Notes on pedagogy of śāstra(something written by a friend)

To add, as śāstra unfolds, things become quite simple and clear. The only issue is getting the pedagogy of śāstra. For instance, pratyakṣa and anumāna are listed ahead of śabda pramāṇa, and deducing from the visible natural phenomena is the primary learning underlying SAstra, with only subtler phenomena and lessons explicated by śāstra. As mentioned here, nature is the mother, teacher and trustee and what Rshis learn about organizing human societies is entirely from nature. The lessons from clans, prides, coalitions of animal world results in an optimal design of human family at micro level. Just the way legs obey the commands of brain and the way a weak body in turn compels brain into commands that suit the body’s condition, just the way the mano-vāk-kāya “hierarchy” works, the social being’s mano-vāk-kāya is understood. This is rather pratyakṣa than śabda as a pramANa (though we can find upon searching pramāṇa like “vAngme manasi pratishThita” or purusha sUkta could be found). śāstra comes into picture only to make a proper correlation to human society, such as Raja being divine representative who commands and sets the society in the right path – references about prajāpati in atharva are useful, but none better than mahābhārata and manusmṛti. The higher aspects of dharma that are not sāmānya are to be found in śruti, which form the substratum for the manifest layer of dharma (such as moral facts). It helps to recall Viswanatha’s taunt in this context – “you call it sāmānya because these things are commonly known through observation, why do you need to teach them formally and call it a subject”. But the sāmānya is not missed at any stage, it is visible in the implicit expectation of its awareness as a requirement. The head and central being two types of powers that hold the family, and a further distribution of these into the natures of power in society (will, knowledge and action in hierarchy, then into knowledge-power-wealth-action in distribution) is quite visible not just in organization but in śruti itself. The head-center nature of Indra-Agni, which later become visible as Siva-Sakti, as the ruling forces of the world-family are the prototypes for this. Similarly the cyclic day-night, month (aligned with moon), year (aligned with sun), astronomical cycles and human life cycle are pratyaksha pramāṇa for cyclic nature of time. śāstra pramāṇa only gives the conceptualizing of how the alignment of social cycle is to be done with the known cycles. One of the reasons upamāna is extensively visible all through in SAstra and kAvya is that it is not just an alaṃkāra but an integral part of the pedagogic nature of our texts. Second aspect is which śāstra throws light on which aspect of life. While the śruti-smṛti-śiṣṭācāra hierarchy is well known for prāmāṇya, śruti is not a reference for understanding the social aspects that evolve from time to time. śruti is a reference for sanātana or immutable yet non-obvious knowledge of the world from which the ever morphing aspects are to be derived and defined, which are liable to change, in the derivative texts. The layers of smṛti texts, be it MBH or dharma śāstra-s, ensure that they reproduce and record the unchanging principles from śruti, then specify the changing ones (the yuga and deśa-kāla layers) so that for a subsequent version of smṛti that evolves, the seeds of permanent principles are taken and continued. Third aspect is the untold – what a text covers is based on the scope of authority it assumes in the knowledge system. What is not covered, if covered elsewhere, indicates the relative authority and if is not, indicates the nature of untold to be self-explanatory or naturally known or not as a necessary factor. For instance the sampradāya-s that are substantially important in the society and are honored even by kings, find next to zero mention in the smṛti texts as influential or authorized or holding stake in social dynamic or organization notwithstanding their real influence, dharma nirṇaya is made the accountability of king no matter who he consults (and there is a different and a specific subject taught to king who he should consult and who he should not).

PS: It is an axiomatic change and a change in worldview for the west to look at things this way (their organizations are driven by ideals more than by nature of things), but they ARE actively working to plagiarize these concepts at various levels in sciences, and at a slower pace in social sciences. The papers on Artificial Intelligence I linked in a previous post indicate how they are getting natural biological phenomena into AI by consciously learning from nature, trying to make repeatable processes that are only cognitively decipherable.

(This was from a note by @SkandaVeera which I preserved)


Sarasvatī indeed has deserted me(she’s deserted me for some years…what was there for two years before I entered college was merely what was left of my good fortune),and the presiding deity of the mind has not been kind to me at all for quite some time. It’s deeply depressing.

A note on Candragomīn and his tradition

On reading this note by manasataramgini,the following note from Tārānātha came to my mind

Candragomīn had travelled to the South,in the temple of the brāhmaṇa Vararuci,where he came across an image of Vararuci acquiring the śāstra of vyākāraṇa from Śeṣa-nāga. He then thought that a commentary should be brief,profound in significance,with no repititions and complete,which Śeṣa-nāga’s commentary was not. He then composed his Candra-vyākāraṇa ,following Pāṇini’s grammar and remarked ‘This work,though brief,is clear and complete’.(Tārānātha remarks that even this remārk was a harsh criticism of the Nāga).

Some trivial points to note here

  • The identification of Pātāñjali as the incarnation of Śeṣa(implicitly),and his commentary(the fact that it’s referred to as lengthy gives it away)
  • The identification of the Varttikakara Vararuci/Katyayana and his linkage to the tradition of Pātañjali in vyākāraṇa-śāstra.


That debate of Candragomī and the nāstika mahāpaṇḍita Candrakīrti lasted for 7 years,and the debate ended after Candrakīrti discovered Avalokiteśvara teaching Candragomī.

Also,the tradition of the Bauddhas recognizes a vyākāraṇa of Candrakīrti’s in the same(Bauddha) tradition that was superior to Candragomī’s,named the Samantabhadra. It was  bhaṭṭārikā āryā Tārā who said that this vyākāraṇa of Candragomī’s would survive,while the one of Candrakīrti’s would be lost because of his pride in his scholarship. And Tārānātha notes that the well in which Candragomī threw his book in(and later pulled it out of)-those who drank water from that well were immediately filled with great wisdom.

प्रभो शम्भो! prabho shambho!


Today,on seeing that liṅgam at that old temple in the lane behind the office of the postmaster general(been there since the very late 1800s?)It’s a tiny navaratna temple,painted red,that shloka of Amṛtavāgbhavācāryā, blessed by Svacchanda-Bhairava himself came to my mind


प्रभो शम्भो दीनं विहितशरणं त्वच्चरणयोः
समुद्धृत्य श्रद्धाविधुरमपि बद्धादरकरं
दयादृष्ट्या पश्यन्निजतनयमात्मीकुरु शिव॥

In SLP1 romanization(explained in the links for vowels and consonants)

praBo SamBo dInaM vihitaSaraRaM tvaccaraRayoH
samudDftya SradDAviDuramapi badDAdarakaraM
dayAdfzwyA paSyannijatanayamAtmIkuru Siva..

It’s translation(taken from the Kamakotimandali website because I’m lazy)

‘O Lord Shiva, this forest named samsāra is filled with venomous serpents that are the sensory objects. To escape from them, I take refuge most humbly in your lotus feet.

O all powerful Shambhu, please take me out of this forest even if I lack faith and devotion, for I am after all your son and I have sought refuge in you with folded hands.’

He gives the scene of composing this verse thus

मन्निमिर्तः प्रभोशम्भोश्लोको यत्सदयेच्छया।
इष्टसिद्ध्यर्थ प्राप सिद्धमहामन्त्रस्वरुपताम्॥

हितायाऽऽस्तिकलोकानां वर्णयामि सभासतः।
नत्वा तत्पादयुगलं तद्वृत्तं विस्मयावहम्॥

सायत्ननं नित्युकृतयं समाप्य समवस्थिते।
स्वासने मरुयन्धकारावृते पूजागृहेऽमले॥

श्रीशिवप्रार्थनापद्ये प्रातरेव स्वनिर्मिते।
अपशब्दं चिन्तयति सहसा दिव्यदेहवान्॥

जीर्णशुकं जानुदघं वसानो लम्बमेकतः।
रोमगुच्छाचितबिलमहाश्रोत्रः शशिप्रभः॥


महात्मा प्रकटीभूय कोऽपि मत्सम्मुखं तदा।
उच्चालयन् तर्जनीं स्वां मामुवाच सगर्जनम्॥

पद्यमेतन्नास्यशुद्धं न कार्यं परिवर्तनम्।
एवं समासे सुमते! कामशुद्धिं विशङ्कसे॥

इत्युक्त्वा यो दयार्त्रेण चक्षुशा वीक्ष्य मां पुनः।
शम्पेव क्वाप्यगात् सद्य आश्रित्याऽलक्षितां गतिम्॥

अजानन्नपि तस्याऽहं नामधामादिकं मुहुः।
प्रणमामि सदा भक्त्या रुपं वाक्यं च संस्मरन्॥

नालगढे धर्मसभाभवने मासि माधवे।
वृत्तं वृत्तं वैक्रमेऽभे ऋद्धिधैर्यमिते गते॥


Transliterated in the SLP1 scheme

mannimirtaH praBoSamBoSloko yatsadayecCayA.
izwasidDyarTa prApa sidDamahAmantrasvarupatAm..

hitAyA”stikalokAnAM varRayAmi saBAsataH.
natvA tatpAdayugalaM tadvfttaM vismayAvaham..

sAyatnanaM nityukftayaM samApya samavasTite.
svAsane maruyanDakArAvfte pUjAgfhe’male..

SrISivaprArTanApadye prAtareva svanirmite.
apaSabdaM cintayati sahasA divyadehavAn..

jIrRaSukaM jAnudaGaM vasAno lambamekataH.
romagucCAcitabilamahASrotraH SaSipraBaH..


mahAtmA prakawIBUya ko’pi matsammuKaM tadA.
uccAlayan tarjanIM svAM mAmuvAca sagarjanam..

padyametannAsyaSudDaM na kAryaM parivartanam.
evaM samAse sumate! kAmaSudDiM viSaNkase..

ityuktvA yo dayArtreRa cakzuSA vIkzya mAM punaH.
Sampeva kvApyagAt sadya ASrityA’lakzitAM gatim..

ajAnannapi tasyA’haM nAmaDAmAdikaM muhuH.
praRamAmi sadA BaktyA rupaM vAkyaM ca saMsmaran..

nAlagaQe DarmasaBABavane mAsi mADave.
vfttaM vfttaM vEkrame’Be fdDiDEryamite gate..



On Kavīndrācārya


ACP: He was a close associate of Dara Shikoh

Me: I’m reading the kavIndrasucipatra,an index of books of his library.

ACP:And a festschrift with verses from all Sanskrit intellectuals of the day was written in his honour,and he negotiated with Shah Jahan on behalf of Hs. There were a lot of mentions of him in the book. Can’t recall offhand/search easily since I read the book in print + will have to pick it up again from the library

ACP: From my notes from the book(author(of this post’s) note:Both of us strongly disagree with the book’s thesis)(Can’t recall offhand/search easily since I read the book in print + will have to pick it up again from the library)

ACP: On Kavīndra’s interactions with the Mughals as a Sanskrit intellectual see Pollock, “Death of Sanskrit,” 407-8 and as a Hindi intellectual see Busch, “Hidden in Plain View,” 289-92.

ACP: My notes from the book further continue:

Under Shah Jahan the Brahmanical profile at the Mughal court became more pronounced with the entry of Kavīndrācārya Sarasvatī and Jagannātha Paṇḍitarāja. These two intellectuals interacted with the Mughals in different ways that demonstrate continuities with earlier Mughal patronage of Sanskrit literati but also important changes in cross-cultural relations. Kavīndra initially approached Shah Jahan in order to negotiate the relinquishment of taxes on certain Brahmanical pilgrimage sites, most notably Varanasi and Prayag. The exact chronology of what occurred is murky because no direct narrative accounts of Kavīndra’s time at Shah Jahan’s court are known in either Sanskrit or Persian. However, information gleaned from Sanskrit and Hindi verses praising Kavīndra attests that he spent time in Mughal company teaching Sanskrit texts to both Shah Jahan and Dara Shikuh. Among other works, he instructed them in Śaṅkara’s Bhāṣya.87 Kavīndra also persuaded Shah Jahan to rescind a pilgrimage tax, much to the joy of the Brahmanical community

He was the one who taught Dara Shikoh the Yoga Vashishta? Don’t remember, you will find it in my collected DMs in the devayasna drafts

Moreover, in the 1640s-50s Kavīndra moved outside of the central royal court and joined the retinue of a Mughal noble, Danishmand Khan, and later of the French traveler, Francois Bernier.93 For reasons we do not yet fully understand, Sanskrit intellectuals shifted away from the central imperial context during Shah Jahan’s reign and found new homes in regional and subimperial courts.94 Additionally, Kavīndra’s association with Europeans reflects wider changes in the cultural landscape of early modern India.


Kavīndra initially approached Shah Jahan in order to negotiate the relinquishment of taxes on certain Brahmanical pilgrimage sites, most notably Varanasi and Prayag

Kavīndra also persuaded Shah Jahan to rescind a pilgrimage tax, much to the joy of the Brahmanical community

Yes,that much I too gathered

ACP: Kavindra also served the Mughals as a poet and musician and was paid by them (which was controversial among v1s in his time)

 Aurangzeb appears to have halted Shah Jahan’s stipend to Kavīndra, which prompted him to seek out Danishmand Khan’s assistance

Shah Jahan named Kavīndra sarvavidyānidhāna (Treasure House of All Knowledge) in recognition of his extensive learning.
Me: Anything about the loss of his library?
ACP: Don’t remember,perhaps there was.
The conversation ends here. Also,if anyone is interested in the kavIndrasucipatra,an index of books in his library, a link of it on exists here.

On manu sm.rti

Me: So,does iPengu here have a point when he says

One of the problems of Manu Samhita is that people focus on punishments there but if we instead concentrate on moral values it promotes then it becomes perfectly Hindu in every way.

SV: Actually people don’t “focus” on the penal codes of Manu,they just quote those and pretend they belong to a more civilized jurisprudence and penal codes(which is patently false but let that pass). And such pretnce is used to give you reason to ignore the Hindu dharma “saastras. What we should get at is not really the “morality” of Manu because there is today a “moral scheme” based on a certain worldview which needs to be combated before you get to the morality itself.

The basic questions of whether nature should be seen as the teacher or ideals(which change with time) as guidance,whether human should be trusted or system,should be raised whose answers can be found in dharma. Penal code or moral code will be corollaries to these axiomatic things.

Me: You still get the point that is made, SV?

SV: Well he is saying look at the moral code not penal code. I fear that won’t get us anywhere as an exercise because of the underlying worldview and assumptions of the moral codeonce you take cognizance of the fact that its implications will be not in “good practices for people” but an actual guide to jurispudence and penal codes. maanava dharma “saastra was never the former,so even seeing it that way would be problematic. And for the latter,it’s a more systematic and systemic work.


maanava dharma “saastra was never the former

Was never a moral code,you mean?

SV: It was never meant as a micro level moral code for individuals,but a guide for those designing the collective moral codes.

SV: Individual,,gender,etc are all explained not in prescriptive terms,but as insights into understanding things at a collective level. For instance as R Ganesh says explain the tree to explain a forest. That does not amount to giving codes for the tree but giving insight into understanding tree thereby forest.

SV: The prescriptive codes for individuals don’t come from these but from the specific code books of each group,lineage,etc

SV: Similarly with the word sanaatana,it is sanaatana because it applies at all times to all peoples,because it is talking about unchanging principles of nature.


Westerners and our traditions

The question on how to interact with Westerners or even those who are deeply influenced by post-enlightenment,Christianized ideals is an important one to deal with. How should they be accepted in sampradAyas/institutions belonging to sampradAyas?

From my brief survey of some institutions,the institutions that have heavily accepted westerners have had massive degradations that have negatively affected the sampradAyas overall. Like ISKCON and the insiduous Abrahamic strains(like suggesting that jIvas fall from vaikunTha,despite baladeva’s bhASya on the last sutra of the brahma-sutras,and too many other things that can’t be spoken about here now and the other splinter groups. Or Yogananda distorting the Kriya Yoga paramparA.

From these examples(one may also refer to the mass influx of Jatts within Sikhi or briefly the post Banda Bahadur period to note that mass influx of people who haven’t had a perparatory period isn’t really a helpful thing). On the other hand,we also have to contend that we really can’t stay shut up in cocoons in the West all the time. Still,we have to deal with its secularizing tendencies while we are there. We’re losing both our men to its secularism and our women to both secularism and marriage to other traditions,which very frequently result in a much reduced ability to pass down our traditions to our children.

This is a problem,which doesn’t seem to have any easy solution,frankly. The most successful and orthodox orgs in the West seem to have been those related with the Saiva Siddhanta Church(not that I am recommending or pushing for them,anyway). A few disciples of Swami Dayananda maybe also? Maybe one or two students of Lakshman joo? We don’t even have the fire of Sridhar Ketkar who married a Jewish wife,bringing her into the Hindu fold.

Rupa Goswami’s advice : saGga-tyAgo vidUreNa bhagavad-vimukhaira janaiH/ziSyAdy ananuvandhitvaM mahArambhAdy anudyamauH (One should keep a distance from those who are averse to the Lord, avoid accepting too many disciples(emphasis mine) and not be overly enthusiastic about initiating great projects) seems to ring truer than ever.

Worshipping Sai Baba and other Siddhas

SV: bANAmati(by the Telugu author Viswanatha Satyanarayana) is a story of a guy possessed by a piSAca. There is a dead saint who is worshiped in that region and the guy uses pUja flowers from that place to rid himself and eventually help the piSAca rid of its piSAci state.

Me: How does this work?Reverence for a dead Siddha?

SV: There are many regions where a local siddha is not cremated but buried, and around that place some effect is felt in times to come.

Me: Elaborate please.

SV: In those places it is not uncommon to have kids named after those siddhas, promises and offerings made in their name etc.

SV: In case of infections, infant deaths etc they pray and name after the siddha for the newborns to survive. Or in cases where kids see “air” or frequent ill-health. But most of this is very specific to those regions, because there is no formalized mantra or devata associated with siddha.

Me: So… Apart from the no formalized procedure,the difference is…?

SV: Besides, devata has several layers whereas dead siddha effect is limited to lower layers of consciousness.Like a ghost, the siddha effect will also be possible at the outermost sheath of subtle body (the vital). Trying to elevate a dead siddha to devata is not going to fly because there is no drashTa given mantra or procedure for worship. Nor is such devotion going to melt the mind’s deeper sheaths.

Me: So… In the case of Sai they are trying to retrofit a Dēvatās role?

SV: Yes and and which is why it is not going to work.

S: SV – something similar. .I personally have very close family who have had kids after going to Reddemma Konda. and as is the norm they are named Reddamma / Reddappa and no particular mantra or anything for her worship.

SV: Instead of “rAjA rAm candra ki jai” or “har har mahAdev” if you shout “jai sai nAth” it is not likely to produce anything in a battle or anything of civilizational purpose.

S: SV – agree,and many sai temples do Rudrakbhishekam to Sai Baba.It is their wish but i find it odd.

SV: No its not their wish it is dogma and rowdyism – neither is rudra mantra their property (it belongs to the vedAgama tradition) nor is the procedure of worship.That anything in the land belongs to my and i have the freedom to use it the way i want is quite dushTa 🙂

S: I understand. my point was/is that – just because they do rudrabhishkeam to Sai, it ain’t gonna give any benefit.

SV: Many Sai cultists also know the limitations of the effect, and hence try to bring into sai temples, along with bhajan, the vedAgama worship so that the “charge” is maintained. It might – after all regardless of where  you pour it, the mantra has its effect. Which is attributed to Sai and not the greatness of Rudra mantra. Which is the main problem.

Me: >and many sai temples do Rudrakbhishekam to Sai Baba


SV: Like rAma jaya there is a “sai jaya” mantra that all Sai cultists chant 🙂

S: Replace Shiva with Sai is how it is there. I am not kidding.4 times aartis. Abhishekams with Rudram. Dhuni for Vibhuti.Tulasi Brindavan.

Me: Most I’ve been to is Lokenath Baba shrines

SV: “brahma vishNu SivAtmakAya namaH” one among the sai ashTottara mantra-s if I remember 🙂 Majority of devata mantras are plagiarized and perverted by inserting sai name.

S: There is a Sai Satyavrata poja,and I’m not kidding.

SV: Plagiarized satya nArayaNa vrata 🙂


An aśṭamukhaliṅga of Paśupatināth at Mandsaur


pitāmaha uvāca।

namaste bhagavan rudra bhāskarāmitatejase.
namo bhavāya devāya rasāyāmbymayāya te..
śarvāya kṣitirūpāya sadā surabhiṇe namaḥ.
iśāya vāyave tubhyaṃ saṃsparśāya namo namaḥ.
paśunāṃ pateye caiva pāvakāyātitejase..
bhīmāya vyomarūpāya śabdāmātrāya te namaḥ.
mahādevāya somāya amṛtāya namo’stute.
ugrāya yajamānāya namaste karmayogine..


yaḥ paṭhed śṛṇuyadvāpi paitā mahamimaṃ stavaṃ.
rudrāya kathitaṃ viprāñśraāvayedvā samāhitaḥ..
aṣṭamūrtestu sāyujyaṃ varṣādekādavāpnuyāt.

The first attestation of this aspect(rather,collection of aspects of Śiva) is in the Śāṅkhāyana Brāhmaṇa,where Rudra,on his own request after being generated by Prajapati,takes on 8 names: Bhava,Śarva,Paśupati,Ugra,Mahādeva,Rudra,Iśāna and Aśani,respectively the waters(āpaḥ),Agni,Vāyu,plants and trees,the sun,the moon,food and Indra respectively. The text then ends with “sa eṣo’ṣṭanāmāṣṭadhā vihito mahān devaḥ“. Also,a similar attestation exists in the Śaṭpāṭha Brāhmaṇa where he takes teh epithets Rudra,Sarva,Paśupati,Ugra,Aśani,Bhava,Mahādeva and Īśāna each manifested through a rūpa. In this version,Agni becomes the form of Rudra,the waters(āpaḥ) of Śarva,the plants of Paśupati,Vāyu of Ugra,lightning of Aśani and the sun of Īśāna.

The Liṅga Purāṇa version(mentioned here) identifies Rudra with the sun,Bhava with the waters and taste,Śarva with earth and smell,Īśa with vāyu and touch,Paśupati with fire(pāvaka),Bhīma with ether,Mahādeva with candra(the moon) and Ugra with the yajamāna.

It is also attested in the Anuśāsana parvan of the Mahābhārata(ch.16)

bhūr-ādyān sarvanhuvanān-utpādya sadivaukasaḥ.
dadhāti devastanubhuraṣṭābhiryo bibharti ca..

In South India,it is first attested int he Maṇimekhalai epic where it talks about the Śaivavādin,the expounder of the doctrine of eight forms of Īśvara.

Manikkavāsagar also attests this in his Tiruvāsagam,Appar and Sambandhar.

Kālidāsa in his benedictory verse of the Abhijñānaśakuntalam mentions this concept too

yā sṛṣṭiḥ sraṣṭur-ādyā vahati vidhihutaṃ yā havir-yā ca hotṛ
ye dve kālaṃ vidhattaḥ śrṇotiviṣayaguṇā yā sthitā vyāpyā viśvam।
yām-āhuḥ sarvabījāprakṛtir-iti yayā prāṇinaḥ prāṇavantaḥ
pratyakṣābhiḥ prapannas-tanubhir-avatu vas-tābhir-aṣṭābhir-Īśaḥ॥

This aspect of Shiva is also found in the famous Shiva Mahimna Stava.

bhavaḥ śarvo rudraḥ paśupatirathograḥ sahamahāṃstathā bhīmeśānāviti yadabhidhānāṣṭakamidam।
amuṣminpratyekaṃ pravicarati deva śrutirapi priyāyāsmai dhāmne pravihitanamasyo’smi bhavate॥

In Indian epigraphy,this concept finds mention in the following places

* Kurgod inscription of the Cālukya prince Someśvara IV and the prince Rācamalla II(dated 1173 and 1181 CE respectively).

* Devapattana Prashasti of Śridhara()

* Ratta inscription from Saundatti(dated 1229 CE)

In Indian iconography,the Mūrtyāṣṭaka is mentioned,but their depiction is surprisingly uncommon. However,they are invoked and beheld in the bricks when a Śiva temple is built.

Now,as to the epigraphical evidence in East Asia

* Phnom Preah Vihear Stele of Bhavavarman II,Śiva is invoked thus

jayāt īnduravi vyomavāyvātmakṣmā-jalānalaiḥ
tanoti tanubhiśśambhur-yyo-śṭābhir-akhilāṇ-(?)

* Tuol Ang Tnot inscription of Jayavarman I(681 CE)

* Bakong Stele inscription of Indravarman I(881 CE)

* Mebon and Pre Rup steles of Rajendravarman(952 and 961 CE): Installations of Aṣṭamūrtis are alluded to. Symbolized by 8 liṅgas in 8 sanctuaries grouped together.

The relevant texts of the Mebon stele

yenaitāni jaganti yajva-hitabug-bhāsvan-nabhasvan-nabhaḥ-

* Prasat Khna inscription of Udayadityavarman II(1060 CE?)

niyoktṛ-ātmādibhāvena-veditavyā mumukṣubhiḥ..

(Note:The concept of the identity of the ātman and the yajamāna is also implied here.)

* Sdok Kak Thom Inscription of Udayadityavarman II(1052 AD). The Śivācārya would offer a garland of 8 flowers(yo-dāt svayaṃ pratyahaṃ aṣṭapuṣpin-tanūnapāto-ṣṭatanoś ca tuṣṭyai)

* Banteay Srei Inscription of Jayavarman V(968 CE) refers to an offering of an 8-flowered garland by the rājaguru Yajñavarāha.

* My-Son Stele inscription of Prakāśadharma-Vikrāntavarman I(dated 657 CE)

* Another inscription by the same king Vikrāntavarman also at My Son:Here,Siva is described as the deva “whose image,identical with the Universe,is manifested by His forms—earth,water,fire,air,sky,sun,moon and sacrificer,which are fifnified by the titles of deva of great power,named Śarva,Bhava,Paśupati,Īsāna,Bhīma,Rudra,Mahādeva,and Ugra(avanivana-panakasakha-pavanavanadapatha-daśaśatakiraṇa-śatakiraṇa-dīkṣita-tanubhir—atanuprabhāvābhiḥ śarva-bhava-paśupat-īśāna-bhīma-rudra-mahādevogrābhidhāna-pradhāna-samupabṛṅhitābhir—āvirbhāvita-viśvamūrtinā)

* Canggal inscription of Java(describes Rudra as sustaining the world through His eight bodies)

* An aṣṭamukhaliṅga exists at Bali(was dated sometime between the 10th-14th century) at Pedjeng.

A stuti to viSNu from the Linga Purana by kSupa


(Note:This portion can serve as a sort of embedded dhyāna śloka)
pūjayā tasya saṃtuśṭo bhagavānpuruṣottamaḥ/
śrībhūmisahitaḥ śrīmāñśaṅkhacakragadādharaḥ//
kirīṭī padmahastaṣca sarvabharaṇa bhūṣitaḥ//
pītāṃbaraṣca bhagavāndevairdaityaṣca saṃvṛtaḥ//
pradadau darśanaṃ tasmai divyaṃ vai garuḍadhvajaḥ/
divyena sarśanenaiva dṛṣṭvā devaṃ janārdanam//
tuṣṭāva vāgmiriśṭāBhiḥ praṇamya garuḍadhvajaṃ/

(Core stotra)
tvamādistvamanādiṣca prakṛtistvaṃ janārdanaḥ/
puruṣastvaṃ jagannātho viṣṇurviśveśvaro bhavān//
yoyaṃ brahmāsi puruṣo viśvamūrtiḥ pitāmahaḥ/
tattvamādyaṃ bhavāneva paraṃ jyotirjanārdana//
paramātmā paramdhāma śrīpate bhūpate prabho/
tvatkrodhasaṃbhavo rudrastamasā ca samāvṛtaḥ//
tatprasādājjagaddhātā rajasā ca pitāmahaḥ/
tvatprasādātsvayaṃ viṣṇuḥ sattvena puruśottamaḥ//
kālamūrte hare viṣṇo nārāyaṇa jaganmaya/
mahānstathā ca bhūtādistanmātrāṇindriyāṇi ca//
tvayaivādhiṣṭhānyeva viṣvamūrte maheśvara/
mahādeva jagannātha pitāmaha jagadguro/
prasīda devadeveśa prasīda parameśvara//
prasīda tvaṃ jagannātha śaraṇyaṃ śaraṇaṃ gataḥ/
vaikuṇṭha śaure sarvajña vāsudeva mahābhuja//
saṃkarśaṇa mahābhāga pradyumna puruśottama/
aniruddha mahāviśṇo sadā viśṇo namostute//
viṣṇo tavāsanaṃ divyamavyaktaṃ madhyato vibhuḥ/
adhaśca dharmoṃdeveśa jñānaṃ vairāmyameva ca/
aiśvaryamāsanasyāsya pādarupeṇa suvrata//
saptapātālapādastvaṃ dharājaghanameva ca/
vāsāṃsi sāgarāḥ sapta diśacaiva mahābhujāḥ//
dyaumūrdhā te vibho nābhiḥ saṃ vāurnāsikāṃ gataḥ/
netre somaśca sūryaśca keśā vai puṣkarādayaḥ//
nakṣatratārakā dyausca graiveyakavibhūṣaṇam/
kathaṃ stoṣyāmi deveśaṃ pūjyaṣca puruṣottamaḥ//
śraddhayā ca kṛtaṃ divyaṃ yacchrtutaṃ yacca kīrtitam/
yadiśṭam tatkṣamasvaśa nārāyaṇa namostute//


idaṃ tu vaiṣṇavaṃ stotraṃ sarvapāpapraṇāśanam/
yaḥ paṭhecchṛṇuyādāpi kṣupeṇa parikīrtitam//
śrāvayedvā dvijān bhaktyā viśṇulokaṃ sa gacchati//




In this section

adhaśca dharmoṃdeveśa jñānaṃ vairāgyameva ca/
aiśvaryamāsanasyāsya pādarupeṇa suvrata//

These four legs of Nārāyaṇa’s seat,(jñāna,vairāgya,aiśvarya,suvrata,ie, knowledge,detachment,prosperity and virtue) are a part of the AdhArASaktyAdi tarpaNa to be performed as the daily āhnika for Pāñcarātrins.


(Note:This portion can serve as a sort of embedded DyAna Sloka)

pUjayA tasya saMtuSwo BagavAnpuruzottamaH/
SrIBUmisahitaH SrImAYSaNKacakragadADaraH//
kirIwI padmahastazca sarvaBaraRa BUzitaH//
pItAMbarazca BagavAndevErdEtyazca saMvftaH//
pradadO darSanaM tasmE divyaM vE garuqaDvajaH/
divyena sarSanenEva dfzwvA devaM janArdanam//
tuzwAva vAgmiriSwABhiH praRamya garuqaDvajaM/

(Core stotra)

tvamAdistvamanAdizca prakftistvaM janArdanaH/
puruzastvaM jagannATo vizRurviSveSvaro BavAn//
yoyaM brahmAsi puruzo viSvamUrtiH pitAmahaH/
tattvamAdyaM BavAneva paraM jyotirjanArdana//
paramAtmA paramDAma SrIpate BUpate praBo/
tvatkroDasaMBavo rudrastamasA ca samAvftaH//
tatprasAdAjjagadDAtA rajasA ca pitAmahaH/
tvatprasAdAtsvayaM vizRuH sattvena puruSottamaH//
kAlamUrte hare vizRo nArAyaRa jaganmaya/
mahAnstaTA ca BUtAdistanmAtrARindriyARi ca//
tvayEvADizWAnyeva vizvamUrte maheSvara/
mahAdeva jagannATa pitAmaha jagadguro/
prasIda devadeveSa prasIda parameSvara//
prasIda tvaM jagannATa SaraRyaM SaraRaM gataH/
vEkuRWa SOre sarvajYa vAsudeva mahABuja//
saMkarSaRa mahABAga pradyumna puruSottama/
anirudDa mahAviSRo sadA viSRo namostute//
vizRo tavAsanaM divyamavyaktaM maDyato viBuH/
aDaSca DarmoMdeveSa jYAnaM vErAmyameva ca/
ESvaryamAsanasyAsya pAdarupeRa suvrata//
saptapAtAlapAdastvaM DarAjaGanameva ca/
vAsAMsi sAgarAH sapta diSacEva mahABujAH//
dyOmUrDA te viBo nABiH saM vAurnAsikAM gataH/
netre somaSca sUryaSca keSA vE puzkarAdayaH//
nakzatratArakA dyOsca grEveyakaviBUzaRam/
kaTaM stozyAmi deveSaM pUjyazca puruzottamaH//
SradDayA ca kftaM divyaM yacCrtutaM yacca kIrtitam/
yadiSwam tatkzamasvaSa nArAyaRa namostute//



idaM tu vEzRavaM stotraM sarvapApapraRASanam/
yaH paWecCfRuyAdApi kzupeRa parikIrtitam//
SrAvayedvA dvijAn BaktyA viSRulokaM sa gacCati//