Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.39.26
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
akrūraḥ iti
—
(should not be called) 'Akrūra'
Direct repudiation of his name. In the same breath that they name him (akrūraḥ iti) they refuse the name. Bhāgavata-style emphasis through paradoxical phrasing.
-
anāśvāsya
—
without consoling
Gerund of ā + √śvas (to breathe out, console). The specific charge: no farewell, no comfort, no breath of soothing given to the people losing Kṛṣṇa. The Lord's removal without consolation is the unbearable thing.
-
priyāt priyam
—
the dearer than the dear / dearest
Superlative construction. Kṛṣṇa is dearer to the gopīs than every other dear thing — children, husbands, lives. The phrase ranks Him at the apex of all priya-vastus in their universe.
-
pāram adhvanaḥ
—
across the path / to the other side of the road
Pāra = the far shore. Akrūra is ferrying Him to the 'other side' — the city across the Yamunā — and by extension across the gopīs' world to another realm of līlā.
In this verse the gopis curse Akrura. "It is not proper for person like this to have the name Akrura (not cruel), because he is extremely cruel. His name should be Krura. He does not promise that he will bring Krsna back again to those who are suffering (suduhkhitam), those who are nearing death. This akrura will be committing the sin of killing people of Vraja. He is taking Krsna, more dear than our life, far off where we cannot go."
Since iti also means etad, Śrīdhara Svāmī does not say ity etad in his commentary. Or as in the usage ity evam ādi the phrase iti etad is permissible according to the example of go-balī-varda. He is most cruel. That person (asau), (whom they cannot even mention because of his cruelty), is taking Kṛṣṇa. Or that person, who we can see over there, is taking Kṛṣṇa. He does not even console the people by saying, “I am taking him, and will bring him back to you.” He should at least give some general consolation to the people (janam). What to speak of consoling us weak women. The addition of su (very) in su-duḥkhitam indicates that very soon he will be responsible for death of women. Thus he is very cruel. kiṁ na vetti nṛśaṁso ‘yam anurāga-paraṁ janam / yenaivam akṣṇor āhlādaṁ nayaty anyatra no harim // Does this cruel person not know about people having great love? He takes away our Kṛṣṇa who is joy for our eyes to some other place. Viṣṇu Purāṇa Therefore his name should be Krūra, not Akrūra. Or, he should not have the name Akrūra, or any other name with a similar meaning.
- Where do you wish someone who took something dear from you had at least said sorry?
- How could you, in your own messages of bad news, consciously console first?
Like a butcher who walks into a household, takes the family's beloved heifer without a word of consolation to the weeping children — the gopīs say Akrūra has earned a new name. He should be called Krūra, simply. To take Kṛṣṇa without comforting Vraja first is the sharpest cruelty.
My note
Source: vedabase.io