Shloka 2.109.7
सत्यधर्मप्रतिपादनम् (Rama’s Defense of Truth and Dharma in Reply to Jabali)
अनार्यस्त्वार्यसङ्काश श्शौचाद्दीनस्ताथाऽशुचिः।लक्षण्यवदलक्षण्यो दुश्शीलश्शीलवानिव।।2.109.5।।अधर्मं धर्मवेशेण यदीमं लोकसङ्कुरम्।अभिपत्स्ये शुभं हित्वा क्रियाविधिविवर्जितम्।।2.109.6।।कश्चेतयानः पुरुषः कार्याकार्यविचक्षणः।बहुमंस्यति मां लोके दुर्वृत्तं लोकदूषणम्।।2.109.7।।
na nāstikānāṃ vacanaṃ bravīmy ahaṃ na nāstiko'haṃ na ca nāsti kiñcana |
samīkṣya kālaṃ punar āstiko'bhavaṃ bhaveya kāle punar eva nāstikaḥ || 2.109.38 ||
I do not truly proclaim the doctrine of the faithless; I am not an atheist (nāstika), nor do I deny anything. Considering the time and occasion, I became a believer again; at another time, by circumstance, I might speak otherwise.
If like a man who appears noble, though ignoble, clean, though unclean or dishonest, auspicious, though inauspicious, a man of character, though depraved, I forsake auspicious ways for unrighteousness, abandon pious acts and scriptural practices and indulge, under the cloak of dharma, in acts of wickedness by causing harm and confusion to the world, will any sensible man with a sense of discrimination between should and should not hold me in high esteem?
Speech should align with dharma and satya; the verse also raises the ethical problem of opportunistic rhetoric that shifts with circumstances.
Jābāli defends himself after Rāma’s rebuke, claiming his earlier nāstika-sounding counsel was situational rather than his true conviction.
Pragmatic persuasion (as portrayed by Jābāli), contrasted implicitly with Rāma’s insistence on principled consistency.