Considering Shiva’s unprecedented wisdom, His unique qualities of leadership, His unbounded love for human beings – in a word, His unsurpassed uniqueness in all aspects of life – spiritual aspirants realized that although Shiva was human in form, He was in fact none other than Táraka Brahma. This idea, that Shiva was Parama Puruśa or Táraka Brahma, dawned only vaguely upon the human minds of those days, but found its full expression some time afterwards.

Some ideas arose in the minds of people, particularly sádhakas, that Brahma is the composite form of Parama Puruśa and Paramá Prakrti; and Shiva was the crystallized manifestation of Brahma. This idea was further developed and took shape long afterwards, during the days of Jain Tantra, Buddhist Tantra, and Post-Shiva Tantra. People were then able to grasp the significance of Shiva Shaktyátmakaḿ Brahma [“Brahma is the composite of Shiva, or Puruśa, and Shakti, or Prakrti”]. Each and every sádhaka realizes, in the exalted state of spiritual realization, Tvameko dvitvamápanno Shivashaktivibhágashah – “O Lord, You are One. You are witnessing everything as the Supreme Cognitive Principle, and You are also doing everything in the capacity of the Supreme Operative Principle. You are giving pain and misery to Your children with one hand, and with the other, You are wiping the tears from the eyes. On the one hand, You are chiding them in the harshest language, and on the other, You are drawing them close to You and showering Your love on them. You are one and the same Entity, but You express Yourself to both extremes – You are perfect in both ways. Your one role is complementary to the other.”

Kata ye elem jána re bándá kata ye kudrat karo
Sáp haiyá kát́a re bándá ojhá haiyá jháŕo

Kata kerámat jána re bándá, kata kerámat jáno
Májh dariyáy jál phyáláiyá d́áuṋgáy baesyá t́áno.

[I wonder how many qualities You have, how many are Your ways of
expression!
On one hand You are the snake that bites, on the other You are
the snake charmer that cures.]

[I wonder how many feats You perform – You throw the net in the
middle of the sea,
But you draw it in sitting on the shore.]

You are the Cognitive Faculty on the one hand, and the Operative Faculty on the other.

Satyaloke nirákárá mahájyotisvarúpińii
Máyáccháditátmánaḿ cańakákárarúpińii;
Máyábalkalaḿ saḿtyajya dvidhábhinná yadonmukhii
Shivashakti vibhágena jáyate srśt́ikalpaná.

[The Supreme Entity in Satyaloka⁽¹⁾ is without form, a flood of effulgence,
Covered by the coating of Máyá (the Creative Principle), united with the Operative Principle like an ungerminated gram.
Later, when the coating of Máyá drops off, the two portions of the gram become separated;
Similarly, when Shiva and Shakti are separated, the imagination of creation is aroused.]

The idea that Brahma comprises both Shiva and Shakti was consummated five thousand years after Shiva’s advent. This is the idea of Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva. It was imagined that Shiva was one: His right side was like that of Shiva, and His left side was like that of Shakti, or Gaorii. One side was plain white, the other side was fair-complexioned; one side was covered with a tiger skin, the other with linen cloth; on one side there was a hooded snake, on the other, the matted locks of Gaorii’s hair. This idea of Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva [Shiva Half Man and Half Woman] represents the inner spirit of Shiva Shaktyátmakaḿ Brahma. True, Ánanda Sútram⁽²⁾ was not composed then, but the idea was there deep in people’s minds. This Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva was not known in the days of Shiva Tantra, but was very much present in the days of Post-Shiva Tantra. Later on it was accepted in the Puranic Shiva Cult, but subsequently this idea disappeared from people’s minds.

I saw the figure of Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva in one of the 108 temples on the Burdwan-Guskara Road to the west of Burdwan town. This Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva is a personification of a philosophical idea: that Shiva and Shakti – knowledge and energy – work in harmony. Energy is a blind force. A little child may die of electrocution, because electricity is merely a form of energy devoid of consciousness; being a blind force, it never stops to think that it is killing an innocent child. Thus there should be proper coordination between energy and cognition. This energy, unless guided and controlled by consciousness, may indulge in destructive activities. Thus all the actional expressions of Prakrti are performed only on the vast body of Supreme Consciousness. If Shakti takes one step away from the body of Shiva, it may be harmful. So Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva is a symbolic form of this creation by Shiva and Shakti. Shiva is only working as a witnessing entity and controlling the movements of Shakti with His characteristic firmness, simplicity, and love for creation.

Kii e nirúpama shobhá manorama
Hara Gaorii ek shariire
Shveta piita káy ráuṋgá dut́i páy
Bhábt́i bhábiyá mari re
Ádha bághachála aunge viráje ádha pat́ámbara mohana sáje
Ádha phańii phańá dhari re.

[What exquisite beauty have Shiva and Párvatii manifested in one body:
One is white, the other is yellow;
When I think of the qualities of those two lotus feet, I am beside myself with joy.
One side of the body is wearing a tiger-skin, the other is covered with fine silk cloth,
And half the head is adorned with a serpent.]

As Shiva desires the well-being of all, He will not allow Prakrti to work unchecked. He will keep her under perfect control, and in order to do that, His simplicity, His honesty, must not be impaired under any circumstances. Even in the inseparable relationship of Shiva and Shakti, Shiva is absolutely simple. Nowhere in His expressions is there any complexity. Even at the time of regulating Prakrti, He is very simple; He is not at all complex. He is discharging His duties in all fields of life, whether big or small, domestic or social, worldly or spiritual, without losing His simplicity. Even when He sets forth to get married, He is always His simple self. His marriage is described in a poem:

Yabe bibáhe chalilá trilocan, ogo marań, he mor marań
Tánr kata shata chila áyojan, chila kata shata upakarań
Tánr lat́pat́ kare bághchál, tánr brśa rahi rahi garaje
Tánr beśt́an kari jat́ájál, yata bhujauṋgadal taraje
Tánr babam babam báje gál, dole galáy kapál-ábharań
Tánr biśáń phukári ut́he tán, ogo marań, he mor marań.

[When Shiva went for marriage, my God!
There were many arrangements and much paraphernalia:
His tiger-skin was rumpled, and His ox was bellowing at intervals;
Around His matted locks, serpents were hissing.
His puffed cheeks emitting babam babam sounds, His neck adorned with a garland of skulls,
Blowing notes on His horn, oh God! These were the arrangements!]

At the time of His marriage, He carried many things, but those things were very simple. For instance, He had His usual loose tiger skin; His bellowing ox, which was His customary mode of transportation; His matted locks of hair; and His trumpet. Thus Shiva was simple and straightforward in all respects. The greatest thing people should learn from Shiva is this sort of straightforwardness and simplicity, and along with that, unflinching devotion to duty.

This simplicity on the part of Shiva has become proverbial. Mahaprabhu Chaitanya lost his father when he was very young. One Ramchandra Ghose, a certain wealthy gentleman of Nabadwip, took the responsibility to maintain his poor Brahman family. He became the guardian of Nimai-Mahaprabhu. At the time of marrying Nimai, the gentleman said that Nimai’s marriage would by no means be a silent ceremony like those of the Brahmans. “I won’t be satisfied with a simple marriage ceremony like that of Shiva, just blowing His trumpet. I will see Nimai is married like Kayastha [upper-caste] boys, to the sound of d́hák, d́hol [heavy drums] and long horns.”

Yes, this is Shiva, at whose marriage only trumpets were blown – even long horns were not blown. Perhaps the bride had on a fine wedding dress and ornaments, but the bridegroom certainly did not wear a silken dhoti and cádar [wrapper], but merely wore his usual tiger-skin as He took His seat at the marriage place. The bride might have the required headdress for marriage, but the bridegroom did not have a shining headdress. Instead, He had hissing snakes around His head. It was not the marriage of a Kayastha youth, after all – it was the marriage of Shiva.

There was no pomp and show in any aspect of Shiva’s life. Shiva, who had countless occult powers, before whom everyone bowed with bended knee, was completely indifferent to His powers. This greatness of Shiva was a distinct trait of His character. While some gods and goddesses wore various types of ornaments – some had crowns on their heads, some bangles on their wrists, some earrings, some gold-decorated girdles around their waists – Shiva had no ornaments. His ornaments were His followers, His devotees – the common people, whom the Aryans branded as “ghosts”. The indigenous people were somewhat dark, and the Aryans were fair-complexioned, so the Aryans despised those followers of Shiva – the common people of India – as “ghosts”. In fact they were not ghosts but the devotees of Shiva. In Sanskrit, they were called gańa [mass of followers].

These people were the ornaments of Shiva. They made up Shiva’s family. His joys and sorrows, pleasures and pains centred around them. And Shiva’s family meant this universe. All the persons of this universe, whether frustrated or joyful, educated or uneducated, devotees or opponents, were included in His family. No one was excluded, because all together made up Shiva’s golden home in His thatched house. Who could be excluded? So the one who was at the head of such a big family became their god.

Some people may criticize Shiva in public, but at heart they will praise Him. Because if other gods are displeased, they will curse the people and bring about their ruin; but Shiva never cursed anyone. He might have been mentally hurt, but He would not curse anyone, He would not harm anyone. If a person criticized Shiva and after that said mentally to Him, “O Shiva, merciful Lord, the easily-satisfied one, tell me if you are forgiving me or not,” He would pardon then and there. Even if someone said to Him in anger, “You must pardon me,” Shiva would pardon him. That is why Shiva was so close to the hearts of the common people. He belonged to one and all. Hence even to this day, Shiva’s words are still ringing in the infinite blue void with profound and serene modulations –

Keu to ámár par nay
Sabái ápan vishvamay
Ámi shudhu hási
Shudhu bhálabási
Náshi klesharáshi
Dii abhay
Keu to ámár par nay.

[No one is unrelated to Me.
All in this universe are My own.
I only laugh
I only love
I remove their sufferings
And their fears.
No one is unrelated to me.]

That is all about Ardha-Náriishvara Shiva. It is a philosophical idea.

Now we should discuss, one after another, those who are claimed to be related to Shiva. We have already discussed Durgá, Kálii, Tárá, etc. Now let us say something about Lakśmii.

The mythological story goes like this: When the gods and the demons were churning the ocean, many valuable things were recovered from the bottom of the sea. Of these, the most notable things were the mammoth, the heavenly tree Párijáta, nectar, etc. One most important entity thus recovered was the goddess Lakśmii: she arose from the seabed in the process of churning. According to mythology, she was married to Náráyańa. So one thing is proven here: that Lakśmii was not Shiva’s daughter – she arose from the seabed. The second thing is that this so-called event of churning the ocean as mentioned in the mythology took place 5500 years after Shiva. So from that point of view also, Lakśmii cannot be Shiva’s daughter. According to mythology, Shiva was also involved in the event of churning – after the churning was over.

There is another allusion to Lakśmii. It is said that once when Lord Krśńa was absent from His capital, Dwaraka, a demon named Narakasura launched an attack on Dwaraka. I have already told you that asura does not mean any weird creature. They are a group, a community, of people who originally lived in Assyria. Later on the Scythians, both in India and outside, were a branch of the Asura community. The Scythians were mainly earth-coloured; they were short but stocky. They were not actually Asuras, but a sub-tribe of the Asuras. As I said, Krśńa was absent from His capital when it was raided by Narakasura. Then Satyabhámá fought a battle against this Asura and killed him.

That was the fourteenth day of the dark fortnight. The Asura having been killed in the battle, the people of Dwaraka illumined the city with fourteen oil-lamps. That day is still observed as Naraka Caturdashii in western India, and the same day in eastern India is called Bhúta Caturdashii. And the following day, eastern India celebrates Shyámá Pújá, the worship of the goddess Shyámá.

I have already told you about Shyámá –

Shiitakále bhaveduśńá griiśme ca sukhashiitalá;
Atasii puśpavarńábhá sá Shyámá parikiirttitá.

[One who is warm in winter and cool in summer,
Who has the soothing colour of the atasii flower, is called Shyámá.]

But in Dwaraka the next day, there was great festivity: feasting, merrymaking, fireworks, etc., and that evening Satyabhámá was worshipped by the people. Since that day, Satyabhámá has been worshipped as Mahálakśmii, and the people of those regions open new charge accounts on that day.

This worship of Mahálakśmii was accepted by the Puranic Shakti Cult. In some places, the worship of Mahálakśmii is preceded by the worship of Alakśmii, a goddess representing misfortune. This Mahálakśmii was the wife of Shrii Krśńa, and her name originally was Satyabhámá. This Lakśmii was not of the Puranic Age because Krśńa was far older than the age of the Puranas; and this Mahálakśmii was born 3500 years later than Shiva, so she cannot be the daughter of Shiva.

We come across another Lakśmii in Jain Tantra, Buddhist Tantra and Post-Shiva Tantra, described as Kamalá, one of the Ten Mahávidyás. Many people wrongly believe that Mahálakśmii and Kamalá are one and the same entity. This is not correct. Mahálakśmii was Satyabhámá, Krśńa’s wife. I have already said that the concept of Dashamahávidyá was a synthesis of Buddhist Tantra, Jain Tantra and Post-Shiva Tantra. This concept of Dashamahávidyá evolved by taking certain entities from each and every Tantra. So this Kamalá of Dashamahávidyá is not the real Lakśmii, and this concept of Kamalá had its origin in the days of Dashamahávidyá, which was more than 5500 years after Shiva. So she cannot be the daughter of Shiva either.

People thought of them as one and the same goddess during the days of the Puranic Shakti Cult.

Kamalá acalá han parishram guńe;
Álasye Alakśmii ási báŕe dine dine.

[Kamalá remains steady in the house of a person if the person
labours hard;
But if one is idle, then Alakśmii takes her place there, and the
person’s misfortunes pile up.]

This couplet proves that people have started identifying Lakśmii with Kamalá.

Each of the Ten Mahávidyás was considered a wife of Shiva, so Kamalá cannot be the daughter of Shiva. Regarding Kamalá, it is said, Káiṋcanakántih sudiipatá sumanohará Kamalá harahrdivásinii – “Her colour is golden and shining, very lovely, and she is rooted in the heart of Shiva; she is the wife of Shiva.” So this clearly shows that Lakśmii, or Kamalá, is not the daughter of Shiva and Durgá, as people think.

The concept of Durgá arose in the Puranic days, only about 1300 years ago, and the concept of Lakśmii is a little older than that. The concept of Mahálakśmii is about 3500 years old, and other concepts are about 1750 years old. So Lakśmii could never be the daughter of Shiva or Durgá (Durgá has no relation to Shiva, because the idea of Durgá came 5500 years later than Shiva).

We come across another laokik goddess who is neither the wife of Lord Krśńa, nor Kamalá of Dashamahávidyá, nor the goddess Lakśmii who arose from the bottom of the sea at the time of churning. She is the laokik goddess Lakśmii, the presiding deity of wealth. In many parts of eastern India, the people perform daily or weekly worship of this deity. She is neither a Puranic goddess nor a Vedic goddess nor a Tantric goddess; she is purely a laokik goddess, and there is no biija mantra, or acoustic root, for this goddess, nor is there any dhyána mantra or prańáma mantra for her. People worship this deity by reciting rhymed verses in Bengali; not even the religious services of a priest are required to worship this goddess. She has no relation whatsoever with Shiva.

Thus analysing from the different sources – history, mythology, Tantric texts, etc., we come to the conclusion that the goddess Lakśmii is in no way related to Shiva.

Now the mythological goddess Lakśmii and the laokik goddess Lakśmii are said to have an owl as their mount, whereas Kamalá of Dashamahávidyá is said to have an elephant as her mount, so these two goddesses cannot be one. Naturally, now, no one should be mistaken about Lakśmii.

Then comes Sarasvatii, the goddess of learning. Sarasvatii is not a Vedic goddess. In the Vedas there is mention of Sarasvatii, but that Sarasvatii is not a goddess but a river. Let us analyse the etymological meaning of the word sarasvatii. The word saras in Sanskrit means a big lake of water, or white effulgence, and the entity who has this white effulgence is sarasvatii (saras + matup + ii, a feminine suffix). So sarasvatii means one who has this white effulgence or who has a big lake. In the Vedas we come across the mention of Sarasvatii – Ambitame nadiitame deviitame Sarasvatii. This Sarasvatii is the name of a river, and the river is so useful, so beneficial for the people that it is revered as the greatest goddess.

The goddess Sarasvatii has no relation with this river. There is a story about the River Sarasvatii. In ancient times there were two rivers, Carmańvatii and Drśadvatii, in central India. The history behind the name of the river Carmańvatii is this: When the Aryans were living in the Rajasthan area in the western part of India, they found many animals there, because there were forests and sufficient rainfall. They used to perform sacrificial rites by killing these animals. There is a story that once they performed a sacrificial ritual killing hundreds of thousands of animals; the heaps of those animals’ skins was as high as a mountain, and blood streamed down unceasingly from that pile of skins. It looked as if a river was flowing. After a long distance, this stream of blood flowed into the Ganges River. As the stream of blood flowing from the pile of animal skins took the form of a river, it was named Carmańvatii in Sanskrit.⁽³⁾ The present name of the river is Chambal.

Then there was another river, Drśadvatii by name. This river originates from the Vindhya Mountain in the Bákhelkhańd́a area, and flows northwards towards the Ganges. Drśad in Sanskrit means “pebbles”. As the river was full of pebbles, the people called it “Drśadvatii”. This river used to flow northwards, and the Carmańvatii used to flow towards the east. Further on, they used to meet at a point south of Prayaga, and then they used to flow together past Kaoshámbii, into the Ganges near Prayaga. The combined flow of the two rivers, Carmańvatii and Drśadvatii, became known as Sarasvatii.

Perhaps you know that many ruins have been discovered at this Kaoshámbii. Many archaeological relics of the days of King Harśavardhana of Sthániishvar have been found there. The first seal in Bengali script, used by King Harśavardhana, was found here at Kaoshámbii.

Now, as the river Yamuna flowed from the west, the river Ganges, or Gauṋgá, from the northwest, and the river Sarasvatii from the south, and the three rivers met at Prayaga. But once there was a tremendous earthquake in central India, as a result of which the Carmańvatii River could no longer flow eastward; so the Carmańvatii River, instead of flowing eastward, flowed into the Yamuna River. The Chambal River these days flows directly into the Yamuna. The Drśadvatii River cannot meet the Chambal River in the north either, and instead flows towards the northeast and empties into the river Shon. The combined flow of the Carmańvatii and Drśadvatii which made up the river Sarasvatii is dry now. So now only two rivers instead of three meet at Prayaga.

Anyway, the modern name of the Drśadvatii is Ghághar or Ghághrá. If any of you go to Rewa city, you will find there the Drśadvatii River, which took a new name, Gharghará, which means that the water of the river emits a rough sound, because it contains large rocks and pebbles. This Sarasvatii River watered arid Madhya Pradesh, as a result of which this area – the northern part of Bákhelkhańd́a – became fertile. So people out of reverence used to call it a goddess. This is the Vedic river Sarasvatii; she is not a woman, nor a goddess, nor is she the daughter of Shiva.

Ambitame – “O Mother”; nadiitame – “O greatest river”; deviitame – “O greatest goddess”. This is the literal meaning of this Sanskrit line. Though there is the mention of Sarasvatii, it is the name of a river. So it is proved that Sarasvatii is not a Vedic goddess.

Now let us consider the second part of the question. I do not accept the view that Sarasvatii is the daughter of Shiva. Next I shall discuss what the Puranas have to say about Sarasvatii.

That Sarasvatii is not the daughter of Shiva is proven by another piece of evidence, the greatest evidence. You know that all recognized gods and goddesses have their respective biija mantras, dhyána mantras, and prańáma mantras. So regarding Sarasvatii, it is said:

Kajjalapúritalocanabháre
Stanayugashobhitamuktáháre
Viińápustakarainjitahaste
Bhagavati bhárati devi namaste.

[I salute thee, O goddess of knowledge,
Whose beautiful eyes are adorned with collyrium,
Whose breast is decorated with a pearl necklace,
Whose one hand holds a viiná, and other hand holds a book.]

Now in the days of Shiva the viińá was in use. The viińá is a very ancient Indian musical instrument. So if Sarasvatii lived in Shiva’s time and if she had a viińá in her hand, it would not be surprising at all. The viińá is the simplest form of stringed instrument, and from this, other stringed instruments evolved later, some in India, some in Central Asia, and some in Áryanyavraja, whose present name is Iran (Persia). In the Persian language, si means “three”, so the instrument having three strings is called sitar. Thus other musical instruments evolved.

So there is nothing surprising if Sarasvatii has a viińá in her hand; but what is surprising is the book in her hand. She is described as viińápustakarainjitahaste [“with a viińá and a book in her hands”]. The fact is, the people in Shiva’s time did not know how to read and write. So how could there be a book? So the author of the Puráńa is caught in his own trap.

As people were not acquainted with letters, it was not possible for anyone to write on palm leaves or birch bark, and certainly there could be no question of a book bound with a hard cover. So if Sarasvatii has a book in her hand, she certainly does not belong to Shiva’s time, and hence she is not the daughter of Shiva either.

Moreover, there is a difference of opinion among the Puranas themselves. Some say that Sarasvatii is the daughter of Brahmá and the wife of Viśńu. Others say that she is the daughter of Shiva and the wife of Brahmá.

The authors of the Puranas are not at all in agreement on this point, and this is also a strong proof that Sarasvatii is not the daughter of Shiva; because Shiva was born seven thousand years ago, while these Puranas were written only 1500 years ago.⁽⁴⁾

There is yet another proof that Sarasvatii was not the daughter of Shiva, nor the daughter of Brahmá, nor the wife of Brahmá. And what is the proof, that trump card? In the dhyána mantra of Sarasvatii, it is said –

Yá kundendu tuśáraháradhavalá, yá shubhravastrávrta;
Yá viińávaradańd́ashobhitakará, yá shvetapadmásańá.
Ya Brahmácyutamaheshaprabhrtibhih devaeh sadávanditá;
Sá máḿ pátu bhagavatii Sarasvatii nihsheśajád́yápahá.

[May the goddess Sarasvatii, who is as white as the kunda flower
(one of the whitest species of flowers), as white as the moon, as
white as the snow,
Who is clad in white clothes, whose hands are adorned with the
beautiful viińá, who is seated on a white lotus,
Who is worshipped by Brahmá, Viśńu and Maheshvara, and who
removes the staticity of the universe –
May she always protect us.]

The third line says that the goddess Sarasvatii is always worshipped by Brahmá, Viśńu and Shiva. Now, had Sarasvatii been Shiva’s daughter, how could she be worshipped by Shiva? Similarly, had she been the daughter or wife of Brahmá, Brahmá certainly would not worship her. Again, had she been the wife of Viśńu, Viśńu would certainly not be expected to worship her. So all the stories of the Puranas are refuted by one shloka, or by one line of the shloka. Thus it is proved conclusively that Sarasvatii is not the daughter or the wife of Brahmá, Viśńu or Shiva.

Now the question arises, how did the worship of Sarasvatii begin? You know that in the days of Vajrayána Buddhist Tantra there was a deity named Tárá. She is the second Mahávidyá of Dashamahávidyá. Regarding Tárá it is said,

Garvitadánavagarvakharvákrti khad́gakharpará Niila Sarasvatii;
Sarvasaobhágyapradáyinii kartrii namaste Tárárúpá tárińii.

[I Salute Thee, O blue Sarasvatii in the form of Tárá the Liberator, who humbles the pride of the arrogant demons with sword in sheath, who grants all good fortune to her devotees.]

During the days of Vajrayána Buddhist Tantra, the one who was worshipped in India was called Ugratárá, the one who was worshipped in China was called Bhrámarii Tárá, and the one who was worshipped in Kiḿpuruśavarśa, or Tibet, was called Vajratárá.

There is an interesting story behind the name of Kiḿpuruśavarśa. In Tibet, the dresses of men and women are somewhat similar – loose garments. So it was difficult to distinguish between a man and a woman from a distance. Kiḿpuruśa means, “Are they male?” And varśa in Sanskrit means “land”; so Kiḿpuruśavarśa means a land where the people find it difficult to distinguish between males and females.

Now, the Vajratárá who was worshipped in Tibet was also known as Niila Sarasvatii. In this mantra also the word “Niila Sarasvatii” has been used. You can see some images of Niila Sarasvatii in a temple in Bodhgaya; she was a blue-coloured goddess.⁽⁵⁾

It is somewhat irrelevant to mention here, but Maharshi Vashistha was a man of the age of Buddhist Tantra. His book, Yogaváshiśt́ha, or Ádhyátmarámáyańa, has no relation to the Rámáyańa by Valmiki; it is a book on Buddhist Tantra written in Sanskrit. Maharshi Vashistha went to China to master the Chinese school of Tantra, and from there he brought an image of Tárá and established it at Tárápiit́ha of Birbhum District in West Bengal. That is, Tárá is also a Buddhist Tantric deity, not a Puranic goddess. However, this Niila Sarasvatii was later changed into All-White Sarasvatii and accepted in the Puranic Shakti Cult. She no longer remained blue; she became white. This all happened 1300 years ago, much later than Shiva. If you ever happen to discover some images of All-White Sarasvatii in the ruins during excavation, whether those images are complete or fragmented, you should know that none of those images is older than 1300 years. This All-White Sarasvatii, the Puranic goddess, was not widely worshipped either, neither during the Mughal period, nor even during the Pathan period.⁽⁶⁾

When worshipping this white Sarasvatii in the Pathan period, the people would use books as symbols of the goddess. Some Europeans in the early days of the British rule jokingly pointed out, “You have so many gods and goddesses! So why do you worship the goddess Sarasvatii as a book? Why not as a goddess?” After that time, in the city of Calcutta, there arose a system to worship the image of the goddess Sarasvatii. So the worship of this All-White Sarasvatii is recent, and she has no relation to Shiva.

The concept of Sarasvatii arose only 1300 years ago, 5700 years later than Shiva. The goddess Tárá of Buddhist Tantra was worshipped with the biija mantra, traeḿ, whereas Sarasvatii, the Puranic goddess, was worshipped with the biija mantra, Aeḿ Sarasvatyae namah. There are some people who think that Sarasvatii is a goddess transformed from Prajiṋapáramitá of Maháyańa Buddhist Tantra. This is not correct, because though both goddesses are the presiding deities of learning, they are so fundamentally different from each other that one cannot be the transformation of the other.

Hence, we come to the final conclusion that Lakśmii is not the daughter of Shiva. She has no relationship whatsoever with Shiva. Nor has she any relationship with Párvatii or with Durgá, another Puranic goddess. The same is the case with Sarasvatii. She has no relationship with Shiva; she is not the daughter of Shiva. The Sarasvatii of the Vedas is the River Sarasvatii, and the Sarasvatii of Tantra is Niila Sarasvatii, or the goddess Tárá. And Sarasvatii the Puranic goddess has been worshipped only since the British period. Prior to that she was not worshipped with the use of an image.

Footnotes

(1) This creation is divided into seven strata called lokas; the highest is Satyaloka. –Trans.

(2) Shrii Shrii Ánandamúrti, Ánanda Sútram, 1962. –Trans.

(3) Carma means “skin”; so the river which originated in a pile of animal skins was called “Carmańvatii”. –Trans.

(4) Had the idea of Sarasvatii come into existence long before the writing of the Puranas, the discrepancies would have been resolved before they were written. –Trans.

(5) Niila means “blue”. –Trans.

(6) That is, she was not worshipped in the form of an idol. –Trans.