Shloka 14
Sundopasundayor Digvijayaḥ — The Conquests of Sunda and Upasunda
Nārada’s Account
यदा प्रभृति दग्धास्ते कुन्तिभोजसुतासुता: । तदा प्रभृति गान्धारे न शक््नोम्यभिवीक्षितुम्,गान्धारीकुमार! जबसे मैंने सुना कि कुन्तीके पुत्र लाक्षागृहकी आगमें जल गये तथा कुन्ती भी उसी अवस्थाको प्राप्त हुई है, तभीसे मैं (लज्जाके मारे) जगत॒के किसी भी प्राणीकी ओर आँख उठाकर देख नहीं सकता था। नरश्रेष्ठ] लोग इस कार्यके लिये पुरोचनको उतना दोषी नहीं मानते, जितना तुम्हें दोषी समझते हैं
yadā prabhṛti dagdhās te kuntibhojasutāsutāḥ | tadā prabhṛti gāndhāre na śaknomy abhivīkṣitum, gāndhārīkumāra |
Bhishma disse: «Desde o momento em que ouvi que os filhos de Kuntī—nascidos da linhagem de Kuntibhoja—haviam sido queimados no incêndio da casa de laca, e que Kuntī também tivera o mesmo destino, desde então, por vergonha, não tenho conseguido erguer os olhos para encarar qualquer ser vivo. Os nobres não consideram Purocana tão culpado por esse feito quanto consideram a ti, ó príncipe de Gandhāra.»
भीष्म उवाच
Educational Q&A
Moral responsibility lies most heavily on the instigator, not merely the instrument: Bhishma frames the plot as a shameful adharma and implies that the one who ordered and intended the crime bears greater blame than the hired agent who executed it.
Bhishma addresses a Gandhara prince—Gandhari’s son—after hearing that Kunti and her sons were supposedly burned in the lac-house. He confesses his own shame and states that people consider the prince more culpable than Purochana, the operative associated with the arson plot.