Shloka 19
अपेतं ब्राह्मण वृत्ताद् यो हन्यादाततायिनम् | न तेन ब्रह्महा स स्यान्मन्युस्तन्मन्युमृच्छति
apetaṁ brāhmaṇa-vṛttād yo hanyād ātatāyinam | na tena brahmahā sa syān manyus tan-manyum ṛcchati ||
Vyāsa disse: “Se um homem mata um brāhmaṇa que se desviou da conduta brahmânica e se tornou um ātatāyin—um agressor armado que vem para matar—ele não incorre, por isso, no pecado de brahmahatyā (matar um brāhmaṇa). Nesse caso, é a ira que encontra a ira: a intenção violenta do agressor é respondida com a força necessária para detê-la.”
व्यास उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse distinguishes status from conduct: when a brāhmaṇa abandons brahminical discipline and becomes an armed aggressor (ātatāyin), stopping him—even by killing—does not count as brahmahatyā. Moral culpability is tied to protecting life and upholding dharma against immediate lethal threat.
In the Śānti Parva’s dharma-discourse, Vyāsa addresses a legal-ethical doubt about violence: whether killing a brāhmaṇa can ever be justified. He answers that in the specific case of an ātatāyin attacking with weapons, the defender is not stained with the sin of killing a brāhmaṇa; the aggressor’s wrath is met by necessary counter-force.