Poverty

[James L. Fitzgerald]

On Tue, 22 Aug 1995 21:06:11 BST Mani Varadarajan said:
>Dominik writes:
>* It is another fact of Sanskrit, Tamil and other classical Indian
>* literature that poverty is rarely, if ever, glamorized or treated as
>* metaphor, in the manner in which Sadhunathan has done.
>
>Here is a passage from the Mahabharata that praises poverty.
>I do not agree with Sadhunathan's statements, but poverty and
>renunciation are often claimed to be virtues in epic and Puranic
>literature.
>
>The passage is marked as XII.176 in P.C. Ray's translation of the
>vulgate.
>
>Mani
>


This thread regarding poverty has made for some interesting
reading.  I had already decided to dig out of my translation of
the Zaanti Parvan the following, very apposite speech of
"Dhanam-jaya," "winner of wealth," Arjuna (from what I refer to
as the "Persuasion of YudhiSThira" (MBh 12.7-38)), when
M. Varadarajan posted the 'Song of Zamyaaka' from the MBh's
Zaanti Parvan (MBh 12.170 in the Poona edition; 12.176 in the
vulgate, where the name occurs as Zampaaka).  This 'giitaa'
praises "having nothing at all" (aakimcanya), an idea which
Arjuna explicitly rebuts in a speech in MBh 12.8.  YudhiSThira,
filled with grief and remorse at the war's slaughter, has just
announced his intention to refuse to rule the kingdom
(12.7.34-41), saying among other things, "The [Vedic?] teaching
is, 'One who has possessions [parigrahavant] is not able to
acquire the whole of the Law,' and that is obvious to me, O you
who finish off your enemies." (12.7.37)  Arjuna immediately
attacked his more delicate older brother with great vehemence
and, among other arguments, emphatically asserted the most
radical pravRtti perspective on wealth and poverty:

================================================================
(The following is only a semi-final draft of what will be sent to
the University of Chicago Press next year for what will be volume 7
of its complete translation of the MBh, which should be available
some time in 1997; particularly unfinished at the moment are the
renderings of dharma, which I had left simply as "dharma" in earlier
drafts.)

[Arjuna to YudhiSThira: MBh 12.8.11-32]

   NahuSa said, 'Having nothing whatsoever is not desirable, for
cruel things must be done in poverty.  Poverty be damned!'

   Sir, you know well the 'nothing for tomorrow' ideal of seers,
but what they call 'Law' proceeds from wealth.  If someone steals
a man's wealth, he shrinks that one's ability to perform lawful
deeds and acquire merit.  If someone were stealing our wealth,
king, would we put up with it?

   People look upon a poor man standing nearby as if he were to
blame for it.  Poverty is something that degrades a person's
position in the world, why would anyone praise it?  King, a man
whose status is degraded grieves, and so does he who has no
wealth.  I see no difference between a man of degraded status and
a poor one.

   Like streams running down from the mountains, all undertakings
proceed from wealth gathered from here and there and then made to
increase.  Law and love and heaven come from wealth, O lord over
men; the world would not manage to survive without wealth.

   All the undertakings of a stupid man bereft of wealth
dissipate into nothingness, like puny little rivers in the
summer.

   He who has wealth has friends, he who has wealth has
relatives, he who has wealth is a man in the world, he who has
wealth is a learned expert.

   A poor man who longs for wealth cannot get it just by wanting
it--wealth comes in the train of prior wealth the way mighty
elephants are tied behind other elephants.

   Law, love, heaven, joy, anger, learning, self-control--all
these proceed from wealth.  The family arises from wealth, the
Law proceeds from wealth.  A poor man has neither this world nor
the next one, O highest among men.  A man with no wealth cannot
properly perform those deeds the Law requires of him.  Law flows
out of wealth like a mountain river from a rocky peak.

   And, king, a man who is lean only in his own body is not truly
lean; truly lean is he whose horses, cattle, household, and
guests are lean.

   Look at this according to basic principles.  Look how it is
with the Gods and the Asuras.  What more is there to it, king,
than that the Gods thrive from having killed their kinsmen {=the
Asuras}?  If nothing belonging to another may be taken, how could
one even begin to do his lawful duties?

   The seers have come to this conclusion in the Vedas (the
three-fold body of Vedic Learning must be studied, that is a
necessity for a seer):  'Wealth is to be appropriated in every
way and sacrificial rites of worship are to be carried out with
painstaking effort.'

   In every case the Gods obtained their positions in heaven
through violence.  Thus did the Gods decide, and so say the
everlasting words of the Veda.

   They recite the Vedas, do asceticism, perform sacrificial
worship, and officiate at the sacrifices of others--all that is
better when one takes from another.

   We do not see any wealth whatsoever, not anywhere, that has
not been carried off from somewhere else.  For that is exactly
how kings win this earth in war.  And having won it they declare
it to be 'mine,' as sons do with their father's wealth.  The
seers who were kings won heaven by conquest, for this is declared
to be their Law.

   As waters flow out of the plentiful ocean in all the ten
directions, so wealth spreads out over the earth from the family
of the king.

===============================================================

Arjuna's diatribe against poverty and his justification of
violence did not persuade YudhiSThira--he soon (12.9.1ff.)
launched into a glowing description of ascetic poverty in the
forest (acknowledging somewhat reluctantly that in time ". . .
one's basic nature comes to the fore, and one's meals become very
important" (12.9.20ab) so one must go in search of food).

I'll not pass any easy judgments on who are the devils
and who are the angels in this discussion.   But both sides are
able to quote the MBh scriptures convincingly on this issue
because the Bhaarata sages were emphatically of more than one mind on this
subject.

Jim Fitzgerald

============================================================
============================================================
James L. Fitzgerald               Home     8708 Kingsridge Dr.
Dept of Religious Studies                  Knoxville, TN 37923
University of Tennessee                    615-539-2881
Knoxville, TN 37996-0450                   email:pa114508 at utkvm1.utk.edu
Phone:  615-974-2467    Fax  615-974-0965
============================================================
============================================================