Shloka 2

जानता वै परं धर्म वसिष्ठेन महात्मना । अगम्यागमनं कस्मात्‌ कृतं तेन महर्षिणा,तथा उत्तम धर्मके ज्ञाता महात्मा महर्षि वसिष्ठने यह परस्त्रीगमनका पाप कैसे किया?

jānatā vai paraṃ dharmaṃ vasiṣṭhena mahātmanā | agamyāgamanam kasmāt kṛtaṃ tena maharṣiṇā ||

Arjuna said: “Vasiṣṭha, that great-souled sage, truly knew the highest dharma. Why, then, did that maharṣi commit the act of approaching what should not be approached—an unlawful sexual transgression? How could one who understands the supreme law fall into such a sin?”

जानताknowing
जानता:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootजानत् (√ज्ञा)
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
वैindeed
वै:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootवै
परम्supreme
परम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootपर
FormMasculine/Neuter, Accusative, Singular
धर्मम्dharma, righteousness
धर्मम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootधर्म
FormMasculine, Accusative, Singular
वसिष्ठेनby Vasiṣṭha
वसिष्ठेन:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootवसिष्ठ
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular
महात्मनाby the great-souled one
महात्मना:
Karana
TypeAdjective
Rootमहात्मन्
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular
अगम्यnot to be approached, forbidden
अगम्य:
TypeAdjective
Rootअगम्य
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
आगमनम्approach, going (to)
आगमनम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootआगमन
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
कस्मात्from what cause? why?
कस्मात्:
TypePronoun
Rootकिम्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Ablative, Singular
कृतम्done, committed
कृतम्:
TypeVerb
Rootकृत (√कृ)
FormPerfective (past participle), Singular
तेनby him
तेन:
Karana
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular
महर्षिणाby the great sage
महर्षिणा:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootमहर्षि
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular

अजुन उवाच

A
Arjuna
V
Vasiṣṭha

Educational Q&A

The verse raises a classic dharma-question: even a knower of the highest moral law may appear to commit a grave transgression, prompting inquiry into context, intention, compulsion, and the complexity of ethical judgment in epic narrative.

Arjuna voices astonishment and doubt: since the sage Vasiṣṭha is renowned as a master of dharma, Arjuna asks why he performed an act described as ‘agamya-āgamanam’—approaching what is forbidden—framing the episode as a moral puzzle that demands explanation.