Shloka 15

Devanagari script

तथैतदन्तरं विद्यात्‌ सत्त्वक्षेत्रज्ञयोर्बुध: । अभ्यासात्‌ स तथा युक्तो न गच्छेत्‌ प्रकृतिं पुन:,अत: विवेकी पुरुषको क्षेत्र और क्षेत्रज्षका यह अन्तर जान लेना चाहिये। इन दोनोंके तादात्म्यका-सा अभ्यास हो जानेसे जीव ऐसा हो गया है कि उसे अपने शुद्ध स्वरूपका पता ही नहीं लगता

Transliteration

tathaitad antaraṁ vidyāt sattva-kṣetrajñayor budhaḥ | abhyāsāt sa tathā yukto na gacchet prakṛtiṁ punaḥ ||

Translation

Bhīṣma said: “Thus a wise person should understand this inner distinction between sattva (the mind’s luminous disposition) and the kṣetrajña (the knower of the field, the Self). When, through long habit, one has come to identify the two as though they were one, the embodied being—so bound by that misjoining—fails to return to the clarity of its own pure nature and is drawn back again into Prakṛti (conditioned nature).”

Word by Word

तथाthus, in this manner

एतत्this

अन्तरम्difference, distinction

विद्यात्should know

सत्त्वbeing; (here) the mind/inner being

क्षेत्रज्ञयोःof the two: the knower of the field (self) (and the other term in the pair)

बुधःthe wise person

अभ्यासात्from practice; due to repeated cultivation

सःhe

तथाthus, in that way

युक्तःyoked; disciplined; endowed (with that understanding)

नnot

गच्छेत्would go; should go

प्रकृतिम्nature; Prakriti

पुनःagain

Speaker

भीष्म उवाच

Characters & Entities

Bhishma

kṣetrajña

Prakṛti

sattva

Character Dynamics

Dharma Sankata (Moral Dilemma)

War Context

Verse Rasa (Emotional Essence)

Philosophical Teaching

Political Layer

Geographic Context

Cross References

Meter (Chandas)

Sandhi Notes

Educational Q&A

What is the core teaching?

One should clearly discriminate between sattva (a quality/state of the mind within nature) and the kṣetrajña (the conscious Self). Mistaking them as identical through long habituation keeps the being bound to Prakṛti and obscures recognition of one’s pure nature.

What is happening in the narrative?

In the Shanti Parva’s post-war instruction, Bhishma continues advising Yudhishthira on inner discipline and philosophical discernment. Here he emphasizes a key Sāṅkhya-like distinction—mind/nature versus the witnessing Self—as essential for freedom from repeated entanglement in conditioned existence.