Vamana Purana — Harihara Non-Duality, Shloka 40

Harihara Non-Duality and the Revelation of Sadasiva to the Ganas

Devanagari script

यन्निन्दध्वं जगन्नाथं पुष्कराक्षं च मन्मयम् स चैव सदृशो लोके विद्यते सचराचरे श्वेतमूर्तिः स गवान् पीतो रक्तो ऽञ्जनप्रभः

Transliteration

yannindadhvaṃ jagannāthaṃ puṣkarākṣaṃ ca manmayam sa caiva sadṛśo loke vidyate sacarācare śvetamūrtiḥ sa gavān pīto rakto 'ñjanaprabhaḥ

Translation

«Le Seigneur de l’univers—aux yeux de lotus, qui me pénètre (et pénètre tout)—que vous outragez : Il existe réellement dans le monde sous des formes correspondantes (aux êtres), en tout ce qui est mobile et immobile. Il est de forme blanche comme une vache ; il est aussi jaune, rouge, et sombre avec l’éclat de l’añjana (khôl).»

Speakers

• A Śaiva-context speaker admonishing revilers
• while invoking a strongly Vaiṣṇava epithet (‘Puṣkarākṣa’) to assert the Lord’s immanence; addressed to those engaged in nindā (reviling).

Primary Deities

• Vishnu (Jagannātha, Puṣkarākṣa)
• Shiva (contextual frame of Hara-bhakti from preceding verses)

Key Themes

• Prohibition of reviling the divine (nindā)
• Immanence of the Supreme in all beings (carācara-vyāpti)
• Unity of sectarian theologies (Śaiva–Vaiṣṇava resonance)
• Divine manifestation in multiple colors/forms
• Bhakti ethics

Verse Rasa (Emotional Flavour)

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

FAQs

Why is a Vaiṣṇava epithet (‘Puṣkarākṣa’, lotus-eyed) used in an Andhaka-vadha (Śaiva) setting?

Purāṇas frequently interweave Śaiva and Vaiṣṇava vocabularies to teach theological concord: the Supreme is one, praised through multiple names. Here, the admonition is that reviling any manifestation of the Lord—by whatever sectarian name—is spiritually ruinous.

What is meant by ‘He exists in all moving and unmoving beings’ (sacarācare)?

It expresses divine immanence: the Lord is present as the inner reality of all entities—animals, humans, gods, and even seemingly inert nature—so contempt toward beings or their sacred forms becomes, indirectly, contempt toward the indwelling Lord.

How should we understand the sequence of colors and forms (white as cow; yellow; red; dark like añjana)?

It signals the Lord’s polymorphic presence across creation—appearing in diverse varṇas (colors) and embodiments. The bovine reference highlights sacred, life-sustaining forms; the color-series functions as a compact theology of omniform manifestation rather than a single iconographic prescription.