Shloka 2
Aṣṭāvakra–Strī-saṃvāda: Dhṛti, hospitality, and a dispute on autonomy
आर्ष एष भवेद् धर्म: प्राजापत्यो5थवा55सुर: । यदेतत् सहधर्मेति पूर्वमुक्ते महर्षिभि:,महर्षियोंने पूर्वकालमें जो यह स्त्री-पुरुषोंके सहधर्मकी बात कही है, यह आर्ष धर्म है या प्राजापत्य धर्म; अथवा आसुर धर्म है?
Yudhiṣṭhira uvāca: ārṣa eṣa bhaved dharmaḥ prājāpatyo ’thavā ’suraḥ | yad etat sahadharmeti pūrvam ukte maharṣibhiḥ ||
Yudhiṣṭhira sprach: „Diese Regel der Dharma — die die großen Seher einst als ‘gemeinsame Pflicht’ (sahadharma) von Frau und Mann bezeichneten — welcher Art von Dharma ist sie? Ist es die ārṣa-Form, von den ṛṣi gebilligt, oder die prājāpatya-Form, von Prajāpati verordnet, oder ist es die āsura-Form?“
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames an ethical inquiry: when a practice is called ‘sahadharma’ (shared duty of spouses), it must be evaluated by authoritative dharma-categories (ārṣa, prājāpatya, āsura). Yudhiṣṭhira seeks to determine whether the practice is truly seer-approved and orderly, or tainted by coercive/āsura elements.
In Anuśāsana Parva’s instruction on dharma, Yudhiṣṭhira questions the classification of a previously stated rule about the joint obligations of man and woman. He asks which recognized dharma-type it belongs to, inviting a clarifying response from the teacher in the discourse.