Vamana Purana — Kali's Complaint to Brahma (Part 2), Shloka 21

Kali’s Complaint to Brahma and the Arrival of Śrī (Jayaśrī) in Bali’s Reign

Devanagari script

सौवर्णस्यन्दनचरा तामसं गुणमाश्रिता नीलाम्बरा नीमाल्या नीलगन्धामनुलेपना

Transliteration

sauvarṇasyandanacarā tāmasaṃ guṇamāśritā nīlāmbarā nīmālyā nīlagandhāmanulepanā

Translation

সেইগৰাকী সোণালী ৰথত বিচৰণ কৰিছিল আৰু তমোগুণত প্রতিষ্ঠিত আছিল; নীল বস্ত্ৰধাৰিণী, নীল মালাধাৰিণী আৰু নীল সুগন্ধযুক্ত অনুলেপনেৰে লিপ্ত—এনেদৰে তাই বৰ্ণিত।

Speakers

• Unspecified narrator voice within Adhyaya 49 (didactic description of guṇa-forms) to the immediate listener in the frame narrative

Primary Deities

• Guṇa-personified Devī/Śakti (tamas aspect)

Key Themes

• Triguṇa doctrine
• Iconography and symbolism (color, vehicle, ornaments)
• Prakṛti/Śakti as guṇa-bearing power

Verse Rasa (Emotional Flavour)

{ "primaryRasa": "adbhuta", "secondaryRasa": "bhayanaka", "rasaIntensity": 0, "emotionalArcPosition": "", "moodDescriptors": [] }

FAQs

Why is tamas associated with the color blue/darkness in this description?

In Purāṇic and Sāṃkhya-inflected symbolism, tamas signifies heaviness, obscuration, and inertia; dark/blue hues (nīla) naturally convey concealment and depth, making them a conventional visual marker for tamasic predominance.

Does the “golden chariot” contradict the tamasic characterization?

Not necessarily. The chariot’s gold can function as a poetic or iconographic contrast—splendor in outward form while the inner quality is tamas—or it may indicate that the guṇas, though distinct in function, arise within the same cosmic prakṛti and can be depicted with regal attributes.

Is this verse describing a specific goddess (e.g., Durgā, Nidrā), or an abstract principle?

The verse reads primarily as a personification of a guṇa (tamas) rather than naming a specific deity. Purāṇas often present abstract metaphysics through deity-like forms to make doctrine memorable and ritually intelligible.