स त्वं विद्वन् धर्ममिममधिगम्य कथं नु माम् । अपत्यार्थ समुत्क्रम्य प्रमादादिव भाषसे,“विद्वन! आप धर्मको जानते हुए भी प्रमादसे कहनेवालेके समान धर्मका लोप करके अब फिर मुझे संतानोत्पत्तिके लिये क्यों प्रेरित कर रहे हैं'
sa tvaṁ vidvan dharmam imam adhigamya kathaṁ nu mām | apatyārthaṁ samutkramya pramādād iva bhāṣase ||
“Ikaw ay marunong at naunawaan mo na ang dharma—kaya bakit ngayon ay nagsasalita ka sa akin na wari’y dahil sa kapabayaan? Matapos isantabi ang landas ng dharma, bakit mo ako muling inuudyukan na magkaanak?”
वैशम्पायन उवाच
Even a learned person must act consistently with dharma; urging someone toward an act framed as contrary to dharma is criticized as ‘pramāda’ (heedlessness). Ethical counsel must align with the moral order one claims to know.
In Vaiśampāyana’s narration, a speaker rebukes a learned interlocutor: despite knowing dharma, he appears to abandon it and then presses the other person to pursue offspring, prompting a moral challenge about consistency and rightful conduct.