I recently bought the Devi-Bhagavata purana from amazon. It has been translated into English by Swami Vijnanananda wich was a direct disciple from Ramakrishna but i have doubts that it is correct. I will give 2 examples. If the translation is true than how can Shaktas follow it?
example 1 from chapter 3
18-24. At every Manvantara, in each Dvâpara Yuga, Veda Vyâsa expounds the Purânas
duly to preserve the religion. Veda Vyâsa is no other person than Visnu Himself; He, in the
form of Veda Vyâsa, divides the (one) Veda into four parts, in every Dvâpara Yuga, for the
good of the world. The Brahmânas of the Kali age are shortlived and their intellect (Buddhi)
is not sharp; they cannot realise the meaning after studying the Vedas; knowing this in every
Dvâpara Yuga Bhagavân expounds the holy Purâna Samhitas. The more so because
women, S’udras, and the lower Dvijas are not entitled to hear the Vedas; for their good, the
Purânas have been composed.
example 2 from chapter 4
15-27. There is no prospect in the after birth of the sonless; never, never will Heaven be his.
Without son, there is none other who can be of help in the next world. Thus in the Dharma
S’âstras, Manu and other Munis declare that the man who has sons goes to Heaven and the
sonless one can never go to Heaven. The man possessing a son is entitled to the Heavenly
pleasures can be vividly seen, rather than imagined. The man with son is freed from sins;
this is the word of the Vedas. The sonless man becomes very much distressed even at the
time of death and while lying on bed that is ground at that time, mournfully thinks. “This all
my vast wealth, various things, this my beautiful house, who will enjoy all these?”
I've heard various conflicting theories about what "the original Purana" was (I think Vishnu Purana is one of the strong candidates?) but I don't know much about the evidence presented for each theory. For those of you who are familiar with Sri Ramanujacarya ji's writings, is it true he didn't quote from Srimad Bhagavatam? If so, why or why not would that suggest that this great Purana wasn't written by that time?
I'm primarily interested in disinterested arguments from history backed up by evidence, rather than traditional beliefs and word-of-mouth, though all perspectives are welcome.
I was curious about the hype around Akshay Tritiya and buying gold and found out that it’s a pure marketing gimmick played out by the gold vendors and businessmen. Nowhere it’s written that it’s auspicious to buy gold on AkshayTritiya on the contrary it’s forbidden to do 5 things on AkshayTritiya as well as every day if possible (but the sins get multiplied if carried out on this day as explained by Parikshit Maharaj placing Kali in the 5 places in Srimad Bhagavata Purana, 1st Skandha)
Were considered even more greater sins on this auspicious day of birth of Parasurama, 6th Avatar of Lord Vishnu
The gold merchants and traders started spreading fake news about the unlimited or un-diminished(Akshaya) returns if gold is purchased on this day, they also started attributing Gold to Goddess Lakshmi as a pure marketing gimmick whereas it was mentioned in Puranas that Goddess of Wealth Lakshmi is only in the following places/things:
The translator of both the volumes is S Subba Rau
Volume 1(Skandhas 1-7): https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.232200
Volume 2(Skandhas 8-12): https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.273815
yatha daridrah kripanah
Just as a miserly, poverty-stricken person overly absorbed in family life suffers because he cannot control his senses, the fish swimming in the shallow water had to suffer the heat of the autumn sun.
sarva-svam jalada hitva
yatha tyaktaishanah santa
The clouds, having given up all they possessed, shone forth with purified effulgence, just like peaceful sages who have given up all material desires and are thus free of all sinful propensities.
These verses were from a section describing autumn in the village of Vrindavana.