The "lost" strands of Hindudharma are utterly fascinating. Like fossils, they provide surprising insights into the stunning breadth of religious conception.
The गरुड-पुराण preserves a remarkable religious conception, which raises many questions (see next tweet).
The गरुड-पुराण preserves a remarkable religious conception, which raises many questions (see next tweet).
The गरुड-पुराण presents a view where विष्णु is supreme & is to be worshiped first, followed by लक्ष्मी, then वायु & भारती. This so far looks like a prototype of the later माध्व theology. Nothing alarming per se. A few people have written on this.
You may also see this article by @blog_supplement for how the गरुड-पुराण is a predecessor of माध्व theology: manasataramgini.wordpress.com
But then the text continues:
But then the text continues:
It says that after the divines (विष्णु, लक्ष्मी, वायु & भारती)., व्यास should be worshiped among men.
And then comes a question by the listener, शौनक, who asks why व्यास comes at the end.
To this, the narrator सूत begins his reply by stating that व्यास should be worshiped after विष्णु and that हरि and व्यास are not be to treated equally, and it gets even more interesting.++
To this, the narrator सूत begins his reply by stating that व्यास should be worshiped after विष्णु and that हरि and व्यास are not be to treated equally, and it gets even more interesting.++
In what I think to be one of the bizarre passages (bizarre in light of mainstream presumptions about the status of हरि & व्यास vis-a-vis one another), सूत states that व्यास is praised in तामस-पुराण-s as a ऋषि (??). ++
He then proceeds to imply that दैत्य-s & their followers who, on the account of that knowledge in तामस-पुराण-s, do so otherwise (worship व्यास before the Divines), will enter अन्धतमस् (blinding darkness)!
The language (अन्धतमस्, तारम्तम्य, calling deviant worshipers as दैत्य-s) do remind one of the माध्व 'style' but the seeming disregard for व्यास is a little shocking (at least to me) and remarkable.
Surely, no माध्व will accept that व्यास is inferior to it even different from विष्णु, or worse, that व्यास is inferior to वायु. It will be interesting to see if there were वैष्णव-s of a वायव्य bent, who did not like व्यास being equated with विष्णु.
inferior to *or even
Loading suggestions...