Shloka 3
अव्यक्त–पुरुष–विवेकः (Discrimination of Avyakta/Prakṛti and Puruṣa) — Yājñavalkya’s Anvīkṣikī to Viśvāvasu
अक्षरक्षरयोरुक्त त्ववा यदपि कारणम् । तदप्यस्थिरबुद्धित्वात् प्रणष्टमिव मेडनघ,अनघ! यद्यपि आपने क्षर और अक्षरको समझानेके लिये अनेक प्रकारकी युक्तियाँ बतायी हैं तथापि मेरी बुद्धि अस्थिर होनेके कारण मैं उन सारी युक्तियोंको मानो भूल गया हूँ
akṣara-kṣarayor uktaṁ tvayā yad api kāraṇam | tad apy asthira-buddhitvāt praṇaṣṭam iva me ’nagha || anagha! yady api tvayā kṣara-akṣaraṁ bodhayituṁ nānā-vidhā yuktayaḥ proktāḥ, tathāpi mama buddhir asthirā bhavatīti tāḥ sarvā yuktaya iva me vismṛtāḥ |
Janaka dijo: “Oh intachable, incluso el razonamiento que has expuesto acerca de lo imperecedero y lo perecedero parece habérseme escurrido, como si se hubiera perdido, por la inconstancia de mi entendimiento. Aunque has explicado lo perecedero y lo imperecedero mediante muchas líneas de argumento, mi mente vacilante me hace sentir como si lo hubiera olvidado todo.”
जनक उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse highlights a key obstacle in spiritual inquiry: even correct instruction on the imperishable (akṣara) and perishable (kṣara) fails to take root when the mind is unstable. It implicitly points to the need for steadiness of intellect—through discipline, reflection, and inner composure—so that metaphysical insight can become firm knowledge.
King Janaka addresses a revered teacher (called “anagha,” ‘blameless’) and admits that despite receiving multiple arguments explaining the perishable and imperishable, he cannot retain them due to mental wavering. He is effectively requesting the teaching to be restated or clarified in a way that stabilizes his understanding.