Shloka 30
स्तन्यस्य मातुर्मधुसर्पिषोर्वा माध्वीकपानस्य च सत्कृतस्य । दिव्यस्य वा तोयरसस्य पानात् पयोदधिभ्यां मथिताच्च मुख्यात्
stanyasya mātur madhu-sarpiṣor vā mādhvīka-pānasya ca satkṛtasya | divyasya vā toya-rasasya pānāt payo-dadhibhyāṁ mathitāc ca mukhyāt |
قال سنجيا: «لقد ذقتُ لبن أمي، وشربتُ العسل والسمن المصفّى، وتمتّعتُ بشراب المادْهْفيكا المُعَدّ بإتقان من أزهار المَدهوكا، ورشفتُ خلاصة المياه السماوية، وذقتُ أطيب زبدٍ طازجٍ مخضوضٍ من اللبن واللبن الرائب. ومع ذلك، فألذّ من كل ذلك—بل ومن كل شرابٍ في الدنيا يُمدَح كأنه رحيقٌ خالد—هو طعم دم عدوي.»
संजय उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse uses extreme taste-imagery to show how war can invert values: what is naturally pure and nourishing (milk, honey, ghee) is rhetorically surpassed by the ‘taste’ of an enemy’s blood. It warns, by depiction, how vengeance and battlefield fury can eclipse ordinary ethical sensibilities.
Sañjaya reports a warrior’s fierce boast in the midst of the Kurukṣetra conflict: after listing the finest drinks known in human and even divine experience, the speaker declares that the blood of his enemy is more gratifying than all of them—highlighting the brutality and psychological intensity of the battle.