Impact of Vedic Culture on Society

by Kaushik Acharya | 2020 | 120,081 words

This page relates ‘Religious tolerance of kings of northern India’ of the study on the Impact of Vedic Culture on Society as Reflected in Select Sanskrit Inscriptions found in Northern India (4th Century CE to 12th Century CE). These pages discuss the ancient Indian tradition of Dana (making gifts, donation). They further study the migration, rituals and religious activities of Brahmanas and reveal how kings of northern India granted lands for the purpose of austerities and Vedic education.

Religious tolerance of kings of northern India

Under the sovereignty of the kings mentioned above, people of different religions lived together, and it seems the protection of their places of worship was a part of the constitution. Although the scriptures have guided the theoretical aspect of the concept of tolerance, practical evidence of this can be found in the numerous inscriptions issued by the king.

The inscriptional records enlighten us about the fact that in ancient and in some parts of early and early medieval India, the general rule pursued by the kings and their officers was tolerance and attention to all faiths. However, Instances of cases of religious persecution and vandalism were not totally absent, but in comparison to the examples found in the inscriptions of toleration, those were very few. The kings, whose epigraphs have been referred to above, had established that tolerance of various ideologies and religious beliefs was one of the striking characteristics of ancient Indian culture. Religious toleration in ancient India became equivalent to paying respects to all the existing religions.

From the above discussion, we find strong evidence of the religious tolerance of kings of northern India at the period under study. Religious tolerance is closely associated with secularism. It is one of the principal features of Indian tradition and culture. At the same time, there is nothing wrong with patronizing different gods or other religions, as all religions lead us to a stage of salvation. As toleration is the basis of togetherness of all faiths, spirituality, and beliefs of any society, it is not difficult to accept that religious freedom is also relevant to the period in question.

The most remarkable and ancient characteristics of this unique conception of Indian culture are found in gveda, where the same text is full of prayers to individual gods. But a closer look at this ancient Indian literature, such as the gveda, reveals that the religious history of India has been based on unity and tolerance from the very beginning.

Religious tolerance among the Indian people has been strengthened by unity in diversity, which is one of the significant distinctions of India. And this unity in diversity was originated from a mixture of race and civilization from the earliest times. And, in the above discussion, we notice at least some of its reflection in early and early medieval period. In this case, the gveda and something similar can be quoted, which proves our point.

The last Sūkta[1] of gveda (10.191) summarizes the whole essence of what humans should do to imbibe. In the context of this Sūkta, the emphasis has been laid on the most distinctive features of human beings, 'unity' and its purpose, approach, and method.[2] An identical conception is too found in the gveda 1. 164. 46,[3] 8.58.2,[4] 10.90-2, 2.1.3 to 2.1.7 and among others that summarize unity is the only reality, and it is not just about the human; unity is found in different deities tied to the same thread.

In the above examples and later scriptures such as the Mahābhārata and Purāṇas, the worship of different deities is mentioned. Still, even though they are called by different names, God is also one. This awareness is also emphasized, which we need to understand Indeed.

Due to the diverse nature of Brahmanism, there are a wide variety of beliefs and traditions associated with both Viṣṇu and Śiva. In Mahābhārata,[5] it is said that there is no difference even between Śiva and Viṣṇu. But, we have discussed them differently in this chapter. They are manifestations of the same Cosmic Energy that creates, sustains, and destroys the Universe. They complete each other’s existence. Each of them is vital for the Universe. Lord Viṣṇu is the preserver of the Universe, while Lord Śiva is the destroyer and provides the path for the next creation according to the Cosmic Laws. They are one cosmic energy entity.

It should be noted that Lord Viṣṇu has worshiped Lord Śiva in most of his incarnations. In the Rāma Avatar, Lord Rāma the manifestation of Lord Viṣṇu offered his prayers to Lord Śiva before leaving to Lankā for battle with Rāvana. Paraśurāma another incarnation of Lord Viṣṇu was a great devotee of Lord Śiva. In Kṛṣṇa Avatar, Lord Kṛṣṇa worshiped Lord Śiva to bring the tree Kalpa-Vrikṣa from Indra. Purāṇas also speaks of the relationship between Lord Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva as there is no difference between the two.[6] They have not only been uniformly imagined but have been sculpted and built together.

Hari-Hara viz. Śankaranārayaṇa is the mixed representation of Lord Viṣṇu (Hari) and Lord Śiva (Hara). Both Vaiṣṇavites and Śaivites thus revere it as a form of the Supreme God. This concept is the equivalence of various gods as one principle, and "oneness of all existence" is discussed as Hari-Hara. Some of the earliest sculptures of Hari-hara, with one half of the image as Viṣṇu (Hari) on the left with Garuḍa and other half as Śiva (Hara) on the right with Nandi, are found in the 6th-century Bādāmi cave temples.[7]

No wonder we find some examples in inscriptions where after the auspicious symbol for siddham those charters open with the usual prayer to Hari and Hara. It is also seen, after the conventional benedictory verse seeking protection of Hari and Hara. We may find several instances in this regard.

However, this occurs in most of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa grants such as Jethwai Plates of The Rāṣṭrakūṭa Queen Śilamāhdevī (c. 786 CE),[8] Baroda Grant of Karka Suvarṇavarsha (c. 812-13 CE),[9] A Rāṣṭrakūṭa Grant of Kṛṣṇa II (c 827 CE)[10] and among others. In the Deopara inscription of Vijayasena, it is mentioned that Vijayasena made a gift to a Temple of Prdyumneśvara, which is a unique form of Hari-Hara.

Thus, the conception of God's oneness made way for the great tolerance, which has been often expressed in the freedom of thought and worship. That has also been said if one worships other gods with full piety and devotion; even then, he will get the fruits of worshiping the present deity.

In the Bhagavad-gītā we may find lord Kṛṣṇa kept saying to the devotees to pray directly to him and abandon all varieties of dharmas and simply surrender unto him alone–

sarva-dharmān parityajya māmekaṃ śharaṇaṃ vraja, ahaṃ tvāṃ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣhayiṣhyāmi mā śhuchaḥ (18.66)”[11]

That means:

“Abandon all varieties of dharmas and simply surrender unto me alone. I shall liberate you from all sinful reactions; do not fear.”

But, if the devotee finds attachment to other deities but Kṛṣṇa, that is also okay.

However, method is improper, but they too are worshiping him.

ye’pyanyadevatā-bhaktā yajante śhraddhayānvitāḥ te’pi mām eva kaunteya yajantyavidhipūrvakam (9.23)”[12]

Which means,

"O son of Kunti, even those devotees who faithfully worship other gods, they too worship me. But they do so ‘avidhi-pūrvakam’ by the improper method (out of ignorance)".

What could be a more magnificent example of religious generosity?

I do realize that many may think that in the second example, Lord Kṛṣṇa is actually talking about worshiping himself. Because he says the ones who are worshiping other gods, they do so improper way ‘avidhi-pūrvakam’. On the contrary, it can be said, it is human nature to bring everyone in their own way. So what preachers of different religions have done down the ages? There must be hesitation towards other religions, but the real religious generosity is to put all that away and make room for other faiths.

It is a kind of generosity not only to keep the fame of the previous kings intact but also to make them restore if necessary. We have seen such examples during the reign of the North Indian kings. Sārnāth can be mentioned in this context. It is mentioned by Gautama Buddha as one of the four places that his devout followers have to visit. It is said that Emperor Aśoka built this Buddhist pilgrimage. Sārnāth suffered from the Huṇa invasions, but Harṣavardhana later initiated the restoration during his reign.

Much the same thing happened in the case of the Somanāth temple in Gujarat which we have already discussed. At present there are no foreign attacks etc., despite that, for the protection of India’s heritage is covered by various laws today, as India’s built heritage is under constant threat from the various natural disasters that visit every year.

Significant examples are found in the inscriptions we mentioned above about the continued religious tolerance in India with small exceptions over a long period of time. The inscriptions show that in all regions of India, the king and his officials and the ordinary people also took the concept of religious tolerance very seriously and expressed deep respect for all conventional beliefs. Thus it may be said, the inscriptions, as we discussed throughout this chapter, bear the example of the ancient tradition of religious liberalism.

According to P.V. Kane, Hinduism had an excellent power of quiet and unobtrusive absorption.[13] An analysis of the fundamentals of Hinduism reveals that basically, it has always stood against particularism or discrimination. It stands for unity as well as the continuity of all existence. The later excesses and errors of the caste system and others, it is submitted, we should not obscure our sense of perspectives says C.P.R. Aiyar in his book Fundamentals of Hindu faith and Culture. [14]

Ellora (Elura or Verul) caves are a series of thirty four magnificent rock-cut temples of Hindu, Buddhist and Jain caves located near the village of Ellora in northwestcentral Maharashtra. These stunning man-made monolithic cave temples dating back to the 6th and 10th century were carved during the rule of Kalācuri, Rāṣṭrakūṭa and Cālukya dynasties. Each of them carved their religious beliefs in these caves with respect for each other, during their individual rule. It can be considered as an excellent example of longterm religious liberism.

Epigraphical records, issued by the kings of early and early-medieval India, are of immense importance, for they contain valuable information relating to the political, social, and religious history of contemporary ages. The preferences and practices of worshipping keep changing as the world progresses from one era to another. It may happen because their services may not be required. For example, Lord Rāma appeared in the Treta Yuga to protect the world from Rāvana, while Kṛṣṇa appeared in the Dwāpara Yuga to restore dharma and finish the work Paraśurāma took up. Therefore, it is not uncommon for some Gods to fade from our memories and disappear entirely from our consciousness. And another reason is, as discussed earlier, the social condition and the varṇa categorization of the populace during the early period.

We have seen how the vedic pantheon underwent changes in the long history of Brahmanical culture and how some gods lost their importance while some gained prominence. As time changes, people would look for newer deities who command their love, attention, and respect. History of early and early medieval period shows that the Gods became known by different names in different periods, or gained wider social acceptance and following. Rāma, Ganeśa, and among others, who are relatively unknown in the vedic period, are more popular today than many traditional Gods.

Due to the impact of Purāṇic mythology and religion, there were the developments of the various cults in northern India and nearby. Among those multiple cults, we can categorize two major sects associated with Viṣṇu and Śiva. However, the impact of Śiva and the practice of Śaivism got the premiere place between the two. Through the inscriptions of the early Gupta period and others, it may be presumed that the area in the Himalayas was then recognized as a sacred place for vaiṣṇavas.

Thus, we find that the prevalence of the cult of avatāras of Viṣṇu in the Gupta age in northern India. It also demonstrates the existence of belief in different varieties of avatāras of Viṣṇu at that period. We may assume that in the early 5th century CE not only the avatāras of Viṣṇu were worshipped, but the notions of various avatāras developed gradually. The avatāravāda came in Bengal with Vaiṣṇavism, and it can be found in the inscriptions in Bengal. In the Gupta inscriptions, the avatāras like Varāha and Vāmana were mentioned. The inscriptions of the Pāla and Sena period refer to several avatāras like Varāha (Bhuvaneswar inscription of Bhaṭṭa Bhavadeva), Narasiṃha (Govindapur Copper-Plate of Lakṣmaṇasena), Paraśurāma (Monghyr Copper-Plate inscription of Devapāladeva), among others. Thus, the ten avatāras of Viṣṇu came into the picture.

We may find several instances where the king took both the purāṇic Gods as their Kuladevatā (family deity). The Mathura pillar inscription of Candragupta II[15] mentioned the establishment of two images called Kapilesvara and Upamitesvara. Again, the Sena rulers were devotees of Sadaśiva, but Lakṣmaṇasena and others were devout worshippers of Viṣṇu. But the descriptions of various vedic rituals and land grants to vedic brāhmaṇas at the same time are also found in those inscriptions as mentioned above. The Sanskrit inscriptions issued from northern India in early and early medieval period indicates whatever the kings were adherents of Brahmanism; the mingling of cultures can be observed all over as Brahmanism or the vedic religion was flowing like an undercurrent in the society.

As we see, the use of these religious titles differed remarkably from one dynasty to another. In some cases, a particular appellation was part of the dynastic tradition and thus also of the established stock of epithets like those titles which were to represent political claims. But in many other royal lines, the religious appellations frequently changed from one king to another.[16] These differences suggest that individual preferences caused the use of a particular epithet. A few rulers even seem to have changed their religious affiliation during their reign; others used śaiva, vaiṣṇava, and other titles side by side. For instance, King Vaidyadeva of Kāmarūpa, who ruled in 12th century Assam, bore the religious epithets Parama-Māheśvara and Parama-Vaiṣṇava at the same time.

Furthermore, there are some examples where their successors posthumously described certain kings not in the same way as they had regarded themselves during their lifetime. This change in the epithets, however, did not coincide with any shift in the patronage pattern of the dynasty. Again, a transition into the opposite direction, we mentioned the instance of Raņabhañja I of Kiñjalimandala who first called himself Parama-Vaiṣṇava, and later he became Parama-Māheśvara. Likewise, Puṣyabhūti King Harṣa was Parama-Māheśvara in his early life and then became a Buddhist. If we go through the chart, we may find some kings are seen taking different religious titles at different times in his reign period. But interestingly, there is not much change in the way land is donated to vedic brāhmaṇas.

It is noteworthy that despite receiving so many titles, for religious merit, they were dependent on granting lands to the vedic brāhmaṇas. And this is why, as we mentioned, the approximately three-quarters of 6th century Maitraka charters record land grants in favor of individual vedic brāhmaṇas without any association with a temple, and one quarter registers the bestowal of villages on Buddhist monasteries. Notably, despite śaiva leanings, there are only five pieces of evidence available so far for donation by Maitrakas in favor of temples where just one belongs to Śiva. There is no doubt that in the early period, vedic brāhmaṇas (individually or in groups) were given much more land than any other institution. In a later period, this trend is likely to remain unchanged even in the 8th to the 12th centuries. We have already mentioned this as an example that grants of villages and lands mostly in favor of individual brāhmaṇas evidenced by 65 percent of 22 known copper plate charters issued by the Buddhist (Parama-Saugata) Pāla kings.

Although there are few examples of land donations for temples, we do not see examples of the kings who will not achieve religious merit by granting lands to the temple. With real though, it can be said that the construction of any temple at that time was quite expensive. If we also look at the history of temple construction, we will see, the temples were not only religious places, but they were known as the glory of the kings during their reign. That is why it took years and years to build those temples with perfect features and impeccable craftsmanship.

Just as the religious titles of the kings are true for political purposes, I think, in some cases, there were only religious reasons. It is the eternal nature of human beings to achieve anything or get results as early as possible. By donating land to the vedic brāhmaṇas, the goal was to be achieved without much expense and in a very short time. In addition, if there was a political motive, it was also being solved by the vedic brāhmaṇas.

The kings were able to spread education in the barren and newly occupied lands that the king could not keep an eye on. Although most of the donated properties were very low taxable or completely tax-free, there are many examples of kings levying taxes on those lands. It seems that these reasons may be behind the tendency of vedic brāhmaṇas to donate large tracts of land. Moreover, the vedic brāhmaṇas had a traditional glory, which there is no way to deny this fact. Thus, despite receiving so many titles and different religious affiliations, for religious merit, they were dependent on granting lands mostly to those vedic brāhmaṇas as mentioned above.

It is very difficult to work with religion, and where there is such a huge religion that has been going on for ages and which has so many divisions and inequalities, the task is even more difficult. Thus, this chapter has not been very easy to work with. Different opinions of many scholars, as mentioned above, the primary source North Indian Sanskrit Inscriptions and some of my observations have helped me to do this hectic job in a compressed form.

In the end, it can be said that kings come, kings go, and another king sits on the throne. They established their own fame, propagated their own religion and built religious architecture. But they never demolished the previous architectural masterpieces. On the contrary, the kings showed their religious generosity by building their own religious fame along with it. This is why we notice the gathering of different religions in some special centers of different dynasties in different times. Bhāruch, Valabhī, Sirpur, Māndāsor, Kanauj, etc. are the places where architecture of different religions can be seen.

Among those ancient cities, Bhāruch was one of the ancient coastal cities in the Gujarat region. This ancient city served as ports and trading centers of the Nanda, Maurya, Sātavāhana, Western Kṣatrapas and Gupta empires in the early period. After the fall of the Gupta Empire during the 6th century, the Maitraka dynasty, descended from a Gupta general, ruled from the 6th to the 8th centuries from their capital at Valabhī, although they were briefly ruled by Harṣa during the first quarter of the 7th century CE. Then Arab rulers (of Sindh region) made the Maitrakas hand over the throne in c. 770 CE. Then the Gurjara -P ratihāra Empire came into the scene and ruled Gujarat including Bhāruch and Valabhī from the 8th to 10th centuries. Along with this other dynasties occupied some part of Gujarat for some periods and the region came under the control of Rāṣṭrakūṭa Empire and Pāla Empire. This is not the end; the native Cālukya dynasty came to rule over the same region during the 10th century CE.

Thus, we can see very well that how many different dynasties have ruled in and around one center. So there is no doubt that they will have an impact on the socioeconomic, political, and of course the religious sphere.

In this regard we already mentioned about Ellora cave temples before. Another example is Sirpur (Madhya Pradesh, now in Chhattisgarh), which has been significant for its temple ruins of Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa of the Rāmāyaṇa fame, as well as those related to Śaivism, Śaktism, Buddhism and Jainism. After excavations in 1950, and again in 2003 have yielded, twenty-two Śiva temples, five Viṣṇu temples, ten Buddha vihāras, three Jain vihāras in different times.[17] The site shows extensive syncretism, where Buddhist and Jain statues or motifs intermingle with Śiva, Viṣṇu and Devī temples. The location is mentioned in the memoirs of the Chinese traveler Xuan zang as a location of Buddhist monasteries and temples. But no matter what dynasty they come from, no matter what religion they believe in, every time we have seen the kings giving lands to the vedic brāhmaṇas.

A twelfth-century inscription sets an excellent example of the religious liberalism of the time and and the inscription dedicated to Allah as protector of a vihara sheds light on the pluralistic past of Bengal. Sujanagar Stone Inscription of the Time of Bhojavarman (c. 1145 CE)[18] “…was 1st translated in 2010 by the late Shariful Islam, but it was in 2019 that Ryosuke Furui, a University of Tokyo expert on ancient Bengal and its epigraphic wealth, rendered a fresh reading and an improved translation”[19] says Ranabir Chakravarti. Relying on Furui’s translation,[20] Chakravarti opines,

“It refers to a vihara, obviously a religious complex, protected by the divinity Allahabhattarakasvami. The term Allaha is clearly the Sanskritisation of Allah. The two Sanskrit honorifics bhattaraka and svami are suffixed to Allaha, implying veneration. This word comes in a sevenline inscription found in Bangladesh that dates back to the reign of Bhojavarman (c. AD 1137-1145), a king of the Varman dynasty, who ruled in Vanga (the present Dhaka Bikrampur Faridpur tract) with Vikramapura as the capital.”

He added,

“During his seventh regnal year (AD 1145), Bhojavarman endorsed a monetary donation in the form of cowries to this religious institution. The word vihara usually stands for a Buddhist monastery, which often contained shrines, educational facilities and residences for monks and others. Applied to Allah or Allahabhattarakasvami, it probably connotes a mosque and its associated structures, including—according to Furui—a madrasa-like institution.”[21]

Again he says,

“The inscription says the initiative for this patronage came from Bhojavarman’s subordinate and intermediary ruler (mahasamanta) Avudeva, son (suta) of Hasi. The name Avu is a Sanskritisation of the Arabic name Abu. A highranking functionary, his name is suffixed with deva, literally god, but actually a regular honorifc for important personages. The name Hasi, father of Avu, could have been based on the Arabic word Hashim or Asif.”

“Avudeva’s monetary donation to the vihara of Allahabhattarakasvami had the assent (anumatya) of all the kinsmen (jnatinam) of the nonlocal people (paradesikas) in the area; as worshippers of Allahabhattarakasvami, they were Muslims, probably from overseas. Bhojavarman is also known from his other inscription, a land grant record in copper plate dated in his fth regnal year, showing that like his two predecessors Harivarman and Samalavarman, he too was a devout Vaishnava ruler. He was a local monarch, ruling merely over a subregion of ancient Bengal. Yet, he looms large in cultural history by accommodating diversity of faiths in his realm. In fact, two Buddhist manuscripts were prepared during the reign of the Vaishnava Varman rulers. Cultural plurality was thus a lived experience in Vanga under the Varmans. The Varman patronage of Buddhism implies their familiarity with viharas. That is why an Islamic institution was called a vihara in the 12thcentury inscription.”[22]

Not only is this twelfth-century Sujanagar Stone inscription testifying to the religious tolerance of the time, but it also gives us a glimpse into medieval life that resonates with relevance in contemporary India.

Just as Vedic culture is associated with religion, so is reading the Vedas and related studies is a part of Vedic culture. In this context, we need to cite the example of Nālandā University once again.

According to historical studies, the library of the Nālandā University as we mentioned earlier was called the “Mountain of Truth” (Dharma Gunj). The library consisted of three gigantic buildings (Ratnasāgara, Ratnarañjaka and Ratnodadhi), which stood up to nine floors. It is not difficult to understand how many books could have been there in those libraries.

According to some historians nearly nine million manuscripts along with Innumerable invaluable books were there. Even, some researchers have proved the question based on the historical data that it took about three to six months for it to burn completely when it was set on fire by the invaders later. But, the ruins are still fresh and burning examples of the greatly advanced education system of early medieval India.

The wreckages of this ancient university still have a lot to say. Where there are so many students, so many teachers, three such libraries, such a rigorous admission process, and above all except for Buddhism, education and curriculum mostly dependent on the Vedas, there is no difficulty in understanding how popular vedic reading and vedic culture was at that time. Needless to say, under the patronage of the aforesaid rulers of different dynasties, the brāhmaṇas enjoyed a great deal of respect in the society for their authentic life and devotion to the study of the Vedas. As we see throughout this whole chapter, the growing influence of purāṇic culture did not confine the vedic culture at any time. The greatness of this ancient culture was deeply rooted in society.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

A sūkta is the sum of some mantras intended for the same deity. Sūkta is a devotional hymn in praise of the deity or others by mentioning its various attributes. The difference with mantra is that it praises the gods as a whole through many mantras. So naturally it is important for a full description of the deity or the subject.

[2]:

‘oṃ saṃgacchadhvaṃ saṃvadadhvaṃ saṃ vo manāṃsi jānatām। devā bhāgaṃ yathā pūrve sañjānānā upāsate… (gveda, 10.191.2-4).

Walk together in the path of truth without bias, injustice, and intolerance. Talk to each other to enhance knowledge, wisdom, and affection without malice and hatred. Keep working together to improve knowledge and bliss. Follow the path of truth and selflessness, as exemplified by noble people (gveda, 10.191.2).

Your analysis of right and wrong should be unbiased and not specific to a particular set of people. You should organize together to help everyone enhance their health, knowledge, and prosperity. Your minds should be devoid of hatred and should see progress and happiness of all as one's progress and happiness, and you should only act for enhancement of joy of all based on truth. Work together to eradicate falsehood and discover the truth. Never deviate from the path of truth and unity (gveda, 10.191.3).

Your efforts should be full of enthusiasm and for the bliss of everyone. Your emotions should be for one and all and love everyone the way you love yourself. Your desire, resolve, analysis, faith, abstinence, patience, keenness, focus, comfort, etc. all should be towards truth and bliss for all and away from falsehood. Keep working in synergy to increase each other's knowledge and happiness (gveda, 10.191.4).

[3]:

‘ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyagniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānasm āhuh’, The wise speak of the One Reality under various names; they call it Agni , Yama, and Mātariśvan (gveda 1.164.46).

[4]:

‘ekaevāgnir bahudhā samiddha ekah sūryo viśvam anu prabhūtah, ekaivoṣā sarvam idaṃ vi bhātyekam vā idaṃ vi babhūva sarvam’, The one Fire is kindled in many places, the one Sun appears in the whole world, the one Dawn shines over all this world and the one (Principle, Spirit) became all these (gveda 8.58.2).

[5]:

One day, when Lakṣmī and Viṣṇu were travelling together, Lakṣmī sees Ucchaiśrāvam, her brother, the horse of Revanta who is the son of Sūrya. Engrossed in seeing her brother, she does not reply to the repeated calls of Viṣṇu. Seeing her attraction, Viṣṇu gives her śāpam (curse) to go to Bhūloka (the earth) in the form of a horse and come back to Vaikuntham (the place of Viṣṇu) only after getting a son equal to him! She comes to Bhūloka to experience the śāpam and realizing that none other than her brother, Śiva can help her calm Viṣṇu, she immediately does a tapas for him and Śiva appears to save her sister Lakṣmī. Lakṣmī says “You and Viṣṇu are both same, the Paramātma. Please help me!” Śiva says “sahadarī (sister)! All learned people know that but how do you know that we both are same? Who told you?” Lakṣmī says, “Once Mahāviṣṇu himself told me this. Seeing him in deep Daiva-dhyānam, I asked him “During Samudramanthanam, I thought you were the greatest of all. Is Devādideva Śiva, better than you that now you are in dhyānam of him now?” Mahāviṣṇu replied “I am doing Śankara-dhyānam.

He is īśvara. He is the same as me. All learned people know that Siva is Viṣṇu , Viṣṇu is Siva, Viṣṇu is the heart of Śiva and likewise Śiva is the heart of Viṣṇu (“śivāya visnurūpāya visnave śivarūpine, śivasya hṛdayam vishnur-vishnoscha hridayam śivah…”). If someone is my devotee but still hates Śiva, he will fall into naraka”. May you all realize the oneness of Śiva and Viṣṇu. May you all be endowed with pure subtle intellect and proper understanding! (The Mahābhārata, Vanaparvan, 39. 76).

[6]:

Just as Śiva is, so is Viṣṇu and just as Viṣṇu is, so is Śiva. There is no difference between

Śiva and Viṣṇu. “yathā śivastathā viṣnuryathā śivah, antarṃ śivaviṣṇośrabhanāgapi na vidyate” (Skandapurāṇa 23. 49)

[7]:

T.A. Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography, vol. II, pp. 334-335.

[8]:

USVAE, vol. V, pp. 434-442.

[9]:

Ibid., vol. VI, pp. 110-121.

[10]:

Ibid., vol. VII, pp. 6-14.

[11]:

www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/18/verse/66

[12]:

www.holy-bhagavad-gita.org/chapter/9/verse/23

[13]:

P.V. Kane, History of Dharmaśāśtra, vol. II, part I, pp. 388-389.

[14]:

C.P. Ramaswami Aiyar, Fundamentals of Hindu faith and Culture, p. 58.

[15]:

USVAE, vol. III, no. 46.

[16]:

D.C. Sircar, Indian Epigraphy, pp. 348-355.

[17]:

A.K. Pradhan and S. Yadav, “Sirpur -A unique township of early medieval India,” In Proceedings of the Indian History Congress (2013), pp. 854-864.

[18]:

Ryosuke Furui,“Sujanagar Stone Inscription of the Time of Bhojavarman, Year 7,” in Pratna Samiksha, vol . 10, pp. 115-122.

[19]:

Ranabir Chakravarti, “A Sanskrit inscription dedicated to Allah as protector of a vihara sheds light on the pluralistic past of Bengal, The vihara’s minaret”, in The Hindu Magazine, Sunday, February 23, 2020.

[20]:

Ryosuke Furui, op. cit.

[21]:

Ranabir Chakravarti, op. cit.

[22]:

Loc. cit.

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: