Shloka 7

Brahmāstra-prayogaḥ: Daśagrīvasya Māyā-vadhaḥ

Rāma–Rāvaṇa Encounter under Illusion

Devanagari script

इमां हि पत्नीमस्माकं धर्मज्ञां धर्मचारिणीम्‌ | संस्पृशेदीदृशो भाव: शुचिं स्तैन्यमिवानृतम्‌,अन्यथा हमारी इस पत्नीको, जो धर्मको जाननेवाली तथा धर्मके पालनमें तत्पर रहनेवाली है, ऐसा भाव (अपह॒त होनेका लांछन) कैसे स्पर्श कर सकता था? यह तो ठीक वैसा ही है, जैसे किसी शुद्ध आचार-विचारवाले मनुष्यपर झूठे ही चोरीका कलंक लग जाय

Transliteration

imāṁ hi patnīm asmākaṁ dharmajñāṁ dharmacāriṇīm | saṁspṛśed īdṛśo bhāvaḥ śuciṁ stainyam ivānṛtam ||

Translation

玉提希提罗说道：“这样的疑影怎能触及我们的妻子——那位知晓达摩、依达摩而行的女子？把污点强加于清净之人，正如无端将正直之士诬为盗贼一般。”

Word by Word

• [{'term': 'imām', 'definition': 'this (woman), this one (accusative singular feminine)'}, {'term': 'hi', 'definition': 'indeed, surely (emphatic particle)'}, {'term': 'patnīm', 'definition': 'wife (accusative singular)'}, {'term': 'asmākam', 'definition': 'of us, our'}, {'term': 'dharmajñām', 'definition': 'knower of dharma

• one who understands righteousness/law'}, {'term': 'dharmacāriṇīm', 'definition': 'one who practices dharma

• one devoted to righteous conduct'}, {'term': 'saṁspṛśet', 'definition': 'could touch, could taint, could come into contact with (optative)'}, {'term': 'īdṛśaḥ', 'definition': 'such, of this kind'}, {'term': 'bhāvaḥ', 'definition': 'state of mind, notion, suspicion, imputation'}, {'term': 'śucim', 'definition': 'pure, clean, morally untainted (accusative singular)'}, {'term': 'stainyam', 'definition': 'theft

• the stigma/charge of stealing'}, {'term': 'iva', 'definition': 'like, as'}, {'term': 'anṛtam', 'definition': 'untrue, falsehood

Speaker

युधिषछ्िर उवाच

Characters & Entities

• Yudhiṣṭhira
• the Pāṇḍavas (implied by 'our')
• their wife (Draupadī, implied)

Educational Q&A

What is the core teaching?

Moral character grounded in dharma should not be lightly suspected; to cast baseless blame on the virtuous is itself an ethical wrong, comparable to falsely accusing a pure person of theft.

What is happening in the narrative?

Yudhiṣṭhira defends the moral integrity of their wife, arguing that a dishonoring suspicion cannot reasonably attach to someone known for understanding and practicing dharma, and he illustrates this with the analogy of a false charge of theft against a pure person.