Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 176

Śuka’s Guṇa-Transcendence and Vyāsa’s Consolation (शुकगति-वर्णनम्)

यदि वाप्यस्पृशन्त्या मे स्पर्श जानासि कठ्चन । ज्ञानं कृतमबीजं ते कथं तेनेह भिक्षुणा

yadi vāpy aspṛśantyā me sparśaṁ jānāsi kaścana | jñānaṁ kṛtam abījaṁ te kathaṁ teneha bhikṣuṇā ||

毗湿摩说道:“即便我并未触碰你,若你仍声称以某种方式感到我的触碰,那么我必须问:那位行乞的圣者、贤哲般遮尸佉(Pañcaśikha),当初又如何能在此将真实的智慧传授给你?因为你执著于感受与错觉,使那智慧成了‘无种’之物——不能结果。”

यदिif
यदि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootयदि
वाor
वा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootवा
अपिeven/also
अपि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootअपि
अस्पृशन्त्याby (me) not touching
अस्पृशन्त्या:
Karana
TypeAdjective
Rootअस्पृशन्ती (न-√स्पृश्)
FormFeminine, Instrumental, Singular
मेof me/my
मे:
TypeNoun
Rootअस्मद्
FormGenitive, Singular
स्पर्शम्touch
स्पर्शम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootस्पर्श
FormMasculine, Accusative, Singular
जानासिyou know/you perceive
जानासि:
TypeVerb
Root√ज्ञा
FormPresent, 2, Singular
कश्चनsomeone/anyone (at all)
कश्चन:
Karta
TypePronoun
Rootकश्चन
FormMasculine, Nominative, Singular
ज्ञानम्knowledge
ज्ञानम्:
Karma
TypeNoun
Rootज्ञान
FormNeuter, Accusative, Singular
कृतम्made/done
कृतम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootकृत (√कृ)
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
अबीजम्seedless (incapable of producing fruit)
अबीजम्:
TypeAdjective
Rootअबीज
FormNeuter, Nominative, Singular
तेto you/for you
ते:
Sampradana
TypePronoun
Rootयुष्मद्
FormDative, Singular
कथम्how?
कथम्:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootकथम्
तेनby him/with that
तेन:
Karana
TypePronoun
Rootतद्
FormMasculine/Neuter, Instrumental, Singular
इहhere
इह:
Adhikarana
TypeIndeclinable
Rootइह
भिक्षुणाby the mendicant/monk
भिक्षुणा:
Karana
TypeNoun
Rootभिक्षु
FormMasculine, Instrumental, Singular

भीष्य उवाच

B
Bhīṣma
P
Pañcaśikha
B
bhikṣu (mendicant/ascetic)

Educational Q&A

Bhīṣma criticizes a mind that mistakes imagined sensation for reality. If one remains trapped in sensory fixation and confusion, even profound instruction becomes “abīja” (seedless)—it cannot mature into realization or ethical transformation.

Bhīṣma addresses an interlocutor who claims to feel ‘touch’ despite no contact. Using this as evidence of delusion, he questions how the ascetic teacher Pañcaśikha could have successfully transmitted liberating knowledge, since the listener’s misunderstanding has made that teaching fruitless.