|
CHAPTER XV
CONCLUSION
In this case, if one sees only
what leads to 'the greatest good of the greatest number',
by taking into account only the external effects of the Action,
one will have to come to the conclusion, that the merit of
satisfying one hundred thousand mendicants is a hundred
thousand times more than the merit of satisfying one beggar.
But, will this conclusion be correct, not from the point of"
view of religion merely, but even of morality? Acquiring
a large amount of wealth, or getting an opportunity of
performing big acts for the benefit of others, does not depend
merely on anybody's virtuous conduct; and if one has to
consider the small act performed by the poor Brahmin according
to his means as of little ethical or religious merit, because
it was not possible for him to perform a large Yajna for want
of money, one will have to come to the conclusion that the
poor need never entertain the hope of becoming religious or moral like the rich.
According to the principle of Freedom of Will, keeping his mind pure was a matter within the
control of the poor Brahmin ; and if there is no doubt that
his charitable instinct was as pure as that of Yudhisthira, then,,
notwithstanding the smallness of the act performed by him,
the ethical merit of this Brahmin and of the small act
performed by him, must be considered to be the same as that
of Yudhisthira and of the magnificent Yajna performed by him
Nay; from the fact that he made a self-sacrifice by making
a gift of food in order to save the life of a mendicant, not
withstanding that he himself was poor and without food for
many days, it follows that his Reason was purer than that of
Yudhisthira ; because, it is a universally accepted fact that.
purity of mind, like courage and other qualities, is truly
proved only in times of adversity; and even Kant has, in the
beginning of his book on Ethics, expressed an opinion that .
that man whose moral rectitude does not flinch even in times of adversity is the truly moral man.
The same thing is conveyed i by what was said by the mungoose. But the purity of the
heart of Yudhisthira had been tested not only by the Yajna
performed by him after he had ascended the throne, that is,
in times of prosperity, but also before that, that is, on many
trying occasions, in adverse circumstances, just as in the
case of the Brahmin ; and as the proposition of the writer of
the Mahabharata was, that Yudhisthira was morally great,
even according to the subtle law relating to righteous and
unrighteous conduct laid down above, he has called the
mungoose a 'reviler'. Still, from the statement in the Maha
bharata that that Brahmin attained the same final state which
is reached by people who perform the Asvamedha Yajna, it
follows that though the merit of the act of the Brahmin might
not, in the opinion of the writer of the Mahabharata, have bean
greater than that of the Yajna of Yudhisthira, yet, he certainly
looked upon the ethical or religious merit of both as at least
the same.
|
|