Read along with the word ‘para-brahmamahishhi’ (shloka #97), we should have meant only the para-Brahman by
the word ‘tvat-patiH’
in #26.
But in the case of para-brahman, there is no question of any action like ‘playing or
sporting’ (‘viharati’);
that is why the interpretation of ‘Kameshvara-Shiva’ (who is non-distinct from ambaa) for ‘tvat-patiH’
in shloka #26.
(Continued...)
No comments:
Post a Comment