na pravekṣyamimāṃstīn na ca vaktabyaṃicchataḥ. aniyuktasya daivasya yuktasya ca na durviṣahaḥ.
“One should not inquire into these three, and should not speak of them even if desired; the inauspiciousness of the gods when not propitiated, and their unendurable wrath when provoked.”
Structure
na pravekṣyam imān stīn na ca vaktabyaṃ icchataḥ aniyuktasya daivasya yuktasya ca na durviṣahaḥ
na (not) pravekṣyam (should be entered) imān (these) stīn (women)na (not) ca (and) vaktabyaṃ (should be spoken) icchataḥ (to one who desires)aniyuktasya (not joined) daivasya (fortune) yuktasya (joined) ca (and) na (not) durviṣahaḥ (should be endured)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| pravekṣyam | pravekṣyam | verb | √viś · laṣṭ · first | I shall enter |
| imān | imān | pronoun | accusative · plural · masculine | these |
| stīn | stīn | noun | accusative · plural · feminine | women |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| ca | ca | indeclinable | — | and |
| vaktabyaṃ | vaktabyaṃ | verb | √vac · laṣṭ · first | I should speak |
| icchataḥ | icchataḥ | verb | √icch · laṭ · second | who wishes |
| aniyuktasya | aniyuktasya | compound | tatpuruṣa · "aniyukta + asya" | of one who is not joined |
| daivasya | daivasya | noun | genitive · singular · masculine | of fate |
| yuktasya | yuktasya | compound | tatpuruṣa · "yukta + asya" | of one who is joined |
| ca | ca | indeclinable | — | and |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| durviṣahaḥ | durviṣahaḥ | verb | √viṣah · laṭ · third | is not to be endured |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse from the Pañcatantra offers a profound insight into the nature of the divine and our relationship with it, hinting at the non-dual reality that underlies all existence. According to Śaṅkarācārya, the ultimate reality, Brahman, is beyond human comprehension and cannot be grasped through mere inquiry or speech. The warning against inquiring into the three unspecified aspects ( possibly the trimurti or the three aspects of time) is a caution against attempting to grasp the ungraspable through finite means. Śaṅkara's commentary on the Brahma Sutras, particularly his discussion on the nature of Brahman, aligns with this understanding, emphasizing that true knowledge of Brahman is not about acquiring more information but about realizing one's true nature as not different from Brahman. This verse, therefore, points to the brahman-ātman identity, suggesting that the distinctions we make are mere appearances, and the reality is one, indivisible whole.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): The Vaiṣṇava tradition interprets this verse in the context of the loving relationship between the jīva (individual soul) and Īśvara (the Lord). Rāmānujācārya would likely see this verse as advising against delving into matters that are beyond human understanding, particularly the mysterious workings of God's will. The 'three' might refer to the triad of creation, preservation, and destruction, aspects of the divine that are both merciful and terrifying. The warning is not to incur the wrath of the Lord by probing into what He has chosen not to reveal. Instead, one should cultivate devotion and surrender, recognizing the majesty and grace of Īśvara. Madhvācārya, with his emphasis on the difference between the soul and God, might view this verse as highlighting the importance of respecting the transcendence of God, not inquiring into His secrets, and instead focusing on one's duty and devotion. Both interpretations underscore the devotional path and the importance of recognizing one's place in relation to the divine.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): From a modern perspective, this verse can be seen as advocating for a humble and pragmatic approach to life. Swami Vivekānanda, in his lectures and writings, often emphasized the importance of focusing on what is within our power to change and understand, rather than speculating on divine or metaphysical matters. This verse can be interpreted as advising against unnecessary speculation or argumentation about the nature of God or the universe, which can lead to fruitless conflicts and distract from the pursuit of personal growth and service to others. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, with his philosophical inclination, might view this verse as stressing the limits of human knowledge and the dangers of dogmatism, encouraging instead an open, inquiring, and tolerant attitude. Both Vivekānanda and Radhakrishnan would likely see this verse as promoting a universal message of self-awareness, compassion, and practical action, applicable to people of all backgrounds and beliefs.