Shloka 25
षष्ठमध्ययनं नाम तेषां कस्मिन् प्रतिष्ठित: । हतो द्रोणो मया होवं किं मां पार्थ विगर्हसे,धृष्टद्युम्न बोला--'अर्जुन! यज्ञ करना और कराना, वेदोंको पढ़ना और पढ़ाना तथा दान देना और प्रतिग्रह स्वीकार करना-ये छः कर्म ही ब्राह्मणोंके लिये मनीषी पुरुषोंमें प्रसिद्ध हैं। इनमेंसे किस कर्ममें टद्रोणाचार्य प्रतिष्ठित थे। अपने धर्मसे भ्रष्ट होकर उन्होंने क्षत्रिय-धर्मका आश्रय ले रखा था। पार्थ! ऐसी अवस्थामें यदि मैंने ट्रोणाचार्यका वध किया तो तुम इसके लिये मेरी निनदा क्यों करते हो। वह नीच कर्म करनेवाला ब्राह्मण दिव्यास्त्रोंद्रारा हमलोगोंका संहार करता था
dhṛṣṭadyumna uvāca | ṣaṣṭham adhyayanaṃ nāma teṣāṃ kasmin pratiṣṭhitaḥ | hato droṇo mayā hovaṃ kiṃ māṃ pārtha vigarhase ||
Dhṛṣṭadyumna said: “Among them, the ‘sixfold discipline’ is spoken of—on which of those duties was Droṇa truly established? I have slain Droṇa; why, O Pārtha, do you censure me? Having fallen away from his own proper dharma, he had taken refuge in the kṣatriya’s way; and while acting thus, he was destroying us with divine weapons. In such a condition, why should my killing of him be condemned?”
धष्टहुम्न उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames an ethical defense grounded in dharma: when a person abandons their proper role-duty and uses power (here, divine weapons) for destructive ends, opponents may argue that resisting—even by killing in war—can be justified as protection of the community and restoration of order.
After Droṇa’s death, Dhṛṣṭadyumna addresses Arjuna (Pārtha), responding to blame. He argues that Droṇa, though a brāhmaṇa by status, had taken up the warrior’s violent conduct and was annihilating the Pāṇḍavas with celestial weapons; therefore Dhṛṣṭadyumna questions why Arjuna condemns the act of killing him.