Shloka 5
Yayāti, Devayānī, Śarmiṣṭhā, and the Exchange of Youth: The Unsatisfied Nature of Desire
श्रीराजोवाच ब्रह्मर्षिर्भगवान् काव्य: क्षत्रबन्धुश्च नाहुष: । राजन्यविप्रयो: कस्माद् विवाह: प्रतिलोमक: ॥ ५ ॥
śrī-rājovāca brahmarṣir bhagavān kāvyaḥ kṣatra-bandhuś ca nāhuṣaḥ rājanya-viprayoḥ kasmād vivāhaḥ pratilomakaḥ
Mahārāja Parīkṣit said: Kāvya (Śukrācārya) was a mighty brahmarṣi, and Yayāti, son of Nahuṣa, was a kṣatriya; how, then, did this pratiloma marriage between a kṣatriya and a brāhmaṇa occur?
According to the Vedic system, marriages between kṣatriyas and kṣatriyas or between brāhmaṇas and brāhmaṇas are the general custom. If marriages sometimes take place between different classes, these marriages are of two types, namely anuloma and pratiloma. Anuloma, marriage between a brāhmaṇa and the daughter of a kṣatriya, is permissible, but pratiloma, marriage between a kṣatriya and the daughter of a brāhmaṇa, is not generally allowed. Therefore Mahārāja Parīkṣit was curious about how Śukrācārya, a powerful brāhmaṇa, could accept the principle of pratiloma. Mahārāja Parīkṣit was eager to know the cause for this uncommon marriage.
FAQs
In this verse, King Parīkṣit specifically questions why a “reversed” (pratiloma) marriage occurred between the kṣatriya and brāhmaṇa orders, indicating it was considered contrary to the customary dharmic order and thus required explanation within the narrative.
Parīkṣit notices a seeming inconsistency: Śukrācārya is described as an exalted brāhmaṇa sage, while Nāhuṣa is called a kṣatra-bandhu (unfit kṣatriya). He therefore asks Śukadeva Gosvāmī to explain how such an inter-order marriage could happen in a pratiloma way.
The verse encourages thoughtful inquiry into ethics and social responsibility: rather than blindly accepting practices, one should understand the principles and consequences behind actions—especially in matters affecting family, society, and spiritual culture.