The descendants of Dhruva Mahārāja (Srimad Bhagavatam #55)

Vidura asks about the descendants of Dhruva Maharaja, leading to the description of his dynasty, up to the Pracetas, leading to the other pastimes described in the 5th canto.

Apr 05, 2025

The Pracetās are descendants of Dhruva Maharaja, who lived later. The younger son of Dhruva, Vatsara, is the origin of a dynasty of great kings, which includes Aṅga, Pṛthu, and Prācīnabarhi, the father of the Pracetās. Nārada Muni witnessed the activities of his disciple and later described them to the Pracetās, glorifying their grand-grandfather. The words "ślokān satre ’gāyat pracetasām" in text 4.12.40 indicate the future, that Narada Muni spoke verses glorifying Dhruva to the Pracetās after he ascended to Dhruvaloka, but it does not mean it happened immediately. This is similar to the usage of the past perfect in English. Dhruva went to Dhruvaloka, and after an unspecified period, Narada visited the Pracetās. Both events happened long ago, in the first manvantara. "After observing the glories of Dhruva Mahārāja, the great sage Nārada, playing his vīṇā, went to the sacrificial arena of the Pracetās and very happily chanted the following three verses."

At the beginning of chapter 4.13, Vidura asks about the descendants of Dhruva Maharaja, leading to the description of his dynasty, up to the Pracetas, leading to the other pastimes described in the 5th canto. Daksa, in his second birth, appears as their son. However, because Daksa doesn't have any descendants until the sixth Manvantara, the dynasty is broken, leading Priyavrata (the other son of Svāyambhuva Manu to assume the throne and start a new dynasty, which is described in the 5th canto.

🔉 Audio of the lesson »

🎙Podcast (Search for “Mysteries of the Vedas” on Spotify, iTunes, etc. to hear all the lessons)

You can join the course on Telegram to get the links for the live sessions and be notified about the updates.

💬 Text of the lesson

Lesson 55: The descendants of Dhruva Mahārāja (chapter 4.13)

The connection between the story of Dhruva Maharaja and the other pastimes of the 4th canto is made in verses 4.12.40 to 4.12.43:

"After observing the glories of Dhruva Mahārāja, the great sage Nārada, playing his vīṇā, went to the sacrificial arena of the Pracetās and very happily chanted the following three verses.

The great sage Nārada said: Simply by the influence of his spiritual advancement and powerful austerity, Dhruva Mahārāja, the son of Sunīti, who was devoted to her husband, acquired an exalted position not possible to attain even for the so-called Vedāntists or strict followers of the Vedic principles, not to speak of ordinary human beings.

The great sage Nārada continued: Just see how Dhruva Mahārāja, aggrieved at the harsh words of his stepmother, went to the forest at the age of only five years and under my direction underwent austerity. Although the Supreme Personality of Godhead is unconquerable, Dhruva Mahārāja defeated Him with the specific qualifications possessed by the Lord’s devotees. Dhruva Mahārāja attained an exalted position at the age of only five or six years, after undergoing austerity for six months. Alas, a great kṣatriya cannot achieve such a position even after undergoing austerities for many, many years." (SB 4.12.40-43)

The Pracetās are descendants of Dhruva Maharaja, who lived later. The younger son of Dhruva, Vatsara, is the origin of a dynasty of great kings, which includes Aṅga, Pṛthu, and Prācīnabarhi, the father of the Pracetās. Nārada Muni witnessed the activities of his disciple and later described them to the Pracetās, glorifying their grand-grandfather. The words "ślokān satre ’gāyat pracetasām" in text 4.12.40 indicate the future, that Narada Muni spoke verses glorifying Dhruva to the Pracetās after he ascended to Dhruvaloka, but it does not mean it happened immediately. This is similar to the usage of the past perfect in English. Dhruva went to Dhruvaloka, and after an unspecified period, Narada visited the Pracetās. Both events happened long ago, in the first manvantara. "After observing the glories of Dhruva Mahārāja, the great sage Nārada, playing his vīṇā, went to the sacrificial arena of the Pracetās and very happily chanted the following three verses."

At the end of the narration, Maitreya offers blessings for all the sincere devotees who study it:

"Anyone who hears the narration of Dhruva Mahārāja, and who repeatedly tries with faith and devotion to understand his pure character, attains the pure devotional platform and executes pure devotional service. By such activities one can diminish the threefold miserable conditions of material life. Anyone who hears this narration of Dhruva Mahārāja acquires exalted qualities like him. For anyone who desires greatness, prowess or influence, here is the process by which to acquire them, and for thoughtful men who want adoration, here is the proper means." (SB 4.12.46-47)

The real blessing for studying the pastime of Dhruva Maharaja and other pastimes described in the Srimad Bhāgavatam is pure devotional service to the Lord. This is the supreme benediction, more valuable than any other benediction, material or spiritual. Even the four types of liberation can't compete with it. The Srimad Bhāgavatam was composed specifically to help us attain this supreme goal. One who faithfully studies the Srimad Bhāgavatam in the company of like-minded devotees will certainly develop it in due time.

A secondary blessing offered by Maitreya is that a devotee can develop qualities similar to Dhruva Maharaja by studying his story, such as his great determination to serve the Lord. Such qualities can be used in the service of the Lord and help us to progress. For one interested in the limited and temporary benefits of material greatness, prowess, or influence, this is also offered. Often, people discuss the activities of political leaders, but this only serves to make them more absorbed in ignorance. If instead we use our time to discuss the glorious activities of the Lord and His devotees, we can obtain anything we desire.

As Prabhupada mentions in text 47: "In the material world everyone is after profit, respectability and reputation, everyone wants the supreme exalted position, and everyone wants to hear about the great qualities of exalted persons. All ambitions which are desirable for great persons can be fulfilled simply by reading and understanding the narration of Dhruva Mahārāja’s activities."

After hearing the mention of the Pracetās in the previous chapter, Vidura is curious to hear more about them. This will give the opportunity for Maitreya to describe the whole genealogical tree of Dhruva Maharaja, describing the activities of Pṛthu Maharaja, and other pastimes that go all the way to the end of the 4th canto.

"Vidura inquired from Maitreya: O greatly advanced devotee, who were the Pracetās? To which family did they belong? Whose sons were they, and where did they perform the great sacrifices?" (SB 4.13.2)

One interesting detail given by Prabhupada in his purport to the second verse is that the path of devotional service has two parallel lines: bhāgavata-mārga and pāñcarātrika-vidhi. Bhāgavata-vidhi is the system of nine processes that begin with hearing and chanting, which gradually brings us to the path of spontaneous devotion to the Lord, while pāñcarātrika-vidhi is the method of temple worship based on following the rules and regulations originally introduced by Nārada Muni himself in Dvāpara-yuga. While hearing, chanting, remembering, etc. is the basis of our spiritual practice, following rules and regulations are also extremely important to regulate our activities and prevent us from maintaining or developing habits that are contrary to our spiritual development. In theory, it is possible to attain perfection by just following the bhāgavata-mārga, but if we discard rules and regulations there is a great risk we may become just sahajiyās, and thus not be able to reach the ultimate goal. Prabhupada thus makes the point both paths should be followed simultaneously, as also taught by Srila Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Thākura.

Regarding the descendants of Dhruva Maharaja, he had two sons: Utkala and Vatsara. Both were extremely qualified, but Utkala was a mahā-bhāgavata from birth, and thus not interested in managing a kingdom. To avoid becoming entangled in politics and material activities, he hid his true qualifications, by acting externally like a foolish, blind, and dumb person, while internally remaining fixed in the worship of the Lord. This led the ministers and elders to consider him mad and appoint his younger brother Vatsara as the successor to the throne. It's described that Utkala remained like fire covered with ashes, remaining as a bhajanānandī for life, without ever showing his real qualification. In this way, he avoided all material relationships and lived free from botheration and unfavorable situations created by materialistic persons.

Vatsara marired Svarvīthi and had six sons: Puṣpārṇa, Tigmaketu, Iṣa, Ūrja, Vasu and Jaya. From these, the oldest, Puṣpārṇa became the next king. He had two wives, Prabhā and Doṣā. The first became the mother of Prātar, Madhyandinam, and Sāyam, and the second of Pradoṣa, Niśitha and Vyuṣṭa. In this way, Puṣpārṇa had six sons.

Vyuṣṭa became the next in the line and was married to Puṣkariṇī. Their son, Sarvatejā, got married to Ākūti (different from the daughter of Svāyambhuva Manu) and gave birth to Cākṣuṣa.

Cākṣuṣa married Naḍvalā and begot 12 sons: Puru, Kutsa, Trita, Dyumna, Satyavān, Ṛta, Vrata, Agniṣṭoma, Atīrātra, Pradyumna, Śibi and Ulmuka.

Ulmuka married Puṣkariṇī and begot six sons: Aṅga, Sumanā, Khyāti, Kratu, Aṅgirā and Gaya. Aṅga became the next into the succession line and married Sunīthā. Their son was Vena, who is the center of the next narration, leading to the appearance of Pṛthu Maharaja.

The role of Cākṣuṣa

The third canto of Srimad Bhāgavatam mixed narrations that happened in the first, sixth, and seventh Manvantaras. The description of Vidura approaching Uddhava and Maitreya happened recently, after the disappearance of Krsna. These are events from the current Manvantara (the 7th). The descriptions of Diti and Kaśyapa Muni begetting children at the prohibited time, the birth of Hiraṇyākṣa and Hiraṇyakaśipu and the fight of Lord Varāha fighting Hiraṇyākṣa all happened in the 6th Manvantara, while the descriptions of the creation of Brahma and the pastimes of Devahūti, Kardama Muni and Lord Kapila happened in the first Manvantara, following the main narration of the creation starting from Brahma.

Two personalities, however, challenge our understanding, by appearing both in the description of events from the first Manvantara and from the sixth: Daksa (in his second birth) and Cākṣuṣa.

Contemporaneous commentators of the Purāṇas often come to contradictory conclusions about their lives and lineage, since they can't conceive that they could live for so long, but the Srimad Bhāgavatam and the commentary of Srila Prabhupada reveal the true accounts. Both Daksa (after his rebirth) and Cākṣuṣa lived all the way from the first to the sixth Manvantara when they finally assumed their posts. This happened because both were able to attain extremely long lifespans through the practice of austerities.

Although, generally, people from Satya-yuga live for up to 100,000 years, people from Treta-yuga for 10,000 years, demigods for 306.72 million years (a Manvantara), etc. great sages who practice austerities can often attain much longer lifespans. In fact, inhabitants of the highest planetary systems (Satyaloka, Tapoloka, and Janaloka) can live up to the end of the life of Brahma. Mortality is something that exists only in the lower planetary systems, where people are involved in fruitive activities. Great sages and devotees, who reach an advanced level of renunciation and mental control become free from the effects of karma, and can thus achieve very long lifespans even while living in the earthly planetary system, like in the case of Daksa and Cākṣuṣa, as well as other personalities mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam, such as Mārkaṇḍeya Ṛṣi, Aśvatthāmā, Bali Maharaja, Vyasadeva, Hanuman, Kripacarya and Parashurama. We can thus see some of them becoming involved in pastimes that happened in different Manvantaras.

Often, these personalities who attain these platforms are engaged in assuming the post of Manu, taking positions amongst the seven great sages or even becoming important demigods or Prajāpatis due to their elevated level of qualification, performing these functions out of duty instead of attachment. Bali Maharaja will become Indra in the next Manvantara, Aśvatthāmā, Vyasadeva, Kripacarya, and Parashurama will assume posts amongst the Saptarṣis and so on.

Daksa was reborn in the first Manvantara as the son of the Pracetās, while Cākṣuṣa appeared a little earlier, also in the lineage of Dhruva Maharaja. Daksa went to the mountains to practice austerities before generating descendants, but Cākṣuṣa got married, lived like a king, and begot children who continued his line before retiring into his practice of austerities. Later, Cākṣuṣa assumed the post of the 6th Manu, and Daksa resumed his service as the main Prajāpati, also in the 6th Manvantara.

Daksa had 16 daughters in his first birth, as described previously, and 60 daughters in his second birth. He had also a number of sons during the 6th Manvantara, but they all became renunciants after being instructed by Nārada Muni, without leaving descendants. Cākṣuṣa in turn had 12 sons in the first Manvantara. It's not described if he had more sons as Manu, in the 6th Manvantara, but we know that Satyavrata, the current Manu (the 7th in the sequence) is not his descendant, being born in the 6th Manvantara as the son of Vivasvān and the grandson of Kaśyapa and Diti.

One may suggest that both Daksa and Cākṣuṣa could have been born much later, at the end of the 5th Manvantara, which certainly would make the narration much easier to explain from a chronological perspective. Although that's the conclusion of some commentators, it is not supported by the text of Srimad Bhāgavatam, which describes Cākṣuṣa as a descendant of Dhruva Maharaja and ancestor of the Pracetās, and Priyavrata assuming the throne still in the first Manvantara after the second birth of Daksa.

The advent of Pṛthu Maharaja

Aṅga was a very pious king, who had the misfortune of having a very bad son: Vena. He became so disappointed with his sinful behavior that he left the kingdom and went to live in the forest as a renunciant. Vena was later cursed by the Brāhmaṇas to die, which led to the appearance of Pṛthu Maharaja.

In his purport to text 21, Prabhupada elaborates on the reasons for the renunciation of king Aṅga:

"In family life a man is supposed to live happily with father, mother, wife and children, but sometimes, under certain conditions, a father, mother, child or wife becomes an enemy. It is said by Cāṇakya Paṇḍita that a father is an enemy when he is too much in debt, a mother is an enemy if she marries for a second time, a wife is an enemy when she is very beautiful, and a son is an enemy when he is a foolish rascal. In this way, when a family member becomes an enemy it is very difficult to live in family life or remain a householder. Generally such situations occur in the material world. Therefore according to Vedic culture one has to take leave of his family members just after his fiftieth year so that the balance of his life may be completely devoted in search of Kṛṣṇa consciousness."

The instructions of Cāṇakya Paṇḍita are not directly part of Vedic literature, but he was certainly a wise person, and Prabhupada often mentions him as a source of common-sense instructions for practical life. Receiving such a bad son created a sense of renunciation in Aṅga, who decided it would be better to dedicate the remaining span of his life to self-realization instead of investing more time into his hopeless family life. Not capable of producing a worthwhile heir for the throne, he left for the brāhmaṇas the mission of deciding what to do.

Hearing that Vena had been cursed by the brāhmaṇas to die astonished Vidura. Normally kings are representatives of the Lord, protectors of the citizens, and the chastisers of the miscreants, while brāhmaṇas are by nature tolerant and non-violent. What uncommon set of circumstances could have made them so angry to curse Vena to die?

"Vidura requested Maitreya: My dear brāhmaṇa, you are well conversant with all subjects, both past and future. Therefore I wish to hear from you all the activities of King Vena. I am your faithful devotee, so please explain this." (SB 4.13.24)

In response, Maitreya described the story of Aṅga and Vena, which led to the appearance of the great Pṛthu Mahārāja, the original emperor and incarnation of the Supreme Lord.

Although a great saintly king, Aṅga had no son. Once, he desired to perform an aśvamedha-yajña. However, despite all preparations and the best efforts of qualified brāhmaṇas, the demigods were not participating or accepting their shares of the oblations.

"O King, we know that the paraphernalia to perform the sacrifice is well collected by you with great faith and care and is not polluted. Our chanting of the Vedic hymns is also not deficient in any way, for all the brāhmaṇas and priests present here are expert and are executing the performances properly. Dear King, we do not find any reason that the demigods should feel insulted or neglected in any way, but still the demigods who are witnesses for the sacrifice do not accept their shares. We do not know why this is so." (SB 4.13.27)

Hearing this honest description by the priests, King Aṅga immediately understood that since there was no fault in the ritualistic arrangements, and also no fault in the actions of the priests, the reason must have been some personal offense he somehow committed. Prabhupada connects this with an explanation about sevā-aparādha, offenses we may commit while performing devotional service, especially in worshiping the deity. We should be attentive to avoid these offenses, instead of just worshiping capriciously, disregarding cleanliness and other principles. If one just makes a show of worship without caring for the proper standards, the Lord may not accept his offerings, just as in the sacrifice of King Aṅga.

After being inquired by Aṅga about his fault, the brāhmaṇas were able to identify that although Aṅga had committed no fault in the current life, he had performed some sinful activities in his past life, and because of that, he remained childless, although being married and possessing all good qualities.

Having a son is essential for any person who is following the path of fruitive activities because on this path one will inevitably commit many sins, which can bring him to hell. The way to save himself is by begetting a good son who will perform the srāddha rituals to deliver his father from such sinful reactions. Without a pious son, a materialist will almost surely face hell after death. Therefore, in Vedic culture, not having a son is considered a great curse, because it excludes one from the path of material progress by being elevated to Pitṛloka, etc. In his purport to verse 31, Srila Prabhupada explains that according to the Vedas, the purpose of marrying is to beget a son, because a son is necessary to deliver his father and forefathers from any hellish conditional life. He mentions Cāṇakya Paṇḍita, putra-hīnaṁ gṛhaṁ śūnyam: without a son, married life is simply abominable.

Generally, people enter into married life because they desire material happiness, and a pious married life according to the recommendations of the scriptures is the way to achieve that. Begetting children is an essential step on this path, because without pious children, even if one can achieve some success in this life, after death he will go to hell and face misery. The solution for one in this situation was to abandon the idea of material sense gratification and dedicate himself to the practice of devotional service, which is actually the recommendation for everyone. On the path of devotional service, one doesn't depend on sons or any other material condition because he or she is derived by the Lord Himself. Because Aṅga was a great devotee, the Lord will gradually bring him to this path.

Aṅga obtains a son

Aṅga was trying to perform an aśvamedha-yajña, which is a fruitive sacrifice, dependent on the cooperation of the demigods. In this type of sacrifice, the demigods are invoked first, and when they are present the Supreme Lord is invoked. Since the demigods were refusing to cooperate with Aṅga, the priests advised him to abandon his fruitive performance and instead perform a sacrifice directly for the satisfaction of Lord Vishnu.

"O King, we wish all good fortune for you. You have no son, but if you pray at once to the Supreme Lord and ask for a son, and if you execute the sacrifice for that purpose, the enjoyer of the sacrifice, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, will fulfill your desire." (SB 4.13.32)

Srila Prabhupada connects the situation of Maharaja Aṅga with our situation in Kali-yuga in his purport to text 25, stating that we are also incapable of performing fruitive sacrifices in the current age, and therefore the only practical yajña for us is the chanting of the holy names.

"A Vedic sacrifice is not an ordinary performance. The demigods used to participate in such sacrifices, and the animals sacrificed in such performances were reincarnated with new life. In this Age of Kali there are no powerful brāhmaṇas who can invite the demigods or give renewed life to animals. Formerly, the brāhmaṇas well conversant in Vedic mantras could show the potency of the mantras, but in this age, because there are no such brāhmaṇas, all such sacrifices are forbidden. The sacrifice in which horses were offered was called aśvamedha. Sometimes cows were sacrificed (gavālambha), not for eating purposes, but to give them new life in order to show the potency of the mantra. In this age, therefore, the only practical yajña is saṅkīrtana-yajña, or chanting of the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra twenty-four hours a day." (SB 4.13.25 purport)

When the Lord becomes present, be it due to the performance of a sacrifice for His satisfaction, or to the chanting of the holy names, all the demigods come with Him, and thus everything becomes auspicious. As Krsna explains in the Bhagavad-Gita, He is the master enjoyer of all sacrifices, and even when one worships some demigods, he indirectly worships Him, although he does so in an improper way. This was also explained by the brāhmaṇas to King Aṅga:

"The performer of the sacrifices [under karma-kāṇḍa activities] achieves the fulfillment of the desire for which he worships the Lord." (SB 4.13.34)

Since all results are ultimately granted by the Lord, even in fruitive performances, the brāhmaṇas instructed Aṅga to directly worship the Lord, even though he wanted a son. Therefore, the king abandoned the performance of the aśvamedha-yajña and started a new sacrifice to satisfy the Lord. As soon as the oblation was offered in the fire, the Lord appeared from the fire as the yajña-puruṣa, wearing a white dress and a golden garland, and carrying a pot filled with rice boiled in milk.

This rice was empowered to grant the king's desire to obtain a son. However, because his wife was not qualified to generate a good son, the result would be an irreligious son. The king is described as udāra-dhīḥ, or very liberal in verse 37, indicating his mentality of just allowing things to happen the way they are supposed to happen without being overly attached. The benediction of the Lord would grant him the ultimate benefit, developing renunciation to the material world and returning back to Godhead, but the short-term results would not be so pleasant. As Prabhupada mentions, the birth of Vena was ultimately due to the will of the Lord, who was anxious to bring Aṅga back home.

Srila Prabhupada explains it in more detail in his purport to text 37: "The word udāra-dhīḥ is significant in this connection. The wife of the King, Sunīthā, was not fit to accept this benediction, yet the King was so liberal that without hesitation he offered to his wife the boiled rice in milk prasāda received from the yajña-puruṣa. Of course, everything is designed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As will be explained in later verses, this incident was not very favorable for the King. Since the King was very liberal, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in order to increase his detachment from this material world, willed that a cruel son be born of the Queen so that the King would have to leave home. As stated above, Lord Viṣṇu fulfills the desires of the karmīs as they desire, but the Lord fulfills the desire of a devotee in a different way so that the devotee may gradually come to Him. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gītā (dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te). The Lord gives the devotee the opportunity to make progress further and further so that he may come back home, back to Godhead."

Why does Prabhupada mention that "the wife of the King, Sunīthā, was not fit to accept this benediction"? More details on this pastime are given in the Padma Purana.

The lineage of King Aṅga was already described. He is a descendant of Dhruva Maharaja, from the lineage of Svāyambhuva Manu. A child is however not the product of just the father, but a combination of the characteristics of the father and mother. Although very pious, Aṅga was married to Sunīthā, who was the daughter of Mrityu, death personified. The genealogical tree of Mrityu was described in chapter eight, the lineage coming from Adharma (irreligion).

In the Padma Purana, Mrityu is described in connection with Kāla (time) and Yamarāja. Kāla is the energy of the Lord that puts the universe in movement, and also the destroyer of everything. Death is certainly one of the features of time, and once a sinful person dies, he is carried to Yamarāja for punishment. The three are thus connected, but they are not exactly the same person, just as Lord Shiva is not the same as the Rudras, even though they are connected.

Sunīthā is described as a beautiful young lady. She had however a cruel and restless nature, which led her to repeatedly disturb a gāndharva called Suśaṅkha who was practicing austerities. Every day she disturbed her meditation, and the Suśaṅkha patiently tolerated her mischief merely telling her to go away.

One day she struck him and verbally abused him, but even this Suśaṅkha tolerated, avoiding retaliating since she was a woman. Once however she whipped him, and that was too much to tolerate. Suśaṅkha lost his patience and cursed her to become the mother of a sinful son. Due to this, none of the demigods wanted to marry her. She was then advised by Rambhā, a divine maid to approach Aṅga when he was practicing austerities in a cave. Attracted by her beauty and unaware of the course and of her character, Aṅga agreed to marry her in the gāndharva style, by mutual agreement.

"The King was very liberal, and after taking permission from the priests, he took the preparation in his joined palms, and after smelling it he offered a portion to his wife." (SB 4.13.37)

Why did the king smell the rice before offering it to his wife? Because that's a way of accepting prasādam without directly tasting it. The king was not supposed to eat the rice, because it was meant to generate a child, but at the same time, he wanted to honor the prasādam of the Lord.

In due course of time, Sunīthā became pregnant from the king and gave birth to a son. As Prabhupada mentions in his purport to verse 39: "Sometimes the Lord arranges an unfortunate wife for His devotee so that gradually, due to family circumstances, the devotee becomes detached from his wife and home and makes progress in devotional life. It appears that by the arrangement of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, King Aṅga, although a pious devotee, got an unfortunate wife like Sunīthā and later on a bad child like Vena. But the result was that he got complete freedom from the entanglement of family life and left home to go back to Godhead."

"After fixing his bow and arrow, the cruel boy used to go to the forest and unnecessarily kill innocent deer, and as soon as he came all the people would cry, “Here comes cruel Vena! Here comes cruel Vena!” The boy was so cruel that while playing with young boys of his age he would kill them very mercilessly, as if they were animals meant for slaughter. After seeing the cruel and merciless behavior of his son, Vena, King Aṅga punished him in different ways to reform him, but was unable to bring him to the path of gentleness. He thus became greatly aggrieved." (SB 4.13.40-42)

Aṅga, however, concluded that obtaining such a bad son was in reality a blessing in disguise, and instead of lamenting, he decided to take the path of renunciation and abandon all illusory attachment to this world.

"A bad son is better than a good son because a good son creates an attachment for home, whereas a bad son does not. A bad son creates a hellish home from which an intelligent man naturally becomes very easily detached. Thinking like that, King Aṅga could not sleep at night. He became completely indifferent to household life. Once, therefore, in the dead of night, he got up from bed and left Vena’s mother [his wife], who was sleeping deeply. He gave up all attraction for his greatly opulent kingdom, and, unseen by anyone, he very silently gave up his home and opulence and proceeded towards the forest." (SB 4.13.46-47)

Vena is killed by the Brāhmaṇas (chapter 4.14)

With the disappearance of Aṅga, there was no qualified ruler to look after the citizens. Although qualified in terms of knowledge of the sastras, Brāhmaṇas don't have the nature to rule and do not aspire for it. Only Kṣatriyas have the right nature for ruling the kingdom, punishing criminals, and fighting enemies. A qualified Kṣatriya is thus installed on the throne and the Brāhmaṇas assist him by giving good advice. As long as a Kshatriya follows this system, he can act as a saintly king, even if not fully qualified.

Without a king, the citizens became unruly and slacked in the performance of their duties. A king was necessary, and without a better option, the Brāhmaṇas decided to install Vena on the throne, despite the protest of the ministers, hoping that they would be able to control him with good advice.

Vena was easily able to control the criminals and offer security to the citizens, but on the other hand, he became proud and started considering himself higher than anyone, including the Brāhmaṇas. He thus started misusing his power and insulting great personalities. He prohibited the Brāhmaṇas from performing sacrifices or giving charity, stopping all types of religious sacrifices.

Without a king, there would be no one to protect the citizens from rogues, but on the other hand, the king himself was irresponsible. The situation was thus extremely dangerous. What to do?

"The sages began to think within themselves: Because he was born from the womb of Sunīthā, King Vena is by nature very mischievous. Supporting this mischievous king is exactly like maintaining a snake with milk. Now he has become a source of all difficulties. We appointed this Vena king of the state in order to give protection to the citizens, but now he has become the enemy of the citizens. Despite all these discrepancies, we should at once try to pacify him. By doing so, we may not be touched by the sinful results caused by him." (SB 4.14.10-11)

A state can't survive without a king, but a sinful king like Vena is no better. The Brāhmaṇas thus decided to try a last-ditch attempt to give good advice to Vena, performing their duty as teachers. If he did not accept it, they planned to kill him with a curse. Internally they were very angry with Vena's sinful activities, but externally they tried to cover it, speaking to him using sweet words, in a way he could be touched and accept their advice:

a) By following the advice of saintly persons, a king acts virtuously and thus increases his prosperity and duration of life. By being impious, a king becomes liable not only to the reactions to his own sins but to the sins of the misguided inhabitants of the kingdom, which will have the opposite result.

b) Rulers who strictly follow religious principles are elevated to lokān viśokān, the planets without misery. In other words, they can be elevated either to the celestial planets or spiritual planets, according to their devotion. By their example, they also elevate the citizens, and thus everyone benefits by becoming rid of the material influence and achieving happiness in life.

c) By acting otherwise and following the principles of irreligion, a ruler spoils the spiritual progress of the whole populace and he himself fails from his position. Vena was on this path, and thus the Brāhmaṇas indirectly alerted he would be very soon deposed if he did not agree to change.

d) The duty of a king is to protect the citizens both against criminals and corrupt ministers who may try to plunder them. When a king properly performs this duty, he becomes eligible to collect taxes from them. In this way a king enjoys both in this life, enjoying vast riches, and after death, enjoying the results of his virtuous activities. By failing to protect the population, however, a king becomes a criminal in just extorting taxes and fines out of them.

e) The ultimate goal of a pious king is to elevate the population to the platform of devotional service to the Lord. By doing so, he can satisfy the Lord. Not everyone may be able to immediately attain a position of pure devotional service, therefore the king should engage them according to their natural tendencies in following the Varṇāśrama system, so they may be gradually elevated by satisfying the Lord with their activities.

f) When the Lord becomes satisfied, nothing is impossible to achieve (like in the case of Dhruva Maharaja, narrated in the previous pastime), therefore even great demigods worship Him. The Lord is the enjoyer of all sacrifices, the owner of everything, and the ultimate goal of all processes of austerity. He is worshipable by everyone, and Vena should thus not consider himself above this process of worship.

g) All good results come from the performance of sacrifices, granted by different demigods, who are plenary expansions of the Lord. By stopping the sacrificial performances, Vena was disrespecting the demigods, which would do no good.

The advice of the Brāhmaṇas was solid and at the same time compassionate. Vena however was too blinded by his false prestige to follow it. Instead of following the good advice of the Brāhmaṇas, Vena turned against them, accusing them of betraying their king, who was maintaining them, and acting like prostitutes, by worshiping someone else (the Lord). In this way, he completely inverted the situation, failing to understand that he himself was being maintained by the Lord. This shows the position of every materialist, who sees himself as all-powerful and the maintainer of others, putting himself in the position of the Lord. Just as Vena was killed by the Brāhmaṇas a result of this mentality, every materialist has to similarly face death eventually.

It is said in the scriptures that the king is the embodiment of all demigods and the incarnation of the Lord because he acts as His representative. Vena, however, due to his false pride, twisted this point, by declaring himself the supreme and considering the demigods and the Lord himself as parts of his body. Therefore, he concluded, the Brāhmaṇas should worship him, instead of worshiping the Lord.

"Lord Viṣṇu; Lord Brahmā; Lord Śiva; Lord Indra; Vāyu, the master of air; Yama, the superintendent of death; the sun-god; the director of rainfall; Kuvera, the treasurer; the moon-god; the predominating deity of the earth; Agni, the fire-god; Varuṇa, the lord of waters; and all others who are great and competent to bestow benedictions or to curse — all abide in the body of the king. For this reason the king is known as the reservoir of all demigods, who are simply parts and parcels of the king’s body.

King Vena continued: For this reason, O brāhmaṇas, you should abandon your envy of me, and by your ritualistic activities you should worship me and offer me all paraphernalia. If you are intelligent, you should know that there is no personality superior to me who can accept the first oblations of all sacrifices." (SB 4.14.27-28)

In hearing this, the Brāhmaṇas understood it would not be possible to correct the king. There was no limit for his arrogance and if allowed to continue ruling he would destroy the whole world. As Prabhupada mentions in his purport: "Saintly persons are generally very kind to all kinds of living entities, but they are not unhappy when a serpent or a scorpion is killed. It is not good for saintly persons to kill, but they are encouraged to kill demons, who are exactly like serpents and scorpions. Therefore all the saintly sages decided to kill King Vena, who was so dreadful and dangerous to all human society."

The Brāhmaṇas then killed the king for his blasphemy, not by using weapons, but by cursing him. Brāhmaṇas in our age don't rigidly follow brahminical principles and thus have no such powers, but at that time Brāhmaṇas were so powerful that just by words they could bring down a powerful king like Vena. After the king was dead, the sages returned to their hermitages. Pained by the death of her son, Sunīthā decided to preserve the body by applying different ingredients and chanting appropriate mantras.

By killing Vena, the Brāhmaṇas stopped his policy of suppressing sacrifices and the worship of the Supreme Lord. However, this led to another problem, which was the rise of thieves and criminals who started plundering the citizens unopposed. It is described that the running of all these thieves formed dust storms around the kingdom, suggesting they had organized themselves in large hordes and were systematically plundering and killing. The save the citizens, the Lord appeared as Pṛthu Maharaja.