History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.170.3

v7.c90.170.3

A devotee may worship any one of Nṛsiṁha, Rāma or Kṛṣṇa, and reach Viṣṇu, but hardly any orthodox work has ever stated that worship of Buddha alone (an avatāra) will lead to attainment of Viṣṇu. Therefore, it is proper to hold that the story of Buddha’s life might not have been given at all or was purposely omitted. On. p. 239 Prof. Hazra puts forward a peculiar argument. According to the Narasimha-purāṇa chap. 53 31, says Prof. Hazra, Kṛṣṇa embodies only a part of Viṣṇu’s śakti¹⁴¹³ and therefore ‘the Narasimha is to be dated earlier than the present Bhāgavata in which Kṛṣṇa is called *bhagavān* himself (Bhāgavata I. 3 28). As the present Bhāgavata is to be dated in the 6th century A. D the Narasimha is to be placed not later than 500 A. D.' Great controversies have raged over the date of the Bhāgavata. The present author holds that the Bhāgavata-purāṇa does not belong to the 6th century A. D. It will be shown below that while Rāmānuja quotes more than a hundred verses from the Viṣṇupurāṇa, which he regarded as one of supreme authority over other Purāṇas (in Vedārthasaṅgraha pp. 141-142 of D C. edition) he does not quote the Bhāgavata at all in his bhāṣya on the Vedāntasūtra. A bigoted devotee of Narasiṃha may say that Narasiṃha avatāra is the perfect avatāra of Viṣṇu, while Kṛṣṇa is only a partial one. But surely that cannot determine the dates of the respective purāṇas. What bigoted devotees are capable of saying may be seen from Brahmāṇḍa III 36.