Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.23.8
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
dīkṣāyāḥ
—
from the initiation
Ablative — the window opens after dīkṣā is taken. The boys (Kṛṣṇa, really) know the exact timing-rules of the Āṅgirasa-satra. Bhagavān is the author of Veda; He is not unaware of how it works.
-
paśu-saṁsthāyāḥ
—
until the sacrifice of the animal
Compound: paśu (animal) + saṁsthāyāḥ (final rite, ablative). The technical boundary in time. Gauḍīyas note Kṛṣṇa quotes karma-kāṇḍa precisely — only to expose its outer husk.
-
sautrāmaṇyāḥ
—
outside of the Sautrāmaṇi sacrifice
An exceptional yajña where food restrictions differ. The argument is technically airtight; the brāhmaṇas' refusal is therefore not on the basis of śāstra but on the basis of pride.
-
duṣyati
—
creates offense
From √duṣ. The grammar of pollution and purity — even within their own vocabulary, no offense would be incurred. The chapter will show real offense lies elsewhere: in failing to recognize Bhagavān.
The cowherd boys anticipated the possible objection from the brāhmaṇas that they couldn’t give the boys any food because they themselves had not yet eaten, and that a priest initiated to perform a sacrifice should not eat. Therefore the boys humbly informed the brāhmaṇas about various technicalities of ritualistic sacrifice. The cowherd boys were not unaware of the formalities of Vedic culture, but their real intention was simply to render loving service to Lord Kṛṣṇa.
Since the brahmanas may say that all the food in the sacrifice is inedible because of the scriptural rule that one should not eat food of those participating in sacrifice, the boys said, "From the beginning until the animal is killed this rule applies. But after that there is no fault in taking food." It is understood from this that the animal was already killed. This applies to all sacrifices except the sautramani sacrifice, in which none of the food can be eaten.
They display their natural learning in this verse. The boys were familiar with various sacrifices such as the animal sacrifice. They use the word hi to indicate that the conclusion is definite, based on scriptural evidence. Eating is contaminating from the initiation until the animal sacrifice but not otherwise. In the sautrāmaṇi sacrifice eating is forbidden but not in other sacrifices. Knowing the other proper and improper time, we ask you for the food.
This shows the boy’s learning. The sautrāmanī sacrifice is mentioned as an example. Hi indicates that this is well known in scriptures.
- Where do I leave my requests easy to refuse because I haven't done the small homework?
- What anticipation of objections would make my next ask harder to dismiss?
A doctor citing the patient's own pharmacology textbook back to him — the cowherd boys argue from inside the brāhmaṇas' karma-kāṇḍa, showing that the rules themselves permit the gift. Even from within ritual law, the door is open; only the heart is closed.
My note
Source: vedabase.io