Ahiṃsā as Threefold Restraint (Mind–Speech–Action) and the Ethics of Consumption
यदि गुरु अपने पुत्रके समान शिष्यको बिना कारणके ही मारता-पीटता है तो वह अपनी स्वेच्छा-चारिताके कारण हिंसक पशुकी योनिमें जन्म लेता है ।।
yadi guruḥ svaputrasamaṁ śiṣyaṁ akāraṇenaiva mārati tāḍayati vā, sa svacchandacāritvāt hiṁsaka-paśu-yoniṁ prāpnoti. pitaraṁ mātaraṁ caiva yastu putro ’vamanyate, so ’pi rājan mṛto janantuḥ pūrvaṁ jāyeta gardabhaḥ.
Bila seorang guru memperlakukan murid seperti anaknya sendiri namun memukulnya tanpa alasan yang benar, maka karena bertindak semata menurut kemauan diri, ia jatuh ke kelahiran sebagai hewan buas. Demikian pula, wahai Raja, anak yang menghina ayah dan ibunya, setelah mati mula-mula terlahir sebagai keledai.
युधिछिर उवाच
Authority must be exercised according to dharma: a teacher should not punish a disciple arbitrarily, and a son must honor father and mother. Unjust violence and filial contempt are portrayed as grave ethical failures that lead to degrading rebirths.
Yudhiṣṭhira addresses a king and cites moral consequences: an unjustly violent teacher falls into an animal birth, and a son who dishonors his parents is reborn first as a donkey. The statement functions as a didactic warning within Anuśāsana Parva’s ethical instruction.