Shloka 11
इत्येतच्छोतुमिच्छामि प्रमाणं तूभयं कथम् । कर्मणामविरोधेन कथं मोक्ष: प्रवर्तते
ity etac chrotum icchāmi pramāṇaṁ tūbhayaṁ katham | karmaṇām avirodhena kathaṁ mokṣaḥ pravartate ||
ສຸກະ ກ່າວວ່າ: “ຂ້ອຍປາຖະນາຈະຟັງໃຫ້ແຈ້ງ: ຈະເປັນໄປໄດ້ແນວໃດທີ່ທັງສອງຈະເປັນຫຼັກຖານອັນເຊື່ອຖືໄດ້—ທັງຄໍາສັ່ງໃຫ້ກະທໍາ ແລະຄໍາສັ່ງໃຫ້ລະການກະທໍາ? ຖ້າມັນເບິ່ງເຫັນວ່າຂັດກັນ, ດ້ວຍເຫດຜົນໃດຈຶ່ງຄວນຮັບເອົາເປັນພະຍານຂອງຊາສະຕຣະ? ແລະຍິ່ງໄປກວ່ານັ້ນ, ໂດຍບໍ່ຕັ້ງຕົນຂັດກັບຂອບເຂດໜ້າທີ່ທີ່ກໍານົດໄວ້, ໂມກສະຈະເກີດຂຶ້ນໄດ້ແນວໃດ?”
शुक उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames a central śāstric problem: Vedic teachings sometimes prescribe action (karma, duties/rites) and elsewhere praise renunciation. Śuka asks how both can be valid authorities and how liberation can arise without contradicting the domain of duty—inviting a reconciliation such as differing contexts/eligibilities, stages of life, or inner renunciation while outwardly performing duty.
Śuka, in dialogue with his father (traditionally Vyāsa), requests clarification on an apparent contradiction in scripture: ‘perform action’ versus ‘abandon action.’ He seeks an interpretive principle that preserves the authority of both and a practical account of how mokṣa is attained without rejecting prescribed conduct.