Shloka 114
Śuka’s Guṇa-Transcendence and Vyāsa’s Consolation (शुकगति-वर्णनम्)
अव्यक्तं प्रकृतिं त्वासां कलानां कश्चिदिच्छति । व्यक्ते चासां तथा चान्य: स्थूलदर्शी प्रपश्यति
avyaktaṁ prakṛtiṁ tv āsāṁ kalānāṁ kaścid icchati | vyakte cāsāṁ tathā cānyaḥ sthūladarśī prapaśyati |
Bhīṣma said: “Among these constituent ‘parts’ (kalās), some thinkers hold the unmanifest Nature (prakṛti) to be their material cause. Others, oriented to gross, tangible analysis, regard the manifest—namely the atoms—as the cause. Thus, according to their mode of seeing, different schools assign causality either to the unmanifest or to the manifest (and some, by implication, reconcile both).”
भीष्य उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights competing philosophical accounts of material causality: some posit the unmanifest Prakṛti as the source of constituents, while others posit the manifest (atoms) as the cause. The ethical-intellectual point is humility and discernment: conclusions about reality depend on one’s standpoint and method of knowing.
In Śānti Parva’s instruction, Bhīṣma is explaining doctrinal differences among thinkers regarding the origin of constituents (kalās). He reports how various schools interpret the material cause—unmanifest Nature versus manifest atomic reality—within a broader teaching on knowledge and liberation-oriented inquiry.