phlegm, who will bring back that animal? Nevertheless, I shall take such measures that Visvantara will know a limit in his almsgiving. This may suffice to appease your anger.'
The Sibis answered: 'No, Your Majesty, this will not do. Visvantara is no person to be brought to reason in this matter by a simple censure.'
Samgaya spoke: 'But what else can I do?
16. 'He is averse to sinful actions, only his attachment to virtuous practices is turning into a kind of passion. Why, should you then deem imprisonment or death inflicted on my own son to be the due requital for that elephant?
'Therefore, desist from your wrath! Henceforward I will prevent Visvantara from such actions.'
Notwithstanding this, the Sibis persisted in their anger and said:
17, 18. 'Who would be pleased, O king, with the pain of death, or prison, or flogging pronounced upon your son? But being devoted to his religious duties, Visvantara is not fit to be a bearer of the troublesome burden of royalty, because of his tenderness of heart and his compassion. Let the throne be occupied by such princes, as have obtained renown for their martial qualities and are skilled in the art of giving its due to each of the three members of the trivarga; but your son, who in consequence of his love of Righteousness (dharma), does not heed Policy (naya), is a proper person to dwell in a penance-grove.
19. 'Surely, if princes commit faults of bad policy, the results of those faults fall on their subjects[1]. They are however bearable for them, after all, as is taught by experience; not so for the kings themselves, the very roots of whose power they undermine.
20. 'Why, then, here say much? Not capable of conniving at a state of things which must lead to your
- ↑ This Indian parallel to the Horatian verse quidquid delirant reges, plectuntur Achivi, runs thus in the original: phalanti kâmam vasudhâdipânâm durnîtidoshâs tadupâsriteshu.
