The Disruption of Dakṣa’s Sacrifice, the Hari-Hara Conflict, and the Establishment of Rudra’s Sacrificial Share
गच्छतस्तस्य देवस्य अम्बराङ्गिरसं नयत् । ऋत्विजां मन्त्रनिचयो नष्टो रुद्रागमे तदा ॥ २१.३६ ॥
gacchatas tasya devasya ambarāṅgirasaṃ nayat | ṛtvijāṃ mantranicayo naṣṭo rudrāgame tadā || 21.36 ||
その神が進みゆくとき、アンバラーンギラサを伴って行った。かの時、ルドラ―ガマにおいて、祭官(ṛtvij)たちのマントラの集成が失われた。
Varāha (default narrative frame; speaker not explicit in excerpt)
It reflects a Purāṇic motif of textual and ritual transmission—how mantra corpora are preserved, displaced, or lost—useful for studying the history of ritual lineages and the narrative framing of religious knowledge.
No explicit geographic toponym appears in this verse; the focus is on persons (e.g., Ambarāṅgirasa) and a textual/ritual context (Rudrāgama).
Rather than a direct moral injunction, the verse foregrounds the fragility of ritual knowledge and the importance of careful custodianship and continuity in learned traditions.
Answers come straight from the texts, with the shlokas they draw on. Ask in your own words.
A free sign-in with Google or Apple keeps your chat saved across web and the app.