3

1) Isha upanishad is only text which is samhita and upanishad both

2) Isha upanishad is considered the first even among the principal upanishads


Now, If I decide to consider only Isha upanishad as the only infallible canonical pramana (shabda) , and though I consider others parts of veda, or ramayana or mahabharat or gita etc etc in high respect; but do not consider them as infallible(or, fallble) pramana. that is, I do not consider other samhitas(other than Isha) of vedas as pramana, though I do not disrespect the other samhitas ). I also do not consider any other religion's text like bible,torah,quran etc as pramana.

That is, I only and only consider Isha upanishad as the only canonical infallible pramana text for myself and my family. Then whether I am a scripturally valid hindu / sanatani or not (considering that I do not consider other parts of veda/veda samhitas as pramana, other than Isha) ?

note: please do not mark/close this crucial question, as duplicate of any other question

  • That is not the question. Arya Samaj accept only samhitas part of vedas as pramana; but Lingayat respect vedas, but do not use it as pramanas. So if I decided to only use Isha upanishad as pramana, (just for my own reasons of why) , then whether it will be considered Hindu/Sanatani or not? – zaxebo1 Apr 17 '18 at 16:39
  • Is there any reason for not considering other Samhitas as Shabda Pramana? We know that Rigveda is believed to be very prior or odest scripture of Sanatan Dharma, so, denying the validity of it might not be a good idea – Paṇḍyā Apr 17 '18 at 16:39
  • Yes technically only isha can be said as shruti . others not. Its also discussed before on this forum. – Rakesh Joshi Apr 17 '18 at 21:55
  • @zaxebo1 I tried to answer your question with the taking information from credible sources. Please let me know if there is any confusion or you need more information – Tej Apr 21 '18 at 3:00
  • Thanks for trying to answer. I added my review comments directly below your answer – zaxebo1 Apr 22 '18 at 17:58
1
+50

First of all let us understand who is a sanatani.

One who believes in Vedas and performs the karma mentioned in them and purifies his consciousness(i.e attains chitta suddhi). Purification of consciousness is to achieve brahma gnana which will give us the status of Jeevan mukta.

Now on to our next question. Can we just perform karma alone and not long for gnana?

The answer to this question is a resounding no from sri krishna himself

The misguided ones who delight in the melodious chanting of the Veda without understanding the real purpose of the Vedas think, O Arjuna, as if there is nothing else in the Vedas except the rituals for the sole purpose of obtaining heavenly enjoyment. (2.42)

Now another question to ask ourselves is can we not perform karma and long for gnana alone?

Again the answer to this is a resounding no from sri krishna

One does not attain freedom from the bondage of Karma by merely abstaining from work. No one attains perfection by merely giving up work, because no one can remain actionless even for a moment. Everyone is driven to action helplessly indeed by the forces of Nature.(3.04-05)

So based on our questions and answers by sri krishna(paramatman) to us we need to attain a fine balance between karma and gnana to become jeevan mukta.

Now to the main question. Will we be called a sanatani if we follow only Isha upanishad and respect other texts without doubts?

Yes you will be a sanatani. The following points will try to correlate the text in Bhagavad geetha with Isha upanishad.

Isha upanishad mentions that the way to escape the state of doing works is through work itself

Let a man wish to live a hundred years here (in this body) performing works; thus will an evil deed not cling to thee, while thou art a man; there is no other way but this by which to escape the influence of works.

A person performing karmas with intention of getting the result will have positive output attached to him which will help him in this life or further lives. If he performs karma with intention of purifying his consciousness then the result of work will not get attached to the person.

Isha upanishad explains the gana that we receive as following

When to a man who understands, the Self has become all things, what sorrow, what trouble can there be to him who once beheld that unity?

The above paragraph mentions the state that we will be in once we attain one true knowledge and become Jeevanmukta.

So even if we hold on to one principle our whole life and it is in sync with what parabrahma asks us to to do to become jeevan muktha then you are sanatani without any grain of doubt.

Respecting different thought processes and being tolerant towards different things are always ingrained in us sanatanis. So there is no need to demean any other text that does not confirm to our beliefs. Listening or reading it and being happy in amazement that how many ways that are there to understand of the glory of lord is the ultimate aim of living in this world.

Developing the view of vasudaika kutumbam and everyone as brothers and sisters will help us to put aside our differences and help each other to reach the ultimate state of being jeevan mukta.

source for Gita : Bhagavad geetha

source for Isha upanishad: Isha upanishad

  • this answer has absolutely no relation with the question. Because in question, it is specifically said that no scripture is being disrespected, it is just that few of them are not hold as shabd pramana(for ex: see hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/19695/… for understanding of pramana for different philosophical sects. Pramana is about epistemological theories. We are not discussing about karma, gyana , tolerance etc. – zaxebo1 Apr 22 '18 at 17:50
  • When lingayatas (a hindu sect) do not hold vedas as pramana, then they do not become disrespectful of it, it is just that they do not hold it as "infallible(in which there is no mistake possible) authority" for their theories derivation. And without vedas as authority, still lingayat's talk about karma and gyan both. So, my question is about epistemological canonicalness authority , not about tolerance/demaning any text. My question is about source for theory of proof of knowledge. see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pramana also see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology – zaxebo1 Apr 22 '18 at 17:59
  • @zaxebo1 What I tried to answer is when you will be considered a sanatani as per our scriptures and if you follow Isha upanishad alone then why you would still be sanatani. The under current message of answer is pointing towards the fact that you will be a sanatani if you follow Isha upanishad – Tej Apr 22 '18 at 23:45
  • okay. just try to add just "few" more lines/quotations/reference "regarding your main current message(as you mentioned in your above comment)", and i will immediately award you the point – zaxebo1 Apr 23 '18 at 2:32
  • @zaxebo1 Sorry couldn't find any exact reference to support that main claim. I hope someone else comes up with more advanced version of answer to clarify your doubts. – Tej Apr 23 '18 at 4:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .