You need not do any research on it. Please learn "Agama prAmANya" of yAmuna and "pAncharAtra rakshA" of dESika from a person knowing sanskrit. Things will be clear then. Regards Vishnu --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "amshuman_k" <amshuman_k@xxxx> wrote: > Dear List, > > There is a claim that pancharatra belongs to ekayana branch of shukla- > yajurvEda and hence it is very much vedic, which is now lost. Though > it is not new that all shaiva, shAkta and vaishNava Agamas claim > derivation from shruti, the claims are dismissed by "orthodox" > vaidikas. Pancharatra was opposed as heretical by the mimamsaka > kumarila bhatta and the vedantin shankara seemed to accept it. > VaikhAnasas fare better, as they are securely placed as a sub- branch > of taittiriyas, which is a known and living shAkhA, and vaikhAnasa > Agamas employ only vedic mantras. > > The drawback is that ekAyana shAkha is non-existent as of now and any > speculation on its contents is just that - mere speculation. > > However, I feel there is a case that could be made for the legitimacy > of the claim. > 1. Though it is customary for Agamas & tantras to claim derivation > from vEdas, it is rare to mention the exact branch, as in our case. > 2. EkAyana is mentioned in chAndOgya brAhmaNa. > 3. I noticed a very interesting thing - ShAndilya, one of the > prominent figure in pAncharAtra doctrine features as authority in the > middle adhyAyas of shatapatha brAhmaNa. (yAgnyavalkya being the other > central authority in the rest of the adhyAyas. Views of other minor > teachers mentioned here and there, but it is the views of > yAgnyavalkya or shAndilya that are accepted). > > So, pAncharAtra may have arisen from a branch of shukla-yajur veda > after all. > > Regards, > KK
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |