Srimad Bhagavatam — Saptama Skandha, Shloka 11
Nṛsiṁhadeva Appears from the Pillar and Slays Hiraṇyakaśipu
श्रीहिरण्यकशिपुरुवाच व्यक्तं त्वं मर्तुकामोऽसि योऽतिमात्रं विकत्थसे । मुमूर्षूणां हि मन्दात्मन् ननु स्युर्विक्लवा गिर: ॥ ११ ॥
śrī-hiraṇyakaśipur uvāca vyaktaṁ tvaṁ martu-kāmo ’si yo ’timātraṁ vikatthase mumūrṣūṇāṁ hi mandātman nanu syur viklavā giraḥ
Hiranyakashipu menjawab: Wahai bedebah, kau cuba merendah-rendahkan nilaiku, seolah-olah kau lebih baik daripadaku dalam mengawal deria. Ini terlalu biadab. Oleh itu, aku faham bahawa kau ingin mati di tanganku, kerana cakap-cakap karut sebegini hanya dituturkan oleh mereka yang akan mati.
It is said in Hitopadeśa, upadeśo hi mūrkhāṇāṁ prakopāya na śāntaye. If good instructions are given to a foolish person, he does not take advantage of them, but becomes more and more angry. Prahlāda Mahārāja’s authorized instructions to his father were not accepted by Hiraṇyakaśipu as truth; instead Hiraṇyakaśipu became increasingly angry at his great son, who was a pure devotee. This kind of difficulty always exists when a devotee preaches Kṛṣṇa consciousness to persons like Hiraṇyakaśipu, who are interested in money and women. (The word hiraṇya means “gold,” and kaśipu refers to cushions or good bedding.) Moreover, a father does not like to be instructed by his son, especially if the father is a demon. Prahlāda Mahārāja’s Vaiṣṇava preaching to his demoniac father was indirectly effective, for because of Hiraṇyakaśipu’s excessive jealousy of Kṛṣṇa and His devotee, he was inviting Nṛsiṁhadeva to kill him very quickly. Thus he was expediting his being killed by the Lord Himself. Although Hiraṇyakaśipu was a demon, he is described here by the added word śrī. Why? The answer is that fortunately he had such a great devotee son as Prahlāda Mahārāja. Thus although he was a demon, he would attain salvation and return home, back to Godhead.
FAQs
Hiraṇyakaśipu claims that excessive boasting is a sign of one nearing death, and that such a person’s speech becomes agitated and confused—revealing his own arrogance and misjudgment of a devotee.
In the confrontation leading to Lord Nṛsiṁha’s appearance, Hiraṇyakaśipu mocks Prahlāda’s unwavering faith and interprets Prahlāda’s fearless words as madness and suicidal audacity.
It highlights how ego can misread courage as recklessness; a practical takeaway is to avoid judging others’ conviction through pride, and to cultivate steadiness of speech and faith under pressure.