Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.142

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c91.142

Language
English

v7.c91.142

In the Śāntiparva, Sātvata and Pāñcarātra are identified¹⁵⁴¹ and it is said that the seven sages called ‘citraśikhaṇḍin’ (lit. whose top-knots on the head were bright or wonderful) viz. Marīci, Atri, Aṅgiras, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu and Vasiṣṭha, proclaimed the (Pāñcarātra) śāstra and God Nārāyaṇa told them that the śāstra would be authoritative in the world and that king Vasu would learn the śāstra from Bṛhaspati to whom it would come by degrees from the seven sages. Chapter 336 of Śānti declares that to the north of the Milky Sea there was territory called Śvetadvīpa, where dwelt devotees of Nārāyaṇa who were called¹⁵⁴² ‘Ekāntin’ and Pāñcarātra is called ‘Ekānta-dharma’. A peculiar doctrine of the Pāñcarātra school is that of the four *vyūhas* (*mūrtis* or forms) viz. that the Supreme Person is Vāsudeva, the individual soul is Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna is mind and springs from Saṅkarṣaṇa and Aniruddha is *ahaṅkāra* and originates from Pradyumna.¹⁵⁴³ It is this doctrine of the four forms of Vāsudeva, each springing from the preceding, that is refuted according to Śaṅkara in the Brahmasūtra II. 2. 42-45. The Śānti 348. 8 expressly refers to the Gītā as already declared to Arjuna. In¹⁵⁴⁴ chap. 349. 64 it is said that Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Pāñcarātra, Vedas and Pāśupata are five lores that differ in their views and were promulgated by Kapila (Sāṅkhya), Hiraṇyagarbha (Yoga), Apāntaratamas (the Veda), Śiva (Pāśupata), the Bhāgavat Himself (promulgator of Pāñcarātra). The Viṣṇudharmottara¹⁵⁴⁵ remarks 'for seeking Brahma (the One Reality in the Universe) there are five Siddhāntas (systems) viz. Sāṅkhya, Yoga, Pāñcarātra,¹⁵⁴⁶ Vedas and Pāśupata'. Relying on Śāntiparva 339. 68 several writers particularly those of the Rāmānuja school assert that the whole of the Pāñcarātra system has Vedic authority, while others like Aparārka p. 13 and Paribhāṣāprakāśa (p. 23) do not-accept it as thoroughly Vedic but only partially.

Linked texts (3)