Guest guest Posted May 30, 2004 Report Posted May 30, 2004 , "Detective_Mongo_Phd" <detective_mongo_phd@h...> wrote: > Honestly, I study tantra, so I know one when I read it. I haven't >read that BG is a tantra. It's just obvious. What if I say it isnt a tantra but an actually an agama, and that too a Shaivagama, becoz it talks about Ishvara? (I am not alone here. Abhinavagupta is known to accord BG an agama status) By that question I mean to show that anybody can call anything as whatever they want and say it is obvious. >I don't think there's a website to give reference to, but I'm sure >there's got to be something at Motilil Banarsidas. I mean, where >else would Vaishnavas get their tantras from? So we should pity vaishnavas thinking they have no tantras and then accord BG the status of a vaishnava tantra? Vaishnavas have their own tantras. These Vishnu oriented tantras are present both in Shakta and Vaishanava traditions. Shakta tantras: Ex:1)Krishna Yamala. 2)May be Sammohana(I did not go thru this one- Might be wrong here) May be these too. Am guessing the following from name. Havent read them Vasudeva Rahasya, Dattatreya kalpa, Hanumatkalpa etc.. Vaishnava tantras:There are two classes Vaikhanasa Agama and Pancharatra. Pancharatra has 108 main texts and many other sub texts. Ex: Padma samhita, Jayakhya Samhita, Laxmi tantra, Narada pancharatra, Hayagriva pancharatra, Ahirbudhnya samhita etc. All above are vaishnava tantras and they are as good and as potent as Shakta/Shaiva tantras. They dont need us to brand BG a tantra(this is not to say that it doesnt have visualizations, meditation techniques etc.). >Neither Vishnu, >Rama, Krishna, or any other form of Vishnu is >mentioned in the 4 Vedas. Of course Narasimha has a few >Upanishads. Saying Vishnu is not mentioned in Vedas is same as saying Shakti is never mentioned in tantras. Rama, Krishna have their own upanishads FYI. Ramatapini, Ramarahasya, Krishna upanishads. >So we have to see Vaishnava tantra as coming from the itihasa. Please see above. >This person would know - >Jagadguru Swami Sathyananda Saraswathy Know what? Jagadguru ? Lol. Ask Arjuna Taradasa. Regards sa. Quote
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2004 Report Posted May 31, 2004 Well, thanks for the rebuttal. I hope you feel better knowing what you know. Take Care. - Satish Arigela Sunday, May 30, 2004 11:55 AM Re: BG - Vaishnava tantras , "Detective_Mongo_Phd" <detective_mongo_phd@h...> wrote: > Honestly, I study tantra, so I know one when I read it. I haven't >read that BG is a tantra. It's just obvious. What if I say it isnt a tantra but an actually an agama, and that too a Shaivagama, becoz it talks about Ishvara? (I am not alone here. Abhinavagupta is known to accord BG an agama status) By that question I mean to show that anybody can call anything as whatever they want and say it is obvious. >I don't think there's a website to give reference to, but I'm sure >there's got to be something at Motilil Banarsidas. I mean, where >else would Vaishnavas get their tantras from? So we should pity vaishnavas thinking they have no tantras and then accord BG the status of a vaishnava tantra? Vaishnavas have their own tantras. These Vishnu oriented tantras are present both in Shakta and Vaishanava traditions. Shakta tantras: Ex:1)Krishna Yamala. 2)May be Sammohana(I did not go thru this one- Might be wrong here) May be these too. Am guessing the following from name. Havent read them Vasudeva Rahasya, Dattatreya kalpa, Hanumatkalpa etc.. Vaishnava tantras:There are two classes Vaikhanasa Agama and Pancharatra. Pancharatra has 108 main texts and many other sub texts. Ex: Padma samhita, Jayakhya Samhita, Laxmi tantra, Narada pancharatra, Hayagriva pancharatra, Ahirbudhnya samhita etc. All above are vaishnava tantras and they are as good and as potent as Shakta/Shaiva tantras. They dont need us to brand BG a tantra(this is not to say that it doesnt have visualizations, meditation techniques etc.). >Neither Vishnu, >Rama, Krishna, or any other form of Vishnu is >mentioned in the 4 Vedas. Of course Narasimha has a few >Upanishads. Saying Vishnu is not mentioned in Vedas is same as saying Shakti is never mentioned in tantras. Rama, Krishna have their own upanishads FYI. Ramatapini, Ramarahasya, Krishna upanishads. >So we have to see Vaishnava tantra as coming from the itihasa. Please see above. >This person would know - >Jagadguru Swami Sathyananda Saraswathy Know what? Jagadguru ? Lol. Ask Arjuna Taradasa. Regards sa. / b.. c.. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.