Shloka 42

Matsya Purana — War of Devas and Asuras; Birth of Aurva Fire; Countering Tamasī Māyā through ...

Devanagari script

क्व दाराः क्व च संयोगः क्व च भावविपर्ययः नन्वियं ब्रह्मणा सृष्टा मनसा मानसी प्रजा //

Transliteration

kva dārāḥ kva ca saṃyogaḥ kva ca bhāvaviparyayaḥ nanviyaṃ brahmaṇā sṛṣṭā manasā mānasī prajā //

Translation

Where are ‘wives’ (as objects of possession), and where is union? Where is the reversal of feelings (passion turning into sorrow)? Surely this is a mind-born progeny—created by Brahmā through the mind alone.

Word by Word

• kva: where/what place for

• dārāḥ: wives, marital ties

• kva ca: and where

• saṃyogaḥ: union, attachment, conjunction

• bhāva-viparyayaḥ: reversal/perversion of mental states, change of emotion

• nanu: indeed/surely

• iyaṃ: this

• brahmaṇā: by Brahmā

• sṛṣṭā: created

• manasā: by the mind

• mānasī: mental, mind-born

• prajā: progeny/creation/creatures

Speaker

• Lord Matsya (instructing Vaivasvata Manu, thematic attribution within Matsya Purana discourse)

Entities Mentioned

• Brahmā

Tags

• Creation
• Manasika Srishti
• Detachment
• Dharma
• Mind

FAQs

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

It emphasizes creation as ‘mind-born’ (mānasī prajā) through Brahmā’s mind—highlighting a subtle, ideational mode of creation rather than physical generation; this supports Purāṇic cosmology where manifestation can arise from mental intention and can likewise be withdrawn.

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

It cautions that attachment (saṃyoga) and emotional reversal (bhāva-viparyaya) are unstable; a householder or king should perform duties without possessiveness, governing and living with restraint and clarity rather than being driven by fluctuating passions.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

No direct Vāstu/ritual procedure is stated; the takeaway is conceptual—ritual and social forms (including marriage as a saṃskāra) should be approached with disciplined mind, since the text frames worldly bonds as mind-dependent constructs.