Hidden Secrets of Bhagawad Gita Revealed -1


Article Contents

I bow to Lord Ganesha the remover of all obstacles, I bow to Goddess of learning Saraswati, who is my mother, seeking her blessings to gain enough reasoning and intelligence, and I bow to the sages Nara and Narayana – the eternal devotees of Lord Shiva, and seek their blessings to reveal hidden truths of Bhagawad Gita through this work of mine. I pray to my mother Uma who bestowed Brahmavidya on Indra, and I bow my head unto my father Shiva who is the source of all knowledge as Dakshinamurti.


Let me begin this article with a quotation by the great poet Kalidasa, which very much aptly applies to the present article’s context.

“purāṇamityeva na sādhu sarvaṃ nacāpi kāvyaṃ navamityavaryaṃ ।
santaḥ parīkṣyābhinavat bhajante mūḍhaḥ parapratyanaiikabuddhiḥ |
|” (vide ‘mālavikāgnimitram’ authored by mahākavi kālidāsa)
“Nothing need to be justified just because it is mentioned in a Purana; and novel ideas of reasoning need not be rejected just because of their recent origin. The discerning people apply the test of logic before accepting anything, but the idiot simply follows things just because there were precedents”.

In this article I would reveal the Hidden Secrets of Bhagavad Gita! Well, before we begin, let me define myself here to set the right expectations. Well, in computer world we have two terminologies viz., ‘Hacker’ and ‘Cracker’. These are the most misunderstood terminologies in the world of computer security. Hacker is a term coined by “Steven levy” in his book “Heroes of the Computer Revolution”, where he had talked in detail about the ‘hacker culture and ethics’. A hacker and a cracker both intrude / break into systems by breaking the enforced security through any available backdoor; but a hackers breaks into it to find all loopholes and then they devise solutions to fix them, whereas a cracker enters only to bring destruction and loss to the owner. There is a thin line difference between these two persons, where the former is a hero whereas the latter stands as a villain; but mostly the ignorant masses, mistakes hackers as villains.

The same difference lies in between a “Critic” and an “Abuser” also! I would like to make it clear in the beginning itself that I may sometimes be a critic, a hacker of Hinduism scriptures. I do not blindly follow what others have said. I get insights from within and I truly feel that it is Mahadeva who teaches me from within. Therefore following those insights I do my own research without digressing away from ‘saMpradAya (tradition)’ and keeping myself firmly grounded in the scriptures given by the great sages, I dig out the hidden truths which have never been revealed before. I like to show, what I am able to see. In that process while following the pointers given by my lord via the inner voice, I analyze scriptures with the power of my three tools viz., ‘Logic’, ‘Reasoning’ and ‘Proof by Contradiction’ while wielding them in the light of scriptures. Well, many a times in my reasoning I do some criticism which might irritate the blind followers out there; but one who reads my points as criticism and not as abuse, that man can really understand the reality that I try to reveal. In this current work on ‘Hacking into Bhagawad Gita’ to reveal certain truths; I have again adopted the same style, which in no way intends to hurt any true devotee of Krishna. Vasudeva is a great god, but incorrect interpretations of Gita and Krishna have actually damaged the fabric of our Sanatana Dharma. So, requesting the readers to read my work with an open mind in order to understand the real secrets hidden in Bhagawad Gita.

Bhagwad Gita is a great Vedantic text which has been passed to us by Lord Sri Krishna. Gita is the essence of all the Upanishads and is a ‘Moksha Shastra’ (a scripture which shows us the path towards liberation). It would not be an exaggeration if i say that Bhagwad Gita is the most misinterpreted scripture as well. Instead of treating it as a book of Vedantic knowledge, it is being considered as a book of supremacy talk. It looks funny to see that people have formed groups / organizations / institutions based on this Bhagwad Gita considering it as a text of Supremacy discussion. When Sri krishna says, “I am Supreme”, people foolishly interpreted it as ‘Sri Krishna is Supreme’, and consequently they created many FAKE and BOGUS samhitas, interpolated many scriptures, and purposely mistranslated many sections in order to call all other Vedic, Aitihasic, and Pouranic super-powers as demi-gods and made them the servants of Krishna – the so called ‘supreme personality of Godhead’. But the fact is – Vedas and Vedanta recognize only one Supreme entity called – ‘Brahman’ which is non-dual in nature. Vedanta says that the ‘self (Atman)’ of every being is verily the same Brahman and hence there is nothing superior than ‘Self’. Therefore when Krishna said, “I am Supreme”, it actually means ‘I (the ‘Self’) is Supreme’, and it doesn’t mean in anyway that ‘Krishna is Supreme’. Bhagwad Gita is completely a text which describes the oneness of Atman with Brahman erasing all dualities and establishes the supremacy of Atman persuading us to ‘realize our true self’.

But some headstrong fanatics spread false theories to establish their favorite god ‘Krishna’ as more superior than every other God; especially ‘Lord Shiva’. But truth is that, without Lord Shiva nothing can survive, everything rests upon Lord Shiva who is the supreme self. This article of mine is written with an intention of revealing the true facts about Bhagwad Gita where with profound analysis it would be revealted that Bhagwad Gita is actually a glorification of Lord Shiva only; because, a deeper and careful study of Vedas / Upanishads would make it clear that Lord Shiva is the ‘Brahman’ of Vedas, he is the ‘Purusha’, he is the ‘Atman’ as described in Vedas and Upanishads. If a careful study of Vedas is done, one would realize that there is nothing beyond Shiva. Therefore, although it’s true that ‘I’ of Bhagwad Gita refers to the ‘Self’, and that ‘Self (Atman)’ is Brahman, but it is also true that the same ‘Brahman (Self)’ is nothing but ‘Shiva’ who is the Veda Purusha.

1. Bhagawad Gita was NOT spoken by Sri Krishna – It was spoken by Shiva through Krishna as the medium

Well, it would be shocking to everyone if i claim that it was Lord Shiva who used Krishna as his instrument to deliver the science of Vedanta (as Bhagwad Gita) to the mankind. It was Lord Shiva who spoke through Krishna. It was under the trance or possession effect (control) of the supreme spirit (Shiva) that Krishna spoke Bhagwad Gita by focusing himself in Yoga.

Sounds shocking and false, right? I can understand that. Well, there are many secrets of Lord Krishna which the Vaishnava Acharyas hide purposely and never allow anyone to know and reveal. Everyone preaches life of Krishna as given in Bhagawatam which is a text containing hyperbolic glorification of Krishna. Of course, Sri Krishna is a great god, but still, to say that he never had any limitations or he didn’t have limits is exaggeration and not the reality! The fact is – Sri Krishna always worked under the blessings of Mahadeva. There is none in the three worlds who were greater devotees of Lord Shiva than Nara & Narayana; and that great sage Narayana was this Krishna. And there is no one who is dearer to Shiva than Krishna because Krishna had always shown outstanding devotion towards Mahdeva. The following are the words spoken by lord Shiva to Ashwatthama in ‘Souptika Parva’ of Mahabharata.

“satyaśaucārjava tyāgais tapasā niyamena ca |
kṣāntyā bhaktyā ca dhṛtyā ca buddhyā ca vacasā tathā | (Mahabharata 10.7.60)
yathāvad aham ārāddhaḥ kṛṣṇenākliṣṭakarmaṇā |
tasmād iṣṭatamaḥ kṛṣṇād anyo mama na vidyate |” (Mahabharata 10.07.61)
“With truth, purity, sincerity, resignation, ascetic austerities, vows, forgiveness, devotion, patience, thought, and word, I have been duly adored by Krishna of pure deeds. For this there is none dearer to me than Krishna”.

I can cite instances from Mahabharata where Sri Krishna resorted to Bhava the illustrious deity of unparalleled glory and sought his shelter for achieving various deeds. Shankara’s protection always makes the protected stand invincible since there is only one lord as per Vedas, who remains unvanquished in battles; that is the god Mahadeva! Well, I would keep those sections of Mahabharata out of scope from this article since this article is only to talk about Bhagawad Gita.

1.1. Krishna expressed his inability to discourse Bhagavad Gita again when requested by Arjuna

Okay, here the point was to reveal a shocking fact which is always kept unrevealed to the devotees by their Vaishnava Acharyas. That fact is – Sri Krishna didn’t recite Bhagwad Gita on his own. Another heavenly super power spoke that Gita through Krishna, and Krishna was just an instrument in that act, nothing more than that. Here is the excerpt from Mahabharata where Sri Krishna himself reveals that truth.

“viditaṃ me mahābāho saṅgrāme samupasthite।
māhātmyaṃ devakīmātastacca te rūpamaiśvaram॥ 5
yattadbhagavatā proktaṃ purā keśava sauhṛdāt।
tatsarvaṃ puruṣavyāghra naṣṭaṃ me bhraṣṭacetasaḥ॥ 6
mama kautūhalaṃ tvasti teṣvartheṣu punaḥ punaḥ।
bhavāṃstu dvārakāṃ gantā na cirādiva mādhava॥ 7
vaiśampāyana uvāca
evamuktastu taṃ kṛṣṇaḥ phālgunaṃ pratyabhāṣata।
pariṣvajya mahātejā vacanaṃ vadatāṃ varaḥ॥ 8
vāsudeva uvāca
śrāvitastvaṃ mayā guhye jñāpitaśca sanātanam।
dharmaṃ svarūpiṇaṃ pārtha sarvalokāṃśca śāśvatān॥ 9
abuddhyā nāgrahīryastvaṃ tanme sumahadapriyam।
na ca sādya punarbhūyaḥ smṛtirme sambhaviṣyati॥ 10
nūnamaśraddadhāno’si durmedhā hyasi pāṇḍava।
na ca śakyaṃ punarvaktumaśeṣeṇa dhanañjaya॥ 11
sa hi dharmaḥ suparyāpto brahmaṇaḥ padavedane।
na śakyaṃ tanmayā bhūyastathā vaktumaśeṣataḥ॥ 12
paraṃ hi brahma kathitaṃ yogayuktena tanmayā।” (MBH 14:16:5-13a)

English translation is available in SECTION XVI – Book 14: Aswamedha Parva:

“'[Arjuna said]: O–mighty-armed one, thy greatness became known to me upon the approach of the battle. O son of Devaki, thy form also, as the Lord of the universe, then became known to me! What thy holy self said unto me at that time, O Kesava, through affection, has all been forgotten by me, O chief of men, in consequence of the fickleness of my mind. Repeatedly, however, have I been curious on the subject of those truths. Thou again, O Madhava, wilt repair to Dwaraka soon.’

Vaisampayana continued, ‘Thus addressed by him, Krishna of mighty energy, that foremost of speakers, embraced Phalguna and replied unto him as follows.

‘Vasudeva said, ‘I made thee listen to truths that are regarded as mysteries. I imparted to thee truths that are eternal. Verily, I discoursed to thee on Religion in its true form and on all the eternal regions. It is exceedingly disagreeable to me to learn that thou didst not, from folly, receive what I imparted. The recollection of all that I told thee on that occasion will not come to me now. Without doubt, O son of Pandu, thou art destitute of faith and thy understanding is not good. It is impossible for me, O Dhananjaya, to repeat, in detail, all that I said on that occasion. That religion (about which I discoursed to thee then) is more than sufficient for understanding Brahma. I cannot discourse on it again in detail. I discoursed to thee on Supreme Brahma, having concentrated myself in Yoga’”.

Few questions arise here. Why did Krishna say the recollection of all the Gita would not come to him? Why did he say it was ‘impossible’ for him to recite all that what he had discoursed on an earlier occasion? When he could go into Yoga last time, why couldn’t he enter Yoga trance again?

This conversation is recorded in Ashwamedha Parva section of Mahabharata where the war had already ceased. So, there is no room for assumptions like – ‘may be due to time constraints caused by the war situation Krishna made such an excuse’. That’s impractical to assume here because when amidst the battle field when Krishna could recite eighteen huge chapters to Arjuna; how could he deny his request when already peace was established. In fact they had enough time to recollect entire war also through gossip. And another most important point to note is – Arjuna was not any insignificant person for Krishna. In Mahabharata section (MBH. 10:12:27) Krishna said,

“yasmāt priyataro nāsti mamānyaḥ puruṣo bhuvi | nādeyaṃ yasya me kiṃ cid api dārāḥ sutās tathā |” (MBH 10:12:27)
“Other than Phalguna I have no dearer friend on earth, that friend to whom there is nothing that I cannot give including my very wives and children…”

Not only this, In Harivamsa Parva of Mahabharata after lifting the Govardhana hill and making Indra his friend, Indra requests Krishna always to protect his son Arjuna by all means. There Krishna agrees and also gives a promise saying he would do like a servant, whatever Arjuna asks him to do.

“yacca vakṣyati māṃ śakra tanūjastava so’rjunaḥ ।
bhṛtyavattatkariṣyāmi tava snehena yantritaḥ ॥” (Harivamsa Parva 2:19:101)
“shakra (indra)! Whatever your son Arjuna asks me, I will do as a servant, because I am bound by your affection.”.

When Krishna could say that he could give his wives and children also to Arjuna when asked, when Krishna gave a promise to Indra that whatever Arjuna would ask him, he would do as a servant then how come he dismissed his request of repeat recitation of Gita? How could Krishna scold Arjuna calling him “destitute of faith”, and why did Krishna feel Arjuna’s act as “extremely disagreeable” to him? From this it is clear that had it really been under the control of Krishna to recite Gita once more, he would have done that truly for his beloved friend viz. Partha, but it wasn’t! So, as an alternative Krishna told him a narrative from ancient history and preached him good knowledge in the form of ‘Anu Gita’.

Therefore it is evident that Sri Krishna was not the original speaker and he summoned some higher heavenly power through Yoga and that ‘Adhrushya (invisible) Nirguna Shakti’ spoke through Krishna the science of Bhagwad Gita. Note that Krishna said it was ‘impossible’ for him to recite the same again. It becomes clear that he didn’t have authority and control over the superior power who spoke Gita through him, and to benefit the mankind that supreme power wanted to convey Gita and hence used Krishna as his messenger, and it was a onetime effort only. Hence summoning the superior power again and again by entering into Yoga was not possible for Krishna.

Even if you disagree at this stage, never mind! I didn’t expect everyone to readily accept my point at this very point itself. However, by and by one would realize the truth; and after reading this entire article it would become clear to everyone that it was none other than Lord Shiva who spoke Bhagwad Gita through Krishna’s mouth.

2. ‘Ishvara Gita’ of lord Shiva is what is passed on to us as Bhagawad Gita by Krishna

This section has been added by me 5 years after I first posted this article. This is because whatever claim I have made about Bhagawad Gita to be a song of Shiva, was later found to be supported by scriptures. Hence added as supporting evidences to my claims. I
t always happens with me that certain unique thoughts take birth in my heart by the voice of my inner self (‘antah sphurana’), and later the same lord shows me the evidences to support these insights too.  My claim that Bhagawad Gita was a discourse spoken by lord Shiva via the mouth of lord Krishna – is truly the opinion of scriptures also.

2.1. Krishna was one of the AchArya-s who handed ‘Ishvara Gita’ of lord Shiva to Arjuna under the name ‘Bhagavad Gita’.

In Kurma Purana there is an excellent Vedantic discourse taught by lord Shiva. That discourse is called ‘Ishvara Gita’. The prelude to that discourse begins with a discussion between the brahmavadi sages to Lomaharshana, where they request him to discourse about the ‘brahman’. Meanwhile guru of Romaharshana viz. Vyasa comes there and then romaharshana requests his guru Vyasa to narrate to the sages about the Brahman. Vyasa begins narration of an ancient discourse of former times where lord Vishnu in the form of kurma (tortoise) had discoursed that knowledge to sages of those times. That narration by Kurma was again a reminiscence of yet another ancient lecture that lord Shiva taught to sages in presence of Narayana. Therefore the original discourse was by lord Shiva, which passed on to Vyasa via a tradition and Vyasa passed on to the sages of the recent times.

There, after the narration of the entire ‘ishvara gita’, the tradition through which that Gita was passed further, is described. It is said that Sanatkumara passed it on to satyavrata, Sanandana passed it on to Gautama, sage angira discoursed that to bharadwaja. Similarly it narrates how Kapila, jaigishavya, Panchashika, parashara, and Valmiki obtained that knowledge.

Then comes the most interesting secret, a great fact gets revealed there. It says that the ‘ishvara gita’, which was originally discoursed by lord Shiva, and which was transmitted by various other personalities to sages mentioned above, in same lines, Bhagavan narayana also himself as Krishna, the son of Devaki had discoursed to Arjuna.

“nārāyaṇo ‘pi bhagavān devakītanayo hariḥ |
arjunāya svayaṃ sākṣāt dattavānidamuttamam ||” (kurma purana 2:11:131)

“Also the lord Narayana, who is called Hari, had himself passed on that excellent knowledge to Arjuna in the form of Krishna, the son of devaki”.

In Kurma Purana, there is yet another chapter where Vyāsa and Arjuna converse on the topic of symptoms and duties of Kali age. In that chapter, Vyāsa stresses many a times on the necessity of worship of Lord Rudra, and finally with much delight Vyāsa touches Arjuna with both his hands and calling him as the greatest of the devotees of Shiva praises him for being the luckiest to have witnessed the cosmic form of lord Shiva during the Bhagavad Gītā discourse that hṛṣīkeśa spoke to him.

dṛṣṭavānasi taṃ devaṃ viśvākṣaṃ viśvatomukham |
pratyakṣameva sarveśaṃ rudraṃ sarvajaganmayam ||60
jñānaṃ tadaiśvaraṃ divyaṃ yathāvad viditaṃ tvayā |
svayameva hṛṣīkeśaḥ prītyovāca sanātanaḥ ||” (Kurma Purana 1:28:61)
“[Vyasa says]:You have directly perceived that Lord Rudra who has his eyes everywhere, who has his faces everywhere, who is the very embodiment of the universe. That divine lordly knowledge (of śiva) has been precisely understood by you. That ancient Hrsikesha (Krishna) himself had recounted it to you out of delight”.

Therefore my insights about Bhagawad Gita are not baseless. Bhagavad Gita was the same discourse of Shiva passed on to us by the teacher (Acharya) Krishna, in his yogic trance where through Krishna Shiva spoke the Gita. Hence Krishna is our gitacharya.

2.2. Bhagawad Gita cannot be discoursed by anyone other than Lord Shiva

We have seen above that in Mahabharata, Krishna had clearly expressed his inability to discourse Bhagawad Gita for a second time and stated that earlier he had discoursed that to Arjuna by concentrating himself in Yoga. The word ‘yoga’ means ‘to unite’. Krishna had united himself with Shiva through the power of yoga and Shiva had discoursed that Gita to Arjuna through the mouth of Krishna.

This inability of discoursing on the highest principle is not new. It was for the same reason that Narayana had requested Shiva to narrate that Ishvara Gita (which is now named as Bhagawad Gita in Mahabharata) to the sages desirous to know the ‘atman’, desired for knowing the science of supreme Brahman (who is shiva).

In badarikashrama, a group of celestial sages were doing penance desirous to know about the atman-tatva. They were all blemishless at heart. They wanted to know about the Brahman.

“sanatkumāraḥ sanakastathaiva ca sanandanaḥ |
aṅgirā rudrasahito bhṛguḥ paramadharmavit 16
kaṇādaḥ kapilo yogī vāmadevo mahāmuniḥ |
śukro vasiṣṭho bhagavān sarve saṃyatamānasāḥ || 17
parasparaṃ vicāryaite saṃśayāviṣṭacetasaḥ |
taptavantastapo ghoraṃ puṇye badarikāśrame ||” (kurma purana 2:1:16-18)

“The sages like Sanatkumara, sanaka, sanandana, angira, rudra, bhrigu, kumada, kapila, garga, vamadeva, sukra, vashishtha, and all such sages, whose mind were under control, consulting among themelves, had performed the severe penance at Badarikashrama”.

Meanwhile from nowhere the two great sages nara and narayana appear in front of them.

“apaśyaṃste mahāyogamṛṣiṃ dharmasutaṃ śucim |
nārāyaṇamanādyantaṃ nareṇa sahitaṃ tadā ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:19)

“Then they saw the great Yogi Narayana, the son of sage dharma, who was beyond the begining or the end, alongwith sage nara”.

Then all those sages prayed to those two great personalities with various hymns and offered their salutations to sage narayana. Sage narayana although being aware of the desire of the sages, yet asks them what was their desire.

“vijñāya vāñchitaṃ teṣāṃ bhagavānapi sarvavit |
prāha gambhīrayā vācā kimarthaṃ tapyate tapaḥ ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:21)

“Becoming aware of the desire of the sages, the omniscient lord spoke in deep voice, “what for are you performing the tapas (penance)?””.

They all revealed their desire to get clarified on some of the questions related to the science of Brahman. They said that for the same reason, knowing sage Narayana to be the knower of everything they had come to that place. They enquired questions on atman-tatva such as – Who is the cause of the world? What is atman? What is liberation? Who is the lord of the universe? Etc., as follows.

“kiṃ kāraṇamidaṃ kṛtsnaṃ ko ‘nusaṃsarate sadā |
kaścidātmā ca kā muktiḥ saṃsāraḥ kiṃnimittakaḥ ||26
kaḥ saṃsārayatīśānaḥ ko vā sarvaṃ prapaśyati |
kiṃ tat parataraṃ brahma sarvaṃ no vaktumarhasi ||” Kurma purana 2:1:26-27)

“[They enquired]: Who is the cause of this entire world? Who always moves in this world? Who is ‘Atman’? What is liberation?  What is the motive behind the world? Who is the supreme lord of the universe? Who is the one who witnesses all? What is the Brahman beyond him? You kindly tell us the answers for all these”.

These questions are all vedantic and are exactly the essence of Bhagawad Gita as well. Then the sage Narayana discarded his sagely form and established himself in his native form of Vishnu holding discus, conch, mace and bow in his hands, having srivatsa mark on his chest and even Lakshmi appears there adorning his side. By his splendour in his Vishnu form, the sage nara becomes almost invisible. This point needs to be noted that here, it is now Vishnu, and no more sage narayana who was sitting in front of the sages.

“evamukte tu munayaḥ prāpaśyan puruṣottamam |
vihāya tāpasaṃ rūpaṃ saṃsthitaṃ svena tejasā || 28
vibhrājamānaṃ vimalaṃ prabhāmaṇḍalamaṇḍitam |
śrīvatsavakṣasaṃ devaṃ taptajāmbūnadaprabham ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:29)

“Thus speaking, the sages started looking at the purushottama (sage narayana), who had established himself in his true form as Vishnu and was looking spotless furnished with a brilliant effulgence. His chest bore the mark of Srivatsa, the splendour of which resembled the molten gold”.

“śaṅkhacakragadāpāṇiṃ śārṅgahastaṃ śriyāvṛtam |
na dṛṣṭastatkṣaṇādeva narastasyaiva tejasā ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:30)

“He held the conch, discus, mace and the bow as his ornaments. He was accompanied by lakshmi, and the lustre emanating from his body made sage Nara invisible”.

Then, the way sage Narayana had emerged in the scene knowing the reason for the penance of the sages, after knowing the questions that were asked by them, suddenly Mahadeva appears in the scene.

“tadantare mahādevaḥ śaśāṅkāṅkitaśekharaḥ |
prasādābhimukho rudraḥ prādurāsīnmaheśvaraḥ ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:31)

“In the meantime, the great god, Maheshvara, with his head adorned with the crescent moon, also emerged on the scene”.

Then everyone praised Mahadeva glorifying various of his great attributes. Then Maheshvara embracing Vishnu asks him what for does Vishnu need him there. This question itself reveals us the answer to the question on why from nowhere suddenly Shiva emerged there in that vicinity even though Vishnu in his native form was present and was ‘considered’ capable of removing those doubts by those sages.

“saṃstuto bhagavānīśastryambako bhaktavatsalaḥ |
samāliṅgya hṛṣīkeśaṃ prāha gambhīrayā girā || 36
kimarthaṃ puṇḍarīkākṣa munīndrā brahmavādinaḥ |
imaṃ samāgatā deśaṃ kiṃ vā kāryaṃ mayācyuta ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:36-37)

“After having been thus adored, lord Ishvara, who is graceful on his devotees, embraced Lord Hrishikesha, and spoke in deep voice, ‘O lots-eyed one, what for have these ascetics, the spokespersons on Brahman, have arrived here? O Achuta what for do you need me?'”.

Vishnu prays to Shiva asking him to speak about the excellent science of Brahman. Note here carefully the words where Vishnu requests Shiva to speak about the divine knowledge which is about him (shiva). Also, note carefully the words of Vishnu where he says, “only you are well aware of yourself, and there is none else who knows you better”. This is the reason the great god Vishnu himself secretly summoned Mahadeva there.

“yadi prasanno bhagavān munīnāṃ bhāvitātmanām |
sannidhau mama tajjñānaṃ divyaṃ vaktumihārhasi || 40
tvaṃ hi vettha svamātmānaṃ na hyanyo vidyate śiva |
tatastvamātmanātmānaṃ munīndrebhyaḥ pradarśaya ||” (Kurma purana 2:1:40-41)

“In case, you are pleased with these rishis, then you kindly bestow your divine knowledge on them in my presence. O Siva, only you are well aware about yourself, there is none else who knows you better”.

Now, recall the questions of the sages. Those sages didn’t ask “tell me about lord shiva”. They asked Vishnu to reveal the knowledge of the one who is known as ‘atman’, who is the ‘brahman’, who is the cause of the world and yet who is the witnesser of everything. And here Vishnu is asking Shiva to talk about himself, and clearly says that there is none who knows Shiva better than Shiva himself.

Relating both instances, what do we infer? The inference is clear that – it is Shiva who is the Supreme Being; other than Shiva no one including Vishnu is competent to discourse about himself.

This is what exactly happened during Mahabharata war as well. Arjuna resorted to Krishna as a disciple the way these sages resorted unto sage narayana (Krishna’s original aspect). The way sages enquired about the supreme knowledge, Arjuna resorted to Krishna to free him from the delusion and tell him what constitutes the highest good. Bhagawad Gita is not a lecture for persuading a hero to kill his relatives. It is indeed atman-vidya. And then what did Krishna do? The way without the knowledge of the sages, Vishnu had silently summoned Maheshvara to that vicinity to talk about the highest knowledge of shiva-tatva; here without the knowledge of Arjuna, Krishna went in communion with Shiva through yoga and Shiva delivered the lecture on Vedanta through Krishna’s mouth.

Actually Bhagawad Gita was certain to manifest in this world in those times. Krishna and Arjuna were only instrumental in helping that ‘ishvara gita’ manifest under the name of ‘bhagawad gita’.  Bhagawad Gita itself says that in olden times that science was present, but due to long lapse of time, it got lost.

“evaṃ paramparāprāptam imaṃ rājarṣayo viduḥ | sa kāleneha mahatā yogo naṣṭaḥ paraṃtapa ||
sa evāyaṃ mayā te ‘dya yogaḥ proktaḥ purātanaḥ | bhakto ‘si me sakhā ceti rahasyaṃ hy etad uttamam ||” (BG 4:2-3)

“Descending thus from tradition, the Royal sages came to know it. But, O chastiser of foes, by (lapse of a) long time, that knowledge became lost to the world. Even the same knowledge hath today been declared by me to thee, for thou art my devotee and friend, (and) this is a great mystery”.

Therefore, the agenda of Shiva was to make this science manifest in the then current world again, hence made use of Arjuna’s delusion as a tool to get Krishna into yoga union with himself and that Mahadeva imparted to this world, that highest science about himself. It was not at all meant for Arjuna, it was all to bring the lost knowledge to benefit the mankind. That science was documented by Veda Vyasa in Mahabharata for all of us, and hence the purpose of shiva was served, the goal of Shiva got completed. For this reason, Krishna couldn’t recall or retell that science to Arjuna again as it was something which only Mahadeva can discourse none else as clearly stated by Vishnu in Kurma Purana. Note that Gita was not just theory, but practical demonstration using cosmic form as well, which Shiva alone was capable to display that highest form none else.

Also, the lord introducing to Arjuna about himself mentions the following words in (BG 4:6) – “ajo ‘pi sann avyayātmā bhūtānām īśvarah…”, which means, “Though (I am) unborn and of essence that knoweth no deterioration, (I am) the lord of all creatures”. Here ‘isvara’ means ‘lord’ which again is a synonym of ‘pati’. When we re-word this, we get that lord to be ‘bhūtānām pati’, and all ‘bhutas’ are bound by his ‘pasha’ hence they all are ‘pashus’, hence that word becomes ‘pashunam pati’ which results in the lord being – verily the great ‘pashupati’ himself!

Conclusion: – From this analysis we can clearly see that Bhagawad Gita cannot be discoursed by anyone else other than Shiva, as it is a science which reveals about Shiva only. For that reason, it has always been revealed by Shiva only. In former times when Vishnu was asked to reveal the atman-vidya, he requested Shiva to narrate about himself; and in Dwapara yuga when that knowledge was almost lost and it was needed to manifest for the benefit of the world, Vishnu (as Krishna) helped that science manifest again, by uniting himself with Shiva through yoga and letting Shiva speak that knowledge via his mouth to Arjuna, which got recorded for the entire mankind. Since it got manifested in this world as a part of Vyasa’s Mahabharata; there was no need for Shiva to obey repeat telecast commands from anyone. Hence Krishna said it was impossible for him to narrate that Gita once again.

2.3. Bhagawad Gita is indeed ‘Ishvara Gita’

The terms ‘Ishvara’ and ‘bhagavAn’, both mean same. Shruti clearly recognizes lord Rudra alone as ‘Bhagavan’, which is evident from the below verse from Atharvashira Upanishad.

“yo vai rudraḥ sa bhagavān ||” (Atharvashira Upanishad 1:01)
“He who is Rudra, is verily the bhagavan”.

The supreme lord is termed as ‘Ishvara’ and ‘Bhagavan’ is a synonym denoting the same ‘ishvara’. There is no difference. Therefore ‘Bhagavad Gita’ is identical in meaning to the term ‘Ishvara Gita’. Therefore, both are the lectures teaching about the glory of Mahadeva alone.

2.4. Adi Shankara clearly recognizes Bhagawad Gita as ‘ishvara Gita’ in Brahmasutra bhashya

In his commentary on brahmasutras, Sri Adi Shankaracharya cites Bhagawad Gita verse in BSB (2:3:45), but terms it as ‘ishvara Gita’.

“īśvaragītāsvapi ca īśvarāṃśatvaṃ jīvasya smaryate mamaivāṃśo jīvaloke jīvabhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ iti ||” (Shankara’s Brahmasutra Bhashya 2:3:45)
“In the Isvaragita (Bhagavad-gîtâ) also it is said that the soul is a part of the Lord, ‘an eternal part of me becomes the individual soul in the world of life. [This verse is from Bhagavad Gita (BG 15:07)]”.

Clearly, he knows that Bhagavad Gita is not any different Gita, rather, it is the very same Shiva whose Ishvara Gita was spoken in more elaborate way by himself via the mouth of Krishna, while maintaining the core message of Vedanta identical.

3. ‘Padma Purana’ attesting my inferences gives more evidence


Padma Purana, which is one of the so called ‘sAtWika purANa’, in its Uttara Khanda, there is a section dedicated to the discussion on the greatness of the Bhagavad Gita, i.e., gIta-mAhAtmayaM. It exists as a dialogue between Shiva and Parvati where Shiva narrates the glory of Gita as narrated by Vishnu to Lakshmi earlier. Here three great facts are revealed which are in agreement with my inferences drawn above. – 1) Vishnu tells that his indweller is Maheshvara and on him he meditates via yoga. 2) The lord of Bhagavad Gita is Shiva of five faces. 3) Bhagavad Gita’s form itself is the form of lord Shiva..

3.1. Vishnu sleeps while being in union with his inner self Maheshvara through Yoga

In that context, Vishnu is shown sleeping on his snake bed deeply immersed in his inner-self. Lakshmi remains seated alongside and she enquires her husband about the reason why does he lazily remains on the bed sleepy as mentioned in the below verse.

“śrīruvāca |
śayālurasi dugdhābdhau bhagavankena hetunā |
udāsīna ivaiśvaryaṃ jagaṃti sthāpayanniva ||” (Padma Purana:UK:175:5)
“O revered one, You, despite being the sustainer of the world, you being indifferent (passive) towards your glory, are sleeping on this milky ocean, what’s the reason behind this?”.

Then the lord replies that he wasn’t sleeping as such, rather he was in contemplation and was in communion with his true form of lord Shiva which is his indwelling spirit.

“śrībhagavānuvāca |
nāhaṃ sumukhi nidrālurnijaṃ māheśvaraṃ vapuḥ |
dṛśā tatvānuvarttinyā paśyāmyaṃtarnimagnayā ||” (Padma Purana:UK:175:7)
“[The lord said]: O you of beautiful face, I’m not sleeping, rather, by the vision which sees (follows) the truth, I am contemplating by being fixed (nimagna) in my true form of lord Maheshvara (lord Shiva)“.

The above verse is again very significant one. It is in sync with Mahabharata as well as Kurma Purana incidents. The way in Mahabharata, Krishna was in communion with Shiva via Yoga and then delivered Bhagavad Gita, the way Narayana remembered Shiva and silently called him to the vicinity to recite Ishvara Gita to the seekers, here Vishnu was again in oneness with Shiva in his Yoga, and then when Lakshmi started asking questions he stated answering, it is as like as Krishna started answering to Arjuna’s questions in Mahabharata in Bhagavad Gita.

Here Lakshmi gets perplexed to know that Vishnu was meditating within himself on something superior than him. She asks him to reveal what or who is that who is different and higher than him.

“śrīruvāca |
bhavāneva hṛṣīkeśa dhyeyo’si yamināṃ sadā |
tasmāttvattaḥ paraṃ yattacchrotuṃ kautūhalaṃ hi me ||14
carācarāṇāṃ lokānāṃ karttā harttā svayaṃ prabhuḥ |
yathāsthitastato’nyatvaṃ yadi māṃ bodhayācyuta ||” (Padma Purana:UK:175:14-15)
“O Hrishikesha! You alone are always to be meditated upon by the self-controlled ones. Therefore, I have a great curiosity to hear from you, about that which is higher than you. O Achuta, tell me if there is something different from you who are the lord, the creator, and the destroyer of the worlds”.

3.2. Vishnu’s form is illusion, in his ‘Original’ aspect he is five faced lord Shiva

Then Vishnu replies her saying that his ‘Vishnu’ form is actually illusionary (made of Maya) which is given the tasks of creation, maintenance and withdrawal of the world. He tells her that the nature of his inner self is different from his body, the self is the form of the ‘Ishvara (lord)’, which can be known only through the unity with it. He says that this is what is told in Bhagavad Gita also.

“śrībhagavānuvāca |
māyāmayamidaṃ devi vapurme na tu tātvikam |
sṛṣṭisthityopasaṃhārakriyājālopabṛṃhitam || 16
ato’nyadātmanorūpaṃ dvaitādvaitavivarjitam |
bhāvābhāvavinirmuktamādyaṃtarahitaṃ priye ||17
śuddhasaṃvitprabhālābhaṃ parānaṃdaikasuṃdaram |
rūpamaiśvaramātmaikyagamyaṃ gītāsu kīrtitam ||” (Padma Purana:UK:175:16-18)
“[Lord Vishnu said]: O goddess, this my body is illusory and not real, and is augmented with the mass of the acts of creation, maintenance and withdrawal. O dear one, the nature of the self is different form this. It is without duality and unity. It is free from existence and non-existence; and without beginning or end. It is pure consciousness, has acquired luster, is beautiful due to great joy, is the form of the Ishvara (lord), can be known only through the unity with the self, and this is what is told in the Gita”.

Then goddess Lakshmi seeing an apparent contradiction enquires further as follows.

“ityākarṇya vaco devi devasyāmitatejasaḥ |
śaṃkamānā ha vākyeṣu parasparavirodhiṣu ||19
svayaṃ cetparamānaṃdamavāṅmanasagocaram |
kathaṃ gītā bodhayati iti me cchiṃdhi saṃśayam ||” (Padma Purana:UK:175:19-20)
“Hearing the words of him of an unlimited lustre, she having doubt to contradictory statement said: ‘If you are highest joy, and not known through speech and mind, then how does Gita make you known. Remove this doubt of me!'”.

Then the narrator of this discussion viz. Lord Shiva (to Parvati), tells what Vishnu had spoken to Lakshmi as follows. Vishnu reveals a great secret about himself here. Recall from previous verse where he told Lakshmi that his form (as Vishnu) is just illusionary. Now he reveals about himself who he originally is! He tells that he is (originally) the Atman (self) which has two aspects – Higher (as nirguNa Shiva, the inactive, witness brahman) and lower (as the Ishvara, the active Brahman). He says that his Ishvara (active form) is of two types BOTH having five faces viz. Panchavaktra (sadashiva) and Maheshvara (kailasa-pati).

This is in sync with Shiva Purana also. Shiva originally is the nirguNa-brahman, he becomes active and assumes the form of five faced Sadashiva (who is the Vedantic Ishvara). Then post creation of the universe he enters into the universe and resides in Kailasha having five faces and is called Maheshvara, where essentially this Mahesvara is not different from the Sadashiva. In Shakta Puranas these two forms are explained as residing in Manidweepa (Sadashiva) and Kailasha (Maheshvara).

Then Vishnu says further that the realization about his nature of five-faced lord is dependent upon the study of Gita. He then teaches entire Bhagavad Gita to Lakshmi. Recall that Vishnu was already in yogic communion with his indwelling lord ‘Maheshvara’ when this discussion between him and Lakshmi started, and now he is able to recite Gita as like as Krishna recited Gita to Arjuna after uniting himself in Yoga. So, there is no confusion or contradiction here. Vishnu and his incarnation(s) have always been successful in reciting Bhagavad Gita ONLY after uniting themselves with Shiva via Yoga, period!

Here in below verses Vishnu tells that Bhagavad Gita is all about the study or knowledge of Vishnu’s original forms of Shiva i.e., Sadashiva and Maheshvara. He had already said that his Vishnu-form is illusory, here he is revealing who he originally is! Yes, Vishnu is none other than Lord Shiva who assumes the illusionary form of Vishnu for the cosmic functions related with the world. What more can be true that the fact that the very Yajur Veda in the Sri Rudram has stated that it is Shiva who assumes the form of Vishnu – “namo giriśāya ca śipiviṣṭāya ca ||” (Yajur Veda IV:5:5:f), which means, “Salutations to Rudra who is the lord of the mountains and salutations to Rudra who is in the form of shipivishta (Vishnu)”. This same truth is being explained in detail by Vishnu himself in below verses.

“īśvara uvāca |
śriyaḥ śrutvā vacoyuktamitihāsapuraḥsaram |
ātmānugāminīṃ dṛṣṭiṃ gītāṃ bodhitavānprabhuḥ ||20
ahamātmā pareśāni parāparavibhedataḥ |
dvidhā tataḥ paraḥ sākṣī nirguṇo niṣkalaḥ śivaḥ ||21
aparaḥ paṃcavaktro’haṃ dvidhā tasyāpi saṃsthitiḥ |
śabdārthabhedato vācyo yathātmāhaṃ maheśvaraḥ ||22
gītānāṃ vākyarūpeṇa yannirucchidyate dṛḍhaḥ |
madīyapāśabaṃdho’yaṃ saṃsāraviṣayātmakaḥ ||23
yadābhyāsaparādhīnau paṃcavaktramaheśvarau |
iti tasya vacaḥ śrutvā gītāsāramahodadheḥ ||24
idaṃ paravibhedena budhyate bhavabhīrubhiḥ |
tamapṛcchadidaṃ lakṣmīraṃgapratyaṃgasaṃsthitam ||25
māhātmyaṃ setihāsaṃ ca sarvaṃ tasyai nyavedayat |26a” (Padma Purana:UK:175:20-26a)
“[Lord Shiva said]: Having heard the proper words of Lakshmi, the lord told her the Gita, the vision leading one towards the self, along with an historical account. “O great lordess, I am the ‘self’ differentiated in two ways, – as higher and lower. The higher is a witness, attributeless, partless, Shiva. As the lower one, I am ‘panchavaktra (of five faces)’ it also remains in two forms. I, Maheshvara, am the self, am to be explained through the distinction in words and meanings, as, through the words of the Gita, my strong noose of the nature of objects in the worldly existence, is completely cut off; since (realization of my two forms) ‘Panchavaktra’ and ‘Maheshvara’, are dependent on its study“. Hearing these words of him (which were) the great ocean of essence of the Gita, those afraid of the worldly existence know it through the difference between this and that. Lakshmi asked thus to him. He told her about the Mahatmayam (greatness) along with the corresponding historical accounts (stories) in its major and minor details.”.

3.3. Bhagavad Gita itself is the body of Lord Shiva – implies – Bhagavad Gita teaches the ‘swarUpa jnAna’ of lord Shiva only

Then Vishnu explains the swarUpa (form) of Bhagavad Gita itself. He says the eighteen chapters are the various body parts of the five faced lord Shiva. The first five chapters are the five faces of the lord Shiva. The next ten chapters are the ten hands. The sixteenth chapter is the belly and the final two i.e., the seventeenth and eighteenth chapters are the two feet of the lord.

“śṛṇu suśroṇi vakṣyāmi gītāsu sthitimātmanaḥ ||26
vaktrāṇi paṃca jānīhi paṃcādhyāyānanukramāt |
daśādhyāyā bhujāścaika udaraṃ dvau padāṃbuje ||27
evamaṣṭādaśādhyāyā vāṅmayī mūrtiraiśvarī |
vijñeyā jñānamātreṇa mahāpātakanāśinī ||28
atodhyāyaṃ tadardhaṃ vā ślokamarddhaṃ tadardhakam |
abhyasyati sumedhā yaḥ suśarmeva samucyate ||” ((Padma Purana:UK:175:26b-29)
“[Lord Vishnu said]: O you, beautiful lady, I’ll tell you about my firm existence in the Gita. The five chapters are the five faces in order. The (next) ten chapters are the (ten) hands; one is the belly, and the (remaining) two are the lotus like feet. Thus the eighteen chapters are the divine forms of words. It, destroying great sins, should be known through knowledge only. Therefore, he, the very intelligent one, who studies a chapter, or half of it, or a verse of a half-verse is liberated like ‘Susharma’”.

Thus from above discussion it is clear that Vishnu understands his true nature as that of Shiva because Vishnu is Shiva’s own form among his ‘Panchabrahma’ manifestations. Vishnu clearly recognizes his ‘Vishnu’ form as illusionary and the original form as that of Shiva of five faces (when in the active saguNa state) and as attributeless Shiva (when in the inactive nirguNa brahman state). Vishnu says Bhagavad Gita’s all chapters constitute the parts of the body of the fife faced Sadashiva, the supreme being. Thus he clearly indicates that Bhagavad Gita teaches about the swarUpa (nature) of lord Shiva only!

(Then he goes about narrating how some sinner by name ‘susharma’ got liberated by listening the first chapter of Gita etc. Subsequent discussion focusses on the greatness of each chapter of Gita by explaining via some stories like how someone by reciting the second chapter of Gita got liberated. So on so forth, each chapter has a story associated with someone. Hence there is nothing important to our discussion in those verses. Hence we need to close this discussion of Padma Purana here).

4. Vishvarupa of Bhagawad Gita was unique form of Mahakala only

Well, a question may arise in the minds of the readers “if Krishna was not the speaker of Bhagawad Gita and if it was Shiva who spoke through Krishna and showed Shiva’s cosmic form, then how could Krishna show Viraat form in Hastinapur Sabha and also later to a sage named Utanka?” Well, answer to this is – in both these cases Krishna showed his supreme Vaishnava form, which is not the Viraat form. Vishwaroopa that was seen in Bhagawad Gita, that cosmic form cannot be seen with normal eyes of flesh, it needs divine eyes. That divine Vishwaroopa was witnessed only by Arjuna and Sanjaya; where both of them had the divine eyes, the former obtained from Krishna and the latter obtained it as a gift from Vyasa.

Here one who has studied Mahabharata may have two questions or objections on the above mentioned points related to Vishvarupa. First objection could be – “Even in the hastinapura sabha Krishna gave divine sight and showed his divine form, then how come you say Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form his not krishna’s and belongs to Shiva?” The second question or objection could be – “In the case of display of cosmic form to sage Utanka, of course Krishna didn’t give divine eyes to Utanka, but vaishampayana mentions clearly that he was shown the divine ‘vaishnava’ form which was shown to Arjuna. How would you explain this?”

Both these objections get easily refuted if we analyse all these chapters carefully. Let me answer them one by one.

4.1. Cosmic form that was displayed in Kuru sabha in Udyoga Parva

In the case of hastinapura sabha, Krishna displayed a divine form which was not the one shown during the battlefield gita session. The form that he displayed was a sum total of celestial ‘support’ that was with him. Krishna says to Duryodhana how foolish was the latter’s understanding about Krishna that the latter considered Krishna to be alone and designed plans to make him captive, Krishna’s divine form was a response to Duryodhana’s foolishness where he showed that it was impossible for Duryodhana to succeed in his motives.

” vaiśampāyana uvāca
vidureṇaivamuktastu keśavaḥ śatrupūgahā।
duryodhanaṃ dhārtarāṣṭramabhyabhāṣata vīryavān॥ 1
eko’hamiti yanmohānmanyase māṃ suyodhana।
paribhūya sudurbuddhe grahītuṃ māṃ cikīrṣasi॥ 2
ihaiva pāṇḍavāḥ sarve tathaivāndhakavṛṣṇayaḥ।
ihādityāśca rudrāśca vasavaśca maharṣibhiḥ॥ 3
evamuktvā jahāsoccaiḥ keśavaḥ paravīrahā॥“ (MBH 05:131:1-2)

“Vaisampayana said, ‘After Vidura had said this, Kesava, that slayer of hostile divisions, endued with great energy, addressed Dhritarashtra’s son, Duryodhana, and said, ‘From delusion, O Suyodhana, thou regardest me to be alone, and it is for this, O thou of little understanding, that thou seekest to make me a captive after vanquishing me by violence. Here, however, are all the Pandavas and all the Vrishnis and Andhakas. Here are all the Adityas, the Rudras, and the Vasus, with all the great Rishis. Saying this Kesava, that slayer of hostile heroes burst out into a loud laughter”.

Then in his divine form are seen, five pandavas surrounding him from all sides, and protecting him with upraised arms. There were rudras, adityas, vasus surrounding Krishna in all sides. On his forehead appeared Brahma, on his chest appeared Rudra and from his other parts other gods issued forth. There appeared his brother Balarama standing by his left side wielding his plough, Arjuna manifested with his bow stretched standing by his right side. Behind Krishna were seen standing Bhima, Yudhishthira, Nakula and Sahadeva. In front of Krishna were seen andhakas, vrishnis, headed by Krishna’s son Pradyumna all with their upraised arms and ready to strike. And Krishna was seen in his native Vishnu form holding discus, conch, mace, bow, nandakam (Vishnu’s sword), and many other weapons. From his eyes, and pores of his body emanated fierce sparks of fire mixed with smoke.

One may refer to the verses 3-13 from chapter 131 of Udyoga Parva from Mahabharata for these details. I’m skipping quoting them because of the length of those verses and translation. The summary has already been provided, which should suffice.

People may easily consider this as the same Vishvarupa seen by Arjuna, but it is not so. We need to carefully read the further verses here. This divine form was doubtlessly great but didn’t require divine eyes to be seen. Everyone was able to that awful form by their eyes of flesh. However the sinful people got terrified seeing that form and closed their eyes. For the pious hearted people such as Bhishma, Drona, Sanjaya, Vidura and the various ascetics and sages who were present there – Krishna had bestowed a divine sight because of that divine sight they were able to behold him without getting scared. That’s it.

“taṃ dṛṣṭvā ghoramātmānaṃ keśavasya mahātmanaḥ॥ 13
nyamīlayanta netrāṇi rājānastrastacetasaḥ।
ṛte droṇaṃ ca bhīṣmaṃ ca viduraṃ ca mahāmatim॥ 14
sañjayaṃ ca mahābhāgamṛṣīṃścaiva tapodhanān।
prādātteṣāṃ sa bhagavāndivyaṃ cakṣurjanārdanaḥ॥”  (MBH 05:131:13b-15)

“And beholding that awful form of the high-souled Kesava, all the kings closed their eyes with affrighted hearts, except Drona, and Bhishma, and Vidura, endued with great intelligence, greatly blessed Sanjaya, and the Rishis, possessed of wealth of asceticism, for the divine Janardana gave unto them this divine sight on the occasion”.

This clearly shows that the divine form shown in the kuru sabha, could be seen by everyone without needing any divine eyes, however, without divine sight that form was scary to look at, and for the good people Krishna gave the divine sight which helped them appreciate the grandeur of that form instead of getting frightened.

Now, let’s recall Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form. There Arjuna asked Krishna to display the cosmic form. Krishna however said to Arjuna that with his normal eyes of flesh he wouldn’t be able to see that cosmic form and gave him divine eyes as stated in below verse.

“na tu māṃ śakyase draṣṭumanenaiva svacakṣuṣā।
divyaṃ dadāmi te cakṣuḥ paśya me yogamaiśvaram॥“ (MBH 6:35:08)

“Thou art, however, not competent to behold me with this eye of thine. I give thee celestial sight. Behold my sovereign mystic nature’”.

This is unlike the kuru sabha episode where everyone was able to see the form with normal eyes, whereas divine sight was given only to eradicate fear. Here however, only after getting the divine eyes, Arjuna was able to see that cosmic form. Otherwise, all the kauravas and pandavas who were wondering what were these two fellows doing in the centre of battlefield gossiping instead of beginning the war – all of them could have also witnessed that cosmic form.

Here another noteworthy point is that – despite having received divine sight, Arjuna kind of brave warrior who even crushed the army of demons called ‘nirvatkavachas’ with his might, who fought hand to hand with Mahadeva and pleased him – such a brave warrior on seeing this cosmic form, trembled with fear like a tree trembling under storm.

“nabhaḥspṛśaṃ dīptamanekavarṇaṃ vyāttānanaṃ dīptaviśālanetram।
dṛṣṭvā hi tvāṃ pravyathitāntarātmā dhṛtiṃ na vindāmi śamaṃ ca viṣṇo॥“ (MBH 6:35:24)

“Indeed, touching the very skies, of blazing radiance, many-hued, mouth wide-open, with eyes that are blazing and large, beholding thee, O Vishnu (all pervading one), with (my) inner soul trembling (in fright), I can no longer command courage and peace of mind”.

In Kuru sabha’s divine form, people got frightened no doubt, but nobody trembled to that extent that anybody could have prayed to Krishna to withdraw that form. Krishna withdrew that form voluntarily, nobody pleaded. However, in Bhagawad Gita episode, we know that Arjuna pleaded Krishna to withdraw that terrible form and appear in his pleasing form. So, all these reasoning proves that definitely this cosmic form what Arjuna had seen, was not the one seen in Kuru sabha.

I know there would still remain some adamant fanatics, who wouldn’t want to let any amount of valid reasoning to enter their adamantine skulls, therefore, foreseeing all these issues, to support my viewpoint, the lord of Bhagawad Gita had already given the verdict in Bhagawad Gita itself. He clearly stated that the cosmic form of Bhagawad Gita was not displayed before.

“śrībhagavānuvāca |
mayā prasannena tavārjunedaṃ rūpaṃ paraṃ darśitamātmayogāt।
tejomayaṃ viśvamanantamādyaṃ yanme tvadanyena na dṛṣṭapūrvam॥“ (MBH 6:35:47)

“The Holy One said, ‘Pleased with thee, O Arjuna, I have, by my yogic power, shown thee this supreme form, full of glory, Universal, Infinite, Primeval, which hath been seen before by none save thee”.

So, that should settle all doubts and arguments to rest! Let’s move on.

4.2. Cosmic form that was displayed to utanka in Ashvamedhika Parva

Sage Utanka requested Krishna to display his supreme form. Krishna obliged to his devotee’s request and displayed his divine form. Here noteworthy point is that Krishna didn’t provide any divine sight to Utanka. He asked and Krishna displayed. However, Vaishampayana who was narrating this chapter, made a comment saying:

“tataḥ sa tasmai prītātmā darśayāmāsa tadvapuḥ।
śāśvataṃ vaiṣṇavaṃ dhīmāndadṛśe yaddhanañjayaḥ॥“ (MBH 14:55:4)

“Vaisampayana continued, ‘Gratified with him, the holy one then showed Utanka that eternal Vaishnava form which Dhananjaya of great intelligence had seen”.

This may make the haters of Shiva to conclude that Bhagawad Gita and its Vishwaroopa was of Vishnu only. However, there is a catch in the statement of vaishampayana. Here he uses the words ‘vaishnava form’ which he said ‘was witnessed by dhananjaya’.

I never claimed anywhere that Vishnu doesn’t have a cosmic form. All I say is Bhagawad Gita is entirely Shiva’s glory and the vishvarupa of Bhagwad Gita is supreme Mahakala’s form. We shouldn’t forget that Vishnu himself means ‘all pervasive’. Lord Vishnu is himself this entire cosmos. Hence the very sahasranama begins with ‘Vishvam’ as the first name of that god, meaning, he is all that is there in this universe because being all-pervasive. So, it is very much true that Vishnu has a cosmic form. In fact as per Puranas Brahma had entered inside Vishnu’s body and witnessed entire creation present within his body. So, was the case with Brahma as well when Vishnu entered Brahma’s body! These gods are not petty creatures, they are the most prominent forms assumed by Shiva. Hence in these ‘vibhootis’ Mahadeva’s nature shines.

Now, coming back to Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form, for Krishna who was Vishnu, it was not impossible to show his own divine cosmic form, even if Arjuna requests a hundred times. But still Krishna failed to repeat the discourse (along with displaying cosmic form), to Arjuna a second time. Let’s see why.

In Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form, there are two parts to the cosmic form viz. – all-pervasive thousand heads, thousand feet form, and second aspect was frightfulness having mouths grinding all the kauravas under the teeth. The thousand heads, thousand feet, all pervading aspect is common to every superior god whosoever displayed cosmic form – say Skanda, Vishnu, etc., however, the fear inspiring kala aspect belongs to Shiva (in his role as Mahakala).

Arjuna not only beheld a form spread in all the directions, but also beheld the supreme Mahakala standing in his terrible cosmic form, devouring the entire enemies of pandavas grinding them under his terrible fangs. This form was all pervasive, hence although Shiva is all-pervasive; the ‘all-pervasiveness’ can be attributed to Vishnu also. Hence it needs to be considered that Shiva’s Mahakala form took possession on top of the all pervading ‘vaishnava’ form which was the base.

To explain more clearly, consider a bald headed person who is ashamed of his baldness and hence wears various wigs (false hair) – when he wears a wig of braided hair, he would look different, when he wears a wig of kinky hair, he would look different, when he wears a wig of blonde colour, he would look different, but remove his wig, and he would be in his base form of being a bald headed person. Similarly, an ugly woman may apply any coats of makeup and may look beautiful in different ways, but when makeup is removed, the original face remains unchanged. The wigs vary; the makeup varies but the base (bald head or ugly face) remains same.

Therefore, the base all-pervasive divine form having thousand heads and thousand feet was same Vaishnava form which was possessed by Mahakala, therefore it frightened Arjuna like anything.

Here in Utanka’s case, we need to consider vaishampayana’s words as speaking only about the base ‘vaishnava’ form which was displayed to Arjuna as all-pervading in all directions. This would become clear with the below reasoning and at the end of this section, I would again show how the lord has already clarified all these potential objections during gita discourse itself.

After Uttanka witnessed the cosmic form, he described it while praying to Krishna. Mahabharata clearly describes Uttanka’s reaction after seeing that form. Nowhere Uttanka gets ‘frightened’. He only becomes filled with wonder (vismayaM) and his narration of that form depicts only and only the all-pervasiveness and not even a hint of it being terrible is available in his words. He had seen the soumya (soft) cosmic form of Vishnu hence it was a vaishnava form. We’ll come to this point shortly, but let’s discuss some observations.

This prayer of Uttanka has been found to exist in two different variations. It could be ‘pATha-bheda’ or ‘whatever’. Let’s see how. The Mahabharata Kumbhakonam edition as well as the version that Nilakantha followed (Nilakantha’s version was the one followed by ‘Sri KM Ganguly’ for his English translation); in both these versions, the prayer of Uttanka after seeing the vaishnava form has some verses found to be lesser. This version of Mahabharata describes krishna’s Vishnu form as follows:

“viśvakarman namas te ‘stu yasya te rūpam īdṛśam
padbhyāṃ te pṛthivī vyāptā śirasā cāvṛtaṃ nabhaḥ ||6
dyāvāpṛthivyor yan madhyaṃ jaṭhareṇa tad āvṛtam
bhujābhyām āvṛtāś cāśās tvam idaṃ sarvam acyuta ||7
saṃharasva punar devarūpam akṣayyam uttamam
punas tvāṃ svena rūpeṇa draṣṭum icchāmi śāśvatam ||” (MBH 14:55:6-8)

However, the southern recension of Mahabharata published by Vavilla Ramaswamy Sastrulu and Sons, Madras; and the Gita press recension have a different reading of the prayer of Uttanka. These recensions have some additional verses as posted below. Noteworthy point is that BORI version also has the below additional verses in their version and after the below verses, come the verses that are shown above.

uttaṅka uvāca
(namo namaste sarvātmannārāyaṇa parātpara।
paramātmanpadmanābha puṇḍarīkākṣa mādhava॥
hiraṇyagarbharūpāya saṃsārottaraṇāya ca।
puruṣāya purāṇāya cāntaryāmāya te namaḥ॥
avidyātimirādityaṃ bhavavyādhimahauṣadhim।
saṃsārārṇavapāraṃ tvāṃ praṇamāmi gatirbhava॥
sarvavedaikavedyāya sarvadevamayāya ca।
vāsudevāya nityāya namo bhaktapriyāya te॥
dayayā duḥkhamohānāṃ samuddhartumihārhasi।
karmabhirbahubhiḥ pāpairbaddhaṃ pāhi janārdana॥)

viśvakarmannamaste’stu viśvātmanviśvasambhava।
padbhyāṃ te pṛthivī vyāptā śirasā cāvṛtaṃ nabhaḥ॥ 7
dyāvāpṛthivyoryanmadhyaṃ jaṭhareṇa tavāvṛtam।
bhūjābhyāmāvṛtāścāśāstvamidaṃ sarvamacyuta॥ 8
saṃharasva punardeva rūpamakṣayyamuttamam।
punastvāṃ svena rūpeṇa draṣṭumicchāmi śāśvatam॥“ (MBH 14:55:7-9)

In either case the prayer is totally focussed only on the two factors viz. – Firstly, the all pervasive nature of the form and second, Vishnu’s glorification by various names of his, such as ‘padmanabha’ etc. This is purely Vishnu’s form, and there is no depiction of terrible fangs and mouths devouring entire creation grinding them under the sharp teeth etc.

This point gives yet another strong evidence in support of my view as follows – Uttanka on seeing the divine ‘vaishnava’ form, clearly recognized it as ‘vishnu’ and sang praises in his glorification which were ‘vishnu specific’ using various names such as – narayana, padmanabha, madhava, vasudeva etc. Whereas contrasting with Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form we see that, Arjuna could not clearly recognize whom he was witnessing. Arjuna asked that lord to reveal who he was, as quoted in below verse.

“ākhyāhi me ko bhavānugrarūpo namo’stu te devavara prasīda।
vijñātumicchāmi bhavantamādyaṃ na hi prajānāmi tava pravṛttim॥“ (MBH 6:35:31)

“Tell me who thou art of (such) fierce form. I bow to thee, O chief of the gods, be gracious to me. I desire to know thee that art the Primeval One, I do not understand thy action”.

And in reply to his question, in the immediately next verse, the lord says – “I am ‘kala’”.

kālo’smi lokakṣayakṛtpravṛddho lokānsamāhartumiha pravṛttaḥ॥” (MBH 6:35:32a)

“The Holy One said, “I am ‘kāla (Time)’, the destroyer of the worlds, fully developed. I am now engaged in slaying the race of men”.

So, our assumption is correct that Bhagawad Gita’s form was Mahakala’s fear inspiring ‘ghora’ form superimposed over Vishnu’s all-pervasive ‘soumya’ form. Hence Arjuna had definitely seen the vaishnava form but that was possessed by Mahakala’s form hence was extremely terrible to behold at.

Moreover, in Anugita episode Krishna had clearly expressed inability and said that it was “impossible” for him to discourse BG once more. And the supreme Mahakala form of chapter 11 of Bhagawad Gita was a part of that discourse which was also shown by resorting to Yoga. Hence if Utanka is assumed to have seen the same form, then it contradicts the words of Krishna in ‘Anu-gita’ section.

Once again, for the adamant fanatics who may not be willing to accept this reasoning, the lord of Bhagawad Gita, foreseeing such people of kaliyuga, had already given his verdict saying that – no one after Arjuna would ever be able to see that form even if one does penances, sacrifices, or any other meritorious activities.

na vedayajñādhyayanairna dānairna ca kriyābhirna tapobhirugraiḥ।
evaṃrūpaḥ śakya ahaṃ nṛloke draṣṭuṃ tvadanyena kurupravīra॥ 48
mā te vyathā mā ca vimūḍhabhāvo dṛṣṭvā rūpaṃ ghoramīdṛṅmamedam।
vyapetabhīḥ prītamanāḥ punastvaṃ tadeva me rūpamidaṃ prapaśya॥” (MBH 6:35:47-49)

“The Holy One said, ‘Except by thee alone, hero of Kuru’s race, I cannot be seen in this form in the world of men by anyone else, (aided) even by the study of the Vedas and of sacrifices, by gifts, by actions, (or) by the severest austerities. Let no fear be thine, nor perplexity of mind at seeing this awful form of mine. Freed from fear with a joyful heart, thou again see Me assuming that other form”.

This is enough to understand that Uttanka didn’t see the cosmic form of Mahakala which Arjuna had seen.

4.3. Cosmic form of Bhagawad Gita was Mahakala form similar to the form exhibited in Ishvara Gita

The supreme lord in Bhagawad Gita tells Arjuna who he is. He clearly says that he is the supreme ‘Kala’. This Kala is not ‘Yama’, rather, is the supreme ‘Mahakala’ the very destructive aspect of lord Shiva. The lord says that he has already slain all the enemies of Arjuna such as ‘Bhishma, Drona, Karna etc.’ and tells Arjuna that Arjuna was just an instrument who was visible in this world engaging in killing.

kālo’smi lokakṣayakṛtpravṛddho lokānsamāhartumiha pravṛttaḥ।
ṛte’pi tvāṃ na bhaviṣyanti sarve ye’vasthitāḥ pratyanīkeṣu yodhāḥ॥ 32
tasmāttvamuttiṣṭha yaśo labhasva jitvāśatrūnbhuṅkṣva rājyaṃ samṛddham।
mayaivaite nihatāḥ pūrvameva nimittamātraṃ bhava savyasācin॥ 33
droṇaṃ ca bhīṣmaṃ ca jayadrathaṃ ca karṇaṃ tathānyānapi yodhavīrān।
mayā hatāṃstvaṃ jahi mā vyathiṣṭhā yudhyasva jetāsi raṇe sapatnān॥” (MBH 6:35:32-34)

“The Holy One said, “I am ‘kāla (Time or Death)’, the destroyer of the worlds, fully developed. I am now engaged in slaying the race of men. Without thee all these warriors standing in the different divisions shall cease to be. Wherefore, arise, gain glory, (and) vanquishing the foe, enjoy (this) swelling kingdom. By me have all these been already slain. Be only (my) instrument. O thou that can’st draw the bow with (even) the left hand. Drona and Bhishma, and Jayadratha, and Karna, and also other heroic warriors, (already) slain by me, do thou slay. Be not dismayed, fight; thou shalt conquer in battle (thy) foes”.

The same is narrated by Krishna in Shanti Parva in chapter 342. Krishna tells to Arjuna the same fact which Vyasa had also revealed to Arjuna earlier. He says that Rudra is known as “Kala” and tells Arjuna that all the foes that Arjuna had slain, had actually been slain beforehand by Kala (Rudra). Therefore relating both these instances we can easily understand that the terribel cosmic form displayed in Bhagavad Gita instance was Mahakala form of bhagavan Rudra!

“yastu tē sō’gratō yāti yuddhē sampratyupasthitē.
taṁ viddhi rudraṁ kauntēya dēvadēvaṁ kapardinam. 138
kālaḥ sa ēva kathitaḥ krōdhajēti mayā tava..
nihatāstēna vai pūrvaṁ hatavānasi yānripūn.139
apramēyaprabhāvaṁ taṁ dēvadēvamumāpatim.
namasva dēvaṁ prayatō viśvēśaṁ haramakṣayam |” (MBH 12:342:138-140)
That Being whom, at the time of all thy battles, thou beheldest stalking in thy van, know, O son of Kunti, is no other than Rudra, that god of gods, otherwise called by the name of Kaparddin. He is otherwise known by the name of Kala, and should be known as one that has sprung from my wrath. Those foes whom thou hast slain were all, in the first instance, slain by him. Do thou bend thy head unto that god of gods, that lord of Uma, endued with immeasurable puissance. With concentrated soul, do thou bend thy head unto that illustrious Lord of the universe, that indestructible deity, otherwise called by the name of Hara.’”

Not only these kauravas, but even the Yadavas, the five sons of Draupadi, and even the Ravana and his demoniac forces in Valmiki Ramayana – all those were actually slain by Mahakala Shiva and Mahakali alone. Even Krishna and Balarama were just instruments in the wipe-out of Yadava race, and in fact they too couldn’t rise superior to the sway of all-destroying Kala. These details have been written in a separate article altogether how Mahakala was the original slayer of all kuru armies and other dynasties also. One may go through it entirely or specifically the section 4 of my article titled “The unfading glory of Mahakala – The Primordial and Eternal Supreme Time!”. This article explains entire nature of Mahakala in great details.

In Ishvara Gita also, lord Shiva exhibits his supreme nataraja form having thousands of head, thousands of feet and dances in the firmament. In Shiva’s ‘vama-bhaga’ (left side) remains Vishnu (because he is in fact Shiva’s wife Uma in male form). Shiva is described in Ishvara Gita as having terrible fangs and sharp teeth as follows.

“brahmāṇḍaṃ tejasā svena sarvamāvṛtya ca sthitam |
daṃṣṭrākarālaṃ durdharṣaṃ sūryakoṭisamaprabham ||” (Kurma purana_2,5.10)

“The one who is established in the world with his own lustre, who has the terrible fangs, which are aweful possessing the lustre of crores of suns”.

This is in similar fashion (although may not necessarily be same, as these forms are all formed of Maya and are taken for specific purposes) seen in Bhagawad Gita also.

“daṃṣṭrākarālāni ca te mukhāni dṛṣṭvaiva kālānalasannibhāni।
diśo na jāne na labhe ca śarma prasīda deveśa jagannivāsa॥“ (MBH 6:35:25)

“Beholding thy mouths that are terrible in consequence of (their) tusks, and that are fierce (as the all-destroying fire at the end of the Yuga), I cannot recognise the points of the horizon nor can I command peace of mind. Be gracious, O God of gods, O thou that art the refuge of the Universe”.

Even if we see the events in the destruction of Daksha’s sacrifice, Veerabhadra is always shown as having terrible fangs and sharpened teeth. That is a trademark awful form of Mahakala aspect of lord Shiva. So, lord Shiva had shown his Mahakala form over his Nataraja aspect to sages in Ishvara Gita; whereas in the battlefield of Kurukshetra he had shown his terrible Mahakala form on top of the all-pervasive form to Arjuna.


•    Krishna’s divine form shown in Kuru sabha was not the same as the Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form
•    The cosmic form witnessed by sage Uttanka was again not the same as that of Bhagawad Gita’s incident
•    Bhagawad Gita’s cosmic form was nothing but supreme Mahakala’s form seen by Arjuna
•    The form Arjuna had seen, was neither seen by anyone before Arjuna nor anyone would be able to see thereafter
•    Bhagavad Gita’s cosmic form was that of Mahakala Shiva only


5. Refuting the authenticity of the narration of Vibhooti yoga in Srimad Bhagavatam

Well, another question may also arise here and especially if the reader is a follower of Srimad Bhagawatam; she/he would surely ask the following question – “If Krishna was unable to repeat Bhagwad Gita once more, then how did he preach ‘Vibhooti Yoga’ chapter to Uddhava in Canto 11 Chapter 16 of Bhagawatam?”

Well, that’s a good question, but i fear that my answer would be too harsh to be read. I’m sorry to say that, that particular chapter of Bhagawatam is totally fake. When we do a comparison of Vibhooti Yoga of Gita from Mahabharata and Vibhooti Yoga of Bhagawatam (as recited to Uddhava) it would reveal us the truth that Bhagawatam’s chapter is cooked up one and can’t be true. Here are the reasonable evidences.

5.1. Defects in Vibhooti Yoga of Krishna’s Srimad-Bhagawatam

Let’s see some defects in Bhagawatam now.

“viśvāvasuḥ pūrvacittir gandharvāpsarasām aham
bhūdharāṇām ahaḿ sthairyaḿ gandha-mātram ahaḿ bhuvaḥ |” (SB. 11.16.33)
“Among the Gandharvas I am Viśvāvasu, and I am Pūrvacitti among the heavenly Apsaras. I am the steadiness of mountains and the fragrant aroma of the earth”.

Whereas the Bhagawad Gita states,

“aśvatthaḥ sarva-vṛkṣāṇāḿ devarṣīṇāḿ ca nāradaḥ
gandharvāṇāḿ citrarathaḥ siddhānāḿ kapilo muniḥ |” (BG. 10.26)
“Of all trees I am the banyan tree, and of the sages among the gods I am Nārada. Of the Gandharvas I am Citraratha, and among perfected beings I am the sage Kapila”.

Oh! In Mahabharata time while speaking Bhagwad Gita Krishna was ‘Chitraratha’ among the ‘Gandhervas’ and by the time Bhagawatam was composed he became ‘Vishvavasu’ among the Gandhervas? Wow! That’s a nice transition in charecters! Well, before someone mentally frames the idea of equating Chitraratha and Vishvavasu let me state that both were Gandhervas but they were not same. Chitraratha (also called as Chitrasen) was the king (leader) of Gandhervas and Vishvavasu was also a prominent Gandherva but different from their host Chitrasena. Vishvavasu received a curse and became a demon called ‘Kabandha’ who was killed by Rama and Lakshmana. Also, chapter 7 from book-2 of Mahabharata has a description of Indra’s court and the deities seated therein as described by Narada. There the names Vishvavasu and Chitraratha are distinctively used to refer to the two primary Gandhervas.

“bhago viśve ca sādhyāśca guruḥ śukrastathaiva ca।
viśvāvasuścitrasenaḥ sumanas taruṇastathā॥” (MBH 2:7:22)

“…Bhaga, Viswa the Sadhyas, the preceptor (Vrihaspati), and also Sukra; and Vishwavasu and Chitrasena, and Sumanas, and also Taruna…”.

Let’s see few more marvelous defects in Bhagawatam now. Read the following verses carefully.

“tīrthānāḿ srotasāḿ gańgā samudraḥ sarasām aham
āyudhānāḿ dhanur ahaḿ tripura-ghno dhanuṣmatām |” (SB 11.16.20)
“Among sacred and flowing things I am the holy Ganges, and among steady bodies of water I am the ocean. Among weapons I am the bow, and of the wielders of weapons I am Lord Śiva”.

Let’s see the below two verses from Bhagwad Gita now.

“pavanaḥ pavatām asmi rāmaḥ śastra-bhṛtām aham
jhaṣāṇāḿ makaraś cāsmi srotasām asmi jāhnavī |” (BG 10:31)
“Of purifiers I am the wind, of the wielders of weapons I am Rāma, of fishes I am the shark, and of flowing rivers I am the Ganges”.

“āyudhānām ahaḿ vajraḿ dhenūnām asmi kāmadhuk
prajanaś cāsmi kandarpaḥ sarpāṇām asmi vāsukiḥ |” (BG 10.28)
“Of weapons I am the thunderbolt; among cows I am the surabhi. Of causes for procreation I am Kandarpa, the god of love, and of serpents I am Vāsuki”.

Oh! Again a shocking transition in forms! In the verse from Bhagawatam, we learn that Krishna says he is “Bow” among all weapons, but earlier in Bhagwad Gita time in Mahabharata i thought he was “Thunderbolt” among all the weapons! Is it that Krishna didn’t like that thunderbolt much and switched over to bow? When he was “Rama” among the wielder of “ALL weapons” during the times of Mahabharata (Bhagwad Gita), then by the time of Bhagawatam how did he become Lord Shiva among the bowmen (and wielder of weapons)?

Well, I understand that supreme lord is everything – the good, the bad, the ugly, and the beautiful. So, that’s perfectly understood that lord is thunderbolt as well as Bow both. But there cannot be variations in Gita from one version to another; that erases the sanctity of it. If I were to write and Publish Gita, If I add a new Vibhooti to Lord’s discourse saying, “Of all the terrorists I am Osama, of all the influencial speakers I am Obama”; It would still be correct, since nothing is different from supreme lord hence these two are also Lord’s Vibhootis; but would that book of mine be considered authentic? If someone says, “Yes such variations we can bring in Gita versions”; then Bhagawatam’s Vibhooti Yoga is correct; if someone says “No”; then Bhagawatam’s that portion is not valid! I leave the decision of acceptance / rejection at the readers’ discretion!

Hope this above criticism is enough to understand that the Vibhooti Yoga chapter of Bhagawatam is NOT authentic and could be just an imaginary tale added by the author even though it might not have really happened!

In fact it would be again too harsh on my part to speak out the truth about Bhagawatam which is; – Bhagawatam itself is NOT an authentic scripture. Bhagawatam is not authored by Vyasa (contrary to everyone’s belief), the reasons behind doubting the authenticity of entire Bhagawatam as a scripture are documented as a separate article titled, “Top N Reasons to call Bhagawatam a BOGUS Scripture”. Interested parties may read it.

Therefore, based on Lord Krishna’s own words from Mahabharata it becomes clear that Krishna didn’t repeat Bhagwad Gita anywhere after the Mahabharata incident and he was not the original speaker of Bhagwad Gita, he was just a mediator through which another supreme power broadcasted his message to Arjuna. Now, to extend this analysis further, let me reiterate my claim here that it was Lord Shiva who spoke Bhagwad Gita through Krishna’s mouth, and Bhagwad Gita is totally a song of the glories of Lord Shiva who is the Parabrahman, Purusha, Atman as stated in Vedas. To explain this point of mine, let me prove my words by analyzing the verses of Bhagwad Gita. Let’s proceed!


Please note that, even though Bhagwad Gita is an essence of Upanishads, it is illogical to try to search for exact verses of Bhagwad Gita in Upanishads or in Vedas since Gita was a dialogue and wasn’t an exact copy-paste of Vedas / Upanishads. That’s why it is called as “essence of Upanishads”. Also, it included many context sensitive phrases like “O Arjuna…O Bharata” etc. So, in this article we will do a “reverse engineering”, to trace Bhagawad Gita’s “concepts” back to Vedas and Upanishads. The Vedic verses and Upanishad verses may not be identical to Bhagwad Gita verses; but by meaning, they would remain same. With this caveat in mind, let’s proceed.

Secondly, this is not a Bhagwad Gita Bhashya (commentary) by me. Already there are great commentaries available, and I don’t like to reinvent the wheel. The purpose of this article has already been outlined above. So, I am not interested to analyze and map the generic, trivial verses of Bhagwad Gita with Vedas. I would cover only those verses and portions of Gita where I smell a superiority complex being stated.

Well, for my analysis, I have identified 154 verses out of the total 700 verses of Bhagawad Gita which is 22.0% of the actual bulk. And believe me, this 22% only is used by Shiva-Haters to malign lord Shiva. I doubt if the so called Krishna devotees really ever read the other verses apart from this fragment! But in all these 154 verses it has been observed that Gita actually sings the glories of Lord Shiva only, and this is a pretty significant number which reveals the presence of Shiva in them, hence one really needs to ponder about this idea. In fact entire Bhagwad Gita, Vedanta, and Vedas sing only the glory of Lord Shiva, which people fail to understand.

But still let’s not conclude so quickly. Let’s read the in-depth analysis.

nainam chindanti shastrani

Lord Shiva giving Bhagavad Gita discourse via Lord Krishna

Understanding the clause, ‘Sri Bhagavan Uvacha”

Bhagawad Gita discource begins with the designation of the speaker as “sri bhagAvan uvAcha” which means, “The supreme Lord is speaking”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Let me begin this analysis with a simple fact. Bhagwad Gita narration states “Sri Bhagawan Uvacha“, which means, “Sri Bhagawan said”. Nowhere Bhagwad Gita ever mentioned, “Sri Krishna Uvacha“.

“Bhagawan” is not an ordinary designation. ISKCON Acharyas translate the word “Bhagawan” as “Supreme Personality of Godhead”, which in simple language is nothing but the “Supreme Lord” above whom there is no one.

This attribute belongs only to Bhagawan Rudra because he is the Purusha, he is the Parabrahman as per Vedas.

“purusho vai rudrah |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10:24:1)
“Lord Rudra is the Purusha of Vedas”.

Shruti clearly calls Rudra as the boss of all gods, who created all gods and gave them their respective powers, positions and designations. Shruti denies the existence of any boss who controls Rudra who is the Purusha.

Atharvasiras Upanishad clearly states that Lord Shiva is supreme. It says that nothing in past neither was ever greater than him nor can ever be in future.

“yasminnida.n sarvamotaprota.n tasmAdanyanna para.n ki~nchanAsti |
na tasmAtpUrva.n na para.n tadasti na bhUta.n nota bhavya.n yadAsIt.h |” (Atharvasiras Upanishad 5:05)
“There is none greater than him, on whom all the worlds are strung like beads. Over ages, nothing so far in the past was ever greater than him and nothing is going to be greater than him in future”.

Svetaswatara Upanishad also voices similar thoughts as shown below.

“na tasya kaarya.n karaNa.n cha vidyate na tatsamashchaabhyadhikashcha dR^ishyate |
paraasya shaktirvividhaiva shruuyate svaabhaavikii GYaanabalakriyaa cha |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 6:08)
“There is no effect and no cause known of him, no one is seen like unto him or better; his high power is revealed as manifold, as inherent, acting as force and knowledge”.

“na tasya kashchit.h patirasti loke na cheshitaa naiva cha tasya liN^gam.h |
sa kaaraNa.n karaNaadhipaadhipo na chaasya kashchijjanitaa na chaadhipaH |”(Svetaswatara Upanishad 6:09)
“There is no master of his in the world, no ruler of his, not even a sign of him. He is the cause, the lord of the lords of the organs, and there is of him neither parent nor lord”.

So, it’s clear from above verses that there is nothing superior to Lord Rudra. He is the Supreme personality of Godhead. Now we’ll see in below verse that it is lord Rudra alone who created all Gods and blessed them with their positions and designations.

“yo devaanaaM prabhavashchodbhavashcha vishvaadhipo rudro maharshhiH |
hiraNyagarbha.n janayaamaasa puurva.n sa no buddhyaa shubhayaa sa.nyunaktu” (Sve Upa. 3:4)
“He, the omniscient Rudra, the creator of the gods and the bestower of their powers, the support of the universe, He who, in the beginning, gave birth to Hiranyagarbha—may He endow us with clear intellect!”

“sa hi kṣayeṇa kṣamyasya janmanaḥ sāmrājyena divyasya cetati |
avannavantīrupa no duraścarānamīvo rudra jāsu no bhava ||” (Rig Veda 7:46:2)
“He (Rudra) through his lordship rules on beings of the earth, on heavenly beings (gods) through his high imperial sway (controlling influence or power). Come willingly to our doors that gladly welcome thee, and heal all sickness, Rudra. in our families”.

Well, an interesting FACT I would like to put here in context. Well, this fact is related to the word “Bhagawan”; It would be surprising for the readers to note that Vedas hailed ONLY Lord Shiva with the title -“Bhagawan”.Yes, initially it surprised me also when i learnt that from my friend’s blog and to my surprise when i researched, i found his point as correct. As I said, its discovery is not my original work; it has been discovered by my learned friend. So, here the readers have two brains which testify this fact. Originally it was my friend’s work which was “re-verified” within the limits of my capabilities, by me.

Vedas have not used the title called “Bhagawan” for any other god including Vishnu. They have used that designation exclusively only for Lord Rudra. Sri Rudram hymn from Yajurveda begins with the salutations to Rudra as the Bhagawan of Vedas. It says, “Om namo bhagawate rudraya |”, which means, “Salutations to lord Rudra who is the Bhagawan (Supreme personality of godhead)”. All other gods who received title as ‘Bhagawan’ received that title from Puranas not from Vedas. In fact in later texts (puranas), even Narada, Vyasa also got referred with that title, hence it became very colloquially used title for everyone in later texts. Bhagawan Vishnu’s names as ‘Om namo bhagawate Vasudevaya’ etc mantras are all Pouranic and not Vedic. In Vedas only Lord Rudra (Shiva) is the Bhagawan. And since Bhagwad Gita is an essence of Vedas and Upanishads it is enough to hint us that it was Bhagawan Rudra who was speaking the Gita from the mouth of Krishna.

Not only this; in fact Rudram hymn has used the words “Bhagawate”, “Bhagavo” etc at many places addressing Rudra. Even Upanishads have greeted Rudra with this exhalted title.

“yo vai rudraH sa bhagavAnyachcha tejastasmai vai namonamaH |” (Atharvasiras Upanishad 2:19)
“He who is Rudra, he alone is Supreme god (Bhagawan). He is the Supreme Light and we salute him again and again”.

“tasyottarataH shiro dakShiNataH pAdau ya uttarataH sa o~NkAraH ya o~NkAraH sa praNavaH yaH | praNavaH sa sarvavyApI yaH sarvavyApI so.anantaH | yo.anantastattAra.n yattAra.n tatsUkShma.n tachChukla.n | yachChukla.n tadvaidyuta.n yadvaidyuta.n tatparaM brahma yatparaM | brahma sa ekaH ya ekaH sa rudraH ya rudraH yo rudraH sa IshAnaH ya | IshAnaH sa bhagavAn.h maheshvaraH |” (Atharvasiras Upanishad 3:6)
“The head of “the sound of Om” is on your left side. Its feet are on your right side. That “Sound of Om” is the Pranava (primeval sound). That Pranava is spread everywhere. That which is everywhere is the greatest. That which is limitless, shines like a white star. That which is also called Shuklam (seminal fluid- the basic unit of life) is very very minute. That which is minute is like a lightning power. That which is like lightning power is the ultimate Brahman (parabrahman). That Brahman is one and only one. That one and only one is Rudra, it is also called Eeshana, it is also the ultimate God (BHAGAWAN) and it is also the lord of all things”.

So, it is evident beyond doubt that the God who preached Bhagawad Gita was “Bhagawan” aka “Lord Shiva”.

Conclusion: – God who spoke Bhagawad Gita was lord Shiva and Krishna only transmitted Shiva’s message like a live telecast of Radio / TV to the mankind.

BHAGAVAD GITA Verse(s) (BG. 2.16), (BG. 2.17), (BG. 2.18), and (BG. 10.20)

nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate satah
ubhayor api drsto ’ntas tv anayos tattva-darshibhih | (BG. 2:16)
avinasi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idam tatam
vinasam avyayasyasya na kascit kartum arhati | (BG. 2:17)
antavanta ime deha nityasyoktah saririnah
anasino ’prameyasya tasmad yudhyasva bharata | (BG. 2:18)
“There is no (objective) existence of anything that is distinct from the soul; nor non-existence of anything possessing the virtues of the soul. This conclusion in respect of both these hath been arrived at by those that know the truths (of things).
Know that [the soul] to be immortal by which this entire [universe] is pervaded. No one can compass the destruction of that which is imperishable.
It hath been said that those bodies of the Embodied (soul) which is eternal, indestructible and infinite, have an end. Do thou, therefore, fight, O Bharata”.

Here the speaker is describing the attributes of Atman in detail but in chapter 10 of Bhagawad Gita the speaker says he is the atman of all. Therefore, because these two are related, instead of analyzing that verse separately, I’m combining that verse also here.

aham atma gudakesha sarva-bhutasaya-sthitah
aham adis ca madhyam ca bhutanam anta eva ca | (BG. 10.20)
“I am the self (Atman), O thou of curly hair, seated in the heart of every being, I am the beginning, and the middle, and the end also of all beings”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Here, since the soul (Self) is being praised with excellent attributes in this verse, and also in (BG. 10.20) the speaker identifies himself with that Atman. So, let me take this opportunity to primarily focus on the aspect of finding who that Atman (Soul) is! In this context let’s see what Shruti speaks about.

Vedas proclaim that the Brahman (also called Purusha) is himself the Atman (Self or soul) of all and if we analyze Vedas carefully, we would understand that Lord Shiva is the Brahman of Vedas. And he is the Atman (Self) of all. Let’s see few references in support of this.

“kasmAduchyate paraM brahma yasmAtparamaparaM parAyaNa.n cha |
bR^ihadbR^ihatyA bR^i.nhayati tasmAduchyate paraM brahma |” (Atharvasiras Upanishad)
“He (Rudra) is called Para Brahmam (Supreme Brahman – the ultimate reality), because he is the highest and excellent of all, though he is inside every thing, he is in and out of everything, he is the refuge of every thing and bigger than the biggest. That’s why he is called Parambrahma”.

Taittiriya Aranyaka (10.16.2) of Yajurveda calls lord Shiva as:

“aatmaaya namaH |” (Salutations to Him, He who is the Spirit – Atman – dwelling in all creatures)
aatmali~Ngaaya namaH |” (Salutations to Him, He who is concealed in the heart of all creatures being their inmost Self.)

So, it is Lord Rudra who is the Atman of all and hence the Brahman of the Vedas. Further the following references also support this truth.

“yatparaM brahma sarvaatmaa vishvasyaayatanaM mahat.h |
suukShmaatsuukshmataraM nityaM tattvameva tvameva tat.h |” (Kaivalya Upanishad 16)
“That which is the Supreme Brahman, the soul of all, the great support of the universe, subtler than the subtle, and eternal – that is thyself, and thou art That”.

In the above verse it is stated that the Atman of all is nothing but the Parabrahman. Now the below verse clarifies who is the Atman of all. It is Rudra who is the Atman and the Parabrahman.

“eko rudro na dvitIyAya tasmai ya imA.nllokAnIshata IshanIbhiH |
pratya~NjanAstiShThati sa.nchukochAntakAle sa.nsR^ijya vishvA bhuvanAni goptA | (Svet. Upa 3.02 & Atharvasiras Upanishad 5.2)
“Rudra is truly one. For the knowers of Brahman do not admit the existence of a second. He rules all worlds by his power. He dwells as the inner Self (Atman) of every living being. After having created all the worlds, He, their Protector, takes them back into Himself at the end of time”.

The below verse describes the properties or qualities of the Atman (which is verily the Brahman) in detail.

“hR^itpuNDariikaM virajaM vishuddhaM vichintya madhye vishadaM vishokam.h |
achintyamavyaktamanantaruupaM shivaM prashaantamamR^itaM brahmayonim.h |” (Kaivalya Upanishad 6)
“(That Who is) unthinkable, unmanifest, of endless forms, the good, the peaceful, Immortal, the origin of the worlds, without beginning, middle, and end, the only one, all-pervading, Consciousness, and Bliss, the formless and the wonderful”.

Note the properties of Atman described in above verse. Atman is the source of all, and immortal (means eternal and imperishable). Now, this same Upanishad further clarifies that the same Soul which is the Brahman is none other than Bhagwan Shiva as follows. It states that Shiva is the origin of all and is eternal. And knowing him only one gets liberated, it says that there is no other way to liberation. These are verily the same qualities that Vedanta attribute to Brahman. So, it is doubly confirmed now.

“umaasahaayaM parameshvaraM prabhuM trilochanaM niilakaNThaM prashaantam.h |
dhyaatvaa munirgachchhati bhuutayoniM samastasaakShiM tamasaH parastaat.h |” (Kaivalya Upanishad 7)
sa eva sarvaM yadbhuutaM yachcha bhavyaM sanaatanam.h |
j~naatvaa taM mR^ityumatyeti naanyaH panthaa vimuktaye | (Kaivalya Upanishad 9)
“Meditating on the highest Lord, allied to Uma, powerful, three-eyed, blue-necked, and tranquil, the holy man reaches Him (Shiva) who is the source of all, the witness of all and is beyond darkness (i.e. Avidya). He alone is all that was, and all that will be, the Eternal; knowing Him, one transcends death; there is no other way to freedom”.

Although it is clear by now, yet let’s see many more evidences to make a firm impression on our doubtful mind.

As evident from the below verse it’s Lord Shiva who resides in the heart as the Atman (Brahman) of all. And this explains who is the lord spoken in (BG. 10.20), “aham atma gudakesha sarva-bhutasaya-sthitah”, meaning, “I am the self (Atman), O thou of curly hair, seated in the heart of every being”. So, here it is crystal clear that Bhagawad Gita was preached by Lord Shiva through the mouth of Krishna. But let’s not stop here, let’s learn some more stuff.

“aya.n hR^idi sthitaH saakshii sarveshhaamavisheshhataH |
tenaaya.n hR^idayaM proktaH shivaH sa.nsaaramochakaH |” (Panchabrahmopanishat 36)
“Lord Shiva, who grants salvation to one, from this day- to-day life of the world, exists as witness without differentiation in the heart of all beings and is called Hrudayam (That which exists within)”.

Lord Shiva who is the Atman of all, is the Parabrahman as confirmed in below verse clearly.

“yachChukla.n tadvaidyuta.n yadvaidyuta.n tatparaM brahma yatparaM
brahma sa ekaH ya ekaH sa rudraH ya rudraH yo rudraH sa IshAnaH ya
IshAnaH sa bhagavAn.h maheshvaraH |” (Atharvasiras Upanishad 3:6)
“That which is also called Shuklam (seminal fluid- the basic unit of life) is very very minute. That which is minute is like a lightning power. That which is like lightning power is the ultimate Brahman. That Brahman is one and only one. That one and only one is Rudra, it is also called Eeshana, it is also the ultimate God and it is also the lord of all things”.

Well, the above analysis has covered pretty much the concept of soul, its properties and its identity with Brahman (who is Shiva). Therefore the Bhagwad Gita verses (BG. 2:16 – 2:18 and BG. 10.20) have been pretty much covered. So, these Bhagwad Gita verses clearly speak about the glories of the Atman which is non-different from Shiva. Hence, these verses actually glorify Lord Shiva alone. We could have put a period here and moved on to the next verse of Bhagwad Gita for our analysis, but learning more is always good and I have some more stuff to share. Therefore I would take this opportunity to extend our analysis of the concept of Atman (Self) to some more extent. We’ll also see that the Atman (supreme self) which remains untouched by illusion and Avidya, the same Atman who is Shiva remains as the Jiva (individual self) in all the beings. We would learn that the Jiva, Atman, Brahman and Purusha are all essentially the same and they all are the names of Bhagawan Rudra only. Let’s precede our discussion further.

Well, here I recommend the readers to read with firm attention since the below analysis is a bit complex and involves complex correlations.

Self, the Atman is of the form of fire, the self-effulgent one. It is the same who is called as Purusha or Brahman or Skhambha or Vaiswanara in Shruti. The nature of self as being the fire is described in Taittiriya Aranyaka of Yajurveda as:-

“ha.nsaH shuchishhadvasurantarikshasaddhotaa vedishhadatithirduroNasat.h |
nR^ishhadvarasadR^itasadvyomasadabjaa gojaa R^itajaa adrijaa R^itaM bR^ihat.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka
“That which is the sun who abides in the clear sky, is the Vasu in the mid-region, is the fire that dwells in the sacrificial altar and in the domestic hearth as the guest, is the fire that shines in men and in the gods, as the Soul, is the fire that is consecrated in the sacrifice, is dwelling in the sky as air, is born in water as submarine heat, is born in the rays of the sun, is the fire that is directly seen as the luminary, and is born on the mountain as the rising sun – that is the Supreme Truth, the Reality underlying all”.

Note the above verse carefully,I’ll use this verse shortly for correlation. The above verse glorifies fire as the supreme truth (Brahman) which is present in all beings as the Atman (soul). This describes the Atman as the same fire which exists in sacrifice. But understand that Vedas have sometimes esoteric and double meanings associated to various terms. Here the sacrifice not only means ‘Yajna’ but actually also means the inflow and outflow of ‘Prana’ (breaths) which keep kindling the fire (Atman) within us. So, here sacrifice in general is ‘Yajna’ which is true, and also the in-depth meaning of the same is Prana (life breaths). The same Agni even dwells as the innermost soul (Atman) of all Gods also, hence Agni being the immortal Atman (Soul), it gives the confidence of immortality and invincibility to Gods. Of course Gods cannot be immortal but their inner self (Atman) always remains immortal, and that Atman extends their life span and they get the full measure of life. This is evident in the below verse from Shatapatha Brahmana.

“athainaṃ devāḥ | antarātmannādadhata ta imamamṛtamantarātmannādhāyāmṛtā
bhūtvāstaryām bhūtvā staryāntsapatnānmartyānabhyabhavaṃstatho evaiṣa
etadamṛtamantarātmannādhatte nāmṛtatvasyāśāsti sarvamāyuretyastaryo haiva
bhavati na hainaṃ sapatnastustūrṣamāṇaścana stṛṇute
tasmādyadāhitāgniścānāhitāgniśca spardhete ‘āhitāgnirevābhibhavatyastaryo hi khalu
sa tarhi bhavatyamṛtaḥ |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:14)
“The gods then established that (fire) in their innermost soul; and having established that immortal element (Agni) in their innermost soul, and become immortal and unconquerable, they overcame their mortal, conquerable enemies. And so this one now establishes that immortal element in his innermost soul; and–though there is for him no hope of immortality–he obtains the full measure of life; for, indeed, he becomes unconquerable, and his enemy, though striving to conquer, conquers him not. And, accordingly, when one who has established his fires and one who has not established his fires, vie with each other, he who has established his fires overcomes the other, for, verily, he thereby becomes unconquerable, he thereby becomes immortal”.

Note that in the above verses ‘gods established Agni in their innermost soul’, should be understood as gods have Agni as their innermost soul. Since without soul the body is inert and one can’t establish an externally available soul within oneself. Vedas are little esoteric in meaning and complex in poetic style. This expression simply means that Gods have Agni (Rudra) as their soul, the same is confirmed in Yajurveda (IV:5:9:p) which states, “devana hridayebhyo namah”, which means, “salutations to the Lord Rudra who is the in-dweller of hearts of all gods (as Atman)”. Therefore it is clear here that Vedas have called Rudra only under the name of Agni in above sections, and all the Gods have Rudra (Agni) as their Atman within them.

Now, how the fire of Atman is constantly lit in our bodies is described as follows. The inflow-outflow of Prana is the sacrifice that keeps the innermost Vaiswanara fire (Atman) always lit. But these Pranas (breaths) are also nothing but fire. That is to say, the sacrificer (Creatures who breathe), kindles the fire by using fire (kindles Atman by using Prana). The below verse confirms this fact that Agni is indeed this Prana which inturn produces Agni (Atman).

“tadyatrainamado manthanti | tajjātamabhiprāṇiti prāṇo vā
agnirjātamevainametatsantaṃ janayati sa punarapāniti tadenamantarātmannādhatte so
‘syaiṣo ‘ntarātmannagnirāhito bhavati |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:15)
“Now, when, on that occasion, they produce that (fire) by churning, then he (the sacrificer) breathes (blows) upon it, when produced; for fire (Agni) indeed is breath (prana): he thereby produces the one thus produced. He again draws in his breath: thereby he establishes that (fire) in his innermost soul; and that fire thus becomes established in his innermost soul”.

The below verse clarifies in more detail about the Prana being fires.

“te vā ete prāṇā eva yadagnayaḥ | prāṇodānāvevāhavanīyaśca gārhapatyaśca vyāno
‘nvāhāryapacanaḥ |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:18)
“The (sacrificial) fires, assuredly, are those breaths: the Âhavanîya and Gârhapatya are the out-breathing and the in-breathing; and the Anvâhârya-pakana is the through-breathing”.

The same Agni which is the innermost soul (Atman) is also the same which is the Agni of the sacrifice (N.B: – This we had noted carefully as stated in verse from Taittiriya Aranyaka

If one has understood everything that’s said till now, one must have understood that VAISWANARA AGNI which is in our body as the Atman, is kindled using Pranas (which are again Agni), and it is the same Agni which exists in “Sacrifice” also. And this inflow-outflow or breath is itself as Sacrifice. Now, the secret truth would be revealed.

The same Agni which is the innermost soul (Atman) is also the same which is the Bhokta (enjoyer) of the sacrifice. But this Agni is verily Lord Shiva only who is praised by the name ‘Agni’ since Agni is the purifier hence most auspicious name it is. In this connection let’s see evidence from Shatapatha Brahmana to stay in sync with Shruti.

“tadvā agnaya iti kriyate | agnirvai sa devastasyaitāni nāmāni śarva iti yathā prācyā
ācakṣate bhava iti yathā bāhīkāḥ paśūnām patī rudro ‘gniriti
tānyasyāśāntānyevetarāṇi nāmānyagnirityeva śāntatamaṃ tasmādagnaya iti kriyate
sviṣṭakṛta iti |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 1:7:3:8)
“That (offering) then is certainly made to ‘Agni,’ for, indeed, Agni is that god;–his are these names: Sarva, as the eastern people call him; Bhava, as the Bâhîkas (call him); Pasûnâm pati (‘lord of beasts,’ Pasupati), Rudra, Agni . The name Agni, doubtless, is the most auspicious (sânta), and the other names of his are inauspicious: hence it is offered to (him under the name of) ‘Agni,’ and to (him as) the Svishtakrit”.

So, from above verses from Vedas it is clear that the innermost self (Atman) which is called Agni is verily the Lord Rudra only. This proves that Atman of all the creatures including the Gods is Bhagawan Rudra. And Atman is verily the Brahman, so it is Rudra who is called as ‘Brahman’ in Vedanta.

Now, let’s see some more verses from Upanishads also. Shvetaswatara Upanishad states that the one, who is called as the Atman or Self (soul) of all, is none other than Bhagwan Rudra.

“sarvaanana shirogriivaH sarvabhuutaguhaashayaH |
sarvavyaapii sa bhagavaa.nstasmaat.h sarvagataH shivaH |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad. 3:11)
“All faces are His faces; all heads, His heads; all necks, His necks. He dwells in the hearts of all beings. He is the all— pervading Bhagavan. Therefore He is omnipresent Shiva”.

“etajGYeya.n nityamevaatmasa.nstha.n naataH para.n veditavya.n hi kiJNchit.h |
bhoktaa bhogyaM preritaara.n cha matvaa sarvaM prokta.n trividhaM brahmametat.h | (Svetaswatara Upanishad 1:12)
“The enjoyer (jiva), the objects of enjoyment and the Ruler (Isvara)—the triad described by the knowers of Brahman—all this is nothing but Brahman (Rudra). This Brahman (Rudra) alone, which abides eternally within the self, should be known. Beyond it, truly, there is nothing else to be known”.

Ekakshara Upanishad also voices the same opinion in this regards as follows.

“ya eva.n nitya.n vedayate guhaashayaM
prabhuM puraaNa.n sarvabhuuta.n hiraNmayam.h |
hiraNmayaM buddhimataaM paraa.n gati.n
sa buddhimaanbuddhimatiitya tishhThatiityupanishhat.h |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 13)
“Whoso thus knows the eternal Dweller (soul) in the cave of the heart, the ancient Lord who has become the all, the golden, the supreme goal of the wise, is wise. He stays transcending all (forms of) wisdom. This is the secret doctrine”.

Now the same Upanishad reveals who is that lord in the very opening verse itself as,

“ekaakshara.n tvakshare.atraasti some
sushhumnaayaa.n cheha dR^iDhii sa ekaH |
tva.n vishvabhuurbhuutapatiH puraaNaH
parjanya eko bhuvanasya goptaa |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 1)
“Thou art the one Imperishable in the Imperishable, conjoint with Uma. As known by means of Susumna, here (on the empirical plane), the one firm (Principle art Thou). Thou art the ancient source of the world, the Lord of beings; Thou the Parjanya (the Principle of life-giving water), the Protector of the world”.

Sage Atri enquired to Yajnavalkya about the realization of the self. He got the following response.

“atha hainamatriH paprachchha yaaj~navalkya.n ya eshho.ananto.avyakta | aatmaa ta.n kathamaha.n vijaaniiyaamiti | sa hovaacha yaaj~navalkyaH so.avimukta upaasyo ya | eshho.ananto.avyakta aatmaa so.avimukte pratishhThita iti |” (Jabala Upanishad 2.01)
“Thereafter the sage Atri (son of the creator Brahma) asked of Yajnavalkya: ‘How am I to realize the Self which is infinite and unmanifest?’ (To this) Yajnavalkya replied: That Avimukta (Lord Siva as the redeemer) is to be worshipped; the Self which is infinite and unmanifest, is established in (i.e., is non-different from) the Avimukta (in Ishvara, possessed of attributes)’”.

So far we have analyzed the concept of Atman in its pure state. But another truth is that the same Atman (Shiva) gets mingled with his own Maya and blankets himself with his power of illusion and becomes the Jiva, the individual self of all beings. Shruti confirms this fact as follows.

“deho devaalayaH proktaH sa jiivaH kevalaH shivaH .
tyajedaj~naananirmaalya.n so.ahaMbhaavena puujayet.h |” (Maitreyi Upanishad II:1)
“The body is said to be the temple; the individual Self (Jiva) is Shiva alone. One should discard the faded flowers in the form of spiritual ignorance and worship God (with the conviction) ‘He and I are one’.

“nama ataryaya chaladyaya cha |”(Sri Rudram, Yajurveda IV:5:8:o)
“Salutations to Him (Rudra) who is born again and again in Samsara and who tastes the fruits of Karmas in the form of Jiva”.

“pashupatiraha~NkaaraavishhTaH sa.nsaarii jiivaH sa eva pashuH |” (Jabali Upanishad 1.2)
“Jeeva (being) is nothing but Shiva (the Lord of all beings – Pasupathi) himself who is acting the role of egoism”.

Therefore the individual self (Jiva), the inner self (Atman) are both one and the same and that is nothing but lord Shiva who si the Brahman (also called as Purusha). It is Lord Shiva who pervades every being (plus Gods) and dwells in their hearts as the Atman. So, the Gita verse (BG. 10.20) is definitely a proof that Bhagawad Gita was actually spoken by lord Shiva and not Krishna (as the traditional belief goes).

Conclusion: – It is therefore analyzed and proved that the Atman (Self or soul) of all beings which is described in the Bhagwad Gita verses 2:16, 2:17, and 2:18 is infact Lord Shiva only and these verses of Bhagwad Gita glorify only lord Shiva under the name of ‘Atman (Self)’.

BHAGAVAD GITA Verse(s) (BG. 2.20), (BG. 2.23)

na jayate mriyate va kadacin nayam bhutva bhavita va na bhuyah|
ajo nityah sasvato ’yam purano na hanyate hanyamane sarire | (BG. 2.20)
nainam chindanti shastrani nainam dahati pavakah|
na cainam kledayanty apo na sosayati marutah | (BG. 2.23)
“It is never born, nor doth it ever die; nor, having existed, will it exist no more. Unborn, unchangeable, eternal, and ancient, it is not slain upon the body being perished. Weapons cleave it not, fire consumeth it not; the waters do not drench it, nor doth the wind waste it. It is incapable of being cut, burnt, drenched, or dried up”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

The above verses of Gita have been exactly adapted from the below verses of Atma Upanishad.

“na jAyate na mriyate na shuShyati na klidyate na dahyate na kampate
na bhidyate na chChidyate nirguNaH sAkShibhUtaH shuddho niravayavAtmA kevalaH
sUkShmo nirmamo nira~njano nirvikAraH shabdasparsharUparasagandhavarjito nirvikalpo
nirAkA~NkShaH sarvavyApI so.achintyo nirvarNyashcha punAtyashuddhAnyapUtAni .
niShkriyastasya sa.nsAro nAsti |” (Atma Upanishad 1:4)
“He (The supreme self) is not born, does not die, does not dry, is not wetted, not burnt, does not tremble, is not split, does not sweat. He is beyond the gunas, is spectator, is pure, partless, alone, subtle, owning naught, blemishless, immutable, devoid of sound, touch, colour, taste, smell, is indubitable, non-grasping, omnipresent. He is unthinkable and invisible. He purifies the impure, the unhallowed. He acts not. He is not subject to empirical existence”.

Well, we have already analyzed in BG. 2:16-2:18 that the Atman (Self or soul) is none other than Shiva who is the Brahman. So, the same truth applies here as well. This Atman whose qualities are being glorified here in these verses of Bhagwad Gita is again the qualities and glories of Bhagawan Shiva alone beyond doubt. But for the sake of elaborating the point let’s see few more verses from Atma Upanishad.

“Atmasa.nj~naH shivaH shuddha eka evAdvayaH sadA |
brahmarUpatayA brahma kevalaM pratibhAsate |” (Atma Upanishad 2:1)
“The Atman – the Shiva, is pure, one and non-dual always, in the form of Brahman. Brahman alone shines forth”.

“daivena nIyate deho yathA kAlopabhuktiShu |
lakShyAlakShyagati.n tyaktvA yastiShThetkevalAtmanA | (Atma Upanishad 2:19)
shiva eva svaya.n sAkShAdayaM brahmaviduttamaH |
jIvanneva sadA muktaH kR^itArtho brahmavittamaH |” (Atma Upanishad 2:20)
“By fate is the body borne into contexts of experiences at appropriate times. (On the contrary) he who, giving up all migrations, both knowledge and unknowable, stays as the pure unqualified Self, is himself the manifest Shiva. He is the best of all Brahman-Knowers. In life itself the foremost Brahman-Knower is the ever free, he has accomplished his End”.

Conclusion: – We have clearly mapped the Bhagwad Gita verses to the Upanishad from where they have been adapted into the Gita lecture. And also it’s been seen that the Atman whose qualities have been proclaimed in the verses BG. 2:20 and BG. 2:23 are essentially the qualities of Bhagawan Shiva. So, this concludes that the Bhagwad Gita verses BG. 2:20 and BG. 2:23 are actually the glorification of Lord Shiva only.

BHAGAVAD GITA Verse(s) (BG. 3.15)

karma brahmodbhavam viddhi brahmakshara-samudbhavam
tasmat sarva-gatam brahma nityam yajne pratisthitam | (BG. 3.15)
“Know that work proceeds from the Vedas; Vedas have proceeded from Him who hath no decay. Therefore, the all-pervading Supreme Being is installed in sacrifice”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Here we need to find out who is that Supreme Being without decay from whom the Vedas have originated. Svetaswatara Upanishad clearly mentions that Vedas, Sacrifices and Penances all originated from Maheshwara the lord who is the controller of his Maya.

“chhandaa.nsi yaGYaaH kratavo vrataani bhuutaM bhavya.n yachcha vedaa vadanti |
asmaan.h maayii sR^ijate vishvameta-ttasmi.nshchaanyo maayayaa sanniruddhaH |” (Swetasvatara Upanishad 4:09)
“The Lord of Maya projects the Vedas, sacrifices, spiritual practices, past and future, religious observances, all that the Vedas declare, and the whole world including ourselves. The lord of Maya, again, is bound by Maya in this [in the form of Jiva].”

The same Upanishad explains further and informs us that the Lord of Maya is Maheshwara as follows.

“maayaa.n tu prakR^iti.n vidyaanmaayina.n cha maheshvaram.h |
tasyavayavabhuutaistu vyaapta.n sarvamida.n jagat.h |” (Swetasvatara Upanishad 4:10)
“Know then Prakriti (nature) is Mâyâ (art), and the Maheshwara the Mâyin (maker); the whole world is filled with what are his members (forms)”.

In Atharvaveda there is a hymn to Kala which sings the praise of the lord Mahakala (Shiva) who is the time, the cause which makes everything happen and cease to happen on time. Mahakala himself determines who should originate, when should originate, who should cease to exist and when should that happen. This hymn to Kala of Kala – Mahakala states that Vedas have sprung from him as follows:

“kāló ha bhūtáṃ bhávyaṃ ca putró ajanayat purā́
kālā́d ŕ̥caḥ sám abhavan yájuḥ kālā́d ajāyata |” (Atharva Veda 19:54:3)
“In Kala erst the text produced what is and what is yet to be. The Riks arose from Kala, the Yagus was born from Kala”.

Again another hymn to Vratya – the ascetic form of Shiva explains that, not only Vedas but Itihasa (Epics), Puranas, Gaathaas and Naarasansis all originated from Shiva. Here the poem esoterically describes in a unique style stating that when Vratya (Shiva) moved away to a region all these sacred texts viz. Vedas et al and also devotion followed him. Scriptures and devotion can’t be considered as mobile creatures which can walk to follow Shiva. Here the verses mean that the scriptures sprang from Vratya (Shiva) in the direction where he projected them.

“sá uttamā́ṃ díśam ánu vy àcalat |
tám ŕ̥caś ca sā́māni ca yájūṃṣi ca bráhma cānuvyàcalan |
r̥cā́ṃ ca vái sá sā́mnāṃ ca yájuṣāṃ ca bráhmaṇaś ca priyáṃ dhā́ma bhavati yá eváṃ véda |” (Atharva Veda 15:6.3)
“sá br̥hatī́ṃ díśam ánu vy àcalat |
tám itihāsáś ca purāṇáṃ ca gā́thāś ca nārāśaṃsī́ś cānuvyàcalan |
itihāsásya ca vái sá purāṇásya ca gā́thānāṃ ca nārāśaṃsī́nāṃ ca priyáṃ dhā́ma bhavati yá eváṃ véda |” (Atharva Veda 15:6.4)
“He went away to the last region. Richas, Sāmans Yajus formulas and Devotion followed him. He who possesses this knowledge becomes the dear home of Earth and Agni and herbs and trees and shrubs and plants. He went away to the great region. Itihāsa and Purāna and Gāthās and Nārāsansis followed him. He who possesses this knowledge becomes the dear home of Earth and Agni and herbs and trees and shrubs and plants”.

The same fact is stated in Purusha Suktam of Rig Veda (10:90) which is again a hymn to the Bhagawan Rudra who is the Veda Purusha as stated in Taittiriya Aranyaka (10:24:1), “purusho vai rudrah”. This hymn also states that all Vedas emerged from Purusha (Shiva) through a sacrifice called ‘Sarvahuta’.

“tasmād yajñāt sarvahuta ṛcaḥ sāmāni jajñire |
chandāṃsijajñire tasmād yajustasmādajāyata |” (Rig Veda 10:90:9)
“From that great general sacrifice Ṛcas and Sāma-hymns were born:
Therefrom were spells and charms produced; the Yajus had its birth from it”.

Lord Shiva is not only the creator of the Vedas and all source of sacred knowledge; he is their protector (preserver) also as stated in Taittiriya Aranyaka as follows. Probably this is the reason why whenever there is a decline in Vedic righteousness Lord Shiva discends as Adi Shankaracharya and reestablishes the Vedic glory.

“iishaanaH sarvavidyaanaamiishvaraH sarvabhuutaanaaM |
brahmaadhipatirbrahmaNo.adhipatirbrahmaa shivo me astu sadaashivom.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.21.1)
“May the Supreme who is the ruler of all knowledge, controller of all created beings, the preserver of the Vedas and the one overlord of Hiranyagarbha, be benign to me. I am the Sadasiva described thus and denoted by Pranava”.

Well, let’s finally look at a verse from Upanishad which also speaks the same truth calling Mahadeva as the father of Vedas.

“prabhu.n vareNyaM pitaraM mahesha.n yo brahmaaNa.n vidadhaati tasmai |
vedaa.nshcha sarvaanprahiNoti chaagrya.n ta.n vai prabhuM pitara.n devataanaam.h |
mamaapi vishhNorjanaka.n devamiiDyaM yo.antakaale sarvalokaansa.njahaara |” (Sharabha Upanishad 2-3)
“I am saluting that primeval God who is the Lord, who is the best, who is the father of the world, who is the greatest among gods, who has created Brahma, who gave all Vedas to Brahma in the beginning, who is the father of Vishnu and other devas, who merits praise, and who at the time of deluge destroys the world. He is the only one who is greater than every body, who is the best and who rules over others”.

Also, it is lord Shiva only who is the leader of sacrifice. He is established in sacrifice. The sacrifice, leader of sacrifice, the priest of sacrifice, the remuneration (dakshina) offered in the sacrifice, and the eater of the sacrifice all is lord Shiva only. Let’s see few evidences in support of this statement.

“R^icho yajuu.nshi prasavanti vaktraatsaamaani samraaDvasuvantariksham.h |
tva.n yaj~nanetaa hutabhugvibhushcha rudraastatha daityagaNaa vasushcha |” (Ekakshara Upanishat 7)
“The Vedic verses, prose formulas and songs proceed from Thy mouth. Thou shinest best (as) the Vasus and the sky. Thou art the leader of the sacrifice; thou art the all-pervading fire and the Rudras. So also (art Thou) the hosts of demons and Vasus”.

“vishve nimagnapadaviiH kaviinaaM tva.n jaatavedo bhuvanasya naathaH |
ajaatamagre sa hiraNyaretaa yaj~naistvamevaikavibhuH puraaNaH |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 2)
“Thou art immanent in all; from (the view-point) of the wise, Thou, the Lord of the world art the all-knowing (Fire-Jataveda). In the beginning Thou art unborn, the first born, the sacrifice, too, art Thou. Thou alone the one omnipresent and ancient”

Atharva Veda’s hymn to Vratya (Shiva) states that his breaths are sacrifice and remuneration as well.

“yò ‘sya ṣaṣṭhò ‘pānáḥ sá yajñáḥ |” (Atharva Veda 15:16.6)
“His sixth downward breath is Sacrifice”.
“yò ‘sya saptamò ‘pānás tā́ imā́ dákṣiṇāḥ |” (Atharva Veda 15:16.7)
“His seventh downward breath are these sacrificial fees”.

“brahma vā agniḥ” (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:5:4:8)
“Agni is the priesthood”.

And Agni is just another name to state facts about Shiva. Shatapatha Brahmana 1:7:3:8 clarifies that Rudra is the god who is called by the name of ‘Agni’. So, Shiva himself is the priesthood.

“rudro yaj~na umaa vedistasmai tasyai namo namaH |” (Rudrahridayopanishad 20)
“Rudra is Yajna. Uma is Vedi. Prostrations to Him and Her”

So, it is to be understood that Lord Rudra is in three-fold existence when it comes to sacrifice viz. the sacrificer(priest), the sacrifice(Yajna), and the sacrificial remuneration (Dakshina). In fact, the ‘Chamakam’ portion of Shatarudriya hymn prays to lord Rudra requesting him to grant all the necessities to perform Yajna. There is no god who can bestow better boons that Rudra, Mahabharata calls Mahadeva as ‘boon giving’ numerous times. Even Rig Veda (2:33:15) calls Rudra as “Bounteous Giver”.

Conclusion:- Therefore Bhagwad Gita verse 3.15 which states that Vedas have originated from the decayless lord who is established in sacrifice; is actually a statement about Lord Shiva. This verse is proved beyond doubt.

BHAGAVAD GITA Verse(s) (BG. 3.22), (BG. 3.23), (BG. 3.24) and (BG. 4.14)

na me parthasti kartavyam trisu lokesu kincana
nanavaptam avaptavyam varta eva ca karmani | (BG. 3.22)
yadi hy aham na varteyam jatu karmany atandritah
mama vartmanuvartante manushyah partha sarvasah | (BG. 3.23)
utsideyur ime loka na kuryam karma ced aham
sankarasya ca karta syam upahanyam imah prajah | (BG. 3.24)
“There is nothing whatever for me, O Partha, to do in the three worlds, (since I have) nothing for me which hath not been acquired; still I engage in action. Because if at any time I do not, without sloth, engage in action, men would follow my path, O Partha, on all sides. The worlds would perish if I did not perform work, and I should cause intermixture of castes and ruin these people”.

Combining a related verse here as follows:

na mam karmani limpanti na me karma-phale sprha
iti mam yo ’bhijanati karmabhir na sa badhyate | (BG. 4.14)
“Actions do not touch me. I have no longing for the fruits of actions. He that knoweth me thus is not impeded by actions”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

This verse seemingly looks like applicable at the earthly plane but it says the worlds would perish if he didn’t engage in action. Therefore this verse actually talks about the entire cosmos as a matter of fact and is not just limited to earthly plane. Well, on earthly plane also it applies aptly on the life of Lord Krishna which we’ll discuss in short and then proceed with the real meaning and we’ll see in real on whom this verse actually applies.

Sri Krishna was a perfect Yogi, he didn’t actually have anything to be obtained from the world, but to uplift Dharma and fulfil the need of his birth he had to take interest in external state’s affairs (Hastinapur), and despite being a charioteer whose duty would end only by safeguarding his master, he still engaged himself in protection of Arjuna, Bhima, and to-be born foetus called Parikshit from Vaishnavastra, Narayanastra, and Bramhashirastra respectively. Had he not involved himself into action there was a sureshot peril for those righteous men. So, Krishna’s life is a great example and a perfect role model for the humanity. But here in this Gita verse neither the peril of humans or governance of country Bharatvarsha is the subject under discussion nor am I writing a commentary on Mahabharata or Krishna’s biography. So, let me come back to the Gita now.

This verse of Gita is actually a universal law that is being stated. It states that if the Supreme Lord doesn’t engage himself into action, the worlds would perish and there would also be intermixtures of Varnas. It is strange to notice that entire cosmos follows a discipline. Planets revolve around the sun, sun rises and sets every day without fail, upagrahas (satellites) revolve around the planets and never go off the track, earth rotates around her own axis causing timely seasons, Indra, Parjanya, Varuna kind of gods shower rains on time in autumn without fail, moon waxes and wanes periodically without any deviation. All these are governed by some external supreme power under whose supervision the entire cosmos functions. One may imagine the chaos that would arise in absence of that boss who controls all these functions. If sun, moon, and mother earth takes a holiday or break, then the flora and fauna would die, crops wouldn’t grow if seasons malfunction. So, this is the beauty of the supreme boss who supervises all these functions and with the fear of which these cosmic functions and gods do their job.

The supreme entity called Purusha (Brahman) is the supreme consciousness which is just a witnesser and doesn’t really require indulging into action. But with the involvement with Prakriti it functions as the government (Eshwara). The supreme Brahman is the same which is called Atman (Self), and as per Shruti Rudra is the Brahman of Vedas as the Sri Rudram of Yajurveda (IV.5.5.i) says, “namo brihate cha” (Salutations to Lord Rudra who is ‘Brihat’ i.e., Brahman), Rudra is the Purusha described in Vedas as the Yajurveda Taittirya Aranyaka (10:24:1) says, “purusho vai rudrah” (Rudra is the Veda Purusha).

The same lord Shiva is beyond the cosmos (Hiranyagarbha) and Viraat and also is present as the self of all as evident in the following verse.

“tataH paraM brahma paraM bR^ihanta.n yathaanikaaya.n sarvabhuuteshhu guuDham.h |
vishvasyaikaM pariveshhTitaaramiisha.n ta.n GYaatvaa.amR^itaa bhavanti |” (Svetasvathara Upanishad 3:07)
“The Supreme Lord Rudra is higher than Virat, beyond Hiranyagarbha. He is vast (Brihat=Brahman) and is hidden in the bodies of all living beings. By knowing Him who alone pervades the universe, men become immortal”.

Supreme self, Brahman (Atman) who is Shiva himself, doesn’t require to work (or act) as stated in below verse from Atma Upanishad.

“punAtyashuddhAnyapUtAni niShkriyastasya sa.nsAro nAsti |” (Atma Upanishad 1:4)
“He (The supreme self) purifies the impure, the unhallowed. He acts not. He is not subject to empirical existence”.

However, the same Bhagwan Rudra who is beyond the universe (Hiranyagarbha) appears within the Hiranyagarbha (cosmos) and remains there as the saguna Brahman involving himself into actions and governance of the universe. Supreme lord Rudra who is beyond the Hiranyagarbha (prajapati) appears inside the Prajapati (cosmos) again as stated in Shatapatha Brahmana (9:1:1:6). He assumes diverse forms inside the Hiranyagarbha (cosmos) and creates various deities, pancha bhutas, and all creatures. Regarding this Taittiriya Aranyaka (10:24:1) of Yajurveda says “sarvo vai rudrastasmai rudraya namo astu” which means, “All this is verily Rudra. To Rudra we offer our salutations”. It further states, “vishvam bhutam bhuvanam citram bahudha jatam jayamanam cayat sarvo hyesha rudrastasmai rudraya namo astu” which means, “The whole universe, the created beings and whatever there is manifoldly and profusely created in the past and in the present in the form of the world, all that is indeed this Rudra. Salutations be to Rudra who is such”.

Similarly Shatapatha Brahmana ( – gives account of Lord Rudra’s Asthamurthy forms by names Pashupati (Plants got manifested from this name), Ugra (God Vayu manifested from this name). Asani (God Indra manifested from this name), Bhava (Parjanya the rain god manifested from this name), Mahadeva (the prajapati Brahma and Moon manifested from this name), Isana (Sun god Aditya manifested from this name). And every time after taking a new name and form Lord Rudra mentioned that he is mightier than all of them. Atharva Veda (15:14) section details out the same story in a different poetic manner where it also speaks of many other forms of lord Shiva including Brihaspati, Vishnu, Maruts to name a few.

Well, true that entrie cosmos, living beings, Devatas (gods) and every mobile and immobile creation is he himself, but then why can’t he stay without indulging himself into action? What would happen if he doesn’t work? Why should he remain strict, and angry? We’ll discuss these points now.

In any system, be it the cosmos or just a country or any organization; law and order are the most significant things which are indispensable. Where there is no law and order, there one can expect only total chaos. Any organization which functions well, its success is only based on the discipline, law, and order. Same rule holds true for cosmos and gods also.

It is because of the fear of Bhagwan Rudra everyone in the cosmos functions with discipline. Sri Rudram of Yajurveda begins its praise to Rudra by offering salutations to Rudra’s anger as follows.

“namaste rudramanyavautota ishhave namah |
namaste astu dhanvane bahubhyamuta te namah |” (Sri Rudram, Yajurveda IV: 5:1: a)
“Oh! Rudra! My salutations to your anger and also to your arrows. My salutations to your bow and to your two hands”.

And the immediately following verses talk about his auspicious nature as follows.

“yaa te rudra shiva tanu raghoraapapakashini |
taya nastanuva shantamaya girishantabhichakashihi |”(Sri Rudram, Yajurveda IV: 5:1: c)
“Lord Rudra, you who dwell on Mount Kailas and who confer happiness, by that form of yours which is not terrible, which will not injure us, and which is highly auspicious, behold and illuminate us”.

How can Rudra behave as a terrible god and at the same time be caring and calm natured as well? It’s all like a fatherly preceptor who loves his disciples as his own children but in order to mend their ways he also gives punishments. Same case holds true on a caring father who also has a stern aspect.

It’s because of the fear of Bhagawan Rudra that the cosmos functions perfectly. This is evident from the below verses of Shruti.

“yadida.n ki.n cha jagat.h sarvaM praaNa ejati niHsR^itam.h |
mahad.hbhayaM vajramudyataM ya etadviduramR^itaaste bhavanti |” (Katha Upa. II.3.2)
“All this universe, evolved (from Prana), moves in prana (Rudra); the most frightful like an uplifted thunderbolt. Those who know this become immortal”.

“bhayaadasyaagnistapati bhayaattapati suuryaH |

bhayaadindrashcha vaayushcha mR^ityurdhaavati paJNchamaH |” (Katha Upa. II.3.3)
“For fear of Him, fire burns; For fear of Him, shines the sun;
For fear of Him, Indra and Vayu function; For fear of Him, death, the fifth, stalks on the earth”.

The below verse is directly spoken by Lord Shiva himself.

“so.aha.n sarvAkAraH . yato vA imAni bhUtAni jAyante |
yena jAtAni jIvanti . yatprayantyabhisa.nvishanti . taM mAmeva
viditvopAsIta . bhUtebhirdevebhirabhiShTuto.ahameva . bhIShAsmAdvAtaH
pavate . bhIShodeti sUryaH . bhIShAsmAdagnishchendrashcha . somo.ata
eva yo.aha.n sarveShAmadhiShThAtA sarveShA.n cha bhUtAnAM
pAlakaH . so.ahaM pR^ithivI . so.ahamApaH . so.aha.n tejaH . so.aha.n vAyuH |
so.aha.n kAlaH . so.aha.n dishaH . so.ahamAtmA . mayi sarvaM pratiShThitam.h |
brahmavidApnoti param.h . brahmA shivo me astu sadAshivom.h |” (Bhasma Jabala Upanishad)
“I myself am that Great Lord Siva, God of all gods, and the Supreme Controller of all the universes. I am that Brahman, I am Omkara; I am the Creator, Preserver and Destroyer of all. Through My terror only, vayu blows, through my terror only Surya shines, through my terror only fire burns, Indra et al also function properly through my terror. I am this world and the five elements. I am the Highest Truth that exists, the Brahman of the Upanishads”.

Rudra’s terror is so fearsome that for that reason even the Vedic seers fear to take his names directly. For that reason, in Vedas the seers have composed hymns under various names (of other gods) but actually meaning to praise Rudra only. All the hymns which speak high about any deity are actually the glories of Bhagawan Rudra alone sung under those various names. That’s the reason Rig Veda (RV 1.164.46) says, “ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti |“ which means, “there is only one God whom learned seers call by various names”. Hence, a lot of places we find Agni, Indra, Soma, Vishnu, Vishwakarman, Prana, Skhambha, Kala, Kama, Vratya etc. kind of names have been used calling them as supreme and as the creators of heaven, earth and universe. All those names are just dummy (indirect) names they all are the glories of Bhagawan Rudra only which praise his various aspects. A perfect example which establishes this truth is present in Shatapatha Brahmana (1:7:3:8) where the sacrifice is actually offered to Rudra but seers out of fear preferred to call him as ‘Agni’ since that indirect calling was felt as auspicious by them; as given below. Here ‘inauspicious’ means ‘fearsome’ since they are his direct names.

“tadvā agnaya iti kriyate | agnirvai sa devastasyaitāni nāmāni śarva iti yathā prācyā
ācakṣate bhava iti yathā bāhīkāḥ paśūnām patī rudro ‘gniriti
tānyasyāśāntānyevetarāṇi nāmānyagnirityeva śāntatamaṃ tasmādagnaya iti kriyate
sviṣṭakṛta iti |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 1:7:3:8)
“That (offering) then is certainly made to ‘Agni,’ for, indeed, Agni is that god;–his are these names: Sarva, as the eastern people call him; Bhava, as the Bâhîkas (call him); Pasûnâm pati (‘lord of beasts,’ Pasupati), Rudra, Agni . The name Agni, doubtless, is the most auspicious (sânta), and the other names of his are inauspicious: hence it is offered to (him under the name of) ‘Agni,’ and to (him as) the Svishtakrit”.

Bhagawan Rudra commands and rules over all gods and created beings with his high imperial power of authority as stated in below verse from Rig veda.

“sa hi kṣayeṇa kṣamyasya janmanaḥ sāmrājyena divyasya cetati |” (Rig Veda 7:46:2)
“He (Rudra) through his lordship thinks on beings of the earth, on heavenly beings through his high imperial sway (controlling influence or power)”.

So, all gods who control the cosmic functions work under the imperial authority of Rudra fearing his strictness and discipline, including Brahma and Vishnu also. In this connection Atharvashika Upanishad says that Brahma and Vishnu meditate on OM (which is lord Rudra only) and do their jobs as creator and preserver. It clearly states that Vishnu meditates upon Eeshana (Rudra) as follows.

“sarvakaraNAni manasi saMpratiShThApya dhyAna.n viShNuH prANaM manasi saha karaNaiH saMpratiShThApya dhyAtA rudraH prANaM manasi sahakaraNairnAdAnte paramAtmani saMpratiShThApya dhyAyIteshAnaM pradhyAyitavya.n sarvamidaM |” (Atharvashika Upanishad 2:1)
“The pranava (the sound of Om) makes all the souls to bow before it. It is the one and only one which has to be meditated upon as the four Vedas and the birth place of all devas. One who meditates like that goes away from all sorrows and fears and gets the power to protect all others who approach him. It is because of this meditation only that Lord Vishnu who is spread every where, wins over all others. It is because Lord Brahma controlled all his organs and meditated upon it, he attained the position of the creator. Even Lord Vishnu , parks his mind in the sound (Om) of the place of Paramathma (ultimate soul) and meditates upon Eeshana, who is most proper to be worshipped. All this is only proper in case of Eeshana”.

That should be enough to clarify beyond doubt that Rudra rules over all Gods and all beings. But then a question may arise, on whose command does lord Rudra function? Is there any boss who rules above Bhagawan Rudra? The answer has been clearly established by sage Svetaswatara as follows.

“na tasya kaarya.n karaNa.n cha vidyate na tatsamashchaabhyadhikashcha dR^ishyate |
paraasya shaktirvividhaiva shruuyate svaabhaavikii GYaanabalakriyaa cha |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 6:08)
“There is no effect and no cause known of him (Rudra), no one is seen like unto him or better; his high power is revealed as manifold, as inherent, acting as force and knowledge”.

“na tasya kashchit.h patirasti loke na cheshitaa naiva cha tasya liN^gam.h |
sa kaaraNa.n karaNaadhipaadhipo na chaasya kashchijjanitaa na chaadhipaH |”(Svetaswatara Upanishad 6:09)
“There is no master of his in the world, no ruler of his, not even a sign of him. He is the cause, the lord of the lords of the organs, and there is of him neither parent nor lord”.

Not only does Rudra command and keep the cosmic functions disciplined, he in fact punishes the one who disobey or deviate from his prescribed duties. That’s why Rudra’s darts, arrows and bow are the most feared objects in all the four Vedas. Even the great lord Vishnu in his incarnation of lion-man (Narasimha), failed to subdue his ‘tamasic’ nature arising out of drinking the blood of the demon Hiranyakashyap; and his failure in controlling his own fiersome warth, became a threat to the universe and its beings. Then it’s the same lord Rudra who without any hesitation killed Narasimha by taking the form of a Sharabha monster as per the following verses from Sharabha Upanishad. This shows that Rudra is not partial, Vishnu who is his own half of the body (they being hari-hara) since Vishnu is a male form of Uma (as Rudra Hridayopanishad clarifies), and Vishnu is the greatest devotee of Rudra and closest to his heart. This is a classic example of Lord Rudra’s blemishless management where his character is always white. Anything grey is black as per his rule. So, whosoever causes disturbance to the cosmic functions without his permission would get punished without any prejudice. He killed Narasimha when Narasimha lost control on his own wrath as follows:

“yo ghora.n veshhamaasthaaya sharabhaakhyaM maheshvaraH .
nR^isi.nha.n lokahantaara.n sa.njaghaana mahaabalaH |” (Sharabha Upanishad 4)
“kR^ipayaa bhagavaanvishhNu.n vidadaara nakhaiH kharaiH .
charmaambaro mahaaviiro viirabhadro babhuuva ha |” (Sharabha Upanishad 6)
“That very strong Maheswara took the horrifying form of Sarabha and killed Narasimha who was destroying the world. (Sarabha is the avatar of Shiva which is a combination of eagle, lion and man). That god with his sharp claws tore, Vishnu who took the form of Narasimha. He who was wearing the hide became Veerabhadra”.

Similarly, as stated in Shatapatha Brahmana (1:7:4:3), Shatapatha Brahmana (1:7:4:6), and Shatapatha Brahmana (1:7:4:7) he respectively destroyed the unethical sacrifice (read Prajapati), made Bhaga blind who was trying to eat the fruit of the unethical sacrifice, and also broke the teeth of Pushan who also tried to eat the sacrificial share which was not fit for being accepted. So, it becomes clear now, that everyone who deviates away from the path of their prescribed duties, or acts unethical, or breaks the rules; has to undergo punishments from Rudra. There is no exception for anyone in the impartial nature of Rudra.

So, with the above detailed analysis it should be crystal clear by now that the one supreme force which governs all the cosmic functions, supervises and manages all the gods and created beings is only Bhagawan Rudra. Now, if Rudra becomes lenient, and doesn’t enforce his law and order through his terror, if Rudra doesn’t engage himself into action and remain as his true nature of Brahman the all witnesser; then there would be total chaos in the universe. Sun god might take leave, Indra might remain indulged in his own pleasurable activities forgetting the timely rains and governance, Brahma might take a break from the usual routine life, Vishnu might take a longer nap on his snake bed and fail to protect people in a timely manner.

Now we are left with analyzing the second part of the Gita verse which states that if the supreme lord doesn’t engage in action, there would be intermixture of castes. That’s also true. The most desirable pleasure for any being (ranging from creatures to gods) is the pleasures of flesh. The most frequently done crime is rape in all the countries. If people stay away from committing adultery, it’s all due to the fear of law, order and punishment. If suppose one fine day someone says there would be no law in the country, and everyone would be given freedom of their own mind; believe me, the only activity that people would indulge in is to satisfy their carnal desires. That way in absence of law and order, there would surely be intermizture of races. Who was born to whom, no body would no. So, here the Bhagwad Gita verse is very apt and logically correct statement.

Conclusion:- Therefore Bhagwad Gita verse BG. 3.22, BG. 3.23, BG. 3.24 which state that even though there is nothing to be attained for the lord, he still involves himself into action lest the universe should perish; is actually a statement about Lord Shiva. And since the BG verse says “I involve myself into action”, this proves that it was Lord Shiva who was speaking through Krishna. This is proved beyond doubt.

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |

Copyright © 2012, by Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula. All Rights Reserved.
Check the Footer of this blog for Licenses related details.

Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः)
Follow him

Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः)

Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula, is 'षण्मातुरः' or 'षण्णां मातृणां पुत्रः' in detail, which means 'The son of six (divine) mothers' as he considers the six great goddesses viz. Parvati, Ganga, Lakshmi, Bhudevi, Saraswati, and Gayatri, as his own mothers, and sees himself as an infant in their laps. Together with their respective consorts he considers them as his own parents. He considers their children such as Ganesha, Skanda, Sanatkumara, Narada, Pradyumna etc., as his own siblings; in fact, not different from himself. He loves these six mothers very dearly, and equally loves the divine fathers; however, he has offered his 'devotion' only to Mahadeva! Hence he stands for lord Shiva safeguarding him from his haters. One would know him better from his writings.
Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः)
Follow him


  1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    People suffering with mental disorders preach (and follow) such topics :)…

  2. anand

    mayavadis don.nt know the truth

    1. Utkarsh

      Wow .keep it up do u know whg ure saying at least read whats written above


    You have indeed been doing a great job! Everyone on the earth has his own right to consider his Ishta as Supreme and the One without a second. Yet Shaivaits didn't have enough corroborative proof of their claim of Shiva being the Supreme Godhead; at least not on the Net while the mad Vaishnavas were ravaging the grounds and vilifying Shiva. A great work Indeed

  4. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Abhijit,

    Thanks for liking this blog. May god bless you and your family.


    I would like to draw your attention to the following points-
    In many scriptures Shiva has been subordinated to Vishnu. And all these instances need refutation.
    1.When Shiva went to kill Tripurasura he couldn't kill him even after a fierce battle. Then Vishnu came to his aid and destroyed the paativratya(chastity) of Tripurasura's wives thereby rendering him powerless.Then only Shiva could kill him.The whole account of the battle is narrated in such a way that Shiva seems an unwilling participant in the battle forced into it by the entreaties of all Devas. The gods somehow made him do the act by preparing everything for him from his bow to his chariot.
    2.The Ganga is said to have originated from the toe-nail of Vishnu (Vishnupadabjasambhuta) She is most reverentially held by Shiva in his mat-locks only because Shiva is a great devotee of Vishnu.
    3.Bhasmasura could have killed Shiva by the power of incineration indiscriminately conferred on him by Shiva himself.Vishnu came to his aid. He incarnated himself as Mohini and tactfully killed the Asura and saved Shiva.

    1. manivannanjurix

      Mahadev can do. But he needs unity amongst devas so he ordered all devas to contribute their power . In Tamil classic narrated that episode which says Shiva get assistance from all demigods in order to destroy Tripura but devas feel pride about themselves Mahadev seek their help, after noticing their prides, lord destroyed the tripura by his mere smile without using the powers of other devas and destroyed the pride of devas.

      Bhasmasura episode: why Lord Vishnu took Mohini form, if he so powerful then he should killed him by Chakra but not. As above article clearly says Mahadev has designated who do this and that. Its goes on.


    4.When Shiva's wife Sati immolated herself in Daksha's sacrifice Shiva got very angry and created Veerbhadra. Veerbhadra defeated every other god present there but although Vishnu's Narayani sena took a severe thrashing from Veerbhadra's hands there was no actual battle between Veerbhadra and Vishnu in which it could have been said that Veerbhadra had defeated Vishnu.It is stated in the tale that seeing the awkwardness of the moment- not through fear- Vishnu wisely left for his Vaikuntha.
    5.Shaiva puranas state the oneness of Vishnu and Shiva.They seem to attempt a reconciliation between the two cults.Vaishnava puranas never do so.They catagorically enunciate the superiority of Vishnu over Shiva.So if you see my point,Saivas are at a disadvantge.The layman may get the impression that since Shaivites don't have an all-powerful God they are making a meek attempt at reconciliation with Vaishnavas and somehow stating the superiority of Shiva by equating him with their all-powerful Vishnu.
    4.In the Ramayana which is apt to be considered a Vaishnavaite text Rama worships Shiva only out of form.His being a devotee of Shiva is for lokasamgraha only.Rama is all-powerful and Supreme.He is himself conscious of his superiority yet worships Shiva to present an example of devotion to the layman.Contrarily Shiva is a true devotee of Rama.He always chants Rama's name and sings his glories.He incarnated himself as Hanuman- a devotee of Rama and served him throughout his life. This tale repeates itself in the modern incarnation of Ramakrishna Paramhamsa who stated that he was none other than the same deity( Vishnu) who had come as Rama or Krishna in the past ages. His foremost desciple-Swami Vivekananda is said to have been an incarnation of Shiva as is evident from the utterances of many devotees and the fact that his monument at the Belur Math has a trident-Shiva's weapon- for its spire.It is said that Ramakrishna had initiated him in the name of Ram whreupon Vivekananda attained an ecstatic state of Samadhi. If Shiva is Supreme, why does he assume a subordinate position to Vishnu in every Yuga?


    5.Ramayana states that Shiva's bow was effortlessly broken by Rama.The story is narrated in such a way as to convey Rama's superiority over Shiva.
    6 Ravana asked for Parvati as a boon from Shiva who readily forfeited his beloved wife for the love of his greatest devotee.Parvati had to pray to Vishnu for her redemption.
    there may be many other such instances where Shiva has been in-subordinated to Vishnu.
    Even our beloved Marathi Saint-poet Dnyaneshwara who was not a Vaishnavite originally but belonged to a Shaivaite sect and who wrote an unparalleled verse-treatise on the Bhagavadgeeta states in one of his verses-jene sangrami haru jitila…. to Arjun mohe kavalila kshnamaji.(that same Arjuna who had defeated even Lord Shiva in battle was overcome by delusion in a moment's time)Here the subordination reaches a new height! Shiva subordinated to even Krishna's devotee! Neither in the original Mahabharata or Bharavi's Kiratarjuniyam do we find any mention of Shiva being defeated by Arjuna.It was Arjuna who was defeated in the battle.Whence did Dnyaneshvara gleaned this paradoxical reference I dont know.


    7 In many forms Shiva puja the worship is started by bowing down to Vishnu.The achamana is done by using the mantras- Keshvaya/Madhavay/Govinday namah. Asanashuddhi is done by reciting the shloka- Om prithivi tvaya dhruta loka devi tvam Vishnuna dhruta.Why Shaivaites had been unable to do away with references to Vishnu in their worship? Vaishnavaites never refer to Shiva in their puja.Moreover why should the Rudradhyaya(Chamakam)should start with obeisance to Agni and Vishnu-Agnavishnu sajoshse….? Its eems wherever there is Shiva, Vishnu has made intrusion into that place somehow.
    8. We must concede that the Vaishnavaites have a great corpus of popular story based literature in their Favor.The Bhagavadgeeta,Bhagavatam,the great epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata with their leading charachters- Rama and Krishna being incarnations of Vishnu,the Vaishnav puranas,even inasmuch as the world of music is cocerned- the more melodiously sung Vaishnav stotras ( listen to Vaishnav stotras sung by M S Subbulaxmi and others-Shiva stotras sung by many others didn't appeal to my mind as being that much melodiously sung).Shaivaites lack the advantage of popular story-based literature because Shiva has been treated more as a Nirguna Tatva rather than a personal deity.There is a big corpus of such literature-no doubt- but it doesnt have the influential potency of the Vaishnavite literature mentioned above.
    If you find these points correct and worth serious consideration I would like you to refute the Vaishnavaites in regard to these points with your superb analytical reasoning.


    Did you see my today morning's post in which I had put forth some points of Vaishnavites which need refutation?

  10. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Abhijit,

    Thanks for the good list of points. They are valid, however, I would humbly request you not to move away from Vishnu either. Barring the cult specific Vaishnava texts, if we go by authoritative and authentic scriptures viz. Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharata (Itihasa), and if we analyze them we'll find that Vishnu is a son of Uma-Maheshwara who originated from them and he being originated form Shiva's left side he is Uma's male form in one way (Uma being shiva's left half). This is why Himavan praises Bhavani as “O Devi I saulte your that thousand headed Narayana form”.
    Vishnu is in reality the greatest god who knows lord Shiva the best. Vishnu always parks his mind on Eshana (as supported by Upanishads and Mahabharata). Vishnu works under the blessings/command/permission of Mahadeva always. Even you know what? when Krishna in former times was asked to seek a boon from Shiva, he asked “O Shiva! I wish the only boon that my devotion for you should always remain unchanged” (Mahabharata has this reference).
    Rishi Narayana (who became krishna) did penance for Rudra and became one with that god Rudra whop is the Purusha and that's how Narayana (Vishnu/krishna) acquired all pervasiveness (reference exists in Satapata Brahmana and Mahabharata). In fact if Vishnu is great, his 'greatness' is due to Shiva. Vishnu is always a dutiful follower of his originator viz. Shiva.

    Therefore, when Vishnu supports Shiva in some mission, it is all the grace of Mahadeva, and not a favor done by Vishnu on Shiva. And in my opinion, after goddess Uma if anyone is there whose heart is filled completely with Shivabhakti it is Vishnu. If you read my article titled “sampurna vishnu tatwam…” you would understand that scriptures not alays glorify Vishnu's deeds. It is goddess Bhavani whose glories are sung under the pseudo-name – Vishnu!. Agnavishno…of chamakam is an invocation to Agni (Rudra) and Vishnu (Uma). It is an esoterically prayed statement to mean “Uma-Maheshwara”. You'll find this point already analyzed in Sampurna Vishnu tatwam…article.

    So, brother; do not worry on the Vaishnavite conclusions on Vishnua nd SHiva. I'll definitely take all your valuable points for refutation. I am thankful to you that you have such a deep shiva bhakti and you have faith in my analtical abilities (which are not mine but actually belong to Mahadeva and it's his grace which shines through these articles and in reality I am just an instrument in his hands). I am also thankful to you for providing this extensive list of points. I am aware fo all these points which are used by Anti-Shiva groups to attack on us, and have plans to refute them.
    However, at present my focus is to hunt for bigger fishes, iam following top-down approach ratehr than bottom up. Hence so far i have not refuted these points. I am focussing on many Meru mountains at present, however, i assure that surely these hills would also be taken into analysis after the bigshots. My idea is if Meru mountains can be blasted, then automatically the hills would stand nowhere, then anti-shiva terrorists cannot gain courage to show challenge us on blasting hills. 🙂

    I'll surely work on your points. Thanks for the interest adn devotion towards Mahadeva! May Uma-Maheshwara bless you and your entire family with all the best things in life! May your bhakti grow further!



    Thank you very much for cosidering my points worthwhile.I belong to a lingayat family in which Shiva puja is mandatory. But when I learned Sanskrit and began to read the scriptures, I came across the above mentioned references.Ever since my mind has been restless and has wanted to refute them.When I saw your blog I got the first ever indication of hope in that direction.
    On the karmic level- in Shiva worship- we must do away with all the dependence on Vishnu.I am not a Vishnu hater or anything like that.But I think Shiva being the Supreme he needs no assistance from Vishnu in anything.Theories remain on the subtle level; what people have directly in their hands and have to deal with are nitya karmas like daily worship. So in my opinion the grave need of the hour is the purification of the modes of Shiva worship by removing all the references to and dependence on Vishnu.The sooner we do this we shall have a practical tool as it were to refute the vaishnavite attacks.Unless and until we do this, however much we may theorize,argue with and raise counter-objections against the attacks of the Vaishnavas,they will always have a practical advantage over us.They will say-Look,whatever you say,your Shiva is always dependent on Vishnu.See practically what you do! Don't you take Vishnu's help in your Shiva Upasana?
    Tell me what you think about this.

  12. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    I can understand your pain very well. The intensity with which Vaishnavites attack on Shaivas is so high that at some point of time our patience gets brokena nd we try to retaliate. That's alright, but all I would say is because of the stupidity of fellow human beings (vaishanas), we may fight against their incorrect thoughts, but in all cases we are too small to remove Vishnu from our lives.
    See like this bro – What harm ahs Vishnu done to us? He is the sustainer, when a cow gives birth to a calf, immediately calf tries to stand on her four legs and then automatically moves towards her mother's udder and suckles there. Who tells a calf that there is food for her in between the hind legs of cow within a bag and it can be obtained by suckling? There is lord Vishnu's sustenance and lord Dakshinamurty's silent teaching in action! The way we cannot live without SHiva, we cannot live without Vishnu as well. You being a Lingayat, you might be familiar with Sri Rudram hymn beyond doubt. That hymn clearly states, “namo shipivishtaya cha”, which means, “salutations to Rudra who assumes the form of Vishnu”.
    When Vishnu is Vishnu because Rudra is in that form; how can we reject him totally? Are we not going to indirectly move our eyes away from Rudra's own form?

    No doubt Vaishnava scriptures need refutation, which I'll do for sure, and I'll do with such an intensity that when I leave this body, I would ensure that Shiva-Bhakti is established and SHiva-droha is annihilated. That's my duty. However, as Gandhi Ji said once, “hate the sin not the sinner”, I am against Vaishnavas' incorrect understanding of Shiva tatwam, but i am not a hater of them, sicne after all Vasudhaiva kutumbakam – entire world being one family all of us including those ignorant shiva-drohi vaishnavas are also our siblings. Owing to this relationship when it looks inappropriate to chop off their heads, how can we chop off Vishnu the lord?

    Moreover, the names Keshava, Narayana etc. are not proprietary to Vishnu. They are all the names originally applicable on Shiva and Shakti. I've plans to write a commentary on Vishnu Sahasranama Stotram analyzing the names to show that that hyn is also a glorification of Uma-Maheshwara.

    Keshava = Ka (prajapati tatwam – creation) + Isha (lordship) + Va (power of protection). It is SHiva who alone has these three qualities – Therefore Keshava originally must be a name of Shiva.
    Vasudeva = comes from the roots “vas (reside)” and “div (shine)”. That supreme being who resides in all bodies illuminating them with the conciousness (chaitanya) as Atman is Vasudeva. And Vedas clearly call that it is Rudra who pervades all bodies as their Atman.

    Narayana = nara (purusha) + ayana (direction) = that entity whose direction or goal is towards nara (purusha) is narayana. THis is nothing but Goddess Tripurasudnari as Kundalini whsse direction or goal is towards Purusha (Shiva) in sahasrara (upwards).

    and so on so forth. remember buddy, there is no scripture which is not a gloirification of Uma-Maheshwara. Ramayana shows purely Shiva-shakti tatwam. Mahabharata glorifies Shiva as the supreme being. Every scripture if minutely analyzed, is a glorification of Uma-Mahshwara alone. It is their glories which are “applied” on “Lakshmi Narayana” as they are the direct forms of Uma-Maheshwara alone. If you read Shiva Geetha (present in this blog), Shiva clearly says that he is brahma, Hari, Skanda, ganesha, Uma, Agni, Indra etc. ANd he says, whichever form one is worshiping, one is worshiping Shiva alone. Even Mahabharata has an incident where Arjuna becomes surprised to see that whatever offerings he used to pour on Krishna's feet everyday, all those items he sees present at the feet of lord Shiva.

    So, when worship of Vishnu also goes to Shiva, why should we even think of eliminating Vishnu from our daily worship of Shiva?


    Dear brother,
    I see the validity of your points. As you know,Gandharva-Pushpadanta has written the great Shivamahimna Stotram where he says,'Due to various inclinations and turns of their minds and their diverse interests men who follow multifarious paths-Straight or crooked-O Lord all those lead unto thee alone;like all streams of water have only one final destination-the ocean.
    From the above statement it clearly follows that Pushpadanta was very liberal as regards all kinds of worship. But you must also know the story about the same Pushpadanta. He was a staunch devotee of Lord Shiva to the point of being a fanatic.Once Lord Shiva took upon himself to remove his fanaticism and to show him that He and Vishnu are non-different.So the Lord appeared before him in the form of Harihara.But alas! Pushpadanta solely being a devotee of Shiva pressed his thumb on the left side nostril of the Harihara form so that Vishnu may not get the fragrance of the incense sticks during the puja.
    Certainly this may sound ludicrous to the modern thinkers with liberal minds.They may say that Pushpadanta who himself has expressed revolutionary liberalism as regards all kinds of worship must be out of his mind while doing this.
    But their is a grain of sanity in his preposterous behavior. Theologically however much you may be liberal in your opinions;yet you have to stick to your own particular path which must be devoid of all other distractions, to cultivate complete and unwavering devotion to your Ishtam.
    The words of lord Hanuman are an exemplification of the rule to be followed. He says,'Although I know that Rama and Vishnu are one and the same,yet I have devotion to the lotus eyed Rama alone.'
    Now you must be getting my point.To develop a pin-pointed concentration on the Ishtam to realize It, you must do away all the other unnecessary distractions.


    the devotees of Vishnu have done this as far as Vishnu worship is concerned.They do not have even the least allusion to Shiva in their worship of Vishnu.At least some of the liberal minds among the Vaishnavites concede to the fact that Shiva and Vishnu are non different.Yet they don't allude to Shiva in any way. Their strength arises out of their single mindedness.
    The worshipers of Shiva also need such single mindedness in their devotion and adoration of their deity.They concede that Vishnu is just a manifestation of their beloved lord Shiva;yet they might want to do away with the references to Vishnu to achieve that single mindedness.
    Do you now see why am I insisting on this point so much?
    I have learnt Sanskrit in the modern useless way of grammar -translation. Not being acquainted with the traditional indigenous method of learning the language I don't have the expertise necessary for changing these age old ways of worship. So I can't authoritatively bring about the necessary change.
    People like you,who have learnt Sanskrit traditionally are capable enough to bring about this change. If you do this,all the Shaivaites like me will be immensely indebted to you.
    with regards,
    Yours in the Lord,

  15. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    hahaha buddy!…I'm not a learned sanskrit expert buddy. I know some basic level sanskrit and use sanskrit dictionary to translate the hymns as done in Sri dakshinamurty varnamala stotram'.

    Well, even if we want to implement your point by removing all vishnu related references from scriptures then the remaining portion of scripture no body would read sicne it is again a kind of human operation hence the remaining scriptures become unauthentic. Secondly, the pUjA-paddHatI what we all follow, has been passed on to us traditionally from ancestors since ages. So, now we cannot remove 'kEsavAya swAhA…' etc from the AchamanaM (holy sipping of water). That is designed as such and I do not have the necessary authority to alter that.

    Single minded devotion can be achieved even without altering any scripture. For instance, Sage Upamanyu knew all shastras from his parents but he singlemindedly devoted himself to Shiva. When Shiva appeared in front of him, Shiva came alongwith his entire family (Uma, Skanda, Ganesha, Brahma, Vishnu, Agni, Indra and all others). In Brahmanda Purana Sri Vishnu explains Veerabhadra that Vishnu is none other than Goddess Uma in male forma s follows.

    Vishnu says to Virabhadra in Brahmanda Purana.

    “ekaiva shaktiH parameshvarasya | bhinnA chaturdhA viniyogakAle |
    bhoge bhavAnI samareShu durgA | kopeShu kALI puruSheshu viShNuH |”
    “The ancient Sakti of the Lord (Parameshwara)appearsin four forms; that Sakti becomes Bhavani in her bhoga form, in battle she takes the form of Durga; in anger that of Kali; and she is present in her male form as me (Vishnu).”

    So, in my heart I cannot think of abandoning my mother Uma when she assumes the masculine form and get called as Vishnu. I see both halves of Shiva equally; left half is my mother, right half is he the father. And the same left half when seen as male, is Vishnu, and If I knock Vishnu away from all scriptures and my daily worship; i will be in huge loss since I'll be in a way discarding my mother Uma to get closer to my father Rudra. That is a painful state for me. I am that infant of theirs, who sits in the lap of Ardhanareeshwara writing articles on the right half while simultaneously suckling the divine milk of shiva-jnana from the left breast (which belongs to Uma). I will die if I am weaned from the left side and I'll also die if I abandon the right side. It is she who feeds me shiva-jnana (shiva jnana pradAyinI – as Lalita Sahasranama stotram calls her). If she becomes upset with me, owing to my disregard to her when she appears in her male form (as Vishnu), i'll be nowhere, I would become orphaned, I would lose shiva-jnhana and I wouldn't be able to write any articles on Mahadeva. :-((

    Therefore, while I make every possibility to erase Shiva-ninda from this world, I cannot erase Vishnu from my sight. He is my mother Ambika in male form, and that's why when he becomes female as Mohini, due to reverse transformation Mohini is none other than Lalitambika (Uma) as Brahmanda Purana clarifies.

    Therefore, i think Pushpadanta's approach of closing left nostril of Shiva was a bit of extreme devotion mixed with a pinch of fanaticism. I think while worshiping Shiva, there is nothing wrong in saying “hello” to Vishnu with a smile and proceed with Shiva-worship. And the 'Kesavaya swaha…” etc. elements in daily Puja is the “hi / hello” stuff for Vishnu which are OK if they are there in worship-sequence.

    Single focus on one entity in purest form is possible only in Nirguna Upasana on Brahman through Advaita Vedanta. When we are worshiping saguna forms, we need to choose one as IshtHa and other forms also remain in our vision whom we need not eliminate but we can attempt to focus on our ishtha more while appreciating our ishtha's presence in all otehr surrounding forms also.

    Hope I could explain my point properly.

    Best Regards,


    Ok friend! we agree that we differ.But mind that its a very well known psychological phenomenon that when you concentrate your mind on a single thing then everything else goes out of focus or rather it SHOULD go out of focus.If it doesn't,then it must be said that complete concentration/devotion has not been achieved.
    Don't take my say as an argument but consider this-
    1.Uma or Shakti is always inherent in Shiva.So when you worship Shiva, Uma is also worshiped. When you take Shiva as the Ultimate Reality or the One without a second any separate consideration of Shakti becomes redundant. Are you an Advaiti or Dvaiti? Once you concede to the fact that Shiva is the Ultimate Principal,you won't be able to say that that Ultimate Principal is twofold.If you say so then the Ultimate Reality ceases to be ultimate.The separate mention of Uma is for the need of the worshipers mind who cant grasp the One without a second and needs worldly affiliations such as mother and father.But the Reality is verily Non-dual.
    2.Uma is Shiva's consort. Her mention may be justified while worshiping Shiva from the dualist view point.Just as a magnet is perceived as having two poles and when you take up the magnet you cant do away with either of the two poles.But how do you explain the worship of two male forms simultaneously? Even as per your say Uma has taken the form of Vishnu, worshipping both Shiva and Vishnu simultaneously is like expecting the magnet to have two North or two south poles at the same time!!!
    3 Again one more point of consideration-Vishnu is no doubt Uma in the male form.Then why again the mention of another female consort of Vishnu called Laxmi?
    The battle of wits between the Shaivas and the Vaishnavas is an age old phenomenon.Each party sites authentic references from from various scriptures.A multitude of scholars steeped into the minutest knowledge of the scriptures have devoted their minds to prove the superiority of their faction. Their erudition has been no doubt superior to yours or mine.(Don't take offence plz.) and yet no one faction has ever succeeded in vanquishing the other with the help of arguments.


    So I am of the opinion that citing references from the scriptures will prove nothing ultimately.As Shankaracharya has said you will raise an argument and your opponent will raise another subtler one then you will be pushed to raise yet another subtler.This will go on endlessly.
    The best way out of this imbroglio is to do away with distractions and worship Shiva as the Ultimate One from the psychological standpoint mentioned in the beginning. That is the purport of the shrutivachana-ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti.
    If you worship shiva then Uma,Vishnu as also all other deities of your veneration will be worship ed.Because Shiva is All. Isn't he?
    One more thing- Do you consider all the puranas and smritis as authentic as the Shrutis? the Shrutis are Revelations.Therefore they are the word of GOD Himself. The other scriptures are interpolated with the interference of human intelligence. Some devious people have deliberately adulterated them many times over to suite their needs.Vishnu purana will say Vishnu is Supreme and Shiva purana will say the same thing of Shiva. So taking recourse to the pauranic literature will render any argument futile because both parties will have equal examples to prove their points.So one friendly advice- If you are so much out to prove everything citing references from the scriptures alone try to prove your points on the basis of Shrutis alone(Pramanam paramam shrutihi).That way the authority of what you say will be unquestionable.(Shrutismrutyoh shrutirev baliyasi)
    Cosidering the human intelligence at work in the writing of puranas , your say that we cant alter modes of worship traditionally handed down to us is again not true.Because these forms of worship are NOT divine revelations which are always unalterable.They have come to us from the puranas. The fact is proven by the existence of various forms of worship of the same deity. They were devised by HUMAN INTELLIGENCE albeit keeping the knowledge gained through revelations at the core.
    So it is not at all impossible to formulate the Shiva worship as envisioned by me.But lets agree that it is not You or I ,who are the persons fit for this task.
    Now you may be getting my point- I didnt want you to prove anything for me by putting forth arguments.I want to worship Shiva alone without any interference of another deity. This is the need of many Shaivaites like me. And they are stranded as it were unless some authoritative personality comes and redeems them from this situation. We dont know or want to know anything else except Shiva.But alas!! contrary to my impression you are not the redeemer….( Again no offence plz)

  18. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Friend Abhijit,

    I feel sorry to have upset a shiva bhakta. But I am unable to help here. Regret the inconvenience and disappointment that I caused to you!

    We both are shiva bhaktas, our destinations again are same i.e. shiva; however, as we both can see, our paths are different. So, let's agree to disagree ; but would request you not to cut me off from your mind. I don't care to part away with shiva-drohis but in order to keep shiva-bhaktas linked with me, i do not mind to stop debating further. That's how, i am not desirous to counter any of your points. I respect your thoughts, value your devotion, but probably it is best to leave the differences as they are and stop continuing this debate with you. God bless!

    However, if you permit, would like to clarify few points.

    [quote]Are you an Advaiti or Dvaiti? Once you concede to the fact that Shiva is the Ultimate Principal,you won't be able to say that that Ultimate Principal is twofold.If you say so then the Ultimate Reality ceases to be ultimate….But the Reality is verily Non-dual.[/unquote]

    I guess you have not read all my articles, otherwise this question wouldn't have arisen! I have always shown oneness of shiva and shakti, they are depicted as two but they are one, the non-dual parabrahman “rutam satyam parambharman purusham kr^shnapingalam”…where krishnapingalam denotes ardhanareshwara!

    [quote]Again one more point of consideration-Vishnu is no doubt Uma in the male form.Then why again the mention of another female consort of Vishnu called Laxmi?[/unquote]

    It's all play of tatwam. Mahabharata calls shiva as “om ye namah” (salutations to Rudra who is goddess lakshmi”. Rudram also calls Rudra as present in the form of all female goddesses. When you see Vishnu as Uma, then Lakshmi is Shiva. And also we have references from Mahabharata as well as shruti that Vishnu is shiva's form, and Lakshmi is Uma's form. Vishnu emerged from shiva's left side, hence he is sometimes shown in scriptures as shiva's form and being originated from left side he is also depicted as uma's form.It's all the way we want to take it, nothing serious or hard and fast rule exists there. I only quoted vishnu as uma's form just for the discussion, but all male forms are Rudra all female forms are Uma.

    Their erudition has been no doubt superior to yours or mine.(Don't take offence plz.) and yet no one faction has ever succeeded in vanquishing the other with the help of arguments

    No offense taken! Time (the supreme mahakala) has watched them, and also is watching me. It is his job to finally decide and weigh whose erudition he liked, so i didn't mind your point 🙂

  19. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    [quote]So I am of the opinion that citing references from the scriptures will prove nothing ultimately.[/unquote]
    I am not sure why my references offended you. I only wanted to cite them to explain my point, and not to supersede your knowledge.

    [quote]That is the purport of the shrutivachana-ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti.
    If you worship shiva then Uma,Vishnu as also all other deities of your veneration will be worship ed.Because Shiva is All. Isn't he?[/unquote]

    Yup! Shiva is all – this truth is known to both of us equally. However, it all depends on our tastes or necessities. All milk items like curd, ghee, paneer, etc are all milk after all; but my taste buds may not agree if i apply “ekam milk humans bahudha vadanti” and drink only milk. I would prefer to consume the same product in various forms. It may differ from person to person, and no body is absolutely right or wrong here. Well, i should you have doubts on my understanding on “ekam sat verse…” kindly wait for few months for my upcoming article on that. Vedas eulogize same god in various names, so when vedas are liberal enough to use different names (forms) to praise same god, i also would like to do the same. So, even if i salute vishnu my salutations would go to mahadeva. Personally, i do NOT see amy distraction in focus of my devotion with these other god-forms. I may be different, and others may have different capabilities, and hence one is free to choose one's mode of focus (read worship) as one pleases. I don't have anything to differ here.

    [quote]So taking recourse to the pauranic literature will render any argument futile because both parties will have equal examples to prove their points.So one friendly advice- If you are so much out to prove everything citing references from the scriptures alone try to prove your points on the basis of Shrutis alone(Pramanam paramam shrutihi).That way the authority of what you say will be unquestionable.(Shrutismrutyoh shrutirev baliyasi) [/unquote]

    Thanks for the suggestion. I believe you haven't read any of my analysis/articles completely (barring shiva gita which is totally puranic) 🙂
    Probably you might want to check again to see my style of writing. Let me state here anyway since it's a time consuming task to read all my articles and understand so here is my style – I do NOT quote puranas independently. I quote shruti, and support it with itihasa and puranas as appropriate! Itihasa and smriti always follow Shruti, and when they support shruti, they are very much authentic. Only when the case is otherwise, they need to be rejected. So, all i want to assure you is, your suggestion is already there in my blood and in my implementation also. 🙂

    [quote]So it is not at all impossible to formulate the Shiva worship as envisioned by me.But lets agree that it is not You or I ,who are the persons fit for this task.[/quote]

    Ok. Agreed! 🙂

  20. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    [quote]This is the need of many Shaivaites like me. And they are stranded as it were unless some authoritative personality comes and redeems them from this situation. We dont know or want to know anything else except Shiva.But alas!! contrary to my impression you are not the redeemer….( Again no offence plz)[/quote]

    I have never claimed to be a redeemer, savior or any incarnation of anyone. I am just the agent, a commando of my boss (Mahadeva) and i work on my boss's orders. My boss (who is my atman), has not permitted/agreed to abandon Vishnu while working for him (boss), so i am bound by my boss's orders and hence couldn't help you out. All my article are inspired by my “antah-sphuraNa” (inner voice) and the inner self being Shiva, I take them to be the instructions of his. And I transfer all those inner voises as notes/articles here. That's what I do, and I do not claim myself to be any upcoming “Acharya” or “jagadguru” to transform anything for the masses. If it gave you an impression that I was a redeemer, then I beg your pardon for having set false image of myself and honestly i don't know the answer why you felt myself to be a redeemer. I never want to put up a false mask/facade but if that happened anyhow, i'm sorry for that. I am just a normal human being and not a bigshot.

    I always was alone in my fight to save shiva's image, and would work on erasing shiva-droha alone in my own style. I don't want to set false expectations to the masses saying i'm their redeemer or savior or anything else.
    Being a redeemer or savior of someone is very responsible position. If it makes you, it makes them, if it mars you, it mars all of them. Therefore, I wouldn't set any false expectations to people, i wouldn't show them any goody goody magical traps to gain followers. I being alone on my path, In my vision and mission if i happen to succeed, my knowledgebase and articles would be a repository of valuable information to the future generations to follow after my departure; and if by any chance i happen to fail, i would atleast have a satisfaction that i didn't play with anyone's faith/emotions by calling myself their savior/redeemer; hence my failure wouldn't hurt anyone.

    Well, you being a shiva-bhakta, even if our paths differ, our destinations are same and hence i would always like to be in your good books and not in your hatred-list 🙂 Therefore i wouldn't want you to say me a 'good bye', but would like to see “see you later …or see you soon” message instead! 🙂

    May Shiva bless you!



    Ha ha!!! hate you? what are you talking buddy? You are and always will be in my good books.Rest assured.You are the first person i came across on the net who is doing something to defend the Shaivaites including me from the mad Vaishnavas.
    I got the impression that you might redeem the Shaivaites because of the following reason- Your articles are written in so convincing a style that I thought you must have learned Sanskrit in the traditional style which gives one command over the language and the Karmic procedures in such a way that the person of your erudition will easily formulate new Karmic procedures.
    But as you say you have not received such instruction.So it came as as a bit of disappointment to me that you should say you are not capable of doing it. 'Redeemer' might be a too high-flown word used by me. I'm sorry for that.
    I will be reading your informative articles and will keep always in touch.
    P S- One more thought of interest-mere wordy arguments can't accomplish anything.Once one has realized Shiva his words will have a far more convincing power than those of a mere bookish erudite.So I think Tapas to realize Shiva and to obtain the token of authority from the Lord himself is necessary for the propagation of the Shaivaite view. I intend to do Sadhana to realize Shiva. Are you doing any spiritual practice of this kind?

  22. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  23. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    This comment has been removed by the author.

  24. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    That's great feeling to see you connected with me 🙂 Thanks!

    Well, regarding Sadhana, – I do daily Puja which is the only visible sadhana one can see, but in my mind throughout my wakeful state shiva's mantra japa keeps happening, whether while brushing my teeth or while eating food, or while walking on roads to office and back, or while sitting idle or anything. I and shiva are never separated, i cannot live without him. The way my breaths are important adn dear to me to live, the same way he is my pranas. I see Shiva in my inhale and exhale of air, i see him in the food that i take. I see him in the thirst, and also in the quenching of thirst, i see him in my hunger and also in quenching of hunger, i see him in the auto-driver who drives me to office (hence i never fear any accidents because he is my charioteer), i see him in my colleagues, i also see him in the form of my manager (hence i seldom face ego problems with team or manager, and they equally like me). Probably this is the reason why I can confidently say that “i have NOT seen any bad person in this world till date. Everyone who came into my life all looked to me as good people”. I see mountains as the huge Linga and the downpouring clouds as doing Abhiskeham on the hills. When sitting in padmasana posture, i see myself (padmasana form) resembling linga and peetha. I even see him in the roadside beggars, and when i drop a coin in their hands i feel thankful for shiva to have given that opportunity to donate a coin to him. I offer all the GOOD that i do with my body, mind, words, senses, intellect, soul, nature, to that Mahadeva who is my lord, but I keep all the BAD with myself which happens with me knowingly/unknowingly. He runs as red (oxygenated) blood in arteries, and blue (deoxigenated blood) in veins; this is why Neela-Lohita (the blue-red god) is not somewhere else, he is in my veins. He keeps me alive. I do not behold any other sadhana to be required to be done after seeing that Kapardin in every atom of your body and your life. It is he who is in my vision which is a bit defective as doctors say, but it's mahadeva's garce that he mad emy outward eyesight poor and gave me micro vision to see him in every scripture of hinduism, i do not see any other god being glorified in any of the scripture (I'll prove this slowly owing to my work, and higher studies i find less time).

    “O My Mahadeva! If you give me a throne and kingly position to rule all the 14 worlds keping even Brahma and Vishnu below me and you keep yourself away from me…i'll die O lord! I woudl ratehr prefer being even a bacteria in the excreta if you bless that bacteria with the knowledge of chanting yur name and singing your glory. Do, not keep yourself away from me O Mahadeva! And also shower your grace and knowledge on all your devotees including this new friend viz. Abhijit!”

    [OOps… Kindly adjust with my lengthy posts. I have that good/bad habit and can't express myself in short hehehe]


    Dear friend,
    I'm very glad that you always have Shiva pulsating in your every breath. I wish I could do the same thing. After all the culmination of all arguments, reading of scriptures, pujas ,yadnyas,japa,pranayama, meditation,and every other possible means of mind control is the realization of the Truth. These means are helpful as long as they are taking us to this highest goal-Aparokshanubhuti. Many a time people get tangled up in the means and totally forget that means can't be the Goal. That's why we find so many factions and cults warring with one another,slitting the throat of their brothers over trifling details.It's like quarreling over the kernel while there is no coconut meat inside.
    Once a sanyasin said that you might have read the whole library by heart yet you might be the farthest from the Truth if you are not doing any sadhana.
    That's why I sincerely wish and pray that the Lord grant me the necessary strength to do Tapas as long as I have life.
    “leave every other means and take recourse into Me alone.I will redeem you from every bondage” These are the Lord's words. I wish that I can follow them.
    With best wishes

  26. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Very true words buddy! “Many a time people get tangled up in the means and totally forget that means can't be the Goal” – that's very true! Well said!
    In your Sadhana, who else can be a better Guru that Mahadeva? May that triple city destroyer, be your guide and take you towards his realization as per your desire.

    And Mahadeva's devotees would never fail. Your desire for Tapasya would definitely have already been heard by the lord and i am sure he might be working on making your wish turn into reality.

    “shivAya guravE namah” “shivakaTAkSha prAptirastu !!”

  27. Sridevi L

    Dear Santhosh Kumar,

    I came across your blog only recently. You are doing good work. Best wishes.

    Could you please explain the line “sarva deva namaskara keshavam prathi gacchathi”. Is it not proclaiming Lord Vishnu to be the receiver of all worship done by humans ?


  28. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    [Your name is sri devi which is the name of my divine mother Lakshmi and also of Lalitha. So, felt like addressing you as maata]

    Dear Sridevi maata,

    I'll answer your question, but before that let me offer my namaskArams to you.

    I usually have the habit of seeing God in every being. Hence you being Sridevi are nothing lesser than my divine mother who happened to grace me by visiting my blog. O Ambike, I am truly blessed today that you graced me by liking this blog and conveying your best wishes.

    Who I am O mother to explain you the mysteries of Hiduism? It's you who shine as intelligence within me and within every being, as confirmed by following PuraNa vAkya.

    “yA dEvI sarva bhUtEshu buddHi rUpENa samsthitA namastasyai namastasyai namastasyai namo namaH”, which means, “That Devi who resides as the intellect in every creature, salutations, salutations salutations to devi who is such”.

    So, I prostrate before that goddess who resides in your name. praNAm!! However, by your grace I would like to answer your query.

    Well, to answer your query -> sarva deva namaskara keshavam prati gachchati, has been already analyzed in the article titled, “Offerings made to Krishna actually goes to lord Shiva” (http://mahapashupatastra.blogspot.in/2011/09/offerings-made-to-krishna-actually-goes.html)

    Hope that article is helpful to clarify your query. praNAm-s



    My new findings about Shiva's subordination to Vishnu-
    1)The Ashvatttha Tree is associated with Vishnu and is considered the most holy tree whereas the Nyagrodha tree ( Vata ) is associated with Shiva. Traditionally Vata does not occupy the foremost place among trees that the Ashvattha tree has (albeit Vata is worshipped on the Vatasavitri Day.)
    2)Vishnu is fond of the Tulasi leaves and Shiva of the Bilvapatra. Tulasi is said to never become stale even after many days have passed after plucking but Bilva leaves do get stale after some days. So even in their objects of fondness Shiva is given the inferior position.
    Please add these findings to the list of points which need refutation which I have given you earlier

    1. manivannanjurix

      Bro your findings are something crazy. Shiva living in crematory and Vishnu enjoying sleep in Adiseshan so Shiva is inferior to Vishnu and Shiva applying ash and wearing Rudhrasksha and whereas as Vishnu looks with great ornaments so you think Shiva inferior to Vishnu. Bro the same kind of thoughts has by Dakshan finally he realized. Why Shiva is unique…there are many reasons …few I illustrating… all devas drunk Amirtham but Shiva drunk Poison in order to conservation of Universe though Vishnu referring to as protector but Shiva took the position. Do you think Shiva is inferior so he got poison? Another all are celebrating onam festival and glorifying Vishnu but people conveniently forgetting who is Mahabali and how he attained that position. The lists goes on…

  30. Unknown

    In Ramayana, Lord Rama was served by Lord Hanumana who is incarnation of Lord Shiva. In the same Treta Yuga Parshurama who is incarnation of Lord Vishnu was desciple of Lord Shiva. Also, wellknown to you guys that name Pasrashurama was because he got the Parshu from Lord Shiva. Rama was the great devotee of Shiva so is Hanumana for Rama. In Mahabharata, Krishna worshipped Shiva as his deity. Lord Mahadeva does dhyana of Lord Rama from eternity a long way before even the birth of Rama.
    There are many instances you folks may know about these great dieties relationship maybe more than mentioned here.
    But you could not realise the fact that even when they are claimed to be Supreme of all they bowed to each other. They were devotees of each other. If you are follower of Shiva you should equally respect Rama & if you are follower of Krishna you should equally worship Shiva.
    Matter of fact is that Shiva & Narayana are same world see them different but they are bonded so much to each other by devotion.
    Shaivas, Vaishnavas, Shaktas should understand that Parmatma is one & has supreme power to come in any form why to descriminate Shiva from Rama?
    Sant Namdeva who used to be Vaishnava once was stopped from entering Mahadeva temple. There he asked a question what is difference between Har & Hari? Evenif he was vaishnavaite he assumed Shiva & Narayana as one. True to his devotion Temple turned its entrance to his face. Moral of the story is it is the Bhakti (Devotion) that counts to Parmeshwara let it be on Shiva or Narayana or even on the lifeless stone. One should know that there is always a difference between the information & knowledge. I see the same thing so I cannot admire the work anymore. You are far away from the truth my dear Brother. Truth we are seeking is not what we want to prove in the end but what we get in the journey towards the end.

  31. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    From your message it looks like one of my close friend has got hurt. It's my mistake that I could not keep you happy.
    Kabir ji says,
    ” nindak niyare rakhiye aangan kuti chhawaye , bin pani sabun bina nirmal kare subhaye”

    Therefore I would take your words as something which would cleanse me some day in case I am not. I need not prove my respect for Narayana to anyone, if you want to see my love for him, pls visit my other blogs stotramaaloka and adhyatmikasampada. Anyway, I can't tell anything more that to ask you to pray to God to show me the right path.
    Thanks anyway for the honest feedback. When my duty would be completed, I would settle in advaita till then allow me to ramble.

  32. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    I didn't feel because of your feedback, but I would have liked if you could have given me your this honest feedback under your real name because, now I am not sure which friend of mine is upset, and how should I patch it up etc. You have left me in total confusion my dear brother. Hopefully someday I would write something good which would bring you back.
    With that hope signing off!

  33. chandrasekhar

    Dear Abhijit,

    Doing acamana etc with Vishnu nama-s is not obligatory.Doing acamana with Kesavadi nama-s is Purana Acamana.Neither the Vedas nor Grihya sutras like Bodhayana ,Apastambha enjoin that acamana must be done with Kesavadi nama-s .Only certain smritis and puranas advocate this practice.Orthodox vaidikas to this day perform only srauta acamana.All the slokas relating to Vishnu are later day accretions.Adi saiva brahmins of tamil nadu from time immemorial perform all vedic karma-s with Siva nama-s.During Poojas Agama acamana can be performed.Only the puja procedure of smartas follow Acamana with Kesavadi nama-s.We Saivas of Tamilnadu perform all the procedures of puja like acamana,sankalpa etc with slokas pertaining to Siva.I humbly suggest you to do the same.I can provide you with more information about this.My email id chandrasekharrajamoorty@gmail.com

  34. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    dear sir,

    thanks for the info. i wasn't aware of this either. Do you have any video/audio demonstrating the procedure for Rigveda sandhyavandanam? (Youtube contains yajurveda style one not rigveda one). I am looking for the procedure with the RigVedic style of swaram (chanting).


  35. chandrasekhar

    Dear sir,
    So far I haven't come across audio or video for rigveda sandhyavandanam.If I'm not mistaken Madhvas are Rigvedi Brahmins.Try googling for Madhva Sandhyavandana.

    Sivo rakshatu.

  36. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Thank you for the reply.
    I am not looking for madhwa's style of sandhya vandanam. I have the Rig vedic sandhyavandanam book which not secetarian styled, but swaram is what i do not have. Since that ritual is from veda, i am told that it needs to be practiced with the corresponding Vedic swaram, instead of just reading out the mantras. Therefore i am looking for the same. I belong to Rig vedic lineage but not related to Madhwa or any vaishnava parampara. So, looking for normal non secetarian, Vedic-styled tutorial of that ritual.

    may lord Siva be always graceful on you and your family.

  37. chandrasekhar

    Dear Sir,
    Could I have Abhijit's email?I don't think he got my message.

  38. srihari2482

    ooh god u r mad u r a pro shaivate . dont i know what all acharyas have said
    1) Shankaracharya – ekam sat vipra bahuda vadanti. u can call by any name its same
    2) RamanujaCharya – only one god . but i call it srinivasa
    3) Madwacharya – Said same only one god .
    man for u shiva is great for another narayana is great .Why do you want to prove something wrong .

    u r just a human what can u think about god u have limited mind ..oh god u need lots of learning .
    u kow u r just a frog in a pond 🙂

  39. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    What those Acharyas have said, i am aware of. Well, i liked one phrase in your message i.e., “oh god u need lots of learning”…Yes, i am always looking forward to lot of learning. Thanks for praying for me.

  40. Anand nesh

    Very good article, had alot of knowledge in your article. I would like to ask a few thing from mahabharat, its a known fact that ved vyasa mahabharat or jaya had only 8,800 verses. Over the centuries it was interpolated with alot of fake or unwanted stories mostly against kauravs and karna, From what i feel is why there are alot of fake stories added agaisnt karna or kauravs is that duryhodan was agaunst pandavs. Pandavs were under the guideness of lord krishna. Karna supported duryodhan. So what i feel is there might be fake stories against kauravs and karna coz in away or so they were against lord krishna. Stories like karna fleding away from wars might have been added stories to make pandavs look superior. Duryodhan nvr had trust in bheeshma or drona coz they were partial against kauravs, being so how could duryodhan had faith in karna if karna had ran fleded in the wars? I just feel that its all added to make karna lower. As it is written in mahabharat clearly that stories will rewritten from the view of the winners. What you feel about this??

  41. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Thanks for readinga dn your kind words.

    Well, Mahabharata hasn't become a 1lakh verses document from 8000 verses due to interpolations. Initially Vyasa wrote Jaya of 8000 verses comprising primarily on the life of Kuru dynasty. Then it was expanded by adding Puranic literature also and it became 1lakh verses called Bharata. When it was weighed against 4 Vedas in a beam balance, Bharata weighed higher, hence called Mahabharata. Further Vyasa had actually expanded it in more than 1 lakh verses but not for the world of humans (earth). On earth he gave 1 lakh version of Mahabharata and in other celestial worlds he gifted the versions which were much larger in content.
    Of course interpolations may not be denied, but to call anything above 8000 verses is interpolation is wrong.

    We need to look at Mahabharata from a holistic point of view rather than with an eye of favoritism. In MBH itself it is declared that all the primary personalities were all divine beings incarnated over earth. Even Duryodhan was Kali, Shakuni was Dwapara, Drona was Brihaspati, Ashwatthama was Kama+Krodha+Rudransha, and so on. The agenda of Vishnu's task was to lessen the burden on earth. hence in order to annihilate in a large scale there had to be some plot. hence these characters. If you see, how large was the band of primary actors? Only 100 kauravas plus a handful older-ancestors. let's take it as 150 at max, and let's assume all these 150 heroes were the sinners. So, do you think to kill only these handful (150) men Vishnu incarnated as krishna? They why were millions of soldiers and hundreds of kings killed in the war where more than 8 akshauhinis of lives were killed? That's the key. To annihilate such a large burden of earth, 150+ divine beings had to come down to support Vishnu in his task. Everything was just as per the plot and nothing else.

    Coming to Karna vs. Arjuna topic:

    No two fingers are ever of same length. So, I don't ever say that both of them were equal. But yes, to judge who is superior is a tough task.
    1. On one hand Arjuna always wielded his divine Gandiva bow and inexhaustible quivers, whereas Karna didn't use his Vijaya bow always except the final battles. Still to be able to stand in front of Gandiva which was being wielded by Arjuna, it is certainly a heroic deed and is praiseworthy. So, if Karna could always withstand Arjuna it is certainly Karna's skillset
    2. Now, when Arjuna overpowers karna in Virat's war, that is correct. That day Arjuna overpowered over the entire Kuru army including all prime leaders. How? That's because while others at Hastinapura were sleeping, pandavas's practice was always ON. They didn't sit idle. Arjuna even went to Swarga to possess weapons and even got charged-up with Rudra strength via his duel with Rudra. So, definitely, “practice makes a man perfect” can be seen as true here.
    3. If Karna flew from war, that shouldn't undermine his position unless he doesn't return at all. Temporary abandoning of battlefield may not undesmine anybody's skills. So, that shouldn't be a problem to you. Karna had once succeeded in blowing off Arjuna's kireetam from his head. He could have killed Arjuna had Krishna not pressed the chariot down. But that doesn't make Arjuna inferior either because – in battle, you can never predict who would win which game until final death or surrender of one of them.
    4. Even the final results of battles cannot be a benchmark for hailing or insulting anyone for his skills. Battles may be won due to circumstances and luck also. How many times was Arjuna not protected by krishna, Shiva, Durga, hanuman tell me? And how many curses were pulling Karna behind that also you may need to think.

  42. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Summary:- Arjuna and Karna both were great warriors. This is why Bhishma never wanted to see one of them killed, hence in his lifetime he never allowed karna from participating. Circumstances makes one win/lose. It depends on which side you stand – would win if you support Dharma and lose if oppose. See how Bhishma was killed, even though he was invincible in battle. So, all these incidents need to be studied in a relative sense of reality and shouldn't be seen at absolute levels of truth – with respect to the skills. Everyone was greatest in their own right, but whatever happened had happened as per the plot of the drama and everyone were just the actors of their given roles.

    P.S:- I am a fan of Bhishma and hence I don't have any special soft-corner for neither Arjuna nor Karna. Hence my above points can be safely taken as neuutral points.

  43. no momento sem nome

    It's according to Shivpuran premisse like the similar Taittiriyaranyaka verse concerning the REAL identity of Brahman Paramount as follow:

    अथ सप्तम्यी वायवीयसंहिता उत्तरखण्डः
    अंबिकापतिरीशानः पिनाकी वृषवाहनः ।
    एको रुद्रः परं ब्रह्म पुरुषः कृष्णपिंगलः ॥ १३ ॥

    Šђreﬞešђĭvắmăhāpŭrɝnă VII, 6.13 The Imperious patron of Ămbĭкā bearing a trident and carried by a bull; Rŭdră, is the only Paramount Вrắђmăn, the blackish-ruddy Person.

  44. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear friend,

    I am pleasantly surprised to see that you have so much interest in Hinduism scriptures. Lord Shiva is really very graceful on you.

    Well, yes, what you have quoted is very correct. The Purusha of Vedas, the Brahman of Vedas, who is described as black and tawny is Bhagawan Shiva alone.

    Those who cannot see him cannot see him and those who can see him can see him (yah pashyati sah pashyati) 🙂

    Thanks again to you. may god shiva bless you. 🙂

  45. Kaushik Kashyap

    Dear Sir,
    Thanks for your reply (in other section). I feel very sad when they don’t even understand what our Shruthi says. They call Shiva is worshiped only by people with material desire. Even they were discussing one shloka called “Gita Mahatmya”. They say this is written by Adishankaracharya, which says Krisna is the only deity. I was shocked when I read that shloka. Here is the link for that shloka ,http://www.salagram.net/gita_mahatmya.htm.

    Please clarify this big confusion. As for as I know, the home deity of Adishankaracharya was Krishna but he strongly claimed that Lord Shiva is the source of all and he wrote Nirvana shatakam.


    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      ISKCON is a separate wing and mostly disassociated with the mainstream Hinduism, they have developed their theories based on many fancy works of their goswamis. Hence ISKCON’s words need not be taken seriously. Their philosophy doesn’t sync with Vedas, Upanishads, Epics and Puranas.

      Regarding Gita Mahatmaya sloka – Mahatmaya portion often are written from Bhakti standpoint. Therefore even someone relates their Gita faith to only krishna, that is all fine. In fact all these krishna bhakti is happening by the wish and boon of Shiva only 🙂
      In Mahabharata and Harivamsa Purana there are couple of times it has been shown that Shiva blessed krishna saying his fame would be widespread. Few quotes are given below:

      “After this, Vasudeva, that foremost of all intelligent men, once more said,–Mahadeva of golden eyes was gratified by me with my penances. Gratified with me, O Yudhishthira, the illustrious Deity said unto me,–Thou shalt, O Krishna, through my grace, become dearer to all persons than wealth which is coveted by all. Thou shalt be invincible in battle. (MBH 13:SECTION XVIII)”

      (same is stated in Harivamsa Parva also)

      “it is through Maheswara of celestial vision that Vasudeva has obtained the attribute of universal agreeableness,–an agreeableness that is much greater than what is possessed by all articles included under the name of wealth. (Book 13:SECTION XIV)”

      And we can see that lord Shiva’s words are not false. 🙂 Iskcon and many such organizations are spreading krishna bhakti everywhere. This is good. The only thing which stings me is that they promote krishna by demoting Shiva, which is BAD!

      Regarding Adi Shankaracharya – As per the legends his family deity was krishna, however he had composed hymns on all Godheads equally. He was a supporter of shanmata and smartha mode of worship. He was a proponent of Brahman beyond all names and forms. Sri Subbu-Ji (A great Advaitin) has refuted many false claims superimposed on Adi Shankara by Vaishnavite bloggers. If you have time you may kindly go through Subbu Ji’s blog, he has done a marvelous job in explaining many misunderstood facts about Shankara and Advaita.

      Best Regards, Santosh

      1. vijendra singh

        This Shiv Ninda would cause the destruction of iskcon like happened with Daksha Prajapati.
        and this Shiv Ninda is the main seed of their destruction in coming future….

        Also, Vaudeva’s sons also did the ninda of great sages,(which is equivalent to the ninda of shiva,according to our scriptures that Ninda of a great sage is equivalent to the ninda of paramatma).

        Hence, there are many examples in our scriptures, that hints me that iskconism would be collapsed and got rid out of this earth…

        not just iskconism,but also including all abhramic religions which are all based on doing ninda of other faiths..

  46. Kaushik Kashyap

    Sure!! Thanks a lot 🙂


  47. Arun Subramaniyan

    The last three posts on adbhutam blog is about refuting Vaishnava nonsense on Parameshwara Rudra is a must read.The author like Appaya Dikshatar is a true advaitin but does not tolerate any nonsense heaped on Pashupati.


    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Yes, I have gone through those blogs. They are wonderful. After going through those three articles, no sane person would ever even listen to what those humble vaishnavas say. 🙂
      I simply bow down to Subbu-ji’s knowledge.

  48. Aditya Sharma

    In Shrimad Bhagwat Purana It is Said Lord Krishna defeated LORD SHIVA.

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Oh! thanks for the info. (As if I am not aware of that hehe). So what do you want to prove? Did you go through my article on your fav “Srimad Bhagawatam”? If not yet, you should read now!

  49. Aditya Sharma

    As it is explained in the Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi. 2.106), Lord Krishna is the original primeval Lord, the source of all other expansions. All the revealed scriptures accept Sri Krishna as the Supreme Lord. Furthermore (Cc.Adi 2.24-26), it goes on to relate that Lord Krishna Himself is the one undivided Absolute Truth and ultimate reality. He manifests in three features, namely the Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan (the Supreme Personality). The Svetasvatara Upanishad (5.4) also explains that the Supreme Being, Lord Krishna, is worshipable by everyone; the one adorable God, repository of all goodness ruler of all creatures, born from the womb [in His pastime of Lord Krishna], for He is eternally present in all loving beings [as Supersoul]. Furthermore, it states (3.8) “I have realized this transcendental Personality of Godhead who shines most brilliantly like the sun beyond all darkness. Only by realizing Him one goes beyond the cycle of birth and deaths. Absolutely there is no other means to get God-realization.”

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Hahahaha…All right!

      I don’t have to say anything here. I’ve understood by which school you have been conditioned.

      Please go ahead with your Chaitanya Charitamrita. May be in next few births you would understand the correct scriptures by the merit you accrue by reading such devotional fiction and novels. Good luck!

    2. Kamarup Kamakhya Devi

      Chaitanya Charanamrita is a work of fancy fiction revered only within Gaudiya Vaishnava circles. No other authentic Vaishnava Sampradaya gives any damn to that bogus text.
      What surprises me is how on earth Mr. Aditya Sharma, did you even dare to think that we Shaktas and Shaivas would even consider your God-foresaken “Chaitanya Charanamrita” as a standard scripture of the same footing as Shruti, Smriti, Itihasas and Tantras when there are dissension among ranks within you Vaishnavas!
      So sweetheart, do us all a favor, please set fire on Chaitanya Charanamrita, Brahma Samhita & Srimad Bhagavatam, and flush down its filthy ashes down a public toilet.

      शवाड़ूड़े शक्तिभूते शक्तिस्थिती शक्तिविग्रहे ।
      शाक्ताचारप्रिये दुर्गे कालिकाए नमस्तु ते ।।

    3. Subhasis Dey

      I am giving you your depicted verse of the Svetasvatara Upanishada :
      sarvā diśa ūrdhvam adhaś ca tiryak prakāśayan bhrājate yad vānaḍvān /
      evaṃ sa devo bhagavān vareṇyo yonisvabhāvān adhitiṣṭhaty ekaḥ // 5.4 //
      As the sun, illuminating all the regions, above, below, and across shines, so too, That One God, glorious, adorable, rules over whatever creatures are born from a womb, who by themselves possess the nature of a cause.
      The phrase whatever creatures are born from a womb means the sources of world-existence like the five elements (fire, water, air, earth and space) over which that one god, the Supreme Self, Brahman rules. These elements are said to be the cause for further evolution of creatures in the world. What the Mantra implies is that these so called causes of the world are not in themselves causes; they operate as causes only because the Bhagavan works through them.
      See, nowhere in this verse is the mention of Lord Krishna. It is the Supreme Brahman who has been addressed here by Sage Svetasvatara. And to know who this Supreme Brahma is according to Sage Svetasvatara, please go through the verse of this Upanishada with due attention especially the verses under Chapter 3. Then everything will be as clear as in daylight. Till then, please don’t interpolate your own thought into this one of the most sacred religious texts for us, the Hindus .

    4. Subhasis Dey

      I am giving you your depicted verse of the Svetasvatara Upanishada :
      sarvā diśa ūrdhvam adhaś ca tiryak prakāśayan bhrājate yad vānaḍvān /
      evaṃ sa devo bhagavān vareṇyo yonisvabhāvān adhitiṣṭhaty ekaḥ // 5.4 //
      As the sun, illuminating all the regions, above, below, and across shines, so too, That One God, glorious, adorable, rules over whatever creatures are born from a womb, who by themselves possess the nature of a cause.
      The phrase whatever creatures are born from a womb means the sources of world-existence like the five elements (fire, water, air, earth and space) over which that one god, the Supreme Self, Brahman rules. These elements are said to be the cause for further evolution of creatures in the world. What the Mantra implies is that these so called causes of the world are not in themselves causes; they operate as causes only because the Bhagavan works through them.
      See, nowhere in this verse is the mention of Lord Krishna. It is the Supreme Brahman who has been addressed here by Sage Svetasvatara. And to know who this Supreme Brahma is according to Sage Svetasvatara, please go through the verse of this Upanishada with due attention especially the verses under Chapter 3. Then everything will be as clear as in daylight. Till then, please don’t interpolate your own thought into this one of the most sacred religious texts for us, the Hindus .

      Reply ↓

  50. Sumanyu Goyal

    Sorry, buddy but you are quite wrong interpreting Lord Krishn and Lord Shiv. They are each other’s POORAKH, that is, they complete each other. They are the sides of one coin only. Shiv is Vish and Vish is Shiv. Understand that first. Shri Krishn was an incarnation of Narayan, ie, Lord Vishnu. If you think they are different, you are wrong my friend. By the way if you know, Lord Shiv prays to Shri Ram, the fourth incarnation of Lord Vishnu and Lord Ram or Krishn pray to Lord Shiv. No one is superior among the two. They are one and the same. If you get that straight, I hope you’ll be able to make the whole text worthwhile.

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      You are right.

  51. Prakash

    Also Sri Rudram 1.10 “Bhagavo Vapa…”… ie. One who has “Bhag” qualites which makes Bhagwan….Also I want to know from which Sruti passage the mantra “Om Namo Bhagvate Rudraya” taken I couldn’t find it in T S. Yajurveda… also from which Sruti passage “Namaste astu bhagvan vishweshwaraya triyambakaya….” taken..?

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Rudram in totality is a collection of rudra mantras from various shruti passages combined together with the Yajurveda IV:5 section. There are few verses from other vedas as well, including verses from Rig veda.
      To me it is not known which shruti passage has the “om namo bhavagate rudraya” verse, but —- The Rishi of this mantra is Kashyapa, the devatA is Rudra, the meter (chhandas) is anushhTubh, according to the commentary of BhaTTa BhAskara. So, bhaTTa bhAskara might have known its roots.

      “namaste astu vishveshwaraya…” is not commented by the commentators so it might be a eulogy added later. But I would still keep the doors open for possibility of existence in some veda shakha which we are not aware of. The reason is, there is a commentary on rudram by Skanda in a purana where this verse is commented by Skanda mentioning its seer, its devata etc. So, in all likelihood it might be from a shruti passage which is not extant to us.

      [Update to my previous answer]: The verse “om namo bhagavate rudraya” is from – “10-75-1” of taittirIya AraNyaka.

    2. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      The verse “om namo bhagavate rudraya” is from – “10-75-1” of taittirIya AraNyaka.

      1. Light

        10-75-1 of Taittariya Aranyaka states “Namo Rudraya Vishnave Mrityurme Pahi”. Meaning “Salutation to All Pervasive Lord Rudra Please Save me from death” / “Salutation to Rudra in the form of Vishnu. Save me from death.”

        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          Thanks. There could be pATha bhedas and in the online version of the aranyaka, I verified and you are right there it says ‘namo rudraya vishnave mrityurme pahi’. I didn’t know the exact reference earlier, as I had posted in my first response, but later from the post from below URL, I learnt and posted the reference number to you.


          In Andhrapradesh (and telangana also), in some temples I have heard it rendered as ‘om namo bhagavate rudraya vishnave mrityur me pahi’ only. So, I think the author in above URL is referring same pATha.

          In summary, I am not very sure which pATha or which Veda section has that reference, but I am sure that it is not an interpolation because Skanda bhahsya has those verses. So, I would say, I am not aware of the reference and would keep myself open to learning from any other readers who may have knowledge of the right reference to find that verse. 🙂

  52. Shashwata Shastri
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Went through them on a cursory glance. That “D. Gayatri” is NOT a lady. that is a fake profile. Such fake profiles should not be entertained in such august forum in the very first place. Secondly, her (his) points are baseless. In some places she(he) sticks to BORI (when it seems supporting her (his) AGENDA) and in other places says BORI too has interpolations (when something is authenticated by BORI which goes against her(his) AGENDA). These vaishnavites are always like this, double tongued snakes. Discussion with such FOOLS is only a time wasting exercise. Not sure why so many learned members there are continuing the threads opened by her (him).

      1. Shashwata Shastri

        Why should we even follow the critical edition of Mahavarata? By the authority of whom? Shiva is son of Brahma, the sholka- Keshava Rudra Sambhaba is not present in the critical edition that is why we can not take it as an authentic verse. Why? Who established such laws? This critical edition of Mahavarata needs some serious criticism itself.

        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          ‘kesava rudra sambhava’ verse is very much there in BORI edition to the best of my knowledge.

          Well, I agree with your point that BORI’s critical edition need not be taken seriously. They themselves have proclaimed somewhere which means to say that ‘Mahabharata was a ever expanding tradition and not just a book’. Then how can we say Critical edition alone is authentic? I read somewhere (not able to recollect), that the chief researcher of BORI team towards the end of his life said that whatever entire life he had spent in research on MBH, he felt has gone wasted. So, these kind of repentances too exist in talks.

          Vaishnavaites take huge interest in critcial edition only when they find any pro-shiva chapter is missing there. When a pro-vaishnava chapter incurs some risk in critical edition, they would say ‘BORI team hasn’t done a good job there’ and would try to ignore such exclusions from BORI’s side and call that their pUrvAchAryAs of Vaishnavite sect are more authoritative.

          just remember mate – “vaishnavites are double tongued snakes. Whatever would look supporting Vishnu’s supremacy, would be considered by them as authentic and whatever sections prove risky to vishnu’s supremacy, they would shamelessly reject even via spurious means and cheap tricks. they can stoop down to any levels to uphold their pet theories and condem shiva’s glories”.

          We need not take Vaihnavite talks as authoritative.

  53. Subhasis Dey

    Thank you, Sir. I am much enriched form this Article, especially from your conversation with Abhijit in the ‘Comments’ section. Your analysis of the word ‘Vishnu’ has really been an eye opener for me. Though not worthy of being called a devotee of Mother Uma, I have set her in my heart. And as a part of my tiniest spiritual effort, I try to chant the holy names of my Divine Mother from ‘Sri Sri Chandi Sapta Sati ‘ everyday. But there also, it has been instructed that we should chant the name of ‘Vishnu’ as part of Achamanam before initiation of chanting the holy names. This used to make me a little bit hesitant to pronounce the name of ‘Vishnu’ before starting reading the ‘Sapta Sati’. But from depiction of Scriptural verses such as : “ekaiva shaktiH parameshvarasya | bhinnA chaturdhA viniyogakAle |bhoge bhavAnI samareShu durgA | kopeShu kALI puruSheshu viShNuH |”or the lines “namo shipivishtaya cha”, etc. it is crystal clear for me that by pronouncing the very name of ‘Vishnu’ I am addressing my Divine Mother only who in turn is none other than Shiva. Thus the veil of illusion about the name of Vishnu has been uplifted from my mind by your writing. Also, it is crystal clear from related Rig Vedic verse No. IX, 96,5 that Vishnu is the dearest son of Uma-Maheswara. But, the said verse does not mention Lord Vishnu arising from the left side of Lord Shiva . Could you please cite any scriptural reference in support of this ?

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Thank you Subhasis ji for sharing your experiences.

      I’m glad that my writings (not mine, but inspired by the lord and I am just an instrument) have been of good use in your life. I submit this at the feet of Uma-Maheshwara.

      Well, Mahabharata states it clearly as follows. Even several Puranas has the same fact recorded.

      “Thou art he that hadst created from thy right side the Grandsire Brahma, the Creator of all things. Thou art he that hadst created from thy left side Vishnu for protecting the Creation.” (MBH 13:XIV)

  54. Karthick

    Santosh Ji, I have been asking doubts and giving suggestions to your articles of Mahapashupatastra, but never got a chance to have some words of praise and I strongly feel that I need to do it 🙂 🙂 . I should definitely say this buddy. ANY SANE PERSON WHO READS YOUR ARTICLES WILL DEFINITELY ACCEPT MAHADEVA AS THE SUPREME REALITY. You have wonderfully portrayed that the essence of the Vedas as Mahadeva in your articles and the Narayana Suktam article. No words buddy. Seriously. After looking at that article then only I came to know that the MAHADEVI has been identified as taking the form of Narayana in the Upanishads, Vedas, Puranas, etc… The LINGODBHAVA article where you have portrayed as Vishnu flying upwards and Brahma flying downwards with Pranayama. Really no words man. That specific one was your own research I presume (that’s what the article stated). That was a very long article. Still I haven’t read it completely. I cannot even think of the kind of research you would have done to write these articles man. YOU ARE THE MAN.

    In the Bhagavad Gita articles, when you stated that the Vishwaroopa was Mahakaal roop and the 18.61 and 18.62 directing towards Lord Shiva, I was slightly hesitant to completely trust it. Infact I myself had a feeling when I was reading 18.61 where Krishna “Ishvarah sarva bhutanam”. Here Krishna is talking about a different Lord and that exactly matches with the shruthi verse “ishanah sarva vidyanam ishvarah sarva bhutanam”. Okay Lord Krishna is talking about Lord Shiva. But I let that thought of mine go away as there was no acharya who has stated that and I thought that I am not supposed to assume anything. Then I happened to read KANCHI PARAMACHARYA – MAHA PERIVAYA – CHANDRASEKARENDRA SARASWATHI SWAMIGAL book – DEIVATHIN KURAL. I was very much interested in what he has written about Siva Vishnu tattwam. I directly went there and MAHAPERIYAVA has explicitly stated that 18.61 and 18.62, Krishna is clearly hinting MAHADEVA only, no one else and I got a satisfaction within myself that my assumption was right and what you stated in the article correlates with what MAHAPERIYAVA has written and my assumption. Also the Mahakaal roop that Krishna shows in the 11th Chapter is of Mahadeva’s Kaal roop. That also he has mentioned in his book 🙂 . That also correlated with what you said buddy :). That greatest personality – MAHAPERIYAVA who was considered to be incarnation of Adi Shakti, Narayana and Mahadeva by the disciples, his words can never be false 🙂 🙂 :). Many Sri Vaishnavas themselves have done Saranagati to him. I am yet to read your Bhagavad Gita completely. need to do it.

    I really see the love and devotion that you have for MAHADEVA. You are the right person who can lash out the Shiva haters out there. May all the great Shaiva, Shakta and Advaita Acharyas like HARADATTA SIVA ACHARYAR, SRIKANTHA ACHARAYA, APPAYYA DIKSHITAR, NILAKANTA DIKSHITAR, BHATTA BHASKARACHARYA and PARAMACHARYA and all the gods be with you in your establishing the supremacy of MAHADEVA. Along with that, please accept the minutest contribution from this menial servant of Mahadeva and please offer my contributions to MAHADEVA buddy, since you are closer to him.

    I also came across a comment of yours that you will be writing on the whole of Bhagavad Gita. That’s really great to hear buddy.

    One suggestion: I am not sure whether you have any idea of transforming these articles to any books. But if you had not thought about it buddy, then you should do it. Whatever articles you have written, you can transform into books may be in the long term I am saying. I would like to see that book from you “BHAGAVAD GITA – THE WORDS OF LORD SHIVA IN REALITY” and also other articles too as books 🙂 🙂 🙂 .

    I envision people reading your books and coming to the conclusion of establishing MAHADEVA as their supreme lord in their hearts 🙂 🙂 🙂 .


    JFYI: I am not sure whether you got the 2 points that I mentioned after reading Mahaperiyava’s DEIVATHIN KURAL. If not you should surely read DEIVATHIN KURAL buddy. There are a lot of unknown facts about Siva Vishnu tattwam which MAHAPERIYAVA has presented :). It would good for your writing.

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः) (Post author)

      Thank you dear Karthick brother. I feel this message of yours is truly coming from Kartikeya (my divine brother) himself, who has become happy with a common man like me trying to defend his father shiva. I thank you from the bottom of my heart for all the kind words of appreciation. However, I would humbly submit all your kind words of praise at the feet of mother umA and father shiva, as it is they who are the real writers, I am truly an instrument in their hands. I am not saying this out of modesty. In my family neither my father is a learned man, nor my grand father was. They all spent their time in living a normal day life – go to job, earn, eat, sleep. My mother taught me worship from childhood that too only the stotras such as ganesha-stotram, lakshmi-narayana-karavalamba-stotram, shiva stuti, and ashtottara pujas. That’s it. Because of her only I did my daily puja with such simple hymns only. And then also I didn’t learn anything from any scripture. Then slowly Orkut website came and there I got attacked by vaishnavites in debates and then I lost to them very badly as I was still not knowledgeable. Then started following them, understood what are our scriptures,a dn what are considered authentic, and how do they debate etc…so in a way credits go to the vaishnavas also who in a way trained me indirectly. Thena lso, i was not in a shape to write anything on Shiva. Then later on finding more pain seeing shiva bashing, I couldn’t tolerate that, but my knowledge was still not sufficient to face the ocean of vaishnavite armies. Then Shiva only via inner guidance guided me to the hidden secrets of scriptures w=and taught me the hidden truths. And that’s how I started writing what I was taught by him.
      Otherwise everyone reads Bhagavad Gita, who would call it as shiva’s glory and would be mocked? I was shown those subtle secrets which this world couldn’t see, so all the glories I owe to shiva and mother uma, who alone are the real heroes in all these success stories. I am only lucky to have become successful in getting their hand put on my head. Without them I am nothing …not even a dust particle. _/|\_ To that mother umA who feeds me her breast milk, and to that Shiva who teaches me tatwam, I offer myself as eternally as their infant lying in their lap. _/|\_ To my loving brothers Kartikeya and Ganesha with whom I would play when I would leave this body, I offer my affectionate hugs _/|\_

      Thank you for showing the blessings of all the great Acharyas who were great shiva bhaktas. I need their blessings truly. I have only one big worry – my eyesight is very high and I am always afraid thinking what if my eyes stop functioning before I complete writing all the teachings that Shiva taught me? So, I seek the blessings of all the acharyas and shiva bhaktas and devatas and I pray to them to protect my eyesight till I am in this body, as I have many more interesting secrets to reveal to this world. All those secrets are taught already and exist in my mind only reproducing them on the blog is pending.

      Surely, I would take your suggestion buddy, would publish these as books in future. 🙂 Regarding deivathin kural, yes I would love to read it someday.

      //please offer my contributions to MAHADEVA buddy, since you are closer to him.//

      Nothing like that dear brother, Mahadeva is equally closest to each and every one, even to his haters. He is the prANa that we inhale, he is the vAk that we speak, he is the sight that helps us see, he is the ashta-prakriti (via ashta-murty) due wo whom we live and survive. He is our very own self. There is none more closer to us that him. Although I pray to him to shower his blessings upon you and your entire family, yet when you start talking to your inner self, you would see him responding back. yes it works. We talk wiet everyone outside but we don’t spare time to talk to our-self. when we do that we would surely be guided by HIM. 🙂 You are as his child as I am his child. We both have equal rights to sit in his lap, equal rights to suckle on umA mata’s breast. There is no gradation among devotees. You are me and I am you, when we both are Shiva bhaktas. 🙂

  55. vijendra singh

    Ok!! Great !! Hidden Secrets you revealed , but tell me how would you merge the line spoken by Krishna that “In the beginning, I told this great knowledge to Sun”…

    I know in one of your book – “you took the example of shiv gita..where shiv shambu stole every god knowledge, then after, all gods started asking shiv shambu “who are you?”, in reply, shiv shambu revealed the true knowledge about himself which is known as shiv gita..

    but again i say, it doesn’t seem complete satisfactory, bcoz in bhagwat-gita-krishna is taking particularly the name of sun,krishna is not taking the name of other gods, instead he’s taking only the name of sun….

    so,please clear this great doubt!!

    hare krishna

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः) (Post author)

      The devas include sun also. the discourses need not be personal one to one teachings. When a group of devas are taught they become instrumental in spreading it further. Sun became instrumental in spreading that knowledge on earth via his solar dynasty. That’s the point. Moreover, Ishvara Gita clearly says that whatever shiva taught to devas and rishis, that ishvara gita was communicated by narayana as krishna to arjuna. SO, there is no room for any doubt there.

  56. Karthick

    Santosh Ji,

    Just a thought. You can also include the below in your article:

    Kurma Purana (1.30.60–61):

    Vyasa says:You have directly perceived that Lord Rudra who has universal vision, has faces all around, who is the very embodiment of the universe.

    That divine lordly knowledge has been precisely understood by you. The eternal Hrsikesha (Krishna) himself has recounted it to you out of delight.

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः) (Post author)

      Dear brother kartick,

      You are like lord Kartikeya himself for me. Thanks for the wonderful reference. I’ll add this.

      When I see myself or via someone showing such references, it fills my eyes with tears thinking that it is Shiva himself who is writing these articles. not me. With these many evidences coming my way, I am truly convinced that whatever I am doing is not my wish, it is the divine wish of the lord. Sometimes with people’s anger on me, I gain doubts, but these kind of instances give me assurance that I should simply do what the lord says without doubting/questioning. All these things are truly his works, I am only his instrument. Otherwise how can I claim Bhagavad Gita as Shiva’s Gita without having any scriptural support and then after so many years Lord showing that it indeed has scriptural support. Wow. I bow to that eternal Isana who is the lord of all vidyas and who inspires our intellect to accomplish his tasks.

      Thanks again for the reference. 🙂

      1. chhavi krishan kaushik

        Hello friends can any one of you please clear that . that who is god(Bhagwan) brahma , vishnu , mahadev , krishan , Ram , Allah , jesus etc . without any definition of shashtras . if no then why are you fighting for shiv or krishan or vishnu . sorry for bad english .

        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः) (Post author)

          Nothing is written here without the basis of shastra-s. I’m sorry if I didn’t understand your point properly.

  57. Akshay

    Please tell me how to attain liberation in this age of kali yuga. Some say to chant Hare Krishna maha mantra.

    I think my question got deleted somehow the last time.

    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (षण्मातुरः) (Post author)

      Calm your mind through meditation and talk to yourself, and see which god you have more attraction towards, and then see a guru and tell him about your inclination towards a particular god and let the guru take it forward from there. he will initiate you with the right mantra.

      No mantra would give liberation just like that. One has to have bhakti or jnana or both alongwith mantra japa. Devoid of these factores, chanting is mechanical and wouldn’t bear fruits.

  58. Parabin

    Hr Hr Mahadev
    anyone reading Bhagwat Gita will approve your viewpoints
    Sir in fact I had told a similar ( same) thing and I was ridiculed
    Thanks a lot for the post


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: