Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.57.41
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
darśayitvā
—
having shown
Causative gerund of √dṛś. The gem is 'shown' — the verb of darśana applied here to an object whose visibility settles a slander. Gauḍīyas: darśana clears doubt; the Bhāgavata applies the same epistemology to gems as to deities.
-
rajaḥ ātmanaḥ
—
the dust upon Himself
Genitive: rajas (dust / contamination / passion) + ātman. The slander had cast 'dust' on Kṛṣṇa's name. Gauḍīyas treat rajas in this verse as a metaphor for unjust suspicion against Bhagavān — and note the play on rajo-guṇa in the background.
-
vimṛjya
—
wiping away
Gerund of vi-√mṛj (to wipe clean). The gesture is precise — Bhagavān wipes His name with the very gem that had been used to soil it. Gauḍīyas: Kṛṣṇa's vindication uses the object of the accusation as its own answer.
-
pratyarpayat
—
He returned, gave back
Imperfect of prati-ā-√ṛ. Bhagavān gives the gem back to Akrūra. The arc closes: He did not want the jewel; He wanted the rumor erased and the devotee restored. Gauḍīyas: Kṛṣṇa's interest in wealth is always instrumental, never possessive.
For the second time, doubts about the Lord’s reputation occasioned by the Syamantaka jewel are dispelled by the jewel itself. Indeed, for the second time the Lord brought the jewel to Dvārakā to establish His integrity there. This amazing series of incidents demonstrates that even when Lord Kṛṣṇa descends to this world there is a tendency for His “peers” to criticize Him. The whole material world is infected by the faultfinding propensity, and in this chapter the Supreme Lord demonstrates the nature of this undesirable quality.
Being scolded gently by Krsna, Akrura took the jewel and gave it to Krsna. Touching it with his hand, Krsna returned it to Akrura.
He showed the jewel to the Yādavas and cleared the accusations (rajaḥ) created by the jewel. Kṛṣṇa thought, “Akrūra concealed the jewel by his will, not mine. Because he has a little qualification, I will offer it to him”. He did this because he was the protector of his devotees. He did this for the benefit of the Yadu dynasty. Or, because he was the Lord, it was the proper action to teach the population. Akrūra placed the jewel around his neck and went away. Hari-vaṁśa says: sa kṛṣṇa-hastāt saṁprāpya maṇi-ratnaṁ syamantakam / ābadhya gāndinī-putro virarājāṁśumān iva // Taking the gem from Kṛṣṇa’s hand Akrūra put it on his neck and shone like the sun.
He showed the jewel to the Yādavas and cleared the accusations (rajaḥ) created by the jewel. Because he was the Lord, it was the proper action to teach the population. Akrūra placed the jewel around his neck and went away. Hari-vaṁśa says: sa kṛṣṇa-hastāt saṁprāpya maṇi-ratnaṁ syamantakam / ābadhya gāndinī-putro virarājāṁśumān iva // Taking the gem from Kṛṣṇa’s hand, Akrūra put it on his neck and it shone like the sun. In order to show the uselessness of wealth, not only with the Lord but with the best devotees who act for the benefit of the people, Satrājit and others acted in this way. Otherwise the Yadus would not have acted in this way. Thus the killing of Satrājit was illusory. The conclusion is discussed in Bhāgavatāmṛta.
Kṛṣṇa shows the gem to the relatives and then gives it back. The whole arc — pursuit, killing, search, exile, recall, exposure — was driven by the need to wipe the dust off His own name. Gauḍīyas read this as one of the Bhāgavata's clearest demonstrations: Bhagavān will move armies and oceans to clear the reputation of His own innocence, less for His sake than for the devotees who depend on it.
My note
Source: vedabase.io