10. Dujjano
A Bad Person
(29 Verses)
112 = Mhn 113 [stm.]
Katvāna kusalaṁ kammaṁ katvānākusalaṁ pure,
sukhitaṁ dukkhitaṁ hontaṁ so bālo yo na passati.
The one who is a fool does not see that doing good deeds, doing bad deeds, (leads to) being happy, being unhappy.
The fool fails to perceive the most basic causal sequence in life: that good actions lead to happiness and bad actions lead to suffering. This ignorance is a failure of insight into the moral structure of reality. While others understand that present choices shape future experience, the fool lives as if actions have no consequences. This blindness is the root of all unwise behavior, trapping the individual in a cycle of creating causes for future pain while being mystified by its arrival.
113 = Mhn 115 [stm.]
Kālakkhepena hāpeti dānasīlādikaṁ jaḷo,
athiraṁ pi thiraṁ maññe, attānaṁ sassatī samaṁ.
The stupid one neglects generosity, virtue, and so on by wasting time, Lit.: by throwing away time. thinking the unstable stable, and himself eternally the same.
The fool squanders his time on trivial pursuits, putting off the cultivation of generosity and virtue which are the very practices that build future happiness and security. This neglect is fueled by a double delusion: he mistakes the unstable, impermanent nature of life and possessions for something solid and lasting, and he falsely assumes his own existence is eternal and unchanging. By failing to see impermanence, he loses the urgency to practice the Dhamma, sacrificing lasting merit for fleeting distractions.
114 = Mhn 116 [ana., rh.q.]
Bālo ’dha pāpakaṁ katvā, na taṁ chaḍḍitum-ussahe,
kiṁ byaggha-ādi gacchanto padaṁ makkhetum-ussahe.
A fool, having done wrong here, would not make an effort to abandon it, why would a charging tiger and so on make an effort to erase his footprint?
Having committed a wrong, a fool makes no attempt to abandon the action or make amends. A fool acts according to his inherent, untamed nature without reflection or restraint. Just as a charging tiger is not worried about leaving tracks, so the fool’s nature is to follow his defilements without shame or corrective effort. The question highlights the absurdity of expecting moral reform from one who identifies wholly with their unwholesome instincts.
115 = Mhn 121; ≈ Vyāsa-subhāṣita-saṁgraha 46 [stm.]
Niddhano pi ca kāmeti, dubbalo verikaṁ karo, Mhn: dubbalo kalahaṁ piyo; though weak he loves to argue. See Vyāsa.
mandasattho vivādatthī—tividhaṁ mūḷhalakkhaṇaṁ.
Though without wealth he still desires, though weak he makes an enemy, though the sword Sattha is normally neuter, but here is masculine. is dull, he is quarrelsome—(this is) the threefold sign of a fool.
This verse outlines three contradictory and self-destructive traits that signal a fool. First, he is filled with desires despite having no wealth to fulfill them. Second, though weak, he picks fights and makes enemies, ensuring his own vulnerability and defeat. Third, though ill-equipped, he is eager to quarrel, guaranteeing failure and harm. These signs reveal a profound lack of self-awareness and practical wisdom that inevitably leads to suffering.
Vyāsa-subhāṣita-saṁgraha 46
Nirdhanaś cāpi kāmārthī, durbalaḥ kalahapriyaḥ,
mandaśāstro vivādārthī—trividhaṁ mūrkhalakṣaṇam.
Though without wealth he still has sense desires, though weak he loves to argue, though the sword is dull, he is quarrelsome—(this is) the threefold sign of a fool.
116 = Ln 31; ≈ Vyāsa-subhāṣita-saṁgraha 43 [stm.]
Anavhāyaṁ gamayanto, apucchā bahubhāsako,
attagguṇaṁ pasaṁsanti Ln: pakāsento; making known (their own virtues). —tividhaṁ hīnalakkhaṇaṁ.
Going without being called, without being asked speaking a lot, they praise their own virtues—(this is) the threefold sign of a despicable person.
The three marks of a despicable or base person all relate to intrusive and self-aggrandising behavior. First, intruding where one has not been invited shows a lack of respect for boundaries. Second, speaking voluminously without being asked demonstrates egotism and poor judgment. Third, praising one’s own virtues is the height of conceit and a sure sign of their absence. These behaviors stem from an inflated sense of self-importance and a complete lack of the humility and social grace that characterise a refined individual.
Vyāsa-subhāṣita-saṁgraha 43
Anāhute praveśaś ca, na pṛṣṭe bahubhāṣaṇam,
stutiś ca svātmavarṇasya—ity evaṁ mūrkhalakṣaṇam.
Entering uninvited, without being asked speaking a lot, celebrating his own character—this is the sure sign of a fool.
117 ≈ Ln 43 [sim., stm.]
Yathā c’ udumbarā pakkā bahirattakam-eva ca,
anto kimilapūraṇā, evaṁ dujjanadhammatā.
Just as a ripe fig on the outside is nicely coloured, but inside is full of worms, so is the nature of the bad person.
A ripe fig may look perfect and appealing on the outside, but inside it can be rotten and teeming with worms. Similarly, a bad person may present a charming, virtuous, or respectable exterior to the world, while their inner character is corrupted by greed, hatred and delusion. This warns against being deceived by appearances and emphasises that true quality is a matter of inner substance, not outer show. One must look beyond the surface in judging character.
Ln 43
Yathā udumbarā pakkā bahirattakam-eva ca,
anto kimilasampuṇṇā, evaṁ dujjanahaddayā. -dd- is m.c.
Just as a ripe fig on the outside is nicely coloured, but inside is completely full of worms, so is the heart of the bad person.
118 = Mhn 124, ≈ Snp 726 [ana., stm.]
Yad-ūṇakaṁ saṇati taṁ, yaṁ pūraṁ santam-eva taṁ,
aḍḍhakumbhūpamo bālo, pūrakumbho va paṇḍito. In Mhn, Snp the last line reads: rahado pūro va paṇḍito, a wise one is like a full lake.
What is deficient makes a noise, what is full is quiet, a fool is like a half-filled pot, a wise one like a full pot.
A deficient or half-filled pot makes a loud noise when struck, while a full pot is silent. Likewise, a fool, who is empty or shallow in knowledge and virtue, is boastful, argumentative and quick to speak without substance. A wise person, full of understanding and virtue, is calm, quiet and speaks only when it is meaningful. The noise of the fool is the sound of his own emptiness; the silence of the wise is the quiet confidence of true depth.
119 = Mhn 125; ≈ Pañcatantra (Pts) 4.55 [sim., stm.]
Budhehi sāsamāno pi, khalo bahutaketavo,
ghaṁsiyamāno p’ aṅgāro nimmalattaṁ na gacchati.
Though being advised by the wise, a villain has numerous deceptions, (just as) burning coal does not become free from impurity.
Even when admonished by the wise, a wicked person does not reform; instead, he devises numerous schemes to maintain his harmful ways or to appear compliant while plotting otherwise. A burning coal does not become clean, it only becomes more black and dirty as it turns to ashes; it. Similarly, external pressure or advice cannot purify a fundamentally corrupt character. Their wickedness is ingrained, and they respond to correction not with remorse, but with further deceit and strategising.
Pañcatantra (Pts) 4.55
Sadbhiḥ saṁbodhyamāno ’pi durātmā pāpapūrusaḥ,
ghṛṣyamāṇa ivāṅgāro nirmalatvaṁ na gacchati.
Even when being admonished by the good a wicked, demeritorious man does not become pure, We need to repeat line d here and at the end for it to make sense. just as burning coal does not become free from impurity.
120 = Ln 127, Mhn 119; ≈ Vṛddha-Cāṇakya (CV) 1.4 [stm.]
Mūḷhasissopadesena, kunārī bharaṇena ca,
khalasattūhi saṁyogā, paṇḍito py-avasīdati.
Through advising a foolish pupil, through supporting a bad woman, through association with a villainous enemy, Ln line c: asatā sampayogena; through association with an unpleasant person. a wise man sinks down.
Even a wise person can be brought down by bad associations. First, by trying to advise a foolish pupil who will not listen, which is a draining, futile waste of energy. Second, supporting a bad or immoral woman leads to entanglement in scandal, distraction and loss of resources. Third, associating with a villain, perhaps out of overconfidence or a desire to reform them, exposes one to treachery and harm. Wisdom alone is not armor against such corrosive influences; we need discernment in choosing our relationships.
Vṛddha-Cāṇakya (CV) 1.4
Mūrkhaśiṣyopadeśena, duṣṭastrībharaṇena ca,
dviṣatā samprayogena, paṇḍito ’py avasīdati.
Through advising a foolish pupil, through supporting a corrupt woman, through association with the hostile person, a wise man sinks down.
121 = Mhn 126 [stm.]
Cārutā paradārāya, dhanaṁ loka-t-āpattiyā, This is parsed according to Bechert and Braun’s note, although the insertion of -t- between vowels is very unusual.
pasutā sādhunāsāya—khale khalatarā guṇā.
Being charmed by another’s wife, having wealth that offends the world, being occupied with destroying the good—in a villain, these are the most villainous qualities.
To be obsessed with another’s wife violates sacred trust and social harmony. To possess wealth in a way that causes widespread resentment or harm through exploitation, arrogance or injustice, turns prosperity into a social poison. To be dedicated to destroying good people or virtuous institutions is an attack on the very foundation of a moral society. These are not minor flaws but the pinnacle of villainy, as they actively corrupt the pillars of the economic and ethical order.
122 = Mhn 127 [stm.]
Ito hassataraṁ loke kiñci tassa na vijjati:
dujjano ti ca yaṁ āha sujanaṁ Mhn: sujjanaṁ; true person. dujjano sayaṁ.
In the world nothing more hilarious is found than this: a bad person who himself says a good person is a bad person.
This verse exposes the ironic comedy of hypocrisy and self-deception. It declares that in all the world, there is nothing more laughable than the spectacle of a bad person who says a good person is a bad person. The humor arises from the complete lack of self-awareness. The villain, projecting his own faults onto the virtuous, condemns in others the very qualities he himself embodies. His judgment is not merely mistaken but self-incriminating. Yet the laughter is tinged with tragedy, for his blindness traps him in his own defilements.
123 = Mhn 129; = Subhāṣitāvalī 384 [ana., stm.]
Na vinā paravādena ramanti dujjanā khalu,
na sā sabbarase bhutvā, vināsuddhena Mhn: vināmejjhena; same meaning. Cf. Subhāṣitāvalī below. tussati.
Without blaming others indeed bad people do not find delight, having eaten all flavours, a dog is not satisfied without what is impure.
Just as a dog, after eating every kind of wholesome food, still seeks out and is only truly satisfied by filth and impure scraps, a bad person cannot find delight or contentment unless they are engaged in blaming, slandering, or finding fault in others. Their pleasure is parasitic, dependent on tearing others down. Wholesome activity or remaining peaceful brings them no joy; their nature compulsively seeks the impure nourishment of malice and criticism to feel complete.
Subhāṣitāvalī 384
Na vinā paravādena ramate durjano janaḥ,
śvā hi sarvarasān bhuktvā, vināmedhyaṁ na tṛpyati.
124 = Mhn 130 [rh.q.]
Tappate yāti sambandhaṁ, Mhn: yāti sandhānaṁ; pursuing a connection. dravībhavaty-avanataṁ,
mudu dujjanacittaṁ, na kiṁ lohena pamīyate. Mhn: na kiṁ lohen’ upamīyate; why should it not be compared with metal?
Heading to bondage he is tormented, he is fluid when depressed, the mind of a bad person is malleable, why should it not be judged by its metal?
The bad person’s mind heads toward mental bondage through craving and vice and is tormented by it. It becomes fluid or weak when depressed, lacking steadfast principle. It is malleable, easily shaped by defilements and external temptations. Just as one judges the quality of metal by testing it, one should judge the character of a person by observing this inherent instability and weakness. The inner metal of his mind is flawed.
125 = Mhn 131 [adm.]
Tasmā dujjanasaṁsaggaṁ āsīvisam-ivoragaṁ,
ārakā parivajjeyya, bhūtakāmo vicakkhaṇo.
Therefore association with a bad person is like association with a poisonous snake, a discerning one, loving life, should avoid (both) from afar.
Bad company must be avoided entirely because association with a bad person is as dangerous as handling a venomous snake. Both can cause sudden, severe and potentially fatal harm. A discerning person who values their life and well-being, both worldly and spiritual, will keep a great distance from such toxic individuals. This is not mere caution but a vital strategy for self-preservation, recognising that the influence of the wicked is passively poisonous and actively treacherous.
126 = Mhn 132; ≈ Vyāsakāra 21 [sim., stm.]
Dujjanena hi saṁsaggaṁ sattutā pi na yujjati,
tatto va ḍayhaty-aṅgāro Mhn: tatto tu dahat’ aṅgāro sante kāḷāyate karo; but a hand is burned black by a glowing coal. sante kāḷāyate karo.
Association with a bad person is not suitable, even for an enemy, just as a hand is burned black by a glowing coal.
Even an enemy should avoid associating with a bad person because such association is inherently harmful and counterproductive. If one extends a hand to handle a hot coal, even with intent to use it against a foe, one’s own hand will be burned. Similarly, any engagement with a villain, regardless of motive, results in self-inflicted damage to one’s reputation, morality and peace of mind. The villain’s harmful nature is indiscriminate; proximity alone is a liability.
Vyāsakāra 21
Durjanaiḥ saha samparkaḥ śatrutāpi na yujyate,
gṛhṇato dahate ’ṅgāraḥ śānte kṛṣṇāyate karaḥ.
Association with a bad person is not suitable, even for an enemy, a hand is burned black by a coal for one who grasps at it.
127 = Mhn 133; = Sūktiratnahāra 41.24 [ana., rh.q.]
Dujjano vajjanīyo va, vijjāyālaṅkato pi ce,
maṇinālaṅkato santo sappo, kiṁ nu bhayaṁkaro?
A bad person is to be avoided, even if adorned with knowledge, a snake adorned with a jewel, is he not still dangerous?
A villain educated and adorned with knowledge is still a villain and his learning may simply make him a more effective deceiver. Just as a snake decorated with a precious jewel remains a venomous snake, which may even invite victims closer. Therefore, the fundamental character is what must be evaluated. Embellishments of status, knowledge, or wealth should not distract from the assessment of virtue, which is the important quality to look for.
Sūktiratnahāra 41.24
Durjaiḥ parihartavyo vidyayālaṅkṛto ’pi san,
maṇinālaṅkṛtaḥ sarpaḥ, kim asau na bhayaṁkaraḥ?
128 = Mhn 134 [ana., stm.]
Aggino dahato dāyaṁ sakhā bhavati māluto,
so eva dīpaṁ nāseti—khale nattheva mittatā.
The wind is a friend when given to a blazing fire, (but) it also extiguishes an oil lamp—there is no true friendship with a villain.
Wind can be a friend to a blazing fire, making it burn stronger. But that same wind will also extinguish a small, fragile oil lamp. Similarly, a villain may appear helpful in certain strong situations such as feeding one’s pride or aggression, but he will inevitably betray or destroy one in a moment of vulnerability or need. There is no consistent goodwill or loyalty; his association is conditional and ultimately destructive, making true friendship undesirable.
129 = Ln 69; = Vyāsakāra 78 [rh.q.]
Sappo duṭṭho khalo duṭṭho, sappā duṭṭhataro khalo;
mantosadhīvasā sappo, khalo kenupasammati?
A snake is vicious, a villain is vicious, (but) a villain is more vicious than a snake; a snake is subdued by mantras and medicine, by what can a villain be subdued?
A villain is more dangerous than a snake. Both are vicious, but a snake’s venom can often be counteracted with mantras or medicine and its behavior is predictable according to its nature. A villain’s malice, however, is more insidious, unpredictable and purposive. His corruption stems from conscious choice and complex defilements that no simple antidote can cure. There is no reliable remedy, making him a greater threat to social and spiritual order than even a reptile.
Vyāsakāra 78
Sarpaḥ krūraḥ A snake is cruel, etc. khalaḥ krūraḥ sarpāt krūrataraḥ khalaḥ;
mantrauṣadhivaśāt sarpaḥ, khalaḥ kenopaśāmyate?
130 = Mhn 47 [ana., rh.q.]
Hadayaṭṭhena sutena khalo neva susīlavā;
madhunā koṭaraṭṭhena nimbo kiṁ madhuro bhave? Mhn: nimbo kiṁ madhurāyate; madhurāyate is a denominative from madhura + āya + middle ending te. Same meaning: becomes sweet.
A villain is not virtuous through having learning set in the heart; does a neem tree become sweet by having honey set in a hollow?
A villain may have learning memorised or even understood intellectually, but if he does not embody it through conduct, it is meaningless. The analogy is the neem tree, known for its bitter leaves. Even if you pour honey into a hollow in its trunk, the tree itself does not become sweet; its nature remains unchanged. Similarly, external knowledge does not alter a wicked person’s fundamental character.
131 [ana., stm.]
Asataṁ sampayogena santo pi asanto bhave;
maggo kacavarayutto ujum-pi asādhu bhave.
Even a good person through connection with a bad person may become bad; even a straight path may become bad when filled with rubbish.
Even a good person can be corrupted by constant contact with a bad one, as negative habits and views are gradually absorbed. The comparison is to a straight path that becomes foul and impassable when littered with rubbish. Our environment and companions shape our mind. This underscores the critical importance of spiritual friendship. To preserve one’s own goodness, one must be vigilant about the company one keeps, as moral purity can be contaminated by persistent exposure to corruption.
132 = Iti 76:5; Dhn 147 [ana., stm.]
Pūtimacchaṁ kusaggena yo naro upanayhati
kusā pi pūti vāyanti, evaṁ bālupasevanā.
The person who wraps putrid fish with a blade of sacred grass (finds) even the sacred grass smells putrid, so it is with those who associate with fools.
If you wrap a rotten fish in fragrant sacred grass, the grass itself will soon take on a foul smell. Similarly, a person who associates closely with fools will inevitably adopt their foolish views, bad habits and poor reputation. Purity is fragile and can be overwhelmed by impurity. The verse advises that one cannot engage with corruption without being stained by it. To remain wholesome, one must avoid the source of the stench altogether.
133 = Ja 480:8; cf. Dhn 148 [adm.]
Bālaṁ na passe na suṇe, na ca bālena saṁvase,
bālenālāpasallāpaṁ na kare na ca rocaye. The opposite of this and the next two verses occur in the next chapter, at 148-150.
May I not see or hear a fool, may I not dwell together with a fool, may I not like or make conversation with a fool.
This verse expresses a deep aspiration to avoid all contact with fools: not to see them, hear them, live with them, or engage in conversation with them. This is not malice but a profound strategy of self-protection, recognising the distracting, irritating and corrupting influence of foolishness. It is the practical application of the previous warnings: actively creating boundaries to safeguard one’s own peace of mind and spiritual progress from unwise company.
134; cf. Dhn 149 [stm.]
Anayaṁ neti dummedho, adhurāyaṁ niyuñjati,
dunnayo seyyaso hoti, sammā vutto pakuppati,
vinayaṁ so na jānāti, sādhu tena adassanaṁ.
The unintelligent one leads to misfortune, he is joined with what is unstable, his method is even more difficult, when rightly spoken to he becomes angry, he does not know the discipline, because of that he is best not met with.
The unintelligent person leads himself and others into misfortune. He is attached to unstable, unreliable things. His methods are difficult and unproductive. When given good advice, he reacts with anger rather than gratitude. He lacks internal discipline. Because he is unreachable and volatile, the wisest course is to avoid meeting with him altogether. Engagement is pointless and risky, as it offers no chance of correction and every chance of provoking conflict or being dragged into his misguided schemes.
135 = Ln 25, Dhp 64; cf. Dhn 150 [sim., stm.]
Yāvajīvaṁ pi ce bālo paṇḍitaṁ payirupāsati,
na so Dhammaṁ vijānāti, dabbī sūparasaṁ yathā.
Even if a fool attends on a wise man for his whole life he does not learn Dhamma, just as a spoon does not learn the taste of curry.
A fool can spend his entire life in the physical presence of a wise teacher, performing the duties of attendance, yet never truly understanding the Dhamma. The spoon, though it sits in the soup pot all through the cooking, never knows the taste of the soup. Similarly, wisdom is not absorbed by mere proximity; it requires an internal capacity for reflection, humility and application. But the fool’s mind is incapable of assimilating the essence of the teaching.
136 ≈ SN 6.12:1 [sim., stm.]
Phalaṁ ve kadaliṁ hanti, hanti veḷunaḷaṁ phalaṁ,
sakkāro kāpurisaṁ We should probably read kāposaṁ, which would give mavipulā. hanti, gabbho assatariṁ yathā.
The fruit indeed destroys the banana, the fruit destroys the bamboo, the reed, SN reads: Phalaṁ ve kadaliṁ hanti, phalaṁ veḷuṁ, phalaṁ naḷaṁ. honour destroys a bad person, just as its offspring destroys a mule.
The banana tree and bamboo are destroyed by their own fruit, which weighs them down or consumes their resources. Similarly, a bad person is often destroyed by the honours, wealth, or status they receive. Lacking the virtue and wisdom to handle such gifts responsibly, they become arrogant, reckless, or a target for envy, leading to their downfall. Like a sterile mule that ends a bloodline, honour without virtue ends a person’s true legacy and well-being.
137 = Ln 55 [ana., stm.]
Sunakho sunakhaṁ disvā, dantaṁ dasseti hiṁsituṁ,
dujjano dujjanaṁ Ln: sujanaṁ disvā; having seen a good person. disvā, rosayaṁ hiṁsam-icchati.
A dog, having seen (another) dog, bares his teeth to hurt him; a fool, having seen (another) fool, is angry, and wishes to hurt him.
Just as one dog seeing another will often bare its teeth and growl, seeking to intimidate or attack, a fool upon encountering another fool is immediately filled with anger and a desire to harm or dominate. This reaction stems from insecurity and the lack of higher principles that would foster cooperation or respect. Their interaction is governed by base aggression rather than reason or goodwill, ensuring conflict and mutual harm.
138 Bechert and Braun flag this and the following verse as being impossible to reconstruct accurately, and therefore they print it as found in the manuscripts. Exactly what nukko means, or piññe and ṅaye in the next verse is not clear to me, the translation and commentary are therefore tentative. ≈ Ln 34 [ana., stm.]
Maṇḍūko pi nukko sīho, sukaro pi nukko dīpi,
bilāro sadiso byaggho, duppañño pi na paññavā.
A frog is not a lion, Nukko doesn’t occur in the dictionaries. It could reasonably be taken as na + ukka, but ukka doesn’t yield any good meaning in the context. However, I am taking the n in nukko as having a negative connotation. a boar is not a leopard, a cat is not the same as a tiger, one lacking wisdom is not wise. Gray’s translation is presumably based on the nissaya: A frog sitting on its rumps is not a lion; a hog grunting is not a leopard; a cat is not a tiger on account of its similarity to one; he is not wise who is of little wisdom.
A frog, though it may puff itself up, is not a lion. A boar is not a graceful leopard. A domestic cat is not a tiger. In the same way, a person who merely lacks wisdom is categorically not a wise person. The verse warns against mistaking the appearance, pretension, or minor capability for the real thing. True qualities like courage, grace, strength and wisdom are intrinsic and substantial, not to be confused with their feeble imitations.
Ln 34
Maṇḍūke pi ukre sīhe, sukare pi uhe dīpe,
bilāre sadise byagghe, sabbadhīre sippasame. Bechert and Braun mark this verse as unreconstructable. What akre and uhe mean here is not clear. The last pādayuga translates as: cats are the same as tigers, all steadfast ones are the same in knowledge. Gray takes it as a series of questions: Does a frog, seated on its haunches, become a lion?—a hog, grunting, become a leopard? Does a cat, by its similarity to a tiger, become a tiger? Are all wise men alike in knowledge?
139 = Ln 33 [ana., stm.]
Maṇḍūko pi sīho viya, kāko gaṇhe piññe piññe,
bālo ca paṇḍito viya, dhīro pucche ṅaye ṅaye.
A frog may appear like a lion, a crow may take piece by piece (?), a fool may appear like a wise one, a steadfast one may question point by point (?). No words are listed in the Pāḷi or Sanskrit dictionaries as beginning with ṅ-. Gray: A frog is like a lion; if a crow seize it, it begins to squeak: a fool is like a learned man; if a wise man question him, he says, “Sir! sir!”
A frog can seem like a lion when it puffs up its chest. A crow can appear to gather things methodically, piece by piece. A fool can, at times, mimic the demeanor of a wise person. A steadfast person might question things point by point, showing discernment. Superficial behaviors can be misleading. One must look beyond initial impressions to see the true nature: the frog is still a frog, the crow is still a scavenger, and the fool’s mimicry does not equate to wisdom.
Ln 33
Maṇḍūke pi ukre sīhe, kākaggahe piye piye,
apaṇḍī pi paṇḍī hutvā, dhīrā pucche ṅaye ṅaye. Ukre, piye piye, apaṇḍī paṇḍī and ṅaye ṅaye are all unclear or irregular forms, making the text untranslatable. Gray: A frog, sitting on its haunches, considers itself a lion; a crow, being captured, cries out, “Dear friend! dear friend!” When questioned by the wise, an ignorant man, thinking himself wise, exclaims, “My master! my master!”
140 ≈ Ln 73 [ana., stm.]
Kāko duṭṭho sakuṇesu, ghare duṭṭho ca mūsiko,
vānaro ca vane duṭṭho, manussesu ca Brahmaṇo.
A crow is vicious amongst birds, a rat is vicious in the houses, a monkey is vicious in the forest, a Brahmin amongst human beings.
In every group, there is a type that causes a particular nuisance: the crow among birds is noisy and thieving; the rat in houses is destructive and stealthy; the monkey in the forest is mischievous and chaotic. The final line delivers a satirical punch: among humans, it is the Brahmin. This targets the Brahmin who is puffed up with caste pride but devoid of true virtue, the hypocrite who causes discord through arrogance and empty claims of superiority.
Ln 73
Ghare duṭṭho ca mūsiko, vane duṭṭho ca vānaro,
sakuṇe ca duṭṭho kāko, nare duṭṭho ca Brahmaṇo.
A rat is vicious in the houses, a monkey is vicious in the forest, a crow is vicious amongst birds, a Brahmin is vicious amongst people.