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 ||
ശിശുപാലൻ പറഞ്ഞു—ഹേ ധർമ്മജ്ഞാ! മഹാബലവാൻ കംസന്റെ അന്നം കഴിച്ച് വളർന്നവൻ തന്നെയാണ് ആ കംസനെ കൊന്നത്; ഹേ ധർമ്മജ്ഞ ഭീഷ്മാ! ഇതിൽ പ്രത്യേക അത്ഭുതമൊന്നുമില്ല.
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.