Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.74.30
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
damaghoṣa - sutaḥ
—
the son of Damaghoṣa, Śiśupāla
Compound: Damaghoṣa + suta (son). The Bhāgavatam introduces Śiśupāla through his father — keeping us aware that this is a particular embodied jīva, not an abstract antagonist. Cedi-king, Kṛṣṇa's cousin (his mother Śrutadevī is Vasudeva's sister).
-
manyuḥ
—
anger
From √man (to think, to be agitated). Cognate with English 'mania'. Vedic word for ignited wrath — Manyu is even invoked in some mantras. Here it is the surface emotion; the depth is vaira (verse 46).
-
amarṣī
—
intolerant
From a + √mṛṣ (not enduring). Amarṣa names the inability to bear another's elevation. Gauḍīyas read amarṣa as the asurika-doṣa that drives Hiraṇyakaśipu's hatred of Prahlāda's bhakti — same flavour, same lineage.
-
abhītaḥ
—
having no fear
A (not) + bhīta (afraid). His fearlessness is the cause of his fall, not its remedy. Gauḍīyas: nirbhayatā without bhakti is dur-bhāgya — only abhaya rooted in surrender (cf. Gītā 16.1) is liberative; abhaya rooted in hate ripens fast and ripens hard.
Śrīla Prabhupāda writes: “In that meeting, King Śiśupāla was also present. He was an avowed enemy of Kṛṣṇa for many reasons, especially because of Kṛṣṇa’s having stolen Rukmiṇī from the marriage ceremony; therefore, he could not tolerate such honor to Kṛṣṇa and glorification of His qualities. Instead of being happy to hear the glories of the Lord, he became very angry.” Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī mentions that the reason Śiśupāla did not object when Sahadeva proposed Kṛṣṇa for the agra-pūjā is that Śiśupāla wanted to ruin King Yudhiṣṭhira’s sacrifice. If Śiśupāla had argued earlier against Lord Kṛṣṇa’s receiving the first worship and another person had been selected, the sacrifice would have then proceeded normally. Therefore Śiśupāla allowed Kṛṣṇa to be selected, waited until the worship was over, and then spoke up, hoping in this way to demonstrate that the sacrifice was now spoiled. Thus he would ruin the endeavor of Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira. In this regard the ācārya quotes the following smṛti reference: apūjyā yatra pūjyante pūjyānāṁ ca vyatikramaḥ. “In the place where those who are not to be worshiped are worshiped, there is offense to those who are actually worshipable.” There is also the following statement: pratibadhnāti hi śreyaḥ pūjyapūjya-vyatikramaḥ. “Improperly understanding who is to be worshiped and who is not to be worshiped will impede one’s progress in life.”
Though Śiśupāla and Dantavakra did not have demonic natures internally, since they were Jaya and Vijaya, externally they imitated demons. That is shown in Śrīdhara Svāmī’s commentary on the killing of Hiraṇyakṣa. That is sensible, since otherwise this pastime would be contrary to the Lord’s intention of giving happiness to the devotees and the Lord. Since they worshipped the Lord internally their inimical words actually had another meaning when they spoke (by their intention). When other demons speak about the Lord, however, by the inspiration of Sarasvatī (not by their intention) their words have another meaning. Here Śiśupāla speaks clearly in order to nourish the fighting rasa. After hearing Sahadeva speak, and hearing all the words until the final offering of respects and cries of victory for Kṛṣṇa, Śiśupāla became angry. He was more evil than his father (damaghoṣa-sutaḥ). In Hari-vaṁśa this is made clear in the episode of his advice to burn Gomanta mountain. He was angry at the words, what to speak of the worship of Kṛṣṇa, since he was intolerant due to f enviousness (amarṣī). Or he began to lament (manyuḥ) and then became angry (amarṣī). He rose from his seat, and raising his right arm, made everyone listen to his loud words at close range (sam—śravayan), since he was very impudent (abhītaḥ).
- Where does the same truth that gladdens me anger someone else?
- What helps me hold steady when devotion attracts opposition?
A cracked vessel cannot hold honey — it leaks the sweetness back out as bitterness. Kṛṣṇa's qualities are honey; Śiśupāla, cracked by life-after-life of vaira, receives the same descriptions everyone else is drinking and emits only insults.
When the four Kumāras were turned away at the gate, Jaya and Vijaya were cursed by the brāhmaṇas. Bhagavān gave them a choice: seven births as devotees, or three births as enemies — three would return them faster.
They chose enmity. Hiraṇyakaśipu-Hiraṇyākṣa, Rāvaṇa-Kumbhakarṇa, and now Śiśupāla-Dantavakra — three lifetimes of vaira-yoga. Gauḍīyas see Śiśupāla's outburst not as ordinary hatred but as the engineered final term of an ancient agreement (SB 7.1.35–47).
My note
Source: vedabase.io