Saura-purana (analytical study)
by Priyanku Chakraborty | 2019 | 92,293 words
This page relates ‘Vishnu, Vaishnavism and the Saura-purana’ of the study on the Saura-Purana—an important Upapurana associated with the Puranic Pashupata sect of Shaivism—and offers crucial insights into the socio-religious, philosophical, and cultural history of India. The study further delves into the oral, literary, and archaeological context of Purana literature (such as the Saurapurana), highlighting its intricate connections with Vedic and Tantric traditions.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
Part 3 - Viṣṇu, Vaiṣṇavism and the Saura-purāṇa
The worshippers of Viṣṇu i.e. the Vaiṣṇavas, however, known as the Bhāgavatas or Pāñcarātras in general in early dates, is one of the most powerful religious sect in the Indian subcontinent which comprising many sub-sects and cults. The Purāṇas played important role for flourishing of the philosophy, theology and rituals of the viṣṇubhāgavatas or Vaiṣṇavas. We can cite here for example the Bhāgavata.p, Matsya-purāṇa, Harivaṃśa-purāṇa, Garuḍa.purāṇa, Viṣṇu-purāṇa etc.
The Puranic Vaiṣṇavism in fact is a submerged form of the different cults such as the cult of Vedic Viṣṇu, Vāsudeva-Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma, Pāñcarātra etc. R. G. Bhandarkar, Gopinath Rao, J. N. Banerjea, Ramakanta Chakraborty, S. R. Goyal and others have made scholarly and elaborate discourse about the origin and development of the different stages of Vaiṣṇavism. The earlier mention of the worshippers of Vāsudeva and Baladeva can be found in the Pāṇiṇi’s Aṣṭādhyāyī and the Buddhist Pali text Niddesa.[1] The Besnagar inscription, dated c. second century BCE refers to the establishment of the pillar with Garuḍa by the Greek Heliodor which was dedicated to his god Vasudeva.[2]
The sectarian character of the Saura-purāṇa is mostly reflected by the despicable approach towards Viṣṇu as well as the Vaiṣṇavas. According to the Saura-purāṇa Śiva is superior to other gods including Brahmā and Viṣṇu.
The man, who considers Śiva and his consort as equal to the other gods, is untouchable:
“na brahmādyaiḥ samaṃ brūyācchaktibhirna ca pārvatīm|
brūyād yadi samaṃ śaṃbhuṃ brahma-viṣṇvādibhiḥ suraiḥ||
yaḥ kaścid tamasāviṣṭaḥ kadācinnaiva taṃ spṛśed|
sarvasmādadhikaṃ brūyād-bhagavantam-umapatim||
tathā devīñca girijāṃ dvijaiḥ śreyo’rhatibhiḥ sadā||”[3]
The thirty-ninth chapter of this Purāṇa states that even an atheist or a greedy or a ungrateful person perhaps could be able to attain liberation, but the person who thinks Rudra as the same as Brahmā, Viṣṇu or Indra, or does not know Śiva as superior to them can never get liberation. Śiva is never equal to Viṣṇu, but he is superior to him.[4] In the fourth chapter of the Saura-purāṇa it is said with lamentation that in the Kali-age the dvijas who are the worshippers of Puruṣottama (Viṣṇu), will censure Śiva. But Viṣṇu will not give liberation to them.[5]
This Purāṇa states that, according to the four Vedas and all Purāṇas, all the gods including Brahmā and Viṣṇu are obedient to Śiva:
“catuṣvapi vedeṣu purāṇeṣu ca sarvaśaḥ|
śrī-maheśāt paro devo na samāno’sti kaścana||
brahmā viṣṇurvalārātiḥ sarve yasya vase sthitāḥ|”[6]
In the Vedas also Śiva is proclaimed superior to Viṣṇu.[7] So, he, who thinks Śiva and Viṣṇu or Brahmā are equal, is treated as “karmacāṇḍāla” and he suffers as a worm in faeces for sixty-thousand years.[8] Therefore, in the thirty-ninth chapter of the Saura-purāṇa, when vaiṣṇavābhasa (false Vaiṣṇava) censures Śiva and praises Viṣṇu, the body of Viṣṇu becomes filled with blood and suddenly he begins crying.[9]
In the Saura-purāṇa Śiva is not described as the god of destruction, rather he is the controller of universal creation, existence and dissolution. However, these three activities are related to the Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Rudra accordingly, and according to this Purāṇa, Śiva takes the three forms–Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Rudra to fulfil these activities.[10] He creates Viṣṇu, Brahmā and Rudra from his left-part, right-part and the heart respectively.[11] [12] Therefore, Śiva is the eternal and superior then the other gods.[13] Brahmā achieves his position because of the touch of the holy dust of Śiva’s feet.
Even Viṣṇu too takes the dust of Śiva’s feet on his head:
“yasya pādarajaḥ-sparśād brahmatvaṃ prāptavānaham|
śārṅgiṇāpi sadā mūrdhnā dhāryate kaḥ śivāt param||”[14]
In the Dakṣa-yajña episode of the Saura-purāṇa when Dakṣa describes Nārāyaṇa or Viṣṇu as the supreme god and as the cause of all creation, the sage Dadhīci denies his arguments.[15]
He says that Śiva, who is mentioned as “Soma” by the sages, is the origin of Viṣṇu and it has been stated in the Śruti:
“umayā saha yo devaḥ soma ityucayate budhaiḥ|
sa eva kāraṇaṃ nānyo viṣṇorapi hi vai śruti||”[16]
Other gods including Viṣṇu are just servants of Śiva:
The Saura-purāṇa mentioned Kṛṣṇa, the son of Devakī and Arjuna as the devotee of Śiva.[18] Kṛṣṇa becomes invincible after getting various boons from Mahādeva.[19]
In the three worlds Kṛṣṇa is the greatest Māheśvara or Śaiva:
Therefore, if anyone worships Kṛṣṇa, Śiva becomes worshipped. So, the worshippers of Śiva should worship Śārṅgī viz. Kṛṣṇa or Viṣṇu.[21]
On another place of the Saura-purāṇa it is stated that before the origin of the universe, Śiva appeared before Brahmā and Viṣṇu. While giving boon to Viṣṇu, Śiva states that there is no difference between Viṣṇu and himself. Viṣṇu is the śakti of Śiva. Viṣṇu is the prakṛti, Śiva is the puruṣa; Viṣṇu is the māyā (illusion), Śiva is the māyī (lord of illusion). Śiva is Sūrya (Sun), Viṣṇu is Candra (Moon). Śiva is the day and Viṣṇu is the night etc. The whole undisclosed universe, in fact, is filled by Śiva and Viṣṇu. After listening to Śiva’s advice Viṣṇu prayed for constant devotion on him. Knowing his wish Śiva was pleased and told him to protect the creation.[22]
Further, according to Saura-purāṇa, Viṣṇu was graced by Śiva as he is the servant of Śiva and this is what the Vedas, Smṛtis and Purāṇas say:
“maheśasya ca dāso’yaṃ viṣṇustenā-nukaṃpitaḥ|
śruti-smṛti-purāṇānāṃ siddhānto’yaṃ yathārthataḥ||”[23]
By the grace of Śiva, Viṣṇu is his great devotee and for this reason he achieves the adorable and respectful position compared to other gods:
“mat-prasādena sarvasmā-dadhiko bhava mādhava|
mad-bhaktānāṃ tvamevāgryaḥ pūjyo mānya-stvameva hi||”[24]
The Saura-purāṇa describes the account how Viṣṇu got the sudraśana-cakra from Śiva after doing hard penance.[25]
Viṣṇu became famous in the three world due to the grace of Śiva:
The Saura-purāṇa states that a Vaiṣṇava is greater than the devotees of the gods Sūrya, Agni or Candra, however, a Śaiva is greater than a thousands of Vaiṣṇava.[27] As per the Saura-purāṇa the Vaiṣṇava and Saura dvijas are considered as receptacle of donations (dāna). However, among the essential qualities of them worshipping of Śiva is included.[28] But if a Brāhmaṇa belongs to the Śaiva sect, he would be considered as the best person to give donation though devoid of virtues. So one should donate only to the worshipper of Śiva. One can gain inexhaustible virtue by giving donation to such
89 Ibid., 66. 37.
90 Ibid., 41. 1ff.
91 Ibid., 34. 30a.
92 “sūrya-vahnīndu-bhaktānāmuttamo vaiṣṇavaḥ paraḥ|
vaiṣṇavānāṃ sahasrebhyaḥ śivabhakto viśiṣyate||” Ibid., 11. 9.
A little different reading of this verse is available in the Manuscript no. 8202 of the Saura-purāṇa:
“sūrya-vahnīndra-bhaktānāṃ uttamo vaiṣṇavaḥ smṛtaḥ|
śivabhaktaḥ sadā skanda sarvāsmādadhiko mataḥ||” (Folio no. 30a, line 11-12).
Here “Indu” i.e. Candra is replaced by “Indra”.
Similar verses are also found in the Liṅga-purāṇa:
“anyabhakta-sahasrebhyaḥ viṣṇubhakto viśiṣyate|
viṣṇubahkta-sahasrebhyo rudrabhakto viśiṣyate|
rudrabhaktāt-paro nāsti loke na saṃśayaḥ||
tasmātttu vaiṣṇavaṃ cāpi rudrabhaktamathāpi vā|
pūjayet sarvayatnena dharkāmarthamuktaye||” (2. 4. 20-21)
93 “mahādevārcanaratā bhūti-śāsana-bhūṣītāḥ|
vaiṣṇavāḥ sūryabhaktā vā patrabhūtā dvijottamāḥ||” Ibid., 10. 10.
a person. If anybody donates others ignoring the worshippers of Śiva, his donation becomes fruitless, and the giver of the donation goes to hell.[29] [30]
The three chapters of the Saura-purāṇa viz. the thirty-eighth, thirty-ninth and fortieth are garrulous to censure the famous Vaiṣṇava leader of the Southern part of India, Madhvācārya (1238-1317 CE). It may be said that three chapters were added to this Purāṇa not before the c. fourteenth-fifteenth centuries.[31] These chapters state that, Madhu (Madhvācārya as named there) will take birth from the womb of a widow of a Brāhmaṇa, and he will corrupt (“dūṣita”) the Karṇāṭaka, Tilaṅgā regions. This Purāṇa describes the activities, personal life, philosophy and monastic order of Madvācārya with disdain. B. N. Krishnamurti Sarma shows in his article elaborately how these interpolated chapters as well as the episode of Madhvācārya of the Saura-purāṇa “abounds in blunders of historical detail and artistic conception. The interpolator is a fourth-rate Pandit ignorant alike of history, geography, tradition, art, proportion and philosophy. His only qualification is his prejudice against Madhva..”[32]
However, in the above mentioned chapters of the Saura-purāṇa there appears to be an indication of flourishing of the Vaiṣṇava cult from the Southern India to the northern part of India. Therefore, the Śaivas were worried about the increasing number of the assuming (“dāmbhika”) Vaiṣṇavas. This worry has been reflected in some verses of the Purāṇa.[33]
Apart from these interpolated chapters, this Purāṇa shows especial dislike towards the Āndhras in some other chapters too.[34] According to Hazra, it is probable that in Andhra Vaiṣaṇavism was in a flourishing stage at least during the period of composition or compilation of this Purāṇa.”[35]
Again, the description of Śrāvaṇa-dvādaśī-vrata is found in the fifteenth chapter of the Saura-purāṇa, which is purely the Vaiṣṇava’s vow. R. C. Hazra opines: “Chap. 15 was evidently introduced by the Śiva-worshippers themselves as an external proof of their apparently sympathetic and compromising attitude towards the more powerful Vaiṣṇavas whom they wanted to placate and win over to their own side by making them believe in the superiority of Śiva over Viṣṇu.”[36]
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
J. N. Banerjea: Pañcopāsanā, pp. 14, 51.
[2]:
Ibid., p 49.
[3]:
Saura-purāṇa, 18. 27-29a.
[4]:
[5]:
“puruṣottama-māśritya śivanindāratā dvijāḥ| kalau yuge bhaviṣyanti teṣāṃ tratā na mādhava||” Ibid., 4. 20. — By the epithet “śiva-nindāratā” a clear indication of sectarian bias of the Vaiṣṇavas of Kaliage is found.
[6]:
Ibid., 38. 1-2a.
[7]:
[8]:
[9]:
Ibid., 39. 10-11.
[10]:
Saura-purāṇa, 23. 53a. — Saura-purāṇa
[11]:
[12]:
a.
[13]:
“brahma-viṣṇu-harakhyāṇāṃ yaḥ paraḥ parameśvaraḥ| taṃ māṃ mahādeva ihi brahman jānanti sūrayaḥ||” Ibid., 23. 56.
[14]:
Ibid., 7. 17b-18a.
[15]:
“nāhaṃ nārāyaṇāddevāt paśyāmyanyaṃ dvijottama| kāraṇaṃ sarvavastunāṃ nāstīsyeva suniścitaṃ||” Ibid., 7. 35.
[16]:
Ibid., 7. 36.
[17]:
Ibid., 2. 38a. Also “dṛṣṭvā viśveśvaraṃ devī sīghraṃ paramayā mudā|| nanāma śirasā bhaktyā bhartu-ścaraṇa-paṅkajam| praṇamya daṇḍavad-viṣṇuryadvṛttaṃ tannyavedayat||” Ibid., 29. 20b-21.
[18]:
Ibid., 5. 27b.
[19]:
Ibid., 32. 60.
[20]:
Ibid., 32. 61a.
[21]:
Ibid., 31. 62.
[22]:
Ibid., 24. 67-74. — Regarding this concept Śripati states in Śrīkarabhāṣya (the commentary of Brahmasūtra by Vīra Śaiva school): “śiva-keśavayoḥ puruṣatvaṃ prakṛtitvaṃ Śruti-smṛti-purāṇā-gamasiddham|” He quoted from the Saura-purāṇa, (however, mentioned as “Āditya-purāṇa”) 24. 70a, as supportive evidence: “āditya-purāṇe viṣṇuṃ prati śivavacanaṃ—‘tvanmayaṃ manmayaṃ sarvam-vyakta-puruṣātmakam’iti|” He also quoted from other Purāṇas: “skande| ‘puruṣānaṃsampūrṇa-sāmva-mūrti-sanātanaḥ| vāsudevaḥ parāśaktiriti’… vedaprapañcitam| ‘prakṛti paramo viṣṇuḥ puruṣaḥ parama-śivaṃ’ iti kūrme| śiva-rahasya-khaṇḍāntabhūtasurakāṇḍādiṣū nārāyaṇasya strīrūpatvaṃ puruṣātvaṃ śivasya|” (Śrīkarabhāṣya, p. 85). Here we can mention the Dāruvana-episode of the Saura-purāṇa, where Śiva and Viṣṇu took the form of male and female respectively (69. 47-49).
[23]:
Saura-purāṇa, 40. 5b-6a.
[24]:
Ibid., 66. 37.
[25]:
Ibid., 41. 1ff.
[26]:
Ibid., 34. 30a.
[27]:
“sūrya-vahnīndu-bhaktānāmuttamo vaiṣṇavaḥ paraḥ|
vaiṣṇavānāṃ sahasrebhyaḥ śivabhakto viśiṣyate||” Ibid., 11. 9.
A little different reading of this verse is available in the Manuscript no. 8202 of the Saura-purāṇa:
“sūrya-vahnīndra-bhaktānāṃ uttamo vaiṣṇavaḥ smṛtaḥ|
śivabhaktaḥ sadā skanda sarvāsmādadhiko mataḥ||” (Folio no. 30a, line 11-12).
Here “Indu” i.e. Candra is replaced by “Indra”.
Similar verses are also found in the Liṅga-purāṇa:
“anyabhakta-sahasrebhyaḥ viṣṇubhakto viśiṣyate|
viṣṇubahkta-sahasrebhyo rudrabhakto viśiṣyate|
rudrabhaktāt-paro nāsti loke na saṃśayaḥ||
tasmātttu vaiṣṇavaṃ cāpi rudrabhaktamathāpi vā|
pūjayet sarvayatnena dharkāmarthamuktaye||” (2. 4. 20-21)
[28]:
“mahādevārcanaratā bhūti-śāsana-bhūṣītāḥ|
vaiṣṇavāḥ sūryabhaktā vā patrabhūtā dvijottamāḥ||” Ibid., 10. 10.
[29]:
“yastu māheśvaro vipro jāti-mātro’pi yadyapi| uttamaḥ sarvapātrāṇāṃ taismai dattaṃ tadakṣayam|| śiva-bhakta-matikramya yaccā-nyasmai pradīyate| — niṣphalaṃ tadbhaveddānaṃ narakañca prapadyate|| tastmād pātratamaṃ jñātvā śiva-bhaktamakalmaṣam| tastai sarvaṃ pradātavyaṃ akṣayaṃ phalamicchatā||” Ibid., 10. 12-14. Also see: 14. 29-30;
[30]:
2-3, 6 etc.
[31]:
R. C. Hazra also doesn’t recommend these chapters as genuine. (See: R. C. Hazra: “The Saura-purāṇa”, The New Indian Antiquary, vol. 6, p. 110.
[32]:
B. N. Krishnamurti Sarma: “An Attack on Śri Madhavācārya in the Saura Purāṇa”, Annals of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, vol. 13, 1931-32, p. 76.
[33]:
[34]:
The Vaiṣṇavism flourished in the southern part of India from c. sixth century CE. The Śrīvaiṣṇava tradition was founded by the Ālvara saints along with Nāthamuni, Raṅganāthācārya etc. This Vaiṣṇava movement became strong by the leadership of Yāmunācārya (c. ninth/tenth century CE), Rāmānujā (1016-1137 CE), Vallabhācārya (c. fifteenth century CE) etc. See: N. N. Bhattacharya: Dharma o Samskriti Prācīna Bhāratīya Prekṣāpaṭa, pp. 139-40.
[35]:
R. C. Hazra: Op. cit., p. 127.
[36]:
Ibid., p. 109.