Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 14

अश्वमेधावसानम् — Dakṣiṇā-vibhāga and Avabhṛtha

Completion of the Aśvamedha

धर्मोपघातकस्त्वेष समारम्भस्तव प्रभो । नायं धर्मकृतो यज्ञो न हिंसा धर्म उच्यते

dharma-upaghātakas tveṣa samārambhas tava prabho | nāyaṃ dharma-kṛto yajño na hiṃsā dharma ucyate ||

Sinabi ni Vaiśampāyana: “O panginoon, ang gawaing ito na iyong sinimulan ay sumasakit sa dharma. Ang paghahandog na ito’y hindi isinasagawa ayon sa katuwiran, sapagkat ang karahasan ay hindi kailanman ipinahayag na dharma.”

धर्मोपघातकःharmful to dharma; destroyer of righteousness
धर्मोपघातकः:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootधर्म-उपघातक
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
तुbut/indeed
तु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतु
एषःthis
एषः:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootएतद्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
समारम्भःundertaking; commencement
समारम्भः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootसमारम्भ
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
तवof you; your
तव:
TypePronoun
Rootयुष्मद्
FormGenitive, Singular
प्रभोO lord
प्रभो:
TypeNoun
Rootप्रभु
FormMasculine, Vocative, Singular
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
अयम्this
अयम्:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootइदम्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
धर्मकृतःdone for dharma; righteous (in purpose)
धर्मकृतः:
Karta
TypeAdjective
Rootधर्मकृत्
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
यज्ञःsacrifice; yajña
यज्ञः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootयज्ञ
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
हिंसाviolence; injury
हिंसा:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootहिंसा
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular
धर्मःdharma; righteousness
धर्मः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootधर्म
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
उच्यतेis said; is called
उच्यते:
TypeVerb
Rootवच्
FormPresent, Passive, Third, Singular

वैशम्पायन उवाच

V
Vaiśaṃpāyana
Y
yajña

Educational Q&A

The verse asserts an ethical principle: an act that harms dharma cannot be justified as dharma, and violence (hiṃsā) is not to be labeled righteousness—especially when presented under the guise of a sacrificial rite.

The narrator reports a moral objection raised against a sacrificial undertaking: the speaker addresses a ‘lord’ and challenges the legitimacy of the yajña on ethical grounds, arguing that its violent aspect makes it contrary to dharma.