Shloka 29
Draupadī’s Lament and Theodicy: Dharma, Dice, and Īśvara’s Governance (Āraṇyaka-parva 31)
ऋषयश्नैव देवाश्न गन्धर्वासुरराक्षसा: | ईश्वरा: कस्य हेतोस्ते चरेयुर्धर्ममादृता:,यदि तप, ब्रह्मचर्य, यज्ञ, स्वाध्याय, दान और सरलता आदि धर्म निष्फल होते तो पहले जो श्रेष्ठ और श्रेष्ठतर पुरुष हुए हैं वे धर्मका आचरण नहीं करते। यदि धार्मिक क्रियाओंका कुछ फल नहीं होता, वे सब निरी ठगविद्या होतीं तो ऋषि, देवता, गन्धर्व, असुर तथा राक्षस प्रभावशाली होते हुए भी किसलिये आदरपूर्वक धर्मका आचरण करते
ṛṣayaś caiva devāś ca gandharvāsurarākṣasāḥ | īśvarāḥ kasya hetos te careyur dharmam ādṛtāḥ ||
Sinabi ni Yudhiṣṭhira: “Ang mga pantas na ṛṣi, ang mga diyos, at ang mga gandharva, asura, at rākṣasa—bagaman makapangyarihan sa kanilang sarili—bakit nila isinasagawa ang dharma nang may pagpipitagan? Kung ang tapas, brahmacarya, yajña, svādhyāya, pagkakawanggawa, at pagiging tuwid ay walang bunga—pawang panlilinlang na walang tunay na kinalabasan—kung gayon ang mga marangal noong unang panahon ay hindi sana sumunod sa dharma, at ang mga makapangyarihang nilalang na ito ay hindi rin sana magtataguyod nito nang may paggalang.”
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
Dharma is not a meaningless performance: its value is affirmed by the fact that even powerful classes of beings—sages, gods, and other superhuman orders—reverently observe it. The verse argues from respected precedent and universal practice to the meaningfulness (and efficacy) of ethical and religious discipline.
Yudhiṣṭhira is reasoning about the reality and purpose of dharma. He challenges the idea that practices like tapas, brahmacarya, yajña, svādhyāya, and dāna are futile, pointing out that if they were truly fruitless, venerable beings and ancient exemplars would not consistently honor and practice them.