Gopalacampu 1.11.85

1.11.85

[1] atha paredyavi ca kathā prathate sma, [2] yathā snigdhakaṇṭha uvāca-yadyapi kālenālpena [BhP 10.8.26] ityādi-rītyā varṣa-traya-traya-paryāyeṇa tayor vayo-gaṇanā nirṇītā, tathāpi kaumāraṃ tu varṣam ekam adhikam adhirūḍham, bāla-vatsānāṃ śrīvatsa-vatsasya ca mitho vatsara-viraha-mayānullāsena vyatīta-kṣaṇa-maya-saṃvatsara-kāla-bāla-vatsānurodhena vā tasya stabdhībhāvāt | [3] tatas tad-bhāvānugāmitayā rāmasya ca tathā vṛttaṃ sutarām eva vṛttam | tad-anantaram akhaṇḍaṃ paugaṇḍaṃ tu varṣa-dvayenaivāpūryata, cirāl labdha-bandhu-saṃvāsena samyag ullāsena jhaṭiti kaiśora-ghaṭanāt | tathā ca prathāṃ karavāma dhenuka-vadhāvama-dhāma-gamanānte | tad evam eva saṅgacchate kālenālpena ityādi |

Now on the next day, the story unfolded. As Snigdhakaṇṭha said: “Although according to the manner of ‘in a short time’ and so forth, their age is calculated in successive periods of three years each, nevertheless early childhood (kaumāra) extended by one additional year, because the boy-calves and Śrīvatsa-vatsa experienced a lack of joy due to their mutual year-long separation, or because of His staying frozen [in age] out of deference to the young calves for whom that year-long period had passed like a moment. Therefore, Rāma's condition naturally conformed to that state as well. Thereafter, unbroken boyhood (paugaṇḍa) was completed in just two years, because youth (kaiśora) quickly arrived due to the full surge of joy from living together with friends found after so long. And we will explain this at the conclusion of the departure to the lower realm upon the killing of Dhenuka. Thus does ‘in a short time’ and so forth hold together correctly.