Shloka 16
नैव सम प्रतिजानाति ब्रह्मवध्यां स्वयंकृताम् । मम क्रात्रा कृतमिदं मया स परिमोक्षित:,अर्वावसु किसी तरह उस ब्रह्महत्याको अपनी की हुई स्वीकार नहीं करते थे। उन्होंने बार-बार यही बतानेकी चेष्टा की कि "मेरे भाईने ब्रह्महत्या की है। मैंने तो प्रायश्षित्त करके उन्हें पापसे छुड़ाया है”
naiva saṃ pratijānāti brahmavadhyāṃ svayaṃkṛtām | mama bhrātrā kṛtam idaṃ mayā sa parimokṣitaḥ ||
He would not at all admit that the brahma-slaying was his own deed. Again and again he tried to make this point: “This act was done by my brother; I have performed the expiation and have freed him from the sin.” The statement underscores an ethical tension—between accepting personal responsibility and attempting to shift culpability while claiming the merit of atonement.
लोगश उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights the moral necessity of truthful acknowledgment of wrongdoing and the limits of shifting blame. Even when expiation (prāyaścitta) is claimed, ethical integrity requires owning one’s actions rather than disowning them while asserting the credit of purification.
A speaker reports that a person refuses to accept that the brahma-slaying was his own act. He repeatedly insists that his brother committed it, and that he (the speaker/person) performed expiation and thereby freed the brother from the sin.