Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 10

ययाति–देवयानी संवादः

Yayāti–Devayānī Dialogue and Śukra’s Consent

नहि वेद सतां विद्यां यां काव्यो वेत्ति वीर्यवान्‌ । संजीविनीं ततो देवा विषादमगमन्‌ परम्‌,क्योंकि शक्तिशाली शुक्राचार्य जिस संजीवनी विद्याको जानते थे, उसका ज्ञान बृहस्पतिको नहीं था। इससे देवताओंको बड़ा विषाद हुआ

nahi veda satāṁ vidyāṁ yāṁ kāvyo vetti vīryavān | saṁjīvinīṁ tato devā viṣādam agaman param ||

Vaiśampāyana sprach: „Bṛhaspati kannte jene heilige Wissenschaft nicht, die unter den Edlen gerühmt wird; nur der mächtige Kāvya (Śukrācārya) kannte sie: die Sañjīvinī, die Kunst, Leben wiederherzustellen. Darum wurden die Götter von tiefster Verzweiflung ergriffen.“

not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
हिindeed/for
हि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootहि
वेदknows
वेद:
TypeVerb
Rootविद्
FormLat (present indicative), 3, singular, parasmaipada
सताम्of the good/virtuous
सताम्:
TypeNoun
Rootसत्
Formmasculine, genitive, plural
विद्याम्knowledge, science
विद्याम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootविद्या
Formfeminine, accusative, singular
याम्which
याम्:
Karma
TypePronoun
Rootयद्
Formfeminine, accusative, singular
काव्यःKāvya (Śukrācārya)
काव्यः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootकाव्य
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
वेत्तिknows
वेत्ति:
TypeVerb
Rootविद्
FormLat (present indicative), 3, singular, parasmaipada
वीर्यवान्powerful, valorous
वीर्यवान्:
TypeAdjective
Rootवीर्यवत्
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
संजीविनीम्the Saṃjīvanī (reviving lore)
संजीविनीम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootसंजीविनी
Formfeminine, accusative, singular
ततःthereupon/from that (cause)
ततः:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootततः
देवाःthe gods
देवाः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootदेव
Formmasculine, nominative, plural
विषादम्despondency, grief
विषादम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootविषाद
Formmasculine, accusative, singular
अगमन्went to/entered
अगमन्:
TypeVerb
Rootगम्
FormLan (imperfect), 3, plural, parasmaipada
परम्great, extreme
परम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootपरम
Formmasculine, accusative, singular

वैशम्पायन उवाच

V
Vaiśampāyana
K
Kāvya (Śukrācārya)
B
Bṛhaspati
S
Sañjīvinī (vidyā)
D
Devas

Educational Q&A

Specialized knowledge can decisively shift moral and political power: the Devas’ distress shows that even the ‘righteous’ side may be vulnerable when it lacks crucial learning, and that mastery of vidyā (especially life-restoring lore) becomes a strategic and ethical force in conflict.

The narration explains that Śukrācārya (called Kāvya) possesses the Sañjīvinī vidyā, a means to revive the dead, while Bṛhaspati does not. Realizing this advantage held by their rivals, the Devas fall into deep despondency.