Shloka 2.61.26

कौसल्याविलापः — Kausalya’s Lament and Ethical Analogies on Kingship

Devanagari script

द्विजातिचरितो धर्मश्शास्त्रदृष्टस्सनातनः।यदि ते धर्मनिरते त्वया पुत्रे विवासिते।।2.61.26।।

Transliteration

dvijāticarito dharmaḥ śāstradṛṣṭaḥ sanātanaḥ | yadi te dharmanirate tvayā putre vivāsite || 2.61.26 ||

Translation

If the eternal dharma—seen in the śāstras and practiced by the twice-born—truly stands with you, how could you have banished your son who is devoted to righteousness?

Context

You have banished your son who is devoted to righteousness. Is it in accordance with the scriptures and the eternal tradition followed by the twice-born?

Characters & Entities

• Dharma
• Śāstra
• Rāma
• Daśaratha
• Dvijāti (twice-born)

FAQs

What is the core ethical principle (Dharma) in this verse?

Dharma must align with śāstra and enduring moral tradition; banishing a dharma-devoted son is presented as incompatible with that standard, implying that ‘dharma’ cannot be invoked to justify an act that contradicts its own scriptural-ethical foundations.

What is the narrative situation?

Kausalyā challenges Daśaratha’s justification of the exile, questioning whether his decision can truly be called dharmic according to śāstric norms.

Which character virtue is emphasized?

Rāma’s steadfastness in dharma (dharmanirata) is foregrounded as the key reason the exile appears ethically indefensible.