Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.61.25
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
dauhitrāya
—
to his daughter's son
From duhitṛ (daughter) + a (relating to). A specific kinship term — the daughter's son is a privileged relation in Sanskrit law, even capable of offering piṇḍa. Rukmī's gift of his grand-daughter to his daughter's son is dharmically peculiar; the next words explain why he does it anyway.
-
baddha-vairaḥ
—
bound in enmity
baddha (bound) + vaira (enmity). The Sanskrit compound paints Rukmī as 'bound' by hatred — and the very next phrase will use bondage-imagery again, this time of love. The verse poses two bonds against each other; love wins.
-
adharmam
—
irreligion
a + dharma, 'against dharma.' Rukmī himself knows the marriage violates dharma — perhaps because of close kin (cross-cousin marriage to an enemy's son), perhaps because the political enmity should bar marriage. The Bhāgavata reports his conscience faithfully.
-
sneha-pāśa
—
the ropes of affection
sneha (oil-like affection) + pāśa (noose). The same pāśa that binds Varuṇa's prisoners, but here woven of love. Gauḍīyas note that even mundane sneha can override dharma — how much more so divine prema, which Rūpa Gosvāmī defines as 'sandrananda-viśeṣātmā,' a higher dharma.
-
anubandhanaḥ
—
whose bondage
anu + bandhana, 'binding-after.' Names the lasting tie that follows from sneha. The Bhāgavata uses the term elsewhere for the soul's bondage to saṁsāra — here turned to a man's bondage to his sister.
Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī explains that according to worldly standards one should not give one’s beloved granddaughter to the grandson of one’s bitter enemy. Thus we find the following injunction: dviṣad-annaṁ na bhoktavyaṁ dviṣantaṁ naiva bhojayet. “One should not eat an enemy’s food or feed an enemy.” There is also the following prohibition: asvargyaṁ loka-vidviṣṭaṁ dharmam apy ācaren na tu. “One should not execute religious injunctions if they will obstruct one’s journey to heaven, or if they are odious to human society.” It should be pointed out here that Lord Kṛṣṇa is not really the enemy of anyone. As the Lord states in the Bhagavad-gītā (5.29) , suhṛdaṁ sarva-bhūtānām jñātvā māṁ śāntim ṛcchati: “One achieves peace by understanding that I am the well-wishing friend of every living being.” Although Lord Kṛṣṇa is everyone’s friend, Rukmī could not appreciate this fact and considered Lord Kṛṣṇa his enemy. Still, out of affection for his sister, he gave his granddaughter to Aniruddha. Finally, we should note that, contrary to the prohibition quoted above, one may not give up the basic principles of spiritual life merely because such principles are unpopular with people in general. As Lord Kṛṣṇa states in the Gītā (18.66) , sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaranaṁ vraja. The last word in spiritual duties is to surrender to the Supreme Lord, and that duty takes precedence over all secondary injunctions. Moreover, in this age Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has kindly presented a sublime process that will attract all sincere people to come to the point of surrendering to the Lord. By following Lord Caitanya’s blissful process of chanting, dancing, feasting and discussing spiritual philosophy, anyone can easily go back home, back to Godhead, for an eternal life of bliss and knowledge. Still, someone may argue that the members of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement should not practice in the Western countries those ceremonies or activities that displease people in general. We respond that even in the Western countries, when people are properly informed of the activities of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, they generally appreciate this great spiritual institution. Those who are especially envious of God will not appreciate any type of religious movement, and since such persons are themselves little better than animals, they cannot impede the great Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, just as the envious Rukmī could not impede the performance of Lord Kṛṣṇa’s pure pastimes.
He agreed to this marriage of his grand daughter to Rukmini's son Anirudda, though it was not according to religious principles. It is against the common custom of "One should not eat the food of an enemy nor feed an enemy." and against the scriptures in such statements as " one should not perform even religious actions which prevent one from going to svarga loka and are commonly disliked in this life."
He gave his grand-daughter to Aniruddha, though he had enmity towards Kṛṣṇa (hareḥ). Though there are cases of marrying one’s uncle’s daughter according to dharma, Rukmī considered it improper because it went against the local custom and produced a relationship with an enemy. But he gave Rocanā because of continual bonds (anu—bandhanaḥ) of affection for his sister.
Though a sworn enemy of Kṛṣṇa, Rukmī gave his grand-daughter to Aniruddha. He considered the marriage improper (adharmam), against normal custom but he consented to the marriage out of strong bonds of affection for his sister.
Like a man tying his own hands with the very rope of affection that he can never untie, Rukmī, knowing the marriage is adharmic, still binds himself further — the sneha-pāśa for Rukmiṇī tighter than any vow of revenge against her husband.
My note
Source: vedabase.io