[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Animal-Killing, and Soul-Merging Condemned
In article <4grs9c$3ll@babbage.ece.uc.edu>, Shrisha Rao <shrao@nyx.net> wrote:
>susarla.krishna@studentserver1.swmed.edu (Hari Krishna Susarla) wrote:
>
>[*chomp*]
>
>>Don't quote me on this, but I once heard that the 18 Puranas were originally
>>one. I can't confirm that, though. I do know that the Puranas are considered
>>as supplemental Vedic literatures by the Vaishnava acharyas. Madhva, in his
>>commentary on Vedanta-sutra 2.1.6 quotes the Bhavishya Puraana as follows:
>
>[*chomp*]
>
>I'm not sure what the context of that quote is, but if you mean to hold
>that by that quote you show Madhva's acceptance of your views, you're
>quite wrong. Here are a few other quotes by Madhva, and his own words,
>where he disagrees:
The view I assert that he, and most other Vaishnavas, accepts, is the latter
statement "I do know that the Puranas are considered as *supplemental* Vedic
literatures by the Vaishnava acharyas." My point is simply that they cannot be
dismissed outright.
>It is quite obvious, then, that the Vedas and the PuraaNas are of
>different natures, and that this fact is documented in scripture.
Different natures, perhaps. But the Bhaagavatam (1.4.20) does state that they
(the Puraanas and Itihaasas) are called the fifth Veda. It does acknowledge
that the Vedas were compiled separately, but the point is that the Puraanas
are supplemental.
regards,
-- HKS
