Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 176

Śuka’s Guṇa-Transcendence and Vyāsa’s Consolation (शुकगति-वर्णनम्)

यदि वाप्यस्पृशन्त्या मे स्पर्श जानासि कठ्चन । ज्ञानं कृतमबीजं ते कथं तेनेह भिक्षुणा

yadi vāpy aspṛśantyā me sparśaṁ jānāsi kaścana | jñānaṁ kṛtam abījaṁ te kathaṁ teneha bhikṣuṇā ||

ビーシュマは言った。「たとえ我が汝に触れていないとしても、なお何らかの形で我が触れを感じると言い張るなら、問わねばならぬ。あの托鉢の聖者、賢者パンチャシカは、いかにしてここで汝に真の知を授け得たのか。汝は感覚と誤解に執して、その知を『無種』—実を結ばぬもの—としてしまったのだから。」

यदिif
यदि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootयदि
वाor
वा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootवा
अपिeven/also
अपि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootअपि
अस्पृशन्त्याby (me) not touching
अस्पृशन्त्या:
Karana
TypeAdjective
Rootअस्पृशन्ती (न-√स्पृश्)
FormFeminine, Instrumental, Singular
मेof me/my
मे:
TypeNoun
Rootअस्मद्
FormGenitive, Singular
स्पर्शम्touch
स्पर्शम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootस्पर्श
FormMasculine, Accusative, Singular
जानासिyou know/you perceive
जानासि:
TypeVerb
Root√ज्ञा
FormPresent, 2, Singular
कश्चनsomeone/anyone (at all)
कश्चन:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootकश्चन
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
ज्ञानम्knowledge
ज्ञानम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootज्ञान
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
कृतम्made/done
कृतम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootकृत (√कृ)
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
अबीजम्seedless (incapable of producing fruit)
अबीजम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootअबीज
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
तेto you/for you
ते:
Sampradana
TypePronoun
Rootयुष्मद्
FormDative, Singular
कथम्how?
कथम्:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootकथम्
तेनby him/with that
तेन:
Karana
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular
इहhere
इह:
Adhikarana
TypeIndeclinable
Rootइह
भिक्षुणाby the mendicant/monk
भिक्षुणा:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootभिक्षु
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular

भीष्य उवाच

B
Bhīṣma
P
Pañcaśikha
B
bhikṣu (mendicant/ascetic)

Educational Q&A

Bhīṣma criticizes a mind that mistakes imagined sensation for reality. If one remains trapped in sensory fixation and confusion, even profound instruction becomes “abīja” (seedless)—it cannot mature into realization or ethical transformation.

Bhīṣma addresses an interlocutor who claims to feel ‘touch’ despite no contact. Using this as evidence of delusion, he questions how the ascetic teacher Pañcaśikha could have successfully transmitted liberating knowledge, since the listener’s misunderstanding has made that teaching fruitless.