Adhyaya 70
कार्त्तवीर्यसंभवः (Kārttavīrya’s Origin / Rise)
This micro-adhyāya is framed as a query (praśna) spoken by the Ṛṣis. The colophon places it in the Madhyama-bhāga of the Tṛtīya Upoddhāta-pāda within the Bhārgava-carita cycle, and titles it “Kārttavīrya-saṃbhava.” The sages ask why the tapo-vana (penance-grove) associated with Āpava Mahātmā was burned after being subdued by Kārttavīrya’s valor. They point to an apparent contradiction: Kārttavīrya is known as a rājarṣi, a protector of subjects (rakṣitā), so how could such a protector destroy an ascetic forest? The chapter thus sets the ethical and genealogical problem the next narrative must resolve—reconciling royal dharma (protection) with harm done to a sacred ecological-ritual space, leading into the next segment of Bhārgava lineage history.
Shlokas
Verse 1
इति श्रीब्रह्माण्डे महोपुराणे वायुप्रोक्ते मध्यमभागे तृतीय उपोद्धातपादे भार्गवचरिते कार्त्तवीर्यसंभवो नाम एकोनसप्ततितमो ऽध्यायः ऋषय ऊचुः किमर्थं तु वनं दग्धमापवस्य महात्मनः / कार्त्तवीर्येण विक्रम्य तन्नः प्रब्रूहि पृच्छताम्
Thus, in the Śrī Brahmāṇḍa Mahāpurāṇa, in the middle section proclaimed by Vāyu, in the third introductory division within the Bhārgava narrative, is the sixty-ninth chapter called “The Birth of Kārttavīrya.” The sages said: “O Sūta, for what reason was the forest of the great-souled Āpava, after being overpowered by Kārttavīrya’s valor, burned? We ask—tell us.”
Verse 2
रक्षिता सतु राजर्षिः प्रजानामिति नः श्रुतम् / कथं सरक्षिता भूत्वा नाशयेत तपोवनम्
We have heard that this rājarṣi was the protector of his people. How could he, being a guardian, bring ruin upon the tapovana—the forest of austerity?
Frequently Asked Questions
The chapter is a gateway into the Bhārgava-carita narrative frame and introduces Kārttavīrya as the focal royal figure; the explicit lineage list is not given in these two verses, but the placement signals forthcoming genealogy/history around Kārttavīrya in relation to the Bhṛgu/Bhārgava cycle.
They ask why Kārttavīrya burned/destroyed a tapovana linked with Āpava Mahātmā, despite Kārttavīrya’s reputation as a rājarṣi who protects subjects—highlighting an ethical inconsistency that demands contextual explanation.
No. This adhyāya is purely a framing interrogation within a genealogical-ethical narrative; it contains no bhuvana-kośa (cosmography) measurements, planetary distances, or geographic enumerations.