2

Wikipedia on “Puranas” have shown classification of the Mahapuranas on the basis of the three gunas of Sat, Rajo and Tamo with the caveat “Scholars consider the Sattva-Rajas-Tamas classification as "entirely fanciful" and there is nothing in each text that actually justifies this classification.”

Sattva ("truth") : Vishnu Purana, Bhagavata Purana, Naradeya Purana, Garuda Purana, Padma Purana, Varaha Purana

Rajas ("passion"): Brahmanda Purana, Brahma Vaivarta Purana, Markandeya Purana, Bhavishya Purana, Vamana Purana, Brahma Purana

Tamas ("ignorance"): Matsya Purana, Kurma purana, Linga Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana, Agni Purana

[Since Wikipedia is not the final word on our Puranas, hence this question]

My question is, “Are there any commentaries, shrutis or other scriptural references for this classification?”

  • Bhagavad Gita has discussed sattva, rajas, tamas in great details. According to that interpretation, whatever is mentioned in wikipedia, has to be scrapped. – iammilind Oct 2 '17 at 7:01
  • 1
  • 1
    This classification is spurious, Classification has gone to extent of saying Purported Tamasic Puranas such as Shiva Purana leads to Hell. See What is the purpose of tamasic purana if it leads to hell? – The Destroyer Oct 2 '17 at 8:19
  • 1
    This is a false classification. – user1195 Oct 2 '17 at 10:30
  • 1
    The division of the Puranas into the sattvic ones and the tamasic ones is not spurious but is genuine, and everyone can see it easily if he knows Vedanta and teaching of the Sruti (Upanishads, etc). Not long ago we have seen one such example of the verses from one Purana called Devi Bhagavata that teaches tamasic verses and doctrines, see how I explained it at hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/18691/… Those verses are contrary to the teaching of Vedanta, Sruti and sattvic Puranas. – brahma jijnasa Oct 3 '17 at 4:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .