Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
## Chapter 3: Stories
### 237. The Elephant and the King
It was requested that the poor elephant was a *tiryanch* (animal). What does it know? Therefore, don't kill it. But the king did not accept their plea. He painfully lifted the next two legs. Even after pleading, the king did not revoke his order. When three legs were lifted, people started discussing that the king was killing an innocent elephant. When the anger subsided, the king said, "Are you able to put the elephant's legs back on the ground?" The mahout said, "If you grant us *abhayadan* (protection), I can bring the elephant back to its original position." The king granted them *abhayadan*. The mahout, through the *ankush* (goad), brought the elephant back to its original position. The king, along with the queen, banished the mahout.
Concluding this story, the commentator Malayagiri says that when one leg is lifted on a broken *tank* (platform), the elephant can put that leg back down with a little effort. Similarly, when a *muni* (Jain monk) commits a minor transgression, he can return to *sanjam* (self-control) with a little purification. When two more legs are lifted, the elephant painfully brings its legs back to their original position. Similarly, a *sadhu* (Jain ascetic) can purify himself with a specific good resolve when he commits a *vyatikram* (major transgression). Just as an elephant, with three legs lifted and standing on one leg, can painfully return itself to its previous position, similarly, a *muni* can purify himself with a more specific good resolve when he commits an *atichaar* (grave transgression). Just as that elephant, with all four legs in the air, is unable to return them, it inevitably falls to the ground and perishes. Similarly, a *sadhu*, remaining in *anaachar* (unrighteous conduct), inevitably destroys his *sanjam* (self-control) soul. The commentator says that in the story, the elephant did not lift all four legs, but in *dartantik* (future), based on the possibility, the plan of *anaachar* is made.
### 11. The Ineligibility of *Adhakarm* (Half-Action): The Vomit Example
In the city of Vakrapur, there lived a soldier named Ugratej. His wife's name was Rukmini. Once, Ugratej's elder brother, Soudas, came from a nearby village as a guest. Ugratej brought meat for food and gave it to Rukmini to cook. Due to being busy with household chores, she ate the meat by mistake. Meanwhile, it was time for Soudas and Ugratej to eat, and she became anxious. In the meantime, a dog, having eaten the flesh of a dead *karpatik* (animal), vomited in the courtyard of her house due to *vayu-sankshhob* (wind disturbance). Rukmini thought, "If I go to a shop and buy meat, it will take a long time. It's time for my husband and brother-in-law to eat, so I will wash this vomited meat well and season it with spices." She did just that.
1. See *Ga. 82/2 Vr. P. 68* and *Dharmopadeśamālā* pp. 46-52.
2. This story is translated in brief from the *Dharmopadeśamālā* text because the commentator has mentioned, "The story of *Nupurpanditaya* is very famous and long, so it is not written here, but it can be understood from the explanation of *Dharmopadeśamālā*." The story continues further there, but only this much is relevant here, so the rest of the story is not translated.