Shloka 23
Go-apahāra (Cattle Theft), Go-dāna (Cow-Gift), and Suvarṇa-dakṣiṇā (Gold Fee): Karmic Consequence and Purificatory Merit
रक्षितास्मीति चोक्तं ते प्रतिज्ञा चानृता तव । ब्राह्मणस्वस्य चादानं द्विविधस्ते व्यतिक्रम:,“आपने प्रजाके धन-जनकी रक्षाके लिये प्रतिज्ञा की थी; किंतु उस ब्राह्मणकी गाय खो जानेके कारण आपकी वह प्रतिज्ञा झूठी हो गयी। दूसरी बात यह है कि आपने ब्राह्मणके धनका भूलसे अपहरण कर लिया था। इस तरह आपके द्वारा दो तरहका अपराध हो गया है”
rakṣitāsmīti coktaṃ te pratijñā cānṛtā tava | brāhmaṇasvasya cādānaṃ dvividhās te vyatikramaḥ ||
“నీవు ‘నేనే రక్షకుడను’ అని చెప్పావు; కానీ బ్రాహ్మణుని ఆవు పోవడంతో నీ ప్రతిజ్ఞ అసత్యమైంది. ఇంకా బ్రాహ్మణుని ధనాన్ని (తప్పుగా అయినా) తీసుకున్నావు. ఇలా నీకు రెండు విధాల అతిక్రమాలు ఉన్నాయి.”
ब्राह्मण उवाच
Educational Q&A
A ruler’s dharma is measured by protection and integrity: proclaiming oneself a protector creates a binding obligation, and failure to safeguard the vulnerable makes the pledge ‘false’ in effect. Additionally, Brahmin property is treated as especially inviolable; even inadvertent taking is a serious breach. The verse frames wrongdoing as twofold—broken protective duty and wrongful appropriation.
A Brahmin addresses a ruler/authority figure, accusing him of two offenses: his public assurance of protection has been undermined because a Brahmin’s cow was lost, and he has also taken the Brahmin’s wealth (even if by mistake). The speech functions as a moral indictment, pressing accountability under dharma.