Skandha 1 - Yajur Veda Australasia - Resources

8 There is, however an anomalous circumstance that puts a hurdle before the acceptance ofthis or an earlier date for the Bhāgavata. No quotation from it has been given by SriRamanuja, born in 1017 A.D. in his extensive writings. He has taken his quotations onlyfrom the Viṣṇu Purāṇa (4 th century A.D.) which is much earlier than the Bhāgavata and inmany respects parallel, but much inferior to it as a sacred text. Such a great Vaishnavascripture like the Bhāgavata, produced most probably in the South and extolling theVaishnavism of the Alvars for which Ramanuja stood, should have been known to him if ithad taken shape between the 5th and the 8th century. There are two possible explanationsfor his silence:–1. The hypothesis that the Bhāgavata was produced in the South between the 5 th and the 8 thcentury is wrong. It must have been produced in the North and had not yet become knownin the South by the time of Alberuni (1030 A.D.). Or,2. Ramanuja avoided reference to it for doctrinal reasons.The second alternative is the more probable one. Ramanuja was a great propagandist of thePancharatra Agama and he must have considered the Viṣṇu Purāṇa as offering bettersupport for it than the Bhāgavata, whose acceptance of Siva almost on a par with Viṣṇumust have been considered by him as militating against his theology.Next, in Ramanuja's system Sriman Nārāyaṇa in Vaikuntha is the highest form of Brahman,whereas the Bhāgavata seems to accept — and it has been so interpreted by Vaishnavasects like those of Chaitanya and Vallabha — that Sri Kṛṣṇa is the supreme form ofBrahman- (Bhagavan svayam). Vāsudeva, a name which primarily indicates Sri Kṛṣṇa, isthe most sacred name for God in the Bhāgavata, whereas Nārāyaṇa is the most importantand sacred one for the Pancharatrins. The Bhāgavatas and the Pancharatrins, though alwaysdevoted to Viṣṇu, seemed to have been distinct sectaries at an earlier date, and Ramanuja'spreference for the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, which has admittedly more of Pancharatra leaning thanthe Bhāgavata might have been due to this. Further, the Bhāgavata is non-dualistic in itstrend, although what brand of non-dualism it represents is disputable. Śaktimat and Śakti(Power- holder and Power) rather than Sariri and Sarira (Self and body) seems to be therelationship envisaged by the Bhāgavata between God and the world. Ramanuja, however,is committed to the latter view. For these reasons Ramanuja might have ignored theBhāgavata, although it became the main text of most of the Vaishnava schools like those ofNimbarka, Chaitanya, Vallabha and Sankara Deva in later times. It has, however, to beadmitted that Ramanuja's avoidance of quotations from a text is not conclusive proof toshow that the text did not exist in his time.IVSri Kṛṣṇa and the Bhāgavata: His Dominance in itThe main thesis of the Bhāgavata is to inculcate the glory and greatness of Bhagavan SriKṛṣṇa and the necessity of cultivating devotion to Him. The rest of the subject matter,including the accounts of the Incarnations, is made subordinate to it. It is an acceptedprinciple of interpretation that the subject matter of a book will be reflected in itsintroduction and conclusion. Judged from this point of view, the whole of the first Skandhaof the Bhāgavata deals with Sri Kṛṣṇa and the bestowal of His grace on the Pāṇḍavas, andthe three concluding Skandhas deal directly with Him and His teachings and the times thatfollow His demise.