Temples/icons during Vedic Era

[Dr Bhavana K R]

Respected vidvajjan, 

Namaskara!! It is a common belief that there were no temples during Vedic Era and Indian Shilpa Shastra is contribution of Greeks. Any book that talk about existence of sculptures and temples during Vedic times ? Kindly help 

Namaskara, 

Dr Bhavana K R 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Is there any reference mentioning 

(the common belief)

 that there were no temples during Vedic Era and Indian Shilpa Shastra is contribution of Greeks ? 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAN96om2xpkKfn2ZjkBW1RK6s73zMwre20i1j1Vyu66BA6P-dTw%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

Senior Director, IndicA

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS Kavikulaguru Kalidasa Sanskrit University, Ramtek, Maharashtra

BoS Veda Vijnana Gurukula, Bengaluru.

Member, Advisory Council, Veda Vijnana Shodha Samsthanam, Bengaluru

BoS Rashtram School of Public Leadership

Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Studies in Public Leadership

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies, 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education, 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

 

[M V S Siva Prasad]

Wonderful query for discussion sir.

Seems to be highly relevant towards towards the historical dimensions  . I too want to know information from this thread sir.

The existence of dwaraka in sea seems to be a suitable point here for discussion. Because in case of dwaraka the Radio Carbon Dating observation / information differs with the historical dimension of later vedic period facts like mahabharata around 1000B.C etc.

Secondly we have the worshipping statues of Pashupati / mother goddess in Indus valley civilization but the temple constructions etc were destroyed . I feel like that. We can't say the Indus valley covilians who constructed their houses etc with mathematical dimensions and techniques with good construction techniques will not construct a temple for the god whom they worship. So there exists a possibility but more research is required in this case. 

Either Temple structure / Sthoopa architecture is completely known from top to bottom  but being the Indus valley civilization was destroyed before our findings we can't say anything . so we can't show the fact of existance of structures because majorly all findings of Indus valley were archeological findings lacking Domes/Gopuram / Harmyaka etc.

The scriptural observations of puranas goes to later vedic period only ( according to history ). We can't add it to the dimension of before vedic period in Historical manner.

There is a book series of The cultural Heritage of India ( a series of 9 books ) . In that one volume may have the information regarding architecture etc.

 If anyone have it in their library they can check and place the information here. 

Thank you sir. 

Sorry for inconvenience if any. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eav0QVToBhM6po-MnRvTP8T%2B_i5kJA2_1X%2BuDPmrt0LyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[S. Kalyanaraman]

कासीत्प्रमा प्रतिमा किं निदानमाज्यं किमासीत्परिधिः क आसीत् । छन्दः किमासीत्प्रउगं किमुक्थं यद्देवा देवमयजन्त विश्वे ॥(RV 10.1\30.3)

Griffith: What were the rule, the order and the model? What were the wooden fender and the butter?
What were the hymn, the chant, the recitation, when to the God all Deities paid worship?

Wilson: What was the authority (of the sacrifice), what was thelimitation, what was the first cause, what wasthe clarified butter, what was the enclosure, what was the metre, what was pra-uga text, when the universal godsoffered worship to the gods?”

Prasanna Chandra Gautam: Then, what was the limit of Yajna; qhR Qa rhw mwAUEINF MWna, what was the purpose, what was the ghee, what was the boundary; what was the metre; and what was the metric hymn when all the deities worshiped The Gods. Essence: There were neither any accepted ritual nor the goods to worship the god then.

So, what is the meaning of प्रतिमा in RV 10.130.3 of the Creation suktam? Isn't the Mohenjo-daro 'stupa' a ziggurat, temple?

S. Kalyanaraman, Ph.D., D. Litt.

https://srinivasankalyanaraman.academia.edu/research.

https://taksha.org/advisors/kalyanaraman

https://sites.google.com/site/kalyan97/national-water-grid

https://sites.google.com/site/indianoceancommunity1/

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eav0QVToBhM6po-MnRvTP8T%2B_i5kJA2_1X%2BuDPmrt0LyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[kenp]

Here are some links.

https://www.learnreligions.com/history-of-hindu-temples-1770625

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shilpa_Shastras

https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/19047/is-there-temple-worship-in-the-vedas

[M V S Siva Prasad]

Please check the following image and check its relevance and information by official sources for confirmation. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/23e1deb6-5900-48c5-9fd9-c93c6ba5accfn%40googlegroups.com.

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

It is a common belief that there were no temples during Vedic Era and Indian Shilpa Shastra is contribution of Greeks

                                                                                                                                                                            --- विदु भावना

What kind of expression is this  -- Vedic Era ?

Do not read the books authored by people who are संप्रदायबाह्य (who are from outside  the Tradition ) . 

पुरुषसूक्तम् is there in all five वेदs -- ऋग्वेद - कृष्णयजुर्वेद -  शुक्लयजुर्वेद - सामवेद - अथर्ववेद ।

The following मन्त्रs are there in पुरुषसूक्तम् -- ऋचः सामानि जज्ञिरे । छन्दाग्ंसि जज्ञिरे तस्मात् । यजुस्तस्मादजायत  -- all the वेदs were there available at a single point of time . 

Otherwise one cannot  perform a यज्ञ ।

वेद is अपौरुषेय ( not authored by anybody ) - बृहदारण्यकोपनिषत् 4-5-11 ---

अरे अस्य महतो भूतस्य निश्वसितम् एतद् यद् ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदः अथर्वाङ्गिरसः इतिहासः पुराणं विद्या उपनिषदः श्लोकाः सूत्राण्यनुव्याख्याननि व्याख्यानानि ... ।

पूर्वमीमांसा ( 1-1-8-29 ) --

उक्तं तु शब्दपूर्वत्वम् (सिद्धान्तसूत्रम्) --- शब्दपूर्वत्वम् = अध्ययनपूर्वत्वम् । There was no person who did वेदाध्ययनम् for the first time independently .  Everyone follows his गुरु । So वेद is

अपौरुषेय (कर्तुः अस्मरणात्) ।

व्याकरणम्  ( तेन प्रोक्तम्  4-3-101 महाभाष्यम् ) --

छन्दो’र्थं तर्हीदं वक्तव्यम् । न हि छन्दांसि क्रियन्ते । नित्यानि  छन्दांसि ।

यास्क cautioned ( निरुक्तम् 2-4  ; मनुस्मृतिः 2-114 ; वसिष्ठस्मृतिः 2-8,9 ;  विष्णुधर्मसूत्रम् 29 - 9,10 ) --

विद्या ह वै ब्राह्मणमाजगाम  गोपाय मा शेवधिष्टे’हमस्मि । असूयकाय अनृजवे अयताय न मा ब्रूया वीर्यवती तथा स्याम् । विद्या approached ब्राह्मण  and said -- I am your शेवधि (निधि)  save me |

 Do not impart me to a person who is -- असूयक (one who considers गुण as दोष  or who would destroy the  गुणs / virtues ) - अनृजु ( a cheat ) - अयत ( impure / not composed )

and I will be powerful (only)  if the above norms are followed .

The term वेद (जातिः)  refers to  1130 शाखs of वेद -- ऋग्वेद (21) , यजुर्वेद (100) , सामवेद (1000 ) , अथर्ववेद ( 9 )  -- पस्पशाह्निकम् , महाभाष्यम् । Only 12 branches are available now .

How can one talk about वेद without checking with all the branches ?

Panini etc could perceive all the branches through योगिप्रत्यक्षम्  /  दिव्यदृष्टि  (clairvoyance ? )  -- see महाभाष्यम् ( वर्तमाने लट् 3-2-123 त्रिभावाः ) - योगानुशासनम् - वाक्यपदीयम् (ब्रह्मकाण्डः)।

श्रोत्रियंश्छन्दो’धीते 5-2-84 - तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् ( यजुर्वेद्ः ) ।

क्षेत्रियच् परक्षेत्रे चिकित्स्यः 5-2-92 - अथर्ववेदः ।

विग्रहादिपञ्चकम् enumerated in पूर्वमीमांसा ( शबरस्वामी only) is not to be taken as प्रमाणम् --

विग्रहो हविषां भोगः ऐश्वर्यं च प्रसन्नता ।

फलप्रदानमित्येतत् पञ्चकं विग्रहादिकम् ॥

It is refuted by latter मीमांसकs .

देवादीनां विग्रहवत्त्वम् - is discussed at length and  all the पूर्व्पक्षs are vehemently refuted with internal proof by शंकराचार्य -- ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्यम् - देवताधिकरणम् ( 1-3 ) --

तत्र अर्थित्वं तावन्मोक्षविषयं देवादीनामपि संभवति  विकारविषयविभूत्यनित्यत्वालोचनादिनिमित्तम् । तथा सामर्थ्यमपि तेषां संभवति । मन्त्रेतिहासपुराणलोकेभ्यः  विग्रहवत्त्वाद्यवगमात् । ......

इतिहासपुराणमपि व्याख्यातेन मार्गेण संभवन्मन्त्रार्थवादमूलत्वात् प्रभवति  देवताविग्रहादि साधयितुम् । ..... तथा च व्यासादयो देवतादिभिः प्रत्यक्षं व्यवहरन्तीति स्मर्यते । ...

We recite वेद regularly -- स्वाध्यायो’ध्येतव्यः ( स्वाध्यायब्राह्मणम् - तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् ) - and it is really useful -- we should not discuss certain things openly .

If someone does not believe in certain things we cannot do anything -- there is answer in ज्योतिषम्  ।

I stop for temporal and spatial considerations .

धन्यो’स्मि 

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad

299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
Ph:09866110741

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/23e1deb6-5900-48c5-9fd9-c93c6ba5accfn%40googlegroups.com.

[Vichitra Thandava]

Nagaraj ji

I would posit the opposite question.  Why would there been a need for temples if you could invoke them directly through the fire?  Other than perhaps talismans or tags prescribed by the deity. 

This is an important question that needs documentary evidence.  At least one major Vedic scholar, Swami Dayananda Saraswati who wrote a Rig Veda Bhashya, is on record that Jains were the first to build temples in the Indian subcontinent.  Others merely copied them. 

The temple-deity construct, from its purpose, is as a store of energy transmitting to people for whom the kula deiva is the the temple deity.  There is an injunction that is harder to follow today - sit inside the temple walls for at least five minutes before leaving as that is the key part of the visit.  This feature perhaps was a reason for caste based entry restrictions later based on whatever the locals decided was polluting to the energy inside the temple walls? 

It would seem that the temple-deity construct is a scaled one for efficiency and cost when populations grew and it wasn't possible or interesting for most to invoke through fire daily or regularly. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAJGj9eav0QVToBhM6po-MnRvTP8T%2B_i5kJA2_1X%2BuDPmrt0LyQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Raghav K]

Dear practitioners,

First, let us recollect the words of the great sage Vyasa in the Mahabharata - 1.1.204 इतिहास पुराणाभ्यां वेदं समुपबृंहयेत |
    बिभेत्य अल्पश्रुताद वेदॊ माम अयं परतरिष्यति| - The Veda is afraid of interpretations by so-called scholars who provide tangential meanings. The very purpose behind compiling the Itihasas and Puranas is to throw light on the Vedas, the mantras and sacrifices contained therein, and the deities to be worshiped etc.

Within the Itihasas, the earliest evidence we find of deity worship and/or existence of a temple is in the Ramayana, Ayodhya kanda where Lord Rama worshipped Lord Narayana before His coronation ceremony in the following slokas:

शेषं च हविषस्तस्य प्राश्याशास्यात्मनः प्रियम् |
ध्यायन्नारायणं देवं स्वास्तीर्णे कुशसंस्तरे || २-६-३
वाग्यतः सह वैदेह्या भूत्वा नियतमानसः |
श्रीमत्यायतने विष्णोः शिश्ये नरवरात्मजः || २-६-४

In tradition, this deity of Lord Narayana is believed to be originally handed over to Lord Brahma by Lord Vishnu Himself which came to the kings in the Ikshvaku dynasty which got later handed over to Vibhishana and is now consecrated and being worshipped as Lord Ranganatha in Sri Rangam.

In the Puranas, we find that Sri Krishna Himself explains about deity installation and worship in the Uddhava Gita in the verses beginning with:

11.27.7 (Bhag P):

vaidikas tAntrikO miSra iti me tri-vidho makhah

trayANAm ipsitenaiva vidhinA mAm samarchayet

11.27.9 (Bhag P):

archAyAm sthanDile'gnau vA sUrye vApshu hridi dvijah

dravyeNa bhakti-yuktO'rchet sva-gurum mAm amAyayA

etc. Interested readers may go through that entire adhyaya.

Second, Sabara Swamin himself and the scholars of all the three traditions - advaita (Shankaracharya see Br Sutras 3.3.43 - तदुक्तं सङ्कर्षे — ‘नाना वा देवता पृथग्ज्ञानात्’ इति ।), dvaita (Madhwacharya, Jaya tirtha), and vishishtadvaita (Vedanta Desika) have acknowledged the existence of madhyama mimamsa a.k.a. sankarsha kanda or devata kanda which talks  about devatas and their various modes of worship.

Finally, some of Swami Dayanand Saraswati's works and views such as satyartha prakash have been challenged by scholars such as Pandita Madhavacharya in their works such as PurANa digdarshan. So, I request that all scholarly views be examined carefully before drawing conclusions about when and why temples/deities were installed.

Thanks and Regards,

[V Subrahmanian]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:27 AM Raghav K <mangol...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear practitioners,

First, let us recollect the words of the great sage Vyasa in the Mahabharata - 1.1.204 इतिहास पुराणाभ्यां वेदं समुपबृंहयेत |
    बिभेत्य अल्पश्रुताद वेदॊ माम अयं परतरिष्यति| - The Veda is afraid of interpretations by so-called scholars who provide tangential meanings. The very purpose behind compiling the Itihasas and Puranas is to throw light on the Vedas, the mantras and sacrifices contained therein, and the deities to be worshiped etc.

Within the Itihasas, the earliest evidence we find of deity worship and/or existence of a temple is in the Ramayana, Ayodhya kanda where Lord Rama worshipped Lord Narayana before His coronation ceremony in the following slokas:

शेषं च हविषस्तस्य प्राश्याशास्यात्मनः प्रियम् |
ध्यायन्नारायणं देवं स्वास्तीर्णे कुशसंस्तरे || २-६-३
वाग्यतः सह वैदेह्या भूत्वा नियतमानसः |
श्रीमत्यायतने विष्णोः शिश्ये नरवरात्मजः || २-६-४

In tradition, this deity of Lord Narayana is believed to be originally handed over to Lord Brahma by Lord Vishnu Himself which came to the kings in the Ikshvaku dynasty which got later handed over to Vibhishana and is now consecrated and being worshipped as Lord Ranganatha in Sri Rangam.

In the Puranas, we find that Sri Krishna Himself explains about deity installation and worship in the Uddhava Gita in the verses beginning with:

11.27.7 (Bhag P):

vaidikas tAntrikO miSra iti me tri-vidho makhah

trayANAm ipsitenaiva vidhinA mAm samarchayet

11.27.9 (Bhag P):

archAyAm sthanDile'gnau vA sUrye vApshu hridi dvijah

dravyeNa bhakti-yuktO'rchet sva-gurum mAm amAyayA

etc. Interested readers may go through that entire adhyaya.

Namaste

On the same lines we have in the Bhagavatam itself the incident of Rukmini visiting the temple of Durga and worshiping there in the various shrines there on the eve of her 'abduction' by Lord Krishna thereby preempting her marriage to Shishupala. The Bhagavatam gives quite a lot of details of the temple.   

Second, Sabara Swamin himself and the scholars of all the three traditions - advaita (Shankaracharya see Br Sutras 3.3.43 - तदुक्तं सङ्कर्षे — ‘नाना वा देवता पृथग्ज्ञानात्’ इति ।), dvaita (Madhwacharya, Jaya tirtha), and vishishtadvaita (Vedanta Desika) have acknowledged the existence of madhyama mimamsa a.k.a. sankarsha kanda or devata kanda which talks  about devatas and their various modes of worship.

With regard to the  'Sankarasha kanda' here is a post in this very forum by Vidwan Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam, which I am copying here:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bvparishat/isTTwlbO_3w That which appears within brackets [ ] are added here in clarification/translation of Sanskrit lines.

Vidwan Sri Korada Subrahmanyam’s post in 2013:

Quote:

// नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Samkaracarya and Ramanujacarya quoted सङ्कर्ष(ण)काण्डसूत्रम् in प्रदानाधिकरणम् – सू . प्रदानवदेव तदुक्तम् (3-3-28-43) –

शां भा – तदुक्तं सङ्कर्षे – नना वा देवतापृथकग्ज्ञानात् इति ।

भाष्यरत्नप्रभा –

संकर्षो देवताकाण्डम् ।

न्यायनिर्णयः –

संकृष्यते कर्मकाण्डस्थमेव अवशिष्टं कर्म संक्षिप्य उच्यते इति संकर्षो देवताकाण्डम् , तस्मिन्निति यावत् ।

[Anandagiri, to the commentary of Shankara, says: the word ‘sankarSha’ is derived thus: the remnant portion of karma that is actually part of the karmakANDa is summarized (sankRuShyate) and this is called ‘devatAkANDa’]

अप्पय्यदीक्षिताः परिमळे –

यद्यपि संकर्षकाण्डो न देवताविचारार्थं प्रवर्तितः । किन्तु द्वादशलक्षण्यविचारितनानाविषयन्यायविचारात्मकः तत्परिशिष्टः , तन्त्रप्रसङ्गवत् उपदेशातिदेशसाधारण्येन प्रकीर्णकः प्रवर्तितः । न हि तत्र देवताविचारेण उपक्रम उपसंहारो वास्ति । …… तथापि संकर्षे देवताविधानरहितेषु उपांशुयाजादिषु देवता अस्ति न वा , प्रयाजादिषु देवतावाचिनः समिद्बर्हिरादिशब्दाः दर्शपूर्णमासाङ्गप्रसिद्धसमिद्बर्हिरादिपराः तदन्यपरा वा ….. इत्यादिदेवताविचारभूयस्त्वात् भूम्ना संकर्षकाण्डस्यैव देवताकाण्डा इत्यपि व्यवहारो’स्तीति तस्य तेनोपादानम् ।

[Appayya Dikshita says in the Parimala:The Sankarsha’ kANDa is not initiated to discuss about devata. The portions not included in the 12-chapter main purva mimamsa shAstra is discussed here in the Sankarsha’ kANDa. There is neither a discussion of devata-s in the beginning – upakarama, or at the end, upasamhara, of the Sankarsha’ kANDa. Yet, since there is a lot of discussion as to whether there is a devata involved in certain shrouta karmas or not, etc. this Sankarsha’ kANDa has an appellation that it is devatA kANda.]

श्रीभाष्ये —

तदुक्तं संकर्षणे – नाना वा देवतापृथक्त्वात् ।

2.तदाह वृत्तिकारः – वृत्तात् कर्माधिगमादनन्तरं ब्रह्मविविदिषेति ।

3.संहितमेतच्छारीरकं जैमिनीयेन षोडशलक्षणेनेति (कर्मब्रह्मशास्त्रयोः ऐकशास्र्यम् – see महावाक्यविचारः for details)

निगमान्तदेशिकाः – शतदूषणी —

देवताकाण्डशेषतया श्रीभाष्यकारैः परिगृहीतम् । ’तदुक्तं संकर्षे’ इति हि सूत्राण्युदाहरन्ति।

[Sri Vedanta Desika in the ShatadUShaNI alludes to the Sribhashya citing the sutra from devatA/sankarsha kaanda]

वेदान्तसारः – श्रीरामानुजाः —

अधीतवेदस्य हि पुरुषस्य कर्मप्रतिपादनोपक्रमत्वात् वेदानां कर्मविचारः प्रथमं कार्य इति ’अथातो धर्मजिज्ञासा’ इत्युक्तम् । कर्मणां च प्रकृतिविकृतिरूपाणां धर्मार्थकामरूपपुरुषार्थसाधनतानिश्चयः , ’प्रभुत्वादार्त्विज्यम् इत्यन्तेन’ ।

प्रस्थानभेदे मधुसूदनसरस्वती —

तथा सङ्कर्षकाण्डमध्यायचतुष्टयात्मकं जैमिनिप्रणीतम् । तच्च देवताकाण्डसंज्ञया प्रसिद्धमपि उपासनाख्यकर्मप्रतिपादकत्वात् कर्ममीमांसार्गतमेव ।

शबरस्वामी (10-4-32) —

स्विष्टकृद्विकारश्च वनस्पतिरिति संकर्षे वक्ष्यते ।

द्वादशाध्याये —

ननु नैव पशोर्हविष्कृदस्ति औषधार्था अवहननार्था वा यथा पत्नी तुल्यवच्छ्रूयते इति संकर्षे वक्ष्यति ।

So here , Sriramanuja , by quoting the first Sutra of पूर्वमीमांसा and the last Sutra (प्रभुत्वात्…) of Samkarsanakanda , it can be surmised that – according to Ramanuja the षोडशलक्षणी is applicable to कर्म ।

वेदार्थसंग्रहे रामानुजाः —

अश्रुतवेदान्तानां कर्मण्यश्रद्धा मा भूदिति देवताधिकरणे अतिवादाः कृताः, कर्ममात्रे यथा श्रद्धां कुर्यादिति सर्वमेकं शास्त्रमिति वेदवित्सिद्धान्तः।

आगमप्रामाण्ये यामुनाचार्याः –

भगवतो जैमिनेः कर्मणः फलोपन्यासःकर्मश्रद्धासंवर्धनाय ।

Scholars feel that – it is विंशतिलक्षणी मीमांसा – षोडशलक्षणी शबरस्वामिप्रणीता (जैमिनिप्रणीता – this correction has been incorporated here after consulting the author of this post, who acknowledged that it was an error during typing the post), चतुर्लक्ष्णी बादरायणप्रणीता ।

Even present day Visistadvaitins feel that Kasakrtsna was not at all the author of Sankarsakanda.

प्रस्तावना (p xx) by समुद्राल वेन्कटरङ्गरामानुजाचार्युलु (Editor) – Samkarsakanda of Jaimini Muni (Sri Venkateswara Vedic Uni , Tirupati, 2009 —

एवंच सङ्कर्षकाण्डकर्तृत्वविषये जैमिनिकर्तृत्वं काशकृत्स्नकर्तृत्वमिति द्विधा अभिप्रायभेदे सति , कृत्स्नस्य देवताकाण्डस्य षोडशाध्यायस्य जैमिनिप्रणीतत्वकथनमेव समुचितं प्रतिभाति ।

श्रीभाष्यकारादिवचनानुसारेण , तत्पूर्वतनशाङ्करवचनानुसारेण , पूर्वतन्त्रभाष्यादिवचनेन च तथैव प्र्तिपन्नत्वात् ।

विशिष्टाद्वैत does not have any special interest in सङ्कर्षणकाण्ड ।

The only thing to note is they have too much of respect for वेदान्तदेशिक / निगमान्तदेशिक ।

I have a copy of सङ्कर्षकाण्ड with a commentary , भाट्टदीपिका (भाट्टच्न्द्रिका), of भास्करराय ( S S V Vedic Uni, Tirupati, 2009).

Since Devatakanda is in the middle of विंशतिशलक्षणी , some may style it – मध्यमकाण्ड also .

There are two available commentaries on Samkarsakanda – by Devaswami and by Bhaskararaya.

The later mostly depends on the former and follows भाट्टचन्द्रिका of Khandadeva .

Any more doubts are welcome.

धन्यो’स्मि

Prof.Korada Subrahmanyam

Professor of Sanskrit,

CALTS,

University of Hyderabad 500046

Ph:09866110741(R),91-40-23010741,040-23133660(O)

Unquote

Here is an article by Dr.Mani Dravid Sastrinah on the topic:  http://www.mediafire.com/file/9i9vok9nj6j21cv/daivamimamsa.pdf%C2%A0

The gist of all the above is: The 'sankarsha kanda' is a part of the Purvamimamsa, dealing with karma and not of the upasana of devatas.  

warm regards

subrahmanian.v 

[Damodara Dasa]

|| Hare Krishna ||

>> I have a copy of सङ्कर्षकाण्ड with a commentary , भाट्टदीपिका (भाट्टच्न्द्रिका), of भास्करराय ( S S V Vedic Uni, Tirupati, 2009).

Is it possible for me to get it? Where is it available now, if at all?
e-copy will even be better.

Thank you,
Your servant,
damodara das

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

सङ्कर्षकाण्डम् - details -- PFA .

 

No idea about e-copy .

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad

299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
Ph:09866110741

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZCED8%3DnMDEG%3Dy_Dz7QgA%3DfaAB6bvPA9JGDqjE13AF%3DMiQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jagannatha S]

https://archive.org/details/SWXl_sankarsha-kanda-of-sage-jaimini-with-devasvamin-bhasya-s.-subrahmanya-sastri

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELQtAH0%3DVv448hXW2egQ9apUauQojwznjGM-JgwM7OyK2A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Damodara Dasa]

|| Hare Krishna ||

Respected Subrahmanyam ji,
Pranams.

I am not able to locate this book for purchasing online. It seems it
is not kept for online sales. Any ideas how to get it? Any contact
numbers?

I saw the SVV publication website but it is not there in their catalog
also. I will also try calling them on the contact details.

Thank you,
Hari Guru Vaisnava das,
damodara das

On 1/10/23, Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada <kora...@gmail.com> wrote:
> नमो विद्वद्भ्यः
>
> सङ्कर्षकाण्डम् - details -- PFA .
>
> No idea about e-copy .
>
> धन्यो’स्मि
>
> Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
> Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad
> 299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
> Ph:09866110741

> *Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada*
> *Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in <http://Koradeeyam.blogspot.in> *

>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 1:07 PM Damodara Dasa <damoda...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> || Hare Krishna ||
>>
>> >> I have a copy of सङ्कर्षकाण्ड with a commentary , भाट्टदीपिका
>> (भाट्टच्न्द्रिका), of भास्करराय ( S S V Vedic Uni, Tirupati, 2009).
>>
>> Is it possible for me to get it? Where is it available now, if at all?
>> e-copy will even be better.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Your servant,
>> damodara das
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZCED8%3DnMDEG%3Dy_Dz7QgA%3DfaAB6bvPA9JGDqjE13AF%3DMiQ%40mail.gmail.com
>> .
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELQtAH0%3DVv448hXW2egQ9apUauQojwznjGM-JgwM7OyK2A%40mail.gmail.com.
>

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

आयुष्मान् भव  दामोदर

give me some time .  Rest assured .

Meanwhile --

1.If प्रतिमा ( पाञ्चरात्रम् etc taken from यजुर्वेद ) is not there where is the विनियोग  for the  प्राणप्रतिष्ठापनमन्त्र ---

असुनीते पुनरस्मासु चक्षुः पुनः प्राणमिहनो धेहि भोगम् । ज्योक्पश्येम सूर्यमुच्चरन्तमनुमते मृडयानः स्वस्ति । अमृतं वै प्राणा अमृतामापः प्राणानेव यथास्थानमुपह्वयते  ( श्रीमहागणाधिपतये नमः , प्राणप्रतिष्ठापनमुहूर्तः सुमुहूर्तो’स्तु ) ।

We prepare a प्रतिमा with turmeric or clay and do प्राणप्रतिष्ठापनम् and then only proceed -- ध्यायामि , आवाहयामि , पादयोः पाद्यं समर्पयामि ....।

2. The issue is discussed in वेदान्तदर्शनम् - ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्यम् --

अन्यत्वे’पि तादात्म्यदर्शनं शास्त्रात्  कर्तव्यं प्रतिमादिष्विव विष्ण्वादिदर्शनम् ....। आत्मत्वोपासनाधिकरणम् ,’ आत्मेति तूपगच्छन्ति ग्राहयन्ति च ’ सू 4-1-3

.....ब्रह्मण आत्मत्वोपदेशः । तदनिराकरणेन चोपासनाविधानम् । प्रतीकाधिकरणम् , ’ न प्रतीकेन हि सः ’ सू  4-1-4

3. About एकाग्रता  --

This is also discussed in वेदान्त - ब्रह्मसूत्रशांकरभाष्यम् --

आसीनः संभवात्  सू  4-1-7 आसीनाधिकरणम् । भा . आसीनश्च अनायासो भवति । तदप्यासीनकर्मोपासनम् ।

 ( शंकराचार्य in this context refers to स्वाध्यायब्राह्मणम् - तैत्तिरीयारण्यकम् -- ’ तिष्ठन्नासीनःशयानो’धीयीतैव स्वाध्ययम् )

( ’अनायासः’  is stated as  one of the eight आत्मगुणs in गौतमधर्मसूत्रम् and also in योगानुशासनम् - ’ स्थिरसुखमासनम् ’ सू )

In भाष्यम् - अनायासः इत्यत्र मत्वर्थीयः अच् प्रत्ययः -- यथा दुग्धा गावः , विभक्ता भ्रातरः (महाभाष्यम्) इति । अनायासः अस्य अस्ति इति अनायासः ।

अचलत्वं चापेक्ष्य सू  4-1-9  स्मरन्ति च सू 4-1-10 -- भा  स्मरन्ति च शिष्टा उपासनाङ्गत्वेन आसनम् -- " शुचौ देशे प्रतिष्ठाप्य स्थिरमासनमात्मनः " (भगवद्गीता 6-11) इत्यादिना । अत एव पद्मकादीनाम्

आसनविशेषाणाम् उपदेशो योगशास्त्रे । (also in पद्मपुराणम् etc ) |

यत्रैकाग्रता तत्र अविशेषात् सू 4-1-11 . भा . ननु विशेषमपि केचिदामनन्ति --

समे शुचौ शर्करावह्निवालुकाविवर्जिते शब्दजलाश्रयादिभिः ।

मनो’नुकूले न तु चक्षुःपीडने गुहानिवाताश्रयणे प्रयोजयेत् ॥  श्वेताश्वतरोप . 2-10

इति यथेति । उच्यते - सत्यम् अस्त्येवंजातीयको नियमः ।

If there is the question as to why a person cannot have एकाग्रता at home then  you should study at least a hundred horoscopes - जातकचक्राणि । All the people are not

born with the same कर्म - सुकृतम् and दुष्कृतम् ।

’ भृगुर्वै वारुणिः ... अन्नं ब्रह्मेति  व्यजानात् ’ (भृगुवल्ली - तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत्) -- is possible for only a limited people .

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Adju.Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology, IIT, Hyderabad

299 Doyen , Serilingampally, Hyderabad 500 019
Ph:09866110741

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CABr-jZAeiNhKCa8TuKkoosv8M5TZWAAFCO-56-4oVRpWoQ28Sg%40mail.gmail.com.