Thou applaudest desires and enjoyments and prosperity. They, however, that have renounced all enjoyments and reduced their bodies by penances, attain to regions of beatitude. The acquisition and preservation of kingdom is attended with both righteousness and unrighteousness. The desire for them exists in thee. Free thyself, however, from thy great burthens, and adopt renunciation. The tiger, for filling one stomach of his, slaughters many animals. Other animals destitute of strength and moved by covetousness live upon the tiger’s prey.[47] If kings, accepting earthly possessions, practise renunciation, they can never have contentment. Behold the loss of understanding that is noticeable in them. As a matter of fact, however, they who subsist on leaves of trees, or use two stones only or their teeth alone for husking their grain, or live upon water only or air alone, succeed in conquering hell.[48] That king who rules this wide unbounded earth, and that person who regards gold and pebbles equally, amongst these two, the latter is said to have attained the object of his life and not the former. Depending, therefore, upon that which is the eternal refuge of joy both here and hereafter, cease thou to act and hope with respect to thy wishes and cease to bear attachment to them.
They that have given up desire and enjoyment have never to grieve. Thou, however, grievest for enjoyments.[49] Discarding desire and enjoyment, thou mayst succeed in liberating thyself from false speech.[50] There are two well-known paths (for us), viz., the path of the Pitris and the path of the gods. They that perform sacrifices go by the Pitri-path, while they that are for salvation, go by the god-path.[51] By penances, by Brahmacharya, by study (of the Vedas), the great Rishis, casting off their bodies, proceeded to regions that are above the power of Death. Worldly enjoyments have been styled as bonds, They have also been called Action. Liberated from those two sins (viz., bonds and action), one attains to the highest end. Mention is made of a verse sung (of old) by Janaka who was freed from the pairs of opposites, liberated from desire and enjoyments, and observant of the religion of Moksha. That verse runs thus: ‘My treasures are immense, yet I have nothing! If again the whole of Mithila were burnt and reduced to ashes, nothing of mine will be burnt!’ As a person on the hill-top looketh down upon men on the plain below, so he that has got up on the top of the mansion of knowledge, seeth people grieving for things that do not call for grief. He, however, that is of foolish understanding, does not see this. He who, casting his eyes on visible things, really seeth them, is said to have eyes and understanding.
The faculty called understanding is so called because of the knowledge and comprehension it gives of unknown and incomprehensible things. He who is acquainted with the words of persons that are learned, that are of cleansed souls, and that have attained to a state of Brahma, succeeds in obtaining great honours. When one seeth creatures of infinite diversity to be all one and the same and to be but diversified emanations from the same essence, one is then said to have attained Brahma.[52] Those who reach this high state of culture attain to that supreme and blissful end, and not they who are without knowledge, or they who are of little and narrow souls, or they who are bereft of understanding, or they who are without penances. Indeed, everything rests on the (cultivated) understanding!'”
SECTION XVIII
Vaisampayana said, “When Yudhishthira, after saying these words, became silent, Arjuna, afflicted by that speech of the king, and burning with sorrow and grief, once more addressed his eldest brother, saying, ‘People recite this old history, O Bharata, about the discourse between the ruler of the Videhas and his queen. That history has reference to the words which the grief-stricken spouse of the ruler of the Videhas had said to her lord when the latter, abandoning his kingdom, had resolved to lead a life of mendicancy. Casting off wealth and children and wives and precious possessions of various kinds and the established path for acquiring religious merit and fire itself.[53] King Janaka shaved his head (and assumed the garb of a mendicant). His dear spouse beheld him deprived of wealth, installed in the observance of the vow of mendicancy, resolved to abstain from inflicting any kind of injury on others, free from vanity of every kind, and prepared to subsist upon a handful of barley fallen off from the stalk and to be got by picking the grains from crevices in the field.
Approaching her lord at a time when no one was with him, the queen, endued with great strength of mind, fearlessly and in wrath, told him these words fraught with reason: ‘Why hast thou adopted a life of mendicancy, abandoning thy kingdom full of wealth and corn? A handful of fallen off barley cannot be proper for thee. Thy resolution tallies not with thy acts,[54] since abandoning thy large kingdom thou covetest, O king, a handful of grain! With this handful of barley, O king, wilt thou succeed in gratifying thy guests, gods. Rishis and Pitris? This thy labour, therefore, is bootless. Alas, abandoned by all these, viz., gods, guest and Pitris, thou leadest a life, of wandering mendicancy, O king, having cast off all action. Thou wert, before this, the supporter of thousands of Brahmanas versed in the three Vedas and of many more besides. How canst thou desire to beg of them thy own food today? Abandoning thy blazing prosperity, thou castest thy eyes around like a dog (for his food).
Thy mother hath today been made sonless by thee, and thy spouse, the princess of Kosala, a widow. These helpless Kshatriyas, expectant of fruit and religious merit, wait upon thee, placing all their hopes on thee. By killing those hopes of theirs, to what regions shalt thou go, O king, especially when salvation is doubtful and creatures are dependent on actions?[55] Sinful as thou art, thou hast neither this world nor the other, since thou wishest to live, having cast off thy wedded wife?[56] Why, indeed, dost thou lead a life of wandering mendicancy, abstaining from all actions, after having abandoned garlands and perfumes and ornaments and robes of diverse kinds? Having been, as it were, a large and sacred take unto all creatures, having been a mighty tree worthy of adoration and granting its shelter unto all, alas, how canst thou wait upon and worship others? If even an elephant desists from all work, carnivorous creatures coming in packs and innumerable worms would eat it up. What need be said of thyself that art so powerless?[57]
How couldst thy heart be set on that mode of life which recommends an earthen pot, and a triple-headed stick, and which forces one to abandon his very clothes and which permits the acceptance of only a handful of barley after abandonment of everything? If, again, thou sayest that kingdom and a handful of barley are the same to thee, then why dost thou abandon the former! If, again, a handful of barley becomes an object of attachment with thee, then, thy original resolution (of abandoning everything) falls to the ground, If, again, thou canst act up to thy resolution of abandoning everything! then who am I to thee, who art thou to me, and what can be thy grace to me?[58] If thou beest inclined to grace, rule then this Earth! They that are desirous of happiness but are very poor and indigent and abandoned by friends may adopt renunciation. But he who imitates those men by abandoning palatial mansions and beds and vehicles and robes and ornaments, acts improperly, indeed. One always accepts gifts made by others; another always makes gifts.
Thou knowest the difference between the two. Who, indeed, of these two shouldst be regarded the superior? If a gift be made to one who always accepts gifts, or to one that is possessed of pride, that gift becomes bootless like the clarified butter that is poured upon a forest-conflagration.[59] As a fire, O king, never dies till it has consumed all that has been thrown into it, even so a beggar can never be silenced tilt he receives a donative. In this world, the food that is given by a charitable person is the sure support of the pious. If, therefore, the king does not give (food) where will the pious that are desirous of salvation go?[60] They that have food (in their houses) are house-holders. Mendicants are supported by them. Life flows from food. Therefore, the giver of food is the giver of life. Coming out from among those that lead a domestic mode of life, mendicants depend upon those very persons from whom they come. Those self-restrained men, by doing this, acquire and enjoy fame and power. One is not to be called a mendicant for his having only renounced his possessions, or for his having only adopted a life of dependence on eleemosynary charity. He who renounces the possessions and pleasures of the world in a sincere frame of mind is to be regarded a true mendicant.[61]
