Shloka 10
Daṇḍa, Ahiṃsā, and Proportional Kingship: The Dyumatsena–Satyavān Dialogue (दण्ड-अहिंसा-विवेकः)
ते चेत् सर्वप्रमाणं वै प्रमाणं ह्ृत्र विद्यते । प्रमाणे5प्यप्रमाणेन विरुद्धे शास्त्रता कुत:
te cet sarva-pramāṇaṃ vai pramāṇaṃ hy atra vidyate | pramāṇe 'py apramāṇena viruddhe śāstratā kutaḥ ||
玉提湿陀罗说道：“若《吠陀》确为一切正知的普遍准绳，那么此处唯有《吠陀》才是权威。然而当连这权威也被被视为‘非权威’之物所驳斥时，任何事物又凭什么还能保有‘论典（śāstra）’之名？并且，若《忆传》（Smṛti）与《闻传》（Śruti）相违，它又依据何理仍可称为经典？”
युधिछिर उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse argues that scriptural authority depends on consistency with the highest accepted pramāṇa (Śruti/Veda). If a text or rule (such as Smṛti) contradicts Śruti, its claim to be ‘śāstra’ becomes untenable.
In the Śānti Parva’s dharma-discourse, Yudhiṣṭhira presses a critical question about how to determine true dharma when different authorities appear to conflict, challenging the basis on which secondary texts can remain authoritative.