Shloka 67
Āṇīmāṇḍavya–Upākhyāna
The Account of Āṇīmāṇḍavya and the Birth of Vidura
अनपत्यतैकपुत्रत्वमित्याहुर्धर्मवादिन: । (चक्षुरेकं च पुत्रश्न अस्ति नास्ति च भारत । चक्षुर्नाशे तनोरनाश: पुत्रनाशे कुलक्षय: ।।) अन्निहोत्रं त्रयीविद्यासंतानमपि चाक्षयम्
anapatyatā ekaputratvam ity āhur dharmavādinaḥ | (cakṣur ekaṃ ca putraś ca asti nāsti ca bhārata | cakṣur nāśe tanor anāśaḥ putranāśe kula-kṣayaḥ ||) agnihotraṃ trayī-vidyā santānam api cākṣayam
Vaiśampāyana sprach: Die Ausleger des Dharma erklären, Kinderlosigkeit sei wie das Haben nur eines einzigen Sohnes. Denn, o Bhārata, Auge und Sohn sind in gewissem Sinne zugleich „vorhanden und nicht vorhanden“: Geht ein Auge verloren, bleibt der Leib bestehen; geht aber der Sohn verloren, so geht das Geschlecht zugrunde. Darum gelten das Agnihotra-Ritual, die Kenntnis der drei Veden und die Nachkommenschaft als unvergängliche Stützen—durch die die Kontinuität und die Pflicht des Hausvaters fortdauern.
वैशम्पायन उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse teaches that the continuity of lineage is a major dharmic concern: losing a son threatens the very survival of the family line, whereas losing an eye does not end the body. Hence progeny, along with Vedic learning and daily ritual (Agnihotra), is treated as an enduring pillar of household dharma.
Vaiśampāyana reports a traditional dharma-based reflection, addressing a ‘Bhārata’ listener, to emphasize why elders equate childlessness with having only one son and why they praise ritual, Vedic knowledge, and progeny as lasting supports for a family’s continuity.