[Advaita-l] paJNchAyatana pUja, purANas and apaurushEyatva

[Annapureddy Siddhartha Reddy]

praNAm.h all,
         I just wanted to summarize the discussion on paJNchAyatana pUja and
the deities that can be worshipped (Thanks to Abhishekji for pointing these
out):
-- upAsana is done to become one with the upAsya. This rules out figures
like the budhda, Jesus Christ, rAghavEndra svAmi etc. because they do not
subscribe to advaita vEdAnta, and a traditional advaitin might see no reason
to have them as an iShTa dEvata.
-- One can say that the budhda could be worshipped because the purANas say
he is an incarnation of viShNu. But, given that the purANas are subordinate
to shruti (in addition to the above reason), this becomes unacceptable.

Still the following questions remain:
-- How do we interpret the episodes of the itihAsas in accordance with
advaita vEdAnta? Please see the following post towards the end for the
questions:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-September/018158.html

Another question on apaurushEyatva:
-- What is the earliest known formulation of the concept of apaurushEyatva
in the sense of not being authored even by Ishvara?

>From Vidyasankarji's excellent post here:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/1996-July/005323.html
we know that the naiyyAyikas held the notion of Ishvara being the author of
the vEdas. It seemed from the article that the pUrva mImAmsakas were the
first to formulate the theory of apaurushEyatva. Shrishaji's article here:
http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2006-January/016522.html
says that Patanjali (presumably in his mahAbhAShya) mentions that the
teachers of a shAkha are different from the mantra draShTas, and these
themselves should not be taken to be the authors. Could someone explicate on
these references? Thanks a bunch.

A.Siddhartha.