Vamana Purana — Sin-Destroying Hymn (Part 2), Shloka 19

The Second Sin-Destroying Hymn (Pāpaśamana Stava) and Syncretic Praise of Hari-Hara

Devanagari script

श्रीकण्ठं वासुदेवं नीलकण्ठं सदण्डिनम् नमस्ये सर्वमनघं गौरीशं नकुलीस्वरम्

Transliteration

śrīkaṇṭhaṃ vāsudevaṃ nīlakaṇṭhaṃ sadaṇḍinam namasye sarvamanaghaṃ gaurīśaṃ nakulīsvaram

Translation

Di Kaṭāha Ia dikenal sebagai Gomitra, yang mengasihi teratai (Paṅkajapriya); di Siṃhala-dvīpa sebagai Upendra; dan di Śakrāhva sebagai Kundamālin, yang berkalungkan bunga kunda.

Word by Word

:

:

:

:

Speakers

• Unspecified eulogist/narrator within the chapter’s stuti-context (addressing the Supreme through Śaiva-Vaiṣṇava nomenclature)

Primary Deities

• Shiva
• Vishnu
• Parvati

Key Themes

• Shaiva-Vaishnava unity (Vāsudeva alongside Śiva epithets)
• Pāśupata/ascetic Śaivism (Nakulīśvara; staff-bearing imagery)
• Purity and faultlessness of the divine (anagha)
• Mythic allusion (Nīlakaṇṭha: poison-bearing episode)

Verse Rasa (Emotional Flavour)

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

FAQs

What is the significance of invoking ‘Vāsudeva’ together with Śiva-names like ‘Nīlakaṇṭha’ and ‘Gaurīśa’?

The verse exemplifies Purāṇic inclusivism: the sacred narrative space (especially in a māhātmya) is sanctified by acknowledging both Vaiṣṇava and Śaiva manifestations, implying a shared supreme divinity accessible through multiple names.

Who/what is ‘Nakulīśvara’ in Purāṇic usage?

Nakulīśvara (often aligned with Lākulīśa/Nakulīśa) denotes a revered Śaiva authority associated with the Pāśupata tradition. In stuti, it functions as a powerful Śiva-epithet highlighting ascetic lineage and doctrinal authority.

How should ‘sa-daṇḍin’ (staff-bearing) be understood here?

It can indicate Śiva’s ascetic/disciplinary aspect (a renunciant bearing a staff) and, more broadly, the Lord as the upholder of order (daṇḍa as chastisement/justice). The verse does not specify a particular icon, so both resonances are plausible.