Shloka 43

Adhyaya 8 — Harishchandra’s Trial: Truth, the Sale of Family, and Bondage to a Chandala

Sanskrit

अथवा किं ममैतेन साम्ना प्रोक्तेन कारणम् ।

अनार्ये पापसङ्कल्पे क्रूरे चानृतवादिनि ॥

Transliteration

athavā kiṃ mamaitena sāmnā proktena kāraṇam /

anārye pāpasaṅkalpe krūre cānṛtavādini //

Translation

അല്ലെങ്കിൽ, നിന്നോടു സമാധാനവചനങ്ങൾ പറയുന്നതിൽ എനിക്ക് എന്ത് പ്രയോജനം? നീ നീചൻ, പാപബുദ്ധിയിൽ ലീനൻ, ക്രൂരൻ, അസത്യവാദി।

Word by Word

• athavā: or else
• athavā: Sambandha (सम्बन्ध/connecting)
• Type: Indeclinable
• Root: athavā (अव्यय)
• Form: Conjunction/alternative particle (विकल्पार्थक-अव्यय)

• kim: what?
• kim: Prashna (प्रश्न/what?)
• Type: Noun
• Root: kim (प्रातिपदिक/सर्वनाम)
• Form: Neuter, Nominative/Accusative (1st/2nd—प्रथमा/द्वितीया), Singular; interrogative pronoun (प्रश्नवाचक-सर्वनाम)

• mama: of me / my
• mama: Sambandha (षष्ठी-सम्बन्ध)
• Type: Noun
• Root: asmad (सर्वनाम-प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Genitive (6th/षष्ठी), Singular; 1st person pronoun

• etena: by/with this
• etena: Karana (करण/Instrument)
• Type: Noun
• Root: etad (सर्वनाम-प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Neuter, Instrumental (3rd/तृतीया), Singular; demonstrative pronoun

• sāmnā: by a sāman-chant / by a hymn
• sāmnā: Karana (करण/Instrument)
• Type: Noun
• Root: sāman (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Neuter, Instrumental (3rd/तृतीया), Singular

• proktena: spoken/uttered
• proktena: Visheshana (विशेषण)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: pra+vac (धातु) → prokta (कृदन्त-प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Past passive participle (क्त/PPP); Neuter, Instrumental (3rd/तृतीया), Singular; agreeing with sāmnā

• kāraṇam: reason / purpose
• kāraṇam: Prashna (प्रश्न/what reason?)
• Type: Noun
• Root: kāraṇa (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Neuter, Nominative/Accusative (1st/2nd—प्रथमा/द्वितीया), Singular

• anārye: O ignoble woman
• anārye: Sambodhana (सम्बोधन/Address)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: anārya (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Feminine, Locative (7th/सप्तमी), Singular; used as संबोधन/locative of address

• pāpa-saṅkalpe: O one of sinful resolve
• pāpa-saṅkalpe: Sambodhana (सम्बोधन/Address)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: pāpa (प्रातिपदिक) + saṅkalpa (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Tatpuruṣa (षष्ठी/कर्मधारय-सम्भाव्य; ‘sinful intention’); Feminine, Locative (7th/सप्तमी), Singular; addressing same person

• krūre: O cruel one
• krūre: Sambodhana (सम्बोधन/Address)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: krūra (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Feminine, Locative (7th/सप्तमी), Singular; addressing

• ca: and
• ca: Sambandha (सम्बन्ध/connecting)
• Type: Indeclinable
• Root: ca (अव्यय)
• Form: Conjunction (समुच्चयार्थक-अव्यय)

• anṛta-vādini: O speaker of falsehood
• anṛta-vādini: Sambodhana (सम्बोधन/Address)
• Type: Adjective
• Root: anṛta (प्रातिपदिक) + vādinī (प्रातिपदिक)
• Form: Tatpuruṣa (उपपद/कर्मधारय-भाव: ‘speaking untruth’); Feminine, Locative (7th/सप्तमी), Singular; addressing

Speakers

• Asura speaker (Śumbha / his representative voice in the encounter) addressing the Devī

Primary Deities

• Devī (Durgā/Caṇḍikā context)
• Śumbha (asura)

Shakti Aspects

• Devī as the autonomous supreme feminine power (no specific epithet explicit in this pāda
• within Durgā Saptashatī context)

Key Themes

• Dharma vs. adharma
• Asuric arrogance
• Truth vs. falsehood
• Failure of conciliation (sāman) before violence

FAQs

What is the philosophical or ethical takeaway?

The verse dramatizes the breakdown of sāman (conciliation) when the speaker deems the other party unworthy—branding the Devī as ignoble and deceitful. Ethically, it exposes an asuric pattern: projection and slander of virtue, justifying coercion when persuasion fails. It warns that arrogance and false attribution of vice to the righteous are themselves marks of adharma.

How does this fit the Pancalakshana (5 characteristics)?

This belongs primarily to Vaṃśānucarita/Carita (narrative of deeds) within the Purāṇic mode—specifically the Devī’s heroic cycle embedded in the Markandeya Purāṇa. It is not a sarga/pratisarga (creation) or manvantara-focused datum in itself, but part of the exemplary sacred history used to teach dharma.

What is the esoteric significance?

Esoterically, the refusal of sāman symbolizes the ego’s incapacity to reconcile with Śakti (truth-consciousness). Calling the Devī ‘anṛtavādinī’ (liar) reflects avidyā’s inversion—where the asuric mind mistakes the Real for false and the false for real—setting the stage for inner conflict that can only be resolved by the triumph of divine discernment and power.