Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 50

पापात्म-धर्मात्म-लक्षणम् तथा निर्वेदेन मोक्षमार्गः | Marks of the Sinful and the Righteous; Dispassion (Nirveda) as a Path to Liberation

एवं न स्त्री न चैवाहं नाध्वगस्त्रिदशे श्वर: । अपराध्यति धर्मस्य प्रमादस्त्वपराध्यति

evaṁ na strī na caivāhaṁ nādhvagas tridāśeśvaraḥ | aparādhyati dharmasya pramādas tv aparādhyati ||

毗湿摩说道:“因此,女子无罪,我亦无罪;那位以婆罗门之形前来的行旅——即诸天之主因陀罗——也无罪。真正的罪人是对达摩的疏忽:正是我一时失念——竟以误杀女子的形态显现——成了此过失的根本。”

एवम्thus, in this manner
एवम्:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootएवम्
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
स्त्रीwoman
स्त्री:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootस्त्री
FormFeminine, Nominative, Singular
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
एवindeed, just
एव:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootएव
अहम्I
अहम्:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootअहम्
FormCommon, Nominative, Singular
not
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
अध्वगःtraveller, wayfarer
अध्वगः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootअध्वग
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
त्रिदशेश्वरःlord of the thirty (gods), i.e., Indra
त्रिदशेश्वरः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootत्रिदश-ईश्वर
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
अपराध्यतिcommits an offense, errs
अपराध्यति:
TypeVerb
Rootअपराध्
FormPresent (Lat), 3rd, Singular, Parasmaipada
धर्मस्यof dharma, of righteousness
धर्मस्य:
TypeNoun
Rootधर्म
FormMasculine, Genitive, Singular
प्रमादःnegligence, inadvertence
प्रमादः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootप्रमाद
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
तुbut, however
तु:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतु
अपराध्यतिcommits an offense, errs
अपराध्यति:
TypeVerb
Rootअपराध्
FormPresent (Lat), 3rd, Singular, Parasmaipada

भीष्म उवाच

B
Bhishma
A
a woman (strī)
I
Indra (Tridāśeśvara)
A
a traveller (adhvaga)
A
a brahmin disguise (brāhmaṇa-veśa, implied by the Hindi gloss)

Educational Q&A

The verse locates moral blame not in persons used as instruments or in external circumstances, but in pramāda—carelessness regarding dharma. Ethical failure arises from negligence, and one must own the lapse rather than scapegoat others.

Bhishma reflects on a wrongdoing connected with the killing of a woman. He declares that neither the woman, nor he as a person, nor Indra (who appeared as a traveller in brahmin guise) is intrinsically to blame; rather, the decisive cause of the offence was his own negligent lapse in adhering to dharma.