महाप्राज्ञ: सौमकिर्यज्ञसेन: कन्यां पाज्चालीं पाण्डवेभ्य: प्रदाय | अकार्षीद् वै सुकृतं नेह किंचित् क्लीबा: पार्था: पतयो याज्ञसेन्या:
mahāprājñaḥ saumikir yajñasenaḥ kanyāṃ pāñcālīṃ pāṇḍavebhyaḥ pradāya | akārsīd vai sukṛtaṃ neha kiṃcit klībāḥ pārthāḥ patayo yājñasenyāḥ ||
Vaiśampāyana berkata: “Walaupun Yajñasena (Drupada) sangat bijaksana, dia tidak melakukan kebajikan yang benar-benar besar dengan menyerahkan puterinya Pāñcālī kepada para Pāṇḍava; kerana putera-putera Pṛthā (para Pārtha), suami Yajñasenī, disebut di sini sebagai ‘tidak berdaya’—celaan yang keras, lebih menggambarkan kehinaan dan ketidakmampuan mereka pada saat itu daripada suatu penghakiman muktamad terhadap nilai diri mereka.”
वैशम्पायन उवाच
The verse highlights how public honor and perceived capability shape ethical judgments in royal politics: a marriage alliance is praised as ‘meritorious’ only when it upholds dignity and strength; when the recipients are viewed as powerless or disgraced, the same act is condemned, showing the tension between dharma, reputation, and political prudence.
In the context of the Sabha Parva’s courtly conflict and humiliation, the narrator reports a severe disparagement: Drupada’s act of giving Draupadī to the Pāṇḍavas is criticized as not being a ‘good deed,’ because the Pāṇḍavas—Draupadī’s husbands—are derided as ‘klība’ (powerless/impotent), reflecting their current dishonor and vulnerability.