Summary
Basavanna questions the religious identity of one who worships the Creator and then bows before an inferior deity.
Such a person cannot rightly be called Bhakta, servant, or Sharana, because the act of worship remains divided between two centres.
Kudalasangama Deva does not approve those who live with this double allegiance.
Imagery & Symbolic Relevance
The worship of the Creator gives the first action. The person outwardly acknowledges the supreme source and offers worship.
The next action contradicts the first: the same person bows before an inferior deity. What began as worship of the highest becomes divided through another act of submission.
Basavanna then tests three spiritual names.
“Can such a person be called a Bhakta?” Bhakti requires fidelity to the Deva who has been accepted as the centre of worship.
“Can such a person be called a servant?” Service loses its truth when obedience is distributed between opposing sacred authorities.
“Can such a person be called a Sharana?” Surrender cannot remain complete while another refuge is retained.
The three names therefore represent increasing claims of devotional belonging. Basavanna refuses all three where conduct contradicts the claimed relation.
The closing phrase concerns people who hold two. Its force lies in double allegiance: one source is worshipped, yet another is approached through bowing.
Kudalasangama Deva’s lack of approval gives the final measure. Religious titles cannot conceal divided conduct before Him.
Lingayoga
In Lingayoga, worship, service, and surrender must arise from one governing relation with the Linga.
The body may bow, the mouth may praise, and the person may claim the name Bhakta or Sharana; yet these acts remain incomplete when inward refuge is divided.
The seeker therefore examines actual dependence rather than devotional identity. The decisive question is not what one is called, but before whom one bows and where one finally places trust.
The practical direction is clear: gather worship, service, and surrender in Kudalasangama Deva without retaining a second sacred allegiance.
Editorial Commentary
The Kannada centres on contradiction in worship. One first honours the Creator and then bows before a lesser deity.
The terms Bhakta, Bhṛtya, and Sharana are tested through conduct. Basavanna asks whether any of these names remains truthful when allegiance is divided.
The closing reference to those who “hold two” concerns double religious dependence. The Kannada does not explicitly discuss this world and a future world.
Kudalasangama Deva’s approval becomes the final criterion. Titles carry no authority when worship itself moves in two directions.
Related Vachana
Supporting Vachana
Sharana Sthala Vachana 751 — The Hollow Drum
Sharana Vachana 751 compares misdirected offering to rice placed upon a drum. The drum may produce sound, but the rice cannot fulfil its purpose there. The vachana concludes by declaring that no other deity exists apart from Kudalasangama Deva.
This prepares Vachana 615 directly. In Sharana, offering and refuge are gathered into one Divine centre. In Aikya, the person who worships the Creator yet bows elsewhere is denied the names Bhakta, servant, and Sharana because conduct remains divided.
Advancing Vachana
Aikya Sthala Vachana 139 — The Topography of the Awakened Heart
Vachana 615 rejects twofold allegiance in worship and refuses spiritual titles to one who bows before separate Divine centres.
Vachana 139 carries this gathering into the perception of sacred reality. It asks whether Devaloka and Martyaloka are truly separate, identifies Shivaloka with Shivachara, and declares the place of the Shiva-bhakta to be Devaloka.
The divided worship rejected in Vachana 615 therefore deepens into undivided sacred presence in Vachana 139. Once Kudalasangama Deva governs worship and conduct, the Divine world is no longer sought as a separate realm elsewhere.
