राजधर्मः, दण्डनीतिः, कर्तृत्व-विचारः च
Royal Duty, Lawful Discipline, and the Question of Agency
ईश्वरेण नियुक्तो हि साध्वसाधु च भारत । कुरुते पुरुष: कर्म फलमीश्वरगामि तत्,(१) भारत! यदि प्रेरक ईश्वरको कर्ता माना जाय तब तो यही कहना पड़ेगा कि ईश्वरसे प्रेरित होकर ही मनुष्य शुभ या अशुभ कर्म करता है; अतः उसका फल भी ईश्वरको ही मिलना चाहिये
īśvareṇa niyukto hi sādhv-asādhu ca bhārata | kurute puruṣaḥ karma phalam īśvara-gāmi tat ||
Vyāsa dit : «Ô Bhārata, si l’homme est réellement poussé par le Seigneur, alors il accomplit le bien comme le mal uniquement sous cette impulsion divine ; et, dans ce cas, le fruit de ces actes devrait revenir au Seigneur lui-même.»
व्यास उवाच
The verse argues that if God is taken as the direct instigator of human actions, then moral agency shifts away from the person; consequently, the results (phala) of both good and evil deeds would logically belong to God. This is a critique of attributing all human action to divine compulsion, and it implicitly defends human responsibility in karma.
In the Śānti Parva’s reflective discourse on dharma and conduct, Vyāsa presents a philosophical point to the addressed Bhārata: he frames a logical consequence of the claim that God is the doer/impeller of human deeds, highlighting the ethical problem that would follow regarding ownership of karmic results.