Shloka 37
कर्णनिधनवृत्तान्तनिवेदनम् | Reporting Karṇa’s Fall to Yudhiṣṭhira
जिसकी बुद्धि शुद्ध (निष्काम) है, वह पुरुष यदि अत्यन्त कठोर होकर भी, जैसे अंधे पशुको मार देनेसे बलाक नामक व्याध पुण्यका भागी हुआ था, उसी प्रकार महान् पुण्य प्राप्त कर ले तो कया आश्चर्य है? ।।
kim āścaryaṃ punaḥ mūḍho dharmakāmo hy apaṇḍitaḥ | sumahat prāpnuyāt pāpam āpagāsv iva kauśikaḥ ||
室利·奎师那说道：“那么，一个迷妄之人——虽渴望行义，却缺乏真正的辨别——若反而招致极大的罪过，又有何可惊异？正如住在诸河汇合处的圣者考希迦，因在无明中假借达摩之名而行事，遂牵连于重罪。相反，当心智清净、无私欲之动机时，即便看似严酷的行为也能结成大功德——如猎人巴拉卡因杀死一头盲兽而得福德。”
श्रीकृष्ण उवाच
Educational Q&A
Kṛṣṇa contrasts purified, desireless discernment with ignorant moral zeal: a person lacking true wisdom may commit grave wrong while trying to practice dharma, whereas one with a purified, selfless intellect may gain merit even from an outwardly harsh act. The ethical emphasis is on right understanding and inner motive, not merely the external label of “dharma.”
In the Karṇa Parva war context, Kṛṣṇa instructs by citing exempla: the hunter Bālaka, who gained merit by killing a blind beast, and the sage Kauśika at a river-confluence, who incurred great sin through an ignorant act done under the pretense of righteousness. These stories are used to clarify how dharma can be subtle and how ignorance can corrupt seemingly pious action.