[Advaita-l] Regarding the Pancharatra, Shankara is one with Purvamimamsa

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 10:59 AM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
>
> Thus, we have someone preceding Shankara, in a non-Vedantic, but highly
> revered, shaastra, not admitting the Pancharatra as a flawless doctrine.
>
>
The same bAdarayANa has clearly said Pancharatra is indeed a valid pramANa.

In brahmANDa purANa;

RigAdyA bhArataM chaiva paJNcharAtramathAkhilam.h |
mUlarAmAyaNaM chaiva purANaM chaitadAtmakam.h ||

ye cha anuyAyinastveshhAM sarve te cha sadAgamAH |
durAgamastadanye ye tairna j~neyo janArdanaH ||

(crude translation: "vEda-s starting from Rg, and the pancharAtra in their
entirety, the mUla rAmAyaNa in its entirety, and those purAaNa-s that
follows the previous. These, and others that follow these, are all
sadAgamA-s; others are durAgama-s, and from these janArdana (Brahman) is
not known.")

Same tone in skAnda purANa as well;

RigyAjuH sAmAtharvAshchha bhArataM pancharAtrakam | mUlarAmayaNaM
chaiva shAstramityAbhidhIyatE || yachhAnukUlamEtasya tachha shAstram
prakIrtitaM | athOnyO graMtha
vistArO naiva shAstraM kuvatmra tat ||

(Rig, yajur, sAma and atharvaNa vEda-s; bhArata; pancharAtrAgama; mUla
rAmAyaNa constitutes sad-
Agama-s . Any other shAstra-s which are ancilary to these shAstra-s are
also sad-shAstra-s. Other shAstra-s, such as paShupatA-s etc
which goes against above shAstra-s are not shAstra-s but sources of mithyA
jnyna).

So, for pUrvamimAmsa folks it is understandable if they have not accepted
Pancharatra texts as valid. But what is the excuse for Vedantins to reject
it, that too the 'founder' of Vedanta Sri.BadarayaNa Himself has defined it
as a valid pramANa?

Thus, those views which refutes Pancharatra are themselves refuted.

/sv