(e.g. Vis.n.u,Bha ̄gavata) or S ́aiva (e.g. S ́iva), but these are in the minority. The
Matsyahas passages of Vais.n.ava and S ́aiva tendency in roughly equal propor-
tions; the Va ̄manahas different portions centered upon Vis.n.u, S ́iva, and Devı ̄; the
Ku ̄rma, as has already been noted, shows traces of both Pa ̄ñcara ̄tra and Pa ̄s ́upata
shaping; the Brahmamay be centered upon the worship of Kr.s.n.a in Orissa as
Jaganna ̄tha, but there are also passages which praise Su ̄ rya and his temple at
Kon.arka, and S ́iva, worshipped at Eka ̄mra; the inclusion of the Devı ̄ma ̄ha ̄tmyain
theMa ̄rkan.d.eyasuggests a S ́a ̄kta tendency, but apart from this there is little to
connect this Pura ̄n.a with any divinity.
It may be that the classification of the Pura ̄n.as under the heading of the three
gun.aswas never meant to affiliate them with the Great Gods ofbhakti.Just as the
number 18 may have been intended to connect them with the Maha ̄bha ̄rata, so
the division into three may have been a way of suggesting that the Pura ̄n.as are
part of the basic fabric of the cosmos, just as the gun.asare, and just as much
linked as the gun.asare with its basic processes (rajas: creation; sattva: mainte-
nance;tamas: destruction). Each one embodies its own version of the bra ̄hman.ic
world-view to which they all subscribe.
The Religious World-view of the Pura ̄n.as
When used as an adjective, the word pura ̄n.ameans “old.” As a noun it can mean
a past event, or a story of past events. Therefore the Pura ̄n.as have sometimes
been regarded as traditional Indian history, compiled and transmitted in order
to preserve a record of the past. Nevertheless, the general consensus of schol-
arly opinion has always been that the motives behind the Pura ̄n.as’ composition
were religious and ideological rather than antiquarian or historical. They are
interested in the past, not for its own sake but as a repository of values for the
present and future. They are purveyors of a comprehensive religious world-view
rather than of historical information, a world-view which reflects both the
bra ̄hman.ic ideology which shaped their development and the popular elements
which they incorporated (cf. Brockington 1987). The features of this world-view
are not identical in all the Pura ̄n.as, even if “all” is restricted only to the
Eighteen. But there is enough consistency of viewpoint among them to allow
one to sketch out a coherent picture, provided that one remembers that this is a
simplified outline.
The Pura ̄n.ic cosmos has been aptly described by Madeleine Biardeau as “the
universe ofbhakti” (l’univers de labhakti, Biardeau 1981: 149, 172). By this she
means a cosmos in which the elements of the Vedic world-view have been
rearranged so as to be transformed into a universe where one supreme God is
the overarching Reality, the ultimate object of all worship. This God’s name may
be Vis.n.u, S ́iva, or Devı ̄, but the role and status are the same whatever the name:
this is the God who is both the all-containing, all-pervading Reality in which
138 freda matchett