Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 13

Adhyātma-nirdeśa

Definition of Adhyātma): Mahābhūtas, Indriyas, Guṇas, and the Witness (Kṣetrajña

विहगैरुप भुक्तस्य शैलाग्रात्‌ू पतितस्य च । अग्निना चोपसयुक्तस्य कुत: संजीवनं पुनः,इनमेंसे जो मरता है, उसे या तो पक्षी खा जाते हैं या वह पर्वतके शिखरसे गिरकर चूर- चूर हो जाता है अथवा आगमें जलकर भस्म हो जाता है। ऐसी दशामें उनका पुनः जीवित होना कैसे सम्भव है?

vihagair upabhuktasya śailāgrāt patitasya ca | agninā copasayuktasya kutaḥ saṃjīvanaṃ punaḥ ||

Seseorang yang telah dimakan burung, atau jatuh dari puncak gunung hingga hancur berkeping, atau dilalap api—bagaimana mungkin dia hidup kembali? Dalam keadaan demikian, apakah asasnya untuk kebangkitan semula?

विहगैःby birds
विहगैः:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootविहग
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Plural
उपभुक्तस्यof one that has been eaten/consumed
उपभुक्तस्य:
Karma
TypeAdjective
Rootउपभुज्
FormPast Passive Participle (क्त), Masculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
शैलाग्रात्from a mountain-peak
शैलाग्रात्:
Apadana
TypeNoun
Rootशैलाग्र
FormNeuter, Ablative, Singular
पतितस्यof one who has fallen
पतितस्य:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootपत्
FormPast Active Participle (क्तवत्/क्त), Masculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
अग्निनाby fire
अग्निना:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootअग्नि
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
उपसयुक्तस्यof one who has been joined/subjected (to it), i.e., burned/consumed
उपसयुक्तस्य:
Karma
TypeAdjective
Rootउप-सम्-युज्
FormPast Passive Participle (क्त), Masculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
कुतःwhence? how?
कुतः:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootकुतः
संजीवनम्revival, coming back to life
संजीवनम्:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootसंजीवन
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
पुनःagain
पुनः:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootपुनः

भरद्वाज उवाच

B
Bharadvāja
B
birds
M
mountain peak
F
fire

Educational Q&A

The verse articulates a skeptical challenge to the idea of returning to life after death by pointing to irreversible physical destruction. It sets up a philosophical inquiry into what ‘life’ or ‘self’ could mean beyond the body, and invites a response grounded in dharma, karma, and metaphysics rather than mere bodily continuity.

Bharadvāja raises an objection in a doctrinal discussion: if a body is destroyed—devoured by birds, smashed by a fall, or burned to ash—how can it be ‘revived’? The statement functions as a probing question meant to test or clarify teachings about post-mortem existence and rebirth.