Matsya Purana — Devayānī–Śarmiṣṭhā Dialogue: Yayāti’s Transgression, Shloka 34

Devanagari script

इत्येतानि समीक्ष्याहं कारणानि भृगूद्वह अधर्मभयसंविग्नः शर्मिष्ठाम् उपजग्मिवान् //

Transliteration

ityetāni samīkṣyāhaṃ kāraṇāni bhṛgūdvaha adharmabhayasaṃvignaḥ śarmiṣṭhām upajagmivān //

Translation

„Nachdem ich so diese Gründe erwogen hatte, o Bester der Bhṛgus, und aus Furcht vor Adharma erschüttert war, näherte ich mich Śarmiṣṭhā.“

Word by Word

• iti-etāni: thus these

• samīkṣya: having examined/considered

• aham: I

• kāraṇāni: reasons/causes

• bhṛgūdvaha: O foremost of the Bhṛgus (address to the sage)

• adharma-bhaya-saṃvignaḥ: distressed/agitated by fear of adharma (unrighteous conduct)

• śarmiṣṭhām: Śarmiṣṭhā (proper name)

• upajagmivān: approached/went to

Speaker

• A kingly narrator within the Yayati cycle (speaking to a Bhṛgu-line sage, likely Śukra or an interlocutor addressed as 'bhṛgūdvaha')

Entities Mentioned

• Bhṛgu (lineage, addressed as bhṛgūdvaha)
• Śarmiṣṭhā

Tags

• Dynasties
• Dharma
• Royal Ethics
• Genealogy
• Yayati

FAQs

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

This verse does not discuss Pralaya; it focuses on moral anxiety (fear of adharma) within a royal narrative, showing how ethical concern drives action.

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

It highlights a core Purāṇic ethic: one should reflect on causes and consequences and act from dharmic fear/awareness—especially rulers, whose private choices can become public disorder.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

No Vāstu or ritual procedure is stated in this verse; its significance is ethical and narrative—deliberation followed by seeking resolution through direct approach.