Sukta 13
कैरा॑त पृश्न॒ उप॑तृण्य॒ बभ्र॒ आ मे॑ शृणु॒तासि॑ता॒ अली॑काः । मा मे॒ सख्युः॑ स्ता॒मान॒मपि॑ ष्ठाताश्रा॒वय॑न्तो॒ नि वि॒षे र॑मध्वम्
kairā́ta pṛ́śne upatṛ́ṇya babhrá ā́ me śṛṇutā́sitā alī́kāḥ | mā́ me sakhyúḥ stāmánam ápi sthātāśrāvayántaḥ ní viṣé ramadhvam ||
O Kirāta, O Speckled, Upatṛṇya, O Brown—hear me, ye black, deceitful ones. Stand not, not even for a moment, in my friend’s domain: hissing and making yourselves heard, take your pleasure down in poison.
ऐ किरात, ऐ चितकबरे, ऐ भूरे रंग वाले, मेरी बात सुनो, तुम काले धोखेबाज़ हो। मेरे दोस्त के इलाके में एक पल भी मत रहो। तुम अपनी फुहार की आवाज़ सुना रहे हो, जाओ, ज़हर में डूब के मरो।
The speaker addresses various named/specified serpent/poison beings (Kirāta, Speckled, Upatṛṇya, Brown; black, deceitful ones), commanding them not to linger even a moment in the friend’s space, but to go enjoy themselves ‘down in poison.’
Covert danger is identified by its ‘hissing’—subtle warning signs. The psyche draws a firm boundary around the vulnerable beloved (sakhyúḥ) and banishes intrusive, deceptive impulses back to their own domain.
Protection often begins with naming and boundary-making: what is recognized as harmful loses the right to reside in one’s intimate sphere.
To prevent hostile poison/serpent-agents from lingering near a protected person (‘my friend’), banishing them to their own poisonous domain.
कैरा॑त । पृश्ने । उपतृण्य । बभ्रः । आ । मे । शृणुत । असिताः । अलीकाः । मा । मे । सख्युः । स्तामानम् । अपि । स्थात । आश्रावयन्तः । नि । विषे । रमध्वम्
Sayana treats the vocatives as naming hostile serpent/poison-classes or their controllers; ‘Kirāta’ can denote forest-people associated with knowledge of poisons and antidotes, here either invoked as witnesses or addressed as the very agents to desist. ‘alīka’ marks treachery: the poison approaches covertly (‘āśrāvayantaḥ’—making itself heard, like a hiss). The charm orders them not to ‘stand’ (stāmāna) near the protected ally, but to ‘delight in poison’—i.e., remain confined to their own sphere, away from humans.
Atharvanic (anonymous/collective)
Protective banishing (apavāhana) charms against serpents/venoms; maintaining safe domestic space.
Shows the Atharvanic domestic logic: the home/kin-domain is ritually defended by commanding hostile forces to return to their own element.
Serpent/poison classes (as adversarial beings) and the banishing force of the mantra
These names map a taxonomy of danger (color/behavior/habitat). The mantra functions as a ‘cosmic policing’ that keeps each force in its proper sphere.
Prevents contact/spread by expulsion; reduces risk of bite/attack through ritual distancing.
Creates a warded perimeter around the protected person and household.
4 × ~8; vocatives cluster in opening, then prohibitive commands
Name-list (nāma-grahaṇa) + prohibitive ‘mā’ creates a spell cadence; ethnonymic coloring is typical of AV cataloguing.
Starts as a roll-call, ends as a sharp dismissal.
Strengthens boundary-intent; the name-listing serves as ‘calling out’ hidden threats.
Recite while establishing a protective perimeter around the patient/household member (‘my friend’), e.g., by circling with water, a branch, or a cord.
On ‘mā ... sthāt’, perform a stopping/warding gesture (palm outward) toward suspected direction of danger.
On ‘ni viṣe ramadhvam’, cast away a small token (dust, ash, or a drop of the preparation) toward a liminal spot (outside threshold), symbolically relocating the threat.
Kauśika Sūtra: protective boundary/banishment acts in poison and serpent contexts; often paired with sweeping away, sprinkling, or setting a protective cord/amulet (edition-dependent numbering).
Atharvan as domestic protector: defines social space (‘friend’s domain’) and enforces exclusion of liminal/forest-associated dangers.
Recite while inspecting/clearing thresholds, sleeping area, cattle-shed; conceptually ‘orders’ serpents out of the friend’s/household’s domain.
At dusk/nightfall (when serpents are feared), before sleep, or after sighting signs (hiss/tracks).
Householder or Atharvan specialist; recitation with perimeter-walk.
Kauśika anti-sarpa/viṣa prayogas commonly pair AVŚ 5.13 verses with boundary/warding acts (edition-dependent citations).
Combine with practical snake-proofing and local wildlife guidance.
poison as a ‘place’ (viṣe) to which harm is relegated; hissing/whispering approach (āśrāvayantaḥ) as sign of covert danger
Poison becomes a container-domain: harm is not annihilated but relocated/contained. Sound (āśrāvay-) marks the liminal approach of danger and is ritually redirected.
Threat of envenomation; also ‘hidden’ toxic influence in a protected zone
Apotropaic banishment: relocate the danger to its own poisonous domain; reduce proximity/contact.
Nidāna-parivarjana principle (avoidance of causes); keeping viṣa away from the body/environment.
Risk-reduction behavior: clearing snake habitat near dwelling; heightened situational awareness to subtle cues (sound/movement).
Serpent/poison beings named by color/type
Banishing serpents/poison agents from the protected person’s vicinity; prevent lingering and attack.
Nāma-grahaṇa (naming), niṣedha (prohibition ‘mā’), apavāhana (sending away) to a designated locus (‘ni viṣe’).
Snake presence near home, stealth approach, covert harm
Protective boundary around loved ones; discernment of deceptive signals.
Maṇipūra (protective will)
Inhale: gather; exhale: ‘send away’ with the prohibitive mā.
A ring of light around the friend/house; serpents dissolve into a dark ‘poison realm’ outside the ring.
Vigilant calm (rakṣā-bhāva)
Practice naming inner ‘alīka’ tendencies (self-deception) and dismissing them from the heart-space.
Maintain marked accents; treat vocatives as clear calls, then sharpen prohibitives (mā … api sthāta).
Do not rush the name-list; pause slightly before mā me sakhyuḥ to mark the boundary shift.
Clear, admonitory, boundary-setting.
Atharvanic banishing often uses ‘place assignment’ (ni…): speak ‘ni viṣe’ as a downward cast-away.
3 times
Fear of snakes near home, campsite, cattle-shed; protecting a child/companion (‘friend’).
Before sleep; after hearing hissing/seeing signs; during perimeter checking.
Sense of protected space; traditional warding; improved vigilance and coordinated action.
Do not approach/handle snakes; use professional wildlife control where appropriate.
The verse is primarily spatial-apotropaic rather than pharmacological: it relocates danger (‘down in poison’) instead of naming herbs. Yet it complements antidotal practice by preventing re-contact and by conceptualizing poison as a bounded sphere.
The vocative ‘Kirāta’ preserves a social memory of forest/tribal specialists associated with poisons and remedies. Whether demonized or invoked, such figures are positioned as liminal outsiders relative to the settled household that the Atharvan protects.
The dense string of vocatives and the direct policing of space (‘do not stand’) are charm-like and pragmatic. The ethnonymic address is more typical of Atharvanic social texture than RV’s predominantly pan-Ārya divine addressees.
Gopatha’s model of mantra as boundary-making and exclusion supports this verse’s logic: harm is compelled to ‘reside’ in its proper locus, while the protected person’s space is ritually purified and defended.
Answers come straight from the texts, with the shlokas they draw on. Ask in your own words.
A free sign-in with Google or Apple keeps your chat saved across web and the app.