Do Puranas Give God a Bad Name?

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I at times wonder..why do Puranas twist and turn facts as to give God a bad name?

For example in Padma Purana there is a passage where Lord Shiva is supposed to declared to Devi that the theory of Maya is a false doctrine being a disguised form of Buddhism with the usage of the word Pracchannabauddha(Crypto Buddhist).

Then Lord Shiva adds on to Devi that "I myself propounded it in Kaliyuga taking the form of a Brahmin"


So this looks like a direct attack on Adi Shankara making it sound like Lord Shiva took birth as Adi S purely to preach a false doctrine!LOL

Now this is not the first time Puranas come up with such stories..I am sure we are familiar about the Puranic claim that Lord Buddha is also a false prophet of Lord Vishnu.

Now..it seems that Puranas have been written to suit the whims and fancies of the writers with hardly any evidence base but what I am surprised is.."why write falsehood by making it sound as if its God who said it?"

Didnt the writers of these Puranas have some guilt conscious in them as not to do disservice to God?

If they really felt they did not like Advaita or Buddhism they should have been bold enough to object and leave their names known and state the reasons why they objected and not cook up some story that Lord Shiva said this to Devi or Lord Vishnu came as false prophet etc.

Doesnt this show cowardice and ill intent?

Now with all these sort of writers in the past who wrote what came to their mind..how can anyone actually trust any scriptures anymore?

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

People can and will twist truths if it serves to accomplish their objectives. But some may be unintentional. As long as you think with clarity, falsehood cannot be forced into you and there will be people who counter such falsehood. Truth will finally triumph.

 

[vignesh2014]

Some of the stories have no basis like Sage Brigu went to three lokas to find who is supreme. Even though Sage brigu was not insulted by both brahma and shiva (they were immersed in their own work) , Sage Brigu cursed both shiva and Brahma.
Eventhough he hit the heart of vishnu by his leg (Lakshmi because of this left vishnu), Brighu never attained any punishment for this.

Like that shiva and vishnu distracted Tharuga Muni's but never got any punishment by coming naked and appearing before rishi patni's and also vishnu coming in the form of Mohini.

Sometime some gods, some rishis, some men are escaping punishment and ultimately Karma theory is falsified by doing good one attain goodness, by doing bad one attain bad karma.

How this distortions came no body can explain? God alone knows:decision:

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Vignesh,

These can be explained by the fact that Gods and those who are self realized are beyond the effects of karma and any seeming distortion has a hidden good purpose.

 

[prasad1]

A novel or a story is a product of some writer. It may involve some mythical place, imagined people, totally impossible situations. That should be acceptable. Our puranas are to a large part purely mythical. Just because they involve the word GOD they do not become religious. The Hindu Brahman is not equivalent of the Abrahamic God.
If you believe in Brahman then every thing is possible. The Gods defined in Puranas are mere figment of imagination of some writer may be thousands of years ago.

 

[renuka]

A novel or a story is a product of some writer. It may involve some mythical place, imagined people, totally impossible situations. That should be acceptable. Our puranas are to a large part purely mythical. Just because they involve the word GOD they do not become religious. The Hindu Brahman is not equivalent of the Abrahamic God.
If you believe in Brahman then every thing is possible. The Gods defined in Puranas are mere figment of imagination of some writer may be thousands of years ago.

Agreed..but even the wildest imagination should not use the name of God(and His various forms) to promote Untruth.

For example how can it be acceptable that Padma Purana makes up a story that Lord Shiva telling Devi He took birth as a Brahmin to promote a false doctrine called Maya and using terms like Cryptobuddhist?

This shows gross distortion of facts to promote another school of thought and also gives Lord Shiva a bad name that He became a liar.Such Puranas are fodder for Non Hindus who will say "when your God lies..how will He save you?"

So for all practical purposes its Untruth..with all these Untruth in the Puranas its of no surprise that people need to recite Asato Ma Sad Gamaya!LOL

 

[renuka]

Recently out here in Malaysia one Devi temple conducted a ritual where a King Cobra was subjected to Mantra recital and the cobra was sort of subdued in the process and the whole ritual was some big hoo haah that was even carried in some news channel in Karnataka.

I wrote in the local newspaper objecting to the ritual and explained that such acts where an animal is taken out of its natural habitat and subjected to ritualism is not in line with Ahimsa and maintstream Hinduism and a Mantra recital is not supposed to be a demonstration of power to subdue a serpent and explained the meaning of the word Mantra.
I also urged Hindu Sangam Malaysia to set guidelines for worship to be carried out in a more organized manner.

The newspaper printed what I wrote and then after a few days the Tamil Daily here to took up this matter seriously and the priest in question was saying in defense that "if we can pray to Naga Deva why cant I do this ritual?"

But the Tamil Daily sort of hinted to him that his act was more of animism and not really Hinduism.

So I wonder what will happen now..cos the next snake ritual is due some next month ..I wonder if it would be allowed to be carried on.

I feel to a great extent stuff that tarnish the name of religion by bringing in animism should be objected cos its not fair to both humans and the animals or snakes involved.

Likewise..Untruth in Puranas should not be tolerated.

 

[prasad1]

Renukaji,
You know I agree with your post#6 and #7.
My post#5 pointed out that puranas are really old stories.
So your contention that :"Likewise..Untruth in Puranas should not be tolerated." is not justified. You need to cut the puranic author same latitude as any other writer. Then again everything is untrue except Brahman. If Homer can write about greek Gods, why not puranic writer have the same liberties?

 

[Brahmanyan]

Do Puranas Give God a Bad Name ?

Dear Doctor,

You have started very interesting discussion. "Puranas" are ancient "Myths" full of real or imaginary events and characters. Such legends are found among all civilizations. People love to imagine events. For instance look at
the stories which are enacted in the Films today. The events portrayed in our Cinemas cannot happen in the real world. Man and woman chasing around singing in the name of love, the music and group calisthenics in the name of dance. These are creations of mind. But people enjoy watching. The seven Books (7+3 supplements) of "Harry Potter" series by J.K.Rowling had crossed 400m copies (next only to Holy Bible and Little Red book of Mao Zedong) in sales. you must have read the Harry Potter series and known what type of events it carries.

We do not have such statistics for our mythological books.

It is my personal view that working of human mind is fascinating. It is ready to accept imaginary things but tends to reject reality. I dare not touch to review our Puranas without offending the sentiments of believers.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Renukaji,

I wanted to keep away from this discussion because this can end up in controversy. But changed my mind as knowledge and truth need not be hidden for fear of controversy. I am not interested in entering into any argument. I am presenting here a view which exists among learned people. Down the memory lane when I was attending indoctrination classes of extreme communism I used to ask precisely the questions which you have raised here to denigrate and condemn the traditional knowledge. I have travelled a long distance since then. Read and use the info to come to a reasoned and logical conclusion of your own. Best wishes. I will be presenting this view in two posts because of the length.

Authors of puranas are human beings subject to the influence of the three gunas of Prakrti—sattva, rajas and thamas. So the authoritativeness of their works has got to be accepted with some reservation. What they say when the sattva guna is predominant in them will be in accordance with the revelation of the Vedas and so authoritative since sattva guna is said to be conducive to the rise of correct knowledge. When rajoguna or tamoguna is preponderant the sayings of the same authors will be vitiated by inaccuracy and ignorance. Such sayings will be in variance with Vedas. The variation may be of two kinds-one in regard to Anustana or practice of rites etc., and the other with reference to the Realities or Tattvas. The former one can be taken as an alternative to what is said in Vedas and may be accepted as valid. But the later variations with reference to Realities like Paramatma, Jivatma and the like will have to be rejected as there can not be more than one reality in these matters.

Puranas are 18 in number and there are many Upa-puranas (subsidiaries). The 18 puranas are 1. Kurma Purana, 2. Garuda Purana 3. Brhan naradiya purana 4.Padma purana 5.Brahma Purana 6.Brahmavaivarta Puranaa 7. Brahmanda Purana 8.Bhavisya Purana 9. Bhagavata Purana 10. Matsya Purana 11.Karkandeya Purana 12.Linga Purana 13.Vamana Purana 14.Vayu Purana 15. Varaha Purana 16. Vishnu Purana 17. Siva Purana and 18. Skanda Purana.

The puranas are classified under three broad heads. They are 1. Saatvika Puranas 2. Rajasa Puranas and 3. Tamasa Puranas. Only Saatvika Puranas need be accepted as authoritative. We have learned ancestors who had followed this method. For instance in the Sankhya and Yoga systems propounded by Kapila and Hiranyagarbha, only such parts as are in consonance with Vedas are accepted as valid and those differing from Vedas is rejected as unauthoritative.

How to determine Which of the puranas are Saatvik and which are Rajasic and so on? Our ancestors who had studied all the puranas dispassionately have laid down rules with the help of which this is done. Sri Sudarsana Suri , the author of the famous work Srutaprakasika has discussed this point in great detail in his work.

Firstly the puranas themselves give us a clue about the nature of the purana. Matsya Purana for instance says:

Agneh sivasya mahatmyam tamasesu prakirtyate
Rajasesu ca mahatmyam adhikam brahmano viduh
Saatvikesvatha kalpesu mahatmyam adhikam hareh
Tesveva yogasamsiddhah gamisyanti param gatim
Yasmin kalpe tu yat proktam puranam Brahmana pura
Tasya tasya tu mahatmyam Tat svarupena varnyate

In the Tamasa kalpas (or days of Brahma) the greatness of Agni and Siva is narrated, in the rajasa kalpas the greatness of brahma is delineatedas high. But in the Saatvika kalpas the greatness of Hari is portrayed as high. It is only in these kalpas that people acquire perfection in Yoga and attain the Supreme Goal.

Another purana declares:

Saatvikeshu ca sarveshu vishnor-mahatmyam isyate

There is another never failing second test for determining the nature of a purana. It is the way the purana begins. In a saatvika purana, the disciple who has a thirst for knowledge, goes to a master (Acharya) who is a learned man himself and has realized God. The disciple pays obeisance to the Master and respectfully expresses his desire to know the ultimate truth. He puts questions of a general nature to the Master like – Which is the highest truth, what is the greatest means, which is the supreme goal etc. The teacher who is interested only in the welfare of the disciple and has no desire for fame, lucre or honour imparts to the deserving pupil the knowledge about the Ultimate Truth. The reply will be specific so that there will be no room for doubt, speculation or misconception in the mind of the disciple.

The Vishnu purana for instance opens like this: It is early morning. Sage Parasara has just finished his morning ablutions and rites and is in his hermitage absorbed in meditation. Maitreya another sage comes to him with thirst for knowledge. He prostrates before Parasara and submits in all humility that he has come seeking right knowledge. Maitreya says, “I wish to hear from you, oh Thou, the knower of religion and duty, how this world came into existence and what will become of it again? What does this world consist of? Whence did come all this movable and immovable creation? How and where was it hidden and into what will it be absorbed?”

The all-knowing sage Parasara first bows to the Divine Lord Vishnu who is Supreme Deity and the Ruler of all. He proceeds to say in reply “The world came into existence from the will of Vishnu and it is altogether existent therein.The world is Vishnu Himself because all creations movable and immovable is pervaded by him. Vishnu is the soul of all this. Hence as being the Atma of all, Vishnu is the only reality. Vishnu again is the supreme goal for attainment. The means for it is meditation on him.

These are all in agreement with what is said in Vedas and so this purana is a saatvika purana. The questions of Maitreya are all general in nature and shows his real search for the truth- being not interested in any particular deity or object of querry. The reply of Parasara is of specific nature to dispel all doubts, giving no room of misconception on the part of his disciple.

Now let us see another purana and how it opens. In the next post. This post has become quite lengthy.

 

[renuka]

Dear Vaagmi ji,


Actually my question is simple..It does not really matter what a person wrote based on imagination as long it remains his own imagination but not implicate God in an untruthful manner.

Fiction is acceptable as long its not harmful and does not become religious tradition.

Even normal human beings like anyone of us wont dare lie in the name of God.

For example just say someone gets caught stealing..I am sure he will give excuses of poverty,hunger etc but would not dare say "God came in my dream last nite and told me to steal"

Compare it with the Padma Purana writer who wrote that Lord Shiva told to Devi that He took birth as a Brahmin to preach a false doctrine of Maya.

Isnt obvious that the writer was Anti Shankara and wanted innocent folks to ditch Shankaras theory and follow the writers favored school of thought?

So the only way to "succeed" in this is to write Untruth that Lord Shiva said so! Just a reminder that this does not remain fiction but becomes tradition.

I hope you get what I mean.

Its is not right that Purana writers whom I feel should been educated enough within acceptable scope of moral judgement to not make his imagination (for obvious personal reasons) twisted into the word of God.

Sattva,Rajas and Tamas classification of Puranas do not really make a difference cos Sattva is Purity,Rajas is Passion and Tamas is inertia/ignorance but falsehood is not stated anywhere in all these three.

A person may be ignorant but he might not be a liar.

I hope you get my point..we are not talking about some science fiction or some superman movie here..fiction and imagination does not get dubbed as religious tradition.

So it might be actually easier to think that people of the past were immoral enough to twist facts to propagate their personal beliefs and drag God into the picture to ruin the mind of simple minded folks in that process.

I feel there is no greater 'sin' than this.

 

[Vaagmi]

Renukaji,

I will give my views on what you have said in your post #11 after completing my second post on puranas.

 

[Vaagmi]

Second of the two posts:

Another purana opens in the following way. ( I am not giving the name of the purana here because I do not want to ruffle feathers here by touching a holy cow. Those who are familiar with puranas will understand the name of the purana or they have to make just a visit to the library.)

The sages in Naimisaranya go to Sutapauranika and request him to narrate to them a purana which will describe the greatness of Linga. The learned Acharya proceeds to describe how Linga has its greatness and how it is to be worshipped for the realization of desires. Since the sages were interested only in knowing about Linga and the worship of it they wanted to ask only about it. This is the request they addressed to the Suta:

Tasmat bhavantam pricchamah
Suta! Pauranika! Adya tu
Puranam samhitam panyam
Lingamahatmyasamyutam.

Here the question is not in a general way but with regard to a particular object and naturally the answer is also in the same manner. There is no spirit of enquiry about the ultimate truth or the supreme Godhead. The teacher Suta also restricts himself to the subject in which the sages wanted his inputs.

All that I have presented in these two posts are for the purpose of understanding the nature of our puranas and how to take what is said in them. With the benefit of this background one will have to take saatvika puranas at their face value accepting what is said there as truth and the rest of the puranas have to be taken with a pinch of salt. If Padma Purana says something and it is not acceptable to a person reading it, it would mean it is just his/her opinion. It does not make the matter untrue or rubbish. It only means that we have approached the puranic words with a prejudiced mind loaded with preconceived notions-that some x,y or z can never be wrong, that when a purana says he is wrong, it would mean that the purana is wrong and not our hero x y or z. It also shows we are in no way different from the sages who approached the Suta Pauranika with a single point agenda of “knowing the greatness of xyz” because they were already sure that xyz was great. If Suta Pauranika had said that xyz was not great, the sages, like us today, would have called him perhaps names and rubbished his purana/knowledge.

 

[Vaagmi]

Post #11 by Renuka:

Actually my question is simple..It does not really matter what a person wrote based on imagination as long it remains his own imagination but not implicate God in an untruthful manner.Fiction is acceptable as long its not harmful and does not become religious tradition.Even normal human beings like anyone of us wont dare lie in the name of God.

You appear to have already concluded that what is written in Padma Purana (the quoted portion under discussion) is just imagination; it implicates God in a untruthful manner; it is fictitious and harmful and finally (this takes the cake)it is all a big lie told in the name of God. With this kind of a closed mind there is no scope for enquiry into truth.

For example just say someone gets caught stealing..I am sure he will give excuses of poverty,hunger etc but would not dare say "God came in my dream last nite and told me to steal"

A corrupt mind will use anything to justify its actions. There are cases of serial killers who claimed that they were ordered by their ishta devata to kill. So your example has a big hole there. LOL.

Compare it with the Padma Purana writer who wrote that Lord Shiva told to Devi that He took birth as a Brahmin to preach a false doctrine of Maya. Isnt obvious that the writer was Anti Shankara and wanted innocent folks to ditch Shankaras theory and follow the writers favored school of thought?

Instead of shouting at the writer of the purana (because it is a view expressed there), it would be better to put forth arguments to show that Shiva could never have told what is credited to him. Would you please try to shed emotions and do that now? I would be interested in knowing those reasons. Whether the writer was antishankara would depend who predeceased whom and our recorded history in this matter is just zero. And you have now discovered a school of thought to identify the writer with. LOL.

So the only way to "succeed" in this is to write Untruth that Lord Shiva said so! Just a reminder that this does not remain fiction but becomes tradition.

It is your word against his word. There is no way to verify the truth in these matters. So the best you can do is to go and live with your perception while letting others to live with theirs.

I hope you get what I mean.

I have understood and that is why I am here.

Its is not right that Purana writers whom I feel should been educated enough within acceptable scope of moral judgement to not make his imagination (for obvious personal reasons) twisted into the word of God.

Being just a repetition I have nothing more to add to this.

Sattva,Rajas and Tamas classification of Puranas do not really make a difference cos Sattva is Purity,Rajas is Passion and Tamas is inertia/ignorance but falsehood is not stated anywhere in all these three. A person may be ignorant but he might not be a liar. I hope you get my point..we are not talking about some science fiction or some superman movie here..fiction and imagination does not get dubbed as religious tradition.So it might be actually easier to think that people of the past were immoral enough to twist facts to propagate their personal beliefs and drag God into the picture to ruin the mind of simple minded folks in that process. I feel there is no greater 'sin' than this.

Sattva, Rajas and Tamas do affect one’s ability to grasp the truth as it exists. Keep aside the term falsehood because it is judgmental and can be challenged as I have done. The guna can play a role in misconception of truth and that is what our ancestors mean when they say truth can be understood as it exists only if sattvaguna is predominent. I do not agree with your judgment that what is said is fiction or imagination or anything like that. So we differ fundamentally in understanding the given words. This is because you are emotionally attached to a certain devotion, a certain belief system, a certain philosophical school of thought, a certain learned Acharya, whom you can not critically examine (because it is an unthinkable blasphemy for you) etc., Again “immoral”, “to ruin the minds of simple minded people” etc., are words expressed in anger. Anger is a web which sucks you in. Please take a hiatus and meditate before reading Padma Purana further. LOL.

 

[renuka]

Again “immoral”, “to ruin the minds of simple minded people” etc., are words expressed in anger. Anger is a web which sucks you in. Please take a hiatus and meditate before reading Padma Purana further. LOL.

I will respond to only this.

Vaagmi dear..an opinion expressed is not anger.How did you conclude it was written in anger?You chose to see anger..hence you felt only anger which was never mine to start with.LOL

Let me assure you it was not in anger..I wrote that to highlight a point.That style of expression did not come with elevated heart rate or respiratory rate and dilated pupils or any increased blood supply anywhere else.

BTW I rather not be in a state of denial when blatant untruth is staring right at my face and it has nothing to do with prefering Adi Shankara.

Even if a Purana had made any other unsubstantiated false claim on any other personality be it even of another religion I would have still objected.

Untruth is Untruth.No one really heard Lord Shiva say He came to preach a false doctrine and no one actually heard Lord Vishnu say that He came as Buddha to preach another false doctrine.Its all hearsay.



Final diagnosis of mine of Padma Purana is "Shot Through the Heart and You're to blame..Darling.. You give God a Bad Name"LOL

 

[vignesh2014]

Here it is mentioning Lord Vishnu as supreme but in reality the three gunas operate on any god, man , rishi or any animal. As you rightly said previously in some kalpas tamo guna will predominate, in some kalpas rajo guna will predominate and in some satva guna will predominate..Therefore Krita yuga is called satya yuga...no other yuga is called satya yuga..therefore we can say whatever written or spoken may or might be called as Truthful thing. But how to get the period which upanishad, veda or purana is written in that period?

 

[tks]

Disclaimer: I did not read all the posts.. Just sharing my views on the title only after quickly scanning some posts.

1. If there is a God of Cosmos , such an entity does not need any advocate.
2. What we call as Hinduism always promoted freedom of expression. No one in this umbrella religion is required to read any Puranas or any epics and adopt them as total truth.
3. Some Puranas even when embellished has valuable insights for conducing our life and some dont.
4. There are people who like to argue that 'my dog is better than your dog' and have improvised that mindset to 'my god is better than your god' . Puranas provide rich content for engaging these people.

5. A more mature outlook is to view Isvara (not using word God on purpose), and view religious practices as being purely there for self growth. In this outlook, one can continue the quest with practices that enhance one's growth and reject notions that do not help in the growth.

6. So long someone is not creating harm for others (like what ISIS is doing to other human beings in the name of Islam) a mature view is to let things be as they are. World is in harmony with its good and bad. If someone is creating harm for others then there is a reason to fight this to minimize harm.

 

[Vaagmi]

I will respond to only this.

Vaagmi dear..an opinion expressed is not anger.How did you conclude it was written in anger?You chose to see anger..hence you felt only anger which was never mine to start with.LOL
Let me assure you it was not in anger..I wrote that to highlight a point.That style of expression did not come with elevated heart rate or respiratory rate and dilated pupils or any increased blood supply anywhere else.
BTW I rather not be in a state of denial when blatant untruth is staring right at my face and it has nothing to do with prefering Adi Shankara.
Even if a Purana had made any other unsubstantiated false claim on any other personality be it even of another religion I would have still objected.
Untruth is Untruth.No one really heard Lord Shiva say He came to preach a false doctrine and no one actually heard Lord Vishnu say that He came as Buddha to preach another false doctrine.Its all hearsay.
Final diagnosis of mine of Padma Purana is "Shot Through the Heart and You're to blame..Darling.. You give God a Bad Name"LOL

Renumma dear,

I never knew that you can call someone's words immoral, that they were uttered to ruin the minds of simple minded peopleand yet claim that you said all that out of immense amount of love and affection and respect for that person. It is just anger and nothing else. vascular dilation or no vascular dilation it was pure anger welling up in the mind. I leave it at that.

For the rest of your post my answer is just this (I reproduce from my earlier post):

If Padma Purana says something and it is not acceptable to a person reading it, it would mean it is just his/her opinion. It does not make the matter untrue or rubbish. It only means that we have approached the puranic words with a prejudiced mind loaded with preconceived notions-that some x,y or z can never be wrong, that when a purana says he is wrong, it would mean that the purana is wrong and not our hero x y or z. It also shows we are in no way different from the sages who approached the Suta Pauranika with a single point agenda of “knowing the greatness of xyz” because they were already sure that xyz was great. If Suta Pauranika had said that xyz was not great, the sages, like us today, would have called him perhaps names and rubbished his purana/knowledge.

 

[Vaagmi]

Disclaimer: I did not read all the posts.. Just sharing my views on the title only after quickly scanning some posts.

1. If there is a God of Cosmos , such an entity does not need any advocate.
2. What we call as Hinduism always promoted freedom of expression. No one in this umbrella religion is required to read any Puranas or any epics and adopt them as total truth.
3. Some Puranas even when embellished has valuable insights for conducing our life and some dont.
4. There are people who like to argue that 'my dog is better than your dog' and have improvised that mindset to 'my god is better than your god' . Puranas provide rich content for engaging these people.

5. A more mature outlook is to view Isvara (not using word God on purpose), and view religious practices as being purely there for self growth. In this outlook, one can continue the quest with practices that enhance one's growth and reject notions that do not help in the growth.

6. So long someone is not creating harm for others (like what ISIS is doing to other human beings in the name of Islam) a mature view is to let things be as they are. World is in harmony with its good and bad. If someone is creating harm for others then there is a reason to fight this to minimize harm.

1. I agree with this. But I would also add that advocates will exist whether the God needs them or not because it is in the nature of human beings to be such advocates.

2. It is said "No one is required to read any Puranas or any epics and adopt them as total truth". No one is required to be told this because it is again the fundamental right of every thinking individual to search for truth and find it with whatever equipments (efficient or inefficient) he has. If he finds puranas to be telling truth he has every right to keep his puranas. What can be avoided is to call names because we think that what is said in a purana is all untruth.

4. "My dog is better than your dog" is harmless when compared to "your dog is horrible while my dog is an angel". If your dog is better, keep it and be happy. Don't come and tell me how horrible my dog is. This is where the stupidity shows and starts a quarrel.

 

[tks]

1. I agree with this. But I would also add that advocates will exist whether the God needs them or not because it is in the nature of human beings to be such advocates.

2. It is said "No one is required to read any Puranas or any epics and adopt them as total truth". No one is required to be told this because it is again the fundamental right of every thinking individual to search for truth and find it with whatever equipments (efficient or inefficient) he has. If he finds puranas to be telling truth he has every right to keep his puranas. What can be avoided is to call names because we think that what is said in a purana is all untruth.

4. "My dog is better than your dog" is harmless when compared to "your dog is horrible while my dog is an angel". If your dog is better, keep it and be happy. Don't come and tell me how horrible my dog is. This is where the stupidity shows and starts a quarrel.

Agreed

Actually true LOL moment on item 4 above ..
In the Chit Cat section I posted a story that in Minnesota they are so happy with a Dog that it has been elected a Mayor and is receiving 1 year of free pet food for its service. It seems the Dog keep bad guys out LoL

 

[prasad1]

Just because it is called Purana and not called a fiction, it does not mean that it has to be factual.
Aesop's fables did convey messages, but no one claimed they were factual. Similarly Jataka tales are not necessarily factual.
My contention is that Our mythology should be treated just as other mythology.
I do not believe in the Historical facts of our ancient scriptures.
I follow them if at all for the philosophy and teachings.

 

[prasad1]

Going back to the op.
Is GOD of the purans the Brahman? I do not think so.
If Brahman is everything that includes good and bad. You can attribute any adjective to Brahman. Brahman is beyond Good and bad.
In Hinduism, Brahman is "the unchanging reality amidst and beyond the world", which "cannot be exactly defined". It has been described in Sanskrit as Sat-cit-ānanda (being-consciousness-bliss) and as the highest reality.
The Isha Upanishad says:


Auṃ – That supreme Brahman is infinite, and this conditioned Brahman is infinite. The infinite proceeds from infinite. If you subtract the infinite from the infinite, the infinite remains alone. Brahman is conceived as Atman, personal, impersonal or Para Brahman, or in various combinations of these qualities depending on the philosophical school.
According to Advaita, a liberated human being (jivanmukta) has realised Brahman as his or her own true self. In that respect the Krishna of Gita was a liberated human being. No more and no less.

 

[renuka]

Renumma dear,

I never knew that you can call someone's words immoral, that they were uttered to ruin the minds of simple minded peopleand yet claim that you said all that out of immense amount of love and affection and respect for that person. It is just anger and nothing else.

Dear Vaagmi Ji,

It is possible..there are many ways of expressing oneself without anger but yet message is got across.

Its called the effect of modulation of one's thoughts...with that technique one can even swear without getting angry!LOL

Let me give you an example..just say when I come across something that I disagree with ..I could think in my mind "what the hell..what is this?" in a very soft sans anger manner.

Once I met a lady friend of my mum whom I am not too fond of..she asked me in the shopping mall how come I still have only 1 child and did not want to have more kids.

Ok this lady has 2 sons and she adopted a girl cos she desired to have a daughter.She is a educated lady who is a wife of a doctor I know well.

Then she was giving me a lecture on why it is beneficial to have many kids and she said she gets a sense of satisfaction when she looks back at all her kids blah blah blah.And she was sort of mocking me as why I decided to only have 1 kid and was saying that my decision is wrong.

This lady is also a self proclaim spiritualist and brags often how religious she is!LOL

Ok so I decided to play Mataji to answer her.

I told her "well you have a point to a certain extent if that suits you..but deciding the number of kids still is very much a personal issue and no one can actually feel how many kids is right..having 1 kid for me felt right..having 2 +1 for you felt right for you.

You did say you felt satisfied.

There are many ways one can be satisfied in life ..some keep having kids..some go shopping..some keep having affairs....so each one finds their own way to satisfy themselves..at the end of the day it all boils down to desire.

I think as a religious person you should be knowing the desires lead to a restless mind..and as we age we are supposed to decrease the baggage of life..time is running out..there is no guarantee you or me will be even alive tomorrow..so why worry about the reproduction rate of anyone else?"


Ok I told all that in a very cool manner and madam got real mad with me and walked off and as I guessed she called my mum the next day and told her I got angry when she told me to have more kids and was rude to her.

So you see..I was not rude nor angry..it was just her perception cos she did not hear what she expected to hear.

 

[nannilam_balasubramanian]

I at times wonder..why do Puranas twist and turn facts as to give God a bad name?

For example in Padma Purana there is a passage where Lord Shiva is supposed to declared to Devi that the theory of Maya is a false doctrine being a disguised form of Buddhism with the usage of the word Pracchannabauddha(Crypto Buddhist).

Then Lord Shiva adds on to Devi that "I myself propounded it in Kaliyuga taking the form of a Brahmin"


So this looks like a direct attack on Adi Shankara making it sound like Lord Shiva took birth as Adi S purely to preach a false doctrine!LOL

Now this is not the first time Puranas come up with such stories..I am sure we are familiar about the Puranic claim that Lord Buddha is also a false prophet of Lord Vishnu.

Now..it seems that Puranas have been written to suit the whims and fancies of the writers with hardly any evidence base but what I am surprised is.."why write falsehood by making it sound as if its God who said it?"

Didnt the writers of these Puranas have some guilt conscious in them as not to do disservice to God?

If they really felt they did not like Advaita or Buddhism they should have been bold enough to object and leave their names known and state the reasons why they objected and not cook up some story that Lord Shiva said this to Devi or Lord Vishnu came as false prophet etc.

Doesnt this show cowardice and ill intent?

Now with all these sort of writers in the past who wrote what came to their mind..how can anyone actually trust any scriptures any more?

Madam

You have nicely brought out but then it needs a long deliberation.

Balasubramanian