Shloka 37
कर्णनिधनवृत्तान्तनिवेदनम् | Reporting Karṇa’s Fall to Yudhiṣṭhira
जिसकी बुद्धि शुद्ध (निष्काम) है, वह पुरुष यदि अत्यन्त कठोर होकर भी, जैसे अंधे पशुको मार देनेसे बलाक नामक व्याध पुण्यका भागी हुआ था, उसी प्रकार महान् पुण्य प्राप्त कर ले तो कया आश्चर्य है? ।।
kim āścaryaṃ punaḥ mūḍho dharmakāmo hy apaṇḍitaḥ | sumahat prāpnuyāt pāpam āpagāsv iva kauśikaḥ ||
Śrī Kṛṣṇa bersabda: “Lalu apa yang mengherankan bila seorang yang tersesat—meski menginginkan dharma namun tanpa daya-beda—justru menanggung dosa besar, sebagaimana resi Kauśika yang tinggal di pertemuan sungai-sungai terjerat dalam kesalahan berat karena bertindak dalam kebodohan atas nama dharma? Sebaliknya, bila buddhi telah murni dan bebas dari pamrih, bahkan tindakan yang tampak keras dapat berbuah jasa besar—seperti pemburu Bālaka yang memperoleh kebajikan dengan membunuh makhluk yang buta.”
श्रीकृष्ण उवाच
Educational Q&A
Kṛṣṇa contrasts purified, desireless discernment with ignorant moral zeal: a person lacking true wisdom may commit grave wrong while trying to practice dharma, whereas one with a purified, selfless intellect may gain merit even from an outwardly harsh act. The ethical emphasis is on right understanding and inner motive, not merely the external label of “dharma.”
In the Karṇa Parva war context, Kṛṣṇa instructs by citing exempla: the hunter Bālaka, who gained merit by killing a blind beast, and the sage Kauśika at a river-confluence, who incurred great sin through an ignorant act done under the pretense of righteousness. These stories are used to clarify how dharma can be subtle and how ignorance can corrupt seemingly pious action.