Shloka 48

Matsya Purana — Yadu Lineage

Devanagari script

प्रह्लादो निर्जितो युद्धे इन्द्रेणामृतमन्थने विरोचनस्तु प्राह्लादिर् नित्यम् इन्द्रवधोद्यतः //

Transliteration

prahlādo nirjito yuddhe indreṇāmṛtamanthane virocanastu prāhlādir nityam indravadhodyataḥ //

Translation

In the battle connected with the churning for nectar, Prahlāda was defeated by Indra; and Virocana, the son of Prahlāda, remained ever intent on slaying Indra.

Word by Word

• प्रह्लादः: Prahlāda

• निर्जितः: was defeated/overcome

• युद्धे: in battle

• इन्द्रेण: by Indra

• अमृत-मन्थने: in the churning for nectar (Samudra-manthana episode)

• विरोचनः: Virocana

• तु: and/indeed

• प्राह्लादिः: descendant/son of Prahlāda

• नित्यम्: always

• इन्द्र-वध-उद्यतः: intent upon the killing of Indra

Speaker

• Likely Lord Matsya (in discourse to Vaivasvata Manu), narrating dynastic-enmity history

Entities Mentioned

• Prahlāda
• Indra
• Amṛta (nectar)
• Samudra Manthana (Churning of the Ocean)
• Virocana

Tags

• Dynasties
• Deva-Asura Conflict
• Samudra Manthana
• Genealogy
• Puranic History

FAQs

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

This verse does not address Pralaya; it situates a Deva–Asura conflict within the Amṛta-manthana narrative, emphasizing rivalry and karmic enmity rather than cosmic dissolution.

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

Indirectly, it serves as a cautionary ethical motif: sustained vengeance (being “ever intent on killing”) perpetuates conflict across generations, contrasting with the Purāṇic ideal of restraint, righteous policy, and stability in governance.

What is the architectural or ritual significance mentioned here?

No Vāstu, temple iconography, or ritual procedure is stated in this verse; the focus is historical-genealogical, tied to the Amṛta-manthana battle context.