Shloka 36
आपद्धर्मे वैश्यवृत्तिः, विक्रय-निषेधाः, तथा ब्रह्म-क्षत्र-सम्बन्धः
Emergency Livelihood, Prohibited Trade, and Brahman–Kshatra Regulation
ब्राह्मणो यदि वा वैश्य: शूद्रो वा राजसत्तम । दस्युभ्यो5थ प्रजा रक्षेद् दण्डं धर्मेण धारयन्,युधिष्ठिरने पूछा--पितामह! नृपश्रेष्ठ!ी यदि डाकुओंका दल उत्तरोत्तर बढ़ रहा हो, समाजमें वर्णसंकरता फैल रही हो और क्षत्रियके प्रजापालनरूपी कार्यके लिये समस्त वर्णोके लोग कोई उपाय न हढूँढ़ पाते हों, उस अवस्थामें यदि कोई बलवान ब्राह्मण, वैश्य अथवा शाद्र धर्मकी रक्षाके निमित्त दण्ड धारण करके लुटेरोंके हाथसे प्रजाको बचा ले तो वह राजशासनका कार्य कर सकता है या नहीं। अथवा उसे इस कार्यसे रोकना चाहिये या नहीं? मेरा तो मत है कि क्षत्रियसे भिन्न वर्णके लोगोंको भी ऐसे अवसरोंपर अवश्य शस्त्र उठाना चाहिये
brāhmaṇo yadi vā vaiśyaḥ śūdro vā rājasattama | dasyubhyo 'tha prajā rakṣed daṇḍaṃ dharmeṇa dhārayan ||
Yudhiṣṭhira said: “O best of kings, if a Brahmin, or a Vaiśya, or even a Śūdra—upholding the rod of punishment in accordance with dharma—were to protect the people from bands of robbers, would such a person be acting rightly? In a time when marauders multiply and social order is endangered, and when no effective remedy is found for the Kṣatriya’s duty of protecting the subjects, is it proper that a strong man from another class take up coercive authority for the sake of safeguarding dharma and rescuing the populace from plunder?”
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames an ethical question about emergency governance: when the Kṣatriya function of protecting society fails, can non-Kṣatriyas legitimately wield daṇḍa (coercive punishment) to defend the people—provided it is done in accordance with dharma.
In the Śānti Parva dialogue, Yudhiṣṭhira raises a practical dilemma to the elder authority: with robbers increasing and social stability threatened, he asks whether a capable Brahmin, Vaiśya, or Śūdra may take up righteous punitive power to protect the populace from marauders.