Samsaya(Doubt): The Puranas are not Vedic.

They are just fanciful narrations

Purva-Paksha (Objection): All the Puranas are dated between 8th to 12th century AD.
They are all fanciful narrations by modern scholars in the name of Badarayanah
(Krishna DvipayanaVyasa). They contain thousands of contradictions and silly
nonsense as well as some profound philosophy. The Puranas are all written after
writing was developed in India which is about 200 BCE the earliest writing we have
are the edicts of Ashoka. Prior to that there is no writing so no single author
could have written them. Vyas simply means the compiler” and there is quite
evidently 100’s of different authors that contributed to the vast literature of the
Puranas. Some Puranic material dates back to the Vedas and was recited during long
yajñas. The only Purana that Ramanujacharya accepted was the Vishnu Purana. No
Vedanta acharya accepts statements of the Puranas as independently authoritative.

Sidhanta(Conclusion):

1. The Puranas are Vedic because it is stated so in the Shrutis.

2. The Puranas are Vedic because it is stated so in the Puranas.

3. The Puranas are Vedic because it is stated so in the Itihasas.

4. The Puranas are Vedic because they are chanted in Yajnas.

5. There is no evidence (other than tarka(logic)) supporting that only some of the
Puranic material is Vedic the rest is not. However, the number of Puranas along
with names are mentioned in Smriti.

6. There is no reason to accept just Vishnu Purana and deny the others.

7. Just like the vedas were memorised the Puranas were also memorised. The evidence
is from Smrti. Whereas there is no credible evidence to prove otherwise, other than
mundane logic.

8. Vyas simply means a compiler. That is true. However, the current Vyas is
Narayana himself. This is supported by Vishnu Purana. Opinions contrary to this is
not supported by any Sastra.

9. a. The puranas contain some crazy and silly explanations but so do the Vedas.
One should not give preference to mundane logic if it contradicts the Sastra. This
is the opinion of Krishna Dvaipayana Vyas.

b. The puranas contain many contradictions. These are meant for different kinds of
people to attain spiritual realisation.

Sangati (Agreement with scriptures):

That the Puranas are Vedic is approved by the Shruti by the following quotations:

Madhyandina-sruti, Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 2.4.10

asya mahato bhutasya nihsvasitam etad yad rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama

vedo’tharvangirasa itihasah puranam ityadina

“O Maitreya, the Rg, Yajur, Sama and Atharva Vedas as well as the Itihasas and the
Puranas all manifest from the breathing of the Lord.”
Atharva Veda: Gopatha Brahmana, purva 2.10

evam ime sarva veda nirmitah sa-kalpah sa-rahasyah sa-brahmanah sopanisatkah

“In this way, all the Vedas were manifested along with the Kalpas, Rahasyas,
Brahmanas, Upanisads, Itihasas, Anvakhyatas and the Puranas.”

Atharva Veda 15.6.10–12

sa brhatim disam anu vyacalat tam itihasas ca puranam ca gathas ca itihasasya ca sa

“He approached the brhati meter, and thus the Itihasas, Puranas,
Gathas andNarasamsisbecame favorable to him. One who knows this verily becomes the
beloved abode of the Itihasas, Puranas, Gathas and Narasamsis.”

Some people who are hellbent on proving that Puranas are not Vedic may have the
following objection:

Some Vedic passages fit the functional definition of Itihasa narrations, such as
the portion of the Rg Veda Samhita describing a conversation between the demigods
and Lord Brahma (samyum prajapatim deva abruvan yo brahmanayavaguret tam
satenayayatet) and the portion of the Nrsimha tapani Upanisad
describing (avacanenaiva procava) Other passages describe the creation of the
universe in Puranic fashion, as in the Taittiriya Upanisad's descriptions yato va
imani bhutani jayante ("From that Surpeme everything in existence was generated";
Taittiriya Up. 3.1) and etasmad atmana akasah bhutah ("From that Supreme Soul, the
sky came into being"; Taittiriya Up. 2.1).

However, this is not true as indicated by the Chandogya Upanishad:

Kauthumiya Chandogya Upanisad 7.1.4

nama va rg-vedo yajur-vedah sama-veda atharvanas caturtha itihasa-puranah pancamo

“Indeed, Rg, Yajur, Sama and Atharva are the names of the four Vedas.The Itihasas
and Puranas are the fifth Veda.”

Here all the vedas are mentioned by name followed by the Puranas and Itihasas are
mentioned. This indicates that the Puranas and Itihasas can’t be parts of Rg Veda
etc as indicated above.

2. The Puranas are Vedic because it is stated so in the Puranas.

Srimad Bhagavatam 3.12.39:

itihāsa-purāṇāni pañcamaṁ vedam īśvaraḥ

Itihasa and Puranas are Fifth Veda.

Skanda Purana (Prabhasa Kanda 2.3–5):

pura tapas cacarogram amaranam pitamahah|

avirbhutas tato vedah sa sad anga pada kramah|

tatah puranam akhilam sarva sastra mayam dhruvam|

nirgatam brahmano vaktrat tasya bhedan nibodhata|

brahmam puranam prathamam ity adi -

The Prabhasa khanda of the Skanda Purana states,"In ancient times Brahma, the
grandfather of the immortal gods, executed severe penances. As a result, the Vedas
became manifest, along with their six supplements, their word-for-word glosses, and
their reordered texts. There then appeared the entire Purana, incorporating all
scriptures. The Purana is unchanging, consists of eternal sound, is auspicious, and
includes as many as one billion verses. It emanated from Lord Brahma’s mouth.
Listen to the description of its divisions: First is the Brahma Purana….”

Here Skanda Purana even mentions the names of the Mahapuranas.

Bhavishya Purana:

Kársanam ca pancamam vedam yan mahabharatam smrtam

“The Mahabharata of VedaVyasa is considered the fifth Veda”

The Bhavisya Purana calls the Mahabharata the Kársna Veda because it was written by
Krsna Dvaipayana Vyasa.

Srimad Bhagavatam 1.4.20 further indicates this:

ṛg-yajuḥ-sāmātharvākhyā

vedāś catvāra uddhṛtāḥ

itihāsa-purāṇaṁ ca

pañcamo veda ucyate

“The four divisions of the original sources of knowledge [the Vedas] were made
separately. But the historical facts and authentic stories mentioned in the Purāṇas
are called the fifth Veda”

3. The puranas are Vedic because it is so mentioned in the Itihasa (Mahabharata):

Mahabharata 12.340.11:

Vedan adhyapayamasa mahabharata-pancaman:

“He studied the Vedas and the Mahabharat, the fifth veda”

4. The Puranas are Vedic because they are chanted in Yajnas.

The following is recited during Brahma Yajna: “yad brahmananītihasa-puranani”

5. The names of the Puranas are identified in Skanda Purana and their
classification is also given in Matsya Purana:

pura tapas cacarogram amaranam pitamahah|

avirbhutas tato vedah sa sad anga pada kramah|

nitya sabda mayam punyam sata koti pravistaram||

nirgatam brahmano vaktrat tasya bhedan nibodhata|

brahmam puranam prathamam ity adi -

The Skanda Purana, as quoted earlier, after describing the emanation of the Vedas
and then the Puranas from Lord Brahma, immediately lists the Puranas, beginning
with the Brahma Purana.

Also the Matsya Purana lists all the 18 Maha-puranas and are classified as sattvic,
rajasic or tamasic.

6. There is no reason to accept the Vishnu Purana and reject the other because it
is nowhere mentioned in Shruti or Smrti.

However the list of all 18 Mahapuranas are mentioned in the Skanda Purana prabhasa
khanda and Matsya Purana.

The only explanation given to accept only Vishnu Purana is by faulted logic. Even a
logic which is not having fault is considered inferior to the Scriptural
statements. This is stated in Brahma Sutra 2.1.11 (Tarkoprathistanad - Scriptures
cannot be understood by mundane logic) and Brahma Sutra 1.1.3 (Sastrayonitvat
- Knowledge about Brahman can only be revealed through scriptures and not by
unnecessary logic)

7. Just like the vedas were memorised the Puranas were also memorised. The evidence
is from Smrti. Whereas there is no credible evidence to prove otherwise other than
mundane faulted logic.

Matsya Purana 53.8–9:

kalenagrahanam matva puranasya dvijottamah|

Vyasa-rupam aham krtva samharami yuge yuge||

“ Thinking that in the passing of time people cannot receive the puranas, I appear
in form of Vyasa and collate them yuga after yuga” (Yuga here refers to 1 divya
yuga)

Matsya Purana 53.9–11:

catur laksa pramanena dvapare dvapare sada |

tad astadasadha krtva bhur loke 'smin prabhasyate |

adyapy amartya loke tu sata koti pravistaram |

tad artho 'tra catur laksah sanksepena nivesitah ||

"The Purana consisting of four hundred thousand verses is divided into eighteen
parts, in which form it is passed on by oral recitation here on earth in every
Dvapara-yuga. Even today the original Purana of one billion verses exists in the
worlds of the demigods. The essential meaning of that Purana is contained in the
abridged version of four hundred thousand verses."
However, the contrary claim that only the vedas were orally recited and the Puranas
does not have any credible evidence from Shruti or Smrti.

8. Vyas simply means a compiler. That is true. However, the current Vyas is
Narayana himself. This is supported by Vishnu Purana. Opinions contrary to this is
not supported by any Sastra.

Vishnu Purana 3.4.2–5:

tato 'tra mat suto vyasa astavimsatime 'ntare

vedam ekam catus padam caturdha vyabhajat prabhuh

yathatra tena vai vyasta veda vyasena dhi mata

vedas tatha samastais tair vyasair anyais tatha maya

tad anenaiva vyasanam sakha bhedan dvijottama

catur yugesu -racitan samastesv avadharaya

krsna dvaipayanam vyasam viddhi narayanam prabhum

ko nyo hi bhuvi maitreya mahabharata krd bhavet

"Then, during the period of the twenty-eighth Manu, the great master, my son Vyasa,
divided the one Veda with four divisions into four separate books. In the same way
as he, the brilliant editor of the Vedas, arranged their entire text into various
books, so have other Vyasas in the past, including myself. O best of brahmanas, you
can understand that thus in each of the rotations of the cycle of four ages a
different Vyasa organizes the branches of the Vedas. But know that Krsna Dvaipayana
Vyasa is the Supreme Lord Narayana Himself. Who else on this earth, Maitreya, could
be the author of the Mahabharata?"

There are more quotes like this. However, this topic will be dealt more completely
in a seperate blog post.

Evidences to the contrary are not present in any Sastra, either Shruti or Smrti.
Hence by the power of Brahma Sutras 2.1.11 and 1.1.3 the opinion is defeated.

9 a. The puranas contain crazy explanations of creation(Sarga) etc. but so do the

One may object - “In the Vedas it is said that stones float, earth speaks and water
speaks. Therefore they are not reliable”

Answer to the objection: Brahma Sutra 2.1.27

Srutes tu sabda mulatvat

“The defects of the agent do not apply to Brahman because of scriptural statements,
which are the only proof concerning inconceivable subjects.”

This proves that there is no defects in the Vedas

Therefore, it is recommended in the Katha Upanishad 1.2.9:

Naisa tarkena matir apaneya prokta ‘nyenaiva sujnaya prestha

Therefore scriptural truths are given higher importance when mundane logic
contradicts them.

Not applying the same to the puranas is called artha-kukuti-nyaya (Half-hen Logic).

b. The puranas contain many contradictions.

It is our common experience that all people are not same. People have different
proclivities and inclinations.

According to the nature of Individuals, different Puranas are written for different
individuals to attain spiritual realisation. This is confirmed in Srimad Bhagavatam
11.14.3–8 and also in Matsya Purana already quoted above.

Opinions otherwise are not supported by any scriptural statements