Shloka 173
कामद्रुम-रूपकः तथा शरीर-पुर-रूपकः
The Desire-Tree and the Body-as-City Metaphors
न तर्कशास्त्रदग्धाय तथैव पिशुनाय च । जो वेदका विद्वान् न हो
na tarkaśāstra-dagdhāya tathaiva piśunāya ca | yo vedakaḥ vidvān na bhavet, anugata-bhakto na bhavet, doṣa-dṛṣṭi-rahito na bhavet, sarala-svabhāvo na bhavet, ājñākārī na bhavet; tarkaśāstra-nindayā nindayā yasya hṛdayaṃ dagdhaṃ rasa-śūnyaṃ jātaṃ, yaś ca pareṣāṃ piśunatāṃ karoti—tādṛśebhyo ’sya jñānasya upadeśo na yuktaḥ ||
Vyāsa said: This teaching should not be imparted to one whose heart has been scorched dry by contentious logic, nor to a slanderer. If a person is not truly learned, not a devoted follower, not free from fault-finding, not simple in nature, and not obedient—and if, by incessantly criticizing and wrangling over the science of reasoning, his inner being has become burnt out and devoid of taste for truth, while he also indulges in backbiting—then instructing such a person in this knowledge is not proper.
व्यास उवाच
Educational Q&A
Sacred or liberating knowledge should be given only to a fit recipient: one who is genuinely learned, devoted, straightforward, obedient, and free from habitual fault-finding and slander. Mere argumentative cleverness that dries up the heart is treated as disqualifying.
In the didactic setting of Śānti Parva, Vyāsa lays down criteria for transmitting higher instruction, warning that people consumed by polemical logic and backbiting are not suitable students for this teaching.