The Fifth Delight
Shri Raghavendra Gurusarvabhauma
58. The Victory of the Scriptural Debate on Taptamudrāṅkana
The following day, the grand Vidvat Sabha (scholarly assembly) reconvened for its concluding session. The hall was packed with eager spectators, all awaiting the debates with great anticipation.
Three scholars, deeply frustrated by the unprecedented victory that Vēṅkaṭanātha had achieved the previous day, were determined to discredit him at any cost. In their desperation, they brought forward a newly arrived scholar from the royal court—one Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī—and led him onto the stage.
They boldly challenged:
"Vaiṣṇavas engage in Taptamudrāṅkana (the ritual branding with heated symbols). This practice is prohibited by the scriptures. We are ready to establish this through debate. If Vēṅkaṭanātha, who basks in the pride of yesterday’s victory, has the courage, let him step forward and defend his position!"
Hearing this, Śrī Sudhīndra, the revered Guru, smiled and declared:
"This is a divine event! A precious jewel is about to be added to the victory crown of Śrī Vēṅkaṭanātha. Let him accept this challenge. The debate shall commence!"
With his gracious gaze, the Guru blessed Ācārya Vēṅkaṭanātha, who in turn bowed before him, ascended the stage, and prepared for the final battle of intellect.
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī, initiating the debate, proclaimed:
"Although the topic of Taptamudrāṅkana (ritual branding) appears in the text Rāmārcanacandrikā (ರಾಮಾರ್ಚನಚಂದ್ರಿಕಾ), there are numerous scriptural references that explicitly prohibit it. Therefore, Taptamudrāṅkana is an unorthodox and non-scriptural practice!"
Unfazed, Vēṅkaṭanātha responded with clarity:
"Your argument is incorrect. There exist numerous authoritative scriptures that not only support but also mandate the practice of Taptamudrāṅkana. These texts explicitly specify the contexts, individuals, and appropriate occasions for performing the ritual branding."
Thus began yet another legendary debate, wherein Vēṅkaṭanātha systematically dismantled the opposing argument with unshakable scriptural evidence.
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"What is your evidence for this claim? Please state it."
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"First, let me explain the concept of Kāla-Vicāra - ಕಾಲ-ವಿಚಾರ (timing considerations). The branding ritual (Taptamudrāṅkana) should be performed during specific life events, such as Jātakarma (birth rites), Caula (tonsure ceremony), Upanayana (sacred thread initiation), and Mantrōpadeśa (initiation into mantras). The Vāsiṣṭha Smṛti states:"
"The learned sages prescribe the proper times for bearing the Chakra mark—Jātakarma (birth), Caula (tonsure), Upanayana (sacred thread ceremony), and during Mantra initiation."
"Additionally, the Vṛddha Manu Smṛti declares that for women, branding is prescribed at the time of marriage, and for men, at the time of Upanayana, along with the recitation of the five principal mantras:"
"During marriage for women and at Upanayana for men, it is enjoined that the Chakra should be borne, along with the five sacred mantras."
"Further, the Padma Purāṇa establishes that Taptamudrāṅkana is an essential, scripturally mandated practice necessary for performing Śrauta (Vedic) and Smārta (ritualistic) duties:"
"One must bear the heated Chakra and Śaṅkha (conch) marks on both arms as a prerequisite for eligibility to perform Śrauta and Smārta rites."
Śruti (Vedic) Evidence
"The authority of Taptamudrāṅkana is firmly established in the Ṛgveda’s Taittirīya Śruti:"
"O Lord, the Supreme Protector! You pervade all bodies in the universe as the Inner Witness. Your divine presence, manifested as Sudarśana, sanctifies and purifies. Those who lack the heat-purified Chakra cannot attain the highest state of liberation."
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"How can you interpret the word Pavitra (purifying) to mean Sudarśana Chakra?"
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"The word Pavitra is etymologically and contextually established as a reference to Sudarśana Chakra, just as Prokṣaṇīya - ಪ್ರೋಕ್ಷಣೀಯ refers to water used in purification rituals. This is confirmed by several scriptural references:"
1. The Vedic Nighaṇṭu - ನಿಘಂಟು (lexicon) explicitly states:
"Pavitra refers to Sudarśana, Kuśa grass, and the sacred thread."
2. Another lexicon states:
"Sudarśana, with a thousand rays, is the ultimate purifier and destroyer of impurities."
3. Śrī Śāstra explains:
"Pavitra refers to Sudarśana, the wheel of Dharma, the gateway to the worlds, and the supreme weapon of the Lord."
4. Further elaboration in another scripture reads:
"Pavitra means Sudarśana, the discus with a thousand rays, the supreme purifier, and the wielder of great power."
"Thus, the term Pavitra refers to Sudarśana both by conventional and etymological usage. Additionally, it aligns with the principle of semantic expansion, which allows words to convey multiple meanings based on context."
"Therefore, from Śruti, Smṛti, Purāṇas, Āgamas, and linguistic analysis, it is conclusively established that Taptamudrāṅkana is a scripturally sanctioned practice."
Thus, Vēṅkaṭanātha systematically refuted the arguments of Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī with irrefutable scriptural evidence, demonstrating the validity and necessity of the Vaiṣṇava practice of Taptamudrāṅkana.
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"Please slow down, Swāmī. The phrase Atapta-tanuḥ - ಅತಪ್ತ-ತನುಃ appears here. You interpret it as ‘one who has not undergone branding with heated marks.’ But that is incorrect. The actual meaning is ‘one who has not undergone bodily purification through austerities such as Kṛcchra - ಕೃಚ್ಛ್ರ and Cāndrāyaṇa - ಚಾಂದ್ರಾಯಣ fasts.’"
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"You are mistaken. The word Atapta - ಅತಪ್ತ is derived from the root Tapa, meaning ‘heat’ or ‘burning.’ The fundamental meaning of this word is ‘scorching,’ and it does not refer to Cāndrāyaṇa - ಚಾಂದ್ರಾಯಣ and other fasts. In the same Śruti, the phrase Śrutāsah - ಶ್ರುತಾಸಹ is contextually linked, which establishes that ‘Āmah - ಆಮಃ’ (one without Taptamudrā) refers to those whose sins have not been burned away through branding. Therefore, ‘Atapta - ಅತಪ್ತ’ in this context means ‘one who has not undergone branding with Taptamudrāṅkana.’"
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"Alright, but you are interpreting the word Tat (तत्) to mean ‘Mokṣa’ (liberation) or ‘Viṣṇu.’ However, ‘Tat’ is a pronoun, and its meaning should be contextually neutral, not referring exclusively to Viṣṇu or Mokṣa."
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"I never make a claim without scriptural backing. The Śruti itself declares that Tat refers to Viṣṇu:"
"‘Tat iti vā etasya mahatō bhūtasya nāma bhavati’"
(‘The word Tat is the name of the Supreme Being.’)
"Here, the Supreme Being referred to is Viṣṇu, as further supported by the Bhagavad Gītā verse:"
"‘Ēkō Viṣṇur mahatāṁ pṛthak bhūtāny anēkaśaḥ - ಏಕೋ ವಿಷ್ಣುಃ ಮಹತಾಂ ಪೃಥಕ್ ಭೂತಾನ್ಯನೇಕಶಃ’"
(‘Viṣṇu alone is the Supreme among the many entities of creation.’)
"Furthermore, in the same Śruti, the term Śrutāsah - ಶ್ರುತಸಹ means ‘those who have been purified by branding with the heated Chakra.’ It does not refer to a one-time branding alone, but instead implies continuous practice. The phrase Vahantah iti - ವಹಂತಃ ಇತಿ signifies that the branded marks must be worn permanently, including the daily application of sacred clay (Gōpīcandana). The term Samāśatē - ಸಮಾಶತೇ means ‘they attain liberation in the form of ultimate bliss, which is none other than Viṣṇu.’"
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"Your argument is quite peculiar. The Śruti passage you cited does not actually support Taptamudrāṅkana. Instead, its primary meaning is different. It describes how Brahmā (the four-faced creator) is pervaded by Viṣṇu, who is the Supreme Protector of all bodies in the universe. The phrase refers to the supreme, vast, and pure bliss of Mokṣa, which cannot be attained by those who do not undergo bodily purification through austerities such as Kṛcchra - ಕೃಚ್ಛ್ರ and Cāndrāyaṇa. Such purification must be continuously practiced, enabling one to eliminate sins and ultimately attain Mokṣa."
(As Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī presented his argument, Vēṅkaṭanātha smiled gently and nodded, making slight head movements. Seeing this, the opposing scholars mistook it as a sign of agreement and felt emboldened, believing that their argument had been victorious.)
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī (enthusiastically continuing his argument):
"There is yet another interpretation of this Śruti passage: ‘O Lord! O Soma! You are the Lord of all herbs and medicinal plants. Your purity extends infinitely, and you pervade the bodies of all beings. In the process of purification through Vedic sacrifices, your true form must remain unobscured. However, substances that are ‘Āma - ಆಮ’ (uncooked or impure) cannot be used in sacrifices, as explicitly stated in the Śruti.’"
"Therefore, the passage does not provide a direct scriptural sanction for Taptamudrāṅkana, as you claim. Instead, it emphasizes that Soma must undergo proper purification before it can be used in sacrifices. Similarly, people must purify themselves through austerities such as Kṛcchra and Cāndrāyaṇa before they can attain the purity required for Mokṣa. Hence, Taptamudrāṅkana cannot be derived as a prescribed practice from this Śruti passage."
At this juncture, Vēṅkaṭanātha, with his signature composed demeanor, prepared to systematically dismantle this counterargument. His expression remained calm, yet resolute, as he was about to deliver an unassailable rebuttal based on further Śruti, Smṛti, and logical reasoning.
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"That is fine, scholars. However, you have made a mistake while interpreting the second meaning. Since the term Śruta - ಶ್ರುತ is applied within the Agni-related context, how can it be reasonably extended to include Pavana (wind) and other purification processes? Please explain."
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī:
"Listen carefully—In phrases such as ‘Satubhiḥ Śruṇoti - ಸತುಭಿಃ ಶೃಣೋತಿ’, the word Śruta has been applied only to objects that have been purified. Therefore, its application in both meanings is valid. Tapas (austerity) is a means to Mokṣa, and the Śruti states ‘Tameva Brahmaṇā Vividiṣanti - ತಮೇವ ಬ್ರಹ್ಮಣಾ ವಿವಿದಿಷಂತಿ’, confirming that Brahman is realized through austerity and knowledge of the Vedas. This establishes that the Śruti can be used both for Mokṣa-sādhana (attaining liberation) and Pavana-saṁskāra (purification by wind or fire).
Moreover, in Vedic rituals, the Yajamāna (ritual sponsor) must chant purifying mantras over Kuśa grass placed on the Uddhātṛ - ಉದ್ದಾತೃ’s lap before a Yāga is performed. This practice is prescribed in the mantra ‘Tasmīn Udīcīna-daśaṁ Pavitraṁ Te Vitataṁ Brahmaṇaspate - ತಸ್ಮಿನ್ ಉದೀಚೀನ-ದಶಂ ಪವಿತ್ರಂ ತೇ ವಿತತಂ ಬ್ರಹ್ಮಣಸ್ಪತೇ’, which establishes its application in that meaning as well."
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"That is incorrect. You argue that since this mantra is applied in a Kalpasūtra-based ritual context, it holds meaning only for purification during ritual incantations. However, by that same logic, the Pañcarātra-śāstra - ಪಂಚರಾತ್ರ ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರ prescribes that this mantra is directly related to Sudarśana, proving that its ultimate reference is to Viṣṇu’s divine Chakra. This is a well-established logical principle that you seem to have overlooked."
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī (agitated):
"If this mantra is designated for Daśa-pavitra-anumantraṇa - ದಶಪವಿತ್ರ ಅನುಮಂತ್ರಣ (tenfold purification incantation) and you claim that it primarily refers to Sudarśana, then does this not introduce a Viniyukta-viniyoga-virodha - ವಿನಿಯುಕ್ತ-ವಿನಿಯೋಗ ವಿರೋಧ (conflict in the designated application of the mantra)?"
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"What exactly do you mean by Viniyukta-viniyoga-virodha (contradiction in mantra application)? Do you believe that a mantra can have only one meaning and be applied in only one specific ritual? That is an incorrect assumption.
A single mantra can retain its same essential meaning while being applied in multiple contexts, without contradiction. For example, consider the phrase ‘Pasaṁyāja - ಪಸಂಯಾಜ’ in Vedic rituals. The mantra ‘Āprāyastha Sametu Te - ಆಪ್ರಾಯಸ್ಥ ಸಮೇತು ತೇ’ is used in one context during the Yajña, but the same mantra is also applied in the Sōmābhisava - ಸೋಮಾಭಿಸವ (Soma purification ritual).
Therefore, there is no contradiction in a single mantra being applicable both in the context of purification and in reference to Sudarśana. Your argument of contradiction is thus invalid."
(With this clear and systematic dismantling of the opposition's claim, Vēṅkaṭanātha demonstrated not only his profound understanding of Śruti and Smṛti, but also his mastery of Nyāya (logic) and Vedic hermeneutics. The scholars opposing him were left stunned, realizing that their argument was effectively countered.)
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī (dissatisfied):
"Swāmī, I accept that if a single Śruti text has multiple applications, there is no contradiction. However, since Śruti (Veda) is superior to Smṛti (secondary scripture), if a certain mantra is designated for a particular usage in Śruti, then applying it elsewhere based on Smṛti would create a contradiction."
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"Śāstrīs, your argument is incorrect. The idea that a mantra assigned by Śruti cannot be repurposed by Smṛti is not valid. There are multiple cases where a mantra, originally designated in Śruti, finds application in Smṛti and other ritual texts.
For example:
1. The Śruti statement 'Vātapreṇo Patiṣṭhata Etena Vai Vātapreṇo - ವಾತಪ್ರೇಣೋ ಪತಿಷ್ಠತ ಏತೇನ ವೈ ವಾತಪ್ರೇಣೋ’ is designated in Cayana - ಚಯನ (fire altar construction).
2. However, the Gṛhyasūtra - ಗೃಹ್ಯಸೂತ್ರ (Smṛti) states 'Vātaprasajātaṁ Vātas Preṇābhivṛṣet - ವಾತಪ್ರಸಜಾತಂ ವಾತಃ ಪ್ರೇಣಾಭಿವೃಷೇತ್ ', which applies the same phrase to Jātakarma (birth rites).
3. Further, in Agnihotra, the same phrase appears in the Smṛti text: 'Vātapreṇai’va Sāyaṁ Prātarupatiṣṭhata - ವಾತಪ್ರೇಣೈವ ಸಾಯಂ ಪ್ರಾತರುಪತಿಷ್ಠತ '.
Similarly, the Śruti phrase 'Iṣēttē Barhirādatta - ಇಷೇತ್ತೇ ಬರ್ಹಿರಾದತ್ತ ' is applied to Pasu-yāga - ಪಶುಯಾಗ (animal sacrifice), but in Kalpasūtra, it is applied to Śākhācchedana - ಶಾಖಾಚ್ಛೇದನ (branch-cutting ritual) with the phrase 'Iṣētaiti Śākhāmācchinna - ಇಷೇತೈತಿ ಶಾಖಾಮಾಚ್ಛಿನ್ನ '.
Thus, your claim that Smṛti cannot prescribe a new application for a Śruti mantra is invalid."
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī (angrily):
"Swāmī! Assigning an entirely new meaning to a mantra beyond its Vedic context is a contradiction! It violates the fundamental principles of interpretation!"
Vēṅkaṭanātha (smiling calmly):
"Śāstrīs, peace! Please think calmly, and you will realize your error. If we were to accept your argument, then all polysemous words (nāna-artha-śabda) would have to be removed from dictionaries! That is absurd!"
(At this moment, the audience, fascinated by Vēṅkaṭanātha’s clarity and logical prowess, burst into applause and laughter, recognizing his ability to dismantle flawed arguments effortlessly.)
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī (frustrated and enraged):
"But Ācārya! The Pañcarātra Śāstra - ಪಾಂಚರಾತ್ರ ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರ contradicts the Vedas in some places, so it cannot be considered authoritative!"
Vēṅkaṭanātha's Defense of Pañcarātra:
With a composed expression, Vēṅkaṭanātha prepared to deliver a decisive response, one that would permanently settle the dispute regarding the validity of Pañcarātra philosophy...
Vēṅkaṭanātha’s Final Defense: The Unquestionable Validity of Pañcarātra and Taptamudrāṅkana
Vēṅkaṭanātha:
"Śāstrīs, why are you directing your frustration towards the Pañcarātra Āgama? Just because either you or I label it as unauthoritative, does that diminish its scriptural validity?
All great scholars and śāstrakāras unanimously affirm:
“Ṛg-Yajuḥ-Sāmātharvāśca Bhārataṁ Pañcarātraṁ Mūla-Rāmāyaṇaṁ caiva Śāstramityabhidhīyate”
(Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma, and Atharva Vedas, along with the Mahābhārata, Pañcarātra, and Mūla-Rāmāyaṇa, are all considered authoritative śāstras.)
Moreover, there is direct evidence:
“Pañcarātrasya Kṛṣṇastha Vaktā Nārāyaṇa Svayaṁ”
(Pañcarātra was personally expounded by Lord Nārāyaṇa Himself.)
Since it is a divinely revealed śāstra, it must be accepted as authoritative!
Your claim that Pañcarātra is inconsistent with the Vedas is incorrect. If an individual fails to understand the inner harmony between the two, the problem lies in his comprehension, not in the scriptures themselves.
For example, certain Śruti passages prescribe Karīrī - ಕರೀರೀ sacrifices for rainfall:
“Karīryā Yajeta Vṛṣṭikāmaḥ - ಕರೀರ್ಯಾ ಯಜೇತ ವೃಷ್ಟಿಕಾಮಃ”
(Those who desire rain should perform the Karīrī sacrifice.)
However, sometimes rain does not follow despite performing the yāga. Does this mean the Śruti itself is invalid? Certainly not! Instead, we assume there were imperfections in the ritual—errors in the priest, offerings, time, mantras, or oblations—which prevented the intended results.
Similarly, even if Pañcarātra appears to differ from the Vedas, it must be recognized as authoritative, and any perceived contradiction is due to human misinterpretation, not because Pañcarātra lacks validity.
Thus, Vinīyukta Vinīyoga - ವಿನೀಯುಕ್ತ ವಿನಿಯೋಗ (the repurposing of mantras) is not contradictory, and Taptamudrāṅkana (ritual branding) has now been conclusively proven as Vedic."
As Vēṅkaṭanātha concluded, the mediators, scholars, and the entire assembly were left in awe. Many nodded in agreement, realizing the unassailable strength of his arguments.
The previously confident Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī, unable to offer any counterarguments, fell silent in utter defeat.
Vēṅkaṭanātha (further strengthening his argument):
"Since there are still lingering doubts, I shall now provide another direct Śruti reference in support of Taptamudrāṅkana. Listen carefully—
“Chakraṁ Bibharati Vapuṣā Taṁ Balaṁ Devānāṁ Amṛtasya Eṣṭo! - ಚಕ್ರಂ ಬಿಭರತಿ ವಪುಷಾ ತಂ ಬಲಂ ದೇವಾನಾಂ ಅಮೃತಸ್ಯ ಏಷ್ಟೋ
Sa Eti Nākaṁ Duritāvidhūya Viśanti Yadvātayo Vītarāgāḥ - ಸ ಏತಿ ನಾಕಂ ದುರಿತಾವಿಧೂಯ ವಿಶಂತಿ ಯದ್ವಾತಯೋ ವೀತರಾಗಾಃ ||”
(Atharvaṇa Śruti - ಅಥರ್ವಣ ಶ್ರುತಿ)
Meaning:
The divine discus (Chakra), heated by fire, grants strength to the Devas.
It is associated with amṛtatva (immortality), as it destroys asuras and eliminates death.
Whoever bears this Chakra upon his body dispels all sins (duritas).
Just as enlightened yogis transcend worldly attachments (vīta-rāgāḥ) and attain liberation,
So too does the bearer of this Chakra—he is freed from the obstacles of both sin and merit, ultimately reaching Mokṣa.
The word 'Nāka' in this context does not mean Svarga (heaven), since suffering still exists there. Instead, it signifies liberation (Mokṣa).
Thus, it is established that those who seek Mokṣa and the removal of sins must perform Taptamudrāṅkana (ritual branding with divine emblems)."
As Vēṅkaṭanātha finished his explanation, the entire audience—scholars, mediators, and dignitaries—rose in thunderous applause. The grandeur of his logic, the depth of his scriptural knowledge, and his unwavering devotion to the śāstra had silenced all opposition.
With no rebuttal left, Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī, who had once been so confident, sat wordless and utterly defeated. The assembly had witnessed history—Vēṅkaṭanātha had not just won an argument but had upheld the authority of Pañcarātra and established Taptamudrāṅkana as a Vedic practice.
"Furthermore, the Taittirīya Śruti states:
'Caraṇaṁ pavitraṁ vitataṁ purāṇaṁ yena pūtasvarati duṣkṛtāni | - ಚರಣಂ ಪವಿತ್ರಂ ವಿತತಂ ಪುರಾಣಂ ಯೇನ ಪೂತಸ್ವರತಿ ದುಷ್ಕೃತಾನಿ
Tēna pavitrēṇa śudēna pūtā atipātmānamarātiṁ tarēma || - ತೇನ ಪವಿತ್ರೇಣ ಶುದೇನ ಪೂತಾ ಅತಿಪಾತ್ಮಾನಮರಾತಿಂ ತರೇಮ '
And the Kāraka Śrutis - ಕಾರಕ ಶ್ರುತಿಗಳು affirm:
'Lōkasya dvāramarcimat pavitraṁ jyōtiṣṭaddā jamānaṁ mahatvadamṛtasya dhārā | - ಲೋಕಸ್ಯ ದ್ವಾರಮರ್ಚಿಮತ್ ಪವಿತ್ರಂ ಜ್ಯೋತಿಷ್ಠ್ಟದ್ದಾ ಜಮಾನಂ ಮಹತ್ವದಮೃತಸ್ಯ ಧಾರಾ
Bahudā dōhamānaṁ caraṇaṁ nō lōkē sadhitāṁ dadhātu || - ಬಹುದಾ ದೋಹಮಾನಂ ಚರಣಂ ನೋ ಲೋಕೇ ಸದಿತಾಂ ದಧಾತು '
These Śrutis serve as authoritative proof for the necessity of Taptamudrāṅkana (ritual branding with divine symbols).
As Vēṅkaṭanātha boldly and eloquently demonstrated the absolute necessity of Taptamudrāṅkana, the assembly of scholars and attendees erupted in applause, expressing their admiration for his impeccable reasoning. Dīkṣita and King Raghunātha Bhūpāla, witnessing this profound display of erudition, exchanged smiles of satisfaction and appreciation.
"Scholars, if you still desire more scriptural proofs, I am ready to present an abundance of them. Listen carefully—
I can cite authoritative texts such as:
Vājasanēya, Bhāskara Saṁhitā, Atharvaṇa, Mahōpaniṣat, Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, Navakhanda, Āpastamba, Mantra Brāhmaṇa, Hārīta, Mātṛ, Vasiṣṭha, Śāṇḍilya, Vṛddhamanu, Śaṅkha, Vyāsa, Pārāśara, and many other Smṛtis.
Itihāsas such as the Mahābhārata.
Purāṇas including Pādma, Āgniya, Mātṣya, Āditya, Mārkaṇḍeya, Brahmāṇḍa, Skanda, Vāmana, Liṅga, Kūrma, Pārāśara, and Viṣṇu Purāṇas.
Saṁhitās such as Vasiṣṭha, Vihagēśvara, and Pārāśara.
All of these scriptures support Taptamudrāṅkana as a Vedic practice!"
Even before Vēṅkaṭanātha could continue listing additional references, the audience, overwhelmed with admiration and reverence, loudly proclaimed, "Śrutaṁ! Śrutam! (We have heard! We accept!)"
Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī, dumbfounded by Vēṅkaṭanātha’s unparalleled knowledge and eloquence, could barely compose himself. In a state of awe and submission, he interrupted, exclaiming—
"Ācārya! Enough! Enough! No further proof is necessary! You are an ocean of scriptural wisdom—the very embodiment of Śruti, Smṛti, Purāṇa, and Saṁhitā!"
As the chief mediators, including Yajñanārāyaṇa Dīkṣita, observed this scene with amused smiles, they mockingly asked Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī—
"Do you still wish to argue?"
Realizing his defeat, humiliation, and regret, Mṛtyuñjaya Śāstrī lowered his head in silence, unable to counter Vēṅkaṭanātha’s irrefutable arguments.
"Thus, Vēṅkaṭanātha emerges victorious in this great Vākyārtha debate!"
Seeing the utter demoralization of Mṛtyuñjaya and his envious supporters, the remaining jealous scholars silently slipped away from the stage, one by one.
Vēṅkaṭanātha, in his characteristic humility, bowed to the assembly before proceeding to the divine presence of Śrī Sudhīndra Tīrtha.
Śrī Sudhīndra Tīrtha, overwhelmed with joy, embraced Vēṅkaṭanātha and declared—
"Vēṅkaṭanātha Ācārya, you are truly blessed! You have rendered the highest service to Śrī Madhvācārya’s philosophy and upheld the honor of our great Maṭha. May Śrī Mūlarāma, Śrī Raghupati, and Vedavyāsadeva bestow their divine blessings upon you!"
Yajñanārāyaṇa Dīkṣita, moved by the grand occasion, rose to speak—
"This is an unparalleled event in history! Our beloved Śrī Vēṅkaṭanātha Ācārya, the esteemed disciple of the royal preceptors, has demonstrated unmatched scholarship in all scriptures. Through his brilliant defense of Taptamudrāṅkana, he has brought immense honor to our Tañjāpura royal court.
He is truly a mahāproudha (unsurpassed in learning) and a supreme master of debate. I declare with absolute conviction that there exists no scholar today who can match him! I offer him my heartfelt gratitude and respect!"
King Raghunātha Bhūpāla himself stepped forward and personally honored Vēṅkaṭanātha with a golden garland, a pair of royal shawls, and rich gifts in recognition of his undisputed victory.
After this extraordinary event, Śrī Sudhīndra Guru gave a grand concluding speech, praising the intellectual and spiritual triumph of Vēṅkaṭanātha.
Following this, the King himself distributed royal honoraria to all assembled scholars, under the guidance of Guru Sudhīndra Tīrtha.
Thus, the great Vākyārtha Sabha concluded in Vēṅkaṭanātha’s resounding victory.
A few days later, Śrī Vēṅkaṭanātha, having received the King’s gracious farewell, departed for Kumbhakoṇam—forever etched in history as an invincible scholar and an unparalleled champion of Vedānta.