Shloka 7
तदनन्तर उसने वेदोक्त धर्म, शास्त्रोक्त धर्म तथा शिष्ट पुरुषोंद्वारा आचरित धर्म--इन तीन प्रकारके धर्मोंपर मन-ही-मन विचार करना आरम्भ किया-- ।। किन्नु मे स्याच्छुभं कृत्वा कि कृतं कि परायणम् । इत्येवं खिद्यते नित्यं न च याति विनिश्चयम,क्या करनेसे मेरा कल्याण होगा? मेरा क्या कर्तव्य है तथा कौन मेरे लिये परम आश्रय है?” इस प्रकार वह सदा सोचते-सोचते खिन्न हो जाता था; परंतु किसी निर्णयपर नहीं पहुँच पाता था
tadanantaraṃ sa vedokta-dharmaṃ śāstrokta-dharmaṃ tathā śiṣṭa-puruṣair ācarita-dharmaṃ—ime trayaḥ prakārā dharmāḥ—manasā vicārayitum ārabdhavān। kintu me syāc chubhaṃ kṛtvā kiṃ kṛtaṃ kiṃ parāyaṇam। ityevaṃ khidyate nityaṃ na ca yāti viniścayam॥
Sesudah itu ia mulai merenung dalam batin tentang tiga macam dharma: dharma menurut Weda, dharma menurut śāstra, dan dharma yang dijalankan para śiṣṭa. Namun ia tetap gelisah, senantiasa bertanya: “Perbuatan apa yang membawa kebaikan bagiku? Apa kewajibanku? Dan siapakah perlindungan tertinggiku?” Demikian ia letih oleh pertimbangan tanpa henti, tetapi tak juga sampai pada keputusan yang teguh.
भीष्म उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights a classic dharma-problem: even after consulting multiple authorities—Veda, śāstra, and the lived conduct of exemplary people—one may still struggle to determine what is truly beneficial, what one ought to do, and what constitutes the highest refuge. It points to the complexity of ethical discernment and the need for a settled inner clarity (viniścaya).
In Bhīṣma’s discourse of the Śānti Parva, a person (implicitly a seeker of right conduct) is described as turning inward to evaluate three recognized sources of dharma. Despite sustained reflection, he remains mentally fatigued and unable to reach a firm conclusion about his duty and ultimate support.