Thread by @DefiledGod

Yoga practices in tAntrika and Agamika systems is different from the yoga darshaNa propagated by brahmA, which is accepted as ancillary to vedAnta. So this is quite incorrect.

Relevant to this, is an explanation of the various systems of thought in shAnti parva as follows+

https://twitter.com/oggy_po/status/1457965197050531843

Janamejaya, desirous of knowing the valid system of thought, questions VaishampAyana,

सांख्यं योगं पञ्चरात्रं वेदारण्यकम् एव च ज्ञानान्य् एतानि ब्रह्मर्षे लोकेषु प्रचरन्ति ह किम् एतान्य् एकनिष्ठानि पृथङ् निष्ठानि वा मुने प्रब्रूहि वै मया पृष्टः प्रवृत्तिं च यथाक्रमम्+

[Janamejaya: Sankhya, Yoga, pAncharAtra and Veda which is a forest (difficult to understand), exist currently in the world. Do they have their basis as one, or are they different? In response to my question, explain their manifestations in due order.]+

The question being asked is – “do all these systems expound the same reality, or do they expound differing realities? What is their relative level of authority?”+

सांख्यं योगं पञ्चरात्रं वेदाः पाशुपतं तथा ज्ञानान्य् एतानि राजर्षे विद्धि नाना मतानि वै

[VaishampAyana: sAnkhya, yoga, pAncharAtra, Veda and pAShupata – understand all these different systems (on the basis of their propagators).]+

By knowing the relative status of those personalities who propagated these systems, their validity is ascertained+

सांख्यस्य वक्ता कपिलः परमर्षिः स उच्यते हिरण्यगर्भो योगस्य वेत्ता नान्यः पुरातनः

[The propounder of sAnkhya is that great rishi, Kapila. The propounder of Yoga is none other than brahmA.]+

The implication is, both Kapila and brahmA, two jIvAs who are not liberated, are the authors (वक्ता) of these systems.

Hence, these systems are dismissed and not considered as authoritative+

अपान्तरतमाश् चैव वेदाचार्यः स उच्यते  प्राचीन गर्भं तम् ऋषिं प्रवदन्तीह के चन

[The Rishi apAntaratamAs is the preceptor of the Vedas, who is called by some rishis as “prAcIna garbha”]+

apAntaratamAs is said to be the वेदाचार्य and not the author (वक्ता) as compared to the previous 2 systems.

This implies that the Vedas are unauthored (apAurusheya) and so have a higher validity than sAnkhya or yoga+

उमापतिर् भूतपतिः श्रीकन्थो ब्रह्मणः सुतः उक्तवान् इदम् अव्यग्रो ज्ञानं पाशुपतं शिव

[pAShupata system was propagated by Shiva who is umApati, the ruler of embodied beings, who holds poison in his throat, son of Brahma & whose knowledge is unperturbed (despite the teachings).]+

By usage of “उक्तवान्”, it is implied mahAdeva is the speaker or author of the pAShupata Agamas and hence this system is dismissed as it is authored by him.

But here, a doubt arises+

Unlike brahmA and kapila who only propagated the systems, mahAdeva is actually worshipped as supreme in these AgamAs. Hence, a doubt may arise – by dismissing these AgamAs, is worship of mahAdeva also discarded?

To dispel these doubts, mahAdeva is described by various names+

“उमापति” means he is the husband of umA who is renowned for her steadfast penances. Hence, he himself is renowned for his steadfast penances on Brahman.

“भूतपतिः” – As the master of embodied beings with rajo and tamo guNa, he propagated those AgamAs for a lower class of people+

“श्रीकन्थ” – He holds the poison in his throat to protect the gods, and so he revealed these AgamAs for asura mohana.

“ब्रह्मणः सुतः” – brahmA always obeys nArAyaNa. As the son of brahmA, he thus propagated these AgamAs on the command of nArAyaNa and not due to independence+

“अव्यग्रो ज्ञानं” – Despite propagating these AgamAs, he remains unperturbed in his own devotion and knowledge.

“शिव” – Who bears the Ganga from bhagavAn’s feet on his head and thus is purified of all ignorance+

All these epithets thus dispel the idea that he should not be worshipped because AgamAs propagating his worship are rejected.

Thus, having dismissed pAShupata, the pAncharAtra is taken up+

पङ्चरात्रस्यकृत्स्नस्य वक्ता नारायणः स्वयम् । ज्ञानेष्वेतेषु राजेन्द्र सर्वेष्वेतद्विशिष्यते

[The propagator of the pAncharAtra in its’ entirety is nArAyaNa himself. Out of all these (systems), the (best) knowledge is to be obtained from these.]+

Unlike brahmA, kapila and paShupati, nArAyaNa is sarvaj~na and sAkShAt paramAtma. Hence, the pAncharAtra, though being authored, is blemishless as it is authored by bhagavAn.

“स्वयम्” – It is not authored by avatArAs like Buddha to delude, but by bhagavAn himself+

pAncharAtra provides the best knowledge in the sense it is complete in comparison to sAnkhya and yoga (both included within it), not contradicting Veda like pAShupata, and is also more easier to understand than the Veda+

Having explained that only the Veda and pAncharAtra are authoritative in their entirety, it is next explained that the ground or basis of all systems is however the same+

यथागमं यथा ज्ञानं निष्ठा नारायणः प्रभुः न चैनम् एवं जानन्ति तमो भूता विशां पते

[(In all these systems) in accordance to aids to knowledge like logic, the basis is the Master, nArAyaNa. Those deluded by darkness of ignorance due to beginningless karmas do not understand him.]+

In reality, the sAnkhya and yoga systems are incomplete, not erroneous. The sAnkhya teaches the 25 principles of prakR^iti which has nArAyaNa as the innerself.

The Yoga system teaches yogic practices and meditation on the self which again have nArAyaNa as their innerself+

The pAShupata enjoins worship of paShupati, who has nArAyaNa as his innerself. Thus, all these systems in reality culminate in his worship, and they are criticized by bAdarAyaNa only in that they do not acknowledge or accept this+

तम् एव शास्त्रकर्तारं प्रवदन्ति मनीषिणः निष्ठां नारायणम् ऋषिं नान्यो ऽस्तीति च वादिनः

[That is proclaimed by those qualified to meditate on Brahman, authors of smritis (manu, vyAsa), that nArAyaNa the omniscient alone is the basis ground (of these systems) & none other.]//