Shloka 4.18.39
वाली–रामसंवादः (Rama’s Justification to Vali on Rājadharma)
प्रधावितान्वा वित्रस्तान्विस्रब्धांश्चापि निष्ठितान्।।प्रमत्तानप्रमत्तान्वा नरा मांसार्थिनो भृशम्।विध्यन्ति विमुखांश्चापि न च दोषोऽत्र विद्यते।।
pradhāvitān vā vitrastān visrabdhāṃś cāpi niṣṭhitān || pramattān apramattān vā narā māṃsārthino bhṛśam | vidhyanti vimukhāṃś cāpi na ca doṣo ’tra vidyate ||
Men who seek flesh strike down animals—whether they are running, frightened, trusting, or standing still; whether heedless or wary, even when turned away. In such a case, no fault is recognized here.
'People seeking animal flesh for food kill animals alarmed or unalarmed, animals that run away or animals that stand still. They kill animals whether they are alert or not and no blemish is attached.
The verse appeals to normative ethics and customary law: if method-based killing in hunting is socially permitted without blame, then method alone cannot be the decisive ground for condemning Rama’s act.
Rama completes the hunting analogy, asserting that striking from an advantageous position does not automatically constitute adharma.
Rational defense of conduct—Rama frames dharma as consistent with established practice and reasoned comparison.