4

I know that Vedas are Sruti, including its embedded texts - Samhitas, Aranyakas, Brahmanas and Upanishads. And also that each Upanishad is linked to each Veda. Tell me, if Upanishads are Sruti, then so must be the "sectarian" ones like Vasudeva, Narayana, Krishna, Garuda, etc, which are the Vaishnava Upanishads and also Shaiva Upanishads, viz. Jabali, Rudraksha, Kaivalya, Dakshinamurti etc.

That means that they are "seen" or "heard" or "perceived" by Sages. Now please tell me, that if this is true, doesn't it instantly prove that Vishnu and Shiva are equal (in essence), because of the authority of Sruti texts, and since there is both a Shaiva and Vaishnava Upanishad (many more Yoga, Sannyasa etc.) embedded to each Veda?

Also if its true then it should prove in a way that Shaivism, Vaishnavism, Shaktism, Yoga are all valid paths to Moksha as they are proclaimed to be equal, hence....Advaita. Also these Upanishads claim Brahman to be either equal to Shiva (in Shaiva Upanishads) or Vishnu (in Vaishnava Upanishads).

4
  • 5
    Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti - Rigveda 1.164.46
    – Pandya
    Commented Jan 10, 2018 at 17:04
  • 1
    Most of.later day.upanishad are ordinary texts i.e even below smriti and puranas. Upanishad are technically not shruti. Please see hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/18989/7853 Commented Jan 10, 2018 at 22:21
  • 3
    Yes. Vishnu and Shiva and Brahma are equal. Devi Bhagavati Herself has said that "He who will differentiate between Shiva, Vishnu, Brahma, will go to hell without doubt". And Devi, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Ganesha, all are supreme Brahman. And actually they are one, but the great delusion causes to see them separated.
    – user12826
    Commented Jan 11, 2018 at 6:13
  • @user12826: "Devi Bhagavati Herself has said that "He who will differentiate between Shiva, Vishnu, Brahma, will go to hell without doubt" - please give reference ?
    – zaxebo1
    Commented May 6, 2018 at 12:16

2 Answers 2

1

Not every text claiming to be an upaniShat is accepted as such universally. An extreme counter-example would be allopaniShat. For that matter, pAncharAtrika-s claim that some of their samhitA-s are remnants of lost shruti.

That said, universally accepted shruti-s are quite abundant in cases where a diverse set of deities are adored as the ultimate - so you don't really need recognition of these sectarian upaniShats as shruti to make the point you're trying to make. That viShNu supremacy and such ideologies stand despite that should tell us about their resilience to such (superficial?) challenges.

1

The answer to this would depend on the perspective. From an academic perspective, sure most of the minor upanishads are later compositions. However, not so from a traditional viewpoint.

Puranas mention the existence of 100+ upanishads.

शौनकः पिप्पलादश्च मुञ्जकेशादयोऽपरे ।२७१.००९ मन्त्राणामयुतं षष्टिशतञ्चोपनिषच्छतं ॥२७१.००९ व्यासरूपी स भगवान् शाखाभेदाद्यकारयत् ।२७१.०१० शाखाभेदादयो विष्णुरितिहासः पुराणकं ॥२७१.०१०

Sumantu, Jājali Ślokāyani, Śaunaka, Pippalāda, Muñjakeśa and others (are those who represent the branches) of Atharva (veda). The Lord (Viṣṇu) in the form of (sage) Vyāsa divided the ten thousand and six hundred hymns and one hundred Upaniṣads into different recensions. (Lord) Viṣṇu also made the divisions of the Epics and Purāṇas.

~ Agni Puran 271.8–10

Furthermore, Among traditional acharyas we have-

  1. Adi Shankaracharya who referenced various 'minor' Upanishads such as Narayana, Varaha, Jabala, Subala, Kaivalya, Katharudra,Atmabodha,Paingala.

  2. Vaisnavacharyas such as Ramanujacharya citing from Subala, Mudgala, Maha, Narayana, Narayana Atharvasirsa, Vasudeva, upanishads.

  3. Shaivacharyas such as Sripati panditaradhya quoting Jabala, Sharabha, Atharvashikha, Kaivalya, Sivasankalpa, Rudra Atharvasirsa

  4. Shaktacharays such as Bhaskararaya commenting on Kalika, Kaula, Bavricha, Tripura Tapini upanishads.

  5. Smarta acharyas such as-

I. sri narayashrama who commented on several of the samanya upanishads such as Tejobindu, Garbhopanishad,Brahmopanishad alongside commenting on even some of the 'secterian ' ones such as Atharvashikha,Nilarudra, Ramapurva tapaniya etc.

II. Sri Vidyaranya mahaswamin who cited several of the minor upanishads such as the muktikopanishad, pancha brahmopanishad etc.

III.Then there's sri Upanishad Brahmayogin who has written a commentary on all 108 Upanishads of the muktika canon.

All of the above acharyas have held their respective 'minor' upanishads as shruti.

Hence, as per the traditional viewpoints, even the minor upanishads, 'secterian' or not come under shruti only.

You must log in to answer this question.