Talk:Purāṇa: Meaningful even if Imaginary

By Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati Swami

There is perhaps an element of the imaginary in the Purāṇas. It is also possible that they contain interpolations. But who is to determine what parts are imaginary and what passages constitute the interpolations? And who is to separate the authentic from the spurious? If each one of us removes what seems interpolatory, nothing will be left of the stories in the end. So it would be better to preserve the Purāṇas in the form in which they have been handed down to us, notwithstanding the apparent errors and distortions.

If there are stories in the Purāṇas that read like fables, let them be so. Do they not bring us mental peace and take us nearer to the Lord? We go shopping and make good purchases. Are we to be happy on this score or are we to be unhappy that there was something wrong with the shop or the shopkeeper? There may be mistakes in the Purāṇic accounts of the earth and the heavens. After all, we can have accurate knowledge of such matters from our books on geography and astronomy. The point to remember is that the Purāṇas contain what geography, astronomy, and history do not: the truth of the Ultimate Reality. Besides, they speak about devotion and dharma.

It is argued that Rāma could not have lived hundreds of thousands of years ago, i.e., in the Tretā-yuga; that it is not likely that the sort of civilization described in the Rāmāyaṇa would have obtained in that distant period. Similar criticisms are made about stories in the Purāṇas and the epics. I do not accept them. But, for the sake of argument, let it be that Rāma did not live in the Tretā age. And let us also presume that all those stories that happened, according to the Purāṇas, in the earlier Kṛta-yuga, did not really belong to that age — let us suppose that they date back to a comparatively recent period, to 7,000 or 8,000 years ago. But for that reason would the story of Rāma or others be less valuable? And would the lessons we learn from such accounts be less meaningful?

The Purāṇas mention the ages in which the stories recounted in them really happened. According to critics, it is not these ages alone that are wrong, but also the date(s) traditionally ascribed to the Purāṇas themselves.

According to the śāstras, Vyāsa composed the Purāṇas 5,000 years ago, at the beginning of the age of Kali. But they must have existed before him also. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad, Nārada speaks about the subjects learned by him and they include the Purāṇas. From this we infer that they must have existed during the time of the Vedas and the Upaniṣads. Just as Vyāsa divided the Vedas into a number of branches for the benefit of people of later times with their diminished capacity to learn, he also composed the Purāṇas, which are detailed in their treatment, with the same purpose in view.

Western-educated people think that the Purāṇas are not very ancient. So let them be. Devotees throng the Kandasvāmi temple in Madras. They feel the presence of the deity there. If they think that there is an end to their sorrows by worshipping at this shrine, what else is required of a temple? Is there any purpose in conducting an investigation into the origin of the temple, whether it had existed during the time of Arunagirināthar and whether he had sung his Tiruppugazh in it? Carrying out research into the Purāṇas is similarly futile. If we bear in mind that their purpose is the cleansing of our mind, there should be no need to harbour any doubts concerning them.

There is no bigger superstition than the belief that the results of historical investigations represent the absolute truth. Much of today's research is hollow; much of it faulty. However, even the view of modern research scholars that the Purāṇas are imaginary serves to show up the purpose for which they are intended: to demonstrate that one who does good prospers, that another who does evil suffers — or is raised up by the compassionate Lord.

Somehow, the Purāṇas are regarded as of secondary importance not only by people who claim to have a "modern" outlook, but also by those proficient in the śāstras. Also, pāurāṇikas (those who have made a thorough study of the Purāṇas and give discourses) are regarded as inferior to those who give talks on other branches of learning. However, scholars who have earned the title of Mahāmahopādhyāya like Yajñasvāmi Śāstri and Kābe Rāmacandracār have given Purāṇic discourses. Today, Śrīvatsa Somadevasarma is devoting himself fully to the printing of all the Purāṇas in Tamil (even though in an abridged form).