Shiva's Kedara Tirtha Shloka 76 - Vamana Purana | Marathi | Vedapath

Vyasa

←Previous VerseNext Verse→

Vamana Purana — Shiva's Kedara Tirtha, Shloka 76

Shiva’s Kedara-Tirtha and the Rise of Mura: From Shaiva Pilgrimage to Vaishnava Theology

Devanagari script

ब्रह्मोवाच विशेषः शिष्यपुत्राभ्यां विद्यते धर्मनन्दन धर्मकर्मसमायोगे तथापि गदतः श्रुणु

Transliteration

brahmovāca viśeṣaḥ śiṣyaputrābhyāṃ vidyate dharmanandana dharmakarmasamāyoge tathāpi gadataḥ śruṇu

Translation

ब्रह्मा म्हणाले—हे धर्मनंदन, शिष्य आणि पुत्र यांत त्यांच्या-त्यांच्या कार्यांनुसार भेद आहे. तरीही धर्म व कर्म यांच्या संयोगात मी जे सांगतो ते ऐक.

Word by Word

ब्रह्माBrahmā

उवाचsaid

विशेषःa distinction

शिष्य-पुत्राभ्याम्by the disciple and the son

विद्यतेexists / is found

धर्मनन्दनO delight of Dharma

धर्म-कर्म-समायोगेin the conjunction of dharma and action

तथाthus / in that way

अपिeven / also

गदतःof (me) speaking / while speaking

श्रुणुlisten

Speakers

Brahmā speaking (addressing ‘Dharmanandana’; the immediate interlocutor is not explicitly named in the given excerpt)

Primary Deities

BrahmāDharma (as a principle/personified referent in the epithet)

Key Themes

Dharma and KarmaRole of son vs discipleVedic social-religious orderTransmission of merit and obligation

Verse Rasa (Emotional Flavour)

{ "primaryRasa": "shanta", "secondaryRasa": "", "rasaIntensity": 0, "emotionalArcPosition": "", "moodDescriptors": [] }

FAQs

Why does the verse mention a ‘distinction’ between son and disciple but then link both to dharma and karma?

The verse frames a common Dharmic discussion: a son is tied to lineage and ancestral rites, while a disciple is tied to Vedic transmission and spiritual succession. Brahmā signals that although their social functions differ, both can be relevant to dharma (normative duty) and karma (ritual efficacy), setting up the next verses that compare their salvific roles.

Who is ‘Dharmanandana’ here?

Literally ‘delight/son of Dharma,’ it is a respectful vocative. In Purāṇic style it can address a listener characterized by righteousness, or someone connected to Dharma as a figure. The excerpt alone does not fix the identity; it functions primarily as an honorific indicating the listener’s dhārmic orientation.

Does this verse imply equality of son and disciple?

Not outright. It acknowledges difference (viśeṣa) but prepares an argument that, in certain religious outcomes (especially merit, purification, and continuity of dharma), a disciple may function analogously to a son—an idea made explicit in the following ślokas.