Shloka 22
Parīkṣit Confronts Kali: Dharma (Bull) and Bhūmi (Cow) at the Dawn of Kali-yuga
राजोवाच धर्मं ब्रवीषि धर्मज्ञ धर्मोऽसि वृषरूपधृक् । यदधर्मकृत: स्थानं सूचकस्यापि तद्भवेत् ॥ २२ ॥
rājovāca dharmaṁ bravīṣi dharma-jña dharmo ’si vṛṣa-rūpa-dhṛk yad adharma-kṛtaḥ sthānaṁ sūcakasyāpi tad bhavet
রাজা বললেন—হে ধর্মজ্ঞ! তুমি ধর্মই বলছ; বৃষরূপধারী তুমি স্বয়ং ধর্ম। তুমি সেই ন্যায় উচ্চারণ করছ যে অধর্মকারীর যে গতি/দণ্ড, অপরাধীকে চিহ্নিতকারীরও তাই হয়।
A devotee’s conclusion is that no one is directly responsible for being a benefactor or mischief-monger without the sanction of the Lord; therefore he does not consider anyone to be directly responsible for such action. But in both the cases he takes it for granted that either benefit or loss is God-sent, and thus it is His grace. In case of benefit, no one will deny that it is God-sent, but in case of loss or reverses one becomes doubtful about how the Lord could be so unkind to His devotee as to put him in great difficulty. Jesus Christ was seemingly put into such great difficulty, being crucified by the ignorant, but he was never angry at the mischief-mongers. That is the way of accepting a thing, either favorable or unfavorable. Thus for a devotee the identifier is equally a sinner, like the mischief-monger. By God’s grace, the devotee tolerates all reverses. Mahārāja Parīkṣit observed this, and therefore he could understand that the bull was no other than the personality of religion himself. In other words, a devotee has no suffering at all because so-called suffering is also God’s grace for a devotee who sees God in everything. The cow and bull never placed any complaint before the King for being tortured by the personality of Kali, although everyone lodges such complaints before the state authorities. The extraordinary behavior of the bull made the King conclude that the bull was certainly the personality of religion, for no one else could understand the finer intricacies of the codes of religion.
FAQs
This verse shows that Dharma himself appears (as a bull) and that a righteous king like Parīkṣit carefully considers justice, even hesitating when revealing a wrongdoer could bring karmic consequence.
Parīkṣit recognized the bull as Dharma and asked about the difficulty of punishing wrongdoing when the victim refuses to name the offender, noting the idea that even an accuser may share in the consequences.
It teaches careful, principled action: seek truth without malice, avoid impulsive blame, and uphold righteousness while remaining aware of one’s own responsibility in speech and judgment.