Shloka 10
युधिछिर उवाच अथ केन प्रमाणेन पुंसामादीयते धनम् । पुत्रवद्धि पितुस्तस्य कन्या भवितुमहति,युधिष्ठिरने पूछा--पितामह! पिताके लिये पुत्री भी तो पुत्रके ही समान होती है; फिर उसके रहते हुए किस प्रमाणसे केवल पुरुष ही धनके अधिकारी होते हैं?
Yudhiṣṭhira uvāca: atha kena pramāṇena puṃsām ādīyate dhanam | putravad dhi pituḥ tasya kanyā bhavitum arhati ||
యుధిష్ఠిరుడు పలికెను—పితామహా! అయితే ఏ ప్రమాణంతో ధనం కేవలం పురుషులదిగా స్వీకరించబడుతుంది? ఎందుకంటే తండ్రికి కుమార్తె కూడా కుమారునితో సమానంగా భావింపదగినదే కదా.
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames an ethical-legal challenge: if a daughter is regarded as equivalent to a son in relation to her father, then restricting inheritance to males requires a clear pramāṇa (authoritative justification). It foregrounds dharma as something that must be reasoned and grounded in recognized authority, not merely assumed by custom.
In the Anuśāsana discussions on dharma, Yudhiṣṭhira questions the prevailing rule of male-only entitlement to property. He argues that a daughter, being ‘like a son’ to her father, should also be considered eligible, and asks Bhīṣma (addressed as Pitāmaha in the surrounding context) to state the authoritative basis for the contrary practice.