अन्धक-हिरण्याक्ष-प्रसङ्गः, वराहावतारः, दंष्ट्राभूषणं च
ततः सब्रह्मका देवाः परिम्लानमुखश्रियः बाधितास्ताडिता बद्ध्वा हिरण्याक्षेण तेन वै
tataḥ sabrahmakā devāḥ parimlānamukhaśriyaḥ bādhitāstāḍitā baddhvā hiraṇyākṣeṇa tena vai
ثم إن الدِّيفات—وبراهمَا معهم—ذبل نورُ وجوههم. عُذِّبوا وضُرِبوا ثم قُيِّدوا على يد ذلك هيرانيياكشا. وهكذا، حتى الآلهة إذا وقعوا في شِباك الـpāśa (القيد والرباط) خضعوا وذُلّوا، إلى أن يعيد پَتي الأعلى، شيفا، نظامَ الكون إلى استقامته.
Suta Goswami (narrating to the sages of Naimisharanya)
It shows that even the Devas can fall into bondage and loss of splendor; Linga-worship is approached as taking refuge in Pati (Śiva), the liberator who restores dharma and removes pāśa.
Indirectly, it frames Shiva-tattva as Pati—supreme lordship beyond the Devas—because the gods themselves are shown as vulnerable under bondage, implying the need for the transcendent liberating principle identified with Śiva.
The verse highlights the condition that necessitates practice: recognition of pāśa (bondage). The implied Shaiva response is Pāśupata-oriented surrender, mantra-japa and Linga-pūjā seeking Śiva’s anugraha (grace) to break bonds.