तेनेह क्षुधितेनाद्य श्रान्तेन च तपस्विना । अजानता कृतं मन्ये व्रतमेतदिदं मम,वे आज भूखे और थके-माँदे यहाँ आये थे। वे तपस्वी नरेश मेरे इस मौन-व्रतको नहीं जानते थे; मैं समझता हूँ इसीलिये उन्होंने मेरे साथ ऐसा बर्ताव कर दिया
teneiha kṣudhitenādya śrāntena ca tapasvinā | ajānatā kṛtaṃ manye vratam etad idaṃ mama ||
“Creo que lo ocurrido aquí hoy fue hecho sin saberlo por ese asceta, hambriento y fatigado. No conocía mi voto de silencio; por eso, pienso que se comportó conmigo de ese modo.”
शमीक उवाच
Śamīka interprets the offense against him as unintentional, caused by hunger and fatigue and by ignorance of his vow of silence. The ethical emphasis is on charitable interpretation, restraint from anger, and judging actions with attention to circumstances and intent.
After being treated disrespectfully, Śamīka explains that the visitor likely acted without knowing that Śamīka was observing silence. He attributes the behavior to the visitor’s hunger and exhaustion, framing the incident as a misunderstanding rather than deliberate malice.