अरक्षितं तिष्ठति दैवरक्षितं सुरक्षितं दैवहतं विनश्यति । जीवत्यनाथोऽपि वने विसर्जितः कृतप्रयत्नोऽपि गृहे न जीवति
arakṣitaṃ tiṣṭhati daivarakṣitaṃ surakṣitaṃ daivahataṃ vinaśyati | jīvatyanātho'pi vane visarjitaḥ kṛtaprayatno'pi gṛhe na jīvati
Lo que no está guardado puede aun perdurar si el destino lo protege; lo bien guardado perece si el destino lo hiere. Aun un huérfano abandonado en el bosque puede vivir, mientras que quien se esfuerza con empeño puede no vivir ni siquiera en su propia casa.
Unspecified (deduced: Sūta/Lomaharṣaṇa narrating within a Māhātmya discourse)
Scene: Two contrasting vignettes: (1) an unguarded hut spared under a protective aura; (2) a fortified house struck by calamity; alongside, an abandoned child in a forest surviving under divine protection, contrasted with a striving householder failing—rendered as moral paradox, not despair.
Human precautions and effort do not fully control outcomes; destiny shaped by karma can preserve or destroy beyond visible safeguards.
This maxim occurs inside the Śrīhāṭakeśvara-kṣetra Māhātmya (Nāgarakhaṇḍa, Tīrthamāhātmya), supporting the narrative’s moral frame.
None; it is a reflective teaching on daiva (destiny) and prayatna (effort).