Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 6

Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s Śrāddha Request and Bhīma’s Objection (Āśramavāsika-parva, Adhyāya 17)

पुत्रैश्चर्च महदिदमपास्य च महाफलम्‌ | का नु गच्छेद्‌ वन दुर्ग पुत्रानुत्सूज्य मूढवत्‌,पुत्रोंका महान्‌ फलदायक यह महान्‌ ऐश्वर्य छोड़कर और पुत्रोंका त्याग करके कौन नारी मूढ़की भाँति दुर्गम वनमें जायगी?

putraiś cārtha mahad idaṁ apāsya ca mahāphalam | kā nu gacched vana-durgaṁ putrān utsṛjya mūḍhavat ||

పుత్రుల వల్ల మహాఫలదాయకమైన ఈ మహా ఐశ్వర్యాన్ని వదిలి, పుత్రులను పరిత్యజించి— ఏ స్త్రీ మూర్ఖురాలిలా దుర్గమమైన అడవికి వెళ్తుంది?

पुत्रैःby/with sons
पुत्रैः:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootपुत्र
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Plural
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
इदम्this
इदम्:
Karma
TypePronoun
Rootइदम्
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
महत्great
महत्:
TypeAdjective
Rootमहत्
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
अपास्यhaving abandoned/left
अपास्य:
TypeVerb
Rootअप-आस् (त्यक्त्वा-अर्थे)
Formल्यप् (absolutive/gerund), Parasmaipada (usage-neutral for gerund)
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
महाफलम्great reward/fruit
महाफलम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootमहाफल
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
काwhat (woman)? / who (female)?
का:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootकिम्
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular
नुindeed/then (interrogative particle)
नु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootनु
गच्छेत्would go
गच्छेत्:
TypeVerb
Rootगम्
FormVidhi-ling (optative), Non-past (modal), 3rd, Singular, Parasmaipada
वनम्to the forest
वनम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootवन
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
दुर्गम्difficult/inaccessible
दुर्गम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootदुर्ग
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
पुत्रान्sons
पुत्रान्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootपुत्र
FormMasculine, Accusative, Plural
उत्सृज्यhaving abandoned/left behind
उत्सृज्य:
TypeVerb
Rootउत्-सृज्
Formल्यप् (absolutive/gerund), Parasmaipada (usage-neutral for gerund)
मूढवत्like a fool
मूढवत्:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootमूढवत्

वैशम्पायन उवाच

V
Vaiśampāyana
S
sons (putrāḥ)
F
forest (vana)
P
perilous/remote forest (vana-durga)
P
prosperity/wealth (artha)

Educational Q&A

The verse underscores the ethical weight of familial responsibility: prosperity and meaningful worldly outcomes are closely tied to one’s children, so abandoning them for a harsh forest-life is portrayed as delusion rather than dharmic discernment.

Vaiśampāyana voices a rhetorical objection: he questions who would forsake great, son-associated prosperity and, abandoning her sons, go to a dangerous forest—framing such a choice as foolish and socially/ethically suspect.