Shloka 26
Āraṇyaka Parva, Adhyāya 116: Jamadagni–Reṇukā Narrative and the Kārtavīrya Conflict
Akṛtavraṇa’s Account
आश्रमस्थं विना रामं जमदग्निमुपाद्रवन् । ते तं जध्नुर्महावीर्यमयुध्यन्तं तपस्विनम्,और एक दिन परशुरामजीकी अनुपस्थितिमें जब आश्रमपर केवल जमदग्निजी ही रह गये थे, वे उन्हींपर चढ़ आये। यद्यपि जमदग्निजी महान् शक्तिशाली थे तो भी तपस्वी ब्राह्मण होनेके कारण युद्धमें प्रवृत्त नहीं हुए। इस दशामें भी कार्तवीर्यके पुत्र उनपर प्रहार करने लगे
āśramasthaṃ vinā rāmaṃ jamadagnim upādravan | te taṃ jaghnur mahāvīryam ayudhyantaṃ tapasvinam ||
Акритаврана сказал: «Когда Рамы не было, они напали на Джамадагни в обители. Хотя Джамадагни был великой силы, он не вступил в бой, ибо был брахманом-аскетом; и всё же сыновья Картавирьи убили его.»
अकृतव्रण उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights the ethical gravity of harming a non-combatant ascetic: even when capable of force, a tapasvin refrains from violence, and violating the sanctity of the āśrama and the protection owed to the unarmed is presented as a grave adharma that triggers later consequences.
In Paraśurāma’s absence, the sons of Kārtavīrya come to Jamadagni’s hermitage and attack him. Jamadagni, though powerful, does not fight back as an ascetic brahmin, and they kill him—an event that becomes a key cause for Paraśurāma’s later actions.