BLOG STATUS: Suspended indefinitely starting 18 Jan 2020. See journal page for details.
Last new article published: 18 Jan 2020, "Ishvara Gita: Chapters 1-11": Read here

Subscribe to updates here.

Sankarshana-Narasimha Worshipped by Parvati Pati

The reason why many mistake the Satarudriyam, Rudra Suktam and other such portions of Veda as pertaining to Shiva is because they are unaware that these are names of nArAyaNa. More specifically, all of the names occurring in the Vedas are names of nArAyaNa. For example take the various suktams in the Rg Veda. All the names belong to bhagavAn sriman nArAyaNa only, as follows:
Brahmanaspati = Lord of Brahma = nArAyaNa.
Agni = Agra Netha = One who leads = nArAyaNa.
Indra, the vajrapAni, slayer of vRtra = The foremost one (Indra), who destroys the covering known as prakrti (vRtra) and who bears the vajra mark on his foot (vajrapAni) = nArAyaNa.
Manyu = Angered Narasimha/Yajna (Sacrifice)/Intelligent One (root-man) = nArAyaNa.
vAyu = One who moves (towards his devotees) = nArAyaNa.
Rudra = Destroyer of samsAra dukham = nArAyaNa.
Bhaga = Gracious Lord = nArAyaNa.
Kshetrapati = Lord of Kshetra (body or holy place) = nArAyaNa.
Isa/IshAna = Ruler = nArAyaNa.
Shambhu = One who causes happiness (by his beauty) = nArAyaNa.
Vishnu = all-pervading One = nArAyaNa.
nArAyaNa = nArAyaNa (from mahAnArAyaNa up.)
So, let us dispense with the idiotic claims that ”Vishnu is mentioned 50 times in the Veda whereas Indra is mentioned 100 times” and other such nonsense. All names belong to nArAyaNa only.
There is however, a speciality with names like “Rudra”, “Soma” and “Ishana” in the sense that these names are exclusively used as names of Narasimha (with very few exceptions) only in the Veda. The commentaries of Sri Rudram and Rudra Suktam in this website would help readers to comprehend this fact.
The devata known as Parvati Pati has a connection with Narasimha. Let us examine the facts with unbiased, authengtic pramAnams derived from the lotus feet of AchAryAs.

It is said in the sAstra that there are 4 (or 3) vyuhAs – vAsudeva, sankarshana, pradyumna and aniruddha. There is a pillar in sri vaikunta known as viSaka yUpam which has 4 nodes in 4 directions. This pillar is an avatAram of bhagavAn in moksha sthAna itself.
The topmost node of this pillar is a mass of effulgence, hard to discern and is ParavAsudeva, srI vaikunta nAtha himself. Proceeding downward the nodes become more visible, with the next node being red in color like a ruby and is the Sankarshana vyUham (In this context, remember the name “rohita” occurring in the Rudram, anuvakam 2 which describes the 5 forms of bhagavan – refer the commentary in this website).  The third node is golden in color and is Pradyumna, whereas the fourth node is black like a thundercloud and is Aniruddha.
Thus, these are the 4 vyUhas. And all the vibhava avatArAs proceed from Aniruddha. That being the case, there are three unique exceptions where the avatArAs were amShas or avatArAs of Sankarshana vyUha. These three avatArAs are Adi Sesha, BalarAmA and Narasimha. Now, Adi Sesha is a jivAtmA who is empowered with the amSha of sankarshana. BalarAmA is an avatArA of Sankarshna, BhagavAn himself, who has the amSha of Adi Sesha. But Narasimha avatArA is sAkshAt Sankarshana.
The vishnu purana describes Narasimha as SankarshanAmsam. The Vishnu DharmOttara purAnA explicitly identifies Narasimha as Sankarshana by saying Haris sankarshanaamsena narasimha-vapur-dharah and also says that Narasimha destroys ignorance, sankarshanaatmaa bhagavaan ajnaanasya vinaasanah. Obviously, the gunams of Sankarshana are balam and jnAnam. This was exhibited by Narasimha to destroy Hiranyakasipu and fulfil the desire of prahlada by understanding the latter’s needs respectively.
Thus, Narasimha alone has a unique place as he is sAkshAt sankarshana, the most powerful and primitive vyUha of nArAyaNa.

This section has already been discussed in “Narasimha and Satarudriyam” section of this website. Let me add that:
  1. Narasimha is equated to ParavAsudeva in the narasimha tApanIya Upanishad which says he is beyond viraja.
  2. The Rudram reteirates the above by using the nama “namO vrikshEbhyO harikEshebhyO” for both paravAsudeva and narasimha in the 2nd and 8th anuvAkams respectively.
  3. The name “IshAnas sarvavidyAnAm” also validates this.
  4. The sahasranama contains the names of paravAsudevan in the first set, it includes “nArasimha vapuH srimAn” among the paravAsudeva nAmas!

The quintessential question – why does the srimad bhAgavatam refer to Shiva as “vaishnavam yathaH shambhuH”? What makes him the greatest of vaishnavas?
Here, “greatest of vaishnavas” refers to his strength of yOga. He is the greatest among those who meditate on Vishnu.
Why is he the best meditator?
It is because bhakti yOga has 4 stages equated to the 4 vyUhas in the mAndukya Upanishad – VaisvAnara stage presided by Aniruddha, Taijasa presided by Pradyumna, Prajna presided by Sankarshana and Turiya presided by ParavAsudeva. The Garuda Purana states that Rudra, who is a stitha prajna, attains Sankarshana padam and will soon attain vAsudeva. What this statement means is that Rudra will attain the position (padam) of yoga presided by Sankarshana, ie, Prajna and then, will attain the final stage known as turiya, which culminates in Brahma sAkshAtkAra and hence, moksha - paravAsudeva.
So, Shiva is currently meditating on Sankarshana, which is the most advanced stage of upAsaNa for a samsAri. And here, we supply the pramAnam from the Bhagavatam as well:
bhavani-nathaih stri-ganarbuda-sahasrair avarudhyamano bhagavatas catur-murter maha-purushasya turiyam tamasim murtim prakritim atmanah sankarshana-samjnam atma-samadhi-rupena sannidhapyaitad abhigrinan bhava upadhavati (Bhagavatam 5.17.16)
Note that here it says that Sankarshana is the AtmA of Rudra, who is always meditating on the former. The sAstrAs say that sriman nArAyaNa assumes the form desired by the yOgI in his (yogi’s) heart when the yogi advances in his upAsaNa. In that aspect, let us remember two points,
  1. The Satarudriyam, which is a praise of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha (and also in his rAghava simha aspect) calls him as “girisanta”, ie, the source, end, limit or origin of Girisha (pArvati pati rudradeva). Thus, the Bhagavatam sloka above is a direct upabrahmaNa of this veda nAma.
  1. The mantra “stuhi srutam gartasadam…” refers to the form of Narasimha in the cave of the heart. Thus, a meditator of Sankarshana visualises Narasimha in the cave of the heart.

Thus, it is established that Rudra is a Sankarshana-Narasimha upAsaka. What is the phalan of such upAsaNa? Some amount of sArUpyam is obtained even in samsAra. Thus, Rudra has the 3 eyes of Narasimha, bluish neck resembling the black neck of Narasimha, etc.
And of course he has named himself after Narasimha. Thus, the names such as Rudra, Soma, Nilalohita, Pinaki, Pashupati, Girisha, Giritra, NeelakaNtha, Mrityu, etc denote Narasimha in the Veda only. It is only that pArvati pati has named himself after his chosen upAsya mUrthy.
Thus, it is established that the names of the Satarudriyam pertain to Narasimha only. In that aspect let us clarify a mistake made in the earlier articles where we mentioned pArvati pati was the devata for Rudram. This is wrong. There is zero pramAna for this other than certain interpolated versions of Mahabharata.
The devata for Rudram is Sri Lakshmi Narasimha. The rishi for the Rudram is pArvati pati, who meditates on Sankarshana. The “aghora rishi” who is the mantra draShta for the Rudram is pArvati pati himself. The same pArvati pati is also the rishi for the Rudra Suktam of Rg Veda which is a praise of Narasimha as well.
The further proof that Rudra worships Sankarshana-Narasimha is furnished by the following Garuda Purana incident:

The narasimha tApanIya Upanishad contains the following enlightening statement:
rudra-japaka-shatam ekam ekena atharvashirah-shikha-adhyapakena tatsamam atharvashirah- shikha-adhyapaka shatam ekam ekena tapaniyopanishad adhyapakena tatsamam tapaniyopanishad-adhyapaka-shatam ekam ekena mantraraja-adhyapakena tatsamam (~Narasimha pUrva tApanIya upanishad).
This says that the mantrarAja pada stOtram is superior to japam of the Rudram, Atharvashika, Atharvasiras and the Narasimha tApanIya itself. This is similar to “srI rAma rAma rAmEti…” in the sahasranAma, which asserts that all the kalyAna guNams described in the sahasranama can be seen in the name of rAma itself. It does not mean the other portions are inferior, but only means that the mantra rAja pada stOtram is the essence of these portions just as “rAma nAmam” is the essence of sahasranAma.
1. The Satarudriyam glorifies Narasimha
Since the Rudram glorifies Narasimha, this is justified already. A little more to add:
The satapatha brahmana contains the following story. Prajapati cried in anger and the tears formed into Rudra of a thousand quivers. The devas, being afraid, appeased this Rudra with the Satarudriyam.
This story is wrongly interpreted as pArvati pati. The meaning of the story is:
Prajapati refers to jiva who possesses prajas (pati means possessor). Thus, prajas signify attachments. Tears are a metaphor for pleasure and pain due to such attachment and anger is a metaphor for the wayward nature of the indriyas. The rudra of a thousand quivers is the indriyas of the jivAtma. “Rudra” is a name that denotes the indriyas since one of the meanings is “One who makes us cry” and the Indriyas make the relatives weep at the time of departure of the jiva from the body.
Thus, to appease the wayward indriyas, they need to be engaged in a stuti of bhagavAn to wean them away from attachments. So, the devas signify sattva guNa and such tendencies who offer the Satarudriyam, a praise of Narasimha, to the indriyas, ie, the indriyas engage themselves by praising narasimha with the satarudriyam.
Thus, the Rudram glorifies Sri Lakshmi Narasimha.
2. The Atharvasiras glorifies Narasimha
Secondly, the Atharvasiras refers to the antaryAmin of Rudra. The statement Rudra makes “I am supreme” is similar to how Prahlada says “I am the unborn lord of all” in the Vishnu purAna and is the statement of a realised person who sees himself as the body (sarIra) of sriman nArAyaNa.  The antaryAmin of Rudra is none other than Narasimha only. Thus, this Upanishad talks about Narasimha as well.
3. The atharvasikha glorifies Narasimha
The atharvasikha contains the following. SrI rAmAnujar, in his vedArtha sangraham, quotes the atharvasiras which says,  "brahmA, viShNu, rudrEndras tE sarvE samprasUyantE“ and  "kAraNam tu dhyEyaH”. These vAkyas mean the following -  Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra and Indra are effects. One must rather choose to meditate on the Cause, which is Shambhu.”
Shambhu is interpreted by achAryan in this work as nArAyaNa. The name Shambhu also occurs in the Vishnu sahasranAmA (svayambhu shambhuraditya) and is a common noun. So, the sruti enjoins meditation on nArAyaNa only.
But why mention Vishnu among the others as effects? Because Vishnu is an avatAra of sriman nArAyaNa in the material world and as such, is included in the category of effects. This does not mean he is limited like the other effects – rather, he is identical to nArAyaNa, the Cause, in all respects as evidenced by Vishnu gAyatri. As per sruti vAkya “ajAyamAno bahuda vijAyatE”, he takes avatArams for sport among the material world and is often mentioned along with lesser deities. The Vishnu Purana also says, “the same janArdhana has become Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva”. Here, Brahma and Shiva are jivAs with nArAyaNa as indweller. Vishnu is verily nArAyaNa himself.
It is mentioned to meditate on the cause only in the context of Brahma Vidya. This does not mean one must not meditate on Vishnu. Different brahma vidyAs enjoin meditation on Brahman in different ways leading to the same goal of Sri Vaikunta. This particular vidya enjoins meditation on the kAraNatma, known as Shambhu, rather than the effects, among which vishNu avatAra is included.
As seen before, Narasimha is equated with paravAsudeva, the kAraNAtma, in many places. Also, the Satarudriyam says, “namas shambhavE” with specific reference to Narasimha, hence Shambhu is his name. The sahasranAma says “nArasimha vapuH srimAn”, ie, his appearance is extraordinarily beautiful which is the exact meaning of the shambhu nama occurring later in the sahasranAmA – “he who causes happiness by the beauty of his appearance is Shambhu” (svayambhushambhur Aditya…).
Furthermore, the kAraNatma in the atharvasikha is identified as narasimha by srI krishNa in the harivamSha where Krishna addresses the upanishadic statement to the antaryAmin of rudra, ie, narasimha. This stuti can be found in the section “prayers of sri Krishna to shiva” where you can see that the last sloka of the stuti is an upabrahmaNa of the atharvasikha addressed to Narasimha.
In this context, there are some detractors like the author of the mahapashupatastra blog who quote the following from the atharvasikha and say it refers to Shiva as supreme “Eeshana”,
The pranava (the sound of Om) makes all the souls to bow before it. It is the one and only one which has to be meditated upon as the four Vedas and the birth place of all devas. One who meditates like that goes away from all sorrows and fears and gets the power to protect all others who approach him. It is because of this meditation only that Lord Vishnu who is spread every where, wins over all others. It is because Lord Brahma controlled all his organs and meditated upon it, he attained the position of the creator. Even Lord Vishnu , parks his mind in the sound (Om) of the place of Paramathma (ultimate soul) and meditates upon Eeshana, who is most proper to be worshipped. All this is only proper in case of Eeshana.
Now, I do not have the Sanskrit text, but let us assume this translation is correct.
Even though the entirety of the atharvasikha is not quoted by vedAntins, this mantra does not trouble vaidikas in anyway. All it says is that Ishana is the supreme object of worship. This Ishana is none other than Narasimha who is referred to as “IshAnas sarvavidyAnAm” in the mahAnArAyaNopanishad and Narasimha tApanIya Upanishad. It is said Vishnu meditates on this Ishana which is also perfectly true. Just as Sri Rama worshipped Narayana (himself) and Krishna worshipped Narasimha, the antaryAmin of Shiva (refer the section on prayers of sri Krishna to shiva), it is clear that Mahavishnu worships himself always. And he gains his strength from his own nature to win over others.
So, this “Ishana” is not pArvati pati as imagined ludicrously by the author of mahApashupatAstra blog, but Narasimha only.
4. The mantra rAja pada stOtra eulogises Narasimha
The mantra rAja pada stOtra is the greatest stotra on narasimha as well, we can easily say that the mantra rAja pada stOtra is the essence of the other sections as abov in explaining the tattvams related to narasimha and hence, of greater merit. That is the purport of this mantra.
Indeed, Ahirbudhnya (Shiva) composed the stotra as the essence of these portions only. Shiva is in the stage of bhakti yOga presided by Sankarshana mUrthy and since Narasimha is an amsam of Sankarshana, he (Shiva) is constantly meditating on Narasimha. Thus Sri Lakshmi Narasimha is the devata of the Rudram and hence is described.
And Ahirbudhnya, being Shiva, also shows how Shiva is constantly meditating on Narasimha.
So, this article conclusively proves:
  1. Sankarshana-Narasimha identity.
  2. Narasimha is praised by all names such as Rudra, Soma, Shambhu, Pashupati, Ugra, etc.
  3. Parvati Pati is the rishi for these vedic portions and not the devata.
  4. Parvati pati worships Narasimha in this manner.
  5. The confusion arising in the minds of those who learn the Satarudriyam, etc will be dispelled as they now know that pArvati pati has named himself after Narasimha and is not referred to by the vedic portions.
  6. The mahApashupatastra blog author’s views have been completely demolished by the various sections on Satarudriyam as well as this article.


  1. Interestingly, in the Muthuswamy Dikshitar song "Sri Rangapura Vihara," the last line in the charanam reads "Shankarshana Moola Kandha Shankara Guru Guhaanandha" and Dikshitar says this after eulogizing Sri Ranganatha as Sri Rama. A similarity I noticed in an article in this blog too! While Dikshitar Kriti is not a parama pramanam, an ardent Parvathidevi Bhakta saying this about Sriman Narayana shows how noble people were in accepting facts without any qualms.

  2. Dear HBB/Aryama,

    The below quoted lines are an excerpt from this article.
    "Thus, these are the 4 vyUhas. And all the vibhava avatArAs proceed from Aniruddha. That being the case, there are three unique exceptions where the avatArAs were amShas or avatArAs of Sankarshana vyUha. These three avatArAs are Adi Sesha, BalarAmA and Narasimha. Now, Adi Sesha is a jivAtmA who is empowered with the amSha of sankarshana. BalarAmA is an avatArA of Sankarshna, BhagavAn himself, who has the amSha of Adi Sesha. But Narasimha avatArA is sAkshAt Sankarshana."

    I am having uncertainty over two things mentioned in the above passage.

    1. Isn't Sri Krishna avatAra an unique exception too? All along it was my understanding that Sri Krishna is sAkshAt vAsudeva rather than an avatAra that proceeded from Aniruddha vyuhA, but I could be wrong. What does our pUrvAchAryAs say about this?

    2. How should we understand this subtle difference between Adi Sesha and BalarAmA? I thought BalarAmA is just another AvEsha avatAra of bhagavAn like ParashurAmA, except in this case the jivAtmA is Adi Sesha. But it seems like there is more significance to this avatAra than I thought.

    I know your time is valuable and must be already spending some significant time on future articles. But I would greatly appreciate if you can shed some light on these, particularly the first question is troubling me.

    1. 1) KrishNa is an avatAra proceeding from aniruddha. Of course, these are just semantics as there is no difference in qualities of para-vAsudeva or krishNa.

      2) I think there is a typo on the article, thanks for pointing it out. Actually, balarAma is an AvatAra of adi sesha, with the amSha of sankarshana. Not vice versa as we had written. HBB will correct that statement later in the article.

      The nArAyaNanIyam and harivaMsha have been quoted by our acharyas and these texts state balarAma is an (AvEsha) avatAra of bhagavAn. The nature of AvESha is svarUpAvEsha (like vedavyAsa) rather than shaktyAvEsha (parashurAma). So, the amSha of bhagavAn in balarAma was very potent and expressive, more so than parashurAma.

      LakshmaNa in contrast did not have this amSha to such potency and hence he is not mentioned as an avatAra of anyone other than adi sesha. You can also clearly see the stark difference in the behaviour of lakshmaNa and balarAma towards bhagavan as well.

      The reason why bhagavAn appeared as AvESha in balarAma is simple. KrishNa wanted adi sesha as his elder brother because adi sesha had served him well as his younger brother in rAmavatAra. As you know, when a devotee serves bhagavan, he always wants to become a devotee of his devotee. By asking adi sesha to be his elder brother, krishNa could serve him as lakshmaNa served rAma.


    2. Cont'd from above...

      But adi sesha by nature is a servant of bhagavAn and he cannot accept such an offer by himself. The elder brother must always be independent to and accepting of the services of the younger brother. So, what krishNa did was to invest his amSha in adi sesha so that the latter could be born before him. The svarUpAvESha of vishNu in adi sesha allowed balarAma to be bhagavan himself and suppress adi sesha's characteristics at times.

      It is an endearing trait of bhagavAn that he always wants to imitate his devotees. In krishNavatAra, he imitated lakshmaNa by serving an older brother. He imitated rAmadUta hanumAn by becoming a similar messenger for the pAndavas. He imitated Sita's quality of purushakAratva, ie, mediation for surrender, by doing both purushakAram and becoming upAyam when Arjuna surrendered to him for gitOpadEsam. He also imitated the personality of a perfect guru by preaching Gita and Anu Gita.

      Hope this clarifies. In summary, balarAma is an AvatAra of adi sesha with svarUpAvEsha of vishNu.

    3. Hello Aaryamaa. I am an aspiring Sri Vaishnava, and your answer to Hari Bhaktha was very interesting!!! I have some queries:

      The svarUpAvESha of vishNu in adi sesha allowed balarAma to be bhagavan himself and suppress adi sesha's characteristics at times.

      In summary, balarAma is an AvatAra of adi sesha with svarUpAvEsha of vishNu.

      What do you mean by 'suppress'? What does 'Avesha' mean? Is Balarama 'higher' than Adi-Shesha in a way? Or is Sri Balarama both Lord Vishnu and Adi-Shesha? I had not known this was an existing concept :O

      Also, rather unrelated, is Lord Vishnu's attire (kaustubha gem, robes, earings, chakra, conch, mace, lotus) all part of him as his personal energy? I read a mantra on the Sudarshana Chakra once.

      This is the first time i have written a comment on your site, but i have been reading this blog for the past year now. :)

    4. It's nice that you are trying to learn Sri Vaishnavism. I will answer your query here just this once as it's based on what I had written earlier, but please understand that we do not usually entertain general questions unless it's related to the topic of vishNu paratva. If you want such general queries answered, please use the contact form and we will answer you through that medium, as opposed to lengthy explanations in the comments section.

      "AvESha" is the ability of bhagavAn to express himself through a jIvAtma to carry out certain tasks. There are 2 types of AvESha -

      ShaktyAvESha in which bhagavAn bestows certain powers on a jIvAtma (parashurAma, kArtavIryarjuna, brahma, rudra, the pAndava arjuna etc). The degree of shaktyAvEsha may vary - ie, parashurAma has a higher degree of vishNu shakti than brahma, rudra etc and hence is counted among the dasavatArAs due to his actions.

      svarUpAvESha in which bhagavAn himself, by svarUpa, "enters" into a jIvA - a sort of "possession" if you will (but in a good way, not exorcist like!) vedavyAsa and balarAma are the major examples -- and balarAma exhibiting greater potency is counted in the dasavatAra.

      When I said "suppress", I meant that bhagavAn's personality was predominant in balarAma due to the AvESha while Adi Sesha's personality was hidden or dormant. In contrast, veda vyAsa's personality was that of the jIvA, but only his knowledge was a consequence of the AvESha (here, I might say that some people appear to think vyAsa is a shaktyAvEsha, but that seems to be contradicted by the sahasranAma vAkya "vyAsaya vishNu rUpAya" which suggests he is svarUpAveSha). BalarAma is adi sesha and not a higher entity.

      BhagavAn can take away the AvESha from these jIvas anytime, upon which they would lose their powers. I would recommend you to read rAmAyaNa, bala kanda, sarga 76, where rAma takes away the vishNu shakti of parashurAma -

      The AvESha avatAras are jIvas with karma and ego who are not fit to be worshipped (with the exception of balarAma who is the nitya sUri adi sesha and hence pure enough to be worshipped).

      Check this link for more information on AvESha: www.srimatham.con/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/prapanna_parijata.pdf. AvESha avatAra is described in page 25 of this PDF with quotes from the agamas.

      Kindly note that this work in the link, prapanna parijata, is not considered a genuine work of Sri Vaishnava acharyas, but seems to be a later work by a lesser person attributed to the acharya. But it does not contradict sampradaya and is hence a good reference. Additionally, we are not fans of the website either, which has many glaringly wrong views on Sri Vaishnavism, so don't take this as an endorsement of the website.

      Regarding your other question, bhagavAn is completely different and distinct from his body which is insentient and made of suddha sattva. There is no concept called "energy of bhagavan"..."energy" seems to be an English mistranslation of the sanskrit words like shakti, amSha, tejas etc. It is a very big topic which cannot be discussed here adequately.

      Please use the contact form for such general queries from now on and we will try to answer at our convenience.

    5. Little more on veda vyAsa.

      The agamas appear to classify veda vyAsa as a shaktyAvEsha, but there are distinct pramAnAs in texts like the quoted sahasranAma sloka and the vishNu purANa which describe him as svarUpAvESha. This could be due to yuga bheda with veda vyAsa being ShaktyAvESha in one yuga and svarUpAvESha in another yuga, a logical explanation. Or perhaps there is a reconciliation I am not aware of myself. Anyway, it is an inconsequential issue.

    6. Thank you so much for your reply. I am a westerner that only speaks English, and this site and it's moderators like you are extremely valuable to me. I will use the contact option for unrelated questions that does not pertain in a topic (such as this one) :)

    7. Dear devotee, you contacted us privately through the form but you forgot to provide an email address. So there is no way of replying back to your questions as of now. Can you type a quick message in the same form (you do not need to re-type what you have already sent us earlier, we have received the message and saved it), this time remembering to provide the address? We can then respond to you.

  3. Thank you for a detailed clarification.
    It's always a heart full of bliss when one reflects upon BhagavAn's SouIlyam!

  4. Dear all,

    Just an interesting thing we noticed. The garuda purANA throws up another link between shiva and sankarshaNa as follows:

    sthitaprajño'pi yastūrdhvaḥ prāpya raudraṁ padaṁ tataḥ |
    sāṅkarṣaṇaṁ tato muktimagād viṣṇuprasādataḥ ||

    Meaning: “ A stithaprajnA (One who is unaffected by changes), who is also (api) Urdhva (one who has risen above desire), obtained (reached) the abode belonging to Rudra (Raudra PadaM), then the abode of SankarshaNa (SankarshaNa Padam) and thereafter obtained mukti by the grace of vishNu”.

    “Padam” refers to literal abodes. This is an upabrahmaNa for the mantras like “tatpuruShAya vidmahE mahAdevAya dimahi tanno rudra prachodayat” and puruShasya vidmahe sahasrAkShasya mahAdevasya dhImahi . tanno rudraH prachodayAt.h”

    Basically, the gist of these mantras and the purANa sloka mean:

    1) The upAsaka who is sthitha prajna and Urdhva first attains KailAsa, the abode of Rudra

    2) By the grace of Rudra, he attains the abode of SankarshaNa. It is well known that the upAsya mUrthy of Rudra is SankarshaNa.

    3) Following this, he attains mukti.

    There are pramANas in the AgamAs which state that the vyUhAs have their own lokas. To quote srI vedAnta desikan in srimad rahasya traya sAra:

    bhava-vyUha-lOkAdi prApti kramam sollumidangaLukkum ..."

    Context : shrI vedAnta dESikan explains that, those pramAnams stating that mumukshus attain the vibhava lOkAs (mediate upon vibhava mUrtIs) and then attain vyUha lOkAs (meditate upon vyUha mUrtIs) and finally attain moksham (ie. paramapadam alias SrI VaikuNTam) is a viSEsha vishayam (specific/special instance) for a particular adhikAri adopting certain Brahma vidyAs and is not for all upAsakAs.

    This Garuda PurANa sloka likely pertains to upAsakas who do rudrOpAsaNa, ie, meditation on paramAtma as the antaryAmin of Rudra as detailed in Upanishads like the atharvasiras. Rudra being an AvEsha avatAra of bhagavAn, this means it is a meditation on vibhava rUpa, as mentioned by vedAnta desikan earlier. They attain Rudra loka, where Rudra is their guru and by his grace, attain SankarshaNa, following which they attain moksha.

    Not just general people, but Rudra himself has another birth left, according to the shAstras:

    mahādeva parejanmaMstava muktirnirūpyate" (nAradIya purANa)

    Oh Mahadeva, after completing another janma, your mukti is to take place.

    Rudra himself, being a sankarshaNOpAsaka, attains SankarshaNa loka in the next birth, which then leads to moksha. Extra puNya earns you Rudra padavi itself as opposed to just a birth in the abode of Rudra it would seem.

    These pramANas are quoted by dvaitins. Apparently they seem to have misunderstood "sankarshaNa" as Adi Sesha and interpret these slokas to say "Rudra becomes Adi Sesha in his next birth, then attains moksha". But that doesn't seem right based on the shruti mantrAs declaring Rudra as a medium to attain paramAtma and the existence of vyUha lokas.

    Interesting, nonetheless.

    1. How very interesting! Pranams for sharing! And may i ask, if it's not too much trouble for you, where in our scriptures does it say Rudra is an Avesha avatara of bhagavan? Thank you :)

    2. Rudra is in-charge of destruction and as such he is the amSha of sankarShaNa, the Lord who exhibits the guNAs of jnAna and bala, and who destroys the Universe. This makes him the AvEsha of the Lord.

      SankarShaNa is associated with the form of Narasimha according to pramANAs like "Haris sankarshanAmShEna narasimha vapur dharah".

      Bhagavatam and several texts, including the above quoted Garuda purANA describe this. The vishvaksEna samhita of the pAncharAtra lists brahma and rudra among the AvEsha avatArAs of the Lord.

  5. I have read for the time and the misunderstanding that Aaryaman has that Krishna is from Anirudha cannot be more untrue. Now for for this word ParaVasudeva... there is no such word that I have come across yet in any of the scripture denoting it as a name, as is conveyed here. Vasudeva yes ofcourse is Lord Krishna's name but Para Vasudev kindly let me read a verse where its mentioned Para Vasudeva.

    Now again the semantic difference that Aaryaman has tried to propagate between Lord Anirudh and Lord Krishna is at best naive.
    Krishna! what is the meaning of this word? One who understands that understands all of Vedas and scriptures. There is no need to understand anything further. It is the essence of all names. Even more integral than the name Narayana itself.

    Lord Krishna as per the holy scripture is understood as the original Narayana. There is no difference between the Vishnu Tatva and yet there is distinctiveness as per the revelation of the scriptures. Krishna is to be understood as the source of all the majesty. Lord Krishna is prayed by lord Brahma as the source of Vishnu tatva and all the forms / incarnations. Lord Brahma calls him the original candle.

    Now I can easily prove this but if only anyone here is interested. This is higher knowledge for Vaishnavas. Not to be discussed outside. It is not to distinguish between Vishnu tatva as that would be foolish but to understand the distinction is the essence. Anirudh for is the plenary expansion of Lord Krishna and there should be no confusion in that.

    2nd) While the explanation of Shiva Tatva is accurate by the owner of this wonderful blog but still it is incomplete. I differ with the many of the averments of Aaryaman vehemently and completely.

    mahādeva parejanmaMstava muktirnirūpyate" (nAradIya purANa)

    Oh Mahadeva, after completing another janma, your mukti is to take place.

    The above mentioned English translation of the verse I with all humility and respect say is most flawed. Then to say that Shiva will become Adi Sheha in next birth is again a major misunderstanding. That is not it. For this 1 has to clearly understand the Shambhu

    If given an opportunity with your & everyone's blessings and good wishes I shall by grace of Lord Krishna try and put to rest these unnecessary confusions worst confounded.

    1. Sir,

      Aryamaa is one of the authors of this blog, and his statements are correct and are as per our Purvacharyas. Note that your position comes from Gaudiya/ISKCON interpretations and it is not accepted by Vaishnavas of other sampradayas. There is no need to bulldoze or force feed other sampradayas.

    2. I am not going to mince words here. There is no intent to offend, just an observation of facts.

      A problem with ISKCON is that they are much closer to abrahamic religions than Vedanta despite their worship of Krishna - their blind belief in one book (Bhagavatam/Gita), wrong interpretations that contradict science and perception, proselytizing by hawking books in airports and railway stations (against tradition which only requires knowledge to be given to those who are interested).

      Then the terminologies they use - "godhead" for Krishna which is a Christian term for the "Father", the use of "original" form as though there are "unoriginal or fake" forms (we ourselves use "Lord" as an english equivalent on thus blog not entirely without regrets), "krishna consciousness", "transcendental/impersonal", "mayavadis" derogatively referred to in a manner similar to how Christians mention Satan, their intolerance for opposing views (it is okay to debate opposing traditions, but demonizing is not needed). Most outrageous is their idea that Jesus was a Vishnu-bhakta while criticising Shaivas as "materialistic" and mayavadis as "rascals"!!

      Essentially ISKCON as practiced by followers of Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Swami Prabhupada is Christianity repackaged with a Vedic flavour and substituting Krishna's name for "God the Father". I would regard Shaivas as closer to the truth than them, and this is said with no enmity to ISKCON; there are many good people within ISKCON; it's just a cold observation of tradition and philosophy.

      However, I have nothing but respect for traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavas. The writings of the six goswamis, Baladeva Vidyabhushana and the devotion of Sri Mahaprabhu is extraordinary and we have referenced some of them on the blog. I am not sure if they have similar beliefs as ISKCON, but certainly, we don't intend to say they are outside of the Vedic tradition.

  6. Adiyen RangarAmAnuja Dasan,
    Just an add-on to the beautiful description of Sankarshana Bhagavan. It is interesting to note that even Garudar is considered to be avataram of Sankarshana Perumal as per Garuda Dandakam of Swami Vedanta Desikan - SankarshanAtman garutman marutpanchakAdIsha murthe


Please click here and read the information in red carefully before posting comments

Kindly also check if we already have an answer to your question, in the FAQ section of this blog:

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.