Shloka 11
Bhīṣma–Śiśupāla-saṃvādaḥ
Bhishma and Shishupala’s exchange in the assembly
यस्य चानेन धर्मज्ञ भुक्तमन्नं बलीयस: । स चानेन हतः कंस इत्येतन्न महाद्भुतम्,धर्मज्ञ भीष्म! जिस महाबली कंसका अन्न खाकर यह पला था, उसीको इसने मार डाला। यह भी इसके लिये कोई बड़ी अदभुत बात नहीं है
yasya cānena dharmajña bhuktam annaṃ balīyasaḥ | sa cānena hataḥ kaṃsa ity etan na mahādbhūtam, dharmajña bhīṣma ||
シシュパーラは言った。「おお、ダルマを知る者よ。この男はかつて、剛力のカンサ（Kaṃsa）の食を受けて生きながらえた。しかるに、そのカンサを自ら討ったのだ。これしきのこと、ダルマを知るビーシュマ（Bhīṣma）よ、格別に驚くには当たらぬ。」
शिशुपाल उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames an ethical accusation: benefiting from someone’s support (eating his food) and then killing him is presented as not a miracle but a morally questionable act. Śiśupāla uses this to undermine the opponent’s glory by recasting heroism as ingratitude or opportunism.
In the royal assembly, Śiśupāla attacks Kṛṣṇa’s reputation. Addressing Bhīṣma as a judge of dharma, he argues that Kṛṣṇa’s slaying of Kaṃsa is not extraordinary because Kṛṣṇa had earlier lived under Kaṃsa’s provision, and then killed him—an act Śiśupāla portrays as unsurprising and blameworthy.