Shloka 68
भरतचरितम्—मृगासक्ति-हेतुकः समाधिभङ्गः, जातिस्मरत्वं, रहूगण-जाḍभरत-संवादः
यदा नोपचयस् तस्य न चैवापचयो नृप तदा पीवान् असीतीत्थं कया युक्त्या त्वयेरितम्
yadā nopacayas tasya na caivāpacayo nṛpa tadā pīvān asītītthaṃ kayā yuktyā tvayeritam
O king, you have said that in Him there was neither increase nor decrease, and yet that He was then ‘full and flourishing.’ By what reasoning can this be maintained?
Uncertain from single-verse input (likely a questioning interlocutor within the Parasara–Maitreya narrative frame)
Speaker: Maitreya
Topic: Apparent contradiction: how can the self have no increase/decrease yet be described as ‘full/flourishing’ (pīvān)?
Teaching: Philosophical
Quality: probing
Concept: A rational inquiry is raised to resolve how immutability of the self can be reconciled with descriptive predicates like ‘full’ or ‘flourishing.’
Vedantic Theme: Brahman
Application: When studying scripture, test apparent contradictions carefully and seek interpretive reconciliation (samanvaya) rather than rejecting teachings prematurely.
Vishishtadvaita: Encourages nuanced predication: qualities may describe the self’s manifested condition (upādhi/association) while its essential nature remains unchanged—central to qualified non-dual interpretive method.
Vishnu Form: Para-Brahman
Bhakti Type: Shanta
FAQs
It frames a philosophical problem: how something can be described as stable (no growth/decline) and yet ‘flourishing,’ prompting a deeper explanation of condition versus appearance.
This verse shows the text inviting rational clarification within a devotional-cosmic narrative, using questions to refine meaning rather than relying only on assertion.
Even when not named here, the Purana’s method typically points toward an underlying stable sovereignty—ultimately grounded in Vishnu as the sustaining reality beyond apparent change.