Shloka 7
Aṣṭāvakra–Strī-saṃvāda: Dhṛti, hospitality, and a dispute on autonomy
अनृताः स्त्रिय इत्येवं वेदेष्वपि हि पठ्यते । धर्मो<यं पूर्विका संज्ञा उपचार: क्रियाविधि:,वेदोंमें भी यह बात पढ़ी गयी है कि स्त्रियाँ असत्यभाषिणी होती हैं, ऐसी दशामें उनका वह असत्य भी सहधर्मके अन्तर्गत आ सकता है, किंतु असत्य कभी धर्म नहीं हो सकता; अतः दाम्पत्यधर्मको जो सहधर्म कहा गया है, यह उसकी गौण संज्ञा है। वे पति-पत्नी साथ रहकर जो भी कार्य करते हैं, उसीको उपचारत: धर्म नाम दे दिया गया है
anṛtāḥ striya ity evaṃ vedeṣv api hi paṭhyate | dharmo 'yaṃ pūrvikā saṃjñā upacāraḥ kriyāvidhiḥ ||
Yudhiṣṭhira said: “Indeed, even in the Vedas it is read in this manner: ‘Women are untruthful.’ In such a situation, that untruth of theirs may be treated, by convention, as falling within the sphere of ‘shared duty’ (saha-dharma) in marriage; yet untruth can never truly be dharma. Therefore, calling the marital duty ‘saha-dharma’ is only a secondary, figurative designation. Whatever acts husband and wife perform together according to prescribed conduct are, by convention, spoken of as ‘dharma.’”
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse distinguishes between dharma in its strict sense and dharma as a conventional or figurative label (upacāra). Even if a scriptural statement is cited about women and untruth, falsehood itself is not elevated to true dharma; rather, certain marital practices may be called ‘shared dharma’ only in a secondary, conventional sense.
Yudhiṣṭhira is questioning and refining the ethical meaning of dharma in the context of marriage and scriptural citations. He argues that some terms (like ‘saha-dharma’ for spousal duty) function as secondary designations for jointly performed prescribed acts, not as proof that untruth can become genuine righteousness.