Just a small clarification - the purpose of the Veda is to describe the nature, form, qualities and vibhUtIs of the Supreme Brahman.
So, the style of the samhita is that a sUkta will choose a particular guNa of Brahman and start elaborating on it+
So, the style of the samhita is that a sUkta will choose a particular guNa of Brahman and start elaborating on it+
During the course of this, the Veda may highlight an avatAra or deed of bhagavAn described in shAstra, as an example of the guNa it is describing.
It is in this vein that the Veda occasionally makes references to incidents in ithihAsa+
It is in this vein that the Veda occasionally makes references to incidents in ithihAsa+
In the example I gave, the guNa that the Veda was describing was soulabhya or accessibility, conducive for sharaNAgati. Thus, it highlighted rAma who embodies that guNa+
So, nobody is rushing to misinterpret sUktAs to say, "hey look this sUkta is about rAma wowee so cool!!1!1! +
So, nobody is rushing to misinterpret sUktAs to say, "hey look this sUkta is about rAma wowee so cool!!1!1! +
In this way, the Veda differs from smR^itIs. While the Veda takes a bhagavad guNa and only quotes a leela occasionally if it fits the guNa, the ithihAsa takes the leelas into focus and describes the guNAs in the course of that leela+
The purANAs then, further magnify select leelas to highlight even more guNAs, which the ithihAsAs may have only barely touched on in passing.
In this way, the shAstrAs all complement each other//
In this way, the shAstrAs all complement each other//
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
