Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.78.28
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
-
asat-vadhāt
—
from killing the impious
Asat (untrue, impious) + vadha (killing). Balarāma is said in other places (SB 10.65, His vow with Pralamba etc.) to have refrained from further killing — but here the bhāvitva (inevitability) of Romaharṣaṇa's death overrides His personal vow.
-
bhāvitvāt
—
because it was destined
Bhāvitva = the state of being-going-to-be. A standard Sanskrit philosophical noun for inevitability. Gauḍīyas note: even the Lord respects the unfolding of karma-niyama within His own līlā.
-
kuśa-agreṇa
—
with the tip of kuśa grass
Kuśa (sacred sharp grass used in yajña) + agra (tip). The Bhāgavatam underlines the disproportion — sūkṣma instrument, decisive effect. The Lord's daṇḍa is proportional only to His will, not to His tool.
-
kara-sthena
—
held in His hand
Kara (hand) + stha (resting). Anything that rests in the Lord's hand is His āyudha. The flute, the cakra, the kuśa — He differentiates them; we should not.
-
ahanat
—
He killed
Imperfect of √han. The deed is direct. No agent, no proxy. The Lord Himself executes the daṇḍa, in front of the very sages whose protocol was breached.
Śrīla Prabhupāda writes: “Lord Balarāma had avoided taking part in the Battle of Kurukṣetra, and yet because of His position as an incarnation, the reestablishment of religious principles was His prime duty. Considering these points, He killed Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a kuśa straw, which was nothing but a blade of grass. If someone questions how Lord Balarāma could kill Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a blade of kuśa grass, the answer is given in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam by the use of the word prabhu, ‘master.’ The Lord’s position is always transcendental, and because He is omnipotent He can act as He likes without being obliged to follow the material laws and principles. Thus it was possible for Him to kill Romaharṣaṇa Sūta simply by striking him with a blade of kuśa grass.”
Because there was no means of preventing his death (bhavitvat), he killed him with a piece of kusa grass.
He acted quickly because the sages might forbid killing Romaharṣaṇa. Even though Balarāma had given up killing while he was on pilgrimage, he killed him since his death was inevitable. He killed with a piece of kuśa that he held in his hand while he acted as a brahmacārī while going on pilgrimage. How could touching him with a tip of kuśa kill him? Balarāma was capable of everything (prabhuḥ).
A blade of kuśa grass — the same grass laid out as the seat of fire-sacrifices — becomes the weapon. The Lord uses no club here, no cakra; the gentlest thing on the yajña-ground takes Romaharṣaṇa's life. The choice of instrument is itself the teaching: even a blade of grass, when held by the Lord, is sufficient daṇḍa.
My note
Source: vedabase.io