Shloka 8
आदि पर्व, अध्याय ३८ — शमीक-उपदेशः, शाप-संदेशः, तक्षक-प्रसङ्गः (Śamīka’s counsel, the curse-message, and Takṣaka’s approach)
तथेति च वचस्तस्यास्त्वयाप्युक्त पितामह । एतदिच्छामि विज्ञातुं कारणं यन्न वारिता,पितामह! आपने भी “तथास्तु” कहकर कटद्रूकी बातका अनुमोदन ही किया है; उसे शाप देनेसे रोका नहीं है। इसका क्या कारण है, हम यह जानना चाहते हैं
tatheti ca vacas tasyās tvayāpy ukta pitāmaha | etad icchāmi vijñātuṁ kāraṇaṁ yan na vāritā ||
Ó Avô! Tu também respondeste: «Assim seja», endossando com isso as palavras dela, e não a contiveste de proferir a maldição. Desejo compreender por que não foi impedida — que necessidade ética ou cósmica exigia que se deixasse aquilo prosseguir?
शेष उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights moral causality: words—especially those empowered as a curse—carry consequences within a larger cosmic order. Even a revered authority may allow a painful outcome when it aligns with dharma and the unfolding of karma, prompting inquiry into when restraint is appropriate and when non-interference serves a higher necessity.
Śeṣa addresses the Pitāmaha, noting that the elder affirmed a woman’s statement by saying ‘tathāstu’ and did not stop her from cursing. Śeṣa asks for the underlying reason—why the curse was permitted rather than checked.