Matsya Purana — Manvantaras, Shloka 82

Devanagari script

गत्यर्थाद् ऋषतेर् धातोर् नामनिर्वृत्तिकारणम् यस्मादेष स्वयंभूतस् तस्माच्च ऋषिता मता //

Transliteration

gatyarthād ṛṣater dhātor nāmanirvṛttikāraṇam yasmādeṣa svayaṃbhūtas tasmācca ṛṣitā matā //

Translation

ولأن الاسم مشتقّ من الجذر «ṛṣ» المستعمل بمعنى «الذهاب/الحركة»، فذلك هو سبب صوغ اللفظ. ولما كان هذا الكائن سْفَيَمْبْهُو (svayaṃbhū: مولودًا بذاته)، عُدَّ لذلك صاحبَ «ṛṣitā»، أي رِشيًّا حقًّا.

Word by Word

• gatyarthāt: from the sense of ‘going/motion’

• ṛṣateḥ: of (the root) ṛṣ

• dhātoḥ: from the verbal root

• nāma-nirvṛtti-kāraṇam: the cause of the derivation/etymology of the name

• yasmāt: because

• eṣa: this one

• svayaṃbhūtaḥ: self-born, self-existent

• tasmāt ca: therefore, and hence

• ṛṣitā: the state/quality of being a Ṛṣi (ṛṣihood)

• matā: is considered/held to be

Speaker

• Lord Matsya (in discourse to Vaivasvata Manu)

Entities Mentioned

• Ṛṣi
• svayaṃbhū

Tags

• Etymology
• Rishi
• Creation
• Dharma
• Vedic terminology

FAQs

What does this verse reveal about the creation or dissolution (Pralaya)?

It supports a creation-oriented idea by identifying a “self-born” (svayaṃbhū) being and explaining Ṛṣi-hood as a primordial category, not a pralaya event.

How does this verse relate to the duties of a King or Householder?

By defining what counts as a true Ṛṣi, it implicitly guides kings and householders to recognize authentic spiritual authority and seek instruction from realized sages rather than mere ritualists.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

No direct Vāstu or temple-rule detail is stated; the ritual takeaway is definitional—ṛṣi status is grounded in intrinsic spiritual origin/realization (svayaṃbhū) and authoritative linguistic tradition.