Text 49
iti putra-kṛtāghena
so ’nutapto mahā-muniḥ
svayaṁ viprakṛto rājñā
naivāghaṁ tad acintayat
iti — thus; putra — son; kṛta — done by; aghena — by the sin; saḥ — he (the muni); anutaptaḥ — regretting; mahā-muniḥ — the sage; svayam — personally; viprakṛtaḥ — being so insulted; rājñā — by the King; na — not; eva — certainly; agham — the sin; tat — that; acintayat — thought of it.
The sage thus regretted the sin committed by his own son. He did not take the insult paid by the King very seriously.
The whole incident is now cleared up. Mahārāja Parīkṣit’s garlanding the sage with a dead snake was not at all a very serious offense, but Śṛṅgi’s cursing the King was a serious offense. The serious offense was committed by a foolish child only; therefore he deserved to be pardoned by the Supreme Lord, although it was not possible to get free from the sinful reaction. Mahārāja Parīkṣit also did not mind the curse offered to him by a foolish brāhmaṇa. On the contrary, he took full advantage of the awkward situation, and by the great will of the Lord, Mahārāja Parīkṣit achieved the highest perfection of life through the grace of Śrīla Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Actually it was the desire of the Lord, and Mahārāja Parīkṣit, Ṛṣi Śamīka and his son Śṛṅgi were all instrumental in fulfilling the desire of the Lord. So none of them were put into difficulty because everything was done in relation with the Supreme Person.