Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Vaishnavism and Shaivism Explained

Dr Uday Dokras Ph D SWEDEN

Chidambaram temple is one of the few temples where both the Shaivite and Vaishnavite
deities are enshrined in one place. So let us explore what are the two grains of Hinduism-
Vaishnavism and Shaivism

Vaishnavism
Vaishnavism is the worship and acceptance of Vishnu (Sanskrit: “The Pervader” or “The
Immanent”) or one of his various incarnations (avatars) as the supreme manifestation of
the divine. During a long and complex development, many Vaishnava groups emerged with
differing beliefs and aims. Some of the major Vaishnava groups include the Shrivaishnavas (also
known as Vishishtadvaitins) and Madhvas (also known as Dvaitins) of South India; the followers
of the teachings of Vallabha in western India; and several Vaishnava groups in Bengal in
eastern India, who follow teachings derived from those of the saint Chaitanya. Most Vaishnava
believers, however, draw from various traditions and blend worship of Vishnu with local
practices.

1
Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

VISHNU

2
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Vishnu with his 10 avatars (incarnations): Fish, Tortoise, Boar, Man-Lion, Dwarf, Rama-with-the-Ax, King
Rama, Krishna, Buddha, and Kalkin. Painting from Jaipur, India, 19th century; in the Victoria and Albert
Museum, London.Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London

In the Vedas and Brahmanas, Vishnu is the god of far-extending motion and pervasiveness who,
for humans in distress, penetrates and traverses the entire cosmos to make their existence

3
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

possible. All beings are said to dwell in his three strides or footsteps (trivikrama): his highest
step, or abode, is beyond mortal ken in the realm of heaven. Vishnu is also the god of the pillar
of the universe and is identified with the sacrifice. He imparts his all-pervading power to the
sacrificer who imitates his strides and identifies himself with the god, thus conquering the
universe and attaining “the goal, the safe foundation, the highest light” (Shatapatha Brahmana).
In the centuries before the Common Era, Vishnu became the Ishvara (supreme deity) of his
worshipers, fusing with the Purusha-Prajapati figure; with Narayana, worship of whom discloses
a prominent influence of ascetics; with Krishna, whom the Bhagavadgita identified with Vishnu
in many forms; and with Vasudeva, who was worshipped by a group known as the Pancharatras.
The extensive mythology attached to Vishnu is largely that of his avatars. Although this notion is
found elsewhere in Hinduism, it is basic to Vaishnavism. Each of his incarnations, especially
Krishna and Rama, has a particular mythology and is the object of devotion (bhakti). The
classical number of these incarnations is 10—the dashavatara (“ten avatars”)—ascending from
theriomorphic (animal form) to fully anthropomorphic manifestations. They are Fish (Matsya),
Tortoise (Kurma), Boar (Varaha), Man-Lion (Narasimha), Dwarf (Vamana), Rama-with-the-Ax
(Parashurama), King Rama, Krishna, Buddha, and the future incarnation, Kalkin. This list varies,
however, according to the text within which it appears and the devotional community that
maintains it. For example, some dashavatara lists include Balarama, the brother of Krishna,
instead of the Buddha. Moreover, the number of incarnations is not fixed across all texts or
traditions; some texts list 24 incarnations of Vishnu. In addition, a particular dashavatara list
popularized by the 13th-century poet Jayadeva in his song Gita Govinda names Krishna, not
Vishnu, as the supreme deity who incarnates himself 10 times. In Jayadeva’s list the first seven
incarnations are the same as those found in other Vaishnava lists. Jayadeva then lists Balarama
and Buddha as the eighth and ninth incarnations. One common element in all these lists is
Kalkin, who is always the final incarnation.

Like most other Hindu gods, Vishnu has his especial entourage: his wife is Lakshmi, or Shri, the
lotus goddess—granter of success, wealth, and liberation—who came forth from the ocean when
gods and demons churned it in order to recover from its depths the ambrosia or elixir of
immortality, amrita. At the beginning of the commercial year, special worship is paid to her for

4
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

success in personal affairs. Vishnu’s mount is the bird Garuda, archenemy of snakes, and in his
four hands are his emblems: the lotus, conch shell, and his two weapons, the club and the discus.
Devotees hold that, in addition to having many avatars, Vishnu also manifests himself in many
temples. He may manifest himself within an iconic form (archa avatara) for worship. In many
South Indian temples, the regional manifestations of Vishnu have distinct identities and are
known by local names (e.g., as Venkateswara in Tirumala-Tirupati and in the Hindu diaspora).
Each of these distinct forms has specific attributes and weapons, which are depicted in particular
locations or poses. Elaborate treatises on iconography as well as on local custom and practice
govern the carving and interpretation of these icons. In many temples in South India
and Southeast Asia, Vishnu is depicted as standing, sitting, striding the universe, or reclining. He
sometimes reclines on the serpent Ananta (“Without End,” suggesting the deity’s mastery
over infinite time). He is frequently displayed in temple carvings and in calendar art with four
arms (though occasional depictions provide him with as many as eight), three of which hold his
conch shell, discus, and club. Although a few Vaishnava philosophical schools may consider the
image in the temple to be a symbol pointing to the supreme being, most devotees perceive it as
an actual manifestation of the deity, a form that he takes to make himself accessible to human
beings.

Whatever justification the different Vaishnava groups (such as the Shrivaishnavas of South India
or the worshipers of Vishnu Vithoba in Maharashtra) offer for their philosophical position, all of
them believe in God as a person with distinctive qualities and worship him through his
manifestations and representations. Many schools teach that it is through divine grace that the
votary is lifted from transmigration to release. Much of Vaishnava faith is monotheistic, whether
the object of adoration be Vishnu Narayana or one of his avatars. Preference for any one of these
manifestations is largely a matter of tradition. Thus, most South Indian Shrivaishnavas worship
Vishnu in one of his many local manifestations; the North Indian groups prefer Krishna.

Shaivism
The character and position of the Vedic god Rudra—called Shiva, “the Auspicious One,” when
this aspect of his ambivalent nature is emphasized—remain clearly evident in some of the
important features of the great god Shiva, who together with Vishnu came to dominate

5
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Hinduism. Major groups such as the Lingayats of southern India and the Kashmiri
Shaivas contributed the theological principles of Shaivism, and Shaiva worship became a
complex amalgam of pan-Indian Shaiva philosophy and local or folk worship.

SHIVA

In the minds of the ancient Hindus, Shiva was the divine representative of the uncultivated,
dangerous, and unpredictable aspects of nature. Shiva’s character lent itself to being split into
partial manifestations—each said to represent only an aspect of him—as well as
to assimilating powers from other deities. Already in the Rigveda, appeals to him for help in case
of disaster—of which he might be the originator—were combined with the confirmation of his
great power. In the course of the Vedic period, Shiva—originally

6
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

a ritual and conceptual outsider, yet a mighty god whose benevolent aspects were readily
emphasized—gradually gained access to the circle of prominent gods who preside over various
spheres of human interest. Many characteristics of the Vedic Prajapati, the creator; of Indra, the
god of rain and of the thunderbolt; and of Agni, the Vedic god of fire, have been integrated into
the figure of Shiva.
In those circles that produced the Shvetashvatara Upanishad (c. 400 BCE), Shiva rose to the
highest rank. Its author proposed a way of escape from samsara, proclaiming Shiva the sole
eternal Lord. Rudra-Shiva developed into an ambivalent and many-sided lord and master. His
many manifestations, however, were active among humankind: as Pashupati (“Lord of Cattle”),
he took over the fetters of the Vedic Varuna; as Aghora (“To Whom Nothing Is Horrible”), he
showed the uncanny traits of his nature (evil, death, punishment) and also their opposites.
Like Vishnu, Shiva is held by devotees to be the entire universe, yet he is worshipped in various
manifestations and in hundreds of local temples. Although it is not always clear whether Shiva
is invoked as a great god of frightful aspect, capable of conquering demonic power, or as the
boon-giving lord and protector, Hindus continue to invoke him in magical rites.
Shiva reconciles in his person semantically opposite though complementary aspects: he is both
terrifying and mild, destroyer and restorer, eternal rest and ceaseless activity. These seeming
contradictions make him a paradoxical figure, transcending humanity and assuming a mysterious
sublimity of his own. From the standpoint of his devotees, his character is so complicated and his
interests are so widely divergent as to seem incomprehensible. Yet,
although Brahman philosophers like to emphasize his ascetic aspects and the ritualists of
the Tantric tradition his sexuality, the seemingly opposite strands of his nature are generally
accepted as two sides of one character.

Shiva temporarily interrupts his austerity and asceticism (tapas) to marry Parvati, and he
combines the roles of lover and ascetic to such a degree that his wife must be an ascetic (yogi)
when he devotes himself to austerities and a loving companion when he is in his erotic mode.
This dual character finds its explanation in the ancient belief that, by his very chastity, an ascetic
accumulates (sexual) power that can be discharged suddenly and completely, resulting in the
fecundation of the soil. Various mythical tales reveal that both chastity and the loss of chastity
are necessary for fertility and the intermittent process of regeneration in nature. The erotic and

7
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

creative experiences portrayed in these narratives are a familiar feature in Hinduism, and they
counterbalance the Hindu bent for asceticism. Such sexuality, while rather idyllic in Krishna,
assumes a mystical aspect in Shiva, which is why the devotee can see in him the realization of
the possibilities of both the ascetic life and the householder state. His marriage with Parvati is
then a model of conjugal love, the divine prototype of human marriage, sanctifying the forces
that carry on the human race.

Shiva’s many poses express various aspects of his nature. The cosmic dancer, he is the originator
of the eternal rhythm of the universe, dancing through its creation and destruction. He also
catches, in his thickly matted hair, the waters of the heavenly Ganges River, which destroy
all sin. He wears in his headdress the crescent moon, which drips the nectar of everlasting life.

Shiva Nataraja at the Brihadishvara Temple, Thanjavur (Tanjore).Frederick M. Asher

Shiva is the master of both tandava, the fierce, violent dance that gives rise to energy, and lasya,
the gentle, lyric dance representing tenderness and grace. Holding a drum upon which he beats
the rhythm of creation, he dances within a circle of flames that depicts the arc of dissolution. He
holds up the palm of one hand in a gesture of protection; with another he points to his foot to
indicate the refuge of his followers. The image of the dancing Shiva is said by Shaivites to
portray five cosmic activities: creation, maintenance, destruction, concealing his true form from
adversaries, and, finally, the grace through which he saves his devotees. The outer form of the

8
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

dance, however, is only one aspect of the divine flow of energy; followers of Shiva say that the
dance is in the heart of every devotee.

Yet while the dancing Shiva is an important and popular representation, the abstract form of
Shiva is perhaps the most commonly seen portrayal throughout India. Shiva is depicted as a
conical shaft (lingam) of fire within a womb (yoni), illustrating the creative powers of Shiva and
Parvati. In temples the lingam, which literally means “distinguishing symbol,” is an upright
structure that is often made of stone. It is placed in a stone yoni that represents both the womb
and the abode of all creation. The union between the lingam and the yoni serves as a reminder
that male and female forces are united in generating the universe.

Shiva also represents the unpredictability of divinity. He is the hunter who slays and skins his
prey and dances a wild dance while covered with its hide. Far from society and the ordered
world, he sits on the inaccessible Himalayan plateau of Mount Kailasa, an austere ascetic, averse
to love, who burns Kama, the god of love, to ashes with a glance from the third eye—the eye of
insight beyond duality—in the middle of his forehead. And at the end of the eon, he will dance
the universe to destruction. He is nevertheless invoked as Shiva, Shambhu, Shankara
(“Benignant” and “Beneficent”), for the god that can strike down can also spare. Snakes seek his
company and twine themselves around his body. He wears a necklace of skulls. He sits
in meditation, with his hair braided like a hermit’s, his body smeared white with ashes. These
ashes recall the burning pyres on which the sannyasis (renouncers) take leave of the social order
of the world and set out on a lonely course toward release, carrying with them a human skull.
Shiva’s consort is Parvati (“Daughter of the Mountain [Himalaya]”), a goddess who is an
auspicious and powerful wife. She is also personified as the Goddess (Devi), Mother (Amba),
black and destructive (Kali), fierce (Chandika), and inaccessible (Durga). As Shiva’s female
counterpart, she inherits some of Shiva’s more fearful aspects. She comes to be regarded as the
power (shakti) of Shiva, without which Shiva is helpless. Shakti is in turn personified in the form
of many different goddesses, often said to be aspects of her.

Shiva and his family at the burning ground. Parvati, Shiva's wife, holds Skanda while watching
Ganesha, and Shiva strings together the skulls of the dead. Kangra painting, 18th century;

9
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Victoria and Albert Museum, London.Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London;
photograph A.C. Cooper

Narratives of culture heroes

A culture hero can easily be assimilated to a god by identifying him with an incarnation of a god.
Thus, great religious teachers are considered manifestations of the god of their devotional
preaching, and stories of their lives have become part of a very rich storehouse of narratives.
Practically gods on earth, these ascetics, according to mythology, have amassed tremendous
powers that they do not hesitate to use. The sage Kapila, meditating in the netherworld, burned to
ashes 60,000 princes who had dug their way to him. Another sage, Bhagiratha, brought the
Ganges River down from heaven to sanctify their ashes and, in the process, created the
ocean. Agastya, revered as the Brahman who brought Sanskrit-speaking civilization to South
India, drank and digested the ocean. When the Vindhya mountain range would not stop growing,
Agastya crossed it to the south and commanded it to cease growing until his return; he still has
not returned. Vishvamitra, a king who became a Brahman, created a new universe with its own
galaxies to spite the gods.
Moving from myth to hagiography (biography of venerated persons), there are also stories told
of the great teachers, and every founder of a sect is soon deified as an incarnation of a god: the
philosopher Shankara (c. 788–820) as an incarnation of Shiva; the religious leader Ramanuja (d.
1137) as that of Ananta, the sacred serpent of Vishnu; and the Bengal teacher Chaitanya (1485–
1533) simultaneously as that of Krishna and his beloved Radha.

Myths of holy rivers and holy places

Of particular sanctity in India are the rivers, among which the Ganges stands first. This river,
personified as a goddess, originally flowed only in heaven until she was brought down by
Bhagiratha to purify the ashes of his ancestors. She came down reluctantly, cascading first on the
head of Shiva in order to break her fall, which would have shattered the Earth. Confluences are
particularly holy, and the confluence of the Ganges with the Yamuna at Allahabad is the most
sacred spot in India. Another river of importance is the Sarasvati, which loses itself in desert; it
was personified as a goddess of eloquence and learning.

10
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

All major and many minor temples and sanctuaries have their own myths of how they were
founded and what miracles were wrought there. The same is true of famous places of pilgrimage,
usually at sacred spots near and in rivers; important among these are Vrindavana (Brindaban) on
the Yamuna, which is held to be the scene of the youthful adventures of Krishna and the cowherd
wives. Another such centre with its own myths is Gaya, especially sacred for the funerary rites
that are held there. And there is no spot in Varanasi (Benares), along the Ganges, that is without
its own mythical history. Srirangam, a temple town set in an island in the Kaveri River in Tamil
Nadu, is considered to be heaven on earth (bhuloka vaikuntham). There are also many places
sacred to followers of Vishnu, Shiva, or other deities.

Philosophical texts
Although the details of Indian philosophy, as it has been developed by professional philosophers,
may be treated as a subject separate from Hinduism (see Indian philosophy), certain broad
philosophical concepts were absorbed into the myths and rituals of Hindus and are best viewed
as a component of the religious tradition.
here have been plenty of answers available for this question , some answering it nicely others
deviating but I shall try to refute the claims made in one of the answers . The gentleman has tried
to compare Shaivism and vaishnavism by presenting points for both. I , however , will try to
speak only regarding the points made against Shaivism . This is a really long answer .
PURVAPAKSHIN :
1. In shaivism , there is no particular focus on any person and no ultimate aim/goal.
2. Shiva, his wife Parvati, their children Ganapati, Kumaraswamy (Murugan) and
Ayyappa are all considered as Gods.The entire family is considered as Gods. Entire
family is worshipped.Ganapati, Murugan, Ayyappa are worshiped independently as
Gods. Special preference is given to children of their family.
3. Parvati and her other forms are worshipped independently and considered as supreme
God by herself. There is no compulsion that she must be worshiped along with
Shiva.There are separate temples for Durga, Kali and Parvati without Shiva being
accompanied.

11
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

4. Some south Indians consider Shiva, Murugan as their ancestors and native God to their
own state. What is this concept of regional God? How can God be restricted to a place,
should not he be universal?
UTTARPAKSHIN :
1. Thinking that there is no ultimate goal or aim in Shaivism is highly inaccurate logically
( I am also not quoting verses ). There is no work without any cause . This has been
used by all the previous Bhasyakartas to prove athesim to be wrong. So , how come
Shaivism be without any cause ?
2. So , the purvpakshin has seen the Shiv temples house Shivling along with Gauri ,
Ganpati etc . Similarily , pictures has been viewerd by him in puja place of people. But
, he definitely forgot the concept of parivar devta . In any temple , beside the Main
deity , the deities considered family members are also housed.
For example , in the famous vaishnav shrine of Lord Venkateswar on Seshachalam , a temple
dedicated to Vakula Mata is located . Similarly , the Srivaishnava temples house the 12 Alwars
alongside other previous Aacharyas .
But someone might say that the purvpakshin by using the word God wants to convey the
meaning of Brahman and wants to imply that Shaivas consider Shiv with his Parivar devta to be
Brahman .
This is again a wrong notion derived in context of no true knowledge of Shaiv Sampradayas .
Shiv worship mainly has 4 divisions Shaiv , Pashupat , Bhairav Aagamas and karalmukh as
mentioned in Varah puran and also by Bhasyakartas . In modern context there are different
schools of Shiv worship namely Shaiv-advait of Smartas , Shraut Shaivism of Srikant Aacharya ,
Lingayat of Basvanna , Shaiv Siddhant of Shaiv-Acharyas , and Trika of Abhinav gupta (
kashmir Shaivism ). {Some also consider Aghoris , kapaliks to be in Shaivism. Others consider
Nath sampraday also. } The division is quite combersum but I tried to present a general picture
of all modern day available ancient sampradays of Shaivism.
Leaving aside Smartas , the rest namely Shraut , Lingayat , Siddhant and Trika consider only
Shiv to be the Brahman and Parvati to be his Shakti and not their children.
Smartas Following Advait theology see the 5 deities , Ganapati , Surya , Vishnu , Shiv and
Shakti to be one same Brahman personified. But Shaiv siddhant considers SadaShiv to manifest

12
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

in 5 different forms for fivefold function while other creatures are born from them and Only
Sadashiv is taken as ultimate reality and not the other forms .
I have not got much information regarding other sampradayas , hence cannot comment.
The person has equated Shaivism with Advait and applied a general lens but there are different
subsects adhering to various philosophies in the Shaivism.
3. Regarding various forms of Shakti being worshipped. There is another popular Sampradaya
called Shakta to worship Shakti . However , in Shaiv Siddhant too Shakti can be independently
worshipped because the karmas of jeeva are under control of ShivShakti , the power of Shiv.
Similarly , Independent Lakshmi temples are too found under srivaishnavism ( Tiruchanur
Padmavati temple )
4. As far as concept of Shiv and Murga being considered ancestors by south indians . Following
counterpoints need to be mentioned . Many Kshatriyas of north trace themselves to Ramchandra
and Krishnachandra. Bhumihars trace themselves from Parshuram. Narasimha is considered to
be son in law by chenchu tribes. Bibi nachiyar is a consort of Sri Rnganath.
In this regard , just like Ramchandra murthy's lineage as king passed on . Similarly , the lineage
of Madurai Pandyas which had Shiv incarnate as Somasundar to marry Meenakshi , is traced by
many. Here , regional connections are established by Bhava and not by scriptural evidence .
Hence these points have been nullified thereby .
PURVAPAKSHIN :
1. Shaivism is not a religion. It is just a sentimental fan following towards a particular
family which is still being continued. Just like there is a fan following for actors’,
celebrity’s family in present days.
2. It clearly shows Shiva and his children are not Gods but just great personalities in
those times and their followers equated him to a God. Like we equate actors,
politicians to Gods and build temples for them.
3. Vaishnavism is a proper religion, it is somewhat a monotheistic religion, where
Narayan (Vishnu) is literally considered as a God and devotees believe that he really
exist as a person in Vaikuntha which is outside all material universes.
UTTARPAKSHIN :

13
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

The second point has been nullified above and since the first point is derived by swimming
second itself . Hence , the second point also gets nullified since the base is itself illogical and
derived of proper information.
Since the purvapakshin has mixed western in indian context , it is quite difficult to understand
the motive with respect to monotheism = religion.
Shaiv siddhant too believes in existence of one singularity called SadaShiv and itself qualified as
a religion by the logic of purvapakshin.
Since the assumption by purvapakshin and it's implication cuts the basic assumption itself. We
see the assumption given is again flawed.
PURVAPAKSHIN : with respect to worship system of Shaivism ,
1. Extremely polytheistic and nature worshipping pagan religion. It is not a God based
religion, rather it is just a GOOD culture. This is what Shiva Bhakt Sadhguru says.
2. No one strongly believes that Shiva is a God. Shiva is a great yogi, tantric and an
occultist who used to stay with group of aghoris. He wears a garland of skulls.
3. Shiva holds a trident (which is normal), has snakes around his neck (which is normal),
has Bull as a vehicle (which is again normal). So Shiva was a normal respectable
human being and anyone can mimic these things.
4. Shaivas mostly follow Advaita, which says “Aham Brahmasmi” (I am God, everyone
is God and everything is God). Which means there is no God.
UTTARPAKSHIN :
1. The flawed view of polytheism is again implied which has been duly refuted above .
And the purvapakshin makes it clear that his knowledge of Shaivism is basically from
the talks of Sadguru ( whose highest reading ability has been asterix ) by dhum-vahani
nyaya.
2. The purvpakshin is again taking one person's view as view of all. Only so called highly
educated people who get their info via Modern day gurus like Sri Sri , Sadguru would
say. If purvpakshin wants to take the view of majority in consideration for this regard ,
roaming in villages of India will reveal how People see Lord Shiv as a god and not as a
yogi which is a modern day fishing interpretation of some elite gurus .
3. Purvpakshin takes the appearance of Lord Shiv in popular culture to prove that he is
ordinary and with respect to Narayan , he uses the symbols to tell him extraordinary.

14
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

Now that is being clarified. Purvapakshin has definitely got no knowledge of Lord
Shiv . Otherwise he would have known that in Sadashiv form he holds ten arms of
arrays of aayudhas. In maheshvar form he holds A deer and in Natraj form he has fire
on his hand , for Jalandhar sanghar , he used a chakra too. None of these are ordinary
things. Wearing snakes is ordinary for purvapakshin which shows the lack of logic
again.
4. Here , purvapakshin accepts that Shaivas mainly follow advait . Well and good . But
then he uses one of the Mahavakyas and misinterprets it . Aham brahmashmi . I am
god , everything is god . Accurate interpretation as per advait until now . But then from
now where does he jump to say that there is no god. When everything is considered
god , how can there be no god. When everything is considered beautiful , how come
there be no beauty . This might be the base for interpreting Shaivism as atheist in
further narrations given elsewhere
PURVPAKSHIN :
 Shaivism is an atheistic and nature worshipping religion. This is why Ravan was
considered as an atheist in Valmiki Ramayan even though he was Shiva vhakt. How is
a Shiva bhakt theist when Shiva is not a God in literal sense. (Now a days people have
their own definition of God, so Shiva and his family are Gods in that sense).
UTTAR PAKSHIN :
 It has been duly mentioned why Shaivism was considered atheist and since there is
misinterpretation by purvpakshin , the first line itself gets nullified. Atheist is someone
who does not believe in God , Brahman in indian context . Ancient india had a school
of philosophy called Charvaka that denied the existence of Brahman and hence vedas.
But Ravan studied and mastered the Vedas . He also worshipped and pleased Brahma
and Shiv . He also wrote Shiv tandav stotram wherein he mentions meditation upon
Lord Shankar to be cause of liberation ( this is in accordance to shvetashvatara and
Brihadaranyak which mention constant mediation upon Brhman to be path to liberation
) , so Ravan being atheist is disproved. Since there is no definition of god as per se
quoted by purvpakshin. It is better to leave it.
PURVPAKSHIN :

15
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

 Shaivism has no Varna system and is not given much importance as it is not part of
Vedic civilization.
UTTARPAKSHIN :
 This is again a baseless assumption by the purvpakshin . The shaiv aagamas
extensively talk of 4 varnas and also of avarnas . “Not being part of vedic civilisation”
must be cleared from the ancient commentators of vedas like Shayan and Bhaskar who
to give the meaning of word Pashupati have resorted to the aagamas. ( Shayan clears
takes a verse from aagamas ) Certainly these vedic commentators were more vedic
than most people of Modern day who can even hardly name the angas / organs of
vedas .
PURVPAKSHIN :
1. As I explained above, Shiva and his family were never considered as Gods and
their fan followers never identified themselves with any religion UNTIL the theistic
religion started in the name of Narayan (Vishnu) through his avatars.
2. Associating body parts of Vishnu and his avatars with Lotus (Padma) for eg: Lotus
eyed, Lotus feet, Lotus hands, Lotus face.
Putting Sri (Lakshmi) as prefix to the names for eg: Sriman Narayana, Sri Hari, Sri
Maha Vishnu, Sri Ram, Srinivas, Sri Krishna.
Terminologies like Purushottam, Adi Purusha, Ved Purusha, 4 hands (Chaturbhuj).
Idea of giving Blue color (Neeli Megha Shyam) to Vishnu, Rama and Krishna body.
All these things originally came from Vishnu only.
3. Vishnu Sahasranama, Vishwaroop, Bhagavad Gita, Garuda puran which talks about
punishments in Narak (hell), Vaikuntha (heaven), Swarga (materialistic
heaven), Padma puran, Paramatma, Jivatmata (soul), rebirth, moksha, yuga all such
notions and thoughts originally came from Narayan (Vishnu).
4. Later on people who were against these things started giving the same to Shiva. Like
Shiva Sahasranama, Shiva Vishwaroop in Shiva/Ishwar Gita where Shiva showed
his imaginary Vishwaroopam to Bhagavan Ram. After seeing the imaginary
Vishwaroop of Shiva, Sri Ram trembled with fear and fainted! These things are not
mentioned in Valmiki Ramayan.

16
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

5. All the Acharyas (including Shankaracharya), Pandits, Philosophers used to go behind

Vishnu only. They were interested in giving commentaries only to Vishnu
Sahasranama, Bhagavad Gita etc.
No great acharyas (even Shankaracharya) gave importance or showed any interest in
writing commentaries on Shiva Sahasranamam or Shiva/Iswar Gita. BECAUSE
THESE ARE NOT ORIGINAL.
UTTARPAKSH :
 The first assumption has already been nullified .
 In points 2 , 3 , 4 , the purvpakshin tries to put a blame on Shaivas to have robbed
things from Vaishnavism. This is wrong considered that one of the source of many
Shiv centric ideas is Shiv puran , mentioned alongside Vishnu puran in the Bhagvatam
while discussing verse numbers. And if the views of Indologists ( this was taken from
this etc ) , is dear to purvpakshin , he may give a look to pashupati seal of Indus valley
to document the antiquity . I will resort to shastra.
 The views of Shayan etc Acharyas who consider The three eyed one to give liberation
has been not considered . Shiv-acharyas of Shaiv siddhant have not been considered .
But a general all acharya tag has been used . Many Acharyas did not present
commentary on Puranas too , so are they faulty and unauthentic ? This counter
question is to nullify the illogic in line.
PURVPAKSHIN : *QUOTES SOME QUESTIONS*
UTTARPAKSHIN : these have puranic backgrounds .
PURVPAKSHIN :
1. Narayan is all the 3 Original Creator, Preserver and Destroyer. Narayan is the source of
all Brahmas and Rudras.
2. Rudra suktam in Vedas is referred as Sri Rudram which means Rudra is none other
than Vishnu himself as “Sri (Laksmi)” in Vedas is used as prefix only for Vishnu. We
call Shri Ram, Shri Krishna, Sriman Narayan, Shri Hari, Shri Maha Vishnu etc. Have
your ever heard Sri Shiva? It sounds weird though.
3. Now people on Quora ignorantly using the phrases of Vishnu to Shiva for eg: Sri
Shiva, Lotus feet of Shiva, Lotus eyed Shiva.
UTTARPAKSHIN :

17
 Indo Nordic Author’s Collective

1. The purvpakshin forgets the thirteenth anuvak of ttaitreya aaranayak , naryanopanishad

. Narayan is Brahama , Shiv , Hari and Indra.
2. This notion of purvpakshin lacks historic and practical background. Commentators like
Shayan has ascribed SriRudram to Shiv and also practically the panch suktas of
Vaishnavas donot contain SriRudram ( but that of Shaivas contain Purush Suktam ) .
Sri is used in meaning of shreya or greatness as used by Shayan .
3. Again puranic references .

18