NARAYANA SUKTAM – A hymn to Tripurasundari Devi

NOTICE: This article needs to be updated. Have found some wonderful evidences to enhance this article. Sometimes I feel I should rewrite it based on the latest findings and evidences structuring it in a more logical fashion. Hence for the time being, readers may skip this article and read the latest posts. 

Let me begin this article by sharing one happy moment with everyone here. I had been writing this article for the past many weekends and wasn’t finding time to complete and publish it. Today is Maha-ShivaRatri and I am publishing this article today. It makes me so happy to see that Shiva made me busy for these many weeks because he wanted me to publish this article on this day. It gives me immense happiness. I am really indebted to my divine parents – Uma-Maheshwara and cannot pay thanks to them.

Well, let’s begin this article with analyzing the meanings of “Narayana”.

Meaning of the name ‘nArAyaNa’


Well, I am not at all a fan of those scholars who try to find the lord through grammar and many a times in an attempt to establish their own preconceived notions as true, end up devising many complexities through the jugglery of grammar. However I am a person who believes in Reasoning and Logic.

Truth is simple – God neither submits himself to experimentation in labs nor to being truly defined though grammar jugglery. One would keep on going into loops without any positive and true outcome when one enters into this vicious circle of grammar since; after all, grammar and language are man-made indeed! However, on the other hand, God does submit himself to reasoning and logic! Only with these tools when one steps forward in doing research on God, she/he gains true realization. This is the reason, Hinduism allows a practitioner to reason / debate with properly applied logic.

I understand that “Sri Vijayendra Teertha”, a Vaishnavite saint had authored a book “NarayanashabdhArtha nirvachanam” outlining more than a hundred meanings for the word ‘Narayana’, I don’t count that as a great text which can help us understand nArAyaNa truly; since, as I said, within the limits of Grammar one cannot inscribe God. Well, I’m going to refute his understanding in this article in a separately dedicated section.

But here in my analysis, I would cite only four meanings or usage of word “nArAyaNa” which are grammatically correct. And even though all four of them are based on Grammar, yet the fourth name only is the Logically correct name when it comes to Vedic hymns.

The names and meanings are:-

1) nArAyaNa = [nAra + Ayana], where, nAra = waters and Ayana = resting place. So, this gives the meaning of ‘nArAyaNa’ as “That being whose resting place is waters”, which implies “Lord Vishnu” who sleeps on waters (ocean of milk).

So, here the name “nArAyaNa” applies on Vishnu. But this is NOT the meaning used in Vedic Suktams while referring to the supreme as nArAyaNa. I’ll explain that in a while.

2) nArAyaNa = [nAra + Ayana], where, nAra = living entities (Jivas) and Ayana = resting place. So, this gives the meaning of ‘nArAyaNa’ as “That being whose resting place is Jivas”, which implies “Lord Vishnu who is the protector of all Jivas having gross bodies and is called virAt”.

“virAt” means the sum total of all gross bodies. “hiranyagarbha” is the sum total of all subtle bodies (minds). When the gross body of Jiva dies, his ‘vAsanAs’ etc. become unmanifest in hiranyagarbha and again when that Jiva takes birth, he inherits those vAsanAs from hiranyagarbha. That’s how Jiva’s birth-death life cycle continues till his ‘kAraNa dEha” which is made of ‘ignorance’, remains alive.
We have a good and informative verse related to the meaning of nArAyaNa as analyzed above.

“hiraNyagarbhaadhishhThitavikshepashaktitastamodriktaaha~Nkaaraabhidhaa sthuulashaktiraasiit.h | tatpratibimbita.n yattadviraaTachaitanyamaasiit.h | sa tadabhimaanii spashhTavapuH sarvasthuulapaalako vishhNuH pradhaanapurushho bhavati |” (Paingala Upanishad 1:06)

“From the projective power controlled by Hiranyagarbha arose the gross power called the ego, with the preponderance of Tamas. What was reflected in it was the consciousness of Virat. That Virat who has conceit in the Ego, a manifest body, and is the Chief Person, Vishnu is the protector of all gross things”.

So, nArAyaNa = “That being whose resting place is Jivas” = Lord Vishnu who is the protector of all Jivas having gross bodies and is called virAt. Here the name, “nArAyaNa “applies on Vishnu. But this is also NOT the meaning used in Vedic Suktams while referring to the supreme as nArAyaNa. I’ll explain that in a while.

3) nArAyaNa = [nara + Ayana], where, nara = purusha (man) and Ayana = Son. In this system of splitting a word, the meaning is derived based on the standard patronymic form. It’s like the following names which could be used to refer to the son of the corresponding parent in the way as mentioned.

cAkrAyaNa is “the son of cakra”

maitrAyaNa is “the son of mitra”

mATharAyaNa is “the son of mAThara”

So, in this interpretation, this gives the meaning of ‘nArAyaNa’ as “Son of nara / purusha”, which is “Hiranyagarbha (prajapati)” because the first born entity from the supreme Purusha was Hiranyagarbha. Therefore, in this context, ‘nArAyaNa’, is the name of “brahmA” because he is the first born.

But this is also NOT the meaning used in Vedic Suktams while referring to the supreme as nArAyaNa. I’ll explain that in a while.

4) nArAyaNa = [nAra + Ayana], where,

“nAra” is derived from the root “nru”, which means man (like nru-simha, the man-lion god; nrupa which means king) and

“Ayana” is derived from the root “Ay” which means “to go / goal / direction of movement”.

So, this gives the meaning of ‘nArAyaNa’ as “That being / entity whose direction is towards nara (purusha)” or “That being / entity whose goal is to move towards nara (and reach him as final destination)”

This is the ONLY MEANING used in VEDIC hymns like “nArAyaNa sUktaM”. Well, this is also a grammatically derived meaning, but the “application” of this meaning requires “Logic & Reasoning”. So far every scholar who used this definition of nArAyaNa, incorrectly interpreted it as – “the goal of humans is to reach Narayana”. This is erroneous interpretation and this would not help you analyze Narayana Suktam. The ONLY interpretation which REALLY explains the Narayana Suktam and other Vedic references on Narayana is obtained when Logic is used to interpret this definition. My interpretation is as follows.

In all Vedic hymns, the name “nArAyaNa” applies ONLY on Goddess Tripurasundari Devi (Uma) – the Shakti of supreme lord Shiva. And people, especially Vaishnavite friends fail to understand this meaning in true sense.

The above meaning is the TRUE meaning implied in all Vedic hymns wherever nArAyaNa is called out. It is the only interpretation of “nArAyaNa” (as being the name of Uma) which stands as correct when we actually analyze the Vedic references on nArAyaNa. Any other interpretation would end up contradicting other Vedic suktams and Upanishads. We’ll analyze and learn every point in detail shortly. Keep reading!

In “nArAyaNa sUktaM” which is a hymn present in Taittiriya Aranyaka of Yajurveda the supreme being who is referred by the name “nArAyaNa” is “Goddess Tripurasundari” the consort of Shiva, whose motion towards Shiva (Purusha ) is sung as a hymn. That hymn actually describes the supreme Shakti who passes through “sushumna nAdi” and travels (Ayana) towards his consort Shiva who is the “nara (purusha)”.

The above explanation was not comprehensible for few Vaishnava gentlemen and therefore let me give an analogy to clear all confusions. The logic that has been used to derive the meaning of nArAyaNa is exactly similar to what exists for vAsudEva as follows.

vAsudEva: – In Vedas, VAsudEva is NOT “VasudEva Sutam iti VAsudEva”.

‘VAsu’ comes from the root ‘vas’, which means “to reside and envelop completely”. ‘dEva’ comes from the root ‘div’, which means, “to shine”. Therefore vAsudEva is that entity which resides in everything and illuminates from within. This is nothing but the “Atman (Self)” which pervades everything and illuminates with conciousness. So, vAsuDeva means Atman, which is actually Shiva as confirmed by Taittiriya Aranyaka of Yajurveda which calls lord Shiva as the Atman of all.

“aatmaaya namaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.16.2)
“Salutations to Him (Rudra), He who is the Spirit – Atman – dwelling in all creatures”.

Therefore antarArdhaM (inner meaning) of vAsudEva is Shiva (the Atman), whereas when it is understood with its bhoutika-ardham (superficial or outward meaning), it becomes “vasudEva sutaM iti vAsudEva” and refers to lord Sri Krishna who was the son of vasudEva.

This analogy should be self-sufficient to understand that Vedic words can have multiple meanings based on the levels they are studied at. Exactly the same logic holds in my derivation of the meaning of nArAyaNa as Tripurasundari. Well, the Vaishnava friends also raised few objections on converting “Ayana” into “AyaNa (‘Na’ stressed), which I would want to analyze separately without interrupting our current flow of analysis. Please refer to section titled “Refuting the “Na-kAra” theory of “nArAyaNa” for more reasoning around this name. Now, let’s get back to our original discussion.

Well, one may get a question – what is so special in the travel of Shakti towards Shiva that Vedas had to create a hymn for that act? Well, my friends! This travel is nothing but the supreme path to realize your true self. This Shakti is called as “Kundalini” in Yoga and this entire travel of Shakti upwards to meet Shiva in Sahasrara Chakra (Crown shell in Brain) is a Yogic procedure. This is the procedure which gives a practitioner, the highest wisdom and enlightenment. It gives the highest form of liberation called “SayujyaM” at the end. Therefore, this Yogic process where one raises his Kundalini Shakti (Tripurasundari) upwards (Ayana) and unites her with her consort Shiva (nara); makes the Shakti gain the name “nArAyaNa”.


So, now the definition of nArAyaNa becomes as – “That goddess Tripurasundari whose goal is to move (Ayana) towards nara (Shiva) is called as nArAyaNa”. So, hopefully it is clear to everyone that “nArAyaNa” is the name of “Shakti” the consort of Shiva.

Before we step into analyzing the Narayana Suktam hymn in detail; let’s first see few references to understand how Kundalini (Tripurasundari) moves towards her consort lord Shiva (nara) and gets united with him in Sahasrara.

Movement of Tripurasundari as Kundalini towards Shiva (Nara / Purusha)


The realization of Brahman cannot happen by outward focusing. Brahman is our own self, when a Yogi focuses himself inwards, he traverses on the path towards Brahman realization. Kundalini awakening is the supreme process which gives realization through true and practical manner.

The vital force Kundalini (who is Tripurasundari) is verily the Parabrahman.

“tatsUkShma.n tachChukla.n yachChukla.n tadvaidyuta.n yadvaidyuta.n tatparaM brahma |” (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 (parabrahman)”.

Shakti remains in Mooladhara, from their she rises upwards along with Prana. Her motion is towards her consort Shiva. This motion or goal (Ayana) of Tripurasundari is towards Shiva who is the Nara (Purusha); therefore Tripurasundari gained the name “nArAyaNa”. Let’s see the verses which detail out her motion towards Shiva.

“yatra kuNDalinI nAma parA shaktiH pratiShThitA |
yasmAdutpadyate vAyuryasmAdvahniH pravardhate |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:51)
“There [in Mooladhara] is located the Parasakti named Kundalini. From that seat, Vayu arises. From that seat, Agni becomes increased”.

“yasmAdutpadyate binduryasmAnnAdaH pravardhate |
yasmAdutpadyate ha.nso yasmAdutpadyate manaH |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:52)
“From that seat, Bindu originates and Nada becomes increased. From that seat, Hamsa is born. From that seat, Manas is born”.

“mUlAdhArAdiShaTchakra.n shaktisthAnamudIritam.h |
kaNThAdupari mUrdhAnta.n shAMbhava.n sthAnamuchyate |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:53)
“The six Chakras beginning with Muladhara are said to be the seat of Sakti (Goddess). From the neck to the top of the head is said to be the seat of Sambhu (Shiva)”.

“kumbhena kumbhayetkumbha.n tadantasthaH para.n shivam.h |
punarAsphAlayedadya susthira.n kaNThamudrayA |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:60)
“It is only through Kumbhaka that Kumbhaka should be firmly mastered. Within it is Parama-Shiva. That (Vayu) which is non-motionless should be shaken again through Kantha-Mudra (throat-posture)”.

“prakR^ityashhTakaruupa.n cha sthaana.n gachchhati kuNDalii |
kroDiikR^itya shiva.n yaati kroDiikR^itya viliiyate |” (YogaKundalini Upanishad 1:74)
“Kundalini assumes the eight forms of Prakriti (matter) and attains Shiva by encircling him and dissolves itself in Shiva”.

“ityadhordhvarajaH shukla.n shive tadanu maarutaH |
praaNaapaanau samau yaati sadaa jaatau tathaiva cha |” (YogaKundalini Upanishad 1:75)
“Thus Rajas-Sukla (seminal fluid) which rises up goes to Shiva along with Marut (Vayu); Prana and Apana which are always produced become equal”.

“rudragranthi.n cha bhittvaiva kamalaani bhinatti shhaT.h |
sahasrakamale shaktiH shivena saha modate
saivaavasthaa paraa j~neyaa saiva nirvR^itikaariNii iti |” (YogaKundalini Upanishad 1:86)
“Then it pierces Rudragranthi, after that, (all) the six lotuses (or plexuses). Then Sakti is happy with Shiva in Sahasrara Kamala (1000 lotuses seat or pineal gland). This should be known as the highest Avastha (state) and it alone is the giver of final beatitude”.

“atha shaivapada.n yatra tadbrahma brahma tatparam.h |
tadabhyAsena labhyeta pUrvajanmArjitAtmanAm.h |” (Kundika Upanishad-20)
“(Therefore the vital air passing through the Kundalini and the Susumna gets dissolved in the Sahasrarachakra at the top of the head. Then the vision, the mind, vital air and the ‘fire’ of the body reach) the seat of Siva (and get dissolved); that is Brahman; that is the transcendent Brahman. That (Brahman) will be realized by the practice (of Yoga), which is facilitated by the acquisition of practice in previous births”.

Hopefully this is enough to understand the Kundalini Yoga in a nutshell. With this knowledge now let’s analyze “nArAyaNa sUktaM” verse by verse in detail.

Narayana Suktam – A hymn to Tripurasundari Devi
narayana Suktam

Narayana Suktam – A hymn to tripurasundari devi

“nArAyaNa sUktaM” is a hymn which is present in Yajurveda Taittiriya Arankaya and has been registered in “Maha Narayanopanishad”.

This hymn is misunderstood by everyone (including scholars), as being a hymn of “Lord Vishnu”. But the truth is that, this hymn is entirely a playground of Shakti (and Shiva) only. In fact, Shiva and Shakti being inseparable wherever Shakti is glorified, Shiva is implicitly glorified, and vice versa. This “nArAyaNa sUktaM” is a hymn to Goddess Tripurasundari Devi in her Nirguna aspect of Kundalini.

And answer to the question – Why was this hymn’s name given as “nArAyaNa sUktam” is — just because this hymn is dedicated to the praise of the “movement of Tripurasundari Devi towards her consort nara – who is Shiva”. This is nothing but the movement of “Kundalini (Tripuasundari)” towards Shiva (Nara) through the Sushumna nerve. Well, this fact is clearly evident in verses 7-12 of this hymn.

For those readers who may not have patience to read this Hymn and corresponding analysis sequentially and who may want to see the meaning of “nArAyaNa (as Kundalini – Tripurasundari)” in practice without wasting much time, I would suggest such readers to follow the following sequence in reading this hymn. Other readers who are like me, who prefer to read things in as-is sequence, may follow the as-is sequence.

  • Narayana Suktam verse(s) 7 – 12
  • Narayana Suktam verse(s) 1 – 6
  • Narayana Suktam verse(s) 13-14


Where the verses 7-12 would give us a clear picture of Goddess Tripurasundari’s Kundalini aspect whose Ayana (Direction) is through Sushumna towards the Sahasrara where Nara (Shiva) resides. And verses 1-6 details out how the same goddess Tripurasudnari has manifested herself as this universe and they also talk about her attributes of being a thousand headed and thousand eyed. Further, verse 13 clearly eulogizes the androgynous form (half male-half female form) of goddess Tripurasundari Devi where the right portion of her body is occupied by her consort Shiva. This verse no. 13 clearly beyond any doubt praises Shiva and Shakti since they are identical. Then the last verse viz. verse 14 is a closure verse for this hymn.


The reason why, so far none of the scholars could understand this real meaning is simply because; they all have been applying GRAMMAR to realize the supreme god. And as I said earlier – “God neither submits himself to experimentation nor to grammar jugglery. He, however, submits himself willingly to Reasoning and Logic”. And I’ve applied reasoning & logic to deduce the true meaning of “nArAyaNa” in Vedic hymns.

Well, coming back to the hymn – this hymn is actually addressed to the functions and glories of Shakti (Tripurasundari) primarily but in an implicit manner in every verse we may also observe praises for her right portion (Shiva) as she is ArdhanareeshwarI goddess. I’ll try my best to bring all these shades in my analysis. I have a purpose to show Shiva’s presence also because this point I would use to refute Vijayendra Tirtha’s one argument later in a separate section.

Before we begin analyzing the verses one by one; we would require understanding “NARA (Purusha)”. Let’s do that first.

Who is “nara”?


“nara” is a synonym of “purusha” and both these words mean “man” in simple terms. Rig Veda has a hymn to purusha which is called as “purusha sUktam”. This Purusha Suktam is actually a hymn to Lord Shiva only. Salient features of Purusha Suktam are:-

  1. Purusha has a thousand heads, thousand eyes, and thousand limbs (N.B:- Thousand doesn’t mean literally thousand. It’s a term used to convey the meaning of ‘not exactly known’. In fact ‘Shata’ (hundred) is also used to mean the same. So, you may consider that Purusha has a hundred heads – absolutely no issues!)
  2. From Purusha sprang this entire universe (Hiranyagarbha) into existence
  3. Entire universe was formed from a quarter portion of Purusha and his remaining three quarters are still not known to Vedas


Now, our immediate target is to understand which God is this Purusha who created this entire universe. For that Shruti answers the above points as follows:

  1. Yajurveda Taittiriya Aranyaka (10:24:1) clearly states – “purusho vai rudrah |”, which means, “Lord Rudra is the Purusha”. And Satapatha Brahmana (9:1:1:6) of Yajurveda says, “so ‘yaṃ śataśīrṣā rudraḥ sahasrākṣaḥ śateṣudhiradhijyadhanvā pratihitāyī bhīṣayamāṇo ‘tiṣṭhadannamicamānastasmāddevā abibhayuḥ |”, which again conveys the same and means, “That hundred-headed, thousand-eyed, hundred-quivered Rudra, with his bow strung, and his arrow fitted to the string, was inspiring fear, being in quest of food. The gods were afraid of him”. Also, Kaushitaki Brahmana (6:1:13) of Rig Veda calls Lord Rudra as “tata.udatiṣṭhat.sahasra.akṣaḥ.sahasra.pāt |”, which clearly says Rudra has a thousand heads and thousand limbs. Therefore it should be clear now that the Purusha of Vedas is Rudra (Shiva).
  2. It is Shiva from whom, sprang Hiranyagarbha. Shiva is the overlord of Hiranyagarbha. Yajurveda Taittariya Aranyaka (10:21:1) says “brahmadhipatirbrahmano’dhipatirbrahma shivo me astu sadashivom |”, which means, “the preserver of the Vedas and the one overlord of Hiranyagarbha, be benign to me. That Sadasiva is described thus and denoted by Pranava (OM)”. Also, Atharva Veda’s hymn (Atharva veda X:7:28) to Shiva’s Agni-Linga states the same as follows. “hiraṇyagarbhám paramám anatyudyáṃ jánā viduḥ | skambhás tád ágre prā́siñcad dhíraṇyaṃ loké antarā́|” which clearly means that From Shiva manifested the Hiranyagarbha, “Men know Hiranyagarbha as supreme and inexpressible: In the beginning, in the midst of the world, Skambha (Linga) poured (i.e., gave birth) that Hiranyagarbha”.
  3. Ekakshara Upanishad (3) clearly states about Shiva that, “praaNaH prasuutirbhuvanasya yonirvyaapta.n tvayaa ekapadena vishvam.h |” which means, “Thou [Shiva] art the Principle of life; Thou the manifestation (the manifested world); Thou the source of the world; by a quarter hast Thou pervaded this world.


So, from above points, which are responses to the salient features of the Purusha Suktam points discussed before; it is clear that Vedas and Upanishads clearly recognize lord Shiva only as the Purusha (nara) of Vedas. So, from the above analysis, “nara” is proved to be “Shiva”. We’re now required to prove “nArAyaNa” in this Suktam now.

Narayana Suktam Analysis


Narayana Suktam verse(s) 1


“sahasrashiirshha.n deva.n vishvaaksha.n vishvashambhuvam.h |
vishva.n naaraayaNa.n devamaksharaM paramaM prabhum.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.1.1)
“This universe is the Eternal Being (Narayana), the imperishable, the supreme, the goal, multi-headed and multi-eyed (i.e., omnipresent and omniscient), the resplendent, the source of delight for the whole universe”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Here the salient features of this verse are as follows:

1. This entire universe is the eternal being Narayana
2. Narayana is imperishable, and supreme
3. Narayana has a thousand heads and a thousand eyes
4. Narayana is resplendent
5. Narayana is the source of delight for the whole universe

Let’s analyze them one by one now.

1) This entire universe is the eternal being Narayana:

As analyzed in earlier sections, “Narayana is the name of goddess Tripurasundari whose direction or goal of movement (Ayana) is towards Nara (Shiva)”.

This interpretation is the only perfect interpretation because it makes this verse of Narayana Suktam remain in sync with the verses of Vedas and other Upanishads as discussed below. Any other interpretation of the word “Narayana” would end up contradicting these below Upanishads and Vedas entirely. And by logic, even an idiot would understand that there can be only one supreme god and all others should be his/her manifestation. There can never be more than one equally supreme king in the same jungle. And Vedas always state that there is only one supreme God who is addressed in various names (Ekam sat vipraH bahuDhA vadantI). So, going by this logic, “Narayana=Vishnu” would end up contradicting the below Upanishads whereas “Narayana=Shakti” remains in synchronization with the below evidences from Shruti.

Entire universe is the manifested form of Goddess Tripurasundari Devi (Lalita) as stated below.

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

The same is stated again in Devi Upanishad also as follows.

“sarve vai devaa deviimupatasthuH | kaasi tvaM mahaadevi | saabraviidahaM brahmasvaruupiNii | mattaH prakR^itipurushhaatmaka.n jagach |” (Devi Upanishad-1-2 from Atharva Veda)
“All the gods waited upon the Goddess (and asked): ‘Mahadevi, who art Thou?’ She replied: I am essentially Brahman. From Me (has proceeded) the world comprising Prakriti (immobile objects) and Purusha (beings / mobile creatures)”.

N.B:- in the above verse it says from her proceeds the universe which is comprised of Prakriti and Purusha. Here Prakriti which constitutes the universe is a lower form of Prakriti called “Pradhana”, and that Prakriti is destructible (hence universe is destructible). And the Purusha mentioned as the constituent of the universe is all created beings which have consciousness. These two shouldn’t be confused with “Moola Prakriti (The goddess herself who is supreme and imperishable) and Purusha (supreme Brahman – Shiva).

All that is born takes birth inside the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha). And Hirayagarbha itself is born. And all that is born; actually gets their birth from Shakti. Shiva infuses life in the creation by entering as the indwelling Atman. The following verses also support the same.

“shivo.ayaM parama.n deva.n shaktireshhaa tu jiivajjaa |” (Tripuratapini Upanishad 1:18)
“Siva is the Supreme God. So (Brahman-knowers) say; Sakti is all that is born”.

Rig Veda says that Gauri (Uma) has become all this creation.

“gaurīrmimāya salilāni takṣatyekapadī dvipadī sā catuṣpadī
aṣṭāpadī navapadī babhūvuṣī sahasrākṣarā parame vyoman ” (RV 1.164.41)
“Forming the water-floods, the buffalo (cow) hath lowed, one-footed or two-footed or four-footed, she, Gauri, Who hath become eight-footed or hath got nine feet, the thousand-syllabled in the sublimest heaven.

“tasyāḥ samudrā adhi vi kṣaranti tena jīvanti pradiśaścatasraḥ
tataḥ kṣaratyakṣaraṃ tad viśvamupa jīvati ” (RV 1.164.42)
“From her (Gauri) descend in streams the seas of water; thereby the world’s four regions have their being, Thence flows the imperishable flood and thence the universe hath life”.

Well, the analysis of Narayana Suktam verse-1 is complete here because our interpretation of Narayana as Shakti is in sync with the other Shruti evdiences quoted above where it says from Shakti emerged this universe (which is same as what Narayana Suktam verse-1 also states).

But let’s see the presence of Ardhanareeshwara here for additional knowledge. Actually speaking; the whole universe and everything gets created by the union of Shiva and Shakti where Shiva implants his seed into Shakti and she engenders it as her womb (Hiranyagarbha – which is the universe). And within that womb as the embryos (worlds and creatures), it is Shiva who enters and makes the creation alive. In this process, all the creation inherits their material existence (or bodies) from Shakti (Prakriti) but the indweller is Shiva who takes birth. So, this is to say that, Shiva takes birth from the womb of his Shakti as the manifested world, and creatures; where the visible entities are created by Shakti and the consciousness is Shiva. It is Shiva who enters the creation and makes it alive. The same has been explained in Bhagawad Gita (BG. 4.6), “prakritim svam adhisthaya sambhavamy atma-mayaya”, which means, “relying on my own Prakriti I take birth by my own (powers) of illusion”. In simple terms, it is like a mother who gives birth to a child where the child is the reincarnation of the father himself but gets his form and body created by his mother.

Here I would like to touch upon a point which I think is necessary to discuss in this context. Well, people who read my other articles, would have a question in their minds –- 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“; then how is it that Shakti is being shown as the creator in this current article? Who is greater – Shiva or Shakti? These kinds of questions are not uncommon. But my friends; let me give here an analogy – Let us assume for the time being that I am a great and an unmatched playback singer. Let’s assume that I have a huge fan following who die for my voice. Let’s say next week I’m booked for recording a song for a blockbuster movie. And let’s say all of a sudden I fall ill with some severe ailment and in any way I cannot record my song next week since I would take atleast a month to recover fully. Now, you (the reader) are the music composer, and producer of the film. You come to me and say, “Hey! I understand that you can’t move out of your bed for recording next week, but my recording cannot be postponed; however I have an alternative here. You may take rest, but please send your potency of singing (Vak Shakti) to the studio; she would sing while you take rest here”. It wouldn’t be surprising if I reply to him as “Hey Idiot! What nonsense! How can I separate my vocal power from me? That’s an integral part of me only, my Vak-Shakti is not different from me, we’re non-dual; how can I accept your stupid suggestion?” So, hopefully with this analogy it should be clear that Shiva’s potency (Maya) is the Shakti. Maya co-exists with Shiva (Brahman), and is not different from him. Only for the sake of this world Shiva appears as two viz. – He (as father) and his Shakti (as mother). But essentially they are not two, they are “one”. That’s the reason why scriptures have numerous times stated their oneness as Ardhanareeshwara form (androgynous form where one body is shared half by each Shiva and Shakti).

That’s the reason why in the beginning of this article, I said that this “nArAyaNa sUktaM” verses would show both the aspects, Primarily – Shakti, and implicitly – Shiva. Hence one can visualize Ardhanareeshwaree in them. One needs to strongly register in his/her memory one point that Shiva and Shakti are one and the same; they are Ardhanareeshwara (one body shared half by each of them). That’s to say, Brahman (Shiva) and Maya (Prakriti-Uma) are one and the same, only for the creation purpose they appear as distinct. So, it is up to the devotion of the devotee whether he/she wants to take Shiva as the creator OR Shakti; but creation is always Shakti, whereas the cause of creation and the indweller of the creation (propagator) is Shiva. And still if we go further into Vedantic details, then the Truth is – there is no creation in reality, everything is only Shiva (Brahman) but his Maya with her illusion shows this one non-dual God Shiva as many forms (Vishnu, Brahma, Indra etc. immobile creations, and all mobile earthly creatures everything). So, all these forms of Gods as well as entire universe together with its mobile and immobile creation is actually Shiva (Brahman) only. His Shakti who is supreme Maya makes him appear in those many various forms. But everything is the illusion of Shakti. So, this way also if we see, it is Shakti who is creating various forms of Shiva even though Shiva is one and the same in reality. She is the agent which helps Shiva appear as many at the will of Shiva. Therefore it is clear and acceptable to learn that entire universe is created by Shakti and the indweller of that creation is Shiva who infuses life in that.

The same is given in below verse from Upanishad in a single statement.

“tatra lokaa vedaaH shaastraaNi puraaNaani dharmaaNi vai chikitsitaani jyotii.nshhi shivashaktiyogaadityeva.n ghaTanaa vyaapaThyate |”(Tripuratapini Upanishad 1:6)
“It is recorded that the worlds, the Vedas, the sciences, legends, codes, medical works and astronomical treatises have all proceeded from the union of Siva and Sakti”.

To elaborate how Shiva-Shakti create universe, we have the following references.

This Soma (Sa+Uma=Shiva) lays his germ (seed) upon his consort Aditi (Uma the Mula-Prakriti) and she produces this world. Means she brings the existence into picture. Therefore she is the mother of universe.

“arāvīdaṃśuḥ sacamāna ūrmiṇā devāvyaṃ manuṣe pinvatitvacam
dadhāti gharbhamaditerupastha ā yena tokaṃ ca tanayaṃ ca dhāmahe ” (RV 9:74:5)
“The Soma-stalk hath roared, following with the wave: he swells with sap for man the skin which Gods enjoy. Upon the lap (womb) of Aditi he lays the germ (seed), by means whereof we gain children and progeny”.

And then inside that golden womb (Hiranyagarbha) which is the visible universe, Shiva takes birth or manifests himself multiplying as all the creatures and Gods with the help of his Prakriti (Tripurasundari) who creates the objects for Shiva to manifest.

“ékacakraṃ vartata ékanemi sahásrākṣaraṃ prá puró ní paścā |
ardhéna víśvaṃ bhúvanaṃ jajā́na yád asyārdháṃ kvà tád babhūva |” (Atharva veda 10:8:7)
“Up, eastward downward in the west, ‘it rolleth, with countless elements, one-wheeled, single-fellied. With half it hath begotten all creation. Where hath the other half become unnoticed?”

And Vedas call Shiva as the father of the entire creation.

“somaḥ pavate janitā matīnāṃ janitā divo janitā pṛthivyāḥ
janitāghnerjanitā sūryasya janitendrasya janitota viṣṇoḥ ” (Rig Veda.IX.96.5)
“Father of sacred chants, Soma (Shiva) flows onwards, the Father of the Earth, Father of the Celestial region: Father of Agni, the creator of Surya, the Father who gave birth to Indra and Vishnu”.

From the verse from Rig Veda (RV 1:164:42) discussed few lines above; we understood that from Gouri descended in streams, the water; and from water the four regions sprang into existence. But from water how the world’s four regions did sprang into existence? It is given clearly in Yajurveda as follows. Note that in the below verse, waters and connection with Varuna etc. are just esoteric expressions. One should simply understand that waters were from Gouri (Uma) and Shiva placed his seed in them. In fact these waters are nothing but the fluids of the womb where in the seed of Shiva developed as the universe. These all Vedic verses are complex and esoteric so one shouldn’t understand them in literal sense.

“Apo varunasya patnaya Asan tA agnir abhy adhyAyat tAh sam abhavat tasya retah parApatat tad iyam abhavad yad dvitIyam parApatat tad asAv abhavad iyaM vai virAd asau yad virAjav upadadhAtIme evopa dhatte yad vA asau retaH siNcati tad asyAm prati tisHtHati tat prajAyate tA oShadhayaH|” (Yajurveda Taittiriya Samhita v:5:4)
“The waters were the wives of Varuna; Agni longed for them, he had union with them; his seed fell away, it became this (earth); what second fell away became yonder (sky); this is the Viraj, yonder the Svaraj; in that he puts down two Viraj (bricks) he puts down these two (worlds). Now the seed which yonder (sky) impregnates, finds support in this (earth), it is propagated, it becomes plants and shoots”.

And don’t worry by seeing Agni as the name in above verse. Agni is just a pseudonym used by Vedas to call Rudra only. Vedic seers fear to call Rudra by his true names, so they use lot many aliases to refer to him. Evidences are given below.

“rudro vA esha yad agnir |” (Yajurveda Taittiriya Samhita V:5:7)
“Agni is Rudra”.

“agnirvai sa devastasyaitāni nāmāni śarva iti yathā prācyā | ācakṣate bhava iti yathā bāhīkāḥ paśūnām patī rudro ‘gniriti |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 1:7:3:8)
“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, and Agni”.

Therefore from above analysis it is clear that entire universe is created by the union of Shiva and Shakti where the entire creation is Shakti only and the indweller is Shiva. And Shiva & Uma are one and the same being Ardhanareeshwara. That is the reason why Vedas also do not see any difference between the couple.

Hence in the below verses from Vedas we can see the Ardhanareeshwara aspect clearly. We have the following verse which states that Aditi (Uma) is all this creation as a father and as a mother too.

“aditirdyauraditirantarikṣamaditirmātā sa pitā sa putraḥ
viśve devā aditiḥ pañca janā aditirjātamaditirjanitvam ” (RV 1:89:10)
“Aditi is the heaven, Aditi is mid-air, Aditi is the Mother and the Sire and Son. Aditi is all Gods, Aditi five-classed men, Aditi all that hath been born and shall be born”

Similarly, Shiva’s Ardhanareeshwara aspect has been sung in Rig Veda esoterically calling him as a bull as well as a cow as follows.

“asacca sacca parame vyoman dakṣasya janmannaditerupasthe |
aghnirha naḥ pra thamajā ṛtasya pūrva āyuni vṛṣabhaścadhenuḥ |” (Rig Veda 10:5:7)

“Not Being, Being in the highest heaven, in Aditi’s bosom and in Dakṣa’s birthplace,
Is Agni (Shiva), our first-born of Holy Order, the Milch-cow and the Bull in life’s beginning”.


Hence, we have seen that the universe is created by Tripurasundari devi (Uma) and also we have seen that since she and Shiva are one (as Ardhanareeshwara), Vedas call her as also the father of the creation.

Conclusion: From above evidences it is clear that it is Tripurasundari Devi from whom this universe is created since she is the supreme Mula-Prakriti (mAyA) and entire creation is her manifested form only. And this Narayana Suktam says “This entire universe is nArAyaNa”. Therefore our understanding of “nArAyaNa” being the name of Shakti is verified here. And the traditional assumption of “nArAyaNa” being Vishnu is refuted, since that assumption would have ended up getting refuted by these many evidences from Shruti.

2) Narayana is imperishable, and supreme

That which is unborn, is only the imperishable. Whatever has a birth, has an expiry date also. So, once again this attribute of Imperishability and being Supreme apply on Goddess Tripurasundari Devi alone. Here are few references to follow.

The supreme Prakriti (Tripurasundari) is unborn in nature and she is the supreme power of Shiva.

“ajaamekaa.n lohitashuklakR^ishhNaaM bahviiH prajaaH sR^ijamaanaa.n saruupaaH |
ajo hyeko jushhamaaNo.anushete jahaatyenaa.n bhuktabhogaamajo.anyaH |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 4:05)
“There is one unborn being (female), red, white, and black, uniform, but producing manifold offspring. There is one unborn being (male) who loves her and lies by her (Jiva); there is another (Eswara) who leaves her, while she is eating what has to be eaten”.

“athaasya yaa sahajaastyavidyaa muulaprakR^itirmaayaa lohitashuklakR^ishhNaa |
tayaa sahaayavaan devaH kR^ishhNapi~Ngalo mameshvara iishhTe |” (Shandilya Upanishad 3:01)
“Maheshvara (the great Lord) who is black and yellow rules with Avidya, Mula-Prakriti or Maya that is red, white and black and that is co-existent with him”.

“maayaa.n tu prakR^iti.n vidyaanmaayina.n cha maheshvaram.h |
tasyavayavabhuutaistu vyaapta.n sarvamida.n jagat.h |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 4:10)
“Know, then, that prakriti is maya and that Maheshwara is the Lord of maya. The whole universe is filled with objects which are parts of His form”.

Since she is unborn, she is eternal and imperishable. And once again the concept of Ardhanareeshwara can be seen in the same Upanishad as follows. The below verse erases the duality between Prakriti (Tripurasundari) and Shiva and calls them both as the same Brahman (Shiva). It is Shiva (Brahman) who appears as Uma (Maya) and then creates the universe; however essentially they aren’t different.

“GYaaGYau dvaavajaaviishaniishaavajaa hyekaa bhoktR^ibhogyaarthayuktaa |
anantashchaatmaa vishvaruupo hyakartaa traya.n yadaa vindate brahmametat.h |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 1:09)
“The Supreme Lord appears as Isvara, omniscient and omnipotent; and as the jiva, of limited knowledge and power; both unborn. But this does not deny the phenomenal universe; for there exists further the unborn prakriti, which creates the ideas of the enjoyer, enjoyment and the object. Atman is infinite and all—pervading and therefore devoid of agency. When the seeker knows all these three to be Brahman, he is freed from his fetters”.

And this Shakti is Supreme also as given in below verse.

“saiShA parA shaktiH | saiShA shAMbhavIvidyA kAdividyeti vA hAdividyeti vA sAdividyeti vA |
rahasyamomoM vAchi pratiShThA |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-3 from Rig Veda)
“She, here, is the Power supreme. She, here, is the science of Sambhu, either as the science beginning with ka, or as the science beginning with ha, or as the science beginning with sa. This is the secret Om grounded in the word Om”.

Therefore, this attribute of being supreme and indestructible sung under the name “nArAyaNa” when understood, gives us the truth as – “nArAyaNa” being the name of Tripurasundari Devi. And again here nArAyaNa cannot be considered as Vishnu since Vishnu is born (he is a manifestation of Shiva), he has a birth. He was given birth by Shiva (through Uma) as follows.

“sá yád dhruvā́ṃ díśam ánu vyácalad víṣṇur bhūtvā́nuvyàcalad virā́jam annādī́ṃ kr̥tvā́ |” (Atharva Veda XV:14:5)
“He (Vratya = Shiva), when he went away to the stedfast region, went away having become Vishnu and having made Virāj an eater of food”.

Yajur Veda also states that it is Shiva himself who manifests himself in the form of Vishnu.

“namo girishaya cha shipivishhtaya cha |” (Yajurveda iv.5.5.f)
“Salutations to the Lord who dwells in mount Kailas and who assumes the form of Vishnu”.

Rig Veda also states the same that Soma (Sa + Uma = Lord with Uma = Shiva) beget Vishnu

“somaḥ pavate janitā matīnāṃ janitā divo janitā pṛthivyāḥ
janitāghnerjanitā sūryasya janitendrasya janitota viṣṇoḥ ” (Rig Veda.IX.96.5)
“Father of sacred chants, Soma (Shiva) flows onwards, the Father of the Earth, Father of the Celestial region: Father of Agni, the creator of Surya, the Father who gave birth to Indra and Vishnu”.

“rudraatpravartate biijaM biijayonirjanaardanaH |” (Rudra Hridayopanishad 8)
“Rudra is the generator of the seed. Vishnu is the embryo of the seed”.

“umaa sha~Nkarayogo yaH sa yogo vishhNuruchyate |” (Rudra Hridayopanishad 11)
“The combination of Uma and Sankara is Vishnu”.

Conclusion: – Therefore it is evident that the being “nArAyaNa” who is said to be Supreme and imperishable, is nothing but the name of “Tripurasundari Devi” only and it can’t be taken as the name of Vishnu in this context of Vedas.

3) Narayana has a thousand heads and a thousand eyes

Here nArAyaNa (Tripurasundari) is said to possess thousand heads and thousand eyes. Well, having thousand heads doesn’t mean Tripurasundari Devi has really 1000 heads / eyes. Sahasra (thousand) and Shata (hundred) are apparent metrics to describe the limitlessness of the supreme power. The real meaning of Sahasrasiirsha (thousand heads) is – Whatever exists, is she only. In other words all faces are her faces, all heads are her heads and all limbs are her limbs. This is to convey that whatever exists as this creation whatever creatures we see – two footed, four footed etc. everything is her own manifestation (form) only. This is clearly stated in the following verses.

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

And when she gave birth to the cosmic-egg (universe), that universe itself is a manifested form of Prakriti (Tripurasundari) as depicted below.

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

Therefore it is now crystal clear that the attribute of being omnipresent (Sahasrasiirsha) belongs to goddess Tripurasundari. It is clear that she has a thousand heads.

Now, let’s analyze the attribute of “Sahasrakshi” (having thousand eyes). Well, it also doesn’t mean to say that she really has a thousand eyes. The menaing of being a thousand eyed deity is her power of “Omniscience”. This means that she knows about everything. In Durga Suktam goddess Durga is eulogized as the Jataveda Agni. Here Agni which is called as Jataveda is not an outwardly present Agni, but it is the fire of consciousness present witin us. And Jataveda-Agni means “all-knowing fire”. Therefore Durga suktam is a great evidence to understand that Durga (Tripurasundari) is all-knowing goddess, which means she is “Omniscient”, which again implies to say that she is “Sahasrakshi” – thousand eyed goddess.

Therefore with the above analysis it is crystal clear that Goddess Tripurasundari is the one who has a thousand heads (Omnipresent) and a thousand eyes (Omniscient).

On a side note, let’s once again see the oneness of Shiva and Shakti here. Vedas see oneness of Shiva-Shakti everywhere, and hence here also we’ll find the same. Goddess Tripurasundari is Ardhanareeshwari means she has an androgynous form where her right side is Shiva. This is just a symbolic way to state them as being identical. Therefore she is the Supreme Brahman identical to Shiva as bentioned below.

“satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The sole Truth is the thing named ‘Lalita (the Beautiful)’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

And keeping the unity of Shiva and Shakti in our minds if we see, Vedas hail Shiva as a thousand headed and thousand eyed deity. It is Shiva who is the Purusha of Vedas and he is said to possess thousand heads & eyes. The real meaning of that statement is – All faces are Shiva’s faces, all heads are Shiva’s heads and all limbs are Shiva’s limbs. This is to convey that whatever exists as this creation whatever creatures we see – two footed, four footed etc. everything is Shiva’s manifestation (form) only.

Yajurveda Taittiriya Aranyaka (10:24:1) clearly states – “purusho vai rudrah |”, which means, “Lord Rudra is the Purusha”. And Satapatha Brahmana (9:1:1:6) of Yajurveda says, “so ‘yaṃ śataśīrṣā rudraḥ sahasrākṣaḥ śateṣudhiradhijyadhanvā pratihitāyī bhīṣayamāṇo ‘tiṣṭhadannamicamānastasmāddevā abibhayuḥ |”, which again conveys the same and means, “That hundred-headed, thousand-eyed, hundred-quivered Rudra, with his bow strung, and his arrow fitted to the string, was inspiring fear, being in quest of food. The gods were afraid of him”. Also, Kaushitaki Brahmana (6:1:13) of Rig Veda calls Lord Rudra as “tata.udatiṣṭhat.sahasra.akṣaḥ.sahasra.pāt |”, which clearly says Rudra has a thousand heads and thousand limbs. Therefore it should be clear now that it is Shiva only who is said to have thousand heads and thousand eyes means all forms are his forms only.


“sarvaanana shirogriivaH sarvabhuutaguhaashayaH |
sarvavyaapii sa bhagavaa.nstasmaat.h sarvagataH shivaH” (Svetasvatara 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”.

“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 forms”.

It is Tripurasundari (Shakti) who is this entire creation. She is the supreme Prakriti who acts as the agent who with her Maya makes the one single lord Shiva appear (manifest) as many. She creates this universe, and Shiva enters the universe as the indweller. So, of course it is true that all forms are Shiva’s forms, all heads, limbs are Shiva’s limbs, but in equally true sense it needs to be understood that all forms are actually Shakti’s forms, all heads are Shakti’s heads, and all limbs are Shakti’s limbs. It is Prakriti who creates all these bodies and Shiva makes them alive. So, all forms are Shakti’s forms indeed. Shiva and Shakti always go hand in hand, if you try to study them by separating them, you would never get a solution!

And most important point is, we are studying a hymn (narayana suktam) which talks about internal god where within us, the same Shiva (purusha) and Shakti (Tripurasundari) exists without any difference in their Nirguna state. And in the Nirguna state Shiva and Shakti are always one. This is the reason why “Durga Suktam” of Yajurveda praises Durga as Jataveda Agni. And we know that Agni is just another name to address Shiva, and under that name Vedas praise Shiva’s Agni-Linga form always. So, this is to convey that Shakti and Shiva are one hence Vedas sing Durga as Agni without any differentiation. Therefore whether you call it as Shiva has thousand heads or Shakti has thousand heads, both mean the same.

So, it is proved that Shakti has a thousand heads and a thousand eyes. Even Puranas also admit the same. That is the reason why “Lalita Sahasranama Stotram” of goddess “Tripurasundari Devi” says:

“Unmesha nimishotpanna vipanna bhuvanavali |
Sahasrashirsha vadana sahasrakshi sahasrapath |” (LS verse 66)
“[Goddess tripuasundari] the opening of whose eyes results in creation and closing in destruction. She has a thousand heads and faces. She has thousands of eyes. She has thousands of feet”.

Since in this verse of Narayana Suktam; here the name “nArAyaNa” is specially used for the supreme that is said to possess a thousand heads and eyes; it applies here on Shakti (Tripurasundari Devi) only. This attribute belongs to both Shiva and Shakti (because Shiva is nothing but the right half of Shakti) but in this context we need to consider the central actor as Shakti who is being praised.

Conclusion: – It is verified that thousand heads and thousand eyes attribute belongs to Shiva and Shakti both but Narayana Suktam sings the glories of Shakti here so, the name “nArAyaNa” is again proved here to be that of Tripurasundari Devi and no case it can be applied on Vishnu. Therefore “nArAyaNa” name in this verse belongs ONLY to Devi.

4) Narayana is resplendent

This is clearly called out in the following Upanishad from Rig Veda that it is Goddess Tripurasundari who shines the three cities (gross, subtle, and causal bodies within us) and is resplendent.

“mahAtripurasundarI bahirantaranupravishya svayamekaiva vibhAti |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The Beauty of the three-great-cities, penetrating without and within, is resplendent”.

Taittiriya Aranyana of Yajurveda also states that it is Durga (Tripurasundari) who is as resplendent as fire.

“taamagnivarNaa.n tapasaa jvalantii.n vairochanii.n karmaphaleshhu jushhTaam.h |
durgaa.n devii.n sharaNamahaM prapadye sutaraa.n naashayate tamaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.2.1.2 and also from Devi Upanishad-9)
“I take refuge in Her, the Goddess Durga, who is fiery in lustre and radiant with ardency, who is the Power belonging to the Supreme (Virochana=Shiva) who manifests Himself manifoldly, who is the Power residing in actions and their fruits rendering them efficacious (or the Power that is supplicated to by the devotees for the fruition of their work). O Thou Goddess skilled in saving. Thou takest us across difficulties excellently well. Our salutations to Thee”.

So, here once again it is evident that the “nArAyaNa” who is resplendent is nothing but “Tripurasundari Devi”.

Well, on a side note, as Durga and Shiva are one and the same being Ardhanareeshwara, even Shiva is called as the supreme light. Atharvasiras Upanishad (2:19) states, “yo vai rudraH sa bhagavAnyachcha tejastasmai vai namonamaH |” which means, “He who is Rudra, he alone is Supreme god (Bhagawan). He is the Supreme Light and we salute him again and again”. This was only for additional knowledge that I cited, just to show that Tripurasundari is never different from Shiva. They are always same.

Conclusion: – Once again it is evident that “nArAyaNa” who is resplendent is actually “tripurasundari Devi”. Hence the name “nArAyaNa” means Uma and not Vishnu here in this context.

5) Narayana is the source of delight for the whole universe

This is again a quality of Goddess Tripurasundari Devi. It is evident from the following verse.

“bhogyamajIjanat.h | sarvamajIjanat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-2 from Rig Veda)
“Whatever is Bhoga (enjoyment which gives joy) is born of her. Everything was born of her”.

“ahamaanandaanaanandaaH viGYaanaaviGYaane aham.h |” (Devi Upanishad-2 from Atharva Veda)
“I am (all forms of) bliss and non-bliss”.

Again on a side note -Likewise every source of delight has been sought from Shiva in Yajurveda’s Sri Rudram Chamakam portion. It is a huge content hence can’t be included here. But anyone who has read Chamakam would understand that there is nothing that has not been asked from Shiva. Lands, health, property, house, cattle, good wife, good progeny, food, happiness, knowledge, salvation and what’s not? Everything has been requested from Shiva by Vedas. And Shiva is the source of all the enjoyments. So, source of all delights is Shiva also because it is we who see differences, but Vedas do not see any difference between Shiva and Shakti.

Conclusion: – It is Tripurasundari who is the source of all delight. So, the name “nArAyaNa” is her name in this context.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 2

“vishvataH parama.n nitya.n vishva.n naaraayaNam harim.h |
vishvamevedaM purushhastadvishvamupajiivati |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.1.2)
“This universe is the Supreme Being (Narayana) alone; hence, it subsists on That, the Eternal which transcends it (in every way)—the Omnipresent Absolute which destroys all sins”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

This verse says the universe is the Narayana alone who transcends the universe and is the absolute Brahman and he is the destroyer of all sins. And as per our definition “nArAyaNa” means “Tripurasundari Devi”. Let’s see if she fits into the qualities described here.
Tripurasundari Devi was present even before the Universe (Hiranyagarbha) was created as shown below. So, she transcends the universe and is the supreme Maya (who coexists and is one with Brahman).

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

And when she gave birth to the cosmic-egg (universe), that universe itself is a manifested form of Prakriti (Tripurasundari) as depicted below.

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

She however transcends the universe and is identical with Brahman. For this another reference says the following.

“sarve vai devaa deviimupatasthuH | kaasi tvaM mahaadevi | saabraviidahaM brahmasvaruupiNii | mattaH prakR^itipurushhaatmaka.n jagach |” (Devi Upanishad-1-2 from Atharva Veda)
“All the gods waited upon the Goddess (and asked): ‘Mahadevi, who art Thou?’ She replied: I am essentially Brahman. From Me (has proceeded) the world comprising Prakriti (immobile objects) and Purusha (beings / mobile creatures)”.

“ahaM paJNchabhuutaanyabhuutaani | ahamakhila.n jagat.h |
vedo.ahamavedo.aham.h | vidyaahamavidyaaham.h | ajaahamanajaaham.h |
adhashchordhva.n cha tiryakchaaham.h |” (Devi Upanishad-3 from Atharva Veda)
“I am the five elements as also what is different from them. I am the entire world. I am the Veda as well as what is different from it. I am the unborn; I am the born. Below and above and around am I”.

She is the Supreme Brahman (since she is identical with Shiva).

“satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The sole Truth is the thing named ‘Lalita (the Beautiful)’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

This makes it clear that the name “nArAyaNa” and its related qualities described in this verse apply aptly on Mahatripurasundari Devi. Hence our definition of “nArAyaNa” being the name of Shakti holds true here. And here “nArAyaNa” CANNOT be taken as the name of “Vishnu” because even Vishnu was created by her as given below.

“tasyA eva brahmA ajIjanat.h | viShNurajIjanat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-2 from Rig Veda)
“Of Her (Tripurasundari) was Brahma born; was Vishnu born of her”.

She is the destroyer of all sins. And she ferries one from the worldly life to Salvation. And also beyond her there is nothing since she is identical with Shiva (Brahman).

“yasyaaH paratara.n naasti saishhaa durgaa prakiirtitaa | durgaatsa.ntraayate yasmaaddevii durgeti kathyate | prapadye sharaNa.n devii.n du.ndurge durita.n hara | taa.n durgaa.n durgamaa.n devii.n duraachaaravighaatiniim.h | namaami bhavabhiito.aha.n sa.nsaaraarNavataariNiim.h |” (Devi Upanishad-28 From Atharva Veda)
“Beyond Her is nothing; renowned is She as DURGA; afeared of life, I bow to the inaccessible One (Durga), Bulwark against all sins; the Pilot who Steers me across the sea of worldly life”.

This is it. But should we see the Ardhanareeshwara aspect in this verse also? Let’s see for extra knowledge. The below verse says that Rudra transcends the universe and is the Brahman. So, it should suffice to understand the oneness of Shiva and Shakti.

“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 Brihat (=Brahman) and is hidden in the bodies of all living beings. By knowing Him who alone pervades the universe, men become immortal”.

So, we have seen that the “nArAyaNa” who has become this world, simultaneously transcends this world and is the destroyer of all sins – is Tripurasundari (and Shiva) alone.

Conclusion: – Therefore from the above analysis it is again clear that “nArAyaNa” when considered as the name of “Tripurasundari” it makes proper sense. So, here in this Hymn, “nArAyaNa” cannot be Vishnu, it is Durga alone.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 3

“pati.n vishvasyaatmeshvaram shaashvatam shivamachyutam.h |
naaraayaNaM mahaaj~neya.n vishvaatmaanaM paraayaNam.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.1.3)
“The lord of the universe and the ruler of individual souls, who is permanent, supremely auspicious and indestructible, who has embodied Himself in man as his support (being the indwelling Spirit), who is supremely worthy of being known by the creatures, who is embodied in the universe and who is the Refuge unfailing”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Here we have the following salient features.

1. Narayana is the Lord of the universe and ruler of individual souls (Jivas)
2. Narayana is the eternal, auspicious and indestructible
3. Narayana has embodied himself in man as the indwelling spirit (Atman)
4. Narayana is worthy of being known by all
5. Narayana is embodied in the universe and is the unfailing refuge

Let’s analyze each point now.

1) Narayana is the Lord of the universe and ruler of individual souls (Jivas)

The lord of the universe is only Brahman who rules as Eshwara. And in this context Shruti says that Goddess Tripurasundari is the Brahman above whom there is nothing.

She is the Supreme Brahman (since she is identical with Shiva).

“satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The sole Truth is the thing named ‘Lalita (the Beautiful)’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

“yasyaaH paratara.n naasti saishhaa durgaa prakiirtitaa |” (Devi Upanishad-28 From Atharva Veda)
“Beyond Her is nothing; renowned is She as DURGA”.

“shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha. Upa. VI:61)
“That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva, Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)”.

Individual soul “Jiva” is nothing but same Supreme self (Atman-Brahman), but is entangled with Maya and becomes bound in the body. The body of that Jiva consists of Tripura (three cities) where “pura” means “body”. The three cities / bodies where the Jiva dwell are viz. gross, Subtle and Causal. And it is again Goddess Tripurasundari Devi who pervades these three cities and plays & rules over the individual self (Jiva). She illuminates the Jiva with the consciousness.

“saiva puratrayaM sharIratrayaM vyApya bahirantaravabhAsayantI |
deshakAlavastvantarasa.ngAnmahAtripurasundarI vai pratyak.hchitiH |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-4 from Rig Veda)
“Pervading the three cities, the three bodies, illuminating within and without, She, the Consciousness within, becomes the Maha-Tripura-Sundari, being associated with space, time and objects”.

This explains the point 1 clearly that it is Tripurasundari who is the lord of the universe and ruler of individual self. So, it is evident that “nArAyaNa” is the name of “Tripurasundari”.

Let us see the zero difference between Shiva-Shakti now to realize the essence of Ardhanareeshwara aspect here.

Shiva is the Bhagawan (Supreme Lord) hence he is the supreme ruler.

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

It is Shiva who is the ruler of individual souls playing inside the Tripura.

“puratraye kriiDati yashcha |jiivastatastu jaataM sakalaM vichitram.h | aadhaaramaanandamakhaNDabodhaM yasmi.NllayaM yaati puratrayaM cha |” (Kaivalyopanishad 14)

“The being (Shiva)who sports in the three cities – from Him has sprung up all diversity. He is the substratum, the bliss, the indivisible Consciousness, in whom the three cities dissolve themselves”.

Conclusion: – “nArAyaNa” who is the supreme lord and the ruler of individual self is “Tripurasundari”.

2) Narayana is the eternal, auspicious and indestructible

Whatever is born has an expiry date, hence they are “mithya (unreal)”. Real is only the supreme Brahman who is unborn. And Narayana (Tripurasundari) is unborn and hence eternal and indestructible. She only gives all the bliss to the world, so she is the supremely auspicious goddess.

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

“saivAtmA tato.anyamasatyamanAtmA |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“She alone is Atman. Other than Her is untruth (mithyA)”.

When the world gets destroyed, when the fivefold forms gets relinquished; then, only she and Shiva remain as the only truth.

“pa~ncharUpaparityAgA darvarUpaprahANataH |
adhiShThAnaM paraM tattvamekaM sachChiShyate mahat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-6 from Rig Veda)
“The fivefold form relinquished and effects like space transcended, remains the one, the great being, The supreme Ground, the only Truth”.

The same has been stated in more clear words by Shankaracharya in Soudnarya Lahari as quoted below. But note that this verse is just for additional clarification supporting the previous verse. I do not wish to analyze a Vedic suktam with references from smriti texts. But the below verse is only to add clarification to the above Shruti verse.

“Virincih panchatvam vrajati harir apnoti virathim | Vinasam kinaso bhajati dhanado yati nighanam |
Vitandri mahendri vithathir api sammeelita-drsa | Maha-samhare smin viharati sati tvat-patirasau |” (Soundarya Lahari 26)
“The creator reaches the dissolution, The Vishnu attains death, The god of death even dies, Kubera the lord of wealth expires, The Indras close their eyes one after one, And attain the wake less sleep, During the final deluge, But you my chaste mother, Play with your consort the Sadashiva”.

She is the supreme bliss of Brahman consciousness (satchidAnanda). And the Sa-chi-ananda Brahman is the supremely auspicious entity.

“chidvidyA.advitIyabrahmasaMvittiH sacchidAnandalaharI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“She is the Science of Consciousness, non-dual Brahman Consciousness, a wave of Being-Consciousness-Bliss”.

3) Narayana has embodied himself in man as the indwelling spirit (Atman)

Tripurasundari is the Atman indwelling in all the beings.

“saivAtmA tato.anyamasatyamanAtmA |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“She alone is Atman. Other than Her is untruth (mithyA)”.

The same is true for Shiva also since Shiva and Devi are not distinct.

Taittiriya Aranyaka (10.16.2) of Yajurveda calls lord Shiva as the Atman of all. So, this proves the Ardhanareeswhara aspect of Shiva-Shakti.

“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)

Conclusion: – “nArAyaNa” is the name of “Tripurasundari” who exists as the Atman in all beings.

4) Narayana is worthy of being known by all

“imAM vij~nAya sudhayA madantI parisR^itA tarpayantaH svapITham.h |
nAkasya pR^iShThe vasanti paraM dhAma traipuraM chAvishanti |” (Tripura Upanishad-7 from Rig Veda)
“Attended thus the Power of Consciousness Is drunk with the draught of Immortality; Knowing Her and worshipping Her throne Her devotees dwell in the heaven (Sahasrara) and enter the supreme Triple City (beyond the junction of eyebrows)”.

Entire “Sri Vidya” tradition stresses the point of knowing Tripurasundari only. Entire content of “Tripura Tapini Upanishad” is dedicated to explaining the “Sri Vidya” (the wisdom leading towards Sri-Maata (Lalita)).Hence Tripurasundari devi is worthy of known by all. Copying that entire Tripura-Tapini Upanishad is a herculean task. One may read that separately if one wants.

Also, since she is the Brahman (being not different from Shiva), entire Vedanta teaches us to know her (Brahman). This applies to Shiva as well. Ardhanareeshwara aspect is applicable everywhere.

5) Narayana is embodied in the universe and is the unfailing refuge

Everything in the universe is “nArAyaNa” (Tripurasundari Devi) only.

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

“sarve vai devaa deviimupatasthuH | kaasi tvaM mahaadevi | saabraviidahaM brahmasvaruupiNii | mattaH prakR^itipurushhaatmaka.n jagach |” (Devi Upanishad-1-2 from Atharva Veda)
“All the gods waited upon the Goddess (and asked): ‘Mahadevi , who art Thou?’ She replied: I am essentially Brahman. From Me (has proceeded) the world comprising Prakriti (immobile objects) and Purusha (beings / mobile creatures)”.

She is the unfailing refuge the ultimate goal since she is the Maya (one with Brahman, hence she is also called Brahman)

“shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha. Upa. VI:61)
“That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva, Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)”.

“satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The sole Truth is the thing named ‘Lalita (the Beautiful)’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

Conclusion: – The “nArAyaNa” who is embodied in the universe and is the supreme goal (refuge) of everyone is indeed the Tripurasundari Devi alone.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 4

“naaraayaNaH paraM brahma tattva.n naaraayaNaH paraH |
naaraayaNaH paro jyotiraatmaa naarayaNaH paraH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.1.4)
“Narayana is the Supreme Reality designated as Brahman. Narayana is the highest (Self). Narayana is the supreme Light (described in the Upanishads). Narayana is the infinite Self”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

1) Narayana (Tripurasundari ) as Brahman, and also the Highest & infinite self (Atman)

Tripurasundari Devi is the Supreme Brahman (Since she is identical with Shiva).

“sarve vai devaa deviimupatasthuH | kaasi tvaM mahaadevi | saabraviidahaM brahmasvaruupiNii | mattaH prakR^itipurushhaatmaka.n jagach |” (Devi Upanishad-1-2 from Atharva Veda)
“All the gods waited upon the Goddess (and asked): ‘Mahadevi , who art Thou?’ She replied: I am essentially Brahman. From Me (has proceeded) the world comprising Prakriti (immobile objects) and Purusha (beings / mobile creatures)”.

“satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The sole Truth is the thing named ‘Lalita (the Beautiful)’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

She is alone Sat-Chit-Ananda. Hence she is the Brahman herself. Also, she is the highest self (Atman).

“saivAtmA tato.anyamasatyamanAtmA | ata eShA brahmAsaMvittirbhAvabhAvakalAvinirmuktA |
chidvidyA.advitIyabrahmasaMvittiH sacchidAnandalaharI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“She alone is Atman. Other than Her is untruth, non-self. Hence is She Brahman-Consciousness, free from (even) a tinge of being and non-being. She is the Science of Consciousness, non-dual Brahman Consciousness, a wave of Being-Consciousness-Bliss”.

Supreme Maya, the Moola-Prakriti (Tripurasundari) is called as Brahman.

“shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha Upanishad VI:61 from Sama Veda)
“That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva, Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)”.

2) Narayana (Tripurasundari) is the supreme effulgence (Light)

It is Durga herself who is the supreme luster (light).

“taamagnivarNaa.n tapasaa jvalantii.n vairochanii.n karmaphaleshhu jushhTaam.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.2.1.2)
“I take refuge in Her, the Goddess Durga, who is of the color of fire and blazes with her spiritual fire, who is the Power belonging to the Supreme Being (Virochana=Shiva) who manifests Himself manifoldly; who is the Power residing in actions and their fruits rendering them efficacious (or the Power that is supplicated to by the devotees for the fruition of their work)”.

Seminal fluid which rises up through spine is called “Kundalini” which is mother Tripurasundari Devi. And this same seminal fluid power (Kundalini) is the “Supreme Light”. Read the below verses carefully.

“ityadhordhvarajaH shukla.n shive tadanu maarutaH |
praaNaapaanau samau yaati sadaa jaatau tathaiva cha |” (YogaKundalini Upanishad 1:75)
“Thus Rajas-Sukla (seminal fluid) which rises up goes to Shiva along with Marut (Vayu); Prana and Apana which are always produced become equal”.

The below verse clarifies about the supreme light (Brahman) as being the seminal fluid power (kundalini). Note that in the below verse it’s said that this seminal fluid power which is Kundlaini is Rudra and is called as Brahman. This once more establishes the oneness of Shiva-Shakti. It remains as fact that Ardhanareeshwara cannot be split, the same androgynous god is seen as two viz. Shiva and Shakti but essentially they inseparably united as one. So, in the below verse one can take Rudra as the supreme light and Brahman and also Tripurasundari (Kundalini) as the supreme light and Brahman. Both the ways it is correct. That’s why in Maha Upanishad verse (VI:61) quoted above, it clearly says that the same Brahman is called as Maya, Prakriti, Shiva, Eshana. So, this makes it clear that Shiva’s attributes and glories can be interchanged with Shakti and vice versa.

“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 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 (bhagavAn) and it is also the lord of all things”.

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

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 5

“naaraayaNaH paro dhyaataa dhyaana.n naaraayaNaH paraH |
yachcha kiJNchijjagatyasmin dR^ishyate shruuyate.api vaa | (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.1.5)
antarbahishcha tatsarva.n vyaapya naaraayaNaH sthitaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.5)
“Narayana is the most excellent meditator and meditation. Whatsoever there is in this world known through sight / perception (because of their proximity) or known through hearing / report (because of their distance), all that is pervaded by Narayana within and without”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Leaving aside the meditator and meditation attributes, let me focus here on the most important point which is – “Whatsoever there is in this world known through sight / perception (because of their proximity) or known through hearing / report (because of their distance), all that is pervaded by Narayana within and without”.

Whatever is seen or heard, whatever exists within the coordinates of space and time, everything is actually pervaded by Tripurasundari Devi. Hence this property is again an attribute of Mahadevi Tripurasundari only. Actually speaking, all the worlds, all the stars, earth and heaven everything is located within our own body, within the Sushumna nadi (nerve) which passes through spine, closely through the heart and connects the mooladhara to Sahasrara. In the Sahasrara Chakra which is present in the brain, exists a great sky (Akasa), there reside all the worlds, that is the abode of Brahman (Shiva). And that’s same Akasa (Sky), heaven, and earth exists within the heart also inside the Sushumna nerve. Everything that you see outside exists within you only. And it is goddess Tripurasundari only as Kundalini who pervades all these cities, heaven, earth and all abodes. This is cited in the following verses.

“atha yadidamasminbrahmapure daharaM puNDarIkaM veshma daharo.asminnantarAkAshastasminyadantastadanveShTavyaM tadvAva vijij~nAsitavyamiti |” (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-I-1)

“Om. Now, in this city of Brahman, there is a mansion in the shape of a small lotus; in it is a small inner Akasa. What is within that – that should be sought; that indeed, one should desire to understand”.

In the above verse city of Brahman refers to the Sahasrara Chakra (1000 petal lotus in skull) where all universes exist. And in below verse it states that whatever exists in that city of Brahman identically exists in the heart (Anahata Chakra) also. This is because Sushumna nadi passes through the heart and it actually contains all the universes.

“taM chedbrUyuryadidamasminbrahmapure daharaM puNDarIkaM veshma daharo.asminnantarAkAshaH kiM tadatra vidyate yadanveShTavyaM yadvAva vijij~nAsitavyamiti sa brUyAt.h | (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-I-2)
yAvAnvA ayamAkAshastAvAneSho.antarhR^idaya akAsha ubhe asmindyAvApR^ithivI antareva samAhiteubhAvagnishcha vAyushcha sUryAchandramasAvubhau vidyunnakShatrANi yachchAsyehAsti yachcha nAsti sarvaM tadasminsamAhitamiti |” (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-I-3)

“If the disciples should say to him, ‘In this city of Brahman in which is a small mansion in the shape of a lotus and in the small inner Akasa within – what is it that lies there which should be sought, which one should desire to understand ?’ – he should say in reply, ‘As large indeed as is this Akasa, so large is that Akasa in the heart. Within it, indeed, are contained both heaven and earth, both fire and air, both the sun and the moon, lightning and the stars. Whatever there is of him in this world and whatever is not, all that is contained within it’”.

Now, the below verse clarifies that it is goddess Tripurasundari devi who pervades the three cities, three bodies and everything because she is the consciousness (which runs through Sushumna as Kundalini).

“dehamadhye brahmanADI suShumnA sUryarUpiNI pUrNachandrAbhA vartate |
sA tu mUlAdhArAdArabhya brahmarandhragAminI bhavati |
tanmadhye taTitkoTisamAnakAntyA mR^iNAlasUtravat.h sukShmA~NgI kuNNdalinIti prasiddhA.asti | tAM dR^iShTvA manasaiva naraH sarvapApavinAshadvArA mukto bhavati |” (Advaya Taraka Upanishad-2)
“In the middle of body there exists the Sushumna Nadi which is as bright as the sun and as cool as the moon. It starts from Mooladhara and goes up to Brahmarandra which is in the top middle of the skull. It is well known that in the middle of it there exists Kundalani which is as bright as crores of suns and as thin as the lotus thread. The man who sees that with his mind’s eye attains salvation by getting rid of all sins”.

“saiva puratrayaM sharIratrayaM vyApya bahirantaravabhAsayantI |
deshakAlavastvantarasa.ngAnmahAtripurasundarI vai pratyak.hchitiH |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-4 from Rig Veda)
“Pervading the three cities, the three bodies, illuminating within and without, She, the Consciousness within, becomes the Maha-Tripura-Sundari, being associated with space, time and objects”.

Devi pervades everywhere, she is before and behind, she is below, above and all around.

“ahaM paJNchabhuutaanyabhuutaani | ahamakhila.n jagat.h |
vedo.ahamavedo.aham.h | vidyaahamavidyaaham.h | ajaahamanajaaham.h |
adhashchordhva.n cha tiryakchaaham.h |” (Devi Upanishad-3 from Atharva Veda)
“I am the five elements as also what is different from them. I am the entire world. I am the Veda as well as what is different from it. I am the unborn; I am the born. Below and above and around am I”.
“yasyaaH svaruupaM brahmaadayo na jaananti tasmaaduchyate.aGYeyaa |
yasyaa anto na vidyate tasmaaduchyate anantaa |
yasyaa grahaNa.n nopalabhyate tasmaaduchyate.alakshyaa | yasyaa
janana.n nopalabhyate tasmaaduchyate.ajaa |
ekaiva sarvatra vartate tasmaaduchyata ekaa | ekaiva vishvaruupiNii
tasmaaduchyate naikaa | ata evochyate.aGYeyaanantaalakshyaajaikaa
naiketi |” (Devi Upanishad-26 from Atharva Veda)
“Brahma and others know not Her essence; so is she called the Unknowable. She has no end; so is she called the Endless. She is not grasped and so is she called the Incomprehensible. Her birth is not known and so is she called the Unborn. She alone is present everywhere, and so is she called the One. She alone wears all forms, and so is she called the Many. For these reasons is she called the Unknowable, the Endless, the Incomprehensible, the Unknown, the One and the Many”.

Therefore it should be clear that the “nArAyaNa” who pervades and envelops everything that is seen or heard is nothing but Goddess Tripurasundari Devi in reality and nArAyaNa is her name here and doesn’t mean Vishnu here.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 6

“anantamavyaya.n kavim samudre.anta.n vishvashambhuvam.h |

padmakoshapratiikaasham hR^idaya.n chaapyadhomukham.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.6)
“One should meditate upon the Supreme – the limitless, unchanging, all-knowing, cause of the happiness of the world, dwelling in the sea of one’s own heart, as the goal of all striving. The place for His meditation is the ether (sky) in the heart – the heart which is comparable to an inverted lotus bud”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

In the Sahasrara Chakra (crown chakra) present in the skull portion of our brain, is present lord Shiva as Brahman. That is called as the city of Brahman. Here the Sushumna nerve pierces through the Brahmarandra (micro pore) and connects with Sahasrara chakra. Within this chakra exists Akasa (Ether / Sky) containing all the worlds, heavens and earth. This is the city of Brahman (Shiva). This same arrangement exists within Sushumna nadi in the place of the heart (inside the Anahata Chakra). Therefore the heart also contains all the worlds including heaven and earth.

In the heart goddess Tripurasundari (Lalita) resides as stated in the below verse.

“hR^itpuNDariikamadhyasthaaM praataHsuuryasamaprabhaam.h |
paashaaN^kushadharaa.n saumyaa.n varadaabhayahastakaam.h |
trinetraa.n raktavasanaaM bhaktakaamadughaaM bhaje |” (Devi Upanishad-24 from Atharva Veda)
“Seated in the lotus-heart, Resplendent as the morning sun, Goddess, bearing noose and hook, With gesture granting boons, dissolving fears; Tender, three-eyed, red-robed, granting devotees Their hearts’ desires, Thee I adore”.

Well, this above verse makes it clear that Shakti is being praised as nArAyaNa in this hymn. But as usual let’s see on a side note the oneness of Shiva and Shakti.

Essentially Shiva and Shakti are same, the point which I love to stress time and again. Hence In the heart reside Lord Shiva and Tripurasundari. Shiva resides in the heart as the Atman and Shakti as the Kundalini conjoint with the Atman. Goddess Uma (Shakti) pervades in all the chakras as Kundalini passing through the Sushumna. If we understand it carefully, Kundalini fire and the Atman (fire of consciousness) are same being Shakti and Shiva respectively. This is the reason why Durga Suktam of Yajurveda calls Durga as Agni.

In the below verse it is clearly mentioned that lord Shiva (who is identical with Uma) is known by means of Sushumna, and this same Shiva is called as Jataveda Agni (All-knowing divine fire of consciousness).

“ekaakshara.n tvakshare.atraasti some sushhumnaayaa.n cheha dR^iDhii sa ekaH |” (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)”.

“vishve nimagnapadaviiH kaviinaaM tva.n jaatavedo bhuvanasya naathaH |” (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)”.

So, Shiva is the Jataveda Fire within us which is nothing but the divine fire of consciousness (simply known as Atman or Purusha or Vaiswanara). Now, Durga Suktam makes this very clear that there is no difference between Shiva and Durga (tripurasundari). This Suktam calls Durga as the Jataveda fire within us but clearly tells that she is the power of Shiva. Durga Suktam entirely praises her under the name of Jataveda Agni. So, it should be clear that there is zero difference between Shiva and Tripurasundari.

“taamagnivarNaa.n tapasaa jvalantii.n vairochanii.n karmaphaleshhu jushhTaam.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.2.1.2)
“I take refuge in Her, the Goddess Durga, who is of the color of fire and blazes with her spiritual fire, who is the Power belonging to the Supreme Being (Virochana=Shiva) who manifests Himself manifoldly; who is the Power residing in actions and their fruits rendering them efficacious (or the Power that is supplicated to by the devotees for the fruition of their work)”.

Since Tripurasundari is Ardhanareeshwari (Androgynous) whose body’s right portion is shared by Shiva, we also have references which state Shiva as the indweller of the heart as Atman.

“aatmali~Ngaaya namaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.16.2 of Yajurveda)
“Salutations to Him, He who is concealed in the heart of all creatures being their inmost Self”.

“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)”.

“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”.

So, this proves that the Atman which resides in the heart of all is Shiva, he is the Jataveda fire (Purusha) pervading through the Sushumna Nadi and through the heart; and since the Jataveda fire is nothing but Durga (Shakti) as Shiva-Shakti are one, hence the Atman dwelling in all is Tripurasundari; therefore it can be concluded that the goddess Tripurasundari Devi resides in the heart of all.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 7 – 8

“adho nishhTyaa vitastyaante naabhyaamupari tishhThati |
Jvaalamaalaakulam Bhaati vishvasyaayatanaM mahat.h | (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.7)
santatam silaabhistu lambatyaakoshasannibham.h |
tasyaante sushhiram suukshma.n tasmintsarvaM pratishhThitam.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.8)
“It should be known that the heart which is located just at the distance of a finger span below the Adam’s apple and above the navel is the great abode of the universe which shines like fire. Like the bud of a lotus, suspends in an inverted position, the heart, surrounded by arteries. In it (or near it) there is a narrow space (called Susumna nAdi). In it everything is supported”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

It is NOT the heart which is the great abode of universe, and it is NOT the heart which shines like fire. It is all the very minute nerve called Sushumna which shines like fire because of Kundalini and it is the Anahata Chakra present at the heart which is the abode of the universe. Therefore, due to the presence of Anahata Chakra and Sushumna nadi Heart is called as the abode of universe and as shining like fire.

“tadeSha shlokaH | shataM chaikA cha hR^idayasya nADyastAsAM
mUrdhAnamabhiniHsR^itaikA | tayordhvamAyannamR^itatvameti
viShva~N~NanyA utkramaNe bhavantyutkramaNe bhavanti |” (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-VI-6)
“There is this verse about it: A hundred and one are the arteries of the heart; one of them leads up to the crown of the head. Passing upwards through that, one attains immortality, while the other arteries serve for departing in various other directions – yea, serve for departing”.

It is Sushumna which shines as bright as crores of sun due to the passage of Kundalini (Tripurasundari) through it. Because goddess Tripurasundari is identical with Purusha (Shiva) and is the self effulgent fire of consciousness called Jataveda; she is the supremely luminous Atman. So, due to her presence Sushumna shines with a brilliance of crores of suns.

“dehamadhye brahmanADI suShumnA sUryarUpiNI pUrNachandrAbhA vartate |
sA tu mUlAdhArAdArabhya brahmarandhragAminI bhavati |
tanmadhye taTitkoTisamAnakAntyA mR^iNAlasUtravat.h sukShmA~NgI kuNNdalinIti prasiddhA.asti | tAM dR^iShTvA manasaiva naraH sarvapApavinAshadvArA mukto bhavati |” (Advaya Taraka Upanishad-2)
“In the middle of body there exists the Sushumna Nadi which is as bright as the sun and as cool as the moon. It starts from Mooladhara and goes up to Brahmarandra which is in the top middle of the skull. It is well known that in the middle of it there exists Kundalani which is as bright as crores of suns and as thin as the lotus thread. The man who sees that with his mind’s eye attains salvation by getting rid of all sins”.

Everything is supported in Sushumna nadi. This implies that, everything exists within it. Inside the Sushumna Nadi contains the great Akasa (Ether), within which exist all the abodes, heaven, earth, stars, constellations and entire universe.

“taM chedbrUyuryadidamasminbrahmapure daharaM puNDarIkaM veshma daharo.asminnantarAkAshaH kiM tadatra vidyate yadanveShTavyaM yadvAva vijij~nAsitavyamiti sa brUyAt.h | (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-I-2)
yAvAnvA ayamAkAshastAvAneSho.antarhR^idaya akAsha ubhe asmindyAvApR^ithivI antareva samAhiteubhAvagnishcha vAyushcha sUryAchandramasAvubhau vidyunnakShatrANi yachchAsyehAsti yachcha nAsti sarvaM tadasminsamAhitamiti |” (Chandogya Upanishad VIII-I-3)

“If the disciples should say to him, ‘In this city of Brahman in which is a small mansion in the shape of a lotus and in the small inner Akasa within – what is it that lies there which should be sought, which one should desire to understand ?’ – he should say in reply, ‘As large indeed as is this Akasa, so large is that Akasa in the heart. Within it, indeed, are contained both heaven and earth, both fire and air, both the sun and the moon, lightning and the stars. Whatever there is of him in this world and whatever is not, all that is contained within it’”.

So here again it is clear that due to the presence of Tripurasundari as Kundalini passing through the Sushumna containing all the universes, the heart is said to be such a great abode. But essentially, all the glories attributed to the heart are actually the glories of Tripurasundari Devi and her inseparable consort Shiva.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 9-11

“tasya madhye mahaanagnirvishvaarchirvishvatomukhaH |
so.agrabhugvibhajantishhThannaahaaramajaraH kaviH | (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.9)
tiryaguurdhvamadhaHshaayii rashmayastasya santataaH |
santaapayati sva.n dehamaapaadatalamastakam.h |
tasya madhye vahnishikhaa aNiiyordhvaa vyavasthitaa | (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.10)
niilatoyadamadhyasthaa vidyullekheva bhaasvaraa |
niivaarashuukvattanvii piitaa bhaasvatyaNuupama |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.11)
“In the middle of that (narrow space of the heart or Susumna) remains the undecaying, all-knowing, omnifaced, great Fire, which has flames on every side, which enjoys the food presented before it, which remains assimilating the food consumed, (the rays of which spread scattering themselves vertically and horizontally), and which warms its own body from the insole to the crown. In the centre of that Fire Which permeates the whole body, there abides a tongue of Fire, of the colour of shining gold, which is the topmost among the subtle, which is dazzling like the flash of the lightning that appears in the middle of a rain-bearing cloud, which is as slender as the awn of a paddy grain; and which serves as a comparison to illustrate subtlety”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

These verses of Narayana Suktam are describing nothing but the Jataveda fire which is present in our body, which pervades throughout our body radiating outwards and passing through Sushumna. This is not just any type of ordinary Agni, it is the fire of consciousness, and the fire of consciousness is nothing but Purusha, and Purusha is none other than lord Shiva.

But Since Shiva and Shakti have never been seen as separate, they are always one; this is the reason why this same Purusha who is called Jataveda fire is used as the name to refer to Durga in Durga Suktam throughout. So, it proves that Durga (Tripurasundari) is identical with Shiva and hence they are called Ardhanareeshwara (Androgynous form having one body shared half by each one of them). Therefore, this divine fire which pervades through Sushumna is essentially Tripurasundari Devi and also is identical with Purusha (Shiva).

Let’s understand these concepts in detail now.

“dehamadhye brahmanADI suShumnA sUryarUpiNI pUrNachandrAbhA vartate |
sA tu mUlAdhArAdArabhya brahmarandhragAminI bhavati |
tanmadhye taTitkoTisamAnakAntyA mR^iNAlasUtravat.h sukShmA~NgI kuNNdalinIti prasiddhA.asti | tAM dR^iShTvA manasaiva naraH sarvapApavinAshadvArA mukto bhavati |” (Advaya Taraka Upanishad-2)
“In the middle of body there exists the Sushumna Nadi which is as bright as the sun and as cool as the moon. It starts from Mooladhara and goes up to Brahmarandra which is in the top middle of the skull. It is well known that in the middle of it there exists Kundalani which is as bright as crores of suns and as thin as the lotus thread. The man who sees that with his mind’s eye attains salvation by getting rid of all sins”.

Goddess Uma (Shakti) pervades in all the chakras as Kundalini passing through the Sushumna spanning from Mooladhara to Sahasrara Chakra. If we understand it carefully, Kundalini fire and the Atman (fire of consciousness) are same being Shakti and Shiva respectively. This is the reason why Durga Suktam of Yajurveda calls Durga as Agni (Jataveda).

In the below verses it is clearly mentioned that lord Shiva (who is one with Uma) is known by means of Sushumna, and this same Shiva is called as Jataveda Agni (All-knowing divine fire of consciousness).

“ekaakshara.n tvakshare.atraasti some sushhumnaayaa.n cheha dR^iDhii sa ekaH |” (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)”.

“vishve nimagnapadaviiH kaviinaaM tva.n jaatavedo bhuvanasya naathaH |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 2)
“Thou [Shiva] art immanent in all; from (the view-point) of the wise, Thou, the Lord of the world art the all-knowing (Fire-Jataveda)”.

So, Shiva is the Jataveda Fire within us which is nothing but the divine fire of consciousness (simply known as Atman or Purusha or Vaiswanara). Now, Durga Suktam makes this very clear that there is no difference between Shiva and Durga (Tripurasundari). This Suktam calls Durga as the Jataveda fire within us but clearly tells that she is the power of Shiva. Durga Suktam entirely praises her under the name of Jataveda Agni. So, it should be clear that there is zero difference between Shiva and Tripurasundari.

“taamagnivarNaa.n tapasaa jvalantii.n vairochanii.n karmaphaleshhu jushhTaam.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.2.1.2)
“I take refuge in Her, the Goddess Durga, who is of the color of fire and blazes with her spiritual fire, who is the Power belonging to the Supreme Being (Virochana=Shiva) who manifests Himself manifoldly; who is the Power residing in actions and their fruits rendering them efficacious (or the Power that is supplicated to by the devotees for the fruition of their work)”.

So, this proves that the Fire which pervades through the Sushumna from insole to the crown; is the fire of consciousness called Purusha or Atman or Vaiswanara or Jataveda. And this fire is nothing but Goddess Tripurasundari Devi and since Tripurasundari is Ardhanareeshwari (Androgynous – whose body’s right portion is shared by Shiva), whether in their Saguna form or in their Nirguna form, they are NOT two, they are always one inseparably united. Therefore this divine fire is called Purusha and is same as Shiva also.

So, this again proves that the “nArAyaNa”, which is the fire within the Sushumna nerve is nothing but “Goddess Tripurasundari Devi”.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 12

“tasyaaH shikhaayaa madhye paramaatmaa vyavasthitaH |
sa brahmaa sa shivaH sa hariH sendraH so.aksharaH paramaH svaraaT.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.13.2.12)
“Paramatman dwells in the middle of that flame. (Although He is thus limited) still He is the four-faced creator, Siva, Vishnu, Indra, the material and efficient cause of the Universe and the Supreme Self-luminous Pure Consciousness”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

This verse states that inside the fire passing through Sushumna resides the Paramatman (nArAyaNa) who is the one and who appears (or manifests) as Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra et al.
Let’s see who this nArAyaNa (Paramatman) is in reality. Here also the truth is that this word “nArAyaNa” who is being called as the Paramatman who manifests as Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra etc. is none other than Goddess Tripurasundari devi only. In this context we have the following evidences from Shruti.

It is the Goddess Tripurasundari Devi (Lalita) who remains seated in the heart (within Sushumna).

“hR^itpuNDariikamadhyasthaaM praataHsuuryasamaprabhaam.h |
paashaaN^kushadharaa.n saumyaa.n varadaabhayahastakaam.h |
trinetraa.n raktavasanaaM bhaktakaamadughaaM bhaje |” (Devi Upanishad-24 from Atharva Veda)
“Seated in the lotus-heart, Resplendent as the morning sun, Goddess, bearing noose and hook, With gesture granting boons, dissolving fears; Tender, three-eyed, red-robed, granting devotees Their hearts’ desires, Thee I adore”.

She is the Nirguna Brahman from where all other Saguna forms arise. This is evident from the below verse from Shruti.

“tasyA eva brahmA ajIjanat.h | viShNurajIjanat.h | rudro.ajIjanat.h | sarve marud.hgaNA ajIjanat.h |
gandharvApsarasaH kinnarA vAditravAdinaH samantAdajIjanat.h | bhogyamajIjanat.h| sarvamajIjanat.h | sarvaM shAktamajIjanat.h | aNDajaM svedajamudbhijjaM jarAyujam.h yatkiMchaitat.h prANi sthAvaraja.ngamaM manuShyamajIjanat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-2 from Rig Veda)
“Of Her [Tripurasundari] was Brahma born; was Vishnu born; was Rudra born. All wind-gods were born, celestial minstrels, nymphs, semi-human beings playing on instruments, were born (of Her), all around. What is enjoyed was born; everything was born (of Her). Everything of Power was born (of Her). The egg-born, the sweat-born, the seed-born, the womb-born, whatever breathes here, the stationary as well as the moving, and man were born (of Her)”.

This Tripurasundari who exists as the Jataveda fire which is again identical with Shiva (Purusha); is Nirguna and the same Shiva and Shakti are called as Brahman and they reside in Sahasrara Chakra (Crown chakra). Because the Niguna Brahman (Shiva) assumes all the Saguna forms within the universe (Hiranyagarbha); and since the Hiranyagarbha is nothing but our own body which supports all the universes and all abodes within it (inside Sushumna); it is actually Shiva who manifests himself as various forms with the help of his Shakti (Tripurasundari). But since both of them are identical, there is nothing wrong to say that it Is Shakti who produces all the various forms of God. And by seeing the verse “sa brahma sa Shiva…” it should NOT be misunderstood as Shiva is “born”. All other forms are born but lord Shiva is the ONLY unborn god. From the Nirguna Brahman aspect of Shiva (which is identical with Skhambha or Purusha), lord Shiva appears as Saguna Brahman (Shiva) within the universe. Then he creates other Gods as his manifestations including Vishnu. He also creates Ashtamurty forms (eight elemental framework of Prakriti) to help in further creation of creatures, and then at his will he disappears or appears. Therefore all other forms namely, Brahma, Vishnu, Indra, Agni, Chandrama, Aditya, Earth etc. are the “manifestations” of Shiva with the help of Shakti, but Shiva’s form is not a manifestation, but rather that is more appropriately termed as “appearance”.

That is the reason when the Bahvricha Upanishad said that from Tripurasundari Devi appeared all the gods viz. Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra, Indra etc., immediately the next verse of same Upanishad clarifies that She is not the origin of Shiva, rather she is his own power, which created all other Gods but helped his consort Shiva appear in his Saguna form. This is the true understanding of Shiva-Shakti.

“saiShA parA shaktiH | saiShA shAMbhavIvidyA | rahasyamomoM vAchi pratiShThA” (Bahvricha Upanishad- 3 from Rig Veda)
“She, here, is the Power supreme. She, here, is the science of Sambhu. This is the secret Om grounded in the word Om”.

So, above verse clarifies that Tripurasundari Devi si the power of Shambhu (Shiva) and at the same time she is the OM (Pranava) which clearly indicates that she is identical with Shiva because Shiva is the Omkara (Pranava) as Yajurveda states “nama staraya cha” (Yajurveda Sri Rudram Anuvaka-8), which means, “Salutations to Him (Rudra) who is the TARAKA (Pravana mantra – Om)”.

Moreover, Shiva never creates anything alone, he and his power (Shakti) are one. With the help of his supreme Prakriti (Tripurasundari) Shiva assumes all the various forms of Gods. So, in a way it is Shakti who creates all these forms, and Shiva only enters those forms as the indwelling Atman and makes them alive. So, it is not at all wrong or unlawful if we give credits of creation totally to Tripurasundari Devi. But again the point that needs to e learnt carefully is the zero difference between Shiva and her. There is no duality between Shiva and Shakti. So, it’s valid even if we interchange their glories. That’s the reason Adi Shankara in his Soundarya Lahari says that “o Mother it is you who kicked Yama to protect Markandeya and your glory has been stolen by Shiva”. He actually means to convey that Shiva kicked Yama with his left leg which actually belongs to Shakti since they share same body half for each other, so he wants to say that the glory went to Shiva but it was actually Shakti who kicked Yama and protected Markandeya. Shiva-Shakti Tatwam is so, beautiful. isn’t it?

Therefore it is true that Shiva (who extends beyond the universe) is the origin of Brahma, Vishnu, Indra and Shiva (here within the universe); while simultaneously it is also true that it is Tripurasundari who is the creatrix of Brahma, Vishnu, Indra and helper of Shiva in appearing within the universe.

We have another Upanishad which also states that Devi created all the gods as mentioned below.

“saishhaashhTau vasavaH | saishhaikaadasha rudraaH | saishhaa dvaadashaadityaaH | saishhaa vishvedevaaH somapaa asomapaashcha | saishhaa yaatudhaanu asuraa rakshaa.nsi pishaachayakshaaH siddhaaH | saishhaa sattvarajastamaa.nsi | saishhaa prajaapatiindramanavaH | saishhaa grahaa nakshatrajyotii.nshhi kalaakaashhThaadikaalaruupiNii | taamahaM praNaumi nityam.h |” (Devi Upanishad-18 from Atharva Veda)
“She, here, is the eight Vasus, the eleven Rudras, the twelve Adityas, She is the all-gods, (those) who drink Soma and (those) who do not; she is the goblins, the demons, the evil beings, the ghosts; she also, beings super-human, the semi-divine. She is Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. She is Prajapati, Indra and Manu. She is the planets, stars and luminous spheres. She is the divisions of time, and the form of primeval Time. I salute Her ever”.

Therefore it is clear that the “nArAyaNa” who takes the forms of Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra etc. is none other than goddess “Tripurasundari” only.

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 13

“R^itam satyaM paraM brahma purushha.n kR^ishhNapi~Ngalam.h |
uurdhvareta.n viruupaaksha.n vishvaruupaaya vai namo namaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.23.1)
“Supreme Brahman, the Absolute Reality (Righteousness and Truth), is the androgynous Person the Umamaheshvara (or Ardhanareeshwara), dark blue and reddish brown in hue, absolutely chaste and possessing uncommon eyes. Salutations to Him alone who is the Soul of the universe or whose form is the universe”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

This verse is a direct testimony of the fact that Narayana Suktam in reality eulogizes Goddess Tripurasundari Devi and her right half viz. Shiva because she is the Ardhanareshwari (Androgynous) goddess.

This verse prays to Shiva and Shakti in one form as Ardhanareeshwara and states clearly that Ardhanareeshwara is the supreme Purusha, Parabrahman, Truth (Satyam), Righteousness (R^itam), and is of reddish brown (Shiva) color in the right half of the body and Dark blue (Uma) complexion in the left half of the body. Shiva’s two very famous names / attributes are “Oordhwaretam” and Viroopaksham”. Where “Oordhwaretam” means that God whose semen is raised upwards, means Shiva is unaffected by the Kama, he is a perfect celibate. And “Viroopaksham” means the god who has uneven eyes, and it is only Shiva and Shakti who possesses odd number of eyes viz. – three eyed god and goddess.

So, here this concluding verse of Narayana Suktam revealed so simply the truth of this hymn that this hymn actually belongs to Shakti, it is a praise of Tripurasundari but in every verse (as analyzed above) this hymn also silently eulogizes her right portion viz. her consort Bhagawan Shiva!

Narayana Suktam verse(s) 14

“Om naaraayaNaaya vidhame vaasudevaya dheemahi |
Tanno vishnuh prachodayaat | Om Shanti.h Shanti.h Shanti.h |
“Let us know Narayana, for which let us meditate upon Vaasudeva, let Vishnu be pleased to guide us. Om may there be peace, peace, peace”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

NArAyaNa = Tripurasundari Devi

And vAsudEva means lord Shiva in Shruti as follows.

In Vedas, VAsudEva is NOT “VasudEva Sutam iti VAsudEva”.

‘VAsu’ comes from the root ‘Vas’, which means “to reside and envelop completely”. ‘dEva’ comes from the root ‘div’, which means, “to shine”.

So, that one God who resides everywhere and envelopes completely and shines everywhere is VAsudEva”.

Let’s see as per Vedas and Upanishads who is the God who pervades everything and who shines everywhere.

Lord Shiva is the supreme Purusha stated in Vedas. There is nothing beyond Purusha since Purusha (Shiva) is the Para-Brahman.

Lord Shiva is the one true God who pervades fully within the universe and he is alone one such god who pervades outside of the universe also. It’s only a quarter portion of the infinite Shiva that has manifested as the universe. So, even though we have other gods like Vishnu, vayu, Sky (Dayus) who pervade fully within the universe, they do not extend beyond the universe. Only Bhagwan Shiva is inside and outside of the universe. Shiva is limitless, he is infinite. There is none who is superior to Shiva in being all-pervasive.

“ekaakshara.n tvakshare.atraasti some sushhumnaayaa.n cheha dR^iDhii sa ekaH |
tva.n vishvabhuurbhuutapatiH puraaNaH parjanya eko bhuvanasya goptaa |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 1)
“praaNaH prasuutirbhuvanasya yonirvyaapta.n tvayaa ekapadena vishvam.h |
tva.n vishvabhuuryonipaaraH svagarbhe kumaara eko vishikhaH sudhanvaa |” (Ekakshara Upanishad 3)
“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. Thou art the Principle of life; Thou the manifestation (the manifested world); Thou the source of the world; by a quarter hast Thou pervaded this world. Thou art the world’s birth, the cause, the life supreme, and the child in the womb armed with the excellent bow and arrow”.

Note the above verse from Ekakshara Upanishad which clearly states that from Lord Shiva’s one quarter only this entire creation emerged. This is the same thing stated in Purusha Suktam of Rig Veda about Bhagwan Shiva as follows.

“tripādūrdhva udait puruṣaḥ pādo.asyehābhavat punaḥ | tato viṣvaṃ vyakrāmat sāśanānaśane abhi |” (Rig Veda 10:90:4)
“Three quarters of his are beyond all this; all of this creation is but from one quarter of him. Again and again, all that eats, and that eats not appeared from this one quarter of His.”

And it is lord Shiva who shines everywhere as stated below.

“mahaan.h prabhurvai purushhaH satvasyaishha pravartakaH |
sunirmalaamimaaM praaptimiishaano jyotiravyayaH |” (Svetaswatara Upanishad 3:12)
“That person (purusha) is the great lord (iishaana); he is the mover of existence, he possesses that purest power of reaching everything, he is light, he is undecaying”.

“na tatra suuryo bhaati na chandrataaraka.n nemaa vidyuto bhaanti kuto.ayamagniH |
tameva bhaantamanubhaati sarva.n tasya bhaasaa sarvamida.n vibhaati | (Svetaswatara Upanishad 6:14)
“The sun does not shine there, nor the moon and the stars, nor these lightnings, and much less this fire. When he (Purusha=Shiva) shines, everything shines after him; by his light all this is illuminated”.

Let us summarize the discussion now.

Narayana means Tripurasundari Devi (Lalita). Vasudeva means lord Shiva. Therefore this verse of Narayana Suktam means the following:-

“Let us know Goddess Tripurasundari, for which let us meditate upon lord Shiva, let Vishnu be pleased to guide us. Om may there be peace, peace, peace”.

Ultimately Tripurasundar and Shiva being one, we are meditating on the same God (the right half) to know the same god (Left portion) and Vishnu is going to help us out here. How beautiful it is! Isn’t it?

 

Analyzing nArAyaNa from other Upanishads

Maha Upanishad
Vaishnava Acharyas and debaters are very fond of this Maha Upanishad because in the beginning verses itself this Upanishad states that only Narayana was there in the beginning and there was no Brahma and Shiva. It states that from Narayana Brahma and Shiva emerged. Poor fellows! They lack the intellect of logical analysis, and hence purely depend upon literal statements. Well, before I explain this further let me quote here exact verses from Maha Upanishad which I would analyze here.

eko ha vai naaraayaNa aasiinna brahmaa neshaano naapo naagniishhomau neme dyaavaapR^ithivii na nakshatraaNi na suuryo na chandramaaH | sa ekaakii na ramate |” (Maha Upanishad 1:1:4)
“Then we shall expound the Mahopanishad. They say Narayana was alone. There were not Brahma, Shiva, Waters, Fire and Soma, Heaven and Earth, Stars, Sun and Moon. He could not be happy”.

Then from his desire arose the universe, deities, sun, moon etc. and then again from Narayana’s desire Brahma and Shiva were born as stated below.

“atha punareva naaraayaNaH so.anyatkaamo manasaadhyaayata | tasya dhyaanaantaHsthasya
lalaaTaattryakshaH shuulapaaNiH purushho jaayate | bibhrachchhriya.n yashaH satyaM brahmacharya.n tapo vairaagyaM mana aishvarya.n sapraNavaa vyaahR^itaya R^igyajuHsaamaatharvaa~NgirasaH sarvaaNi chhandaa.nsi taanya~Nge samaashritaani | tasmaadiishaano mahaadevo mahaadevaH | atha punareva naaraayaNaH so.anyatkaamo manasaadhyaayata | tasya dhyaanaantaHsthasya lalaaTaatsvedo.apapat.h | taa imaaH pratataa aapaH | tatastejo hiraNmayamanDalam.h | tatra brahmaa chaturmukho.ajaayata |” (Maha Upanishad 1:7-9)
“Again, Narayana, desiring something else, thought. From his forehead a person arose with three eyes and a trident, having glory, fame, truth, celibacy, austerity, detachment, mind, lordship, seven Vyahritis (Bhur etc.,) along with Pranava, Rik and other Vedas, all metres is his body – so, he is the great Lord (Mahadeva). Then again, desiring something else, he thought – From his forehead, sweat fell and became the wide waters: from it a bright golden egg – in it was born the four-headed Brahma facing east”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

As we have seen in the analysis of Narayana Suktam that the name Narayana didn’t mean Vishnu, it meant Tripurasundari there, the same way here also In the above verses Narayana doesn’t mean Vishnu, it is the name given to the Nirguna Shakti (Tripurasundari) who is identical with the Nirguna-Brahman (Shiva) and since all Saguna forms arose from the Nirguna Brahman, here it says Shiva also emerged from Narayana (Tripurasundari). But here it means Shiva’s Saguna form only because the Nirguna Brahman is himself Shiva.

But let me use the “Proof by Contradiction” method to explain this Upanishad. Let me ASSUME that in Maha Upanishad “Narayana” means “Vishnu”. And then it would mean that Shiva emerged from Vishnu, right? Let’s see if this assumption stands valid or gets brutally smashed to death!

To analyze this point further let mefirst explain the appearance of goddess Tripurasundari in her Saguna form. She is the supreme Prakriti and is identical with the Parabrahman who is Shiva. She is the science (power) of Shambhu (Shiva). She is extremely beautiful as her name itself suggests, and holds noose, goad, bow and arrows in her four hands.

“eshhaatmashaktiH | eshhaa vishvamohinii paashaaN^kushadhanurbaaNadharaa | eshhaa shriimahaavidyaa |” (Devi Upanishad 1:15)
“This is the power of Self, enchanting all, armed with the noose, the hook, the bow and the arrow. This is the great and holy Science”.

“hR^itpuNDariikamadhyasthaaM praataHsuuryasamaprabhaam.h |
paashaaN^kushadharaa.n saumyaa.n varadaabhayahastakaam.h |
trinetraa.n raktavasanaaM bhaktakaamadughaaM bhaje |” (Devi Upanishad 1:24)
“Seated in the lotus-heart, Resplendent as the morning sun, Goddess, bearing noose and hook, With gesture granting boons, dissolving fears; Tender, three-eyed, red-robed, granting devotees Their hearts’ desires, Thee I adore”.

Goddess Sita in Rama Rahasya Upanishad is none other than Lalita Tripurasundari only as evident from the below verse.

“raamaabhiraamaa.n saundaryasiimaa.n somaavata.nsikaam.h
paashaa~NkushadhanurbaaNadharaa.n dhyaayettrilochanaam.h ” (Rama Rahasya Upanishad Ch 2, Verse 33)
“I worship the three eyed one, Who is Abhirama (Sita), the pinnacle of beauty,
Who wears the crescent as ear ring, And who holds the noose, the goad, the bow and the arrow”.

It clearly shows Sita (Abhirama) as the Goddess LALITA TRIPURA SUNDARI the consort of Sadashiva. The name ‘Tripurasundari’ is ascribed to only Goddess Uma (Lalita) because there is none who is more beautiful than her. And in above verse sita is called as ‘pinnacle of beauty’ which is a direct comparison with Uma. Sita is called as the one holding noose (pasha), Goad (Ankusha), bow (Dhanush), Arrow (Baanam).

And Shiva is termed as Rama in Rama Rahasya Upanishad as follows.

“raama.n trinetra.n somaardhadhaariNa.n shuulinaM param.h
bhasmoddhuulitasarvaa~Nga.n kapardinamupaasmahe ” (Rama Rahasya Upanishad 2:32)
“I worship that Rama, Who has three eyes, Who wears the crescent,
Who holds the trident, Who is anointed all over by ash, And who is with matted hair”.

So far we have understood that Sita and Rama in Rama Rahasya Upanishad represent Shakti and Shiva respectively. Now let’s see another verse from same Upanishad as follows.

“hanuumantaM paprachchhuH raamasyaa~Ngaani no bruuhiiti hanuumaanhovaacha |
vaayuputra.n vighnesha.n vaaNii.n durgaa.n kshetrapaalaka.n suurya.n chandra.n naaraayaNa.n naarasi.nha.n vaayudeva.n vaaraaha.n tatsarvaantsamaatraantsiita.n lakshmaNa.n
shatrughnaM bharata.n vibhiishhaNa.n sugriivama~Ngada.n jaambavantaM praNavametaani raamasyaa~Ngaani jaaniithaaH | taanya~Ngaani vinaa raamo vighnakaro bhavati |” (Rama Rahasyopanishat 1:07)
“They all again asked, Lord Hanuman,”Please tell us the angas (aspects) of Lord Rama. Lord Hanuman told, “Please understand that Lord Ganesha, Goddess Saraswati, Goddess Durga, all the Kshetra Palaka-s, Sun, Moon, Lord Narayana, Lord Narasimha, Lord Vasudeva, Lord Varaha, Lord Lakshmana, Shatrughna, Bharata, Vibheeshana, Sugreeva, Angada, Jambavanta and Pranava are the angas of Lord Rama. Without these angas, Lord Rama will not remove all roadblocks”.

In the above verse, Narayana cannot be Durga (Shakti) since she is explicitly mentioned. So, Narayana is Vishnu here. And this means Narayana manifested from Shiva hence he is an Anga of Shiva. Also Atharva Veda clearly says that from Shiva (Vratya) manifested Vishnu (Shiva became Vishnu) as follows.


“sá yád dhruvā́ṃ díśam ánu vyácalad víṣṇur bhūtvā́nuvyàcalad virā́jam annādī́ṃ kr̥tvā́ |” (Atharva Veda XV:14:5)
“He, when he went away to the stedfast region, went away having become Vishnu and having made Virāj an eater of food”.

So, definitely Vishnu cannot be the origin of Shiva. But then Maha Upanishad verse says that Narayana alone existed in the beginning and Narayana created Shiva and Brahma. So, here is a contradiction, and Rama Rahasya Upanishad contradicts Maha Upanishad. But Rama Rahasya Upanishad is correct since it is in sync with Atharva Veda which says Vishnu manifested from Shiva. So, here Maha Upanishad stands as contradicted. So, it shows our initial assumption on Maha Upanishad (as Narayana=Vishnu) stands WRONG. And hence Narayana of Maha Upanishad needs to be someone else not Vishnu. Now, let’s analyze it further.

Having our assumption of Narayana of Maha Upanishad as Vishnu got brutally refuted, we have understood that we have made a wrong assumption there. So, by this ‘proof by contradiction’ method we have proved that “Narayana” of Maha Upanishad cannot be Vishnu.

Now let me assume here that the way we saw that Narayana Suktam is a hymn to Tripurasundari Devi, same way Maha Upanishad verse also tells about Tripurasundari only. With this assumption, let me see if this is correct or not.

“eko ha vai naaraayaNa aasiinna brahmaa neshaano naapo naagniishhomau neme dyaavaapR^ithivii na nakshatraaNi na suuryo na chandramaaH | sa ekaakii na ramate |” (Maha Upanishad 1:1:4)
“Then we shall expound the Mahopanishad. They say Narayana was alone. There were not Brahma, Shiva, Waters, Fire and Soma, Heaven and Earth, Stars, Sun and Moon. He could not be happy”.

Then from his desire arose the universe, deities, sun, moon etc. and then again from Narayana’s desire Brahma and Shiva were born as stated below.
“atha punareva naaraayaNaH so.anyatkaamo manasaadhyaayata | tasya dhyaanaantaHsthasya
lalaaTaattryakshaH shuulapaaNiH purushho jaayate | bibhrachchhriya.n yashaH satyaM brahmacharya.n tapo vairaagyaM mana aishvarya.n sapraNavaa vyaahR^itaya R^igyajuHsaamaatharvaa~NgirasaH sarvaaNi chhandaa.nsi taanya~Nge samaashritaani | tasmaadiishaano mahaadevo mahaadevaH | atha punareva naaraayaNaH so.anyatkaamo manasaadhyaayata | tasya dhyaanaantaHsthasya lalaaTaatsvedo.apapat.h | taa imaaH pratataa aapaH | tatastejo hiraNmayamanDalam.h | tatra brahmaa chaturmukho.ajaayata |” (Maha Upanishad 1:7-9)
“Again, Narayana, desiring something else, thought. From his forehead a person arose with three eyes and a trident, having glory, fame, truth, celibacy, austerity, detachment, mind, lordship, seven Vyahritis (Bhur etc.,) along with Pranava, Rik and other Vedas, all metres is his body – so, he is the great Lord (Mahadeva). Then again, desiring something else, he thought – From his forehead, sweat fell and became the wide waters: from it a bright golden egg – in it was born the four-headed Brahma facing east”.

The same has been stated in Bahvricha Upanishad of Rig Veda for goddess Tripura Sundari Devi as follows.

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

“tasyA eva brahmA ajIjanat.h | viShNurajIjanat.h | rudro.ajIjanat.h | sarve marud.hgaNA ajIjanat.h |
gandharvApsarasaH kinnarA vAditravAdinaH samantAdajIjanat.h | bhogyamajIjanat.h| sarvamajIjanat.h | sarvaM shAktamajIjanat.h | aNDajaM svedajamudbhijjaM jarAyujam.h yatkiMchaitat.h prANi sthAvaraja.ngamaM manuShyamajIjanat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-2 from Rig Veda)
“Of Her [Tripurasundari] was Brahma born; was Vishnu born; was Rudra born. All wind-gods were born, celestial minstrels, nymphs, semi-human beings playing on instruments, were born (of Her), all around. What is enjoyed was born; everything was born (of Her). Everything of Power was born (of Her). The egg-born, the sweat-born, the seed-born, the womb-born, whatever breathes here, the stationary as well as the moving, and man were born (of Her)”.

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

So, here our assumption of Narayana being Goddess Tripurasundari is correct. And hence Maha Upanishad’s Narayana is NOT Vishnu, it is Goddess Tripurasundari Devi who is the Shakti of Shiva as shown below.

“saiShA parA shaktiH | saiShA shAMbhavIvidyA |” (Bahvricha Upanishad 1:3)
“She, here, is the Power supreme. She, here, is the science (power) of Sambhu”.

And now one may question, if she is the power of Shiva then how could she create Shiva again? Answer is simple! There is no creation in reality. There is no Duality in reality. Only the supreme lord Shiva exists. He is called as Parabrahman in Vedanta, and his Maya (Shakti) is identical with him. That same non-dual Parabrahman (Shiva) when desires to become many, his Shakti Tripurasundari who is the supreme Maya (Supreme Prakriti) with her illusion she makes the one single lord Shiva appear to be multiple as Brahma, Vishnu, Indra, Animals, Humans, Mountains, Stars, Planets, etc…Entire mobile and immobile creation including Gods and humans is lord Shiva only. He is one but appears to be multiple in so many diverse forms. That’s the reason why Shruti says, “sarvaM khaluvidam Brahman”, which means, “Everything is brahman (Shiva) only”. For fulfilling the desire of Shiva to multiplicate, Tripurasundari creates Shiva’s various manifestations from herself within the universe (Hiranyagarbha), but in reality Shiva is infinite pillar of fire of consciousness (Skhambha / Purusha); he is unmanifest Brahman. And if he has to appear in visible form within the Hiranyagarbha (universe), his Saguna Brahman form as Shiva is created (facilitated) by Shakti. And within the universe Shiva further manifests himself as Vishnu, Brahma, Agni, Indra etc., with the help of his Maya. That’s the meaning of this verse where Shakti (Narayana) creates everyone including Saguna Shiva also.

And in Maha Upanishad the emergence of Shiva from Narayana’s “forehead”, etc. organs are just for the sake of Upasana (worship), so that we can atleast imagine how the creation happened. But in reality in Vedas there is nothing mentioned anywhere which says from someone’s forehead Shiva appeared in Saguna form. The unmanifest cannot be comprehended by the mind, so Upanishads give these kinds of picturable, thinkable, imaginable descriptions so that the devotees could visualize that picture and do their Upasana.

So, it is proved beyond doubt that “Maha Upanishad” talks about “Goddess Tripurasundari Devi” as “Narayana” and not Vishnu. This is the reason, the same Upanishad later tells that Tripurasundari (Supreme Prakriti) is same as Shiva and Shiva is same as Brahman. Both Shiva and Shakti are identical and they are Brahman.

“shuunya.n tatprakR^itirmaayaa brahmavij~naanamityapi |
shivaH purushha iishaano nityamaatmeti kathyate |” (Maha Upanishad VI:61)
“That Brahman has been (identified with) emptiness, Prakriti, Maya and also consciousness. It has also been said to be “Shiva – Purusha, Eshana, the eternal and the self (Atman)””.


Narayana Upanishad
This Upanishad also claims similar stuff what we have analyzed in Maha Upanishad. And the answer to them is also the same what we have discussed in Maha Upanishad. Let me quote the verses quickly so that we can close it fast.

“Om adha purusho ha vai Narayano akaamayath. Praja srujeyethi. Narayanath prano jayathe. Mana sarvendriyani cha kham vayur jyothirapa prithvi viswasya dharini. Narayanath brahma jayathe. Narayanath Rudra jayathe. Narayanath Indro Jayathe. Narayanath prajapathi prajayathe. Narayanath Dwadasa aadhithya Rudra Vasava sarvaani Chandamsi Narayana deva Samudpadyanthe. Narayanath pravarthanthe. Narayane praleeyanthe. Eethath Rig veda siro adithe |” (Narayana Upanishad 1:1)
“Om! Narayana desired to create people. Because of this thought, Soul (prana) rose from him. Mind and all body parts, sky, air, light, water and the earth which can carry all these created beings took their form. From Narayana, Brahma was born. From Narayana, Rudra was born. From Narayana, Indra was born .From Narayana those people who rule these human beings were born. From Narayana, the twelve suns, eleven Rudras, Eight Vasus and all those meters (for writing) were born. All these function because of Narayana. All these end in Narayana. Thus is read, the Upanishads of Rig Veda”.

Reasoning & Analysis:

Here also the same logic holds true. Narayana is the name of goddess Tripurasundari Devi and here also it cannot mean Vishnu. Also, in the above Narayana Upanishad verse it is said that from Narayana twelve Adityas were born, and Vishnu is one among the Adityas. So, anyway Narayana here is NOT Vishnu rather it is Tripurasundari. The same stuff has been cited in Bahvricha Upanishad as seen earlier; let me copy once again here.

“devI hyekAgra evAsIt.h | saiva jagadaNDamasR^ijat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-1 from Rig Veda)
“The Goddess was indeed one in the beginning. Alone she emitted the world-egg (Hiranyagarbha)”.

“tasyA eva brahmA ajIjanat.h | viShNurajIjanat.h | rudro.ajIjanat.h | sarve marud.hgaNA ajIjanat.h |
gandharvApsarasaH kinnarA vAditravAdinaH samantAdajIjanat.h | bhogyamajIjanat.h| sarvamajIjanat.h | sarvaM shAktamajIjanat.h | aNDajaM svedajamudbhijjaM jarAyujam.h yatkiMchaitat.h prANi sthAvaraja.ngamaM manuShyamajIjanat.h |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-2 from Rig Veda)
“Of Her [Tripurasundari] was Brahma born; was Vishnu born; was Rudra born. All wind-gods were born, celestial minstrels, nymphs, semi-human beings playing on instruments, were born (of Her), all around. What is enjoyed was born; everything was born (of Her). Everything of Power was born (of Her). The egg-born, the sweat-born, the seed-born, the womb-born, whatever breathes here, the stationary as well as the moving, and man were born (of Her).

“tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h |sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“You and I and the entire universe and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari”.

So, it is proved here also beyond doubt that Narayana in Narayana Upanishad is not Vishnu, it is Tripurasundari Devi’s name.

Refuting the “Na-kAra” theory of “nArAyaNa”

If Narayana of Mahopanishad and Narayanopanishad are treated as Vishnu, then it would contradict many Shruti passages, hence it would become unauthentic. However, all contradictions get erased ONLY by knowing that “Narayana” spoken of in Vedas and Upanishads is NOT Vishnu; it is the name of unmanifest Shakti, the Kundalini which is Tripurasundari, which is identical with Supreme Brahman. All these controversial attacks from mahopanishad and Narayanopanishad have been successfully refuted, and their real meanings have been explained in this article above (refer to above section).

One of the Vaishnava gentlemen called my analysis of Narayana-Suktam as ‘NONSENSE’ and said to me, “There is only one adherent of your Tripurasundari nonsense, and that is you!” However, let me reveal a truth that in Kurama Purana Himavan (the father of Parvati) after hearing about her cosmic divine form spoke the following words.

 

“sahastramūrdhānamanantaśaktiṃ |
sahastrabāhuṃ puruṣaṃ purāṇam |
śayānamantaḥ salile tathaiva |
nārāyaṇākhyaṃ praṇato ‘smi rūpam ||” (kUrma PuraNa 1:11:245)
“I salute thy form called Narayana, O Lalita, which has a thousand heads, which is of infinite energy, having a thousand arms, the ancient Person, reclining on the waters”.

(The above quote has also been referenced in Soubhagya Bhaskara, a commentary on Lalita Sahasranama Stotram by the illustrious sage Bhaskararaya Makhin).

So, from the above verse it is clear that the idea Tripurasundari the Nirguna Shakti (infinite energy) being Narayana (of thousand heads), was already there in Puranas. Himavan believed that and Sri Veda-Vyasa documented his praise in Kurma Purana. Coincidentally, my inner self (Atman), has also revealed the same secret and inspired me (antaH sphurNa) to analyze Narayana Suktam in that manner. Therefore it is NOT me alone who is adherent of such a truth, and hence it cannot be called “Nonsense” when they (the Vaishnavas) lack intellect to comprehend the inner truths.

Let me firmly state here that there is NO evidence in any scripture of Hinduism which states that Narayana (Vishnu) travels through Sushumna nerve within us. It is the Kundalini Shakti alone who travels through the Sushumna nerve, and we have ample references in shruti, smriti and itihasa to support this point. And if you note carefully, Narayana Suktam verses 7 to 12 clearly talk about Narayana travelling through Sushumna (as affirmed by Chhandogya Upanishad)  which is a clear cut proof that “Narayana” of Narayana-Suktam is Not Vishnu, rather it is Shakti and note it carefully that no body can prove Vishnu as the one who travels through Sushumna. It’s a challenge to all Shiva-Drohis to show me an evidence from any Itihasa, any Purana or any Upansiahd that Vishnu travels through Sushumna nerve! (They can’t show me evidence right away but surely in future they may show, because they are experts in interpolating scriptures and adding a new verse to Padma Purana is not a big task for them).

Secondly, Narayana Suktam verse 13 clearly glorifies Ardhanareeshwara as parambrahman, purusha and having black-tawny hue, UrdhwarEtas, and having three-eyes (virupaksham). This verse also cannot be proved as applicable to Vishnu because in no scripture anywhere has Vishnu ever been shown as having three-eyes and having double colored appearance (dark and tawny) and as Urdhwaretas (having semen raised up indicating vow of celibacy).

There is another argument stating the Tripurasundari logic can be applied if Narayana spells as “nArAyana”, but it is spelt as “nArAyaNa” where “Na” suffix makes it a proper noun applicable only on Supreme Brahman. There is no need to discuss this since my logic of nArAyaNa is not based on the individual words viz. nAra and Ayana but my logic is based on their ROOT words viz. “nru” and “Ay”. But still let me not put them down, let accomodate their arguement and reason around that. Well, first thing is, the logic that I used in my Narayana Suktam analysis also matches with what Mahabharata applies in deriving the meaning of Narayana. In Mahabharata also “Ayana” becomes “AyaNa” finally as stated below.

 

“āpo nārā iti proktāḥ saṃjñā nāma kṛtaṃ mayā |
tena nārāyaṇo ‘smy ukto mama tad dhyayanaṃ sadā |” (MBH 3:187:3)

“In ancient times I called the waters by the name of nAra; and because the waters have ever been my Ayana or home, therefore have I been called Narayana (the water-homed)”.

This defines Narayana as “That being whose Ayana (resting place) is nAra (waters) is called as nArayaNa”. 

Note that there is no stress (Na) in “Ayana” and “nAra + Ayana” becomes nArAyaNa finally (“na” becomes “Na”). Although my derivation of nArAyaNa is based on the “Root” words, yet it is also inline with the Mahabharata one.

Vaishnava gentlemen objected and said “nArAyaNa” has been used in scriptures as a proper noun applicable ONLY on Supreme Brahman. I agree, but it depends whom we equate with that Supreme Brahman. Whosoever is that Supreme being becomes called by the name of nArAyaNa. But the problem is they equate that Supreme Brahman as Vishnu. They said that nArAyaNa name is ONLY applicable on Vishnu and great Vedantis saints (even Advaitins) of the past have admitted this. They said that Sri Appayya Dikshitar wanted to map nArAyaNa name to Shiva but he failed because of “Na” syllable. Therefore they expect me also to accept defeat! How stupid this logic is! How can someone take Sri Appayya Dikshitar’s failure as a yardstick to measure my achievements? There should be a limit to madness even! Sri Appayya failed because he couldn’t see nArAyaNa Suktam as a hymn to Kundalini Shakti. Had he perceived that, he would have achieved long back the conclusion what I have documented in my Article on nArAyaNa-Suktam!

Let me show loopholes in the Etymology what these Vaishnavas consider as bulletproof.  Yes, I agree with them that common nouns like Shiva (auspicious) can be applied on any god and nArAyaNa being a proper noun it refers to only one being. pAnini sutra (8.4.3): pUva-padAt samgyAyA => In a proper noun (samgyA-pada) “na” (dental) becomes “Na” (retroflex) if the “na” is preceded by a word ending “ra”. So the compound word “nArAyaNa” could only refer to a Distinct Person.

In general also all common nouns like “Building”, is applicable to everyone’s house, but a house with a specific address makes it a proper noun, a distinct identification. But let me show an example of proper noun to show the fallible nature of it.

We have “Taj Mahal” in India, and it is the only one monument in the world. Therefore the name “Taj Mahal” is a proper noun and it cannot be a common noun. No other monument can be called as “taj mahal”, and whenever references, it must mean the monument which is there in Agra. But, let us say, an engineer based on his self interest builds another identical copy or replica of Taj Mahal in Hyderabad. Then by default people would name it also as “Taj mahal”, because it is a replica of the original one. Only factor of differentiation would be location, i.e., “Taj Mahal of Agra” and “Taj Mahal of Hyderabad”.  So, we have seen that the one infallible proper noun has become a common noun when a duplicate came into existence and in order to distinguish them as unique place name became mandatory.

The same analogy holds good on the name “nArAyaNa” also. It refers to Vishnu and it refers to nirguna-Shakti (Tripurasundari) both equally, but it gets distinguished based on the definition as, “That entity whose resting place (Ayana) is waters (nAra) is called as nArAyaNa” – This is Vishnu’s definition and is unique for him. Whereas, “That entity whose goal / direction of motion (Ayana) is towards nara (purusha Shiva) is called nArAyaNa” – This is Tripurasudnari’s definition based on root words and is unique for her.

Another example could be “rAmAyaNa” which is “rAma + Ayana (direction of movement)” is identically same as the definition of Tripurasundari as nArAyaNa. And on similar lines it is spelt as “rAmAyaNa” and not “rAmAyana”. This “rAmAyaNa” is again a proper noun applicable on Rama’s lifestory (epic) only but still we have Valmiki Ramayana, Kamba Ramayana (by kamba), Bhushundi Ramayana (by kAk bhuShunDI), AdhyAtmika rAmAyaNa (Brahmanda Purana) and so on… Where has the rAmAyaNa which is again a proper noun, been infallible in this case? It has become a common noun when only read as “rAmAyaNa”, but it remains a unique proper noun when we prefix the version (Valmiki, Bhushundi, Adhyatmika etc…) to the word “rAmAyaNa”.

Hope the logic is clear now that the name “nArAyaNa” is uniquely applicable on Vishnu based on his specific definition, and likewise it is applicable on Devi based on her specific definition.

And since the name “nArAyaNa” in Vedas belong to the highest Brahman only, it is rightly applicbale to the unborn Tripurasudnari since she is Brahman as stated by herself below.

“sarve vai devaa deviimupatasthuH | kaasi tvaM mahaadevi | saabraviidahaM brahmasvaruupiNii | mattaH prakR^itipurushhaatmaka.n jagach |” (Devi Upanishad-1-2 from Atharva Veda)
“All the gods waited upon the Goddess (and asked): ‘Mahadevi, who art Thou?’ She replied: I am essentially Brahman. From Me (has proceeded) the world comprising Prakriti (immobile objects) and Purusha (beings / mobile creatures)”.

nArAyaNa Suktam’s name nArAyaNa which applies on the highest brahman is NOT applicable on Vishnu because Vishnu has a birth and hence he cannot be the unborn highest reality. Vishnu’s birth is stated below. Shiva manifested himself as Vishnu as stated below.

“sá yád dhruvā́ṃ díśam ánu vyácalad víṣṇur bhūtvā́nuvyàcalad virā́jam annādī́ṃ kr̥tvā́ |” (Atharva Veda XV:14:5)
“He (Vratya =Rudra), when he went away to the stedfast region, went away having become Vishnu and having made Virāj an eater of food”.

Again let me come back to their same arguement what we discussed above. As we know Vaishnavas questioned, if really Tripurasundari was nArAyaNa then as per the definition of “nru (nara=man) + Ay (Ayana=direction of motion)” it must have been spelt as “nArAyana” but why it’s spelled as “nArAyaNa” in Vedas? This is a redundant question after having studied the above analysis. However, I would like to provide 3 answers to this to eliminate this question for ever.

[Note that the below answers are only additional reasoning which are not related with our definition of nArAyaNa, and these are being given to look at a 360 degree view on this argument. Our derivation still stands unquestionable since that’s based on the antarArdham (inner meaning) of the root words “nru” and “Ay” and not on complete words “nAra” and “Ayana”] .

The first answer is simple – Even in Ramayana’s case, “rAma + Ayana” became “rAmAyaNa” and not “rAmAyana”. So, that is the same logic being applied here. And second reason could be that we need to understand that Vedic grammar is not Paninian. And hence differences would be there in the two.  However, I can see a third reason also why Yajurveda might have spelled nArAyana as nArAyaNa. Our Vedas are highly esoteric and highly cryptic. The word what they “mean” is not what they “spell” because the God loves to be mystic. Here are few examples from Satapatha Brahmana which clearly states that Vedas contain twisted pronunciations instead of actual pronunciation because God loves mysteries.

“śāntadevatyaṃ ha vai tacatarudriyamityācakṣate paro ‘kṣam paro ‘kṣakāmā hi
devāsta |” (Satapatha Brahmana 9:1:1:2)
“Sântadevatya, doubtless, is here called mystically (esoterically) ‘Satarudriya,’ for the gods love the mystic”.

“makhavānha vai tam maghavānityācakṣate paro’kṣam paro’kṣakāmā hi devāḥ |” (Satapatha Brahmana 14:1:1:13)
“Since Makhavat is he who is mystically (esoterically) called Maghavat, for the gods love the mystic”.

“udumbharo ha vai tamudumbara ityācakṣate paro ‘kṣam paro ‘kṣakāmā hi devā |” (Satapatha Brahmana 7:5:1:22)
“…’udumbhara’ doubtless being what is mystically (esoterically) called Udumbara, for the gods love the mystic”.

“tā āhitayo ha vai tā āhutaya ityācakṣate paro’kṣam paro’kṣakāmā hi devāḥ |” (Satapatha Brahmana 10:6:2:2)
“And these assignments (âhiti) are mystically (esoterically) called oblations (âhuti), for the gods love the mystic”.

“roco ha vai taṃ rukbha ityācakṣate paro ‘kṣam paro ‘kṣakāmā hi devā |” (Satapatha Brahmana 7:4:1:10)
“And ‘rokas’ (shine) they mystically (esoterically) call ‘rukma’ (gold plate), for the gods love the mystic”

“pūṣkaraṃ ha vai tatpuṣkaramityācakṣate paro ‘kṣam paro ‘kṣakāmā hi devā |” (Satapatha Brahmana 7:4:1:13)
“…’pûshkara’ being what is mystically (esoterically) called ‘push-kara’ (lotus-leaf), for the gods love the mystic”.

“hiramyaṃ ha vai taddhiraṇyamityācakṣate paro ‘kṣam paro ‘kṣakāmā hi
devā |” (Satapatha Brahmana 7:4:1:16)

“…’hiramya’ being what is mystically (esoterically) called ‘hiranya’ (gold), for the gods love the mystic”.

These are the ONLY cryptic words revealed by Vedas freely for us as handful examples to make us understand the fact that Vedas are NOT direct plain language rather they are highly esoteric. If someone thought that the aforementioned list of esoteric words is the only ones then it’s a huge misconception on the part of that person. Entire set of Vedas is esoteric in its entirity.  Vedas have given those examples as a quick hint for us to apply our brains to analyze Vedas instead of reading them superficially. Therefore thinking from Vaishnavite viewpoint the answer we get is; this is how most likely the name “nArayana” is spelled “nArAyaNa”; but for sure that hymn is NOT directed towards Vishnu. It is a copyright attribute of Tripurasundari that she alone travels inside Sushumna which is the nerve of the heart and contains entire universe within (as confirmed in Chhandogya Upanishad verse referenced above). So, there is no way one can prove that hymn belonging to Vishnu! And my analysis on that hymn above in this article is unassailable!

I have quoted Vedic references to show cryptic words, so people who may think of rejecting my claim of nArAyaNa name also being cryptic; before rejecting my thought as “nonsense”, such people are demanded to provide some evidences to support their rejection; otherwise based on the evidences I have provided (which are pratyakSha), they need to accept the possibility (which is anumAna based on the pratyakSha evidences) of cryptic name in Narayana Suktam.

There is no end to the objections of Vaishnavas. They also object saying Vishnu-gayatri mantra from Yajurveda starts with ‘Narayana’ hence that name belongs to him. Let me show what it means in reality.

 

Analyzing Vishnu-Gayatri

 

Yajurveda has a Vishnu Gayatri mantram as follows.

“naaraayaNaaya vidmahe vaasudevaaya dhiimahi |
tanno vishhNuH prachodayaat.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.1.6.29)

“May we know Narayana. For that, may we meditate upon Vasudeva. May Vishnu impel us towards I”

Now let us split each word and understand their meanings.

nArAyaNa: – The Nirguna-Shakti called Kundalini or Tripurasundari

vAsudEva: – In Sanskrit grammar, VAsudEva is NOT “VasudEva Sutam iti VAsudEva”.
‘VAsu’ comes from the root ‘Vas’, which means “to reside and envelop completely”. ‘dEva’ comes from the root ‘div’, which means, “to shine”. Therefore vAsudEva is that entity which resides in everythinga dn illuminates it. This is nothing but the “Atman (Self)”. So, vAsuDeva means Atman. And it is again Tripurasundari who is the Atman pervading the three-cities (sthoola, sookshma, karana bodies) and illuminating them with her resplendence.  The same is stated below.

“mahAtripurasundarI bahirantaranupravishya svayamekaiva vibhAti |” (Bahvricha Upanishad-5 from Rig Veda)
“The Beauty of the three-great-cities, penetrating without and within, is resplendent”.

And Vishnu is none other than goddess Uma’s male form as stated below.

yaa umaa saa svaya.n vishhNuh |”(Rudra Hridayopanishad 1:05)
“Uma Herself is in the form of Vishnu”
.
Therefore it means to say that Uma (who is identical with Brahman and is Nirguna as nArAyaNa) she in her manifest (saguNa) form is Vishnu. So, the Vishnu Gayatri when analyzed under these facts it reads as follows:-

“May we know that NirguNa Shakti viz. Tripurasundarialso called as nArAyaNa, for which we may meditate upon the Self (Atman) which is called vAsudEva. May the saguNa form Vishnu impel us towards his supreme nirguNa form called Tripurasundari / nArAyaNa”.

Te nirguNa nArAyaNa (Tripurasudnari) cannot be perceived through external worship. It needs us to become inward focussed, meditating on our self (Atman). This is why Bahvricha Upanishad calls Tripurasundari as Brahman as the Atman as the consciousness as follows.

“saivAtmA tato.anyamasatyamanAtmA | ata eShA
brahmAsaMvittirbhAvabhAvakalAvinirmuktA
chidvidyA.advitIyabrahmasaMvittiH sacchidAnandalaharI
mahAtripurasundarI bahirantaranupravishya svayamekaiva vibhAti |
yadasti sanmAtram.h | yadvibhAti chinmAtram.h |
yatpriyamAnandaM tadetat.h pUrvAkArA mahAtripurasundarI |
tvaM chAhaM cha sarvaM vishvaM sarvadevatA itarat.h
sarvaM mahAtripurasundarI | satyamekaM lalitAkhyaM vastu
tadadvitIyamakhaNDArthaM paraM brahma |” (Bahvricha Upanishad 5 from Rig Veda)
She alone is Atman. Other than Her is untruth, non-self. Hence is She Brahman-Consciousness, free from (even) a tinge of being and non-being. She is the Science of Consciousness, non-dual Brahman Consciousness, a wave of Being-Consciousness-Bliss. The Beauty of the three-great-cities, penetrating without and within, is resplendent, non-dual, self-subsisting. What is, is pure Being; what shines is pure Consciousness; what is dear is Bliss. So here is the Maha-Tripura-Sundari who assumes all forms. You and I and all the world and all divinities and all besides are the Maha-Tripura-Sundari. The sole Truth is the thing named ‘the Beautiful’. It is the non-dual, integral, supreme Brahman”.

Since she is Atman, this is why Lalita Sahasranama Stotram clearly says that she can ONLY be known by focusing inwards and not outwards as follows.

“Antarmukha samaradhya bahirmukha sudurlabha |” (LS verse 162)
“She is easily obtainable for those whose worship is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focused”.

And to reach her nirguNa form called nArAyaNa, we need to meditate on her (vAsudEva) within us and for this Vishnu would guide us. This is what is the analysis of Vishnu-Gayatri Mantra!

 

Conclusion: – In no case anyone can prove that Vishnu travels through Sushumna nerve. In no case anyone can prove that Vishnu is ever called as Three-Eyed (virUpAkSha), in no case anyone can prove that Vishnu is Krishna-Pingalam (half dark and half tawny). Therefore nArAyaNa sUktaM verses 7-12 which clearly talks about Kundalini and verse 13 which clearly praises Ardhanaareshwara make this hymn completely a copyright material for Tripurasundari Devi alone. Vaishnavas cannot digest this truth but fact is fact and this fact is unassailable.

Refuting Vijayendra Tirtha

 

Allegations and Insult of Appayya Dikshitar by Vaishnavites

Vaishnavites allege that Appayya Dikshitar was attacking Vaishnava philosophy. I’m copying a direct verse from a Vaishnava website (link) which mentions as follows – “Incidentally, Appayya Dikshita is the vile creature who cast a lot of aspersions on Acharya Madhva, accusing him of quoting imaginary or non-existent references. One shudders to think of the havoc that he would have caused if a great savant like VijayIndra tIrth had not been there to counter him and defeat him at every turn”.

It is said that Sri Vijayendra tIrtha invited Appayya Dikshitar to a debate and discussed several doctrinal issues during which they say that Vijayendra Tirtha established the supremacy of Vishnu over Shiva and defated Appayya Dikshitar. They say that when Appayya Dikshitar tried to show Shiva’s supremacy from Shruti by quoting Shiva as the Parabrahman, Vijayendra Tirtha used Narayana Suktam’s verse “narayanam param brahman…” to show that Narayana is called as Parabrahman.

They mention that when Appayya Dikshita used the verse “EkO rudrO na dwitIyaya tasthUr” to call out that Shruti says it was lord Shiva alone who became everything; Vijayendra Tirtha used the verse “eko ha vai naaraayaNa aasiinna brahmaa neshaano” to state that there was Narayana alone when there were no Brahma and Shankara. And these Vaishnavas state that Appayya Dikshitar tried to equate Narayana with Shiva by explaining the name narayana as belonging to Shiva; when in response to his statement Vijayendra Tirtha on the spot composed a book called “NarayaNa Sabdartha nirvachanam” in which he explained using Sanskrit GRAMMAR a 100 meanings of the word “nArAyaNa”, and established that all the other names can be applied on Shiva but the name “nArAyaNa” cannot be applied on Shiva because of the letter “Na” in it.

Also, it is believed that to Appayya’s quotes from Shaiva Puranas, Vijayendra countered and rejected them saying that they were from Tamasik Puranas, and only Satwik Puranas are acceptible in debates. To Appayya’s quotes, Vijayendra countered by quoting Bhagawatam stating it to be the Satwik Purana.

My Response to the above allegations and to Vijayendta Tirtha’s points

Well, as per the above given summary of the debates that is believed to have happened between Appayya Dikshitar and Vijayendra Tirtha. I have the following two main points to criticize on, but prior to that let me talk something about the Satwik/Tamasik Puranas. Well, I never understood what’s the logic to call Shiva Puranas as Tamasik! Vaishnavites say that they are Tamasik because Padma Purana mentions in a verse. And also they say that Shaiva Puranas contain stories which are for Tamasik devotees and demons. However, I didn’t get the reason how can Veda Vyasa write imaginary stories in Puranas. If some book contains stories only for demons and if those stories are not to be taken as real let’s say for instance the story of Shiva’s infinite Linga whose length couldn’t be measured by Vishnu and Brahma; if this story is imaginary, it shouldn’t exist in Purana because “Purana” is supposed to be a book containing stories of ancient past happened in Hindu mythology. And I cannot write Aesop’s fables or Malgudi Days kind of fiction in Puranas, right? One thing I understood is, Vaishnavites call Shaiva Puranas as Tamasik just to save their faith from the greatest threat – the superiority of lord Shiva.

Except for one interpolated stupid verse in Padma Purana which states Shaiva Puranas as Tamasik; there has been no systematic proof shown by any scholar which could be taken as a base to analyze and reject Shaiva Puranas labelling them as Tamasik. Can they show any proof why those Puranas are not to be followed? I ask them whether they can show me a logically derived step by step analysis for the same?

While on the other hand they consider Srimad Bhagawatam as the MOST authentic Satwik scripture available in this universe. But I have derived a strong irrefutable proof through logical analysis and reasoning that Srimad Bhagawatam is a bogus scripture. Read that detailed analysis in the article titled, “Top N Reasons to call Bhagawatam a BOGUS Scripture“.

Well, let’s come back to the main discussion now. yes, I would refute the following two points of Vijayendra now.

1. To Appayya’s argument of Shiva as Parabrahman Vijayendra Tirtha quoted Narayana Suktam to state that Vishnu (Narayana) is Parabrahman. Vijayendra Tirtha grammatically proved that due to the word “Na”, the name Narayana cannot be said to be the name of Shiva

2. To Appayya Dikshitar’s argument on ‘Shiva alone existed before’, Vijayendra Tirtha quoted a verse ‘Narayana alone existed when there were no Shiva no Brahma’ from Maha Upanishad

Let me refute Vijayendra’s points one by one.

1) Who is Parambrahman Shiva (of Appayya) or Narayana (of Vijayendra)? Can the name “Narayana” belong to Shiva?

Well, even a secondary school boy would laugh at this argument put forth by Vijayendra. There can never be TWO supreme gods in Hinduism. There is ONLY one Parabrahman whom Seers call by various names. When Appayya quoted Shiva as Parabrahman, Vijayendra Tirtha quoted another verse calling Narayana as Parabrahman without even thinking that there cannot be two Brahman’s in same Hinduism. By seeing Vijayendra quoting Narayana as Parabrahman, Appayya Dikshitar tried to analyze Narayana and he tried to correlate Narayana as Shiva, but Vijayendra persistently kept on proving that Narayana cannot be equated to Shiva.

I would say Appayya was logically at correct reasoning levels, Appayya Dikshitar’s approach was correct; because, at any given point of time there cannot be more than one Parabrahman in Hinduism and since both Appayya and Vijayendra were quoting from Shruti texts, Appayya’s attempt to equate Shiva and Narayana was very apt. But Vijayendra Teertha foolishly tried his level best to make the unification attempt of Appayya fail and with some magical grammar jugglery Vijayendra is believed to have composed 100 meanings of “Narayana”, and proved that the name “Narayana” belongs ONLY to Sri-Hari and cannot be applied on Shiva because of some “Na” syllable. And it is believed that Appayya accepted defeat. This shows how poor Vijayendra was in logic and interpretation skills; of course he might be a scholar in grammar, no doubt. If Vijayendra is taken as correct, then it means we have two Parabrahmans in Hinduism viz. Narayana and Shiva because Vedas and Upanishads have numerous instances of Shiva as parabrahman (below I quoted one sample verse).

“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 (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”.

Also, Yajurveda Taittiriya Aranyaka (10.23.1) also calls Shiva as the Parabrahman. There are many references to cite from Vedas and Upanishads in support of Shiva as Parabrahman. In fact Vedas recognize ONLY Shiva (and Shakti) as the Parabrahman.

Now, if we consider Narayana as Vishnu’s name as per Vijayendra Tirtha’s flawed logic; then we would have two Parabrahman in Hinduism, which is brutally refuted by Rig Veda which says “Ekam Sat Viprah Bahudha Vadanti”, which means, “There is only one truth (God) whom the seers call by various names”. And we have seen in very detail in the above section on analysis of “nArAyaNa sUktaM” that the name “nArAyaNa” in Vedic hymns does NOT apply on Vishnu; it is the name of Shiva’s Shakti (Tripurasundari).

And it becomes logically correct to call nArAyaNa (Tripurasundari) as the Parabrahman because this is in sync with Devi Upanishad, Bahvricha Upanishad kind of many texts. And here it doesn’t contradict the axiom of “There cannot be more than one Parabrahman” because Shakti (Tripurasundari) is inseparably united with Shiva (Parabrahman). Therefore Vedas interchangeably call Shiva and Shakti as Parabrahman; but essentially there is no violation of the axiom of having one Parabrahman because they are not two; they are always one non dual Ardhanareeshwara.

This is the reason why in the beginning of this article itself, I said that – “Supreme God neither submits himself for experimentation nor can he be comprehended using GRAMMAR; however the almighty submits himself to logical analysis and reasoning”.

Vijayendra Tirtha tried to comprehend Narayana through Grammar, he derived 100+ meanings of the word “Narayana”, but all his 100 meanings revolved around Vishnu. But in “Narayana Suktam”, Narayana CANNOT be the name of Vishnu as we have seen in my detailed analysis. Narayana Suktam talks about the supreme power which travels through Sushumna, hence that is nothing but Kundalini (Tripurasundari) whose direction of movement (Ayana) is towards Shiva (nara), hence the name Narayana is the name of goddess Tripurasundari Devi in this hymn. And there is no scripture in Hinduism which has ever said Kundalini as Vishnu. Kundalini, Shatchakras, Yoga, and Tantra; all these fields are entirely a playground of Shiva and Shakti only. Vedas, Upanishads, Tantra, Sri-Vidya, Puranas, and all hymns and every lierary work of Hinduism state Kundalini Yoga as a play of Shiva and Shakti only. Therefore “Narayana” of Narayana Suktam can NEVER be Vishnu; it is always Shakti (tripurasundari) only beyond doubt!

So, Vijayendra Tirtha’s approach of using “Narayanam para Brahman” verse of Narayana Suktam to state Vishnu as Parabrahman is totally baseless and absurd. Because, if he equates Narayana of Narayana Suktam to Vishnu, he would end up contradicting various other Shruti texts viz. Bahvricha Upanishad, Devi Upanishad, Durga Suktam, Yoga Kundalini Upanishad, Yoga Shikha Upanishad, Kshurika Upanishad, Advaya Taraka Upanishad, Tripura Upanishad, Tripura Tapini Upanishad, Varaha Upanishad, SriVidya, Tantra, and all Shakta Puranas and other miscellaneous scriptures… and the list goes on. And if someone else also wants to support Vijayendra Tirtha here, then he/she would also land up in soup because he/she would need to stand against these many scriptures.

And the definition of “nArAyaNa” which I stated in my analysis as “Tripurasundari Devi’s Ayana (Direction) is towards nara (Shiva) hence she is called nArAyaNa” is the ONLY CORRECT definition and it remains in agreement / in sync with all the aforementioned Shruti, and Smriti scriptures.

Now coming to the second part of the argument which says the name “nArAyaNa” cannot be Shiva’s name because of some stupid syllable “Na”. Well, this is also funny and absurd. We have proved in this article that in Vedic hymns and Upanishads “nArAyaNa” is the name of “Tripurasundari” who is the consort and potency of Shiva. Moreover, we have seen numerouns instances that Shiva and Shakti are never distinct. In each verse of Narayana Suktam I had purposely shown the presence of Shiva along with Shakti equally. This was the purpose I had in my mind to mention their oneness there. Now, it is well known to us that Shakti is not different from Shiva.

Shiva himself is “nara (Purusha)”, Shiva himself is Shakti, and Shakti herself is called as nArAyaNa. Therefore, by mathematical logic if – “A (Shiva) = B (Shakti) and B (Shakti) = C (nArAyaNa), then it gives us the answer as A (Shiva) = C (nArAyaNa)”. So, Shiva is “nara (Purusha)” and Shiva is himself “nArAyaNa” also! This logic once again testifies that Sri Appayya Dikshitar’s argument of Narayana being the name of Shiva is very valid statement. I wonder how clever and cunning Vijayendra Tirtha was to confuse Appayya with his 100 grammatical illusionary meanings and made him accept defeat; and I wonder whether there was any impartial judge watching their debate that time? God knows! But whatever may be the history, the present context here exposed Vijayendra Tirtha’s flaws and with this reasoning it is clear that Appayya was correct and he should have won that debate had it been a fair game!

So, If Vijayendra Swami felt that by confusing Appayya Dikshitar with his illusionary GRAMMAR juggleries and cheap tactics he achieved a great feat; then I would want to remind him that his approach is against many vedic and Upanishadic scriptures; and under the hammer of my “Logic and Reasoning” his Grammar has succumbed to death!

Here I offer and dedicate this victory of mine (over Vijayendra Tirtha’s bogus grammatical expertise) to the the great hero of yester years viz. Sri Appayya Dikshitar. Hail!

2) To Appayya Dikshitar’s argument on Shiva alone existed before, Vijayendra Tirtha quoted a verse Narayana alone existed when there were no Shankara no Brahma (he quoted from Maha Upanishad)

Well, this point has been already refuted in my analysis done in the above section on “Maha Upanishad”. And it is clear beyond doubt that the “nArAyaNa” of “Maha Upanishad”, doesn’t mean Vishnu; it means goddess Tripurasundari Devi. Refer to above section for a detailed analysis on this point and then come back and continue reading.

Therefore it should be clear by now that Vijayendra Tirtha’s argument was totally flawed because he thought Narayana in his Vedic verses was Vishnu; but in fact he was unknowingly putting good statements in support of Shiva and Shakti only. Let me state here the reason why such mysteries exist in Upanishads where Tripurasundari’s glories are sung under the name of Narayana – that is because, Gods love mysticism, so as Vedas do. Vedic seers and Gods love to present straight forward hymns in a complex manner (reason is best known to them), even Satahapatha Brahmana states in innumerable places saying, “paro ‘kṣakāmā hi devā |”, which means, “…for the gods love the mystic”.

So, our approach should be analytical in nature while dealing with complex and contradicting scriptures. Let’s say Upanishad-X says [2 + 3 = 5] and another Upanishad-Y says [2 + 3 = Eight]. In such scenarios, instead of saying – “because Upanishad-Y is a revered text and is also my personal favorite (due to obvious reasons), when it says [2+3=Eight], that should be 8 always, I would be adamant to prove that [2+3=8] always; I don’t care about other mathematics” – That’s what Vijayendra Tirtha had done in his debates. To prove Narayana Suktam and Maha Upanishad’s verses as truth, he adamantly composed 100 meanings of “nArAyaNa”, but failed to analyze “nara + Ayana” logic completely.

The right approach would be to analyze why Upanishad-Y says [2+3=Eight] when everyone knows that mathematically [2+3=5] is the truth; when you analyze with an analytical bent of mind powered by logic and reasoning; you would understand that Upanishad-Y also explains the same truth but is talking in mysterious coded language; and the mystery is that the no. of alphabets in “E-i-g-h-t” is 5; and that’s the crypted text it uses to denote 5. Got the point? Appayya was following this analytical approach; hence he was trying to correlate Narayana with Shiva. Therefore Appayya was a far better saint than Vijayendra. On similar lines, following the same analogy when we see; Vedas and Upanishads love to be mystic in meaning; therefore instead of saying directly that Shiva’s Shakti (Tripurasundari) is the Brahman, it uses the definition “Because Tripurasundari’s Ayana (Direction) is towards Nara (Shiva), she has the name – Narayana”; and states Tripurasundari’s glories under the encrypted name called “nArAyaNa” and says, “nArAyaNa is ParaBrahman”. And hence here it is clear that Sri Appayya Dikshitar’s debate arguments were correct. I am not sure spells of black magic Vijayendra cast on Appayya to convince him that he was defeated.

Conclusion: – From above analysis on Appayya Dikshitar and Vijayendra Tirtha’s debate on Shiva vs. Narayana; it is crystal clear that Vjayendra Tirtha’s arguments might be grammatically correct but on the basis of logic and reasoning, his points were totally bogus and baseless. Ideally Appayya should have won that debate, but due to some crooked magical tactics Vijayendra could confuse him and made him accept that Vijayendra became victorious. I do not understand how could Vijayendra be called as scholar? He didn’t have even the slightest awareness that any single Upanishad is NOT complete within itself. Otherwise why should saints derive 108 Upanishads? He thought just by BLINDLY using a verse from “Maha Upanishad” he would be able to showcase Vishnu as Shiva’s origin and would defeat Appayya easily. His stupid Grammar worked some blackmagic on Appayya and Appayya accepted defeat, but had Vijayendra possessed even the slightest amount of “logical thinking and reasoning skills”, he would have understood the greatness of Shiva and instead of deriving 100+ grammatical meanings of Narayana he could have spent his time in a more productive work of correlating Narayana with other Upanishads. If he really had that much intelligence he would have understood Narayana as Shakti and Not as Vishnu and accepting Appayya’s approach as correct he would have declared Appayya as the winner. Appayya’s approach was very proper because he atleast tried to correlate Narayana with Shiva, and only God knows why Vijayendra became victorious! This shows how cunning Vaishnava idiots (oops scholars) were.

I have seen various discussions on internet forums where Vaishnavite friends bashed Shaivites time and again saying that Appayya Dikshitar was brutally defeated by Vijayendra Tirtha. Of course I do not have much background of their debate since I wasn’t a witness of their debate in that ancient era, but one thing what I can say in this present times is that, by my analysis it looks to me that Appayya deserved victory, but somehow Vijayendra claimed it for himself. From the above detailed analysis on name “nArAyaNa”, it is doubtlessly clear that it is the name of goddess Tripurasundari (Shiva’s consort), and not that of Vishnu. Therefore, Vijayendra’s arguments stand refuted with this analysis now. Hence I offer or dedicate this victory of mine to that great Advaitin – Sri Appayya Dikshitar.

It is sad to see people from same religion stand at daggers down on each other based on their false beliefs. Appayya was an Advaitin he didn’t hesitate to compose a hymn on Lord Vishnu as “Varadaraja Stavam”. I would want to know if there is any Vaishnava scholar who had ever penned down even a single paragraph praising lord Shiva? I haven’t come across any Vaishnava scholar who has not called Shiva as demi-god in his works; and I have never seen any Advaitin calling Vishnu as demi-god. Even Shaivites never call Vishnu as demi-god, lord Vishnu is like a family member (Parivar Devata) of lord Shiva’s family for Shaivites. I wonder when people would understand the real knowledge of Shiva and Shakti. Really, Shiva-Tatwam cannot be comprehended so easily; it requires thousands of births to gain that amount of virtue in order to comprehend Mahadeva!

VERDICT
The name “Narayana” in Upanishads and Vedas doesn’t mean Vishnu it means Tripurasundari Devi – the Shakti which travels through Sushumna nadi and unites with her consort – Shiva in Sahasrara Chakra.

Vijayendra Tirtha was an unintelligent scholar whose reasoning and logic was not up to the mark in comparison to that of Sri Appayya Dikshitar. However he supposedly won the debate with Appayya (but how far that is a reality, only God knows!)

 


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

100 Comments

  1. jaiganesh

    OMG,What a analysis! This article is just the tip of the iceberg to show that your are completely blessed by Lord Dakshinamurthy.Even a Vaishnava can't interpret the word “NARAYANA” better than you.

    //Also, it is believed that to Appayya's quotes from Shaiva Puranas, Vijayendra countered and rejected them saying that they were from Tamasik Puranas, and only Satwik Puranas are acceptible in debates.//

    Even in Vedas,there are several verses identifying the “EVER MERCIFUL” Lord Shiva as Supreme.Do these Vaishnavites dare to call Vedas also as TAMASIC?

    Narayana/Devi is just the other half of Shiva,part of him. That is why in both sankaranarayana and arthanareeswara forms shiva's presence in undeniable where the other side is shared by Narayana/Devi. But these Vaishnavites go to Shiva temple only to worship Devi and they'll never even turn to Shiva sannathi's direction.Just wondering how they fail to identify that Devi/Narayana is the inseparable half of Shiva!

    In 82nd sloka of Sivanandalahari,Sankaracharya explains it clearly how Narayana became a very prominent god for worship!

    Even after explaining Vishnu Sahasranama by Bhishma,when Yuthistira asks about 1000 names of great god Shiva,Bhisma accepts his ignorance
    and tells Only Sri Krishna ,due to his great devotion to shiva, can tell that.Now do they call Mahabharatha and Krishna are tamasik? A true Vaishnavite is a person only who follows the words of Krishna i.e both Bhagavath Gita and Siva sahasranama.

    Reply
    1. sohini

      🙂 true words

      Reply
    2. Arwin

      82nd verse

      Banasthwam , vrishabhastwam Ardha vapusha baryatwam,
      Gonithwam sakkhitha mridhangavahatha chetyadhiroopam dhadhow,
      Twat pade nayanarpanam cha kruthavan twad deha bhago hari,
      Poojyat poojyatharasya eva hi na chet ko vaa tadanyo adhika. 82

      Oh Lord of Arya (11),
      The lord Vishnu became your arrow (12) and bull (13),
      Occupied half your body,
      Became transformed to be your wife,
      Occupying half your body
      Became a boar to search for you,
      Became your lady friend to serve the nectar,
      Became the player of drum while you danced,
      And offered his eye in worship at your feet,
      He also took half the share of your body as Harihara,
      And so he becomes eminently suitable for worship,
      For who else is there greater than him.

      Reply
  2. jaiganesh

    Ji,

    Kindly enlighten me on another claim by Vaishnavites that Shiva holds River Ganga in his Head which washed away the feet of Lord Vishnu? (Though Shiva is Bhakta-vatsala,who also found nothing wrong when Kannappa Nayanar stamped Shiva to give his eyes,Arjuna hitting Shiva with a bow when the latter came as a hunter,encouraging krishna to fight with him in Banasura episode). Also read in one of the articles long back in which Appayya Dikshita arguing both Ganga rivers are different.

    Reply
    1. sohini

      Also read in one of the articles long back in which Appayya Dikshita arguing both Ganga rivers are different.
      can you please give the link for this ?

      Reply
  3. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Thanks, Bro. All glories goes to Mahadeva! So, I have transferred all your praises to him 🙂 If any shortcomings exist, they are purely mine.

    Well, the “logic” behind calling scriptures as Tamasic/Rajasic/Satwik is totally baseless. There is no logic in fact. They just rely on some stupid verse from padma Purana which calls Shaiva scriptures as Tamasik. Agreed with your points.

    Reply
    1. Dhyey Bhatt

      Thanks santoshkumarje your articles helps me to understand the “tattva” of shrutis.
      I ‘ve 1question that why so called Vaishnav Aacharya Indirectly Reduce Lord Shiva’s Glories mention in Shruti.?

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

        They have their personal agenda to shadow shiva’s greatness to uplift Vishnu’s sole lordship. Hence they resort to all kinds of underhand tricks.

        Reply
      2. Dhyey Bhatt

        “Narayan Suktam – hym to Tripurasundari” is the enlightening Article,but santoshji you had mention that yet you are going to post some more evidence from shrutis so none can refute this truth so once You post it would you please mention it in “Mahapasutastra” to notify seeker and devotee of Maheshwara like me please…Actually I want to Download this article but Once you complete it With the additional refference from shruti I can download it…
        Once Again I request you to complete this article with further evidence supporting it once you get time from your Occupied Schedule

        Reply
        1. Sure dear friend. Once i update it, i’ll surely post a notification alert which would inform you and other readers of the updated version.

          Reply
          1. Dhyey Bhatt

            Dear Santoshji ,

            I’ve one Doubt about “Rudra”as per Shruti and ” Kaalagni Rudra”

            Is Lord Shiva(Rudra of Vedas) and Kaalagni rudra(Kailash-pati or Parvati Pati are different like Vishnu and krishna?I mean that is Parvati-Pati is an Menifestation or Incarnation of Durga-Pati like LaxmiPati(Lord Vishnu) and Husband of Rukmani(Sri Krishna)
            .Moreover what is the differnce between Lord Shiv Maha-Shiv, SadaShiv , ParaShiv?

          2. Shiva, Rudra, Sadashiva etc., names are equally used to refer to the turIya-shiva (sadashiva) in Vedas and Puranas. The kalagni-rudra is the role played by an aspect of teh lord at the time of destruction, kalagni-rudra could be kala-bhairava, or veerabhadra etc., forms depending upon the instance for which the the corresponding form is invoked.
            Shiva/sadashiva is the fifth (who is the origin or all origins, and is beyond the creation vishvAdhiko-rudrO-maharshi). (he is termed Rudra in Vedas), and he entered this universe in a saguna form for the sake of all of us as the lord of kailasha. There he is termed Maheshvara (he has no difference between his original aspect and this aspect, shiva Purana says kalashapati Rudra is the purnaavatara of original rudra-shiva). Then this Maheshvara creates other aspects such as Bhairava/Veerabhadra/Sarabha etc., all such aspects are the kalagni-rudra forms created for the task of destruction/regeneration.
            Shiva, Mahashiva, Parashiva, sadashiva are all the various epithets used by different schools within shaivism to refer to sadashiva the brahman only.

            In reality Shiva has five fold forms – Sadashiva, Maheshvara, Rudra (kalagni), Vishnu, Brahma. Yes, even Vishnu is an aspect of Shiva only. The fights of vaishnavites and shaivites are in reality a sport that the lord enjoys probably. We are debating between the lord and his form. Sad, but unfortunately true!

  4. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear, these petty and insignificant attacks do not matter much. Please do not worry with such claims.

    See, regarding the Birth of Ganga there are at least 3 stories known to me. So, birth of Ganga is not concretely available as a right proof. From Puranas we have two stories
    1. Brahma transformed his Kamandalu water into a damsel which was Ganga.
    2. Brahma washed the feet of Vishnu and that water because a damsel – Ganga
    3. Once Shiva was singing nice songs and dancing; Vishnu became so much immersed in that performance that he started melting from bottom, and vishnu's molten form was collected by Brahma in a pot and that got transformed as Ganga lady

    And did you see none of these verses state a common story. Well, adding to this Ramayana has a story which says,

    4. Ganga was the elder daughter of the king of Himayala (Himavat), and his wife Menaka devi. Hence Ganga was the elder sister of Parvati.

    So, you see these many versions exist (within the limits of my knowledge) related to Ganga's birth. And only god knows how many otehr versions exist! However Ramayana's story of Ganga's birth also exists in some Puranas (not sure which one), so this could be a correct version.

    Anyway; whatever be the evrsion; even if i assume Ganga as Vishnu's feet's water; then also how does it make Shiva inferior to Vishnu? In Vamana avatara Vishnu had done a great deed of supressing Bali's pride and measuring the three worlds, so his efforts were commendable; hence Brahma washed Vishnu's feet with ganga water. And later on to relieve Bhagiratha's ancestors from a curse, when there was no other way out otehr than Ganga's touch, it was impossible for the earth to bear the power of Ganga's direct fall; so who is that superman who comes to rescue when the world remains at crises? Who came and drank Halahala poison when world was at stake? – it's the one Superman – Mahadeva! So, Mahadeva held Ganga in his matted hairlocks.

    But it was nowhere an act to please Vishnu or prove Vishnu is superior. And you know why Ganga is caleld so pious, remover of sins and giver of salvation? – It is because her body touched Shiva. It is Shiva's piousness that reflects in ganga. It is Shiva's sin-removing potency that Ganga carries, it is SHiva's grace of salvation that Ganga confers upon…So, SHiva made Vishnu's Ganga more pious, more sacred. So, if someone is interested in supremacy, who is greater now?? Obviously Mahadeva!

    On a side note, these stories like someone's feet water some carrying on head so the latetr oen is inferios etc; are baseless sicne these are not supremacy stories. These roles were played to do good to the universe (jagat kalyanam). If you take DAKSHA prajapati's example, Daksha was born to Brahma from Brahma's TOE. And SHiva married Daksha's daughter Sati. So, does it mean Daksha was superior than Shiva? Does it mean Shiva became super-inferior that Brahma?…Same logic applies on Vishnu and his feetw ater – ganga also.

    Reply
  5. sudhir

    https://www.facebook.com/SivaVaishnava wat do u say? abt this?
    ?

    Reply
  6. sudhir

    ਦੇਹ ਸਿਵਾ ਬਰੁ ਮੋਹਿ ਇਹੈ ਸੁਭ ਕਰਮਨ ਤੇ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨ ਟਰੋਂ ॥
    ਨ ਡਰੋਂ ਅਰਿ ਸੋ ਜਬ ਜਾਇ ਲਰੋਂ ਨਿਸਚੈ ਕਰਿ ਅਪੁਨੀ ਜੀਤ ਕਰੋਂ ॥
    ਅਰੁ ਸਿਖ ਹੋਂ ਆਪਨੇ ਹੀ ਮਨ ਕੌ ਇਹ ਲਾਲਚ ਹਉ ਗੁਨ ਤਉ ਉਚਰੋਂ ॥
    ਜਬ ਆਵ ਕੀ ਅਉਧ ਨਿਦਾਨ ਬਨੈ ਅਤਿ ਹੀ ਰਨ ਮੈ ਤਬ ਜੂਝ ਮਰੋਂ ॥੨੩੧॥

    देह शिवा बर मोहे ईहे, शुभ कर्मन ते कभुं न टरूं
    न डरौं अरि सौं जब जाय लड़ौं, निश्चय कर अपनी जीत करौं,
    अरु सिख हों आपने ही मन कौ इह लालच हउ गुन तउ उचरों,
    जब आव की अउध निदान बनै अति ही रन मै तब जूझ मरों ॥२३१॥

    Translation: O Lord Shiva grant me the boon, that I may never deviate from doing a good deed.
    That I shall not fear when I go into combat. And with determination I will be victorious.
    That I may teach myself this greed alone, to learn only Thy praises.
    And when the last days of my life come, I may die in the might of the battlefield.
    — Guru Gobind Singh

    Reply
  7. sudhir

    Shiva avatars not like Vishnu's!!
    Vishnu incarnate as Human, to solve the problems of Humans(Devotees)!! Whereas Shiva takes different kind of forms(avatars) to solve the problems of Deva's (gods,demigods and asuras)!! Shiva and Vishnu forms are uncountable!! In Saiva Siddhanta tradition, 25 or 64 or 108 anthropomorphic (iconic) forms are highlighted. The 25 forms of Shiva are most significant. In ancient India, different groups came up with lists of 24 or 25 forms (probably due to competition). The Shaivas have 25 forms of Shiva, the Vaishnavas have 25 avatars of Vishnu, the Buddhists have 25 Buddhas, and the Jains have 24 Tirthankaras.
    Shiva as 11 Rudras, Sage Durvasa, Adi Shankara, Hanuman, Virabhadra, Shiva as 8 Bhairavas!! There are 108 Maheshvara Murtis of Shiva!! You know some forms like, Nataraja,Dakshinamurthy,Ardhanarishvara and so on,…..

    Reply
  8. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    People suffering with mental disorders preach (and follow) such topics :).. They have their own theory and that doesn't match with authentic scriptures, so, I have nothing much to say.

    Reply
  9. sudhir

    त्रयी साङ्ख्यं योगः पशुपतिमतं वैष्णवमिति
    प्रभिन्ने प्रस्थाने परमिदमदः पथ्यमिति च।
    रुचीनां वैचित्र्यादृजुकुटिल नानापथजुषां
    नृणामेको गम्यस्त्वमसि पयसामर्णव इव॥ ७॥
    The different practices based on the three Vedas, SaMkhya, Yoga, Pashupata-mata, VaishhNava-mata etc . are but different paths (to reach to the Greatest Truth) and people on account of their different aptitude choose from them whatever they think best and deserved to be accepted . But as the sea is the final resting place for all types of streams , You are the only reaching place for all people whichever path,straight or zigzag, they may accept .

    Reply
  10. Madhav_Megadave

    Rightly said. One must give reasons for calling one Purana as tamasic etc.

    I have read a few portions of the Shiva Purana and found NOTHING “tamasic” in it. I fail to understand the reason behind the classification of Puranas as Satvik, Rajasic and Tamasic. Just because Padma Purana said so (which itself claims to be Satvik- I HAVE NO IDEA WHY :O !!!), doesn't mean it is correct.

    My understanding of the Tamo guna says that it promotes darkness, death, ignorance, laziness and other negative virtues. And some deluded souls claim worship of Shiva leads to accumulation of tamas and not Moksha. BUT WAIT.. Maha Mrityunjaya Mantra is perhaps the ONLY Moksha mantra from the Vedas. They say, it's not addressed to Shiva. May God help them.

    Santosh, I would like to know why the highest place in the Vedas is the abode of Lord Vishnu (om tad vishnoh paramam padam sada pashynati surayah- Seers always look towards the supreme abode of Vishnu, as if it were an eye in heaven. From your posts, and from the little knowledge I have gathered from Vedas and a few Upanishads, I believe Shiva is everything, and the actual God of Mahabharata is Lord Shiva who 'disguises' himself as Vasudeva through his own Maya and beguiles all of us. Is Lord Shiva's abode not visible to the eyes of sages? Is it beyond every loka or even Mount Kailash? If Lord Vishnu Himself gets His Vishnutva from Shiva, why is the supreme abode Vaikuntha? :O

    Please reply whenever you are free. I think your project is taking a toll on you. May Mahadev lighten your burden. 🙂 🙂

    Reply
  11. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Madhav,

    The “tad visnoh…” verse translation is correct but people and scholars also misinterpretted that verse.

    in reality, Vishnu's loftiest station (or highest abode) is Maheshwara himself. 🙂 This point i am going to prove in my next article. That's a huge topic hence can't answer here, it requires a full article to comprehend this subject.

    Please wait for my next article on sampoorna Vishnu tatwam where i have strong evidences from sruthi to prove my point and i'm working on drafting that article. Only thing is nowadays my office is keeping me too busy to continue with this work. But in a month's timeframe i believe i would be able to publish my detailed article on Vishnu tatwam.

    Reply
  12. Madhav_Megadave

    Amazing. 🙂 Am eager to read your thoughts on Vishnu tatwam. 🙂 🙂

    Reply
  13. sudhir

    अर्कद्रोण प्रभृतिकुसुमैरर्चनं ते विधेयं।
    प्राप्यं तेऽज स्मरहरफ़लं मोक्षसाम्राज्यलक्ष्मीः॥

    If one worships you with an ordinary dandelion flower, you grant him liberation or an empire even. Actually there is dearth of nothing for God, so he perceives your devotion, not the value of the offering. Is there any dearth of water for Lord Gangadhar, that he will wait for water from us? Is Lord Trinetra sitting in darkness without any light, that he will wait for mustered oil from us? Is he starving for food, that he will wait for fruits and sweets from us? One who is giving everything to the world, what can we offer to him? We offer things which are already owned by him. Still he showers the rain of mercy upon us, so he is named as Bhakta-Vatsal. Shiva favors every individual but he is more affectionate to his devotees because a devotee is like his Vatsa, a kid.

    दासानुरस्यावपसीति तर्णकान् भक्तात्मकानोदनबालकोभयम्।
    पोषाय गृह्णास्यथ तेषु सौहृदं पुष्णासि तस्मादसि भक्तवत्सलः॥

    Purport: You accept your devotees as child and embrace them to your chest. You simultaneously accept rice and child, so that you may feed the child for sustenance. You are Bhakta-Vatsala due to your excessive love towards your devotees. Seeing the kindness of the Lord, one devotee says—“O Lord! I know the secret behind your roaming in the mountains. It is because that you want to step over my rocky heart.”

    Reply
  14. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Sudhir – Thanks for your beautiful quotes and translations.

    Reply
  15. sudhir

    plzz admin continue post abt lord shivv , u r doing a great(divine ) service of lord shiva

    Reply
  16. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Sudhir,

    I'll surely try my best to be regular in posting. Only problem is that my work is allowing me no time nowadays. Will surely try to find some time for these postings.

    I am honored that you liked my service.

    Reply
  17. Madhav Prashanth R

    Hey Santosh. Since you have read the Mahabharata, I want to ask you a question about the visit of Rishi Markandeya to Yudhishtir's kuti in the forest. Markandeya Rishi, who saw Krishna (in yellow robes) with the Pandava gang spoke about the legend of Narayana. It seems he had seen a young boy, who made him 'see' the entire universe and beyond. He called himself Shiva, Vishnu, Brahma, Indra etc and bore the conch shell, discus, mace etc. Markandeya said that the same “boy” has incarnated as Janardana Krishna in the Vrishni dynasty. In another instance in the Shanti Parva, Krishna tells Arjuna that it is just one God who is worshipped whenever Rudra or Narayana are prayed to. They are supposed to be of the same nature and pervade the universe together. Is this an allusion to Ardhanarishwara?

    Does that put Krishna and Shiva on an equal footing? Maybe Narayana (Ardhanarishwara/Shiva-Parvati) is THAT Nirguna Brahman whom everyone keeps talking about, who out of his own will, 'chose' to arm 'himself' with discus. Vishnu is merely one of his many expansions. :-/

    Reply
  18. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Madhav,

    I'm sorry to reply so late. I was stuck up with office and work. Well, in the actual pralaya nobody remains, so markandeya's being is out of question. We have 5 types of Pralaya out of which i'll narrate two here.

    The life-span of the fourteen Manus put together make one day(daytime) of Brahma, that is 4, 320, 000, 000 years. His night has the same length. While one day of Brahma is thus 8, 640, 000, 000 years his one year is 365 such days and his life-span is 100 such years. The life of his cosmos is the same. When Brahma's life comes to an end the Brahman alone will remain and there will be no cosmos. Then another Brahma will start creation all over again.
    Bhuloka, Bhuvarloka, Suvarloka, Maharloka, Janaloka, Tapoloka and Satyaloka comprise the seven worlds. The gods, mortals and so on live in these worlds. Bhuloka, Bhuvarloka and Suvarloka form one group. “Bhurbhuvassuvaha, ” we pronounce this so often while performing rituals. The remaining four belong to higher planes. When Brahma goes to sleep at night the first three worlds will be dissolved in the pralaya (deluge). This is called “avantara-pralaya”(“intermediate deluge”). All other worlds will perish when his life-span ends.

    During this Avantara Pralaya all the gross portion of BhubhuvaSuva worlds perish and appear inside the body of Vishnu (vata-patra-shayi) because he is the virat / protector of Virat (sum total of gross bodies), only water remains all over and he sleeps on it. And the subtle bodies get merged within Brahma (hiranyagarbha – sum total of subtle bodies). Again while recreating these three worlds Subtle bodies (containing Vasanas) are used as blueprint to recreate the worlds present inside Vishnu's belly. SO, Narayana is a creater of the worlds in this point of view.

    However, there is another supreme Pralaya called Mahapralaya, when nothing remains, nor even water or any panchabhuta, not even the 14 worlds, not even brahma, not even Vishnu, and not even Kalagni Rudra (the destroyer deity an aspect of Rudra and shouldn't be confused with Rudra the supreme, by seeing same name), not even Indra, or anyone else. That time only Mahadeva and Tripurasudnari exist and they are called as Brahman and Maya (or Eshwara and Maya) in vedanta. Then they create another Brahma, (Hiranyagarbha), enter into it and take all forms fo deities once again and so on…And SHiva again apepars as Vishnu. This is the reason Mahabharata calls Shiva as “Jaleshayah” meaning “O Lord SHiva it's you who appear sleeping on waters (as Narayana)”. So, all are Shiva's forms, Brahma, Vishnu (Narayana), Indra, et al. Nothing is different from Shiva and hence scriptures praise various forms of the sam SHiva with the creator, etc. adjectives, and hence all glories of Shiva applies on Vishnu as well, since Vishnu is nothing but Shiva himself in another form, similarly all glories of Vishnu are Shiva's glories. Both are same.

    Krishna is not different from Rudra, it's just these scriptures talk misleadingly. Scripures are written in a very naughty way to hide the same truth udner various names. That's what even RV says “ekam sat viprah ahudha vadanti”. And it's humans who are foolish to read only the literal menaing instead of inner meaning. If we study scriptures in between the lines, as you rightly guessed, Krishna is not different from Rudra.

    Reply
  19. Niladri Chowdhury

    This is all false!!! Sri Sri Radha Krishna is prakriti and purusha and also parashakti and parabrahman!!!

    Reply
  20. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Niladri,

    OK, if your devotion says so, I have no problem in saluting your Radha-Krishna. Jai Radhe Krishna ! (Happy?)

    But if your PCN (Pre-Conceived-Notion) or your fanaticism says so, then listen that I do NOT have the capability to correct your “Beliefs”. So, you may live in your world of utopia.

    Reply
  21. arun subbe

    Perfect. People that are asleep can be awakened but not those that pretend to be asleep.

    Reply
  22. Sanjeev Mishra

    sir, please explain me vishnu param pad

    Reply
  23. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula

    Dear Sanjeev,
    Vishnu parama padam has been explained in the following link.
    http://mahapashupatastra.blogspot.in/2012/10/sampurna-vishnu-tatwam.html

    Reply
  24. NripendraNarayan

    Why did shiva take the ganga in his head which originated from lord vishnu's feet???
    Who's supreme now? This point was said by sri chaitanya mahaprabhu to defeat these shaivas!

    Reply
    1. Shiva bore Ganga on His head because her current could have deluged the world. Oh vile Shivadrohi! Hold your tongue and stop blaspheming!

      Reply
  25. Lord Shiva

    When Sri Vishnu incarnated as Krishna, Yashoda used to pull his ears. Does that make Yashoda supreme?

    Reply
    1. sohini

      nicely said 🙂

      Reply
  26. Seeker of Truth

    I think you should read this to understand Narayana Sukta better: [URL removed by Modeator]

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      LOL. You have probably seen that now, I know about that from the day one. I’ve many other strong evidences to support my analysis which I am yet to add. I’ll have to do a good restructuring to this article which is not my priority at present. Once done, you may check back and see whose theory is correct!

      Reply
  27. Rama

    With no offense – do you think you have more brain/knowledge that all of our acharyas ?

    if your logic is correct then Vedas should have called NarayaNA suktam as NarayaNI suktam and narayaNA upanishad as narayaNI upanishad if they are trying to euolize the female form of (same) God instead of Female form of (same) God right?

    Vedas are not mystic everywhere, they are pretty much clear most of the time. Our prominent acharyas like Sankaracharya are also clear in guiding the people in understanding, unfortunately it is only people like you who want to be willingly blind towards the truth about Narayana form of God(as you like the Shiva form of the God most), writing these kind of stupid articles which will create more confusion and will also misguide others.

    FYI – I am a believer of oneness of Siva and Vishnu(truth is one but sages call it with different names), since your blog is all about anti-vishnu I am wondering whether you are really wasting your time just to waste the time of others…like you said there shouldn’t be two supreme Gods…

    if the Almighty is getting euolized as Narayana/Vishnu he is also getting euolized as Shiva in the same scriptures(be it be vedas or purnas), like sweetness is the same inner-content in all the various sweets(with different names) that we prepare it is the same God but with different names/consorts in all the scriptures…

    Jai Shri Rama

    (I dont think I have to tell you clearly that Rama = Om Namo NaRAyana + Om NaMA Shivaya)

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Wait till I revise my older articles. I have recently learned many other secrets about Narayana sukta and hence I feel the current article must be updated.

      Narayana is originally the name of Shiva which was inherited by Vishnu later. Narayana is also the name of Shakti (remember shakti is neither male not female it is eulogized as mother however). So when I update this article with those new secrets it would be evident why all hymns of Vedas originally and in reality eulogize Shiva and shakti and secondarily also eulogize Vishnu as Vishnu is NOT different from Shiva and shakti as Vishnu is shiva’s form.

      I understand at what levels oneness of Shiva keshava is valid also I know why I need to continue writing these articles glorifying shiva. You need not teach me what is right and what is wrong.

      Reply
    2. sohini

      if you speak about ACHARYAS then you MUST know that these acharyas were nothing more than mortal human beings, not GODS or incarnations. So is santoshji, a normal man. So if you can believe in the acharyas you should also not disbelieve santoshji. Do u agree with each views of every acharya? Even they are contradictory to each other? Then u must agree with santoshji too. What if santoshji does not bear the title of acharya before his name? Who were these acharyas we talk about now? Why were they called acharyas? It is b’coz they taught us something. So does santoshji. Its only upto u whether u agree with his knowledge or not. But u can not just say “With no offense – do you think you have more brain/knowledge that all of our acharyas ?”. And yes it definitely IS an offence.

      Reply
      1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

        Dear Sohini,

        I am touched by your kindness and affection that you have for me, but I would humbly request not to equate me with acharyas. I’m only showing this world what I am able to see, and what I am able to see is what Shiva is showing me. So, I am just a medium through which Shiva is spreading his teachings. and wherever anything is wrong in my write-ups, are my faults due to failure of properly not being able to grasp mahadeva’s teachings. if any glory exists, that belongs to him 🙂 I’m just a dummy 🙂

        Reply
  28. Light

    I had read somewhere that Nakara rule fails in: Supar +Nakha =Suparnakha… Here Na changes into aNa but still Suparnakha can be used as adjective for all… ie. Those who have long nails can be called Suparnakha…

    Reply
  29. Arwin

    Dear Santosh, I have been coming across this verse often used by vaisnavas that vaisnavam yathu sambhu. Means Lord Shiva is best devotee of Lord Vishnu/Krsna. Can you clear this claims??
    I have another thought that vainava maybe another name of lord vishnu. If that is correct means it should be Lord Vishnu is Lord Shiva right??? is that correct??? please reply to me santoshji.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      The verse ‘vaishnavanam atha shambhu’ is from Srimad Bhagawatam, which is a bogus Purana, not a work of Vyasa (read here). But the essence of that verse is true; i.e., the concept of Shiva being Vishnu’s devotee is (relatively) true which is out of shiva’s own boon to Vishnu. Vishnu is actually the greatest devotee and follower of shiva so much so that with truth, sincerity, austerity, penance, he always dwells in shiva. In the entrie universe it is Vishnu whose devotion to shiva is unparalleled. For that reason, Shiva became too happy with him and did his coronation as ‘isvara’ of the universe and gave him boons that everyone would obey him as the lord. Shiva assigned lordship like his own to Vishnu and for commanded all other gods to always worship Vishnu, and also to lead by example he himself saluted Vishnu with devotion. So, this is how out of his own grace and love for Vishnu’s devotion, Shiva gave him everything and preferred to even act as his devotee. However, at the absolute level this is just shiva’s leela, Shiva has no master, Shiva si the master of all.

      These “relative truths” are taken by vaihnavas literally and they spread them as absolute facts. But the fact si Vishnu is shiva devotee and Shiva out of compassion returns favours of Vishnu by showing himself as Vishnu’s devotee.

      But anyway, Vishnu is none other than Uma, hence both showing reverence to each other is nothing but one half of shiva showing reverence to the other half. In reality Vishnu is shiva’s wife appearing in male form. So, these differences are emphasized by vaishnavites, but one who knows vishnu as Uma herself, laughs at them 🙂

      Reply
      1. Arwin

        Yes I accept your explanation on the verse and explanation except for the bogus purana thing. And why is that. If so how can purana collection will be complete???. Or Mr. Santosh are u saying that there are only 17 purana in total???

        Reply
        1. Arwin

          May be the Srimad Bhagavatam went into complete re write during past centuries. May be vaisnava selfishness. In the internet there are two different type of Bhagavata purana. One is Iskcon’s srimad bhagavatam and the other is J.L.Shastri 5 Vols of Bhagavata Purana. This two is completely different from the other. In Iskcon’s srimad bhagavatam says more about goloka and radhe but J.L.Shastri 5 Vols of Bhagavata Purana never says anything at all about radhe and mentioned less about goloka. May be few verses. May be this is the reason for my view. Complete rewrite disengages future generation where people who will be reading it. So, that my view, Mr. Santosh

          Reply
          1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

            Even in ISKCON’s SB there is NO mention of Goloka, radha in core text (sanskrit). You might be reading the translation and Purport of Srila Prabhupada and his followers. You may validate it if you feel needed.

        2. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          The “bhagavata” among 18 Mahapuranas is “Devi bhagawata” not Srimad-bhagavatam. Eve if you note the ending of each chapter of Devi bhagawatam it reads “Thus ends the so and so chapter of Devibhagavata Mahapurana“. The SB and DB both are of 18k verses only. Somehow DB was pushed to Upa-Purana status by someone even though it explicitly says it is a Mahapurana.

          Secondly, the Madhwas say – Madhwacharya found that at his time there were tens of versions of Srimad Bhagavatam and after having read all of them only one version he authenticated and finalized as correct one. And that is same version what we have in vogue today. That version has been refuted in by article on Bhagavatam as bogus.

          Thirdly, there were no versions of Srimad Bhagavatam available at Ramanuja’s times or Shankara’s times. Leave about Shankara, why did Ramanuja not quote even a single verse from Srimad Bhagavatam in his commentaries despite he being a vaishnava? Food for thought??

          Hope this clarifies. !

          Reply
          1. Arwin

            Ok. Mr. Santosh. I have been reading Devi Purana. Devi Purana which is translated by Swami Vijñanananda which is only version of Devi Purana I can read in the internet. Some part of The Devi Purana says Lord Krsna is Supreme and He created Mula Maya. She became pregnant by Him. Thus, formed Maya and Narayana. I read many chapters of cantos in it, proclaims Lord Krsna’s Supremacy. I was wondering, Why is Lord Krsna is proclaimed such way by Devi Purana. Can you give any websites produce Devi Purana of correct translation???. Her abode is stated to be above Goloka, Vaikuntha, Kailasa. But in Canto 3 Chapter 2-4 stated that above Vaikuntha only, Mani Dvipa abode of Bhagavati. Then why this statement should be given???. This questions are not assiociated to the above question

          2. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

            Dear Arwin ji,

            Let me divide your query in three parts – 1) Lord krishna’s depiction of superiority in Devi Bhagavatam (DB). 2) Devi’s abode manidweepa’s location related (apparent) contradictions. 3) links to other translations of DB.

            First of all we need to understand one thing firmly is – Devi tatwam and Shiva tatwam sung in Puranas are 90% yogic secrets or internal phenomena rather than being external physical events. This si why their stories look mostly puzzling whereas Vishnu’s sports even though they have internal connection, they are mostly played on physical plane and we celebrate them as avataras. Hence hsi stories do not puzzle us much.

            1) We need to understand – “What is Krishna doing in a Purana explicitly dedicated to Devi?”, further, “Why is Krishna shown as primordial and supreme in a canto of that purana which is totally dedicated to devi’s glory?”. We know from other Puranas that krishna is Narayana’s form and not vice versa. But here Krishna is shown at the top. These are purely esoteric truths revealed in secret manner. Let’s first look at “radha” and understand who is she. Devi bhagavatam glories many goddesses but on a careful reading same DB has given clear hints who they are within us. DB says “rAdhaA’ is “prANa-shakti”. Hence “rAdhA” is in all of us. It is that current which directs our mind,devotion,knowledge upwards towards krishna (not devaki putra, but that purusha who is the goal of all, who attracts hence ‘krishna’). “rAdhA’ when reversed becomes “dhArA” (a stream; which has natural tendency to flow down). In non-bhaktas, non-jnAnIs, the spiritual quest remains downwards, away from the lord, entangled in mundane world. There she is the mOha / mAyA / avidyArUpI ‘dhArA’. For the seekers of immortality, she becomes the vidyA and grants necessary wisdom (for jnana marga followers), and necessary bhakti (for bhakti marga followers) and directs their quest upwards towards Krishna, hence she becomes ‘rAdhA’ there. in Yogic parlance, she is the “prANa-shakti” which remains sleeping and downwards (adhO-kunDalini) in all hence we remain ignorant of our true self. She is downward hence “dhAra” there. For the yogi who strives to gain moksha that prANa-shakti is directed upwards, hence she becomes ‘inverse of dhA-rA, hence becomes rA-dhA’, and moves towards her ‘krishna (all attractive)’ lord who is none but shiva in sahasrAra. Further in a different view point from shastras, shiva and uma being one and the same, prANa is seen as Shiva and the brahman in sahasrara is also seen as mula-prakriti. In that sense it is SHiva who is rAdhA and lalitA the krishna and this is the same logic using which Br.Purana praises Lalita as the one who exists as the cowherd boy Krishna playing with the gopikas. In another Devi related text (forgot the name but heard in a pravachanam) it is said lalita and shiva had interchanged their gender and lalita assumed the name krishna and shiva became radha. All these are true, by the way! Because the ultimate reality in sahasrara is “shiva-shakyaikya-rupini-lalitambika” – i.e., lalita who is shiva and shakti united together. The ultimate depiction is “ardhanareeshwara” tatwam.
            Hence there neither krishna is devaki-putra krishna nor rAdhA is a vaishnavite deity. Krishna and rAdhA are shiva-shakti sung under those names. All names – krishna, Narayana, Rama, Vishnu, Purushottama…..etc ORIGINALLY belong to MAHADEVA and all names such as Lakshmi, Sree, rAdhA, sitA, SaraswatI etc all ORIGINALLY are the names of Uma. This concept is complex and may need a lengthy post, but I hope it has answered your question to some extent.

            2) Reason why Manidweepa is said as above goloka, vaikuntha, kailasha in the last canto in DB and in Canto-3, it looks like being seated above vaikuntha is as follows – What is called as Manidweepa in Puranas, is the very same city whcih is termed “brahmapuri” in chandogya etc., Upanishads. Manidweepa is again an internal reality spoken in DB. Manidweeepa is nothing but Sahasrara chakra where the sOma-maNDala in sahasrara is the sudhA-sAgara and in the center of that is the ‘bindu-shthana’ which is brahmapuri and called manidweepa. This manidweepa has a “ChintAmaNi-gruha” within which devi resides. That is also called as ‘sarvaloka’ hence within manidweepa itself you can see all other lokas situated. This DB speaks very esoterically all the Yogic secrets in plain story format. Brahma-loka is dvAdhishthana chakra, Vishnu’s abode is in manipuraka chakra, above them comes the hrudaya-sthana (heart region). Heart region is the region of “dahara akasa”. Sruti says that whatever is there in the city of brahman, that is exactly (duplicate) present in the region of heart too. This is why the yogis in their heart region in dahara-akasa meditate upon the manidweepa. That is one form of meditation. It is she who is “dahara-akasa” as well. Hence she is hailed in Lalita saharsranama as “daharAkAsa-rUpiNI”. Further, heart is the locus of “chitta”, and chitta is the storehouse of all wishes. Hence the dahara-akasa is the city where he rmansion made of “chintAmaNi” exists. Akasha is also called as “ambara”, and “dahara” is the locus of “chitta”, hence it is “chit-ambaraM” i.e., “chidambaram”, hence her sahasranama calls her as “nateshi” (the dancer i.e., natarajarupini) in the heart.
            In short – manipuraka chakra is the vishnu’s abode and above that is anahata-chakra where the dahara region exists within which also the supreme manidweepa can be seen by yogis. Hence Canto 3 has taken the Yogi (the reader) to the dahara-region and shown Devi there. Hence here if we literally read it, we think manidweepa is above vaikuntha. In the 12th canto the yogi (reader) is taken to ‘Sahasrara region and shown the manidweepa there hence that is said to be higher than goloka. Hence here if we read literally, we think that as a contradiction.

            3) I don’t know any other translations of DB online, but in print you may get many other translations (even better ones).

            That was a pretty lengthy response, but thanks to you for giving me an opportunity to think about my mother’s tatwam, in a short while Devi navaratri is the upcoming festival.

            Hope this clarifies.

  30. Arwin

    Yes. Mr. Santosh. Of course it clarifies me. I have been asking a lot of questions lately. I want to ask more because you are a such learnt scholar. Believe it or not I have been debating with Iskcon Devotee for more than 1 year. I quoted out many advaita verses and saiva verses too. Even Vaisnava Puranic verses. He simply said that ” Krsna is not equal to noone. Lord Shiva (Sadasiva) is created by Maha-Sankarshana and cannot be supreme/Godhead. Let me list my further questions.

    1) Do you believe in the existence of Goloka???

    2) What is the position of Sivaloka, because in Vayu Purana as mentioned above, story mode says that Sivaloka is above Brahma loka and below Vaikuntha. But in Skanda Purana which I read from the Kamkoti Math here
    http://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/details/skandapurana37.html which states that Above vaikuntha or from bhuloka to Kailasa which situated above vaikuntha is 240 crore yojanas. I so confused with this. There many variations in the Puranas. So clarifies me.

    3) Is there separate realm for Lord Sadasiva who is beyond Maheshwara??? And why Lord Sadasiva with 25 heads are found in Vaikuntha who seems to be lifting Lord Vishnu.???

    4) What about Brahma vaivarta Purana???. From your eralier post BVP is highly corrupted. So can you share any source of correct translation??? If we put Krsna as Sakthi and Radhe as Shiva the BVP is entirely different. But still both Devi Purana and BVP mentions Goloka. So what does this means??? What does Goloka meant for???

    I got more but for now clarify me with these questions above. Our Q & A will continue. Answer whenever can as far as for me, the answer is important. I you have office works also. So answer at anytime you feel free. Sorry for such Q & A sessions but I have more to go. For these is it.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      All these are intrinsic phenomenan described. Svadhishthana is brahma’s loka, manipua is Vishnu’s vaikuntha, anahata is rudra loka, ajna is kashi (varanasi), sahasrara is the supreme shivaloka also called as mahakailasa.

      Reply
  31. Arwin

    Read Rudrasamhita section 2: Narration of separation of Sati Chapter 25 which explains the origin of Krsna and Goloka in Shiva Purana itself. In it, Goloka said to be created from Sivaloka ABOVE Kailasa because He says that He went to His Highest Region. So is extra notes to the questions above. Forgot to mentions. Sorry.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Shivaloka is Sahasrara and Goloka is the cowshed in that, i.e., the soma-mandala within sahasrara is the goloka.

      Reply
    2. Karthick

      There is also one more place in Shiva Maha Purana (Uma Samhita Chapter 19) which says:

      Sloka 40-41: There is no loka above Shiva Loka. Goloka is close to it which is the abode of humble cow. Sri Krishna at the command of Shiva and Shakthi was deputed there to take care of the cows.

      http://www.indianscriptures.com/scriptures/puranas-18-puranas-mahapurana/siva-mahapurana/vol-iii/chapter-19/topic-1

      Reply
      1. Yeah, Siva Purana rudra samhita (if i recollectc orrectly) says Shiva himself build a nice throne in his goshala in shiva loka and that entire goshala is called goloka where he coronated vishnu. The goloka is a part of shiva loka.

        Reply
  32. Arwin

    Mr. Santosh, I have just reading the narayana astra blog which is opposite to you. Now, they say the upanishad that you produced is fake and bogus. I think the only thing you have mentioned as bogus is Bhagavata Purana. In fact that is true. But what about upanishad like Devi upanishad and etc. Bogus chapter was added in Maha upanishad. Where do you get this upanishad source in the internet and what is the historical background and who else have commented on this upanishads???

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      What the narayanastra authors say is the upanishads that I quote are not authentic. It is they who consider them as bogus not me 🙂

      All the 108 upanishads have been commented by Upanishad-brahmendra-yogin, a scholar saint form advaitin lineage.

      Reply
    2. Karthick

      Even Srila Prabhupada has given the authorized list of 108 Upanishads in one of his purports.

      Reply
  33. Arwin

    Mr.Santosh I have found a book in exoticindia which (from the sample pages), Lord Siva is declared as Complete Brahman and there was no mention of Goloka, in the sample pages. Here is the web address.

    http://m.exoticindia.com/m/book/details/NAL561/?utm_source=Exotic+India&utm_campaign=935acc5203-New_Books_at_Exotic_India3_23_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d3cf7070b4-935acc5203-223522265

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Dear Arwin ji,

      I think you read the contents in haste. May i recommend a re-read? I could see Goloka’s pastimes there very well.

      Reply
  34. Arwin

    Dear Santosh, I have attached the verses from Shiva Maha Purana where it states that Goloka is created by Lord Siva and throned Lord Vishnu who assumes Gopesh in Goloka.

    Rudrasamhita Section 2: Seperation of Sati Chapter 6

    Sri Rama said, “O Goddess, in earlier times Lord Siva, the supreme creator, once summoned Visvakarma, the best architect in the universe, and got a gigantic and charming building built near His cowshed. A beautiful lion throne was placed therein. (1)

    Lord Siva also got a beautiful and vast umbrella made which was hung over the lion throne, for the sake of Ganesa. (2)

    He (Lord Siva) invited all the Gods including Indra and others, besides Siddhas, Gandharvas, Nagas and the acaryas, upadesas and Agamas, Lord Brahma with His sons, the sages and the celestial Goddesses and nymphs arrived there with various presents. (3)

    Sixteen virgins each of the devas, sages, siddhas and serpents were also brought for the auspicious ceremony. (4)

    O Sages, different musical instruments like lute tabours, etc. were played, upon , and songs were sung. There was thus a great pomp and show at the festivities. (5)

    The articles and herbs which were considered necessary for the festivities were brought. Five pots were filled with the scared water from all the flowing holy rivers. (6)

    The attendants made all other necessary arrangements. The Vedic hymns were recited loudly. (7)

    With the mind filled with delight, Lord Siva, called Lord Visnu from Vaikuntha. O Goddess, Lord Siva was immensely pleased at the devotion of Lord Visnu. (8)

    During the auspicious tie, Lord Visnu was made to occupy the unique throne and decorated Him delightfully, in various ways. (9)

    A beautiful crown was placed over the head of Lord Visnu and the abhiseka of Lord Visnu was performed in the Brahmanda-mandapa (Grand Hall) by Lord Siva Himself. (10)

    Lord Siva then conferred all His fortunes on Lord Visnu, which could not be given to anyone else, by Lord Siva, who is well disposed towards His devotees, offering prayer to Lord Visnu. (11)

    Lord Siva who is favorably disposed towards His devotees, displaying independent but subservient, to the boon granted by Him, spoke these words to Lord Brahma, the creator of the universe. (12)

    Lord Siva said. “O Lord of the world, from today onwards, Lord Visnu, what to speak of the entire universe, would be adorable by Me even. All should listen to this. (13)

    “O Dear one, together with all the Gods, you also offer your salutation to Lord Hari. At my command the Vedas shall also excel Him in the same way as they do for Me.” (14)

    Sri Rama said, “Thus speaking, Lord Siva Himself offered His salutation to Lord Visnu. Thereafter Lord Siva, getting pleased with the devotion of Lord Visnu, bestowed further boons on Him. (15)

    Thereafter, Lord Brahma and other Gods, the sages, siddhas and others offered their salutation to Lord Visnu. (16)

    Thereafter, Lord Siva praised Lord Visnu in the presence of all and getting pleased, He bestowed several other boons on Him. (17)

    Lord Siva said, “You at my command, henceforth, would become the creator, preserver and the destroyer of the world, you will chastise the evil people and become the bestower of dharma, artha and kama. (18)
    You will be the Lord of the universe, adorable in the world, immensely valorous besides being invincible in the battle, even by Me. (19)

    You accept the three Saktis conferred by Me on you. You will engage Yourself in several types of sports and Your glory would spread in all the three lokas. (20)

    O Visnu, whosever would be jealous of You, I shall punish him making, all the efforts. O Visnu, I shall bestow the excellent moksa (Liberation) to your devotees. (21)

    You accept this Maya from Me which can hardly be withstood by the Gods and others and by which the entire world can be captivated or made unconscious. (22)

    O Hari, You are actually my form. This Brahma is my right arm. You are the creator of Brahma and would be His sustainer as well. (23)

    Of course, I happen to be Rudra, who would be adored by you and Brahma. There is no doubt about it. (24)
    Living here, you protect the entire world by incarnating on the earth variously and in diverse ways of protection. (25)

    Your place in my Loka would be of great prosperity and glory, which would be known as Goloka.” (26)

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      I have these verses already. Thanks anyway.

      Reply
  35. Arwin

    Mr. Santosh this is very important.

    Mahabharata says

    mahAdevaH sarvamedhe mahAtmA hutvA AtmAnaM devadevo babhUva

    This indicates that Rudra Performed Sarvamedha yagna and prayed to Lord Vishnu to become Mahadeva.

    Is this true? And please explain it to me.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Dear Arwin ji,

      The incident is right but the translation or interpretation of Vaishnavas is WRONG. It is not about Shiva “attaining” some status by performing a sacrifice. Here is KMG’s translation of the verse form Mahabharata (12:XX):

      “Clad in deer-skins, the high-souled Mahadeva, having poured his own self as a libation in the sacrifice called Sarva, became the first of gods, and surpassing all creatures in the universe and prevailing over them by means of that achievement, shines in resplendence.” (MBH 12:XX)

      In fact sarvamedha is an allegorical depiction which actually means the Brahman (Mahadeva) pervaded every created entity and at the same time everything remains in him. This is evident from the satapatha brahmana (13:7:1:1) narrative of sarvamedha:

      “1. Brahman Svayambhu (the self-existent, n.) was performing austerities 3. He said this much,–
      ‘Verily, there is no perpetuity in austerities; well, then, I will offer up mine own self in the creatures, and the creatures in mine own self.’ And, accordingly, by offering up his own self in the creatures, and the creatures in his own self, he compassed the supremacy, the sovereignty, and the lordship over all creatures; and in like manner does the Sacrificer, by thus offering all sacrificial essences 1 in the Sarvamedha, compass all beings, and supremacy, sovereignty, and lordship.”

      So, we can understand that the Brahman (Shiva) after projecting the universe from hsi own self, he pervaded them by his own self, which is termed here as sarvamedha.

      Reply
      1. Arwin

        Thank you Mr.Santosh for your explanition. If i got anymore questions i’ll ask u. Once again thanks.

        Reply
  36. VikramInside

    Adi Shankara mentioned Sriman Narayana as supreme. You wish to satisfy yourself with some own creative knowledge. Go ahead. Let that Shiva give you knowledge.

    Govindam Baja Mooda Mathey

    Firstly don’t confuse Advaita with Shiva just because Shankara said it.

    Know the principle and open up. Purusha Sukhtham talks about Naama Guna. Not nir- visesha para Brahmam

    A nir visesha Brahmam is as good as nothing. That Brahmam will not indulge in any activities including creation.

    Secondly when you say Lower Brahmam is the one that creates you are defeating your own Advaita. Duality dosha.

    There is only one brahmam “ekamEva adwitheeyam”.

    Ganga story, oh yea for every story of Vishnu there is an opposite story from Shiva. No wonder if our quench of thirst is not satisfied by so many varieties Ganga MAhAthmyam.

    Linga upasana – That’s the best mis understanding of shaivaites.

    If Shiva has no shape how come Linga got a shape? If Linga is nirvisesha why do you even worship him? Refer to a realised soul as per Advaita in first place including Aadi Shankara Bhagavath paada.

    As far as purAnAs are concerned, we wish to be sathvik. Those who wish to fight can take excerpts from tamasic purana.

    Yes Shiva is ever mecriful who dened it? Does a person keep on go killing? It is the majority of gunA that matters.

    Many Shaivaites try to dis prove Narayana but fail to establish their own god as supreme.

    Shiva is obviously good to his devotees.

    Can anyone say did Vishnu kill Shiva in any sathvik purana? He won’t because he has better jobs to do. That’s what Sathvik.is all about.

    All the best

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Adi Shankara mentioned Sriman Narayana as supreme. You wish to satisfy yourself with some own creative knowledge. Go ahead. Let that Shiva give you knowledge.

      And you thought the ‘narayana’ mentioned by Adi Shankara was your chaturbhuja Vishnu! Go ahead! Let Vishnu give you proper knowledge of that being who the original ‘narayana’ is!

      Govindam Baja Mooda Mathey

      Very well. You too do the same but additionally giving due respect to Shiva.

      Secondly when you say Lower Brahmam is the one that creates you are defeating your own Advaita. Duality dosha.

      I never said ‘lower brahman’ read the post carefully. I wrote ‘lower order prakriti’, and by that I meant ‘pradhana’, which gets destroyed on attaining knowledge. When scriptures say ‘mula-prakriti’ she is identical to brahman, and indestructible.

      Ganga story, oh yea for every story of Vishnu there is an opposite story from Shiva. No wonder if our quench of thirst is not satisfied by so many varieties Ganga MAhAthmyam.

      Those who cannot correlate the variety of Gnaga stories speak like you. I have no such confusions.

      Linga upasana – That’s the best mis understanding of shaivaites. If Shiva has no shape how come Linga got a shape? If Linga is nirvisesha why do you even worship him? Refer to a realised soul as per Advaita in first place including Aadi Shankara Bhagavath paada.

      Who told you linga is for worshiping someone with shape? Linga is ellipsoid and that geometrical shape best describes Shiva. It is arupa-rupi.

      As far as purAnAs are concerned, we wish to be sathvik. Those who wish to fight can take excerpts from tamasic purana.

      As if Satwika puranas do not have fights! Don’t you have banasura war, daksha yajna war in satwika puranas?

      Many Shaivaites try to dis prove Narayana but fail to establish their own god as supreme.

      I may not be among those ‘many shaivites’. But without using unfair means you cannotd eny Mahadeva’s supremacy. But it ahs been consistently seen that shiva-haters use unfair logics to forcefully conclude everything in their favour.

      Shiva is obviously good to his devotees.

      Who denies?

      Can anyone say did Vishnu kill Shiva in any sathvik purana? He won’t because he has better jobs to do. That’s what Sathvik.is all about.

      because obviously no one can kill Shiva! Well, to the dimwits called ‘shiva-haters’ sharabha incident always look as a tale fo supremacy, but that is a need of the hour and needs to be left at that.

      All the best

      Thank you!

      Reply
  37. Arwin

    Mr.Santosh I want to know that, Is Mani Dvipa and Maha Kailasa are different or is the same? If yes means which one is supreme? And second from where did you obtain the source of upanishad, samhita, brahmana, and aranyaka you use on the article? I mean the website. I want to read the Samhita, Aranyaka, Brahmana and upanishads.

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

      Literally, Manidweepa is same as Maha-Kailasha and both refer to Sahasrara in our body. lalita sahasranama calls her as “mahAkailAshanilayA”. Since they both are same, there is no point of supremacy between the two. While talking about the supreme shiva (bhuvaneshvara), scriptures glorify Mahakailasha, and while talking about his consort supreme bhuvaneshvari, manidweepa is discussed prominently. Common friend, how can there be two different houses for a husband and wife? 😀 They are supposed to live under one roof only 😀

      For all Hinduism scriptures, you may look at sacred-texts.com – most of the texts are available there. Some I have in hard copy format.

      Reply
      1. Karthick

        Santosh Ji, Can you give references for the scriptures that glorify Maha Kailasa? Interested to read them. Also the references for the below:

        Svadhishthana is brahma’s loka, manipua is Vishnu’s vaikuntha, anahata is rudra loka, ajna is kashi (varanasi), sahasrara is the supreme shivaloka also called as mahakailasa.

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

          These are learnt from the teachings in Srividya tradition which is mostly about inner science of Kundalini. Mahakailasha etc., terms are specific to Kundalini yoga.

          Reply
  38. Arwin

    Santoshji, At Start I did have such confusion. But when I read the Siva Sutras, which mentioned Anandi Shiva who is Brahman. Who is termed as GOD here in this sutra. He manifested Sadasiva as per Siva Sutra. Then Anasira Siva is mentioned. As per the sutra, Anasira Siva is a state and not a tatvam. He is sandwiched between Sakthi Tatvam above and Sadasiva Tatvam below and Anasira Siva state is in between it. So I remembered Devi Bhagavata Purana and refered it. There is a throne which has 4 legs and 1 plank. Where plank is Sadasiva and 4 legs are dharma, rudra, maheshwara, and visnu. Above the plank seated Bhuvaneswara and above on Him on the left thigh Bhuvaneswari seated. Situated in between them is Bhuvaneswara. So, I thought that Anasira Siva is Bhuvaneswara. Not only that A verse from Shiva purana which mentions sakshat siva whose age is twice as much as sadasiva’s. So, is it possible that two more shiva as present above sadasiva? I know that will contridict the upanishads etc. But is there such?

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

      Arwin ji – Darsanas (philosophies) differ in terms of their definition of the absolute truth or supreme being. Siva sutras are kashmiri shaivism specific texts, there such multiple divisions of same ‘shiva’ concept are given. Similar is the case with saiva siddhanta too. if we look into Sri Vidya, the shakta darshana has 36 tatwas. if we take Advaita vedanta, they believe in 24 tatwas. Similarly, if we take advaita, there are only 4 stages of conciousness – jagrut, swapna, sushupti and turiya. There is nothing beyond turiya as per advaita darshana. But shakta darshana proposes “turIyAtItA” (beyond turIya) also as one stage. So, based on such definitions, the visualization of Shiva as – paramashiva, parashiva, parApara-shiva, sadashiva, maheshvara, rudra etc…many such definitions are given. Among darshanas, some definitions agree, some contradict. So, its better to stick to one path of our choice always. Otherwise everything would confuse. Darshanas pose different definitions of shiva, but let’s not complicate our lives by following those definitions. Puranas, vedas and itihasas are enough for us to learn about the Shiva with whom we can relate ourselves well. 🙂

      To my knowledge, Shiva purana doesn’t mention about any other shivas above sadashiva. It mentions sadashiva’s in two aspects i.e., nirguna aspect in the form of agni-linga and sadashiva as the saguna aspect.

      Reply
      1. Karthick

        I have come across a place in Shiva Maha Purana where it says Sakshat Shiva is greater than Sada Shiva and 4 nimeshas of Sakshat Shiva is the whole life of Sada Shiva.

        Reply
  39. Arwin

    Santoshji, I want to know the ancient teachings of sauram, ganapatya and kaumaram. Because i have doing extensive research on the sects. I have done on sakta and vaishnavam. Also on saivaism. I want to know (sauram, ganapatya and kaumaram) their creation. From who the presiding deity emerged and whom they created. The Creation Chart of them. If u give either websites or explain it to me via reply. I need to know this to complete my research. Santoshji, I know you have knowledge to explain it to me. I would be great full to know it Mr.Santoshji.

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

      Dear Arwin ji,

      Souram’s roots are in Valmiki Ramayana’s Aditya hrudayam, Mahabharata’s Vana Parva where a hymn to Surya is detailed (sung by Yudhishthira), and their roots are in Vedas where Savitar is related with Supreme being’s status.
      Similarly, Skandam’s roots are in Valmiki Ramayana (kumara sambhavam tale), Mahabharata (2 times narrated and glorified), Puranas such as Shiva, Skanda etc.
      Ganapatyam’s roots are in Vedas (brahmanaspati’s hymn, gaNANAM tvAM gaNapatigaM…), ganapati-atharvashirsha-upanishad, ganesha-purana, mudgala-purana.

      These gods may be created but their ‘nature’ is always supreme as they represent the supreme tatwam only. So, even if skanda/ganesha took birth later, they are not jivas or devas, they are ishvara in nature.

      Reply
  40. Arwin

    Santoshji Sauram sect is done but I need a agamic text of kaumaram and ganapatya sects. As far as I have understood the complete teachings of Sauram. But the suggested texts never revealed anything. So, do you have any ganapatya and kaumaram agamic texts website? If I get it I would finish my research.

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

      I’m extremely sorry for not being able to help you further, as I don’t know or don’t have access to those agamic texts that you are looking for.
      You may search in some digital library websites and even in archive.org and see if you get any help from there.

      All the best for your research.

      Reply
  41. Arwin

    Mr.santosh, I want to ask you about dimensions mention is our religion. How many dimensions are there? What are they? How it differs from science teory? What is the explaination for it? What is the source of the dimensions explaination or staement of it? Present me the appopriate website so I can visit. Thanks.

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

      I don’t have info related to this question.

      Reply
  42. KIRAN KUMAR

    As per the Rg.Veda(which is the oldest religious text in the human history, from which the later traditions owe their origin)Vishnu is the one who pervades everything with his 3 strides and he is supreme, none is greater or equal to him.
    Purusha suktam confirms it as Narayana.
    Mention is also made of Rudras or storm gods, but there is no mention of Siva. These rudras are later identified with Siva.
    The Rg vedic Sanskrit(which has its origins in proto Indo-European languages) is different from classical Sankrit, being very ancient it is subject to varied misinterpretations according to one’s whims and fancy’s like the theory propagated in this blog.
    It’s basic psychology of human beings to claim what they believe or understand to be supreme and try to disprove or humiliate others. But the reality is otherwise.
    Concept of God is very difficult to comprehend for a mundane mind, and those who comprehend it will never show up to make tall claims and useless arguments, because it is freedom from everything a state of constant union with absolute.
    There is no perfect authority in Hinduism to claim or to prove what is right or what is wrong, our ancients excelled in the art of introspection which ultimately lead them the bliss, and each had their own vision of truth with the sounds they get through intuition.
    Later people assimilated the various truths thus visioned into the mainstream sects like vaishnavas, shaivas etc.
    The truths visioned are woved into stories to make them understandable to the common mind and attain the absolute.
    The literature of puranas are written to suite the minds of different classes of people by the name of sattvic, rajasic or tamas.
    They all speak of same truth interwoven with different characters viz. ” ekam satyam viprah bahuda vadanti”, ” satyam Eva jayate” and one should execute ones prescribed dharma.
    They are written in beautiful, imagination and adoration for the God they believe in.
    But today the people of sanatana dharma had lost their imagination, intelligence and tend to follow blindly what others preach without introspection.
    And few left over scholars are involved in ideological and sectarian battles and left the mainstream hindu society to degrade and leading to conversions.
    Perhaps there is need for another adisankara to unify our dharma.
    The beauty of sanatana dharma lies in its diversity to accomodate various dharmas and live in harmony with each other.
    People follow the path of ancient sages and philosopher’s whose minds are unwavering and stithapragyna, these days it is impossible to find them.
    If you love to adore Siva and Shakti please do it and achieve perfection by your devotion to the beloved but not by humiliating, degrading or with the intention of annihilation of other traditions by useless commentaries.

    “Love and hatred cannot exist together”

    How can you force upon your ideology upon countless traditions and religions in this world who had achieved enlightenment with their notion of name and form of God.
    Truth is one paths are many.
    Wish you all the success in your path.

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

      1. Your opening statement itself shows how shallow your knowledge is about vedas. Rig Veda is NOT the oldest Veda my dear, veda is always one, it was classified into four bundles by Vyasa. How can one bundle be oldest and others recent?
      2. regarding Vishnu’s 3 strides, read my article titled ‘sampurna vishnu tatwam…’
      3. Purusha sukta never confirmed the purusha as Narayana. However Vedas clearly state ‘purusho vai rudrah’ meaning ‘Purusha is Rudra’. Clear? Ah. Don’t teach me ‘hreescha lakshmischa patnyo’. There hree and sree are Shiva’s shakti only.
      4. You say Siva is not mentioned in vedas rudra is mentioned. I again tell you that your knowledge is shallow. Ever listened to Sri rudram which says ‘shankaraya cha namah shivaya cha”?? I don’t think you heard that. Go learn vedas under a guru.
      5. Your indo-european blah blah blah tells me that you subscribe to indological views which in my opinion are all baseless. Sanskrit is deva bhasha. the very origin of the universe is based on aksharas. How can you categorize it in indo or european ?
      6. Ah….then comes your super long sermon!…….Well, because a truth which I could see, when i tried to show to others in simple terms, you and others aren’t able to realize the secret truth. Hence, I have decided to update it with finest details to come to your levels and make you see what I see. This article would be refined in another few months, and after reading that version let me see who dares to open their mouth to preach me!

      The ‘ekam sat viprah…’ verse is most commonly misunderstood verse. I know what it says very well. I’m sure you don’t understand what it says!

      Last line of your message is a good wish that you have given me. Thanks for that.

      Reply
  43. Karthick

    One correction Santosh Ji.

    “sahastramūrdhānamanantaśaktiṃ |
    sahastrabāhuṃ puruṣaṃ purāṇam |
    śayānamantaḥ salile tathaiva |
    nārāyaṇākhyaṃ praṇato ‘smi rūpam ||” (kUrma PuraNa 1:11:245)
    “I salute thy form called Narayana, O Lalita, which has a thousand heads, which is of infinite energy, having a thousand arms, the ancient Person, reclining on the waters”.

    I think the above verse is stated in Kurma (1.12.234). 12th Chapter is “Glory of Goddess Parvati” whereas the 11th Chapter is “Incarnation of the Goddess”.

    Reply
    1. Ok thanks for the reference.

      Reply
  44. Karthick

    Regarding the below,

    Narayana Suktam verse(s) 13

    “R^itam satyaM paraM brahma purushha.n kR^ishhNapi~Ngalam.h |
    uurdhvareta.n viruupaaksha.n vishvaruupaaya vai namo namaH |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.23.1)

    This verse also comes in Maha Narayana Upanishad after “Om namo hiranyabahave” stotra. Thus it indicates it is verily Shiva and moreover all the names like vishwaroopa, viroopaksha and krishnapingala come in Shiva Sahasranama and also Urdhvaretas comes in Mahabharata.

    You can also refer to the below pdf.

    http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/articles/Shiva.pdf

    Reply
    1. Yes, Taittiriya Aranyaka 10 book contains the Mahanarayanopanishat, and these all mantras constitute the Mahanarayanopanishat. You are right in other points. I agree.

      I had seen that good work in advaitin list couple of months back. It was a good read. By the way that author’s name is also ‘karthik’ if i recollect correctly. Are you the same author by the way? if yes, that would be a pleasant surprise. 🙂

      Reply
      1. Karthick

        No No. It’s not me 🙂

        Reply
      2. Karthick

        I want to share one more interesting verse in the Upanishads where ritagum satyam verse refers to Shiva. You might be aware of it but still I am sharing:

        In Jabala Darashana Upanishad, it is said that:

        R^ita.n satyaM paraM brahma sarvasa.nsArabheShajam.h
        Urdhvareta.n vishvarUpa.n virUpAkShaM maheshvaram.h

        I will now tell you about Dhyana (meditation) which destroys sorrow. Dhyana should be done of that Maheswara, who is the medicine for problems arising out of birth, who is the discipline and fundamental basis of the world who is of the form of Para Brahma, who has the masculine power upwards, who is of the form of the world, who is Virupaksha, and who is the head of all yogis as “I am He”. Then continue to do Dhyana of him who is beyond the reach of meditation, who is the personification of Sachidananda Brahman and who is soul in person as “I am He” for attaining salvation. In the mind of that great Purusha who practices like this, the science of Vedanta would automatically appear. There is no doubt about it.

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

          Yes, it is very interesting verse, I read it long back (some years back). Thanks for refreshing my memory. It is really awesome when we come across our fav verses after a huge gap of time at the verge of forgetting them, when lord refreshes them in memory via the agents like you. 🙂 _/|\_

          Reply
          1. Karthick

            We are all instruments in the hands of MAHADEVA 🙂 .

            Also the same is present in a different version in Narasimha Tapani Upanishad 🙂 🙂 :

            R^ita.n satyaM paraM brahma puruSha.n kR^iShNapi~Ngalam |
            Urdhvareta.n virUpAkSha.n sha~Nkara.n nIlalohitam ||
            umApatiH pashupatiH pinAkI hyamitadyutiH |
            IshAnaH sarvavidyAnAmIshvaraH sarvabhUtAnAM
            brahmAdhipatirbrahmaNo.adhipatiryo vai yajurvedavAchyasta.n

            You told that you will be writing on Narasimha Tapani Upanishad. Waiting for it Santosh Ji 🙂 🙂 .

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

            Yeah. Lot many things are pending to be written. May Mahakala manage my time – is what I can pray. 🙂

  45. Karthick

    Santosh Ji, Was Appaya Dikshitar really defeated by Vijayendra Tirtha? I have heard about the mahimas of Appaya Dikshitar where he entered the Tirupathi Temple and suddenly the Tirupathi Balaji idol turned into a Shiva Linga and many other things too.

    Reply
    1. I personally don’t think Appayya Dikshita would have got defeated. But I haven’t read his biography and his works, so don’t have much knowledge to analyze on that. However, I am convinced that Vaishnavites can distort facts, histories, and even texts. so, it could be just a good marketing of appayya’s defeat that probably made it resound everywhere. But the truth could be otherwise.

      Reply
  46. Karthick

    I know you said that you will update this article. But this doubt that I have is a general one. Not related to this article. I need your help for clarification Ji.

    In Devi Upanishad, I encountered this verse:

    nArAyaNena sa.nyukto vAyushchAdharasa.nyutaH . vichche
    navArNako.arNaH syAnmahadAnandadAyakaH

    The air, with Narayana united, And with the lip; vicce, the nine-lettered; The letter, shall delight the lofty ones.

    What’s the meaning of this verse and what does Narayana mean in this verse?

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

      It is related to Srividya rahasyas. Here this article gives explanation about the navavarna mantra and the bijaksharas that are referred by the names ‘narayana’, etc.
      https://www.kamakotimandali.com/srividya/devyupanishat.html

      Reply
  47. Karthick

    Lord Shiva is the Essence of Vedas
    Prayer from Shruti Sukti Mala of Haradattacharya:

    (yasmai namo bhavati yasya guNAH samagrAH
    nArAyaNopaniShadA yat upAsanA uktA |
    yo naH prachodayati buddhim adhi kratau yaH
    taM tvAm ananyagatir Ishvara saMshrayAmi ||)

    Meaning of the Prayer Song:

    One, for Whom namaskarams are told,
    in Whom qualities are in their completeness,
    Whose worship is told in the Narayanopanishad,
    Who kindles our intellect,
    Who is the Supreme for the worship,
    that is You, oh Ishvara!
    Without any other sanctuary,
    I take refuge in You!

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

      excellent. Thanks for sharing. I didn’t know this hymn.

      Reply
      1. Karthick

        Haradatta Sivacharayar was originally a Vaishnava by the named Sudarshana. He converted himself into Shaivaite. He has written a lot of books and one of them is Sruthi Sukti Mala (Essence of the Vedas). He underwent great ordeals to prove his devotion towards Shiva and Shiva was the Ultimate Reality to his fellow Vaishnavites especially his father.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: