Shloka 63
Adhyaya 8 — Harishchandra’s Trial: Truth, the Sale of Family, and Bondage to a Chandala
राजपत्नी उवाच ।
प्रसादं कुरु मे नाथ क्रीणीष्वेमं च बालकम् ।
क्रीतापि नाहं भवतो विनैनं कार्यसाधिकाः ॥
rājapatny uvāca | prasādaṃ kuru me nātha krīṇīṣvemaṃ ca bālakam | krītāpi nāhaṃ bhavato vinainaṃ kāryasādhikā ||
Hoàng hậu thưa: “Xin thương xót, thưa chúa thượng—xin mua cả đứa bé này nữa. Dẫu tôi có bị mua, nhưng không có nó thì tôi không thể phụng sự để thành tựu những điều ngài muốn.”
{ "primaryRasa": "karuna", "secondaryRasa": "bhakti", "rasaIntensity": 0, "emotionalArcPosition": "", "moodDescriptors": [] }
FAQs
The verse foregrounds the ethical tension between treating persons as property and the lived reality of relational dependence: the queen frames her worth and capacity to serve as inseparable from the child. As a dharmic lesson, it emphasizes compassion and the recognition that duties and wellbeing are not isolated but bound to vulnerable dependents.
This verse functions primarily as upākhyāna (illustrative narrative) used to convey dharma/rāja-nīti rather than directly presenting sarga/pratisarga/vaṃśa/manvantara/vaṃśānucarita. It most closely supports vaṃśānucarita-style moral narration (conduct and exempla within historical/royal settings), though the single verse does not specify genealogy.
Symbolically, the ‘child’ can be read as the indispensable inner principle (innocence, continuity, or the future fruit of action) without which worldly capability (‘kārya-siddhi’) is hollow. The plea suggests that power and productivity, when severed from care for the vulnerable, become spiritually unfit—dharma requires wholeness, not mere transaction.