“Trees when laden with fruit
are bowed down, and
the clouds when pregnant
with fresh rain hang near the earth: and
in like manner good men are
not unduly exalted by prosperity.
This is the natural
disposition of the liberal man (paropakārin).
...
The ears of men like these
are ornamented by hearing the revelation of divine wisdom, and not with
ear-rings;
their hands are adorned by
liberality (dāna) rather than by bracelets and rings: and
their bodies shine by the
doing of good unto others, and not by being anointed with the oil of sandal-wood.”
“Trees are bowed down
with weight of fruit,
Clouds big with rain hang
low,
So good men humbly bear
success,
Nor overweening grow.
...
No earrings deck the good
man’s ears, which still on scripture feed;
His hands, still open to
the poor, no golden bracelets need;
The perfume of his kindly
acts, like flowers in leaves concealed,
Exceeds the fragrant
scent which nard and sandal unguents yield.”
“The
ear is adorned by hearing the Shāstras, and not by an
ear-ring,
The
hand by liberality (dāna) and not by a bracelet:
the
whole person (kāya) of the
kind-hearted (“karuṇāparāṇāṁ”) shines (“vibhāti”) by doing good to
others (paropakāra) and not by
anointing sandal-ointment.”
As you can see,
these are two different translations of Stanza 71, and three different
translations of Stanza 72, of Bhartṛhari’s Nīti Śataka.
The second is
what one would call a “free translation” {where did
the author get the word nard from? there is
reference only to sandalwood (candana), not to spikenard} albeit poetic in the 18th-19th century
English Romantic sense of the term.
He conveys the
idea, but the translation is inadequate.
I’d go with:
“Trees when laden with fruit
are bowed down (namra), and
(the word namra is
significant: derived from the root nam,
it primarily means bent down, bowing, stooping; but
the word is used in the sense of soft, gentle,
tender, modest, humble, well-behaved)
...
the clouds when pregnant
with fresh rain hang near the earth: and
in like manner good men
are not unduly exalted by prosperity.
(As in, they are not lifted up, they
don’t set themselves high & above others – not arrogant & puffed-up
& proud)
This is the natural disposition of the generous,
helpful man (paropakārin).
Just as the best, most beneficial trees
are those which are bent down low through the weight of their abundant fruitage
– just as the most loved & longed-for clouds are those which shower water –
enlivening the whole world, cloaking the Earth with green, decking trees with
lush leaves & flowers, swelling up the rivers, sending forth roaring
cataracts amongst mountain cliffs – and laden with moisture, lay close to the
Earth – so is the innate nature of truly benevolent men, i.e. who do good to
others (paropakārin): humble,
not lifting themselves up above others, even in prosperity.
Wealth does not puff them up or make
them arrogant.
They are naturally gentle & modest.
They do not gaze down upon others with
contempt or derision from their inaccessible heights, but are naturally soft
& humble (namra).
“The ear is adorned by
hearing the Shāstras, and not by an
ear-ring,
The hand by liberality (dāna) and not by a bracelet:
the whole person (kāya) of the kind-hearted (“karuṇā parāṇāṁ”) shines
(“vibhāti”) by doing good to
others (paropakāra) and not by
anointing sandal-
paste.”
The idea is that the adornment of a
compassionate man’s ear is not his ear-ring, but his attentive listening to
sacred writ – in other words, his knowledge of sacred wisdom & his imbibing
that wisdom;
what makes his hand beautiful is his
charity (dāna), i.e.
giving away (figuratively, with his hands)
not the bracelets he wears;
what makes his body, his whole being,
glow with radiance, is not anointing himself with sandalwood, but being
benevolent, i.e. doing good to others, paropakāra meaning much the
same as dāna, but having
wider significance: causing the welfare of others; helping,
assisting or serving others.
I must say that “sacred writ” isn’t
quite appropriate a substitute for “Shāstra”.
“Sacred writ” is a modern European
term, conveying something quite different from the Indian, Sanskrit word “Shāstra”.
Shāstras
teach you many things – including how to sow dissension amongst the courtiers
of a rival king – or what should be the layout of a city.
The Shāstras of
India deal with all aspects,
and every aspect, of life –
they’re not just about “godliness” & “righteousness”.
“Sacred wisdom” or “divine wisdom” also
don’t quite convey the right idea, since such terms have heavily western-religious
undertones.
What is meant is more like the wisdom –
solid practical wisdom included – which has the sanction of centuries of
experience & learned authority – but which, yes, ultimately has
the seal of “divine” sanction & origination {everything originates in the Supreme Being}.
These thoughts, this imagery, these
sentiments, are not restricted to Bhartṛhari.
The symbolism & the ethical ideals
are echoed in various forms, in various ways, in myriad permutations &
combinations, throughout Indian literature.
Tree & cloud imagery are rampant,
in Hindu texts, and are often found together.
We read, in the Shānti Parva of the Mahābhārata {12.75.13}:
parjanyam iva bhūtāni mahādrumam iva dvijāḥ
narāstam upajīvanti nṛpaṃ sarvārthasādhakam
“Men seek the protection of a competent (sarvārtha-sādhaka) king like creatures seeking relief from the clouds (parjanya) or birds (dvija) seeking refuge
in a large tree (mahā-druma).”
{The Hindi translator
understands sarvārtha-sādhaka
as “one who succeeds in fulfilling all wishes”}.
Here again the benevolence &
munificence of great men is compared to clouds that shower rain {parjanya}, or prolific, leafy, immense trees {mahā-druma}.
Cloud symbolism is perhaps
the single most important, in Hinduism, after that of the
lotus – but, in a sense, it predates lotus
symbolism in pervasiveness & persistence, going back all the way to the Ṛg Veda where it is portrayed mostly in a
negative light, i.e. the Asura Vṛtra is
identified with the rain-cloud which is dismembered by Indra
to release life-giving rains on Earth {lotus symbolism is found in the Ṛg Veda, but isn’t of much importance there}.
It isn’t so simple, though.
Quite the contrary.
It may be a lesser known fact that while the Sanskrit word asura means, amongst other things, cloud – so does the word deva.
In his translation of the Mahābhārata 1.68.10, Ganguli identifies parjanya
{the rain-giving cloud} with Indra himself:
“And Parjanya
(Indra) poured showers at the proper
time, & the produce of the fields was always pulpy & juicy.”
{“kālavarṣī ca parjanyaḥ sasyāni rasavanti ca...”}
The Hindi translator simply says megha, i.e. cloud.
In a note appended to the Ṛg Veda 2.12.12, H.H. Wilson again notes the identity of the rain-cloud, Parjanya, with Indra – and mentions that it has 7 forms, which are enumerated in the Taittiriya Āraṇyaka.
Parjanya, the Rain-cloud, is often invoked & prayed to, in the Ṛg Veda {the hymn 5.83, for instance}.
In the Bhagavad Gītā 3.14., parjanya is identified with rainfall itself, and Kṛṣṇa says:
“From food {anna} all living creatures come into being; from rain {parjanya} is the generation of food; from sacrifice {yajña} rain {parjanya} comes into being & yajña is born of karma”.
This, however, would be a slight digression from the central subject of the cloud-&-tree symbolism used for great men of liberality & compassion, of those who protect & nourish & cherish others.
Kālidāsa – one
of the greatest poets in world history – uses cloud & tree symbolism
extensively, in this respect.
Thus
we read, in Raghuvaṃśa, 10.5 {Kale translation}:
“At about the same time the
gods, harassed by Rāvaṇa, went to Hari, just as travellers, oppressed with heat, repair
to an umbrageous tree.”
After Hari, i.e. Viṣṇu – {of whom we’re told “lokānugraha evaiko hetuste janmakarmaṇoḥ” “Doing good to the world is the only goal of your incarnations & actions” (10.31)} – reassures the Devas that he shall incarnate as Rāma on Earth to destroy Rāvaṇa, Kālidāsa writes (10.48):
“Having, in this way
drenched with the water (in the form) of speech the crop-like gods withered
(dried) by the drought of Rāvaṇa, the cloud-like Kṛṣṇa (Viṣṇu) disappeared.”
Here Viṣṇu is
compared to a cloud, and his speech, to rain – which gives a new lease of life
{i.e. hope, relief, comfort} – to the devas, who’re like drought-afflicted crops waiting & thirsting for the raincloud.
The principal message, or ethic, in Bhartṛhari’s Nīti Śataka, though, is the humility, the
absence of pride & high-handedness, of not holding oneself aloof & being cut-off – of great men, who’re compared to rain-bearing
clouds & fruit-laden trees.
They’re “bent low, stooped low”
(namra) – precisely because of their generosity & compassion.
The greatness of
the compassionate man seeking the welfare of others doesn’t merely lie in giving – but that in being abundant & blessed – he is humble, accessible, approachable.
“Charity
suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself,
is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not
easily provoked, thinketh no evil...” – 1 Corinthians
13.4-5.
The essential idea is the same, but there is a difference: Bhartṛhari is talking about the innate disposition of those people who are charitable & helpful.
Innate these qualities may be, but such men, and such phenomenon, nevertheless serve as examples, as ideals to be inculcated & follows, because the same Hari, the same Kṛṣṇa, in the same Mahābhārata, uses almost the identical words, in advising Yudhiṣṭhira {2.45.65-66}:
parjanyam iva bhūtāni mahādrumam iva dvijāḥ
bāndhavās tvopajīvantu sahasrākṣam ivāmarāḥ
“O king of kings, cherishest
thou thy subjects with ceaseless vigilance and patience.
And
§
as the clouds (parjanya) are unto all creatures,
§
as the large tree of spreading bough (mahādruma) is
unto birds,
§
as he of a thousand eyes (sahasrākṣa – the Sun) is unto the immortals (amara),
bāndhava may well be translated as friends, dependents, or rather, all those who art bound to thee.
From the cloud &
tree, we see that: in being bountiful, in having & giving (fruit, water), one is humble.
The plenteousness
& the modesty are simultaneous virtues & presuppose & imply each other.
The truly benevolent man, the genuinely generous man, the man who gives, out of his own inherent & authentic & spontaneous feeling of love & kindness, is intrinsically humble & modest.
That is what human beings must learn & imbibe, in themselves.
