"The object of our love, the cause of our life, Krsna, is indifferent to us. Why, then should we criticize the creator? How has he broken this very strong bond of love? Friendship broken in an instant cannot be real friendship. Though he has brought us to the point of death, he does not even look at us. He has decided to go to Mathura for his own happiness, even if we should cry and eventually die. Giving up house, husband and son, we became his servants. In order to become his servants we gave up all these things, but now he is giving us up and going away. Why? Because he has new lovers. Because we have become old lovers, he is giving us up and going away. Thus in this life we achieve nothing (having left our husbands and Krsna having left us), and in next life also (since we have broken laws of dharma.)"

Why should we criticize the indifferent creator? The son of Nanda, the reason for our existence, or intimate possession, is the same. Because he is the son of the king of the cowherds, and he has a loving relationship with us, he should look at us cowherd girls. He does not give regard to us (na samīkṣate) since he is eager to go far away even without asking us. One can speak of the future, but at this moment we do not see that he notices us. Though he knows we are strongly bound to him in friendship, he is a person who breaks such friendship in a moment. Why should he give us regard? In order of importance they list what they have given up: house, relatives, sons and husbands. Directly (addhā) we have come close to him as his servants, offering our bodies to him (dāsyam). This indicates a special type of dāsya. They have approached him because they are full of pain, having been brought under control (sva-kṛtāturā) by his smile and other features. Or they state the reason he should look at them: they are pained by what he has done (sva-kṛta), giving them up. They are not suffering from sickness. Simply he does not look at them. Still, giving up all the people of Vraja, on the pretext of seeing relatives, he appears most pleasing (nava-priyaḥ) by his sweet qualities at this time as we see him go.

Na is placed first in the sentence, expressing negation, but with respect. Because he is the son of a cowherd (nanda-sunuḥ) he should look at us, but in departing he does not even glance at us, or in going to Mathurā he does not even consider us—because in a moment he breaks friendships. “Being indifferent to people there, after some time he will think of us.” He will ignore us because we have been experienced so much previously. He likes new things (nava-priyaḥ). Or seeing Kṛṣṇa who does not look at the gopīs or worry about their intense suffering, they speak. Shall we criticize the creator? The son of Nanda does not see us. He should see us by his nature since he is the son of Nanda. They describe their qualification according to their bhāva. We have given up houses, relatives, sons and husbands (in order of increasing excellence) and gained at close hand (upa) service directly (addhā) by giving our bodies etc. The speciality of their dāsya is indicated by this. The reason for attaining him is that he has made us desire him (sva-kṛtāturāḥ). Or “Your beloved is going on his own. What is my fault?” They speak to the creator. He does not break his friendship easily since he is Nanda’s son. He should not ignore us since we are solely devoted to him. O creator! He does notice us, since he made us desire him. We have become his servants, giving up everything. Otherwise we would be ungrateful. And moreover he is most attractive (nava-priyaḥ).