Shloka 17
ययाति–शक्रसंवादः
Speech-Ethics and Forbearance in the Celestial Court
पृष्टं तु साक्ष्ये प्रवदन्तमन्य था वदन्ति मिथ्या पतितं नरेन्द्र । एकार्थतायां तु समाहितायां मिथ्या वदन्तं त्वनृतं हिनस्ति,महाराज! किसी निर्दोष प्राणीका प्राण बचानेके लिये गवाही देते समय किसीके पूछनेपर अन्यथा (असत्य) भाषण करनेवालेको यदि कोई पतित कहता है तो उसका कथन मिथ्या है। परंतु जहाँ अपने और दूसरे दोनोंके ही प्राण बचानेका प्रसंग उपस्थित हो, वहाँ केवल अपने प्राण बचानेके लिये मिथ्या बोलनेवालेका असत्यभाषण उसका नाश कर देता है
pṛṣṭaṃ tu sākṣye pravadantam anyathā vadanti mithyā patitaṃ narendra | ekārthatāyāṃ tu samāhitāyāṃ mithyā vadantaṃ tv anṛtaṃ hinasti ||
Vaiśampāyana said: “O king, if, when questioned while giving testimony, a person speaks otherwise than the fact in order to save the life of an innocent being, and someone calls him ‘fallen’ (patita), that accusation is itself false. But when the matter is narrowed to a single self-serving aim—when both lives are at stake and one speaks untruth only to save oneself—then that falsehood, that untruth, becomes the cause of his ruin.”
वैशम्पायन उवाच
Educational Q&A
Truthfulness is a central dharma, yet the text recognizes an ethical exception: speaking contrary to fact in testimony to save an innocent life is not to be condemned as ‘falling.’ However, lying from narrow self-interest—especially when choosing one’s own safety at the cost of another—becomes destructive and morally ruinous.
Vaiśampāyana instructs the king on the ethics of witness-bearing (sākṣya). He distinguishes between a compassionate, life-saving deviation from literal truth and a self-centered lie, warning that the latter ‘anṛta’ leads to the speaker’s downfall.