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 ||
ヴィヤーサは言った。「この教えは、争いを好む論理によって心が焼け焦げ、乾ききった者にも、また中傷する者にも授けてはならぬ。もし人が真に学識を備えず、篤い随順の弟子でもなく、欠点探しから離れず、性質が素直でなく、従順でもないうえに、論理学を絶えず非難し論争しているうちに内なる心が燃え尽き、真理の味わいを失い、しかも他人の陰口に耽るならば—そのような者にこの知を説くのは相応しくない。」
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.