If Daśaratha did not kill Shravan intentionally, then why was he cursed for an accident?
It was not his intention to kill any human being (or Rishi in this case). It was just that he thought there was an elephant and he shot it down.
Did his previous karmas lead him to this destiny?
It is mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana that Dasratha was an ace hunter who could shoot unseen (just on hearing ) Ayodhya Kanda Ch 63 Verse 11
"This sin was done by me while I was young and wielding a bow. At that time, I was famous as a young man, who can shoot heard (but unseen) object by an arrow, O Kausalya!"
But he mistakenly killed the young ascetic taking him for an elephant drinking water.
As the act was unintentional , he didn't incur sin of killing the ascetic. But as Dasratha caused suffering to ascetic's parents, ascetic's father cursed him
This is evident at the time of deceased ascetic's father lament
Valmiki Ramayana Ayodhya Kanda Chp 64 , verses 23-25
"A killing brought about by a warrior premeditatedly and in particular to a hermit, would expel even Indra from his post."
"The head of a dispatcher of a weapon with a knowledge of the matter on a sage established in austerity or such an unmarried student practicing sacred study, gets burst into seven pieces."
"You are still surviving because you have done it unknowingly. Not even you, but today the whole of Ikshvaaku dynasty would have been no more, if it is not the case."
As seen from above verses the ascetic father acknowledges that it is an unintentional act . If it wasn't huge calamity would have befallen on Dasratha.
Ascetic's father acknowledges that Dasratha doesn't incur the sin of killing because he acted out of ignorance
O, king! Since the sage was killed by you, belonging to the warrior class, through ignorance, the sin of killing a Brahmin will not take possession of you
Manusmriti 11.46 says
A sin committed unintentionally is expiated by the reciting of the Veda; while that committed intentionally, in folly, is expiated by the various forms of expiatory rites.—(46)
Because Dasratha was safe as far as sin is concerned (all he had to do was recite vedas), the father of ascetic took matters in his own hands .After all he was in pain and agony because of Dasratha
Verse 55
O, king! Even as I am suffering from agony now because of the loss of my son, in the same manner; you will also die due to agony caused by the loss of your son
Finally, there is no past life Karma in play here. If there was Prarabdha karma then he would suffer the loss of Rama without the curse. Dasratha suffered in the end solely because of the curse
Even any good karma (action) will have a tinge of bad, just like a fire is always accompanied by smoke. [Ref: Bhagavad Geeta 18.48]. No human action is perfect.
Therefore, our karma should also be classified as predominantly punya-karma (good actions) or paapa-karma (not good actions) based on its consequences [Ref: Mahabharata 12.37].
So, though Dasharatha's action was unintentional, he had to suffer some effect.
The issue is it is not definite if Daśaratha really did kill the boy unintentionally. Daśaratha definitely killed someone and specifically a Rishi, because the Ramayana tells us that outside Daśaratha's speech.
Now while the translation here suggests Daśaratha is righteous, that actually doesn't mean much in Daśaratha. This is because Manu, who Daśaratha is an incarnation of, being a Prajāpati, is technically responsible for deciding what is righteous, so he could always just make an exception for himself. That's kind of inevitable with divine command morality, there will always be someone with this ability.
- dharmaatmaa = The high-souled; raaghavaH = Dasaratha; vilapanneva = while lamenting; apratiruupam = about the unworthy; vadham = killing; tasya maharshheH = of that sage; punaH = again; abraviit = spoke; kausalyaam = to Kausalya (as follows):
The high souled Dasaratha, while lamenting about the unworthy killing of that sage, spoke further to Kausalya as follows:
Rudra said:
1-3a. Formerly Svāyambhuva Manu muttered the great formula of twelve syllables at Naimiṣa on the pure, auspicious bank of Gomatī. For a thousand years he worshipped Lakṣmī’s lord. Lord Viṣṇu said to him: “Choose a boon from me.” Then Manu Svāyambhuva joyfully said to Viṣṇu:
...
Rudra said:
8-14. Having thus given him a boon, Viṣṇu vanished there only. From Manu Svāyambhuva he had the first birth. He was born as king Daśaratha in the Raghu-family formerly. The second birth was that of lord Vasudeva in the family of the Vṛṣṇis. He will be born as a brāhmaṇa in the town of Śambhala in the last two quarters of the Kali-age of the measure of a thousand divine years. Kausalyā was born as the wife of king Daśaratha. Devakī was known (to be born) to serve the Yadu-family. Devaprabhā was born as the wife of a brāhmaṇa Harivrata. Thus they obtained the motherhood of Viṣṇu in three existences. O you of a good vow, I shall first tell you the account of Rāma, by just remembering whom even sinners get liberation. Hiraṇyaka and Hiraṇyākṣa, taking up second birth, will be born as the very strong Kumbhakarṇa and Rāvaṇa.
वैश्यं प्रति तथैवैते निवर्तेरन्निति स्थितिः । न तौ प्रति हि तान् धर्मान् मनुराह प्रजापतिः ॥ ७८ ॥
vaiśyaṃ prati tathaivaite nivarteranniti sthitiḥ | na tau prati hi tān dharmān manurāha prajāpatiḥ || 78 ||
For the Vaiśya also these three should cease,—such is the law; since Prajāpati Manu has not prescribed these duties for those two (castes).—(78)
Anyway, the main reason I don't believe Daśaratha's story is that it does not make any sense, and spending time outside Earth (unlike the rest of his family, except Kaikeya, who seems to stay silent out of a mixture of confusion and fear) he really should know better.
The first issue is as shown before, the person who he kills is a Maharishi. The Vishnu Purana, which at its core is two Rishis speaking to each other gives Bharata as 9000 Yojanas. A yojana is 8000 dhanus. A dhanu refers to bows, specifically (from common use in India at the time) the long bows as tall as the wielder. The average human height changes over time, so let's just go with 163 cm. That would give a modern human yojana of 13.04 km. Thus the Bharata using modern human yojanas would be 117,360 km. For reference, the Earth has a diameter of 12,742 km. Now whether Bharata refers to India, Earth, or a cosmic region, it means Rishis are either way too small or way too big to be mistaken for an elephant. If the Rishi shapeshifted he would fit, but he has literally no incentive to do so. Also if Rishis were humanoid, the direction to hit the weak points of an elephant do not match with those of a human in arrow direction.
THE country that lies north of the ocean, and south of the snowy mountains, is called Bhārata, for there dwelt the descendants of Bharata. It is nine thousand leagues in extent1, and is the land of works, in consequence of which men go to heaven, or obtain emancipation.
- tataH = then; mayaa = by me; shrutaH = was heard; shabdaH = the sound; kumbhasya = of a pitcher; puuryataH = being filled; jale = with water; matvaa = thinking; ayam = it; dvipaH iti = as an elephant; ayam = it; abhihataH = was killed; mayaa = by me; baaNena = with an arrow."
"Then by me was heard the sound of a pitcher being filled with water. Guessing it as an elephant, I killed it with an arrow."
The other obvious issue is elephants drinking and filling a pitcher of water both sound nothing like each other and are completely different in loudness. The bubbles from containers really give them away.
To conclude Daśaratha is not morally at fault for killing the boy, as he cannot be morally at fault for practically anything being a Prajāpati. He is causatively at fault though. So depending on how you want to assign fault for the curse, he is at fault or not. Also, you could argue he was not ever cursed.
P.S. Daśaratha clearly wants people to eventually find out, otherwise, he would have used a more sensible animal to mistake the Rishi for or just not used one found on Earth.
P.P.S Daśaratha clearly misses his son, but even in that life alone, he has over 350 wives, so it is safe to assume he has more than we know.
After the game of dice was won by Kauravas, Pandavas and Draupadi were humiliated and were sent to the Forest, as agreed upon. Sri Krishna arrive later in the Forest.
Sri Krishna states as follows;
Women, dice, hunting and drinking to which people become addicted in consequence of temptation, have been regarded as the four evils that deprive a man of prosperity. And those versed in the Sastras are of opinion that evils attend upon all these.
So hunting, along with dice, drinking, etc, will make human intoxicated with the vice and make lose human his equanimity and self control.
Dasaratha, during such intoxication discharged arrow, which killed an ascetic boy.
निपाने महिषम् रात्रौ गजम् वा अभ्यागतम् नदीम् | अन्यम् वा श्वा पदम् कंचिज् जिघांसुर् अजित इन्द्रियः || २-६३-२२ तस्मिंस्तत्राहमेकान्ते रात्रौ विवृतकार्मुकः |
"Without my senses under control and with an intent to kill there a (wild) buffalo or an elephant or any other wild animal coming in the night at that place for the purpose of drinking water, I was ready with my bow at a solitary place."
Knowing fully well about hunting as vice, Dasaratha had overcomed with the desire of hunting, killed the ascetic boy in the darkness using his skill of using arrows towards sound that emanated.
So he committed a sin and cannot be excused under the pretext of killing unintentionally.
Here, curse was not delivered by the direct victim- the ascetic boy, but by the father of the ascetic boy.
The father of the ascetic boy along with his wife were blind and old. At that point of time, it becomes unbearable to anyone to sustain the pain of separation from their son, who is everything to them.
Thus, curse was delivered out of grief.
However, in order to undergo similar pain, Dasaratha should be a father of a son.
So it's a blessing in disguise for him, which assured him fatherhood.
