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 ||
ວະຍາສະກ່າວວ່າ: ຄຳສອນນີ້ບໍ່ຄວນຖ່າຍທອດໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ທີ່ຫົວໃຈຖືກເຜົາໃຫ້ແຫ້ງດ້ວຍຕັກກະວິທະຍາອັນຊອກຫາການໂຕ້ຖຽງ ຫຼືແກ່ຜູ້ຊອບນິນທາວ່າຮ້າຍ. ຖ້າຜູ້ໃດບໍ່ເປັນຜູ້ຮູ້ຢ່າງແທ້, ບໍ່ເປັນສາວົກຜູ້ສັດຊື່, ບໍ່ພົ້ນຈາກການຈ້ອງຈັບຄວາມຜິດ, ບໍ່ມີນິໄສງ່າຍຊື່, ແລະບໍ່ນອບນ້ອມເຊື່ອຟັງ—ທັງຍັງໂຕ້ຖຽງວິຈານຕັກກະວິທະຍາບໍ່ຢຸດຈົນໃຈຂ້າງໃນໄໝ້ຫມົດ ແລະຂາດລົດຊາດແຫ່ງສັດຈະ ພ້ອມທັງຊອບນິນທາຄົນອື່ນ—ການສອນຄວາມຮູ້ນີ້ໃຫ້ຜູ້ນັ້ນ ບໍ່ເໝາະສົມ.
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.