Yudhishthira said. Without giving up the domestic mode of life, O royal sage of Kuru's race, who ever acquired Liberation which is the annihilation of the Understanding? Do tell me this.

How may the gross and the subtile form be renounced? Do you also, O grandfather, tell me what the supreme excellence of Liberation is.

Bhishma said Regarding it is cited the old discourse between Janaka and Sulabha, O Bharata!

Formerly there was a king of Mithila, of the name of Dharmadhyaja, of Janaka's race. He was given to the religion of Renunciation,

He was well conversant with the Veda, with the scriptures on Liberation, and with the scriptures dealing with royal duties. Governing his senses, he ruled this Earth.

Hearing of his good conduct in the world, many wise men, well-conversant with wisdom, O foremost of men, wished to imitate him.

In the saine golden age, a woman by name sulabha, belonging to the mendicant order, practised the duties of Yoga and travelled over the entire Earth.

In course of her wanderings over the Earth, Sulabha heard from many ascetics of different places that the king of Mithila was given to the religion of Liberation.

Hearing this report about king Janaka and desirous of learning whether it was true or not, Sulabha became desirous of seeing Janaka.

Abandoning, by her Yoga powers, her former body and features, Sulabha assumed the most perfect features and peerless beauty.

In the twinkling of an eye and with the speed of the quickest arrow the fair browed lady having eyes like lotus-petals went to the capital of the Videhas.

Arrived at the metropolis of Mithila having a large population, she adopted the guise of a mendicant and appeared before the king.

The king, beholding her delicate form, became filed with wonder and enquired who she was, whose she was, and whence she came.

Welcoming her, he assigned her an excellent seat, honoured her by offering water to wash her feet, and pleased her with excellent refreshments.

Refreshed duly and pleased with the rites of hospitality offered to her, Sulabha, the female mendicant, urged the king, who was encircled by his ministers and seated in the midst of learned scholars, (to speak out his fidelity to the religion of Liberation).

Doubting whether Janaka has succeeded in acquiring Liberation by following the religion of Renunciation, Sulabha, gifted with Yogapower, entered the understanding of the king by her own understanding.

Controlling, by means of the rays of light that came out from her own eyes, the rays issuing from the eyes of the king, the lady, desirous of ascertaining the truth, bound up king Janaka with Yoga fetters,

Own Priding himself upon his invincibleness and defeating the intentions of Sulabha, that best of kings seized her resolution with his own resolution.

The king, in his subtile form, had no royal umbrella and sceptre. The lady Sulabha, in hers, was without the threefold stick. Both staying then in the same form, thus conversed with each other. Listen to that conversation as it took place between the king and Sulabha.

Janaka said O holy lady, to what course of conduct are you given? Whose are you? Whence have you come? After finishing your business here, where will you go?

No one can, without questioning, determine another's proficiency in the scriptures, or age, or order of birth. You should, therefore, answer these questions of mine, when you have come to me.

Know that I am truly shorn of all vanity about my royal umbrella and sceptre. I wish to know you thoroughly. You are deserving, I think, of my respect.

Do you hear me as I describe to you Liberation, for there is none else who describe to you that subject. Hear me also as I tell you who that person is from whom in days of yore I acquired this distinguishing knowledge.

I am the beloved disciple of the great and venerable Panchashikha, belonging to the mendicant order, or Parasara's family.

My doubts have been removed and I am fully conversant with the Sankhya and the Yoga systems, and the ordinances about sacrifices and other rites, which form the three well known paths of Liberation.

Wandering over the Earth and following path that is pointed out by the scriptures, the learned Panchashika formerly lived happily in my abode for four months during the rains.

That foremost of Sankhyas described to me, according to the truth, and in an intelligible manner suited to my understanding, the several kinds of means for acquiring Liberation. He did not, however, order me to give up my kingdom.

Freed from attachments, and fixing my Soul on Supreme Brahma, and unaffected by companionship, I live, practising in all its minute details that threefold conduct which is laid down in treatises on Liberation.

Renunciation in the highest prescribed for Liberation. Renunciation, by which one becomes freed, emanate from Knowledge.

From Knowledge originates the endeavour after Yoga, and through that exertion one acquires knowledge of Self. Through means knowledge of Self one gets over joy and grief. That enables one to transcend death and acquire great success.

That high intelligence has been acquired by me, and accordingly I have not over all pairs of opposites. Even in this life I have been freed from stupefaction and have got over all attachments.

As a soil, saturated with water and softened thereby, causes the seed to sprout forth, similarly, the acts of men cause rebirth.

As a seed, fried on a pan or otherwise, becomes unfit to sprout forth although the power for sprouting lies there, similarly my understanding having been freed from the productive principle formed by desire, by the instructions of the holy Panchashikha of the mendicant order, it no longer gives its fruit in the form of attachment to the objects of the senses.

I never experience love for my wife or hate for my enemies. Indeed, I keep aloof from both, making the fruitlessness of attachment and anger.

I regard both person impartially, viz., him who smears my right hand with sandal-paste and him who wounds my left.

Having attained my object, I am happy, and consider in the same light a clod of earth, a piece of stone, and a lump of gold. I am shorn of all attachments, though am engaged in ruling a kingdom. On account of all this I am better known over all bearers of triple sticks.

Some foremost of men who are conversant with the Liberation say that Liberation has a triple path. Some consider Knowledge having all things of the world for its object as the means of Liberation. Some hold that the total renunciation of acts is the means thereof.

Another class of persons conversant with the scriptures Liberation say that Knowledge is the only means. Others, viz., Yatis, gifted with subtile vision; hold that acts form the means.

The great Panchashikha, discarding both the opinion about knowledge and acts, considered the third as the only means or path of Liberation.

If house-holders be endued with selfrestraint, and control over the senses, they become the equals of Sannyasins. If, on the other hand, Sannyasins be endued with desire and aversion and wives and honour and pride and affection, they become like householders.

If one can acquire Liberation by means of knowledge, then may Liberation exist in triple sticks. Why then may Liberation not exist in the umbrella and the sceptre as well, especially when the reason in taking up the triple stick and the scepture is the same.

One becomes attached to all those things and acts which are necessary for him for the sake of his own self for particular reasons.

If a person, seeing the faults of the domestic mode of life, renounce it for adopting another mode, he cannot, for such rejection and adoption, he considered as one who is at once freed from all attachments.

Sovereignty is fraught with the rewarding and the punishing of others. The life of a mendicant is equally fraught with the same. When, therefore, mendicants are like kings in this respect, why would mendicants only acquire Liberation, and not kings?

Not withstanding the possession of sovereignty, therefore, one becomes purged of all sins by means of knowledge alone, living in Supreme Brahma.

The putting on of brown cloths shaving of the head, bearing of the triple stick, and the water-pitcher, these are the external signs of one's mode of life. These are useless in helping one to acquire Liberation.

When, despite the adoption of these emblems of a particular mode of life, Knowledge along becomes the cause of one's Liberation from sorrow, it would appear that the adoption of mere emblems is absolutely useless.

Or, if, seeing the mitigation of sorrow in it, you have adopted these emblems of Sanyasa, why then should not the mitigation of sorrow be seen in the umbrella and the sceptre which I use.

Liberation does not exist in poverty; nor is bondage to be seen in riches. One acquires Liberation through Knowledge only, whether one is poor or rich.

For these reasons, know that I am living in a state of freedom, though outwardly engaged in the enjoyment of religion, wealth, and pleasure, in the form of kingdom and wives, which form a field of bondage.

I have cut off the fetters formed by kingdom and riches, and the bondage of attachments, which the sword of Renunciation whetted on the the stone of the of the scriptures describing Liberation.

As regard myself then, I tell you that I have become freed in this way. O mendicant lady, I entertain an affection for you. But that should not prevent me from telling you that your conduct does not tally with the practices of the mode of life, which you have adopted.

Under formation of the body is highly delicate. You have beauty. You have an exceedingly shapely form. You are young. You have all these, and you have also subjugation of the senses. I doubt it verily. ine as

You have stopped up my body for ascertaining as to whether I am really liberated or not. This åct of yours does not tally with that mode of life whose emblems you carry.

The triple stick is unfit for a Yogin who has desire. As regards yourself, you do not adhere to your stick. As regards those who are freed, they should protect themselves from fall.

Listen now to to what your transgression has been on account of your contact with me and your having entered into my gross body with the help of your understanding.

Why have you entered into my kingdom or my palace? At whose sign have you entered heart.

You belong to the foremost of all the orders, being, as you are, a Brahmana woman. As regards myself whoever, I am a Kshatriya. There is no union for us two. Do not help to cause an intermixture of races.

You follow the duties that lead to Liberation. I am a householder. This act of yours, therefore, is another evil you have committed, for it produces an unnatural union of two opposite modes of life.

into my I do not know whether you belong to my own family or do not belong to it. As regards yourself also, you do not know who I am. If you are of my own Gotra, you have by entering into my body, produced another evil,-viz., or unnatural union.

If, again, your husband be alive and living in an distant place, your union with me has produced the fourth evil of sinfulness, for you are not one whom I may lawfully marry.

Do you commit all these sinful deeds, actuated by the motive of performing a particular object? Do you do these from ignorance or from perverted intelligence.

If, again, on account of your evil nature you have thus become thoroughly independent or unrestrained in your conduct, I tell you that if you have any knowledge of the scriptures, you will understand that everything you have done has been productive of evil.

A third fault touches you on account of these acts of yours, a fault that is destructive of peace of mind. By trying to show your superiority, the indication of a wicked woman is seen in you.

Desirous of asserting your victory as you are, it is not myself alone whom you wish to defeat, for it is plain that you wish to win a victory over even the whole of my court.

By loO king thus towards all these meritorious Brahmanas, it is clear that you wish to humiliate them all the glorify yourself.

Stupefied by your pride of Yoga power that has been born of your jealousy, you have caused a union of your understanding with mine and thereby have really mingled together nectar with poision.

The union, again, of man and woman, when each seek the other, is sweet as nectar. That association, however, of man and woman when the latter, herself coveting, cannot get an individual of the opposite sex that does not seek her, is, instead of being a merit, only a fault that is as noxious as poison.

Do not continue to touch me. Know that I am righteous. Do you act according to your own scriptures. Your enquiry, viz., whether I am or I am not liberated, has been finished.

You should not conceal from me all your secret motives. You should not who thus disguise yourself, conceal from me what your object is, that is, whether this call of yours has been prompted by the desire of accomplishing some object of your own or whether you have come for accomplishing the object of some other king.

One should never appear deceitfully before a king; nor before a Brahmana; nor before his wife when that wife is possessed of every wifely virtue. Those who appear in deceitful guise before these three very soon meet with destruction.

The power of kings consists in their sovereignty. The power of Brahmanas wellversed in the Vedas is in the Vedas. Women hold a high power on account of their beauty and youth and blessedness.

These are powerful in the possession of these powers. He, therefore, who seeks to accomplish his own object should always approach these three with sincerity and openmindedness, Insincerity and deceit cannot yield success.

You should, therefore, inform me of the order to which you belong by birth, of your learning and conduct and disposition and nature, as also of the object with which you have come here.

Bhishma said Though chastised by the king in these unpleasant, improper, and ill-applied words, the lady Sulabha was not at all abashed.

After the king had said these words, the beautiful Sulabha then gave vent to the following words in reply which were more handsome than her person.

O king, speech should always be free from the nine verbal faults and the nine faults of judgement. It should also, while setting forth the meaning with clearness, be possessed of the eighteen well-known merits.

Ambiguity, determination of the faults and merits of premises and conclusions, weighing the respective strength or weakness of those faults and merits, establishment of the conclusion, and the element of persuasiveness or otherwise that belongs to the conclusion thus arrived at,-these five characteristics belonging to the sense-form the authoritativeness of what is said.

Listen now to the characteristics of these requirements beginning with ambiguity, one after another, as I explain them according to the combinations.

When knowledge rests on difference from one another, and when the understanding rests upon many points one after another, the combination of words is said to be sullied by ambiguity.

By ascertainment called Sankhya, is meant the determination, by elimination, of faults or merits, adopting tentative meanings.

Krama, or weighing the relative strength or weakness of the faults or merits, consists in settling the propriety of the priority or subsequence of the words used in sentence. This is the meaning of the word Krama as held by person who can explain sentences or texts.

Conclusion is the final determination after this examination of what has been said on the subject of religion, pleasure, profit, and Liberation, in respect of what it particularly is that has been said in the text.

The sorrow begotten by wish or hatred multiplies itself greatly. The conduct, O king, that one follows in such a matter is called Prayojanam.

Take it for granted, O king, at my word, that these marks of Ambiguity and the others, vhen occurring together, make a complete and intelligible sentence.

The words I shall utter will have senses, be free from ambiguity, logical, free from tautology, smooth, certain, free from bombast, agreeable, or sweet truthful, not inconsistent with the three-1 old objects of life, refined not elliptical or imperfect, shorn of harshness or difficulty of comprehension, characterised by due order, not far-fetched in sense, corrected with one another as cause and effect, and each having a specific object.

I shall not tell you anything, actuated by desire or anger or fear or cupidity or abjectness or deceipt or shame or mercy or pride.

When the speaker, the hearer, and the words said, perfectly agree with one another in course of a speech, then does the sense or meaning come out very clearly.

When about what is to be said, the speaker does not care for the understanding of the hearer by uttering words whose meaning is understood by himself, then, however good those words may be, they cannot be comprehended by the hearer.

That speaker, again, who, without caring for his own meaning, uses words that are of excellent sound and sense, creates only erroneous impressions in the mind of the hearer. Such words in such matters are certainly faulty.

That speaker, however, who uses words that are, while expressing his own meaning, intelligible to the hearer as well, is a true speaker. No other man deserves the name.

You should, therefore, O king, hear with rapt attention these words of mine, fraught with meaning and endued with wealth of sound.

You have asked me who I am, whose I am, whence I am coming, etc. Listen now to me, O king, with full mind, as I answer these questions of yours.

As lac and wood, as grains of dust and drops of water, exist mixed up when brought together, so are the existence of all creatures.

Sound, touch, taste, form, and scent, these, and the senses, though different in their essences, exist yet in a state of unison like lac and wood.

It is again well known that nobody asks any of these, saying, who are you? Each of them also has no knowledge either of itself or of the others.

The eye cannot see itself. The ear cannot hear itself. The eye, again, cannot satisfy the functions of any of the other senses, or can any of the senses satisfy the functions of any sense except its own.

If all of them even combine together, even then they can not know their own-selves as dust and water mingled together can not know each other though existing together. In order to perform their respective functions, they await the contact of external objects.

The eye, form, and light, form the three requisites of the action called Seeing. The same holds good about the action of the other senses and the ideas which is their result.

Then, again, between the functions of the senses and the ideas which are their result, the mind is an entity quite separate from the senses and is considered to have an action of its own. With its aid one distinguishes what is existent from what is non-existent for arriving at certainty.

With the five senses of knowledge and five senses of action, the mind makes a total of eleven. The twelfth is the Understanding. When doubt originates about what is to be known, the Understanding comes forward and sets at rest all doubts,

After the twelfth, Sattva is another principle numbering the thirteenth. With its aid creatures are distinguished as possess more of it or less of it in their constitutions,

After this, Consciousness (of self is an other principle.) It helps one to apprehend self as distinguished from what is not self.

Desire is the fifteenth principle, O king, the whole universe. The sixteenth principle is Avidya or nescience. To it are attached the seventeenth and the eighteenth principles called Nature and Manifestation.

Happiness and sorrow, decrepitude and death, gain and loss, the agreeable and the disagreeable,-these form the nineteenth principle and are called pairs of opposites.

Beyond the nineteenth principle is another, viz., Time, called the twentieth. Know that the births and deaths of all creatures are owing to the action of this twentieth principle.

These twenty exist together, Besides these,. the five Great primary elements, and existence and non-existence, bring up the number to twenty-seven. Beyond these, there are three others, named Vidhi, Shukra, and Bala, that make the number thirty. That is which these thirteen principles occur is said to be body.

Whether the Unmanifest or the Manifest be their cause, or whether the two be considered as their cause, or, fourthly, whether the four together be the cause, they that are conversant with spiritual science behold Nature as the cause of all creatures.

That Nature which is Unmanifest, becomes manifest in the form of these principles. Myself, yourself, O king, and all others that are gifted with body, are the result of that Nature.

Embryonic conditions are due to the mixture of the vital seed and blood. On account of insemination the result which first appears is called by the name of 'Kalala.

From 'Kalala' originates bubble. From 'Budbuda' originates what is called 'Peshi.' From 'Peshi' that stage originates in which the various limbs are seen. From this last stage appear nails and hair.

When the ninth months is gone, O king of Mithila, the creature takes its birth so that, its sex being known, it is called a boy or girl.

When the creature comes out of the womb, the form it presents is such that its nails and fingers seem to be of the colour of burnished copper. The next stage is called infancy, when the forin that was seen at the time of birth becomes metamorphosed.

From infancy youth is reached, and from youth, old age. As the creature advances from one stage into another, the from shown in the previous stage becomes changed.

The constituent elements of the body, which serve various functions in the general economy, undergo change every moment in every creature. Those changes, however, are so minute that they cannot be marked.

The birth of particles, and their death, in each successive stage, cannot be marked, O king, even as one cannot mark the changes in the flame of a burning lamp.

When such is the state of the bodies of all creatures,-i.e., when what is called the body is changing continually like the rapid motion of a house of good mettle,-who then has come whence or not whence, or whose is it or whose is it not, or whence does it not arise? What connection does there exist between creatures and their own bodies?

As fire is generated from the contact of flint with iron, or from two sticks of wood when rubbed against each other, so are creatures created from combination of the (thirty) principles already named.

Indeed, as you yourself see your own body in your body and as you yourself see your soul in your own soul, why is it that you do not see your own body and your own soul in the bodies and souls of others.

If it is true that you see an identity with yourself and others, why then did you ask me who I am and whose?

If it is true that you have, O King, been freed from the knowledge of duality which says-this is mine and this other is not mine, then what use is there with such questions as Who are you, whose are you, and whence do you come?

What marks of Liberation can be said to take place in that king who acts as others act towards enemies and allies and neutrals and in victory and trace and war?

What inarks of Liberation are in him who do not know the true nature of the three-fold objects of life as shown in seven ways in all acts and who, on that account, is attached to that three-fold objects?

What marks of Liberation exist in him who cannot look impartially on the agreeable, on the weak, and the strong? Unworthy as you are of it, your pretence to Liberation should be suppressed by your counsellors.

This your attempt to acquire Liberation is like the use of medicine by a patient who indulges in all sorts of forbidden food and practices.

O chastiser of enemies, thinking of wives and other sources of attachment, one should see these in his own soul. What else can be considered as the indication of Liberation.

Listen now to me as I speak fully of these and certain other minute sources of attachment belonging to the four-well-known acts to which you are still fettered though you profess yourself to have adopted the religion of Liberation.

That man who has to rule the entire world must, indeed, be a single king without a second. He is obliged to live in only a single palace.

In that palace he has again only one sleeping 'room. In that room he has, again, only one bed on which at night he is to lie down.

Half that bed again he is obliged to give to his Queen. This may serve as an example of how little the king's share is of all he is said to possess.

This is the case with his objects of enjoyment, with the food he eats, and with the dresses he puts on. He is thus attached to a very limited share of all things. He is, again, attached to the duties of rewarding and punishing.

The king always depends on others. He enjoys a very small share of all he is supposed to possess, and to that small share he is compelled to be attached. In the matter also of peace and war, the king is not independent?

In the matter of women, of sports and other sports of enjoyment, the king's inclinations are greatly limited. In the matter of taking advice and in the assembly of his councellors what independence can the king be said to have.

When, indeed, he passes orders on other men, he is said to be perfectly independent. But the moment after, in the several matters of his orders, his independence is limited by the very men whom he has ordered.

If the king wishes to sleep, he cannot satisfy his desire, resisted by those who have something to do with him. He must sleep when allowed, and while sleeping he is compelled to wake up for attending to those who have urgent business with him.

Bathe, touch, drink, eat, pour libations on the fire, celebrate sacrifices, speak, hear,these are the words which kings have to hear from others and hearing them have to serve those that utter them.

Men come in numbers to the king and pray to him for gifts. Being, however, the protector of the general treasury, he cannot make gifts even to the most worthy.

If he makes gifts, the treasury becomes exhausted. If he does not, disappointed solicitors regard him inimically. He becomes vexed and as the outcome of this, misanthropy possesses his mind.

If many wise and heroic and rich men live together, the king's mind begins to be filled with distrust. Even when there is no cause of fear, the king fears those who always wait upon and adore him.

Those I have mentioned, O king, also find fault with him. See, how the king's fears may originate from even them.

Then again all men are kings in their own houses. All men, again, in their own houses are householders. Like kings, O Janaka, all men in their own houses punish and reward.

Like kings others also have sons and wives and their own selves and treasuries and friends and stores. In these respects the king does not differ from other men.

The country is ruined, the city is burnt by fire,-the foremost of elephants is dead, at all this the king grieves like others, little thinking that these impressions are all owing to ignorance and mistake.

The king is seldom freed from mental sorrows caused by desire and aversion and fear. He is generally afflicted also by headaches and various other diseases.

The king is afflicted by all pairs of opposites. He is alarmed at everything. Indeed, beset with enemies and obstacles as kingdom is, the king, while he enjoys it, passes sleepless nights.

Sovereignty, therefore, is blessed with a small share of happiness. The misery with which it is full is very great. It is as unreal as burning flames fed by straw or the bubbles of froth seen on the surface of water.

Who is there that would like to obtain sovereignty, or having acquired sovereignty can hope to acquire tranquillity? You know this kingdom and this palace as yours.

You think also this army, this treasury, and these counsellors as yours. Whose, however, in sooth are they, and whose are they not? Allies, ministers, capital, provinces, punishment, treasury, and the king,—these seven which form the limbs of a kingdom exist, depending upon one another, like three sticks standing with one another's help. The merits of each are shown by the merits of the others. Which of them can be said to be superior to the rest?

Some particular ones are regarded as superior to the rest when some important purpose is served through their agency. Superiority, for the time being, is said to belong to that one whose efficacy is thus seen.

The seven limbs already mentioned, O best of kings, and the three others, forming ten, supporting one another, are said to enjoy the kingdom like the king himself.

That king who is gifted with great energy and who is firmly attached to Kshatriya duties, should be satisfied with only a tenth part of the produce of the subject's field.Other kings are seen to be satisfied with less than a tenth part of such produce.

There is no one who possessed the kingly office without some one else possessing it in the world, and there is no kingdom without a king. If there be no kingdom, there can be no virtue and if there be no virtue, whence can Liberation arise.

Merit of the most sacred and the highest order is associated with kings and kingdoms. By ruling a kingdom well, a king acquires the merit of a Horse-sacrifice with the whole Earth given away as sacrificial gift.

O king of Mithila, I can mention hundreds and thousands of faults like these that belong to kings and kingdoms.

Then, again, when I have no real connection with even my body, how then can I be said to have any connection with the bodies of others? You cannot charge me with having tried to engender an inter-mixture of castes.

Have you heard the religion of Liberation in all its bearings from the lips of Panchashikha, together with its means, it methods, its practises, and its conclusion?

If you have prevailed over all your bonds and freed yourself from all attachments, may I ask you, O king, why you preserve your connections still with this umbrella and those other appendages of royalty.

I think that you have not listened to the scriptures, or, you have listened to them without any advantage, or, perhaps, you have listened to some other books loO king like the scriptures.

It appears that you are endued with only worldly knowledge, and that like an ordinary man of the world, you are bound by the fetters of touch and wives and mansions and the like.

If be true that you have been freed from all fetters, what harm then have I done you by entering your body with only my Intellect?

The practice with Yatis is to live in uninhabited or deserted adodes. What harm them have I done to whom by entering your understanding which is indeed shorn of true knowledge?

I have not touched you, O king, with my hands, or arms, or feet, or thighs, O sinless One, or with any other part of the body.

You are born in a great family. You have modesty. You have foresight. Whether the act has been good or bad, my entrance into your person has been a private one, concerning us two only. Was it not unfair for you to proclaim that private act before all your ministers.

All these Brahmanas deserve respect. They are foremost of preceptors. You also are worthy of their respect, being their king. Doing them respect, you are entitled to receive reverence from them.

Thinking on all this, it was not proper for you to proclaim before these foremost of men the fact of this union between two persons of opposite sexes, if indeed, you are really acquainted with the rules of propriety about speech.

O king of Mithila, I am living in you without touching you at all even like a drop of water on a lotus leaf that rests on it without drenching it in the least.

If, despite this, you still feel my touch, how can it be believed that through the instructions of the mendicant Panchashika, your knowledge has become disassociated from the sensual objects.

You have, it is evident, deviated from the domestic mode of life, but you have not yet acquired Liberation that is so difficult to acquire. You live between the two, pretending that you have reach the goal of Liberation.

The contact of one that is liberated with another that has been so, or of Soul with Nature, cannot lead to an intermingling which you fear.

Only those who consider the Soul to be at one with the body, and who think the several orders and modes of life to be really different from one another, commit the inistake of supposing an intermingling to be possible. My body is different from yours. But my soul is not different from your soul. When I am able to realise this, I have not the least doubt that my understanding is really not living in yours, though I have entered into you by Yoga.

A pot is carried in the hand. In the pot there is milk. On the milk is a fly. Though the hand and pot, the pot and milk, and the milk and the fly, cxist together, yet they are all different from each other.

The pot does not assume the nature of the milk. Nor does the milk partake the nature of the fly. The condition of each is in dependent of itself, and can never be changed by the condition of that other with which it may for the time being exist.

Simnilarly, colour and practices, though they may exist together with and in a person that is liberated, do not really belong to him. How then can an intermingly of orders be possible on account of this union of myself with you.

Then, again, I am not superior to you in colour. Nor am I a Vaishya, nor a Shudra, I am, O king, of the same caste with you, born of a pure family.

There was a royal sage named Pradhana. It is clear that you have heard of him. I am born in his family, and my name is Sulabha.

In the sacrifices performed by my ancestors, the foremost of the gods, viz., Indra, used come, accompanied by Drona, Shatashringa, and Chakradvara.

Born in such a family, it was found that no fitting husband could be found for me. Instructed then in the religion of Liberation, I wander over the Earth alone, practising asceticism. to

I am not a hypocrite with regard to the life of Renunciation I follow; I am not a thief that appropriates others properties. I am not a confuser of the practices of the different castes. I am firm in the practices of the mode of life I follow.

I am firm and steady in my vows. I never utter any word without thinking of its fitness. I did not come to you, without having thought properly, O king!

Having heard that your understanding has been purified by the religion of Liberation, I came here from desire of some good. Indeed, it was for enquiring of you about Liberation that I had come.

I do not say so for glorifying myself and humiliating my opponents. But I say it, out of sincerity only. What I say is that he who is liberated never vaunts that intellectual superiority which one shows by logical discussions for the sake of victory. He, on the other hand, is really liberated who devotes himself to Brahima, that sole seat of peace.

As a person of the mendicant order lives for only one night in an emphy house, similarly, I shall live for this one night in your body.

You have honoured me with both words and other offers that are due from a host to a guest. Having slept this one night in your body, O king of Mithila, which is as it were my own chamber now, tomorrow I shall go.

Bhishma said Hearing these words fraught with excellent sense and with reason, king Janaka could not replay thereto.

Bhishma said Hearing these words fraught with excellent sense and with reason, king Janaka could not replay thereto.