Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.25.3
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
martyam
—
an ordinary human (mortal)
From √mṛ. Indra's central error — naming Kṛṣṇa by a category Kṛṣṇa does not occupy. Bg 9.11 indicts this exact move: avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam. The whole canto is a refutation of martyam here.
-
upāśritya
—
taking shelter of
From upa + ā + √śri — to take complete refuge. The technical verb of śaraṇāgati. Indra denounces precisely what Vraja got right. Gauḍīyas note: the offender's complaint is often the devotee's certificate.
-
deva
—
against the demigods
Indra's framing — Vraja has offended 'the gods' (i.e. him). The verse turns on the deva/Deva distinction the Bhāgavatam constantly draws: subordinate devatās vs. Bhagavān Kṛṣṇa, the Deva of devas.
-
kānana - okasām
—
of those who dwell in the forest
kānana (forest) + okas (dwelling). Indra means it dismissively — rustics. But Vṛndāvana's forest-dwelling is itself the supreme abode in Gauḍīya geography; what he intends as insult is the gopas' very glory.
Of course, Indra was really saying that the cowherd men had offended him, Indra, by taking shelter of Kṛṣṇa, whom Indra considered to be martya, a mortal. This was certainly a gross miscalculation on Indra’s part.
Indra speaks "How astonishing to see the amount of wealth and bliss of these cowherd men!" According to Sarasvati : krsna is called martyam because he appears to give auspiciousness to the ignorant souls of the material world. The gopas have taken shelter of that Krsna, and ignored me, the lowly devata.
[Indra said:] Just see how these cowherd men living in the forest have become so greatly intoxicated by their prosperity! They have surrendered to an ordinary human being, Kṛṣṇa, and thus they have offended the gods. This is astonishing (aho)! They are lowly forest people, ignorant. The prefix upa has a negative connotation as in upapati (paramour lover). Upāśrityā indicates falling from dharma, reputation and family rules. By saying this, he shows his superiority over humans as a devatā. Thus he mentions that the offense is against the devatās, not just himself. He expresses himself in this way to show that it is not proper to give up the status of a devatā and accept qualities of a human. The people of Vraja did not think of Indra as a devatā what to speak of being the head of the devatās. However another meaning can be found in his words. The people of Vraja as dwellers in the forest and cowherds were most sattvic in qualities. They surrendered to Kṛṣṇa who was the parabrahman in human form (matryam), who was most affection to his devotees. Therefore it was proper that they ignore the devatās.
- What categories have I placed the Lord in that don't fit Him?
- Where do I miscall Him 'mortal' in some quiet way and so refuse to surrender?
Indra looks down at Vraja and sees only what every offender sees of devotees — drunkenness, foolishness, social transgression. The form of an ordinary cowherd is for him exactly what the form of a deity is to the atheist: the same shape, read backward through pride.
When Kṛṣṇa came as the Pāṇḍavas' messenger, Duryodhana saw only a cowherd-cousin without an army worth respecting, and tried to arrest Him. Vidura and Bhīṣma saw the same body and recognized Bhagavān.
The form of Kṛṣṇa is one; what changes is the seer. Indra's 'martyam' here belongs to the same family of mistakes.
My note
Source: vedabase.io