Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 16

Sabhā Parva, Adhyāya 68 — Pāṇḍavānāṃ Vanavāsa-prasthānaḥ; Duḥśāsana-nindā; Pāṇḍava-pratijñāḥ

यदिदं द्रौपदीवाक्यमुक्तवत्यसकृच्छुभा । विमृश्य कस्य कः पक्ष: पार्थिवा वदतोत्तरम्‌,राजाओ! कल्याणी द्रौपदीने बार-बार जिस प्रश्नको दुहराया है, उसपर विचार करके आपलोग उत्तर दें, जिससे मालूम हो जाय कि इस विषयमें किसका क्‍या पक्ष (विचार) है!

yad idaṃ draupadīvākyam uktavaty asakṛc chubhā | vimṛśya kasya kaḥ pakṣaḥ pārthivā vadatottaram, rājāo! |

Вайшампаяна сказал: «Тщательно обдумайте слова благой Драупади — слова, которые она повторяла снова и снова. Затем, о цари, дайте свой ответ, дабы в этом деле стало ясно, какую позицию занимает каждый из вас».

यत्that which
यत्:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootयद्
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
इदम्this
इदम्:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootइदम्
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
द्रौपदी-वाक्यम्Draupadi's statement
द्रौपदी-वाक्यम्:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootद्रौपदी-वाक्य
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
उक्तवतीhaving said / said
उक्तवती:
Karta
TypeVerb
Rootवच्
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular, क्तवतु (past active participle, feminine form)
असकृत्repeatedly
असकृत्:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootअसकृत्
शुभाauspicious (lady)
शुभा:
TypeAdjective
Rootशुभ
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular
विमृश्यhaving considered
विमृश्य:
TypeVerb
Rootमृश्
Formल्यप् (absolutive/gerund), Parasmaipada (usage)
कस्यof whom
कस्य:
TypePronoun
Rootकिम्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Genitive, Singular
कःwhat / which
कः:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootकिम्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
पक्षःside; standpoint
पक्षः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootपक्ष
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
पार्थिवाःO kings
पार्थिवाः:
TypeNoun
Rootपार्थिव
FormMasculine, Vocative, Plural
वदतspeaking; (you) speak
वदत:
TypeVerb
Rootवद्
FormMasculine, Vocative, Plural, शतृ (present active participle)
उत्तरम्answer
उत्तरम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootउत्तर
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular

वैशम्पायन उवाच

V
Vaiśampāyana
D
Draupadī
K
kings (pārthivāḥ/rājāḥ)

Educational Q&A

The verse emphasizes responsible judgment: before taking sides, the assembled rulers must deliberate on Draupadī’s repeated ethical-legal question and then state their positions openly, making accountability and clarity in dharma-discourse central.

In the royal assembly after Draupadī has repeatedly posed her challenge, Vaiśampāyana narrates that the kings are urged to reflect on her words and respond, so it becomes evident who supports which interpretation in the dispute.