Narayana means Tripurasundari Devi! OMG, I never knew!
We all know people might go to any lengths to actually prove a point of their beliefs (including me, I am only human after all)… but one article I came across today seems to the pinnacle of that effort. The gentleman who wrote that article has spent so much time and effort in trying to prove that the sacred hymn of Narayana Suktam is actually meant for Tripurasundari Devi and not Lord Narayana.
The gentleman keeps referring to his “detailed analysis” as to why Narayana in Narayana Suktam cannot refer to Lord Narayana… but the detailed analysis that he refers to is just a jugglery of root words… concluding with the ONLY MEANING of the word Narayana is “That being / entity whose direction is towards nara (purusha)” or “That being / entity whose goal is to move towards nara (and reach him as final destination)”. And boom… out of the blue, the Nara/Purusha is Shiva, the being/entity whose goal is to move towards Nara is Tripurasundari Devi.
Declaring that Bhagavad Gita was not spoken by Lord Krishna (seems like he was in a trance and Lord Shiva spoke through him), that Sita Devi is actually Parvati Devi and Lord Rama is actually Lord Shiva, Srimad Bhagavatam as a fake purana are the crown jewels of this twisty twist effort.
I did not spend too much time on any of the pages in the site (obviously), but it looks to me that people like these keep running their conclusions between Lord Shiva is supreme, or/and Shakti is supreme and then all of a sudden Lord Shiva becomes this formless, nameless, qualityless Parabrahman and Tripurasundari Devi becomes the cliched mystic kundalini in everyone’s body.
I have no problem if someone wants to worship only Lord Shiva, consider him as the Supreme Being, spread the goodness around… may his devotion grow forever and may his life be blessed. But I am clearly annoyed when people keep jumping between personalism and impersonalism like intoxicated monkeys when it comes to professing their devotion to Lord Shiva. In doing that, while thinking they are glorifying his mystic potency and showcasing their own intellectual prowess of understanding 2 irreconcilable positions as the same, they actually insult him in to nothingness.
Edit: I came across a site that rips apart this particular fancy theory of Narayana means Tripurasundari devi. Anyone interested can visit http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html and enjoy the carnage.