A विष्णुभक्त's problem with शिव

[Mahamaho. Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

This विष्णुभक्त  tries to avoid शिव at every step --

1. वेङ्कटेश्वर -- He is श्रीनिवास (at Tirumala-Tirupati) rather than वेङ्कटेश्वर -- ईश्वर (here) means शिव ।

2. वीश -- Before the Matric system was introduced there used to be a different system (in Andhra) -- वीश is 1400 grams - पदलम् is 700 grams . This person wanted

वंकायलु ( Brinjal ) of one वीश - but there is problem - the word ईश means ईश्वर -- so he asked the vendor for two पदलम्s of वंकायलु । The vendor shot back - you mean a वीश ?  -- the same two पदलम्s -- you mean a वीश ? -- give me the same two पदलम्s . The poor vendor could not get the point (Philosophy) - weighed a वीश !!

3. शिवकोडि -- name of a village near मुंगण्ड (मुनिखण्ड , East Godaavari Disttrict , Andhra Pradesh) which is the birth place of Jagannathapanditaraya and myself).

He had some work in that village and enquired someone - how to reach विष्णुकोडि ? -- the person shot back - do you mean शिवकोडि? there is no विष्णुकोडि 

as such ! - the same विष्णुकोडि , which way? -- go straight for one kilometre then turn right -  there will be शिवकोडि , I do not know what your probelm is !

4. Stone in rice -- Generally it is thrown away . Rather this man thought - good chance! I am able to get him -- crushed the stone between the teeth.

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam

Prof of Sanskrit (Retd)

Adj Professor , Dept of Heritage Science and Technology

IIT , Hyderabad

Chairman , Bharateeya Vidvat Parishat

Ph:09866110741

https://sites.google.com/view/koradeeyam/home

[Krishna Kashyap]

Namaste Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam Ji,

Your recent email reminded me of a conversation between my teacher, Sri KSV, and HH Kanchi Paramacharya on the Siva Vishnu topic.

I've attached the document with details of this conversation.

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CAKj2ELQ_UuHhvLwzy0-19fsnADHEpam6i8TpJFGe2NkNLJ221Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Yasoda Jivan dasa]

परात्परतरं यान्ति नारायणपरायणाः ।

न ते तत्र गमिष्यन्ति ये द्विषन्ति महेश्वरम्॥ इति कूर्मपुराणे 

यः शिवः सोऽहमेवेह योऽहं स भगवान्शिवः। नानयोरन्तरं   किञ्चिदाकाशनिलयोरिव॥ इति हयशीर्षपञ्चरातत्रागमे 

शिवाय विष्णुरूपाय। शिवरूपाय विष्णवे । 

शिवस्य हृदयं विष्णुर्विष्णोस्तु हृदयं शिवः।।

यथा  शिवमयो विष्णुररेवं विष्णुमयः शिवः।

यथान्तरं  न पश्यामि तथा मे स्वस्तिरायुषः ।। इति हरिभक्तिविलासे 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANkLSMn6tHuT9DXqeumDDMJewsLf8Koxypv%2BOMjfd95byB1miw%40mail.gmail.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

A very interesting anecdote pertaining to Trimuti Abheda from Skanda Purana describing how All the Three Trimutis are devoted to each other and do not go beyond one another.  

~ स्कन्दपुराणम्/खण्डः १ (माहेश्वरखण्डः)/कौमारिकाखण्डः/अध्यायः ४१       

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/gh5

Sages in Naimishāraṇya were beset with a question as to who among the Trimurtis was the Greatest.

॥करन्धम उवाच॥

केचिच्छिवं समाश्रित्य विष्णुमाश्रित्य वेधसम्॥
वर्णयंति परे मोक्षं त्वं तु कस्मात्तु मन्यसे॥ ४१.१ ॥

॥महाकाल उवाच॥
अपारवैभवा देवास्त्रयोऽप्येते नरर्षभ॥
योगींद्राणामपि त्वत्र चेतो मुह्यति किं मम॥ ४१.२ ॥

Even great yogis are deluded on the above question even though the Three Gods are of unmatched powers.  

[This statement of the Purana is mirrored in the Māyāpanchakam of Shankaracharya:

विधिहरिहरविभेदमप्यखण्डे
बत विरचय्य बुधानपि प्रकामम् ।
भ्रमयति हरिहरभेदभावा-
नघटितघटनापटीयसी माया ॥ ५॥

Alas! Maya (माया) makes the impossible possible. It creates the division of Brahmadeva (ब्रह्मदेव), Visnu (विष्णु), and Rudra (रुद्र) even in the undivided Brahman. It indeed deludes even the scholars such that they practice devotion divided between Visnu (विष्णु) and Rudra (रुद्र).]

पुरा किलैवं मुनयो नैमिषारण्यवासिनः॥
संदिह्यांतः श्रेष्ठतायां ब्रह्मलोकमुपागमन्॥ ४१.३ ॥

Who is the greatest among the Three?

Brahmā replied:

तस्मिन्क्षणे विरिंचोऽपि श्लोकं प्रह्वोऽब्रवीत्किल॥
अनंताय नमस्तस्मै यस्यांतो नोपलभ्यते॥ ४१.४ ॥
महेशाय च भक्ते द्वौ कृपायेतां सदा मयि॥

Vishnu and Shiva are unparalleled. My obeisance to them both. Let both be compassionate to me.

ततः श्रेष्ठं च तं मत्वा क्षीरोदं मुनयो ययुः॥ ४१.५ ॥
तत्र योगेश्वरः श्लोकं प्रबुध्यन्नमुमब्रवीत्॥

Vishnu said:

ब्रह्माणं सर्वभूतेषु परमं ब्रह्मरूपिणम्॥ ४१.६ ॥
सदाशिवं च वंदे तौ भवेतां मंगलाय मे॥

Brahma and Shiva are both Great  I bow to them and they shall bless me.

ततस्ते विस्मिता विप्रा अपसृत्य ययुः पुनः॥ ४१.७ ॥
कैलासे ददृशुः स्थाणुं वदंतं गिरिजां प्रति॥

Shiva said:

एकादश्यां प्रनृत्यानि जागरे विष्णुसद्मनि॥ ४१.८ ॥
सदा तपस्यां चरामि प्रीत्यर्थं हरिवेधसोः॥

During the Ekadashi vigil I dance in Vishnu's abode. I always practice tapas for the pleasure of Brahma and Vishnu.

श्रुत्वेति चापसृत्यैव खिन्नास्ते मुनयोऽब्रुवन्॥ ४१.९ ॥
यद्वा देवा न संयांति पारं ये च परस्परम्॥
तत्सृष्टसृष्टसृष्टेषु गणना काऽस्मदादिषु॥ ४१.१० ॥

The sages concluded:  When the Trimurtis themselves hold each other to be the Greatest, we stand nowhere. 

उत्तमाधममध्यत्वममीषां वर्णयंति ये॥
असत्यवादिनः पापास्ते यांति निरयं ध्रुवम्॥ ४१.११ ॥

Those who differentiate between the Trimurtis are liars and sinners and will end up in hell. 

एवं ते निश्चयामासुर्नैमिषेयास्तपस्विनः॥
सत्यमेतच्च राजेंद्र ममापीदं मतं स्फुटम्॥ ४१.१२ ॥
जापकानां सहस्राणि वैष्णवानां तथैव च॥
शैवानां च विधिं विष्णुं स्थाणुं चाप्यन्वमूमुचन्॥ ४१.१३ ॥
तस्माद्यस्य मनोरागो यस्मिन्देवे भवेत्स्फुटम्॥
स तं भजेद्विपापः स्यान्ममेदं मतमुत्तमम्॥ ४१.१४ ॥

Let him worship that God to whom he finds himself naturally drawn.  

This is the conclusion of Veda Vyasa through this episode. 

Hindi translation: 

https://www.getwisdom.in/index.php?flg=N&pmd=W&mdi=L&thm=2&vip=puran&puran=13+Skand&sec=2&chap=14&pn=157&act=back&cod=skanda&bn1=chap&bn=page

Vishnu is the foremost Shaiva - Skandapurana

Just as the statement 'वैष्णवानां यथा शम्भुः' of the Bhāgavatam (Shiva is the greatest Vaishnava) we have the statement:

'Nasti Shaivagranirvishnoh' (Vishnu is the greatest Shaiva) in this chapter of the Skandapurana:

स्कन्दपुराणम्/खण्डः १ (माहेश्वरखण्डः)/अरुणाचलमाहात्म्यम् २/अध्यायः ०४

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/h1w

नास्ति शैवाग्रणीर्विष्णोर्नास्ति रक्षा विभूतितः ।।
नास्ति भक्तेः सदाचारो नास्ति रक्षाकराद्गुरुः ।। ५६ ।।

 Also the Shiva purana says in this chapter:

शिवपुराणम्/संहिता २ (रुद्रसंहिता)/खण्डः ३ (पार्वतीखण्डः)/अध्यायः ३५

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/wk8

Yamaraja blesses Padma, a chaste woman: Let your husband be devoted to Shiva just as Vishnu is: 

शिवभक्तो हरिसमस्सिद्धस्तु कपिलात्परः ।।

Sridhara Swamin, at the invocation of his Bhagavata commentary, says:

माधवोमाधवावीशौ सर्वसिद्धिविधायिनौ। 

वन्दे परस्परात्मानौ परस्परनुतिप्रियौ॥ 

I bow to Mādhava and Umādhava (Shiva) who are both 'Isha-s' Supreme Lords. They are capable of bestowing all accomplishments (to their devotees). They are both the selves of each other and both love to engage in the stuti of each other.  

Veda Vyasa has said in the Mahabharata:

रुद्रो नारायणश्चैव सत्त्वमेकं द्विधा कृतम्। 

लोके चरति कौन्तेय व्यक्तिस्थं सर्वकर्मसु।। 12-350-27a 12-350-27b. 

[Rudra and Narayana are only two manifestations of One Principle.......]  

warm regards

subrahmanian.v 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CA%2BxhfB%2BqtNj6O-FiDq5S%2B33bs8tENG2BVJgxii8a%2BsnJ8hmE%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kalyan Chakravarthy]

> वेङ्कटेश्वर -- He is श्रीनिवास (at Tirumala-Tirupati) rather than वेङ्कटेश्वर -- ईश्वर (here) means शिव ।

The ईश्वर in वेङ्कटेश्वर is not a reference to शिव. It means Lord.

वेङ्कटेश्वर - Lord of the (mountain) Venkata.

We see extensive usage of the word वेङ्कटेश्वर by Vaishnavas.

In the main सुप्रभातम् - श्री वेङ्कटेश दयिते तव सुप्रभातम्

In the स्तोत्रम् - विना वेङ्कटेशं न नाथो न नाथः

सदा वेङ्कटेशं स्मरामि स्मरामि ।

हरे वेङ्कटेश प्रसीद प्रसीद

प्रियं वेङ्कटॆश प्रयच्छ प्रयच्छ ॥

In the प्रपत्ति (repeating several times) - श्रीवेङ्कटेशचरणौ शरणं प्रपद्ये

The above is sung everyday morning in Tirumala during सुप्रभात seva.

The सुप्रभात is composed by a Sri Vaishnava Acharya - Prativadi Bhayankara Sri Anantacharya.

The Bhagavad Gita also uses the words related to ईश्वर for कृष्ण.

भगवान् कृष्ण referring to Himself as महेश्वर - 

भोक्तारं यज्ञतपसां सर्वलोकमहेश्वरम्।

सुहृदं सर्वभूतानां ज्ञात्वा मां शान्तिमृच्छति।।5.29।।

यो मामजमनादिं च वेत्ति लोकमहेश्वरम्।

असम्मूढः स मर्त्येषु सर्वपापैः प्रमुच्यते।।10.3।।

अर्जुन addressing भगवान् कृष्ण as परमेश्वर -

एवमेतद्यथात्थ त्वमात्मानं परमेश्वर।

द्रष्टुमिच्छामि ते रूपमैश्वरं पुरुषोत्तम।।11.3।।

अर्जुन addressing भगवान् कृष्ण as विश्वेश्वर -

अनेकबाहूदरवक्त्रनेत्रं

पश्यामि त्वां सर्वतोऽनन्तरूपम्।

नान्तं न मध्यं न पुनस्तवादिं

पश्यामि विश्वेश्वर विश्वरूप।।11.16।।

भगवान् कृष्ण referring to Himself as ईश्वर -

उत्तमः पुरुषस्त्वन्यः परमात्मेत्युदाहृतः।

यो लोकत्रयमाविश्य बिभर्त्यव्यय ईश्वरः।।15.17।।

यस्मात्क्षरमतीतोऽहमक्षरादपि चोत्तमः।

अतोऽस्मि लोके वेदे च प्रथितः पुरुषोत्तमः।।15.18।।

There are several such examples of the word ईश्वर used in a Vaishnava context.

श्रीकृष्णार्पणम्

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Google's AI Overview :

 Early Azhwar saints, including Poigai Alwar and Peyalwar, have described Lord Venkateswara (Tirupati Balaji) as a combination of Shiva and Vishnu (Hari-Hara) in their hymns. 

Here are the key details regarding this description:

• Hari-Hara-Samaikya Murti: In some of the older pasurams (verses) of the Azhwars, the Lord of Tirumala is described as having attributes of both Vishnu and Shiva.
• The Specific Verse: While sometimes attributed to Poigai Alwar, the specific verse describing this synthesis is often noted in Peyalwar's Moondram Thiruvanthathi (verse 63). It describes the Lord with matted hair (Shiva's Thazh sadai), a tall crown (Vishnu's Neen mudi), an axe (Shiva's Mazhu), a Chakra (Vishnu's discus), an encircling snake, and a golden waist band.
• The Interpretation: The verses highlight the lord of Tirumala as "two forms in one" (Hari-Hara), signifying that Vishnu is the Antaryami (inner self) of Shiva.
• Context: This portrayal emphasizes that the Supreme Brahman is one and appears to devotees in the form they choose to worship, or a blend of both. 

Later Reinterpretation:
While the early Azhwars (Poigai, Bhoothath, and Pey) described this combined form, later Vaishnava Acharyas, particularly Ramanujacharya, focused on identifying the Tirumala deity strictly as Vishnu. Ramanujacharya established the idol's identity as Vishnu, subsequently reducing the emphasis on the Shaivite attributes. 

However, the historical hymns of the early Azhwars (collectively part of the Naalayira Divya Prabandham) still hold these descriptions of the combined form of the Lord. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/4305c5df-b354-4937-8988-9f5d52783329n%40googlegroups.com.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

Hyderabad, Telangana-500044

 

 

 

[Kalyan Chakravarthy]

>Early Azhwar saints, including Poigai Alwar and Peyalwar, have described Lord Venkateswara (Tirupati Balaji) as a combination of Shiva and Vishnu (Hari-Hara) in their hymns. 

I will discuss what the early Alwars actually say in a subsequent post. 

In this post, however, I want to present evidence that strongly supports the identification of the Tirumala deity with Vishnu. This evidence comes from the Tamil work Silappatikaram, generally dated between the 2nd and 6th centuries CE, which is several centuries earlier than Sri Ramanuja (11th–12th century CE).

Modern scholars usually place the Alwars between the 6th and 9th centuries CE. While there is some overlap in dating ranges, it is a reasonable working assumption that Silappatikaram predates the earliest Alwars.

A detailed description of the deity at Venkatam appears in Canto 11 of Silappatikaram:

வீங்கு நீர் அருவி வேங்கடம் என்னும்

ஓங்கு உயர் மலையத்து உச்சி மீமிசை-

விரி கதிர் ஞாயிறும் திங்களும் விளங்கி,

இரு மருங்கு ஓங்கிய இடைநிலைத் தானத்து,

மின்னுக் கொடி உடுத்து, விளங்கு வில் பூண்டு, 45

நல் நிற மேகம் நின்றது போல-

பகை அணங்கு ஆழியும், பால் வெண் சங்கமும்,

தகை பெறு தாமரைக் கையின் ஏந்தி,

நலம் கிளர் ஆரம் மார்பில் பூண்டு,

பொலம் பூ ஆடையின் பொலிந்து தோன்றிய 50

செங் கண் நெடியோன் நின்ற வண்ணமும்-

என் கண் காட்டு என்று என் உளம் கவற்ற

A translation of Silappadikaram by V R Ramachandra Dikshitar can be found here (page points to the relevant verses translation) - 

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.201802/page/n187/mode/1up

In page 172-173 in the book numbering, the translation is given as follows - 

"(I also came to see) the beauty of the red-eyed Lord, holding in His beautiful lotus-hands the discus which is death to His enemies, and also the milkwhite conch ; (to see Him) wearing a garland of tender flowers on His breast, and draped in golden flowers ; and dwelling on the topmost crest of the tall and lofty hill named Venkatam, with innumerable waterfalls, standing like a cloud in its natural hue, adorned with a rainbow and attired with lightning, in the midst of a place both sides of which are illumined by the spreading rays of the sun and the moon."

Apart from this translation, I have also referred to another translation by R Parthasarathy. The name of the book is - "The Cilappatikaram: The tale of an anklet", available on Amazon India at this link -

 

https://www.amazon.in/Cilappatikaram-Tale-Anklet-R-Parthasarathy/dp/0143031961

The translation given by this author is as follows (brackets are mine) - 

"I came to see the splendor of red-eyed Vishnu (Nediyon/நெடியோன்), Holding in his elegant lotus hands, 

The wheel (chakra) that augurs death to his enemies,

And the milkwhite conch (shankha), who appears radiant,

In a cloth of golden flowers, with a wreath,

Of tender blossoms flung over his chest,

On the peak of the sublime hill known as Venkatam,

Bathed by waterfalls in spate, he lives - 

The hill erect as a dark cloud,

Robed in Lightning and brightened with a rainbow,

Its lofty heights washed by the outspread rays

Of the sun and the moon"

Notable in the above descriptions are - the Lord holding the Discus and milk white Conch in his hands. This is strong Vaishnava iconography, describing Vishnu. Also remarkable is the absence of any specific Shaiva iconography.

Taken together, this provides strong early literary evidence that the deity of Venkatam was considered as exclusively Vishnu centuries before the period of later Vaishnava Acharyas.  

  श्रीकृष्णार्पणम्  

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Yes, Kalyan ji. 

What Google's AI overview is presenting is a special case within the broad general case presented by you. 

As an example, this verse is mentioned:

In verse 63 of Moondram Thiruvandhadhi, Peyalwar describes the Lord of Tirumala (Venkateswara) as having attributes of both Shiva and Vishnu, highlighting their oneness: 

tAzh saDaiyum neeNmuDiyum oNmazhuvum chakkaramum
soozharavum ponnANum tOnrumAl soozhum |
tiraNDaruvi pAyum tirumalaimEl endaikku
iraNDuruvum onrAi isaindu

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/4214f9ef-9f8e-477d-9d39-d5255df8039fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Kalyan Chakravarthy]

In my previous post, I mention evidence from Silappatikaram on this topic, which exclusively identifies Venkateshwara as Vishnu.

Now, there are some statements that have been written on the topic of early Azhwars specific description of Venkateswara -

>Early Azhwar saints, including Poigai Alwar and Peyalwar, have described Lord Venkateswara (Tirupati Balaji) as a combination of Shiva and Vishnu (Hari-Hara) in their hymns.

>While the early Azhwars (Poigai, Bhoothath, and Pey) described this combined form, later Vaishnava Acharyas, particularly Ramanujacharya, focused on identifying the Tirumala deity strictly as Vishnu.

The above are very strong statements and need to be examined.

There are three early Azhwars - Poigai Azhwar, Bhoothath Azhwar and Pey Azhwar. Since the claim is about these early Azhwars, in this post, I will take up the works of the Azhwars. Specifically, to keep the post at a reasonable length, the first of the Azhwars alone will be considered here. So, this post will be about the work of Poigai Azhwar, known as Mudhal Thiruvandhadhi.  

The Tamil text can be found at this link below (Pasurams numbered 1 to 100)-

2082-mta-ta.pdf

The English text can be found in the link below -

2082-mta-en.pdf

I am intentionally avoiding traditional translations, since one may say that they could be biased. The translation that I follow is that of Dr. Kausalya Hart, and it can be found in the link below -

https://www.projectmadurai.org/pm_etexts/utf8/pmuni0623_eng.html

In the above link, Mudhal Thiruvandhadhi constitutes pasurams 2082-2181 (part of Nalayira Divya Prabandham).

When one scans the pasurams, an interesting conclusion that one comes to is that the word "Thirumala" is not used by Poigai Azhwar for today's Tirumala. Instead, Poigai Azhwar uses the word Venkatam (வேங்கடம்) (Vēṅkaṭam)/Thiruvenkatam for Tirumala. (There is another word, ThirumAl, that is used, and it means Vishnu/Krishna). This is an important point, to be remembered for later analysis.

While Poigai Azhwar talks about Shiva being present in Vishnu's body in a general context, in this post, our interest is specifically confined to those Pasurams that describe or refer to Venkateswara, since the claim is about Venkateswara. Specifically, is there any evidence to show that Poigai Azhwar associates Hari-Hara or Shiva in those Pasurams where he talks of Venkatam? That is the question being addressed here.

Poigai Azhwar mentions Venkatam and/or its Lord in the following pasurams (I am giving both the numberings)  -

26 (2107),
37,38,39,40 (2118, 2119, 2120, 2121),
68 (2149),
76, 77 (2157, 2158),
82 (2163)
99 (2180)

A straightforward verification of the translations by Dr. Kausalya Hart shows that in none of these pasurams, Venkateswara is treated as Hari-Hara. In all these places he is treated as Vishnu alone. To examine this in slightly more detail -

Pasuram 26 says that the Lord wears a Thulasi garland. - indicates Vishnu.

Pasurams 37-40 talks about the exploits of Lord Krishna, also mentions the Lord blowing shankha - indicates Vishnu.

Pasuram 68 mentions the Lord resting in the milky ocean - indicates Vishnu.

Pasurams 76-77 talks about Trivikrama measuring the world and sky and also other Vaishnava kshetrams like Vaikuntham - indicates Vishnu

Pasuram 82 - talks about the Rama avatar of the Lord, the incident recounted here is the killing of Maricha - indicates Vishnu

Pasuram 99 - talks about the Lord resting on Adishesha in the milky ocean - indicates Vishnu

In none of the 10 places above, the Azhwar mentions any of the characteristics of Shiva in the Lord of Venkatam.

There is thus, no evidence to say that Poigai Azhwar considered Venkateswara as Hari-Hara. He considers Venkateswara as Vishnu.

In the next post, I will look at the Pasurams of Bhoothath Azhwar.

श्रीकृष्णार्पणम्  

On Saturday, 14 February 2026 at 10:54:52 am UTC+5:30 Nagaraj Paturi wrote: