Are 18 Puranas authentic scriptures of Vedic religion?

 

      After the decline of Vedic religion, Puranic religion is prevalent in India today, where people give importance to obscene Puranas like Bhagwat etc. And declare it as the authorized book of Sanatan Dharma.

In fact, these 18 Puranas and Upapuranas have no importance in Sanatan Vedic Dharma. This is just a fantasy created by fools. But Puranic spreads false propaganda by presenting falsehoods and half-truths. Today we respond to this false propaganda.

Let me give an example.

"मा पा॑प॒त्वाय॑ नो न॒रेन्द्रा॑ग्नी॒ माभिश॑स्तये । मा नो॑ रीरधतं नि॒दे ॥"(Rigveda 7/94/3) The word Narendra is there in this mantra Now, if someone interprets the meaning of the word Narendra as the current Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, will it be the correct meaning? not at all. Because Vedas are there before P.M. Modi. His name is not in the Vedas, but on the basis of the word Narendra which appears in the Vedas, he has been named 'Narendra'.

The same thing is true for the word Purana which appears in the Vedas. There is no description of fake 18 Puranas in the Vedas, but when the fools composed fake 18 Puranas, they took the word Purana from the Vedas and named their book.

"Purana" words in the mantras of Atharvaveda :

ऋचः सामानि च्छन्दांसि पुराणं यजुषा सह। उच्छिष्टाज्जज्ञिरे सर्वे दिवि देवा दिविश्रितः ॥(AtharvaVeda 11.7.24)

तमि॑तिहा॒सश्च॑पुरा॒णं च॒ गाथा॑श्च नाराशं॒सीश्चा॑नु॒व्यचलन् (Atharvaveda 15.6.11)

इ॑तिहा॒सस्य॑ च॒वै स पु॑रा॒णस्य॑ च॒ गाथा॑नां च नाराशं॒सीनां॑ च प्रि॒यं धाम॑ भवति॒ य ए॒वं वेद॑॥(Atharvaveda 15.6.12)

To prove the Puranas as being based on the Vedas, evidence of these Veda mantras is generally given. Through the word Purana in these Veda mantras, an attempt is made to prove that Ashtadasha Purana is also described in the Vedas.

 It seems that he has not even read the Vedic commentaries made by his Puranists. Acharya Sayana has explained the meaning of words like Itihaas, Purana, Narasanshi, Gatha etc in his Rig Veda Bhasya Bhumika if Puranists had seen it once then they would not have made this foolish blabbering.

Rigveda Bhasya Bhumika of Acharaya Sayana (page no-66)

According to Acharya Sayana, the meaning of word Purana which appears in the Vedas is not from 18 fake purana, but the description of the origin and primary state of the universe in the Vedas is indicative of mantras. That is why he gave the example of Taittiriya Brahmin in the example of the word Purana. According to Sanatan Dharma, the mantras which describe the initial state of the world in Nasadiya Sukta, Purusha sukta etc are called as Purana.

 Sayana has explained the meaning of the words Gatha, Narashansi, etc. in the above mantra as various types of mantras in the Vedas. Therefore, according to the context, the meaning of the word Purana is also taken to be Veda Mantra.

 In this way the Pauraniks are babble without reading the meanings of their Pauranik Acharyas of their opinion and make the foolish attempt to prove the 18 Puranas from the Vedas.

Teitriya Aranyaka (2/9)

Even in Taittiriya Aranyaka, the words Gatha, Narashansi, Purana should be interpreted as above.

Is In the Chandogya Upanishad Puranas are called 5th Veda?

What can we say about the stupidity of those who make this claim? Certainly he has zero knowledge of Sanskrit. There is no word 'Itihas' and 'Puraan' in Chandogya Upanishad, but there the word 'Puraan' is an adjective of 'History' but not a particular book name.

नाम वा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेद आथर्वणश्चतुर्थ इतिहासपुराणः पञ्चमो वेदानां वेदः पित्र्यो राशिर्दैवो निधिर्वाकोवाक्यमेकायनं देवविद्या ब्रह्मविद्या भूतविद्या क्षत्रविद्या नक्षत्रविद्या सर्पदेवजनविद्या नामैवैतन्नामोपास्स्वेति ॥ ७.१.४ ॥

In this mantra, the word Purana is in the Pulinga, whereas the word Purana used in the Bhagavata Purana is in the Napunsak linga. Even in Mantra of Chandogya upnishad (7.1.2), 'Itihaspuranam' is one word and is in Second Vibhakti.Here also the word Purana is an adjective of history not a noun.

At least The Pauranik People could have seen the commentary of their Acharya Shankar here!

Adi guru Shankaracharya has also considered Itihasa and Purana as one and has given the example of the historical book Mahabharata and not of any Purana books like Bhagwat purana matashya purana etc.

 Which proves that the word Purana here is an adjective of history and not an independent word.

The word "Purana" in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad :

स यथाऽऽर्द्रैधाग्नेरभ्याहितात्पृथग्धूमा विनिश्चरन्त्येव वा अरेऽस्य महतो भूतस्य निश्वसितमेतद्यदृग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्वाङ्गिरस इतिहासः पुराणं विद्या उपनिषदः श्लोकाः सूत्राण्यनुव्याख्यानानि व्याख्यानन्यस्यैवैतानि सर्वाणि निश्वसितानि॥ ( Brihadaaranyak upnishad 2/4/10)

This same mantra is also mentioned in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (4.1.2). There is word Purana in it, according to Pauraniks its meaning is 18 Puranas.At least they should have seen their commentary of Adi Shankaracharya.

 Adi Guru Shankaracharya here also did not mean the 18 Puranas by Itihas Purana, but here by Itihas Purana he meant the description of the primary stage of creation in Brahmin texts and Vedas.

conclusion : All this evidence proves that the names of these 18 fake Puranas are nowhere in the Vedic texts. And these 18 fake Puranas do not have any importance even in Sanatan Dharma. Our real religious scriptures are Vedas, Upanishads, Darshan etc. We should glorify him only.