Guru Shanmukha Stuti – गुरु षण्मुख स्तुति

My First poem in Samskrita language. This is just an advertisement post. The actual poem is hosted on my poetry blog. One could access that from below given link:

गुरु षण्मुख स्तुति || Guru Shanmukha Stuti

http://stotramaalika.blogspot.in/2015/12/guru-shanmukha-stuti.html

 

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

119 Comments

  1. sohini

    read this beautiful piece of poetry by you santoshji, really really gr8 work, thanks for the translations as i’m not versed in sanskrit, If you ever get the time then would you care to give some analysis on the birth stories of God Karitikeya, b’coz we come across too many different legends telling the birth of this god like he is the son of 1.shiv & parvati, 2.only shiv, 3. agnidev & swaha devi in her 6 disguises, 4. shivji as biological father & agnidev as foster father, 5. devi ganga, devi prithvi, krittikas as foster mother etc. Is there any compact legend that states all these to be true of their own?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Thanks for the kind words. All glories to the almighty, otherwise who am i to be able to write even a couplet in sanskrit?

      Well, Skanda janana tatwam has so much of deep mysteries that the rishis could see the same fact in various angles. And all those angles of perception have been mentioned in the form of various types of stories.

      Fro the point of inner meaning (tatwika rahasya) if we see – the Swaha and Agni who were the original creators of Skanda are not the deities (agni deva and his wife). Shiva’s original form is Agni (fire of conciousness), and in that aspect of his his counterpart Uma’s name is termed as Swaha. So, in that story the rahasya is – “Skanda is the very spark of that original fire of consciousness and is identical with that supreme chit”.

      Same book also says, Shiva’s tejas was stopped by him from not entering into Uma’s womb 9on god’s request). Shiva’s a portion however gets released and falls on earth, Agni takes it up and then throws it in Ganga. ganga couldn’t bear that in her womb and casts it away on mountain, and there in the forest of reeds he developes into a full baby.

      This i a yoga rahasya – “original Agni (Shiva)’s spark of consciousness) from sahasrara first came down till Muladhara (Earth), from there it was taken up by Agni (swadhishthana) [Actually swadhisthana is also termed as agni-sthana in soundarya lahari]. Then it was cast into ganga i.e., waters which is manipuraka chakra, then it was casted aside and that slipping of baby from ganga’s womb and casting aside is possible due to vayu (prana), so the next chakra vayu chakra and akasha is always there. and finally when he falls into the forest of reeds (shara vanam) that is sahasrara there he develops into full baby. it is a travel of kundalini consciousness from top to bottom and bottom to top.

      SO, the same conciousness of Kundalini which is originally sourced from sahasrara (Shiva) hence is the spark of shiva. But since earth, fire, water, vayu, akasha play a role in bringing it – i.e., the ascension of kundalini and finally the forest of reeds is the thousand petalled lotus.

      Reply
  2. sohini

    santosh ji can you tell me whether the following lines exist in any authentic scripture ?
    नाकोऽपि येन पिहितो मुनिकण्वमूर्ध वल्मीकवेणुजधनुस्त्रितयाग्रजन्मा।
    यः सप्तशीर्षफणिरूप उदारकर्मा चापस्तमावहसि नाथ! ततः पिनाकी॥
    The holy sound of Omkar is accepted as a bow in spiritual practices, by which Lord Pinaki is captured eternally.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      This verse was quoted by Sri bhaskararaya, while doing a commentary on ‘Shiva ashtottara shatanamavali” (Shiva’s 108 names). That commentary goes by the name as ‘shivanAmakalpalatAlavAla’. So, since, he has quoted, it must be from authentic sources only

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thank you santosh ji for the info, this quote has made me think that may be the verse from valmiki ramayan where it is said that vishnu broke shiv’s bow with a HUMM sound, that sound may actually be OMKAR in reality, and that’s why mahadev became immobile just to respect the primordial vibe of OMKAR.

        Reply
  3. sohini

    i have another qstn (yeah again :)), a few days ago i was discussing about URDHVA PUNDRA (the “U” shaped mark on vishnu’s forehead) and i threw a qstn towards my friends that as the vaishnavas say that the urdhva oundra is the mark of vishnu’s foot then why does vishnu himself draws his own foot mark on his (vishnu’s) own forehead ? in answer to this one friend of mine said that it is actually lord shiv’s foot mark on vishnu’s forehead. But she did not give any reference to this, so i wanted to know if its true?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      I am not aware of any such reference of that U mark being some foot mark.

      Reply
  4. sohini

    santoshji can u give some discussion on ” taratam knowledge of shivlinga ” & i wanted to know what is the meaning of putting a bit of clay (perhaps called “braj”) on the top of a shivlinga?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      I am not aware of such practices of putting clay etc., may be some temple priests may help you.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        ok thank u

        Reply
  5. sohini

    santoshji i have read somewhere that one of ganesha’s name is skandapurvaja i.e born before skanda, also in bengal most of the times ganesha is regaeded to be older than kartik, so who among the two brothers is elder actualy. And we all know that parvati and uma are same but somewhere i read that uma was a previous birth of parvati. so which is correct?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Yes, Ganesha was elder to Kartikeya. In shiva Purana the narrator touches about the story fo b irth of ganesha, and then parks ita side to narrate after the story of skanda’s birth. This is why the sequence of stories is interchanged, but people who don’t read the chapters carefully think skanda was elder tha ganesha as per shiva purana, which is not so. Only narration is interchanged by explicit mention of that fact.

      Uma is originally the name of adi Shakti, and Parvati also as she is the same. Paravti’s mother mena devi in an attempt to stop her from going for penance utters the words “u…ma” meaning “U” (an exclamation addressings omeone calling her attention), amd “ma” (don’t). saying “Hey..don’t (go for penance)”, and then it is said that it became her name. But actually what mena devi ahd pronounced is her original name only, in ignorance. 🙂

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thank you for the info, whatever puaranas, upanishads or spiritual scriptures i’ve ever read is mostly in english translations and are gist-like translations, so……. u understand what i’m trying to say. And one more request can you write something up on tandav?

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          Tandava – This is the dance of shiva, which is normally said to happen at the end of creation. But every moment tandava happens. The nataraja tatwam is very subtle tatwam. In our hearts that nataraja dances every second. This heart is the ‘chidambara’, where nataraja resides. By beig in our heart via his dance he makes all the creatures act. This is what is said in Bhagawad Gita as “ishvara resides in all the hearts and makes the creatures dance to his tune the way a magician does”. A great nuclear scientist “fritjof kapra” had experienced the dance of shiva in subatomic particles in his research. He realized that creation, sustenance and destruction everything not only at the cosmic level but also at the subatomic levels are nothing but – the dance of shiva!

          So, shiva tandava is an ever happening dance.

          Reply
          1. Shashwata Shastri

            Please check simha dhyanam.

  6. sohini

    hello santoshji, i have a request, if its possible then can you have a look on this link below ? its not too long.
    http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/7456/why-didnt-lord-vishnu-drink-the-poison-that-came-out-from-the-churning-of-ocean

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Went thru that.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        the quotes from garuda puran there are disturbing, can you give some explanations?

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          Not a priority for now. May take them later.

          Reply
          1. sohini

            ok

  7. sohini

    Respected santoshji this post of mine is just to congratulate you and thank you only. In one of your posts/comments you mentioned that one tv serial encouraged you to come up with this blog of yours about god shiv, i don’t know which serial it is but i wanna tell you one thing that for me it is also a tv serial mostly that has made me become a devotee mahadev bhagwan shiv, the serial is DEVON KE DEV ……MAHADEV. I just wanted to share this with you. I’m a highly logistic and practical woman for whom evidence is logic and logic is evidence. So in many cases i might have not agreed with your logics about justifying deeds of god shiv. But that does not keep me from thanking and congratulating you for your works. I can totally understand how much effort you put for every single work of yours. You have your job and your family to look after, and yet after that you put your strength in this time consuming work, hats off to you for that. A big portion of people have being manipulated and corrupted by iskcon cult nowadays, and the result is utter shiv dwesh. Your blog gives people the light to think or to atleast enquire about things instead of getting diverted by the iskconites’ freaking manipulations. Thank you so much

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Thanks for the kind words! All credits go to Maheshwara! I’m just his tool.

      Reply
  8. sohini

    you know what santoshji, for a few days now the freezer of our refrigerator is forming shivling-like ice formations in it 🙂 today my mother sarcastically told my father that may be bhagwan shiv is giving darshan to his bhakt (that’s me ofcourse) 🙂 the formations are so nice to look at

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      what a nice thing!! thanks for sharing. u r a blessed soul dear to mahadeva 🙂

      Reply
  9. sohini

    santoshji can you tell me the detailed etymology of the names- SHIV, AGHOR,SHITIKANTH, NARAYAN, VISHNU, HAR, HARI ?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      shiva = auspicious
      ahora = a-ghora = not ghora = not terrible = benign
      shitikantha = of dark colored throat
      narayana = nAra (waters), Ayana (resting place or goal)
      vishnu = all-pervasive
      hari = withdrawer of all sins
      hara = withdrawer of sins as well as the creation

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thnx

        Reply
  10. sohini

    santoshji once i heard from a panditji at durga puja saying something about devi durga, her lion/lioness, and mashishasur being forms of brahma, vishnu and maheshwar. Though i do not remember who is the form of whom, but i remember the story. Do u know anything about this? i’m planning to ask the panditji about this story when he comes to do the puja for this year’s durga puja. Also i heard a story when i went to puri about subhadra being form of brahma, jagannath that of vishnu and balram being the incarnation of maheshwar. Can u tell me anything about this?Also some say that subhadra is devi durga’s yogmaya aspect, but as far as i know yogmaya was the baby girl born to yashoda.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      IMHO the stories narrated by that panditji are not from valid scriptures. Still then you may check with him politely about the sources of his info. (suggest not to offend him by challenging his sources of info. Just listen to his account, give a smile, say thanks and forget it if you find his sources not being the valid granthas).
      Even the other story of jagannath is not true. Jagannath is Krishna, balabhadra is balarama, and subhadra is subhadra. The folklore is something that one needs to listen and forget after sometime. These stories may be part of local folklore but not from scriptures (as far as my knowledge goes).

      Yes, yogamaya who took birth from yashoda ma, assumed the form of durga when kamsa tried to kill her and then after giving him forewarning she disappeared. later the same maya took birth from vasudeva as the little sister of krishna.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        yeah why should i go and challenge the panditji? i would love to know the story only, i like every mythological stories whether its true or not

        Reply
      2. sohini

        o sorry, i didn’t look at the last sentence ” later the same maya took birth from vasudeva as the little sister of krishna.” and commented “so there’s no connection between yogmaya and subhadra, right?”
        ok, so if subhadra is yogmaya and if we take that this yogmaya is durga’s form then how could subhadra marry arjun, who was incarnation of nara rishi i.e a part of vishnu himself? i mean durga’s one and only ETERNAL consort is shiv only. Also vishnu is duga’s celestial brother.

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          The story of Yogamaya reincarnating as Subhadra is something which i heard many a times, but haven’t personally validated that in scriptures yet. Assuming it to be correct, we may not be seeing it literally.

          We need to look at these stories with tatwam instead of literal readings. Arjuna is “nara” and “nara” is the name of “brahman” and who is called “purusha”. Purusha is Rudra, brahman is Rudra. So, Rudra is the Nara too. Hence Durga is Rudra’s consort only. Moreover ‘Arjuna’ too is originally the name of Shiva (remember Mallikarjuna?). Arjuna is name of Agni too and again Agni is Rudra only. So, these are some esoteric truths played by charecters in the epic.

          Reply
      3. Shashwata Shastri

        Please check simha dhyanam

        Reply
        1. sohini

          any link for simha dhyanam ?

          Reply
    2. To be precise, it are lotus, lion and Mahişāsura who are forms of Brahmā, Vişņu and Śiva; the source of this information is Kālikā Purāņa.
      In Devī Tańtra section, it is explained that Brahmā in the form of lotus, Vişņu in the form of lion and Śiva in the form of corpse act as Mahāmāyā’s steed. Lotus is laid on lion’s back, corpse on lotus and Kāmākhyā in the form of Siddha Kubjikā sits on the corpse. This explains the lore from Yoginī Tańtra, where it is stated that when Yoni of Dākşāyanī fell at Kāmapīțha, Brahmā (form of Mahālakşmī), Vişņu (form of Mahāsarasvatī) and Śiva (form of Mahākālī) became three peaks of Nīlaparvata to bear Devī’s Bhaga.
      These three peaks, three Vāhanas and three deities represent Trikūța, where Caņđikā dwells in Her three forms.

      In case of Devī Mahişāsuramardinī, the chapter narrating Kātyāyanī’s exploit describes Mahādeva incarnating as Mahişāsura three times at the request of Rambhāsura, and getting slain by three forms of Ādyāśakti- Ugracaņđā, Bhadrakālī and Durgā.

      Disguising as a woman, Mahişāsura tests the virtue of a monk who lives in Kātyāyana’s monastery, and the monk & his celibacy succumb when Mahişāsura stealthly drinks up ghee meant to be offered to Devas as Havis during a Yajna. Kātyāyana thus curses Mahişāsura to die at a woman’s hands.
      Seeing this, Śiva prays to Caņđikā and requests Her to slay Mahişāsura, since Vişņu in the form of lion is unable to bear Devī by Himself; hence, Mahādeva requests Devī to accept the body of His bufallo incarnation as Her Pīțha and relieve Sińharūpi Vişņu from some burden.

      Devas, banished from Amarāvatī, reach the northern shore of milk ocean, where they witness sixteen armed Bhadrakālī, riding a lion and shining like full moon due to Her white complexion on the day of Mahālaya (Aśvina Amāvasyā). Armed with weapons and clad in red, She impalls Mahişāsura with Her trident and directs Devas to go to Kātyāyana’s monastery to find a way of vanquishing Mahişāsura. Devas find Brahmā, Vişņu and Śiva there, and from the combined energies of all deities, Durgā’s Avirbhāva occurs on Šašțhī. Her complexion is tawny and She has ten arms. Devas adorn Her with jewelry and arm Her with their weapons.

      Meanwhile, Mahişāsura has a nightmare in which He sees Bhadrakālī beheading Him and drinking His blood. In His third birth, Mahişāsura prays to Bhadrakālī and desires Mokşa. Bhadrakālī not only assures that He would never leave Her foot but also displays Her Ugracaņđā form, that has black complexion and wears skins and garland of severed heads. This Devī with eighteen arms is one who accompanied Vīrabhadra and wrecked havoc at Dakşayajna.

      Mahişāsura forgets about Devī’s boon due to Māyā and fights a fierce battle on Saptamī. Subsequently He attains Devī Sāyujyam upon getting slain by Devī Durgā on Aşțamī. These all happened during Svāyambhūva Manvańtara.

      In Sāvarņika Manvańtara and Sārasvata Kalpa, Mahişāsura will reincarnate and will get slain by Aşțādaśabhujā Mahālakşmī.

      On a side note, the temple lore of Vaişņava Devī (a Kaśmīr Śrīvidyā shrine before its Vaişņavisation) narrates how Bhairava (a form of Śiva) chases Durgā and gets beheaded.

      Skańda Purāņa has two versions of Mahişāsura Vadh; in one, Durgā beheads Mahişāsura and finds a Śivalińga emerging. She realises Her ‘mistake’ and sanctifies that Lińga to cleanse Her ‘sin’.

      Also, a popular Bengali phrase “Shiber mathaye jol dewa” (lit. pouring water on Śiva’s ‘head’) refers to Jalābhişeka of Lińga.

      Though this appears as Devī’s Supremacy over Śiva in literal sense, but esoterically it conveys the sublime import of monism, that has been glorified time and again by Kaula, Trīka and Kevaladvaita philosophies.
      According to the Brahmasūtra Bhāşya of Śrī Ādiśankara, from Brahmā in Brahmaloka to a blade of grass, everything is Brahman, and Brahman is both the efficient as well as material cause of the world. That means, Jīvātman is non-dual with Paramātman.

      Mind that, Mahişāsura invokes a sense of negativity:-
      Mahişāsura is a bufallo who changes forms. He is the symbol of monumental rage, that is born of lust, greed, pride, envy and self-hatred. This is the condition of Jīvaśiva.
      He seeks Durgā (Brahman), but Nirvāņa is not possible till the sense of “I” i.e., duality exists. So Durgā beheads Him; in other words, She detaches His intellect from his desires, thus facilitating the transformation of Jīva into Śiva.
      When that happens, Mahişāsura’s decapitated head becomes an object of worship. He realises He is Śiva (Brahman) and attains Devī Sāyujyam.
      Likewise, the head of Bhairava is worshiped at Bhairava Ghāțī near Bhavan of Vaişņava Devī since Bhairava transforms into Śiva.

      “mahişastvam mahāvīram jīvarūpi sadāśiva l
      atastvam pūjayişyāmi kşamasva mahişāsura ll”

      This is the Pūjā Mańtra of Mahişāsura used during five day long Durgā Pūjā.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        wow wow wow, just wow, mesmerizing -^-
        onek onek dhonnobad 🙂

        Reply
    3. Coming to Subhadrā, who is apparently an incarnation of Durgā, it is yet another myth engineered by Vaişņavas.

      First of all, there is no evidence of Yogamāyā, the daughter of Yaśodā, reincarnating as Subhadrā. Yogamāyā’s origin can be traced in Śiva Purāņa, Harivańśa Purāņa and Devī Māhātmya.

      Śiva Purāņa:-
      Śiva once jocularly addresses Pārvatī as “anjanasadřşyā kālikā” (one with the complexion of split coryllium) in front of fair complexioned Apsaris. Pārvatī, who is fond of Her dark complexion, abandons Śiva and starts performing severe penances. Brahmā gets appeased and comes to grant boons to Pārvatī; She requests Brahmā to make Her Gauravarņāńgī (one with fair complexion), to which Brahmā agrees. Kālī sheds Her dark skin and becomes Gaurī. However, Her dark skin becomes another Goddess by the name of Kauşikī (since She came into existence from Pārvatī’s Křşņakoşa). Brahmā takes Kauşikī to Brahmaloka and adopts Her as His daughter, while Gaurī returns to Śiva and lives happily.

      Harivamśa Purāņa:-
      Kauşikī eventually leaves Brahmaloka and goes to Amarāvatī. Here, Ińdra adopts Her as his sister and She becomes renowned as Āryā.
      In due course of time, Vişņu requests Āryā to transform Devakī’s 7th conception (Balabhadra) into Rohinī’s womb, and thereafter incarnate from Yaśodā’s womb at the time when Vişņu Himself would incarnate as Křşņa from Devakī’s womb.
      Āryā keeps Her word, incarnates as Yaśodā’s daughter, gets exchanged with Křşņa by Vasudeva, gets slammed on the wall by Kańsa, frightens Kańsa by assuming the form of Aşțhabhujā Mahāsarasvatī and vanishes. She goes to Vińdhyā mountains and becomes renowned as Vińdhyavāsini.

      Devī Māhātmya:-
      After Mahāsarasvatī slays Śumbha and Niśumbha, She predicts Her future incarnations. They are Śākambharī (slayer of Durgamāsura), Raktadantā (slayer of Rūrū Daitya), Bhimā (protector of sages) and Bhrāmarī (slayer of Aruņāsura). Other than these four, Devī predicts another incarnation; when Śumbha-Niśumbha would reincarnate, She will emerge as Nandā from the womb of Yaśodā, make Vińdhyās Her home and slay the reincarnations of Śumbha-Niśumbha.

      There is no Purāņa, no section of Mahābhārata describes the war between Subhadrā and Śumbha-Niśumbha, or at which point of time Subhadrā leave either Ińdraprastha or Dvārikā and settle in Vińdhyāńcala.

      What I have gathered from my converstation with a Paņđā from Pūri is that the Vigrahas of Jagannātha, Balabhadra and Subhadrā are placed upon the Yańtras of Dakşiņā Kālikā, Ugra Tārā and Bhuvaneśvarī respectively. Also, Jagannātha is worshiped with Kālī Mańtra, Balabhadra with Tārā Mańtra and Subhadra with Bhuvaneśvarī Mańtra.
      Other than that, Mahānirvāņa Tańtra says that Jagannātha is Kālī, Balabhadra is Tārā and Subhadrā is Bhuvaneśvarī.

      The secret behind this can be understood with the help of Jyotişvidyā. In Tāńtrik astrology, each Mahāvidya (except Dhūmāvatī) has three consorts- Bhairava, Vişņu and Gřha.

      Jagannātha:-
      Kālī’s Gřha is Śani (Saturn), who is a form of Kālī’s Bhairava Mahākāla. Śani is compatible with Cańdra (Moon), and Křşņa, a Cańdravańśī, is male form of Kālī. Besides, Kālī is also Yāminī (Rātri), the half sister of Śani. As Kālindī, Kālī is consort of Křşņa.
      In West Bengal, Kālī and Śani are always worshiped together on Saturdays.
      At Jagannātha’s left is Lakşmī (consort of Křşņa), who is Kamalā, whose Bhairava is Vişņu and Gřha is Śukra (Venus). Śukra, Cańdra and Śani are compatible. Kamalā’s male form is Matsya.

      Subhadrā:-
      Next to Jagannātha is Subhadrā, who is identified as Bhuvaneśvarī, whose Bhairava is Trayambaka (Śiva) and Gřha is Cańdra. Cańdra is also compatible with Buddha (Mercury), who is son of Cańdra.
      Besides, Subhadrā is mother of Abhimanyu, who was incarnation of “Cańdra’s son”, while her husband Arjuna (Indra) is an Āditya (solar deity). That connects Subhadra to both Sun and Moon.
      Besides, Trayambaka is married to Bhuvaneśvarī, whose brother is Vişņu (Křşńa), the Bhairava of Kamalā (Lakşmī).
      Bhuvaneśvarī’s male form is Varāha.

      Balabhadra:-
      He is identified as Tārā, whose Bhairava is Akşobhya and Gřha is Břhaspati (Jupiter). Tārā is identified as Śakti of Rāmacańdra, a Sūryavańśī, and a variant version of Sahararāvaņa Vadh describes that after Sītā slew Sahasrarāvaņa in the form of Kālī, She transformed into Tārā (milder form of Kālī) when Rāma worshiped Her. Thus Tārā is also Sītā (an incarnation of Bhūdevī).
      Balabhadra was named “Rāma” at the time of birth, and is considered an incarnation of Śeśanāga. Coincidentally, Tārā’s Bhairava Akşobhya is also a Nāga, and sits on Tārā’s head.
      Břhaspati is compatible with Sūrya (Sun) and Buddha.

      Now, if we compare them, we see how they are linked together:

      Jagannātha is Śani while Lakşmī is Śukra. They are compatible. With them stands Subhadrā, who is Cańdra and Buddha, and both are compatible with Śani and Śukra.
      Balabhadra, however, is Břhaspati-enemy of Cańdra and Śukra; but Břihaspati is compatible with his stepson Buddha, for whom he has immense affection. Buddha unites Břhaspati and Cańdra.
      Likewise, Balabhadra is also Sūrya, who is enemy of Śani. But two are united because of Buddha.
      Besides, Balabhadra (Tārā) is Bhūdevī, consort of Varāha, and with Him stands Subhadrā (Bhuvaneśvarī), whose male form is Varāha. Also, Bhūdevī’s incarnation Satyabhāmā is consort of Křşņa (Jagannāțha).
      With them is enshrined Vimalā (Bhairavī), whose Bhairava is Dakşiņamūrtī, Gřha is Lagna and male form is Narasińha.
      Lagna is compatible with all planets, Dakşiņamūrti is Guru of both Śukra and Břhaspati, while Narasińha is favourable to Prahlāda- a Daitya and disciple of Śukra. Also, Balabhadra is a Nāga (snake), while Bhairavī dwells in Mūlādhāra Cakra as Kulakuņđalinī, also a Nāgin.

      So these five deities have been placed together strategically, and they represent Gřhas, Bhairavas, Vişņus and Mahāvidyās, who are to be worshiped together as per Jyotişvidyā.
      That is another thing that post Vaişņavisation of Puri the temple has turned into an exclusively Vaişņava shrine. The true essence has been long forgotten.

      Vaişņavas assume that Subhadrā is ‘Durgā’ since they are a confused lot who use ‘Durgā’ as an umbrella term for all Avatāras of Devī. Besides, they have this habit of taking their cherry-picked Śāstras literally; so it must have happened that one Vaişņava must have heard that Subhadrā is Bhuvaneśvarī and jumped to the conclusion that wife of Arjuna and mother of Abhimanyu was incarnation of Vińdhyavāsini.

      Regards,
      Kāmakalā Bhattācārya
      (Bhairavī Kāmākhyā Devī of Kāmarūpa)

      dakşayajnavināśinyē l
      rāvaņasya vināśāya rāmasyānugrahāya ca akālebodhitā devī l
      om hrīm śrīm bhagavatī śrī śrī durgā devyē nama: ll

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thank u soooooo much.

        Reply
        1. The credit goes to Maa Kamakhya. Jai Maa _/|\_

          Reply
  11. sohini

    so there’s no connection between yogmaya and subhadra, right?

    Reply
  12. sohini

    i was watching the tv serial “siya ke ram” and after they mentioned sahastra ravan, i went through a net search and came across this site- (interesting fact that mahadev shiv pacified even the kali form of sita)
    http://www.speakingtree.in/allslides/super-shocking-how-sita-saved-rama-and-killed-greater-ravana

    Reply
    1. There is another version of Sahasraskandha Vadh, which is documented in Tara Rahasya and Sarvollasa Tantra.
      According to this version, when Sita in the form of Kali slew Sahasraskandha Ravana, Brahma and other deities propitiated Her with hymns; appeased, Devi assumed the calmer form of Tara. Holding Her sword with the right hand, Devi accepted the clothing of tiger skin from Brahma, removed Her golden crown, piled Her hair into Jatamukuta and bound it with the serpent Akshobhya. Shiva laid on ground and requested the boon of Brahmavidya from Devi, to which Devi placed Her left foot on His chest and enlightened Him. Hence, Rudra offered Her a blue lotus and a skull cup.
      A similar account is found in Yogini Tantra as well, with only difference of Parvati in the form of Kali placing Her foot on Shiva’s chest and enlightening Him by displaying Her Nirguna form to Him.

      So if we take Adbhut Ramayana’s account of Shiva ‘pacifying’ Sita in the form of Kali/Tara into consideration, it does not mean that Sita had lost control over Herself and Shiva had to come to rescue. Shiva Himself is Brahman, Shakti Herself is Brahmavidya and both are one and same; it is to enlighten us Jivas that they perform these esoteric Lilas.

      Devi Tara is shown standing/sitting atop a corpse in Pratyalidha posture (in which left foot is forward), three-eyed and is blue in complexion. Her Bhairava (consort) is Akshobhya, a Bodhisatva who in the form of a cobra coils around Devi’s matted hair. She wears a crown made of the skulls of five meditating Buddhas. She is adorned by a garland of skulls, pot-bellied, holding a sword, a flaying knife, a blue lotus & a skull cup in four hands, and stands/sits atop a corpse, either burning on a cremation pyre or a white lotus blooming amidst the milk ocean.
      Tara is primarily worshiped by Vamachara and/or Mahachinachara rituals, primarily in cremation grounds, battle fields, abandoned buildings or any other solitary place. Her eight Yoginis are Tarinismrita, Ugratara, Mahogra, Vajra, Chamunda, Nilasarasvati, Kameshvari and Bhadrakali.
      Tantric Sandhya Vandana is dedicated to Tara, in which She is invoked in Her three forms- Ekajata, Nilasarasvati and Kamakhya in the dawn, mid-day and dusk respectively.
      Tara represents complete form of Adyashakti as She is Sarasvati, original form of Bhudevi (Lakshmi) and consort of Akshobhya Buddha (form of Mahakala) and hence Kalika at the same time.

      Reply
  13. sohini

    hello santoshji, a very absurd question has suddenly stricken me. I’ve always noticed that ganesh ji has in his four hands the shankha, chakra, gada and padma and in pictures of ganeshji i’ve seen that ganeshji wears peacock feather on his mukut. Now, these are some characterristics we always relate to god vishnu always. So is there any connection between vishnu and ganeshji ?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      That’s not an absurd question. That’s very profound philosophy that has manifested in your mind as a question. 🙂 It requires a bit detailed explanation so bear with my lengthy answer.

      Ganapati was created by Parvati from her dirt. He got beheaded and became devoid of life force. Then Shiva put an elephant head and infused life in him. This is nothing but the principle of creation being done via prakriti and Shiva infusing chaitanyam to it being the atman. Head is the place where from prana entwrs the bofy. So heas is the centre for life to the body. Ganapati’s head is composed of vowels and body of consonants. Vowels give life to consonants. Hence the head placement by Shiva on the inert body gave it life.

      Now why elephant head? Elephant “gaja” when reversed becomes “jaga” (world), where both parvati and shiva were involved in giving a shape and life to it. So ganapati’s gaja aspect indicates him to be the world principle where the entire world is composed and enlightened by prakriti-purusha i.e., shakti-shiva.

      Aitareya Aranyaka of Rig Veda says “vowels give life to consonants”. Entire cosmos being alphabets. Further Vishnu too is uma-rudrAtmaka. He is a combination of Uma and rudra. Hence even Vishnu’s first name in sahasranama calls him “vishvaM” (world) as he is also of the same tatwam. For this hidden tatwam ganapati is also hailed as “Vishnu swarupa” or of the tatwam of Vishnu in puranas. (Devi bhagawatam says ganesha as narayana’s form).

      Further, in another interpretation, ‘Gaja’ reversed is ‘jaga’. The head is gaja vadana. The gaja head is supported by his form. So it symbolizes that he is the adhishthana for the jaga hence Brahman. ganapati’s original shivashaktyAtmika tatwam is the nondual Brahman tatwam which is sung in ganapati atharvasirsha Upanishad. This shiva-shakti tatwam manifested as their son in a form later. Since that same tatwam is Vishnu’s too, he is seen as vishnu’s aspect.

      Hope this clarifies.

      Reply
      1. Shandilya

        Even in Jagannath Puri , Prabhu Jagannath after the auspicious Snan Jatra, is first dressed in Ganesh Vesa .

        Reply
  14. sohini

    thank u so much santoshji for appreciating my question and for giving this beautiful answer 🙂 It has clarified my doubts, just one more thing: so shall we consider ganeshji to be a form of vishnu or shall we say that they both share the same tattwam ?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      We may worship ganesha as Vishnu’s nature. Nothing wrong in worshipping him as Vishnu’s form either.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        🙂

        Reply
  15. sohini

    santoshji in my earlier post on this page i had wanted to know something from gadura puran,
    http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/7456/why-didnt-lord-vishnu-drink-the-poison-that-came-out-from-the-churning-of-ocean
    can u explain it now?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      I haven’t read garuda Purana, Sohini! And cannot jump to conclusions based on the selective extracts of vaishnavites and also on their interpretations.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        ok thank u santoshji 🙂

        Reply
  16. sohini

    hello santoshji, i wanted to ask u one thing. In the tv serial devon ke dev mahadev, they told that sita’s sisters urmila, mandavi and shrutakirti were incarnations of the flowers and conch shells of devi lakshmi which she came out from the samudra holding in her hands at the time of samudra manthan. But i have never read this story in any of the translations of valmiki ramayan. Can u tell me where this story comes from ?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      hello sohini,

      I’m not aware of such story. I would rather consider those ladies as the incarnations of the shaktis of the respective persons. Like Sesha’s wife as Urmila, Bharata and shatrughna were sudarshana and conch, so their shakti of slaying and shakti of nada (sound), might be their wives.
      P.S: These are my views, and i don’t know any scriptures attesting them either 🙂

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thank u
        🙂

        Reply
  17. Gowtham.K

    Sir Happy Deepavali.Sir I have a big doubt about which version of Shiva mahapurana is authentic.Shiva mahapurana with 6 samhithas seems to be much authentic and ancient.It was first published in 1896 by Bombay press.Scholars seems to have quoted from this version.On the other hand Shiva mahapurana with 7 samhithas seems to have much later additions.Its Satarudra samhitha’s Asvathaman story contradicts with Mahabharatha.Kotirudra samhitha has a nonsesnse story about the origin of Shivalingam.Rudrasamhitha resembles Kalidasa’s Kumarashambhavam.Its Sankacuda story surely shows that its a later interpolation.MENTIONS about Goloka and Radha are also there in it.Especially that story about Shiva lingam in KOTIRUDRA SAMHITHA is a irritating cheap interpolation either made by Foreign Invaders or haters of Shaivism.

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      Dear Gowtham,

      Happy belated Deepavali.

      Shiva Purana’s no story seems contradictory to my eyes. Ashvattahma is mentioned in Mahabharata too as a portion of Rudra plus krodha plus other deities. Kalidasa’s work’s two cantos which resemble Shiva purana are considered as not authored by kalidasa by scholars (i read somewhere in bharatiya vidvat parishat group). Not the otehr way round. Even if for assumption we say kalidasa’s work resemble Shiva Purana, that’s alright because the main story of kumara’s birth is shiva’s family related story so obviously shiva purana might have influenced his work.

      Regarding Shiva lingam what story seems irritating? All the stories seem perfectly OK to me. Goloka and Radha are very much there in many other Puranas, so it’s not bad to see them in Shiva Purana too.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        hello santoshji, i don’t remember if i’ve ever asked this before, so i ask it now. In vyas mahabharat there’s a mention of ashwathhama once asking krishna to give him (ashwathhama) his (krishna’s)sudarshan chakra. Krishna challenges ashwathhama to take the chakra if he could, but ashwathhama was not able to lift or take the chakra. My question is if ashwathhama were part incation of mahadev shiv, then why wasn;t he able to carry krishna’s sudarshan chakra? I mean there’s a story which says sudarshan was gifted to narayan by shiva himself. Was is because ashwathhama was also part incarnation of krodha too, and the incident happened just to show that when krodha overpowers someone, he is unable to do a lot of things, even though he’s part incarnation of mahadev?

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          The primary motive of Shiva as ashwatthama was not to show his Shiva nature, rather aid and act as per the plan of Vishnu (Krishna) in his mission of reducing the burden of earth. So, Ashwatthama was just a partial incarnation alongwith krodha, moha etc., devatas combined together. So, here his Shivatwam was never at the forefront. He was made to side with adharma to attract many adharmis by his splendor (such as kauravas banked upon him for his excellent knowledge of weapons), and get them destroyed by Krishna and Pandavas. Let me tell you that Mahabharata is all drama, all pre-planned. So, there defeat is neither a real defeat victory is nor a real victory. Ultimate aim was to decrease burden of earth. So, ashwatthama was just a ‘name sake’ incarnation of Shiva.
          Secondly, his other inherent amshas dominated in him always, his shivatwa was seen only in certain places such as chastising Karna by telling him Arjuna’s greatness when Karna was proudly underestimating Arjuna and so on. rest of the places his otehr elements were dominating. So, despite he having excellent knowledge of Krishna’s true nature, he was by nature addicted to wickedness. Hence he couldn’t life sudarshana.

          There is no hard and fast rule that amshas of Shiva should be able to do same feats which Shiva does. We need to look at the purpose for which Shiva manifests. The same Shiva as Hanuman did superhuman feats because the purpose of that incarnation was that. In summary, feats of an incarnation need not necessarily be a replica of the original person.

          Reply
          1. sohini

            i had almost this answer in my mind too 🙂 thank u santoshji for this beautiful answer 🙂

  18. sohini

    and a few more questions 🙂 🙂 🙂
    1. why didn’t shivji stop sati devi from going to dakshayagna and from immolating herself?
    2. why didn’t god shiv go to the arena of dakshayagna himself to battle with daksha? why did he send veerbhadra instead?
    3. why did mahadev do the tandav after the death of sati? i mean tandav is afterall a dance, and what is the significance of doing a dance after the death of one’s beloved one?
    4. why did not hanuman take all the vanarsena along with ram lakshman on his back and cross the sea? why did they have to make the setu?
    5. there are some verses in valmiki ramayan hinting that ram had more than one wife. So did ram have other wives than sita?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      🙂
      1. Because those events were needed to happen for the Dakshas (all those people whose vision is clouded with blankets of ignorance and cannot see Shiva’s true nature) eyes to open. For the shakti-peethas to get installed on earth for the benefit of mankind.
      2. To kill a mosquito do you use nuclear missiles or you would use mosquito repellent coils or all-out? Why Shiva himself needed to go when veerabhadra was enough to subjugate daksha along with all the gods who stood by him?
      3. Dance has many variations with moods. Lasya is the type of dance which shiva-parvati perform while in auspicious / love mood. tandava is the type of dance performed with anger or for destruction.
      4. So that today NASA can take pictures and say ‘yes ramayana is real’ 🙂 Or may be this brilliant idea didn’t struck the mind of the dimwit Hanuman 😛 Or may be those days zhandu-balm wasn’t available to cure back pain if Hanuman were to take entire sena on his back. 😛
      5. What are those verses, pls share? Rama had only one wife.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        lol santoshji, these are the most funny answers i’ve ever read on your blog 🙂 🙂 🙂 😛 😛
        and here are the verses-
        Valmiki writes in the Ayodhya Kanda,

        hR^ishhTaaH khalu bhavishhyanti raamasya paramaaH striyaH |
        aprahR^ishhTaa bhavishhyanti snushhaaste bharatakshaye || 2-8-12

        12. raamasya= Rama’s; paramaastriyaH= great wives; bhavantikhalu= will become; hR^ishTaaH= delighted; te= your; snushhaaH= daughters-in-law; bhavishhyanti= will become; aprahR^isTaaH= unhappy; bharata kshhaye= of Bharata’s weak position.

        “Rama’s wives will get delighted. Your daughters-in-law will be unhappy because of Bharata’s waning position.”

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          This is just a casual statement by manthara, not about the existing wives, but about a possibility in general in future. None of the other texts like Puranas or Mahabharata has ever even hinted about more than one wife of Rama. So, it is safe to conclude this as just a casual comment seeing future possibility of a King. The ramayana online translator too makes same comment as follows.

          “The words ‘Rama’s wives’ here do not indicate that Rama had multiple wives. Manathara refers to a possible future where Rama being a King would marry other women. It was a norm then for a king to have more than one wife”.

          Reply
          1. sohini

            thank u 🙂

  19. sohini

    sir and two more questions 🙂 🙂 🙂
    1. can u write a whole post on the tamsic tatwa? I mean one of the biggest reasons some stupid minds keep bad- mouthing about mahadev is that mahadev is tamsic in nature. These kind of people interpret tamsic as the mode of ignorance. What they don’t understand or rather don’t want to understand is that one of the 3 main gods of our trimurti can not be IGNORANT at the very least. And it is anly mahadev shiv who is called nirgun (beyond all gunas) and sagun (the lord of all gunas and of everything that exists or does not exit) at the same time.
    2. while killing mahishasur, devi durga is described as mahalakshmi and narayani many a times, but why not as devi parvati or mahagauri or mahadevi which associates her to shiv ji, who is inseperable from mata durga?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      1. Tamas is a very much required quality for teh universe to manifest, function and disappear. The mulaprakriti in order to create, assumes the three gunas and does the creation. In fact without taking recourse to tamas how does Vishnu kill daityas?
      2. Mahalakshmi is NOT lakshmi (the wife of Vishnu). Mahalakshmi is Shiva’s wife Durga’s name. Narayani is also the name of Uma only. The supreme Mulaprakriti lalita is named as Mahalakshmi (and she is NOT the wife of Vishnu).

      Reply
      1. sohini

        “In fact without taking recourse to tamas how does Vishnu kill daityas?” yeah couldn’t agree more. 🙂
        thank u santoshji for always coming up with answers to my questions. And wanted to thank u for one more thing is that though ur blog is dedicated to discussions about mahadev shiv yet you always answer so politely to every other non-shiva related questions. 🙂

        Reply
        1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

          My pleasure 🙂

          Reply
          1. sohini

            🙂

  20. sohini

    santoshji, i’ve read in different places that mahadev’s vahan nandi maharaj was born from mahadev’s boon, sometimes he is said to be incarnation of shivji, sometimes incarnation of vishnu too. So, which one’s correct?and one more thing
    what is the difference between complete incarnation and partial incarnation? I mean does partial incarnation mean non-human incarnations of gods and full incarnations mean human incarnations of gods? or does the partial term mean that the incarnation has born out of a part from the god? and if that is so, then how can we call krishna to be full incarnation of vishnu when he was, according to mahabharat, born from a black hair of vishnu and balram was born from a white hair of vishnu (which definitely raise the question of balram being sheshnag avtar)?

    Reply
    1. Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula (Post author)

      nandi was the son of sage Shilada. He was obtained by the boon and grace of lord Shiva. He is considered as a manifestation of Shiva himself. I haven’t heard him to be an incarnation of Vishnu.

      When someone takes birth with the amsha (a part of essence) of the lord, that person is teated as partial incarnation. Ashwatthama was a partial incarnation of Rudra, krodha, kama, etc. deities summed together. Purna avatar means having all the aspects of the original god in the incarnation.

      Krishna and Balarama both were partial incarnations technically. But Krishna is called Purna avatar, the actual term should be ‘shoDaSha kalA pUrNa avatAra’, where the kalas are recounted to be 16 of the moon, which are vedantically the (4)x(4) stages of conciousness, and whosoever has those 16 kalas is called as having become a full blown god. Krishna being a fullly realized gyani is said to have those kalas hence termed as full avatara. But technically Krishna was an amsha of Narayana.

      Now, Narayana’s fourfold forms have sankarshana as one, so when mahabharata says from his hair Balarama was born, and in another place it says he was born from Sesha’s amsha, both are same truths depicted in different ways.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        u have cleared my answers so easily santoshji 🙂 thank u so much.

        Reply
        1. sohini

          oops! i meant cleared my doubts 🙂

          Reply
  21. Gowtham.K

    Vanakkam sir.Few months before i asked about Shiva mahapurana and you cleared my doubts.Thanks a lot sir.Im greatly dissappointed as no new full length posts you have posted last year.Sir I humbly request you to write many posts which gives many informations for persons like me who are eager to know more about Lord Shivaparameshwara.It is from your blog that I get many valuable knowledge giving informations.They are useful for me and my friends to have debates and to give suitable correct answers to ignorant vaishnavites and Iskconites.And again my heartful thanks and salute for you sir.

    May Lord Shiva and matha Parvathi bless and make you to write more knowledge giving posts.Namah Shivaya.Hara Hara Mahadeva.

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

      Namaste dear Gowtham,

      Thanks for your kind words. The more senior we become, the more quality works we would tend to take. I’m hard pressed on time, hence the delay, however, a complex puzzle has unfolded in my mind by the grace of Uma Maheshvara. That is a lengthy topic to write and hence would take time. May be in 2 months time I would hopefully be able to pen that down. Before that an update to my ‘Bhagavatam’ article (proving it to be unauthentic with more proofs) would be published.

      I however do not encourage people to use learnings from my blog for debating vaishnavites, because if they were open to accept the greatness of shiva, they would have accepted during the Appaiyya Dikshitar’s time or before him itself. They are still popping up everywhere means, they are not open for learning. So, it would only waste your valuable time if you choose to debate with them. This is just a suggestion though.

      Reply
  22. Gowtham.K

    Thank you so much for your kind reply sir.Im eagerly waiting for your posts.And I and my friends have a great respect for that great saint Appayya dhikshithar sir.Im searching for a long time to get his many most valuable works.Sir could you please tell me is there any blogs or websites from which I can get or download Dhikshtar’s valuable works.

    Sir stopped my debates with Vaishnavites and Iskconites because they dont understand what we say and simply blabber.Thank you for your kind suggestion and advice sir.

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

      I am not aware of Sri Appayya Dikshitar’s works. Never read them. I only know about him and the tasks he did.
      Please see in archive.org or in some other digital libraries you may be able to find his works.
      Thank you for your interest in this blog and good to see your respect for Appaiyya Dikshitar ji.

      Reply
  23. sohini

    hello santosh ji, a very very very happy new year to you and your family (though its 14th jan already) 🙂 🙂 🙂

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

      Thank you Sohni for the wishes. A very happy new year to you and family too. 🙂
      By the way, let’s not wish a fellow Hindu with ‘happy new year’ in Jan as this is just a calendar year for us as we are unfortunately following gregorian calendar for some purposes. Our actual new years begin based on Hindu calendar where we may wish each other.
      The more we practice these the more we would be able to bring the lost Hindu dharma to life. Few more – Celebrating birthdays with cake-cutting and candle puffing is not our culture, our hinduism teaches us to light up lamps, not to put off the lights. And many such western things which have encroached upon our Hindu way of life and we proudly celebrate them, we need to slowly unlearn.
      p.S: Well, pls don’t think i’m targeting you with such a big lecture just for the sin of wishing new year? No, you are just a medium through which I am expressing my thoughts to the world (readers), so that we all can together go back to the lap of Hinduism.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        I ABSOLUTELY agree wid u santoshji 🙂 in fact the very words u have spoken, i keep preaching these ALWAYS. 🙂 there was REALLY no need for the “p.s” 🙂

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

          Thank you for understanding 🙂

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

      Thanks, for the links. I shall go through them when time permits.

      Reply
  24. sohini

    but the mention of dakshayani being the mother of the brothers nar, narayan ,hari ,krishna (in one of the above links) may have somethinf to do with uma-mahadev tatwam. Just a thought of mine though.

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

      Daksha has many daughters, and around 11 (if i remember correctly) daughters were given in marriage to Dharma. Out of those many wisfes one of the wife conceived nara, narayana, hari, and Krishna.
      Technically, all the daughters of Daksha are “dakshayani”. Dakshayani is not a name it is an adjective which means, ‘daughter of daksha’. Like ‘Pandava’ is a name of all the five brothers.
      However, most popularly this name is known for Sati devi. The way every pandava was kaunteya but Arjuna comes to our mind whenever someone says ‘kaunteya’ as he was more popularly seen getting addressed by that name.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        my pleasure 🙂

        Reply
      2. sohini

        thank u 🙂

        Reply
  25. sohini

    i totally agree wid u sanjoshji when u say “I however do not encourage people to use learnings from my blog for debating vaishnavites, because if they were open to accept the greatness of shiva, they would have accepted during the Appaiyya Dikshitar’s time or before him itself. They are still popping up everywhere means, they are not open for learning. So, it would only waste your valuable time if you choose to debate with them. This is just a suggestion though.”

    Reply
  26. sohini

    hello santoshji, how r u? once i asked u a question sbout indrajit being mahadev shiva’s son, i just found out that this story belongs to uttarramayan. There’s nothing wrong about meghnad being mahadev’s son, because mangaldev was mahadev and devi bhumi’s son, god ayyappan was harihar putra etc. The only thing distubing in indrajit’s case is that this story tells about mahadev deceiving mata parvati. And also another similar story is that of mahadev and mohini which states about a lustful nature of mahadev. Surely mohini used devi lalitasundaris maya but some stories simply denies that and states about parvati mata’s embarrasing situation caused by her husband’s lust over mohini.
    And one more thing, when was mahishasura actually killed? Was it before or after samudra manthan? And why could not mohini recognise rahu/ketu in the guise of gods? Some vaishnav texts say that mohini did it on purpose to show the strength of amrit and how it could save one’s life even after getting beheaded.

    Reply
  27. sohini

    hello santoshji, i’ve read than mohini devi gave birth to god ayappan from her thigh, because being an incarnation of vishnu, mohini could not have a real womb, so her thigh took place of womb. My question is if womb was REALLY required then thigh shouldn’t have worked and if it was the case that vishnu could have given birth to a child from any part of his body then why the case of lack of true womb was taken into account? I mean vishnu gave birth to urvashi from his thigh too, but for that he did not have to take mohini form or no womb was required.

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

      I haven’t heard about the birth from thigh legend.

      Reply
  28. sohini

    and one more thing 🙂
    i am really confused about dattatreya avtar, really, whatever facts i’ve read about god dattatreya , i’ve always left totally confused 🙁 here’s one such fact- https://www.facebook.com/notes/tanuja-thakur/incarnation-of-lord-dattatreya-as-mentioned-in-shreegurucharitra/227591470590839/

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

      Please limit the questions or discussion to authentic scriptures only. You should read only Vyasa’s creations and not any random books by any other authors.

      Reply
  29. sohini

    but then we must neglect ramcharit manas by tulsidas because it was not valmiki’s creation, upapuranas like kalika puran etc. have to be denied because they were not created by vyasa. But is utterly unfair because IN FACT vyasa’s works condradict his own works and that would also mean except for vyasa no other person has ever experience GOD,and they can not know anything, that’s why every other author is bogus.

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

      Uff..what happened to you Sohini? Why are you so angry? The Gurucharitra etc., kaliyuga originated works are not comparable with Vyasa, Valmiki and other rishis works. If you bring tomorrow sai-sat-charitra and ask for my validation, do you think I wouldn’t be asking you to refraid from such? This blog is NOT for querying on any random stuff that you come across the internet. Understand this.

      Regarding your points on contradictions I would say – Contradictions are there in your mind, not mine. I am pretty much clear what are authentic sections and what are interpolations. I am no where confused by Mahadeva’s grace. You need to respect Ramcharitmanas where it ahs to be respected, and where Valmiki Ramayana needs to be respected it needs to be respected. The “utterly unfair” impression that you had form somewhere has no ground. I don’t see anywhere I gave an unfair judgement saying every author is bogus. You have Dattatreya’s stories in Puranas why do you need to for for some other book of modern origin?

      Think on your messages when you are calm and then I believe you woudl understand where is the problem. Thx!

      Reply
      1. sohini

        believe me santoshji, i was really calm when i messaged this. Actually its just my nature to find logic and i try to see things from every point of view.

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

          Great (y)

          Reply
  30. sohini

    we can not just REFUTE any scripture just because we can not explain it or that because it contradicts our belief in something or that because we are too afraid to except some truth that is just the opposite to our belief.

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

      LOL The fact is – We would not be able to Refute any scripture if we cannot explain it. so, when we refute, we are explaining it better. Rest of your comment doesn’t require any answer as they don’t apply on me because i am neither afraid not hold some beliefs to get contradicted. I work on facts, period!

      Reply
  31. sohini

    as a person who has done masters in both physics and mathematics it is in my nature to consider or atleast try to understand whether there is any logic behind this thing or that, i just do that. A scientist always has a particular understanding of something which she/he is trying to prove but any other things that comes in her/his way, its validation is ALWAYS checked.

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

      Other matters aside, i felt very good to learn about your educational background. Good that you have the mindset to validate things before acceptance.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        thank u so much santoshji for your appreciation 🙂 after posting my last comments, i thought, may be you are thinking that i had started some kind of battle/arguments with you. But your appreciation has proved me wrong and has really really really relieved me from a burden. You know why i felt so burdened(i can not think of any other word :P)? Because in your blog ONLY, i have found a place where not only i can know about god shiv but also i can feel free to debate, even with you (i have in some previous posts told you something about the name SOMA), feel free to ask anything (i have many a time asked you non-mahadev related questions). So thank you santoshji again for your appreciation, it means a lot 🙂 I just had started to think that i might lost an opportunity to quench my thirst for spiritual knowledge, and then i saw this appreciation of yours.

        Reply
        1. Ah. relax dear friend. We all meet because of ‘ruNAnubandha’ by the desire of the lord. And for friends such as you, I wouldn’t ever want disassociation. 🙂 Chill.

          Reply
  32. adityahridayam9

    Pranamam to all,
    Very informative comments given by others.
    Here I would like to share more detailed information about the Shiva Sutras.
    Thanks.

    Reply
    1. sohini

      hi santoshji, as i asked u earlier, whether we should see god dattatreya as a composite avtar of brahma, vishnu and maheshwar or an avtar of vishnu only?
      and is this shlok about vishnu or ganeshji? – shuklambaradharam vishnum sashivarnam chaturbhujam
      because at some places i’ve read that this is a god ganesh shlok, and the term “shashi varnam” gives hint to the god being ganeshji if we take varnam literally means complexioned. But then in mahabharat hanumanji has told bhim about the different roop of vishnu in different yugas.

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

        Dattatreya is a composite avatara of the trio but primarily Vishnu’s form. The way Arjuna was Indra, and Nara’s combined avatara, Yudhishthira as Indra and Dharma avatara etc..

        Shuklambaradharam Vishnum is a ganesha prarthana.

        Reply
    2. sohini

      have u already shared those infos about shiva sutras? i mean i can not find.

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

        Pls click the hyperlink in his message. It takes you to website named manblunder. He ha sposted shiva sutras there.

        Reply
        1. adityahridayam9

          Yes please follow the hyperlink then you can find more information about Shiva sutras.

          Reply
  33. sohini

    i have read this story before and always find this very beautiful -http://vedics.in/war-between-lord-shiva-lord-rama/

    Reply
  34. sohini

    hi santosh ji, have you written any other piece of poem of late ?

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

      NO 🙁

      Reply
  35. sohini

    A very very very happy belated rakshabandhan to you santosh bhaiya 🙂 sorry ‘coz i couldn’t wish yesterday, but all that matters is intention ri8 ? so i wish you as a sister that you may prosper in life and shine the brightest 🙂 and also keep enlighting us about mahadev shiv shankar 🙂

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

      Thank you for the wishes dear sohini-behen. May lord shiva bless you.

      Reply
      1. sohini

        you r most welcome 🙂

        Reply
      2. sohini

        just finished reading a translation of the shata rudriya……. amaaaaazing it is……. one particular name of mahadev has caught my attention though…. harinetra…. interesting…… does it mean one whose eyes resemble those of hari or one with green eyes ?

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

          “The green/yellow colored eyes” or “the eyes like that of a monkey”.

          Reply
      3. sohini

        hello santoshji, can you give me a little insight over vrishkapi? whatever i’ve read about vrishkapi, have always intrigued me more n more.

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

          “vRRiShAkapi” is a name that is common epithet to many gods and applied in various scriptures on various gods.

          “tato vibhuḥ pravaravarāharūpadhṛk vṛṣākapiḥ prasabhamathaikadaṃṣṭrayā” (Harivamsa) – This name here is applied on Vishnu during his Varaha form
          vṛṣākapiśca śambhuśca kaparddī raivatastathā” (Harivamsa) — This name here is applied on Shiva
          “tvaṃ haṃsaḥ savitā bhānuraṃśumālī vṛṣākapiḥ” (Mahabharata) — Here this name is applied on Surya!

          Apart from them even Indra and Agni have the same name in other texts.

          Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: