Question

Just as the Buddha’s teachings were compiled by his followers, the teachings of Mahavira were also recorded by his disciples. These were often in the form of stories, which could appeal to ordinary people. Here is one example, from a Prakrit text known as the Uttaradhyayana Sutta, describing how a queen named Kamalavati tried to persuade her husband to renounce the world: If the whole world and all its treasures were yours, you would not be satisfied, nor would all this be able to save you. When you die, O king, and leave all things behind, dhamma alone, and nothing else, will save you. As a bird dislikes the cage, so do I dislike (the world). I shall live as a nun without offspring, without desire, without the love of gain, and without hatred … Those who have enjoyed pleasures and renounced them move about like the wind, and go wherever they please, unchecked like birds in their flight … Leave your large kingdom … abandon what pleases the senses, be without attachment and property, then practise severe penance, being firm of energy …

Which of the arguments advanced by the queen do you find most convincing?

Answer 1

The most convincing argument is that material wealth is temporary and cannot save a person from death. True peace comes from righteousness (dhamma), not accumulation. Here is why this argument stands out:

1. The Material vs. Spiritual Argument
   • Wealth can never bring ultimate inner satisfaction.
   • Possessions are completely left behind at death.
   • Material treasures fail to protect human life.
   • Only dhamma offers lasting protection and salvation.
2. An Alternative Choice: The Metaphor of Freedom
   • It compares materialistic royal life to a restrictive cage.
   • It frames renunciation as breaking free into open skies.
   • It connects true freedom with a lack of attachment.
   • It describes a peaceful life untethered by greed or hatred.