Shloka 26

मायामोह-प्रवर्तन, वेदमार्ग-बहिष्कार, तथा पाषण्ड-संसर्ग-दोषः

Māyāmoha’s Delusion, Rejection of the Vedic Path, and the Fault of Heretical Association

Devanagari script

नैतद् युक्तिसहं वाक्यं हिंसा धर्माय नेष्यते हवींष्य् अनलदग्धानि फलायेत्य् अर्भकोदितम्

Transliteration

naitad yuktisahaṃ vākyaṃ hiṃsā dharmāya neṣyate havīṃṣy analadagdhāni phalāyety arbhakoditam

Translation

This saying is not upheld by sound reasoning: violence cannot be made into dharma. That ‘oblations not even touched by fire would still yield the sacrificial fruit’ is mere childish talk.

Word by Word

• न: not
• न: Sambandha (Negation/सम्बन्ध)
• Type: Indeclinable
• Root: न (अव्यय)
• Form: निषेध-अव्यय (negation particle)

• एतत्: this
• एतत्: Karta (Subject/कर्ता)
• Type: Noun
• Root: एतद् (सर्वनाम-प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा-विभक्ति (Nominative), एकवचन; ‘this’

• युक्तिसहम्: reasonable, supported by logic
• युक्तिसहम्: Karta (Subject-qualifier/कर्ता-विशेषण)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: युक्ति (प्रातिपदिक) + सह (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा-विभक्ति (Nominative), एकवचन; समासः—युक्ति-सह ‘consistent with reasoning’; विशेषणम् (वाक्यम्)

• वाक्यम्: statement
• वाक्यम्: Karta (Subject/कर्ता)
• Type: Noun
• Root: वाक्य (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा-विभक्ति (Nominative), एकवचन

• हिंसा: violence
• हिंसा: Karta (Subject/कर्ता)
• Type: Noun
• Root: हिंसा (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: स्त्रीलिङ्ग, प्रथमा-विभक्ति (Nominative), एकवचन

• धर्माय: for dharma, for righteousness
• धर्माय: Sampradana (Purpose/सम्प्रदान)
• Type: Noun
• Root: धर्म (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: पुंलिङ्ग, चतुर्थी-विभक्ति (Dative), एकवचन

• नेष्यते: will not lead (to), will not be conducive
• नेष्यते: Kriya (Action/क्रिया)
• Type: Verb
• Root: नी (धातु)
• Form: लृट्-लकार (Simple Future), प्रथम-पुरुष, एकवचन; आत्मनेपद; कर्मणि-प्रयोग (passive sense) ‘will be led/considered’

• हवींषि: oblations
• हवींषि: Karta (Subject/कर्ता)
• Type: Noun
• Root: हविस् (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा/द्वितीया-विभक्ति (Nom/Acc), बहुवचन; अत्र प्रथमा (subject of implied verb ‘भवन्ति/स्युः’)

• अनलदग्धानि: burnt by fire
• अनलदग्धानि: Karta (Subject-qualifier/कर्ता-विशेषण)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: अनल (प्रातिपदिक) + दग्ध (कृदन्त; √दह्)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा/द्वितीया-विभक्ति (Nom/Acc), बहुवचन; कृदन्तः—दग्ध (क्त); समासः—अनल-दग्ध ‘burnt by fire’; विशेषणम् (हवींषि)

• फलाय: for (obtaining) fruit/result
• फलाय: Sampradana (Purpose/सम्प्रदान)
• Type: Noun
• Root: फल (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, चतुर्थी-विभक्ति (Dative), एकवचन

• इति: thus
• इति: Sambandha (Quotation-marker/सम्बन्ध)
• Type: Indeclinable
• Root: इति (अव्यय)
• Form: उद्धरण-निपात (quotative particle)

• अर्भकोदितम्: spoken by a child
• अर्भकोदितम्: Karta (Subject-qualifier/कर्ता-विशेषण)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: अर्भक (प्रातिपदिक) + उदित (कृदन्त; √वद्/√उद्? ‘said/uttered’)
• Form: नपुंसकलिङ्ग, प्रथमा-विभक्ति (Nominative), एकवचन; कृदन्तः—उदित (क्त, ‘uttered/said’); समासः—अर्भक-उदित ‘uttered by a child’; विशेषणम् (वाक्यम्)

Speaker

Sage Parāśara (teaching Maitreya in a dharma-discourse context)

Parashara-Maitreya Dialogue

Speaker: Parasara

Topic: The rationalist critique used by Māyāmoha against Vedic sacrifice (hiṃsā and efficacy of offerings)

Teaching: Philosophical

Quality: revealing

Philosophical Teaching

Concept: Arguments that appear ‘reasonable’ can be weaponized to dismiss śāstric dharma; mere logic without proper hermeneutics (mīmāṃsā) becomes a tool of delusion.

Vedantic Theme: Maya

Application: Balance reason with disciplined scriptural study and context-sensitive interpretation; avoid absolutizing partial ethical intuitions.

Vishishtadvaita: The Lord’s dharma may transcend limited human inference; the jīva’s intellect must be guided by śāstra while remaining ethically awake.

Vaishnava Theology

Vishnu Form: Para-Brahman

FAQs

What is the significance of ahimsa (non-violence) in this Vishnu Purana verse?

The verse asserts that violence cannot be validated as dharma by clever argument; ethical truth must be consistent with reason, and harming beings is rejected as a righteous means.

How does Sage Parāśara explain the misuse of ritual logic here?

He dismisses the claim that unburnt oblations could still produce sacrificial merit as ‘childish,’ implying that ritual results require proper causes—and that moral law cannot be bypassed by sophistry.

What is the theological importance of Lord Vishnu in this context?

By grounding dharma in rational and moral order, the text supports the idea that true righteousness aligns with the cosmic governance ultimately upheld by Vishnu, not merely with external ritual claims.