Rajadharmanushasana Parva — The conduct of a king when he has no friends or when he is surrounded by wicked ministers

Yudhishthira said How should a king behave who is shorn of friends, has many enemies, and an exhausted treasury, and is destitute of troops, O Bharata.

Again how should he behave hiinself when he is surrounded by wicked ministers, when his counsels are all divulged, when he does not find his way clearly before him, when he attacks another kingdom, when he is engaged in grinding a hostile kingdom, and when though weak he is at war with a powerful king? How should a king act whose affairs are iilmanaged and who disregards the requirements of place and time, who is unable, for his oppressions, to bring about peace and create disunion among his enemies? Should he try to acquire wealth by foul means or should he sacrifice his life without seeking wealth?

Bhishma said Conversant as you are with duties, you have, O foremost of Bharata's race, asked me a question dealing with the mystery of duties. Without being asked, O Yudhishthira, I could not venture to dwell upon this duty. Morality is very subtile. One understands it, О foremost of Bharata's race by the help of scriptural texts. By remembering what one has heard and by doing good acts, some one in some place may become a righteous person.

By acting intelligently the king may or may not acquire wealth. Guided by your own intelligence do you think what reply should be given to your query on this subject.

Listen, O Bharata, to the highly meritorious expedient which kings should follow (during times of distress). For the sake of true morality, however, I would not call those means fair.

If the treasury filled by oppression, such a conduct brings the king to the brink of destruction. Such is the conclusion of all intelligente men who have deliberated upon the subject.

The scriptures or science which one always studies imparts him the knowledge becomes agreeable to him.

Ignorance yields barrenness of invention about means. Finding out of expedicnts, again, through the help of knowledge, becomes the source of great happiness. Without cherishing any misgivings and any malice, here these instructions.

Through the decrease of the treasury, the king's army suffers deterioration. The king should, therefore, replenish his treasury like one creating water in a forest which is without water.

In pursuance of this code of morality practised by the ancients, the king should, when the opportunity presents itself, show mercy to his subjects. This is eternal duty.

For able and competent men the duties are of one kind. In times of distress, however, one's duties assume a different aspect. Without riches a king may, by penances acquire religious merit. Life, however, is much more important than religious merit.

By acquiring only religious merit, a king, who is weak never succeeds in acquiring just and proper means for maintenance; and because he cannot, by even his best endeavours, acquire power by the help of only religious merit, therefore the practices in time of distress are sometimes regarded as quite of a piece with morality. The learned, however, opine that those practices beget sinfulness.

After the time of distress is over, what should the Kshatriya do? He should act in such a way that his merit may not be dissipated. He should also act in such a way that he may not have to yield to his foes. These are his duties. He should not be despondent.

He should not try to save the merit of others or of himself. On the other hand, he should save his own self. This is the settled conclusion. There runs this Shruti, viz., that Brahmanas, who are conversant with duties, should be proficient in them. Likewise, as regards the Kshatriya, his proficiency should be in exertion, since might of arms is his great wealth.

When a Kshatriya's means of sustenance are gone, what should he not take excepting what belongs to ascetics and Brahmanas?

Even as a Brahmana in a time of distress may officiate at the sacrifice of a person for whom he should never officiate and eat forbidden food, so there is no doubt that a Kshatriya may take riches from every one say ascetics and Brahmanas.

Even one attacked (by an enemy and seeking the means of escape) what can be an unfair means? For a person confined in a ungeon and seeking escape what can be an improper path? When a person becomes afflicted, he escapes by even an improper way.

For a Kshatriya who has, for his insufficient treasury and army, become exceedingly humiliated, neither a life of mendicancy nor the profession of a Vaishya or that of a Shudra has been sanctioned.

The profession prescribed for a Kshatriya is the acquisition of wealth by battle and victory. He should never beg of a member of his own caste. The person who maintains himself ordinarily by following the practices primarily sanctioned, for him, may, in times of distress, support himself by following the practices laid down in the alternative.

In a time of distress, when ordinary practices cannot be followed, a Kshatriya may support himself by even unjust and improper means. The very Brahmanas, it is seen, do the same when their means of living run out.

When the Brahmanas act thus, what doubt is there regarding the conduct of the Kshatriya)? This is, indeed, settled. Without despairing and yielding to destruction, a Kshatriya nay, by force, take, what he can, from rich persons. Know that the Kshatriya may, by force, take, what he can, from rich persons. Know that the Kshatriya is the protector and the destroyer of the people. Therefore, a Kshatriya in difficulty should take by force, what he can, with a view to protect the people.

No person in this world, O king, can maintain himself without injuring other creatures. The very ascetic leading a solitary life in the forest is no exception.

A Kshatriya should not live, depending upon destiny, especially he, O chief of the Kurus, who wishes to rule.

The king and the kingdom should always mutually protect each other. This is an eternal duty.

As the king protects, by spending all his money, the kingdom, when it is in distress, so should the kingdom protect the kingdom protect the king when he is in distress.

The king, even when reduced to straits, should never abandon his treasury, his machinery for punishing the wicked, his army, his friends and allies, and uther necessary institutions and the chiefs living in his kingdom.

Masters of duty say that one must keep his seeds, even from his very food. This a truth cited from the work of Shamvara, well-known for his great powers of illusion.

Fie on the life of that king whose kingdom is weakened. Fie on the life of that men who from want of means goes to a foreign country in quest of a living.

The king depends upon his treasury and army. His army, again, depends on his treasury. His army is the source of all his religious merits. His religious merits, again, are the root of his people.

The treasury can never be replenished without oppressing others. How then can the army be maintained without oppression? The king, therefore, in times of difficulty, commits no sin by oppressing his subjects for filling the treasury.

For celebrating sacrifices many improper deeds are done. Therefore a king commits no sin by doing improper acts (when he seeks to fill his treasury in a time of distress).

For the sake of wealth improper practices are followed in seasons of distress. If (at such times) such improper practices be not followed, evil is the sure consequence. All those institutions that are maintained for working destruction and miso y exist for the sake of collecting wealth. Guided by such considerations, an intelligent king should settle his conduct.

As animals and other articles are a necessary or sacrifices, as sacrifices are for purifying the heart, and as animals, sacrifices, and purity of the heart, are all for final liberation, even so policy and punishment exist for the treasury, the treasury, exists for the army, and policy and treasury and army all the three exists for defeating enemies and protecting or enlarging the kingdom.

I shall here quote an example illustrating the true way of morality. A large tree is cut down for making out of it a sacrificial stake. In cutting it, other trees which stand in its way have also to be cut down. These, also, while falling down, kill others standing there about.

So they who stand in the way of replenishing a treasury must be killed. I do not see how else success can be acquired.

By wealth, both the worlds, viz., this and the other, can be acquired, as also Truth and religious merit. A person who has no wealth is more dead than alive.

Wealth for the celebration of sacrifices should be won by every means. The demerit of an act, done in an hour of difficulty, does not equal to that which permeates the same, if done at other tinies, O Bharata.

The acquisition of wealth and its abandonment cannot both be possibly suen in the same individual, O king. I do not see a rich man in the forest.

With respect to wealth which is seen in this world, every one fights with every one else, saying,-This shall be mine.-This shall be imine.

There is nothing, O scorcher of foes, which yields greater merit to a king than the possession of a kingdom. It is sinful for a king to oppress his subjects with heavy taxes at ordinary times. In a season of distress, it is quite different.

Some acquire wealth by gifts and sacrifices; some who like penances acquire the same by penances; some acquire it by the help of their intelligence and cleverness.

A person who has no wealth is said to be weak, while he who has wealth becomes powerful. A man of riches may acquire everything. A king who has a well-replenished treasury can accomplish everything.

By his treasury a king may acquire religious merit, gratify his desire for pleasure, acquire the next world, and this also. The treasury, however, should be filled by the help of righteousness and never by unrighteous deeds, which pass for righteousness in times of difficulty.