Are GODs just symbolic ???

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, S Jayanarayanan wrote:

> Maybe the swami takes the PuraNa-s to be "symbolic"
> and the itihaasa-s to be "historic".

Given that the stories of the Ramyana and Mahabharata are themselves
retold in certian Puranas that doesn't make sense either.

> After all, we do
> see a difference between itihaasa (e.g. RamaayaNa,
> Mahaabhaarata) and PuraNa (e.g. VishNu purANa), though
> I've never understood the difference between the two.
>

There really isn't.  Well Purana is supposed to deal with 5 subjects while
itihasa is more free-form but in practice that doesn't really make a
difference either.  Perhaps we should just take itihasa-purana as a dual
compound?


--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
It's a girl! See the pictures - http://www.braincells.com/shailaja/