Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 48

भृगु–भरद्वाजसंवादः: वर्णभेदस्य कर्माधारितव्याख्या

Bhrigu–Bharadvaja Dialogue: A Karma-Based Account of Varṇa

हेतुवादान्‌ प्रवदिता वक्ता संसत्सु हेतुमत्‌ । आक्रोष्टा चाभिवक्ता च ब्रह्म॒वाक्येषु च द्विजान्‌

hetuvādān pravaditā vaktā saṃsatsu hetumat | ākroṣṭā cābhivaktā ca brahmavākyeṣu ca dvijān |

സഭകളിൽ ഞാൻ ചെന്നു ഹേതുവാദങ്ങളേ പ്രസംഗിക്കുമായിരുന്നു; കാരണങ്ങളാൽ നിറഞ്ഞ വാദപ്രതിവാദങ്ങളേ പറയുമായിരുന്നു. ദ്വിജർ ശ്രദ്ധയോടെ വേദവാക്യങ്ങളെ ചിന്തിക്കുന്നിടത്ത്, ഞാൻ അവരെ ബലമായി ആക്രമിച്ച്—അപമാനിച്ച്, എതിർത്ത്—എന്റെ തർക്കവാദം മാത്രം പ്രദർശിപ്പിക്കുമായിരുന്നു.

हेतुवादान्reasonings; arguments (doctrines of logic)
हेतुवादान्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootहेतुवाद
FormMasculine, Accusative, Plural
प्रवदिताspeaker; one who speaks forth
प्रवदिता:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootप्र + वद्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
वक्ताspeaker; orator
वक्ता:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootवच्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
संसत्सुin assemblies; in councils
संसत्सु:
Adhikarana
TypeNoun
Rootसंसद्
FormFeminine, Locative, Plural
हेतुमत्reasoned; having reasons (argumentative speech)
हेतुमत्:
Karma
TypeAdjective
Rootहेतुमत्
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
आक्रोष्टाreviler; one who shouts abuse
आक्रोष्टा:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootआ + क्रुश्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
अभिवक्ताaccuser; one who speaks against
अभिवक्ता:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootअभि + वच्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
ब्रह्मवाक्येषुin sacred utterances; in Vedic statements
ब्रह्मवाक्येषु:
Adhikarana
TypeNoun
Rootब्रह्मवाक्य
FormNeuter, Locative, Plural
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
द्विजान्twice-born (Brahmins)
द्विजान्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootद्विज
FormMasculine, Accusative, Plural

भीष्म उवाच

B
Bhishma
D
dvija (Brahmins)
S
saṃsat (assembly)
B
brahma-vākya (Vedic utterances)

Educational Q&A

Bhishma condemns the arrogant misuse of logic in sacred or learned settings: reasoned speech should serve truth and dharma, not ego, insult, or the humiliation of the wise—especially when discussing Vedic teachings.

Bhishma is recounting his own past conduct: in assemblies he habitually argued and debated, and when Brahmins discussed Vedic statements with reverence, he would aggressively interrupt, abuse, and contradict them, asserting his own contentious reasoning.