Purana Pramana
BY: BAHUSHIRA DASA
Oct 19, USA (SUN) — In reply to Deenanatha das, he has stated, “The Arcarya’s words are to be used as supporting material and not as the sole basis of for an argument.” This is not always the case. The acarya’s words can stand on their own, due to their spiritual advancement. Bhaktivinoda Thakur has some good quotes from Sri Tattra Sutram. He states:
"Spiritual ordinances are intended for the regulation of the ignorant human beings whereas those who are endowed with discretion and divine wisdom are not controlled by them…since knowledge itself is the root of the scriptures the one who has attained that self-evident knowledge will not be ruled by the scriptures, but they guide him with advices. In case of ignorant people, this is not so. They must be governed by the rules of the scriptures for their upliftment…
Devotees of the supreme Lord are not controlled by the scriptures since their activities are congenial to the divine wisdom…Therefore, when the self realized devotees ordain any new arrangement, they should be agreed with as a religious code, even if such new arrangements are not found in the spiritual dictums of the previous sages." (191-204)
Prayagtirtha das, in is article "Mayavada Leanings", says that “We should regard what is written in Prabhupada’s books as primary evidence, as letters and conversations are all subject to time, place, and circumstance”. In the past, the Neo-Gaudiyas said the letters that Srila Prabhupada wrote to the devotees are time, place and circumstance evidence and full of relative statements and should not be used as primary evidence. So the letters are taboo. But that wasn’t good enough for them. Now it’s the conversations of Prabhupada that are taboo. So what’s next? In the 1980’s, some devotees thought that if one removes Srila Prabhupada’s letters from being a basis for evidence, then they can limit other devotees access to a lot of Prabhupada’s quotes. Now it has taken a new turn! Now the conversations of Srila Prabhupada, loaded with jewels of knowledge, are off limits as evidence. Next certain books will be off limits, namely those books printed that are conversations or letters given by Prabhupada.
Remember that these are the same Neo-Gaudiyas who wanted statements in Srila Prabhupada’s books removed that criticized his godbrothers. They have a hard time making a distinction about instructions that are given to a certain devotee and words that are for the benefit of all the devotees. Both ideas are contained within his written letters. It takes a certain amount of grey matter in the brain to make a distinction about what is an instruction for a single devotee and what is wisdom for all. Do the Neo-Gaudiyas really think that Srila Prabhupada didn’t know that the letters were being archived and would be available for all to read in the future? For them to think that Prabhupada’s letters are only full of relative statements is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Simply for them to whitewash all the points Srila Prabhupada made in his letters, and now in his conversations, is too much to tolerate. Especially when many of the same points made in the letters are given in his lectures and books.
In the topic at hand, fall/no fall of the jiva, Srila Prabhupada was not the first acarya to bring out this discussion to the public. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur have also made many similar statements about fall/no fall of the jiva, just like Prabhupada did. And devotees have quoted them, in previous papers. The combination of Guru, Sastra, Sadhu is the best, and that is our basis for discussion.
In the original debate on the fall/no fall issue, Kundali das said in the book, "Our Original Position" that, “If the GBC could show me just one pramana that supports the fall position, I would be relieved of my anxiety that ISKCON is deviating from the Sampradaya” (173). Many verses I have given and that is what I have shown in my article, "Fall Verses - Patanam Slokas". And from Srimad Bhagavatam there is a nice verse quoted in "Actual Source of ‘Goloka Envy Fall’ Determined Conclusively, Part 2”. Well, at least Kundali was honest and up front.
Deenanatha Das in his article, "Back to Basics" has said:
"However, even sastra has an order of consideration and I am confident that the verses from this Purana [Brahma Vaivarta Purana], which is classified as being a Purana in the mode of passion and is rarely if ever quoted by Prabhupada, would take precedence over the above verses from the Bhagavad-Gita."
One should be confident only when he has full information about how to read a Purana, and what is to be accepted or rejected. The Garuda Purana encourages us with these words:
III.1.53: "Skanda, Padma, Vamana, Varaha, Agni, and Bhavisya are Rajasa Puranas. Each of these contains sections on the Rajas and Tamasa material.
54: They are Rajasa, Rajas being prominent in them. Those seeking for release should not listen to these sections. Only the Sattvika part among these Puranas should be listened to-that provides merit equal to that of listening to Garuda.
55: Brahma, Brahmanda, Brahmavairarta, Linga, Markendeya, and Aditya are the tamasa Puranas; Parts of these Puranas are Sattvika and rajasa.
56: They should not be listened to by the seekers of truth, for they are Tamasa, the best of sages, there are Sattvika portions in them, listening to which accords merit equal to the merit listening to Garuda.
70: …The Bhagavat Purana, at first, in the glorification of Lord Visnu. Thereafter he composed Garuda.
71. Garuda is one of the principle Puranas as declared in the sastras. There is no Purana equal to Garuda in the exposition of the Vaisnava cult.
In these quotes from Garuda Purana (a Sattvika Purana), a reader is being instructed to analyze the portions of the Rajasa and Tamasa Puranas that are Sattvika in nature. So the Rajasa and Tamasa Puranas in these categories are not to be rejected. So what are the Sattvika portions? Garuda Purana says, “Sattvik means devoted to Visnu.” 3.1.42. That means talking about Visnu, Visnu’s devotees, or Visnu Himself talking. In the Brahma- Vaivarta Purana portion that I quote, Narayana is telling Narada Muni about a conversation between Yamaraja and Savitri (Mother of the Vedas). These are Mahajanas. Mahajano yena gatah sa panthah. And we follow these Mahajana’s words. In the Narada Pancaratra, Narada Muni, (a Mahajana), places Srimad Bhagavatam,Brahma Vaivarta Purana, and Visnu Purana next to each other in importance.
Verse 28: By hearing the entire Srimad Bhagavatam, which consists of 18,000 verses divided into 12 cantos, which are spoken by Sukadeva Goswami, one achiever liberation.
Verse 29: Oh sage Srimad Bhagavatam is thus named because long ago, Lord Krsna had imparted its pure knowledge, which is the essence of the Puranas to Brahma.
Verse 30: Hearing the Brahma-vaivarta Purana is a cause for liberation because it contains pure transcendental knowledge of the Supreme Brahman.
Verse 31: The Brahma-vaivarta Purana is divided into four parts: Brahma-Khanda, Prakriti-Khanda, Ganesa Khanda, and Sri Krsna Janma-khanda, wherein the appearance of Sri Krsna has been elaborately described.
Verse 32: Oh child, by hearing with devotion the glorious Sri Visnu Purana, which was compiled by the great sage, Parasara, one achieves supreme liberation."
In an article, on page 106, in "Our Original Position" Prabhupada quotes:
a. From Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 6.137, purport:
"The Rg Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda, Atharva Veda, Mahabharata, Pancaratra and original Ramayana are all considered Vedic literature. The Puranas (such as the Brahma-vaivarta Purana) are especially meant for Vaisnavas and are also Vedic literature."
b. From Prabhupada’s Lectures, General, April 29, 1969, Boston:
"There are eighteen Puranas. Out of that, one Purana is called Agni Purana. And another Purana is called Brahma-vaivarta Purana. So in these two Puranas also, this Hare Krsna movement is there…"
c. From Prabhupada’s Lectures, Srimad Bhagavatam, June 15, 1974, Paris:
"For the sattva-guna, the Visnu Purana, Brahmanda Purana, Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Bhagavata Purana…Because knowledge has to be given to everyone, but according to his capacity."
d. From Room Conversation, Bhubaneswar, January 24, 1977:
Prabhupada: "That will be nice. I was training, but they have not become so expert. As I am doing Bhagavad-gita, Srimad…, they could do Padma Purana, Visnu Purana, Brahma-vaivarta Purana in the same way, but our students are not so expert."
In my own research I have found these references:
p. 81- The story of Sukadeva Goswami’s birth can be found in Srimad Bhagavatam as well and it is recorded in detail in the Brahma Vaivarta. (Vaisnava Vijay) Bhakti Prajna Kesava Goswami Maharaj. Bhimaseni–nirjala Ekadasi is from Brahma-Vairvarta Purana. Yogini Ekadasi is from Brahma Vaivarta Purana. Kamika Ekadasi, Aja Ekadasi, Vamana Ekadasi, Indira Ekadasi, Papankusa Ekadasi, Rama Ekadasi are also in Brahma Vaivarta Purana. Therefore, nine ekadasis are mentioned in this Purana.
Brahma-vaivarta Purana is only second to the Bhagavat in providing nectar of Radha Krsna Leela as compared to the other Puranas.
So Srila Prabhupada had a desire to translate Padma Purana, Visnu Purana, Brahma-Vaivarta, so he had faith and was attracted to these three other Puranas. He also said we are not so expert to translate. That was 32 years ago. Are we ready now? You tell me.
The Goswamis quoted from all the Puranas to make a point about philosophy. Madhvacarya, Baladeva Vidyabhusana quoted Brahma-vaivarta Purana. Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur quotes many times from Brahma-vaivarta Purana in his book titled “Brahmana and Vaisnava.” From all these statements we can see that Brahma-Vaivarta Purana as a sastra holds its weight, and is to be accepted as pramana.
Raghava Goswami in his Sri Krsna Bhakti Ratna Prakash, p.10, Chapter First Ray of Light, text 14 says, “All the Puranas are integral parts of the original Veda, and therefore by disrespecting the Puranas, one commits an offence to the Veda.” In Srimad Visnu-Tattva-Vinirnaya, Madhvacarya says, "All Puranas are pramanas because they follow the teachings of the Vedas. Also books following the Vedas are Pramanas".
In the Caitanya-caritamrta Madhya Lila 6.137, it reads:
svatah-pramana veda stya yei kaya
laksana karile svatah-pramanya-hani haya
"The Vedic statements are self-evident. Whatever is stated there must be accepted. If we interpret according to our own imagination, the authority of the Vedas is immediately lost."
Rupa Goswami quoting Kurma Purana in Laghu Bhagaratamrta Vol. 3, verse 327, p. 10 says:
Virodho Vakyayor yatra Napramanyam yad isyate
Yathariruddhata ca syat tatharthah kalpate tayoh iti
"When contradictions are found in the Vedic Scripture, it is not that one statement is wrong. Rather both statements should be seen in such a way that there is no contradiction."
Raghava Goswami in his book Bhakti Ratna Prakash, Chapter First Ray of Light, verse 11 says, "If one disagrees with the statements of the Puranas, and thinks the Puranas to be in error, then he becomes the lowest of men."
In conclusion, devotees should not become offensive when debating this Fall/no fall topic, but try to apply what Rupa Goswami has stated in the second to last quote above.
