కోమటి సాక్ష్యం

komati sakshyam

Translation

A merchant's testimony

Meaning

This expression is used to describe a statement or evidence that is intentionally vague, non-committal, or deceptive. Just as a merchant might avoid taking a firm side to protect their business interests, 'Komati Sakshyam' refers to a testimony where the speaker avoids giving a direct answer or tries to please both parties without revealing the truth.

Related Phrases

The faith of a Kômaṭi. Faithlessness.

This expression refers to a double-edged or unreliable trust. It is used to describe a situation where someone's loyalty or commitment is solely dependent on their own profit or benefit, suggesting that their allegiance may shift as soon as the circumstances are no longer advantageous to them.

For Lakshmayya who eats ten sweets, is one sweet a matter of concern?

This proverb is used to describe a person who handles large challenges or massive tasks effortlessly, implying that a minor version of that task is trivial for them. It plays on the name 'Lakshmayya' and the word 'Lakshyam' (target/concern). It is similar to saying 'A person used to dealing with thousands won't blink at a single rupee.'

A Kômaṭi's truth.

This expression refers to a 'truth' that is ambiguous, non-committal, or deceptive. It is used to describe a situation where someone gives a diplomatic or evasive answer that seems honest but hides the actual facts to avoid trouble or profit-seeking, much like the stereotypical cleverness attributed to traditional traders.

A Kômaṭi's evidence. A story is told of a Kômaṭi who, when asked to identify a horse about which a Mussalman and Hindu were quarrelling, said the forepart of it looked like the Mussalman's horse and the hindpart like the Hindu's.

This expression refers to a statement or testimony that is ambiguous, non-committal, or clever enough to avoid taking a definitive side. It is used to describe a situation where someone speaks in a way that protects their own interests while technically answering a question, often leaving the listener in confusion.

For the illiterate Virupaksha Deekshita, are twenty-one sweets a challenge?

This expression is used to describe someone who lacks knowledge or skill in a particular area but excels in consumption or simple physical tasks. It highlights a contrast between a lack of intellectual depth ('illiterate') and a huge appetite or capacity for material indulgence. It is often used sarcastically to refer to someone who is more interested in eating than learning.

Like the burning of a Kômaṭi's house. A heavy loss.

This expression is used to describe a situation where someone experiences a significant loss or problem but chooses to remain silent or suffers in secret without crying out for help, usually to avoid revealing their hidden wealth or secrets. It implies a quiet or concealed catastrophe.

For a person with an empty/illiterate stomach like Virupaksha Dikshita, is eating twenty-one sweets even a challenge?

This proverb is used to describe a person who is uneducated or lacks intellectual depth (nirakshara kukshi) but has an insatiable appetite or a singular focus on material consumption. It suggests that for someone who doesn't spend time on learning or refinement, performing a task of indulgence—like eating a large number of sweets—is effortless and of no consequence.

A rat testifying for a cat.

This proverb is used to describe a situation where a culprit or an untrustworthy person produces a witness who is equally biased, unreliable, or under their control. It signifies a deceptive alliance where the witness is unlikely to speak the truth against the perpetrator.

The cat a witness in the rat's case. Interested evidence. A fox should not be of the jury at a goose trial.

This expression is used to describe a situation where two parties who are naturally biased or complicit with each other stand as witnesses for one another. It implies that the testimony is untrustworthy because both parties have a mutual interest or are equally corrupt, much like how a cat and mouse 'working together' would be an absurdity or a conspiracy.

For virtue, the deed itself is the witness; for a well, the water is the witness.

This proverb emphasizes that truth and character don't require external proof; their results speak for themselves. Just as the presence of water proves a well's worth, a person's good deeds or true nature serve as their own evidence.