Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 57

Ahiṃsā as Threefold Restraint (Mind–Speech–Action) and the Ethics of Consumption

यदि पुत्रसमं शिष्य॑ गुरुहन्यादकारणे । आत्मन: कामकारेण सोऊपि हिंस्र: प्रजायते

yadi putrasamaṁ śiṣyaṁ gurur hanyād akāraṇe | ātmanaḥ kāmakāreṇa so 'pi hiṁsraḥ prajāyate ||

Disse Yudhiṣṭhira: Se um mestre, movido por seu próprio capricho e desejo, matasse um discípulo que é como um filho, e sem justa causa, então esse mestre também se torna um homem violento. A autoridade não santifica a crueldade: até um guru incorre em culpa moral quando age por impulso egoísta e não segundo o dharma.

यदिif
यदि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootयदि
पुत्रसमम्equal to a son
पुत्रसमम्:
Karma
TypeAdjective
Rootपुत्र-सम
FormMasculine, Accusative, Singular
शिष्यम्disciple
शिष्यम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootशिष्य
FormMasculine, Accusative, Singular
गुरुःteacher
गुरुः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootगुरु
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
हन्यात्should kill / were to kill
हन्यात्:
TypeVerb
Rootहन्
FormOptative (Vidhi-lin), 3rd, Singular, Parasmaipada
अकारणेwithout cause; in the absence of a reason
अकारणे:
Adhikarana
TypeNoun
Rootअ-कारण
FormNeuter, Locative, Singular
आत्मनःof oneself
आत्मनः:
TypeNoun
Rootआत्मन्
FormMasculine, Genitive, Singular
कामकारेणby acting according to desire; by whim
कामकारेण:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootकाम-कार
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular
सःhe
सः:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
अपिalso; even
अपि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootअपि
हिंस्रःviolent; harmful
हिंस्रः:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootहिंस्र
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
प्रजायतेis born; becomes
प्रजायते:
TypeVerb
Rootप्र-जा
FormPresent (Lat), 3rd, Singular, Atmanepada

युधिछिर उवाच

Y
Yudhiṣṭhira
G
guru
Ś
śiṣya

Educational Q&A

Even a guru is not above dharma: killing a disciple without just cause, out of personal desire or whim, makes the teacher culpable and morally ‘violent’. Legitimate authority cannot excuse adharma.

Yudhiṣṭhira is articulating an ethical principle within the Anuśāsana Parva’s instruction on right conduct: he frames a conditional case about a guru harming a disciple to clarify that unjustified violence—especially by one entrusted with care—corrupts the doer.