Fair, wanting wealth for virtue’s cause,
Better still wanting none, because,
Rather than washing one’s foul feet,
Is not keeping them clean discreet?
____________________________________________Here is the transliteration of the original verse:
dharma-artham yasya vitta-īhāvaram tasya nir-īhatā |
prakśhālanāt hi pankasyashreyah na sparshanam nŗņān || vana 2-49
In today’s times we see the wealthy giving away to temples. Most of it might be guilt money. We tend to justify unacceptable means in weaselling away wealth for so-called good deeds. This verse poses us a question. What is better— fouling up feet in filth first and then washing them clean, or avoiding the muck altogether?
As to the text: vitta-īhā = desire of wealth; varam = better; nir-īhatā = not wanting, not yearning; prakśhālanāt hi = for, instead of washing clean (after dirtying): pankasya = of mud/muck; shreyah = (it is)preferable/better; na sparshanam = not touching (mud): nŗņān = by men.
It is one thing wanting wealth for own sake. At another level lies wanting wealth for a good cause, for virtue, dharma and the like. Yet, wanting, desiring is still at the root. Is not it better not wanting still? Better than cleaning up feet, better is to steer clear of mud.
Leave a Reply