The Second Sin-Destroying Hymn (Pāpaśamana Stava) and the Syncretic Praise of Hari-Hara
एकशृङ्ग नमस्तुभ्यं नमस्तुभ्यं वृषाकपे श्रीनिवास नमस्ते ऽस्तु नमस्ते भूतभावन
ekaśṛṅga namastubhyaṃ namastubhyaṃ vṛṣākape śrīnivāsa namaste 'stu namaste bhūtabhāvana
{"bhagavata_parallel": "Bhāgavata Purāṇa 8.20–8.22 (Vāmana’s authority and divine sovereignty over worlds)", "vishnu_purana_parallel": "Viṣṇu Purāṇa 1.2; 6.5 (Nārāyaṇa as ruler and refuge; satya as divine nature)", "ramayana_connection": null, "mahabharata_echo": "Mahābhārata, Nārāyaṇīya and Viṣṇu-sahasranāma traditions (Nārāyaṇa as supreme; martial-protective epithets)", "other_puranas": ["Agni Purāṇa (stotra and dhvaja symbolism in royal-dharma contexts)"], "vedic_reference": "Ṛgveda 1.22.20 (tad viṣṇoḥ paramam padam—steadfast supreme station; ‘dhruva’ resonance)"}
{ "primaryRasa": "adbhuta", "secondaryRasa": "shanta", "rasaIntensity": 0, "emotionalArcPosition": "", "moodDescriptors": [] }
Purāṇic stutis often stack epithets to invoke multiple theological facets at once—cosmic sovereignty (ekaśṛṅga), heroic potency (vṛṣākapi), auspicious presence with Lakṣmī (śrīnivāsa), and universal causality (bhūtabhāvana). This is a standard devotional-poetic technique that also functions as a compact theology.
In Purāṇic usage, “ekaśṛṅga” can signal singular supremacy (“the One with the single horn/peak”), and may echo older Vedic idioms where unusual physical markers symbolize unique power. In a stuti context it is best read as an honorific emphasizing unmatched lordship rather than a literal zoological description.
No. This śloka is purely doxological (praise) and contains no toponyms or hydrography. Any geographical framing would come from surrounding verses/chapters, not from this line itself.