[Advaita-l] SIDDHANTA KAUMADI

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Sudhanshu Shekhar prabhuji
Hare Krishna

I agree with what you said. However, let us be a little patient here. It is undeniable that there are allegories in Puranas. I will take an example. In case of Bhagvat, in the Bhagvat-Mahatmya, there is a story of Gokarna who was a preta and who listened to Bhagvat katha while being hidden in a bamboo with seven nodes. After each day of listening of Bhagvat katha, there was a noise and one node of that bamboo would break. After seven days of hearing, all seven nodes stood broken and Gokarna appeared as a gandharv/devata :-) . I found it simple to relate with seven chakras.

Now, the question is, when both allegory (imagination) and history (satyatva) are present, how to find as to which is allegory and which is fact.

To think of a God sleeping on Sheshanaga, on whose head rests our mother earth, and who in turn is situated in a ksheera-sagara does not seem too good for vyavharika satyatva either.

I am raising the question because I am dissatisfied with complete-allegoical or complete-factual explanations of our Purana/Smritis. And hence lies the confusion.


Ø     IMHO, symbolical explanation of  the allegories should not force us to conclude that characters enshrined in those episodes themselves are kevala kAlpanika.  For example, in adhyAtma rAmAyaNa, rAma symbolically explained as parabrahman, it does not mean that rAma himself as a person / king/ purusha is kevala kAlpanika and rAma as a person was just imagined to propagate parabrahma tattva??  Likewise, we should not conclude, Brahma, vishNu, shiva as celestial beings  just kAlpanika and these characters are imagined just to depict sattva, raja tamO guNa??  I reckon, thinking like this is completely unwarranted.  It is always better to understand these symbolisms without hurting / damaging / doubting the very existence of these deva-devata-s and their respective abodes.  Yes, when rAma has been narrated as an epitome of dharma or personification of dharma, it does not mean rAma as a person imagined just to narrate dharma.  Likewise we have to understand trimuthy tattva.  I agree that there might be some exaggerations and  superfluous episodes in smruti and purANa-s, but those things should not force us to doubt or question the very existence of purANik characters.  We should learn to be rationale and analytical to grab  the essence of these allegories without damaging the sentiments and basics of Hindu dharma.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar