Bhakti and Embodiment

by Barbara A Holdrege

  Thus the śākhās have been enumerated, and the subdivisions of the śākhās, their founders, and the reason for their division have been declared. The same divisions of the śākhās are established in all the manvantaras. The śruti derived from Prajāpati [Brahmā] is eternal (nitya). These [śākhās] are only its modifications (vikalpas).61

  Although the division of the Veda into śākhās in each Dvāpara Yuga serves to facilitate its preservation and understanding, it is inevitable, according to the Purāṇas, that in the course of time as Dvāpara Yuga passes into the final yuga, Kali Yuga, human intelligence and morality continue to decline and sin and corruption increasingly prevail, until eventually, by the end of Kali Yuga, knowledge of the Vedas is entirely lost from human consciousness. In this way at the end of each mahā-yuga the Vedas disappear from the earth. At the beginning of the subsequent mahā-yuga the ṛṣis again reintroduce the Vedic mantras by giving vocalized expression on the gross level of speech to the subtle reverberations of the eternal Veda.62

  Vedic Status of the Purāṇas

  The Purāṇas, having affirmed the transcendent authority of the Veda through their own distinctive formulations, seek to participate in that status by assimilating themselves to the Vedic mantras. The relationship of the Purāṇas with the Veda has been debated by both Indian and Western scholars, with some scholars arguing that there is a close connection between the two classes of scriptures and others arguing that there is little or no connection.63 The Purāṇas themselves claim direct continuity with the Veda and deploy a variety of strategies to substantiate their claims to Vedic status. The starting-point for Purāṇic reflections on the relationship between the Purāṇas and the Veda entails clarifying the characteristics that distinguish a Purāṇa and establishing their special status as a distinctive “Purāṇic canon” within the larger brahmanical corpus of śāstras.

  The Purāṇic Canon

  The category Purāṇa is one of the principal categories of smṛti texts within the brahmanical Sanskritic canon. However, as Giorgio Bonazzoli has demonstrated, within the larger brahmanical canon the Purāṇas also form their own distinctive “canon.” The Purāṇas utilize a number of mechanisms to delimit the Purāṇic canon and to establish the authenticity and authority of those texts that are included in the canon.64

  First, the Purāṇas delimit the Purāṇic canon by including in their own texts lists of the eighteen principal Purāṇas, or Mahāpurāṇas, as distinct from the eighteen minor Purāṇas, or Upapurāṇas.65 The standard lists given in the various Purāṇas include the Bhāgavata Purāṇa as the fifth of the eighteen principal Purāṇas: Brahma, Padma, Viṣṇu, Śiva, Bhāgavata, Nārada, Mārkaṇḍeya, Agni, Bhaviṣya, Brahmavaivarta, Liṅga, Varāha, Skanda, Vāmana, Kūrma, Matsya, Garuḍa, Brahmāṇḍa.66

  A second mechanism used by a number of the Purāṇas to standardize the Purāṇic canon involves including in their enumerations of the eighteen principal Purāṇas idealized representations of the number of ślokas (verses) contained in each Purāṇa, which do not correspond to the actual number of ślokas in the extant printed editions of the Purāṇas. The total number of ślokas in all the Purāṇas taken together is said to be 400,000 (four lakhs)—a number that figures prominently in Purāṇic theories of their own origins. Among these idealized representations, the Bhāgavata is consistently said to contain 18,000 ślokas.67

  A third strategy used by the Purāṇas to establish their canonical authority is to invoke the classical definition of a Purāṇa, which is said to be distinguished by five characteristics, pañca-lakṣaṇa: descriptions of primary creation (sarga) and of secondary creation (pratisarga); genealogies of gods, sages, and kings (vaṃśa); accounts of the intervals of Manu (manvantara); and histories of the royal dynasties (vaṃśānucarita).68 However, the extant Purāṇas contain much more than this definition suggests, and some give only minimal attention to these five topics.69 The pañca-lakṣaṇa definition nevertheless remains a sign of authenticity, and hence even those Purāṇas that do not conform to the definition make reference to the pañca-lakṣaṇa as the distinguishing marks of a Purāṇa.70

  A fourth mechanism used to establish the canonical authority of the Purāṇas is to ascribe their authorship to Vyāsa, one of the most renowned sages of the brahmanical tradition. As mentioned earlier, in addition to dividing the one Veda into four distinct Saṃhitās, this great ṛṣi is credited with accomplishing two additional literary feats: he composed the epic, the Mahābhārata, and he subsequently compiled and disseminated the eighteen principal Purāṇas. Purāṇic traditions concerning the role of Vyāsa in forming the Purāṇic canon will be discussed in a later section.

  The Bhāgavata Purāṇa follows the example of earlier Purāṇas and utilizes each of these four mechanisms in order to secure its canonical status as a Purāṇa. First, the Bhāgavata mentions the distinction between principal (mahat) and minor (alpa or kṣullaka) Purāṇas71 and makes reference twice to the standard list of eighteen principal Purāṇas in which it has a place.72 Second, the Bhāgavata includes an idealized list of the number of ślokas contained in each Purāṇa, in which it ascribes to itself and to the other seventeen Purāṇas the standard number of ślokas.73 The Bhāgavata Purāṇa fulfills the third criterion of authenticity by making explicit reference to the pañca-lakṣaṇa and dealing with all five topics. At the same time it expands upon the normative tradition by incorporating the five topics into an extended list of ten characteristics, daśa-lakṣaṇa, that distinguish a Purāṇa.74 Finally, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa builds on the Purāṇic traditions concerning the role of Vyāsa in forming the Purāṇic canon and attempts to surpass these earlier traditions, as we shall see, by establishing its own preeminent status as the last of the eighteen Purāṇas compiled by Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana Vyāsa, which constituted the culmination and fruition of his long career.

  The Bhāgavata Purāṇa thus accords with Purāṇic standards of authenticity in order to secure its place in the Purāṇic canon. In adopting the Purāṇic literary form, the Bhāgavata appears to have used the Viṣṇu Purāṇa in particular as its model. It follows the general scheme of topics found in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa while at the same time expanding upon and reconfiguring the scheme.75 More specifically, the life of Kṛṣṇa and his love-play with the gopīs, the cowmaidens of Vraja, which are celebrated in the tenth book of the Bhāgavata, appear to have been modeled after the gopī episodes in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa.76 The Prahlāda episode in the seventh book of the Bhāgavata similarly appears to have been modeled after the Viṣṇu Purāṇa’s accounts of Prahlāda.77 However, as discussed in Chapter 2, the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, in its portrayals of the devotion of the gopīs and of Prahlāda, introduces important innovations—in particular, in its representations of bhakti as a passionate and ecstatic intoxication, in contrast to the more intellectual and contemplative form of bhakti expressed in the Viṣṇu Purāṇa.78

  While the Bhāgavata Purāṇa thus conforms with the Purāṇic model, particularly as represented by the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, it at the same time distinguishes itself from the other Purāṇas in significant ways. First, it is the most unified and homogeneous of all the Purāṇas. M. Winternitz remarks that “it is the one Purāṇa which, more than any other of the others, bears the stamp of a unified composition, and deserves to be appreciated as a literary production on account of its language, style and metre.”79 Second, the homogeneity of the Bhāgavata is characterized by a consistent focus throughout the text on bhakti—and, moreover, a distinctive type of bhakti—in contrast to the more sporadic treatment of devotional concerns in the other Purāṇas. Third, the language and style of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa are different from those of the other Purāṇas. In contrast to the epic-Purāṇic vernacular Sanskrit that is generally employed in the Purāṇas,80 the Bhāgavata Purāṇa regularly uses Vedic grammatical forms and vocabulary, as I will discuss further when I turn to an analysis of the Bhāgavata’s ve
dacizing strategies.

  Purāṇas as the “Fifth Veda”

  The Purāṇas, while delimiting themselves as a distinctive Purāṇic canon, are at the same time concerned with elevating their status within the larger brahmanical canon by moving beyond their ascribed classification as smṛti texts and connecting themselves with śruti, the Veda. As members of the Purāṇic canon, the various Purāṇic texts tend to deploy a parallel set of strategies to assimilate the Purāṇas—as a general canonical category—to the Veda. Their claims on occasion extend beyond the limits of the Purāṇic canon to include the Itihāsas and Purāṇas together, as two categories of smṛti texts that aspire to śruti status.

  The Purāṇas at times simply assert their identity with the Veda, claiming for both the Itihāsas and the Purāṇas the status of the “fifth Veda” alongside the four Vedas—Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva—that constitute the core śruti texts.81 The Bhāgavata Purāṇa, for example, after relating how Vyāsa divided the one Veda into four, declares that the Itihāsas and Purāṇas are the fifth Veda:

  he four Vedas were separated out under the names Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva. And the Itihāsas and Purāṇas are said to be the fifth Veda.82

  The Purāṇas sometimes invoke the designation “Purāṇa-Veda” to assert their dual status as Purāṇas that form part of the Veda.83 They also declare themselves to be equal to the Veda (veda-samita, veda-sammita, or brahma-sammita)84 and the essence of the Veda (veda-sāra)85—claims that are repeatedly made by the Bhāgavata Purāṇa.86

  A number of the Purāṇas emphasize that knowledge of the Vedas is not sufficient but must be supplemented by knowledge of the Purāṇas.

  A brahmin who knows the four Vedas with their subsidiary limbs (aṅgas) and Upaniṣads but who does not know the Purāṇa is not truly learned. With both Itihāsa and Purāṇa one should supplement the Veda. The Veda is afraid of one with little knowledge.87

  Primordial Origins of the Purāṇas

  The Purāṇas seek to substantiate their claims to Vedic status by providing accounts of their origins that parallel Vedic accounts, both in their emphasis on primordial origins and in their focus on the sage Veda-Vyāsa’s role in the process of transmission. As a number of scholars have noted, the Purāṇas present two alternative traditions regarding their origins: (1) one tradition asserts the existence of a single primordial Purāṇa, which was subsequently condensed and divided by Vyāsa to form the eighteen Purāṇas, while (2) an alternative tradition makes reference to an original “Purāṇa Saṃhitā,” which was compiled by Vyāsa from previously existing materials and formed the basis of four Saṃhitās from which the eighteen Purāṇas were derived.88

  The seminal expression of the first tradition is found in the Matsya, Vāyu, Brahmāṇḍa, Skanda, Śiva, and Padma Purāṇas and claims that at the beginning of each cycle of creation a single primordial Purāṇa emerges from the creator Brahmā as the “first of all the śāstras,” even prior to the Vedas. This Purāṇa, consisting of one billion (one hundred crores) ślokas, is first recalled by Brahmā, after which the Vedas issue forth from his mouths. The Matsya Purāṇa declares:

  Of all the śāstras the Purāṇa was first recalled (smṛta) by Brahmā—eternal (nitya), consisting of śabda (śabda-maya), holy, having the extent of a hundred crores [of ślokas]. Afterwards the Vedas issued forth from his mouths and also Mīmāṃsā and the science of Nyāya together with the eightfold means of valid knowledge (pramāṇa).89

  This Purāṇic tradition emulates the Vedic paradigm by invoking the notion of an eternal, primordial Purāṇa that parallels the notion of an eternal, primordial Veda. At the same time this primordial Purāṇa surpasses the primordial Veda in terms of its chronological priority—as the “first of all the śāstras”—and in terms of its vast extent—one billion verses (Purāṇa) versus 100,000 verses (Veda).

  Accounts of how the eighteen Purāṇas are derived from this primordial Purāṇa are found in the Matsya, Skanda, Śiva, Nārada, Padma, and Liṅga Purāṇas. According to the variant of this tradition presented in the Matsya Purāṇa, it is through the agency of Vyāsa, a partial manifestation of Viṣṇu, that the one primordial Purāṇa—which as the “first of all the śāstras” was also the “source of all the śāstras”—came to assume its present earthly form as eighteen Purāṇas. Vyāsa, the sage responsible for dividing the primordial Veda of 100,000 verses into four Saṃhitās in every Dvāpara Yuga, is credited with performing a parallel task in every Dvāpara Yuga with respect to the Purāṇas: he condensed the primordial Purāṇa of one billion ślokas into an abridged edition of 400,000 (four lakhs) ślokas and subsequently divided the abridged edition into eighteen Purāṇas. Although it thus assumed a modified earthly form, the original Purāṇa of one billion ślokas continues to exist in the world of the gods (deva-loka).90

  The second tradition, which represents the Purāṇas as originating from an original “Purāṇa Saṃhitā,” is found in the Brahmāṇḍa, Vāyu, and Viṣṇu Purāṇas. This tradition relates how Vyāsa, after dividing the primordial Veda by separating out the four types of Vedic mantras to form the four Vedic Saṃhitās and the functions of their respective priests, then proceeded to compile the Purāṇa Saṃhitā from narratives (ākhyānas), episodes (upākhyānas), verses (gāthās), and other materials.91 When Vyāsa taught the four Vedic Saṃhitās to four of his disciples, respectively, he taught this Purāṇa Saṃhitā to his fifth disciple, Sūta Lomaharṣaṇa (or Romaharṣaṇa). Lomaharṣaṇa in turn taught it to his six disciples, three of whom compiled their own Saṃhitās. These three Saṃhitās, together with that of Lomaharṣaṇa, constitute the four principal (mūla or pūrva) Saṃhitās from which the eighteen Purāṇas were derived.92 The Vedic paradigm is clearly evident in these accounts of Vyāsa’s role in compiling, dividing, and disseminating the Purāṇa Saṃhitā as the fifth Veda alongside the four Vedic Saṃhitās.

  The Bhāgavata Purāṇa, following the example of earlier Purāṇas, invokes the Vedic model in its accounts of the primordial origins of the Purāṇas and of Vyāsa’s role in transmitting the texts. It does not, however, mention the Purāṇic tradition concerning the primordial Purāṇa that first emerges from the creator Brahmā, after which the Vedas issue forth from his mouths. Instead the Bhāgavata provides an alternative account in which the order of precedence is reversed: the four Vedas issue forth, respectively, from the four mouths of Brahmā, after which the Itihāsas and Purāṇas, as the fifth Veda, emerge from all four mouths together.

  From his eastern and other mouths he brought forth in succession the Vedas known as Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva.… Then the all-seeing lord [Brahmā] sent forth from all his mouths together the Itihāsas and Purāṇas as the fifth Veda.93

  While chronological precedence is thus ascribed to the Vedas, the ontological precedence of the Purāṇas is implied by the image of Brahmā sending forth the fifth Veda from all four of his mouths simultaneously, in contrast to the emergence of each of the four Vedas from only one of his mouths.

  The Bhāgavata Purāṇa also includes a number of traditions that emphasize the role of Kṛṣṇa Dvaipāyana Vyāsa in dividing the one Veda into four Saṃhitās in Dvāpara Yuga and in transmitting the four Vedas along with the fifth Veda—Itihāsas and Purāṇas—to his disciples.94 One account emphasizes the parallels in the process of transmission of the Vedas and the Purāṇas and in this context includes a variant of the Purāṇic tradition concerning the Purāṇa Saṃhitās. Just as Vyāsa divided the one Veda into four Saṃhitās, which he transmitted to his four main disciples and their respective lineages, so he taught the Purāṇas, as the fifth Veda, to his fifth disciple, Romaharṣaṇa, who in turn transmitted four original (mūla) Purāṇa Saṃhitās to his disciples.95 The account concludes with a discussion of the ten characteristics, daśa-lakṣaṇa, that distinguish a Purāṇa, followed by an enumeration of the eighteen Purāṇas that display these characteristics.96

&n
bsp; Purāṇas as Accessible Vedas

  While in their claims to primordial origins the Purāṇas emulate the paradigmatic Veda, in their earthly status, as concrete texts transmitted in oral and written form, they diverge from the model of the Vedic Saṃhitās by serving as what we might term “accessible Vedas.”

  The Purāṇa-Vedas assume the role of accessible Vedas in two interrelated senses: first, they provide a socially inclusive model of scripture that is in principle accessible to people at all levels of the socioreligious hierarchy; and, second, they make the meaning of the Vedas accessible by interpreting and elaborating the Vedic teachings in terms that can be understood by the general populace. In contrast to the Vedic Saṃhitās, which are socially circumscribed scriptures that are restricted to male members of the three “twice-born” varṇas (social classes)—brahmins (priests), kṣatriyas (kings and warriors), and vaiśyas (merchants, agriculturalists, and artisans)—the Purāṇas are socially inclusive scriptures that are intended for people of all social classes, including śūdras (servants) and women.97 The Purāṇas represent themselves as the Veda of the general populace, complementing and supplementing the Vedic Saṃhitās by incorporating popular devotional teachings alongside traditional Vedic teachings.

  The Purāṇas declare themselves the repositories of efficacious mantras, comparable in power to the Vedic mantras, and regularly proclaim the fruits (phala) of reciting (root paṭh) a Purāṇa and of hearing (root śru) such recitations. In their perspectives on recitation the Purāṇas depart from the Vedic model in important ways. One of the most significant departures is that whereas the Vedic Saṃhitās may be recited and heard only by male members of the three twice-born varṇas, Purāṇic recitations are intended for the general populace and can therefore be heard by marginalized groups who are excluded from hearing Vedic recitations, in particular śūdras and women. In addition, the Purāṇas emphasize not only the power of mantra but the power of sacred narrative as well. In contrast to recitations of the Vedic Saṃhitās, which focus almost exclusively on śabda, on verbatim reproduction of the Vedic sounds, in Purāṇic recitations both śabda and artha, sound and meaning, are important, for the content of the texts is intended to convey important teachings to the general populace. As Thomas Coburn has emphasized, the Purāṇas exemplify the “didactic” function of smṛti texts, which are intended above all to convey discursive meaning to an audience, in contrast to the “sacramental” function of śruti texts, the sounds of which must be accurately reproduced irrespective of whether their discursive meaning is understood.98 The significance of this synthesis of śabda and artha, sound and meaning, in Purāṇic constructions of scripture has also been emphasized by C. Mackenzie Brown: