iti saha vidureṇa viśva-mūrter
iti saha vidureṇa viśva-mūrter
guṇa-kathayā sudhayā plāvitorutāpaḥ
kṣaṇam iva puline yamasvasus tāṁ
samuṣita aupagavir niśāṁ tato ’gāt
Śukadeva said: Removing his great pain by conversing about the sweet qualities of the Lord with Vidura, Uddhava spent the night, which passed like a moment, on the bank of the Yamunā and then departed in the morning.
He remained for the night which passed like a moment. Uddhava is a descendent of Aupagava and is thus called Aupagavi. He left the next morning (tataḥ).
|| 3.4.28 ||
rājovāca
nidhanam upagateṣu vṛṣṇi-bhojeṣv
adhiratha-yūthapa-yūthapeṣu mukhyaḥ
sa tu katham avaśiṣṭa uddhavo yad
dharir api tatyaja ākṛtiṁ tryadhīśaḥ
Parīkṣit said: How could Uddhava, the chief among the heads of groups of leaders of charioteer groups among the Vṛṣnis and Bhojas, who had attained nearness to the Lord, remain alone? But the Lord, remover of sorrows, avoided giving any counter orders.
Since even the Lord, master of the three worlds, completely (ā) gave up his pastimes (kṛtim), ended his prakaṭa pastimes, how did Uddhava remain?
Nidhanam upagateṣu vṛṣṇi-bhojeṣv superficially means “When the Vṛṣṇis and Bhojas met destruction.” However the real meaning is when the Vṛṣṇis and Bhojas attained nearness (upa) to Kṛṣṇa, their complete treasure, their all in all (nidhanam). It is not proper that he, even in one portion, should remain alone to experience the pain of separation from Kṛṣṇa. One should not think that he was not a Vṛṣṇis, for it is said, among them, he alone remained. How could he avoid the Lord’s order to go to Badarikāśrama? That is explained here. Though the Lord is the remover of all suffering (hariḥ), he avoided indicating other purposes (ākṛtim) to him. To the gopīs he said tad yāta mā ciraṁ goṣṭhaṁ śuśrūṣadhvaṁ patīn satīḥ: now go back to the cowherd village, without delay, O chaste ladies, and serve your husbands. (SB 10.29.22) If he would have given some hint to the contrary to the gopīs when he gave this order, then Uddhava, most intelligent, would not have gone to Badarikāśrama. He would have stayed with the Lord.
|| 3.4.29 ||
|
