seen mantra-s) no? > >  > > The siva-parvati samvada or the dialogue between Siva and Parvati > >is a medium through which the tantrikas compiled the works. > >Nevertheless, they are some of the wonderful works, but it cannot be > >considered as Swatah Pramanas / Parama Pramanas or Apoursheyas. > > So for example if you want to know(yes one will ask a Guru but what > does he refer to) how to perform the prAsAda mantra japa where do you > look for a pramANa? > > a)taittarIya saMhita, > b)sAma vidhAna brAhmaNa > c)or the shaiva Agama by name sArdha-trishati-kAlottarAgama? > > No cookies for the right answer :-) > > From above it will be clear to you that tantra-s are svataH pramANya > in their sphere just like the sharuta/smArta works are valid for > their sphere. > > It is not that the veda is something higher than tantra but both > address different but very similar things and are valid in their own > spheres. > > Regards > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi wrote: > > Namaste, > > Shruthir dwividou prokthaha > > >taantriki vaidiki chaethi.... >> > > Can you specify exact skandha alongwith and the chapter and under > which context. I have a copy of mula patha of Srimad Bhagavatha with > the commentary of Shri Sridhara. I will refer it. It think it is > archana dwividha. Vaidika and tantrika archana. I dont have the exact skanda reference. There is 1 more place where I remember seeing a similar statement. This is probably in kullUka bhaTTa's commentary on manu smriti or is it the padma purANa? Cant exactly remember. I will give it when I bump into it again. I wonder if teh devI bhAgavathaM says this... > As regards the sroutha ritual, entire thing is apoursheya. But not is > the case with Tantra. Tantra originating from adhah srotas of Siva is > abandoned and Urdhwa srotas could be accepted (if conforms to sruti). That doesnt seem to be the case. You will observe that the rituals changed over time and what is followed now wasnt the same a few millenia back. shruti has nothing to do with either the acceptance or rejection of tantra just like you dont resign your job because it doesnt appear anywhere in veda. For a dvija the question of acceptance or rejection comes *only* when he wishes a follow a particular tAntric path(or some elements from this path) which contains elements opposed to smriti-s. For the rest this question doesnt arise. But why bother with all that.. One could remain a *pure* vaidika and give up chaNDI or dakShiNAmUrti or something else and focus on gAyatri. See again the last para of my earlier post. The spheres of influenece are different. > <<In tantra** there are mantra-s, related yantra-s and then a tantra > > involving mantra and yantra.>> > > This is a circular statement. The tantra is just a methodology >which > involves the upasana of mantra. This methodology is >poursheya. Yes like shrauta ritual elements of this methodlogy could be pauruSheya. It will be understood that above is not a circular statement if by the first use of the word tantra(i.e. In " tantra " ...) it is understood that I meant the mass of literature existing under the title of x tantra, y tantra etc but not any particular detail of a paddhati involving mantra and yantra. > However, a learned friend of mine said that the tantrika bijas are > also " poursheya " which implies it is not sruti (not revealed and > heard in antarmukha avastha). The Bija mantras are not revealed >but > coined by tantrikas. I doubt this. But since you admit it is just an opinion and nothing more that, I have nothing to say. >However, if these tantrika bijas refer and > accept the pramana of veda can be accepted. Read it again please.. Does the above make any sense? Perhaps you could explain more as to how a tantrika bija will appear before you and say " I accept veda as pramana " ..? >For example, the > panchadasi finds its reference in upanishad as Kamo yonih It has an upanishad title but is a actually tAntric work styled as an upanishad. All later upanishads are like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 Devi Bhagavata says: " dvividhA mama pUjAsyAdbAhyA cha AbhyantarAni cha bAhyApi dvividhA proktA vaidiki tAntriki tathA " // Meaning: There are two forms of worship: One is external worship and the other is internal. The external worship is again of 2 types : One is Vaidika and other is Tantrika. Suta Samhita also says the same thing regarding the external worship as " vaidika tAntrika bhEdEna dvaividham " Regs, Sriram , " Satish " <satisharigela wrote: > > , " sriram " <sriram_sapthasathi@> > wrote: > > > > Namaste, > > > > Shruthir dwividou prokthaha > > > >taantriki vaidiki chaethi.... >> > > > > Can you specify exact skandha alongwith and the chapter and under > > which context. I have a copy of mula patha of Srimad Bhagavatha > with > > the commentary of Shri Sridhara. I will refer it. It think it is > > archana dwividha. Vaidika and tantrika archana. > > I dont have the exact skanda reference. There is 1 more place where > I remember seeing a similar statement. This is probably in kullUka > bhaTTa's commentary on manu smriti or is it the padma purANa? Cant > exactly remember. I will give it when I bump into it again. I wonder > if teh devI bhAgavathaM says this... > > > > > As regards the sroutha ritual, entire thing is apoursheya. But not > is > > the case with Tantra. Tantra originating from adhah srotas of Siva > is > > abandoned and Urdhwa srotas could be accepted (if conforms to > sruti). > > That doesnt seem to be the case. You will observe that the rituals > changed over time and what is followed now wasnt the same a few > millenia back. > > shruti has nothing to do with either the acceptance or rejection of > tantra just like you dont resign your job because it doesnt appear > anywhere in veda. For a dvija the question of acceptance or rejection > comes *only* when he wishes a follow a particular tAntric path(or > some elements from this path) which contains elements opposed to > smriti-s. For the rest this question doesnt arise. > > But why bother with all that.. One could remain a *pure* vaidika and > give up chaNDI or dakShiNAmUrti or something else and focus on > gAyatri. > > See again the last para of my earlier post. The spheres of influenece > are different. > > > <<In tantra** there are mantra-s, related yantra-s and then a > tantra > > > involving mantra and yantra.>> > > > > This is a circular statement. The tantra is just a methodology > >which > involves the upasana of mantra. This methodology is > >poursheya. > > Yes like shrauta ritual elements of this methodlogy could be > pauruSheya. > > It will be understood that above is not a circular statement if by > the first use of the word tantra(i.e. In " tantra " ...) it is > understood that I meant the mass of literature existing under the > title of x tantra, y tantra etc but not any particular detail of a > paddhati involving mantra and yantra. > > > However, a learned friend of mine said that the tantrika bijas are > > also " poursheya " which implies it is not sruti (not revealed and > > heard in antarmukha avastha). The Bija mantras are not revealed > >but > coined by tantrikas. > > I doubt this. But since you admit it is just an opinion and nothing > more that, I have nothing to say. > > > >However, if these tantrika bijas refer and > > accept the pramana of veda can be accepted. > > Read it again please.. Does the above make any sense? > Perhaps you could explain more as to how a tantrika bija will appear > before you and say " I accept veda as pramana " ..? > > > >For example, the > > panchadasi finds its reference in upanishad as Kamo yonih > > It has an upanishad title but is a actually tAntric work styled as an > upanishad. All later upanishads are like that. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.