Shloka 29
यदिधर्मोभवेद्भूतअधर्मोवापरन्तप ।न स्महत्वामुनिंवज्रीकुर्यादिज्यांशतक्रतुः ।।6.83.29।।
yadi dharmo bhaved bhūta adharmo vā parantapa | na sma hatvā muniṃ vajrī kuryād ijyāṃ śata-kratuḥ ||6.83.29||
പരന്തപാ! ധർമ്മം മാത്രമേ യഥാർത്ഥത്തിൽ പ്രബലമായിരുന്നുള്ളൂ—അല്ലെങ്കിൽ അധർമ്മം തന്നെ പ്രബലമായിരുന്നാലും—വജ്രധാരി ഇന്ദ്രൻ, ശതക്രതു, മുനിയെ വധിച്ചിട്ടും യജ്ഞം നടത്തുകയില്ലായിരുന്നു.
"Indra killed an ascetic (Viswarupa) and did fire sacrifice. If dharma alone is his duty, he could have done hundreds of fire sacrifices and not have killed the ascetic. If adharma is duty he would have killed the ascetic and not done fire sacrifice."
FAQs
The verse argues that real-world (and mythic) conduct mixes seemingly contradictory acts; therefore dharma cannot be reduced to a simplistic, uniform rule.
To persuade Rāma, the speaker cites Indra as an example of a figure associated with sacrifice who also commits violence, implying that outcomes and duties are morally complex.
Argumentative intelligence—using precedent and exempla to critique moral absolutism.