Shloka 6

Matsya Purana — Pṛthu

Devanagari script

अनुनीतो ऽपि न ददाव् अनुज्ञां स यदा ततः शापेन मारयित्वैनम् अराजकमयार्दिताः //

Transliteration

anunīto 'pi na dadāv anujñāṃ sa yadā tataḥ śāpena mārayitvainam arājakamayārditāḥ //

Translation

Though repeatedly entreated, he still did not grant permission; then, having slain him by a curse, they were afflicted by the calamity of being without a king (arājakatā).

Word by Word

• अनुनीतः (anunītaḥ): though pacified/earnestly requested

• अपि (api): even/though

• न (na): not

• ददाव् (dadāv): he gave/granted

• अनुज्ञाम् (anujñām): permission/consent

• स (sa): he

• यदा (yadā): when

• ततः (tataḥ): then/thereupon

• शापेन (śāpena): by a curse

• मारयित्वा (mārayitvā): having caused to be killed/having slain

• एनम् (enam): him

• अराजकम् (arājakam): kingless condition/absence of a ruler

• अय (aya): misfortune/calamity

• आर्दिताः (ārditāḥ): afflicted/tormented

Speaker

• Likely Sūta (narrator) recounting a royal-ethical episode within Matsya Purana’s discourse to Manu

Tags

• Rajadharma
• Arājakatā
• Curse
• Kingship
• SocialOrder

FAQs

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

This verse is not about cosmic Pralaya; it highlights a social “dissolution” (aya) that occurs when kingship collapses—arājakatā is portrayed as a destructive condition for society.

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

It underscores the necessity of legitimate authority and consent in governance: refusing rightful permission can trigger conflict, and the loss of a king leads to disorder—implying that rulers must act decisively and dharmically to prevent arājakatā.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

No Vastu or temple-ritual detail appears in this verse; its takeaway is political-ethical—stable rulership is treated as a prerequisite for protecting rites, law, and public order.