Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 30

Rathaghoṣa–Saṃjñāna: Damayantī’s Inference and the Dispatch of the Envoy (Āraṇyaka-parva, Adhyāya 71)

अपि चेदं वयस्तुल्यं बाहुकस्य नलस्य च । नायं नलो महावीर्यस्तद्विद्यक्ष भविष्यति,“इसी प्रकार बाहुक और नलकी अवस्था भी एक है। यह महापराक्रमी राजा नल नहीं है तो भी उनके ही समान विद्वान्‌ कोई दूसरा महापुरुष होगा

api cedaṁ vayastulyaṁ bāhukasya nalasya ca | nāyaṁ nalo mahāvīryas tadvidyakṣa bhaviṣyati ||

Ṛtupārṇa berkata: “Lagipula usia Bāhuka dan Nala tampak sama. Jika ini bukan Nala, sang pahlawan perkasa, maka pastilah seorang agung lainnya—yang setara dalam kepandaian dan ilmu.”

apialso; even
api:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootapi
caand
ca:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootca
idamthis
idam:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootidam
Formneuter, nominative, singular
vayas-tulyamequal in age
vayas-tulyam:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootvayas-tulya
Formneuter, nominative, singular
bāhukasyaof Bāhuka
bāhukasya:
TypeNoun
Rootbāhuka
Formmasculine, genitive, singular
nalasyaof Nala
nalasya:
TypeNoun
Rootnala
Formmasculine, genitive, singular
caand
ca:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootca
nanot
na:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootna
ayamthis (man)
ayam:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootidam
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
nalaḥNala
nalaḥ:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootnala
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
mahā-vīryaḥof great prowess
mahā-vīryaḥ:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootmahā-vīrya
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
tatthat (one)
tat:
Karta
TypePronoun
Roottad
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
vidyākṣaḥskilled in dice-play
vidyākṣaḥ:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootvidyā-akṣa
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
bhaviṣyatiwill be
bhaviṣyati:
TypeVerb
Rootbhū
Formsimple future (luṭ), 3rd, singular, parasmaipada

ऋचुपर्ण उवाच

Ṛtupārṇa
B
Bāhuka
N
Nala

Educational Q&A

The verse highlights careful discernment: true excellence can be recognized through signs such as age, capability, and learned skill. Even when identity is concealed, virtue and competence leave traces that invite reasoned inference rather than rash judgment.

King Ṛtupārṇa observes that Bāhuka’s age matches Nala’s and suspects a deeper identity. He reasons that if Bāhuka is not the famed Nala, then he must be another extraordinary person with comparable expertise—hinting at Nala’s concealed presence.