Shloka 14
Adhyāya 314 — हिमवदाश्रमः, शक्तिक्षेपकथा, तथा स्वाध्यायविधिः
Himalayan Hermitage, the Myth of the Thrown Spear, and Rules of Vedic Study
जनकने पूछा--महामते! प्रकृति और पुरुष दोनों आदि-अन्तसे रहित, मूर्तिहीन और अचल हैं। दोनों अपने-अपने गुणमें स्थिर रहनेवाले और दोनों ही निर्गुण हैं ।।
Janaka uvāca—Mahāmate! prakṛtiś ca puruṣaś ca ubhau anādi-nidhanau amūrtau acalau ca. ubhau sva-sva-guṇeṣu sthitau ubhau ca nirguṇau. agrāhyau munivarārdūla katham eko hy acetanaḥ? cetanavāṁs tathā caikaḥ kṣetrajña iti bhāṣitaḥ. muniśreṣṭha! ubhau buddhy-agocarau. kathaṁ tarhi etayoḥ ekāṁ prakṛtiṁ tvam acetanaṁ vadāsi, dvitīyaṁ ca cetanaṁ kṣetrajñaṁ ca?
阇那迦问道：“大德！普拉克里蒂（Prakṛti）与补卢沙（Puruṣa）二者皆无始无终，无形无相，寂然不动；各安住于自性，而又被说为超越诸德（guṇa）。噫，诸仙之虎！若二者皆不可执取、亦非智识所及，为何你称其一——普拉克里蒂——为无觉？又为何称其二为有觉，并名为‘知田者’（kṣetrajña）？愿最胜牟尼为我开示，此分别当如何理解。”
जनक उवाच
Educational Q&A
The verse frames a key philosophical problem: if both Prakṛti and Puruṣa are described as subtle, beginningless, and beyond ordinary cognition, on what basis is Prakṛti termed insentient while Puruṣa is termed sentient and the kṣetrajña (inner knower)? The teaching to be drawn is that ‘insentient vs. sentient’ is a functional distinction: Prakṛti is the objective principle that manifests body-mind and experiences, while Puruṣa is the witnessing consciousness that knows them.
In Śānti Parva’s instructional dialogue, King Janaka questions a sage’s exposition. He challenges the apparent inconsistency in describing both principles as beyond form and intellect, yet assigning consciousness to one and not the other, pressing the teacher to clarify the doctrinal distinction between Prakṛti and Puruṣa/kṣetrajña.