अथ खलु सौम्येदं परिव्राज्यं नैष्ठिकमात्मधर्मं यो विजहाति स वीरहा भवति । स ब्रह्महा भवति । स भ्रूणहा भवति । स महापातकी भवति । य इमां वैष्णवीं निष्ठां परित्यज्यति । स स्तेनो भवति । स गुरुतल्पगो भवति । स मित्रध्रुग्भवति । स कृतघ्नो भवति । स सर्वस्माल्लोकात्प्रच्युतो भवति । तदेतदृचाभ्युक्तम्
atha khalu saumyedaṃ parivrājyaṃ naiṣṭhikamātmadharmaṃ yo vijahāti sa vīrahā bhavati | sa brahmahā bhavati | sa bhrūṇahā bhavati | sa mahāpātakī bhavati | ya imāṃ vaiṣṇavīṃ niṣṭhāṃ parityajyati | sa steno bhavati | sa gurutalpago bhavati | sa mitradhrugbhavati | sa kṛtaghno bhavati | sa sarvasmāllokātpracyuto bhavati | tadetadṛcābhyuktam
"So then, my dear: whoever abandons this wandering, the constant duty of the self, becomes a slayer of a hero, a slayer of a brahmin, a slayer of an embryo, a great sinner. Whoever abandons this Vaiṣṇava standing becomes a thief, a defiler of the teacher's bed, a betrayer of a friend, ungrateful; he falls from every world. And of this it is said in a verse."
0b94cafb668a · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
Here is a passage where the book speaks most sharply, and it is worth examining both what it says and how it should be read. One who abandons renunciation is equated with a slayer of a brahmin, a thief, a betrayer; and this list is the list of mahā-pātaka, "great sins." Let us say plainly: this equation is disproportionate if taken literally.
A person who has not held to a vow has killed no one; and to place him beside a murderer is to lose the measure. Let us add, however, what stands behind this sharpness and makes it understandable. In Indian literature such equations are a device of emphasis, not a legal assessment; other books use the same device, promising the fruit of a thousand sacrifices for a single bath.
They cannot be read as an account; they can be read as an indication of weight. Let us add what is worth noting in the expression itself: vaiṣṇavīṃ niṣṭhām, "Vaiṣṇava standing." Niṣṭhā means "standing, firmness, constancy"; and on the Vaiṣṇava ladder cited when reading the Varāha (4.1), it stands as the fifth step, between the diminishing of hindrances and taste.
That is, renunciation is called here not a refusal but constancy in a relationship; and to abandon it means not "to stop fasting" but "to stop holding on." Read this way, the sharpness becomes explicable: the weight is measured not by the deed but by what one steps back from. The Vaiṣṇava side holds, on this score, something else too, and a softening one, which must be cited so the passage does not read as hopeless: the Gītā 6.40 says that the kalyāṇa-kṛt does not come to a bad end; and that what has been accumulated is not lost was discussed when reading the Varāha (4.40).