Shloka 35

Matsya Purana — Uma’s Austerities and the Slaying of the Deceiver Asura ĀḌi

Devanagari script

इति चिन्त्य हरस्तस्या अभिज्ञानं विधारयन् नापश्यद्वामपार्श्वे तु तदङ्गे पद्मलक्षणम् //

Transliteration

iti cintya harastasyā abhijñānaṃ vidhārayan nāpaśyadvāmapārśve tu tadaṅge padmalakṣaṇam //

Translation

Thinking thus, Hara (Śiva), holding in mind her identifying sign, looked—but on the left side of her body he did not see the lotus-mark that should have been there.

Word by Word

• iti: thus

• cintya: having reflected/thinking

• haraḥ: Hara (Śiva)

• tasyāḥ: of her

• abhijñānam: token of recognition/identifying sign

• vidhārayan: holding, keeping in mind

• na apaśyat: did not see

• vāma-pārśve: on the left side

• tu: however/indeed

• tad-aṅge: on that body/limb

• padma-lakṣaṇam: lotus mark/lotus emblem (auspicious sign).

Speaker

• Sūta (narrator) or the Purāṇic narrator describing Śiva’s action (narrative voice)

Entities Mentioned

• Hara (Shiva)
• Padma (lotus mark)

Tags

• Abhijnana
• AuspiciousMarks
• Iconography
• Recognition
• PuranicNarrative

FAQs

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

This verse does not address pralaya directly; it focuses on recognition through an auspicious identifying mark (padma-lakṣaṇa) within a narrative episode.

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

Indirectly, it reflects the Purāṇic emphasis on careful discernment and verification (abhijñāna) before accepting identity or claims—an ethical parallel to prudent judgment expected of rulers and householders.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

The key technical element is iconographic: padma-lakṣaṇa (lotus mark) as an auspicious sign used for identification—relevant to Pratimā-lakṣaṇa (iconography) traditions rather than Vāstu construction rules.