Ramayana — Yuddha Kanda, Sarga 64, Shloka 6
महोदर-वाक्यं कुम्भकर्ण-प्रतिषेधः
Mahodara’s Counsel and the Critique of Kumbhakarna’s Solo Assault
यांस्तुधर्मार्थकामांस्त्वंब्रवीषिपृथगाश्रयान् ।अवबोद्धुंस्वभावेतान्नहिलक्षणमस्तितान् ।।।।
yāṃs tu dharmārthakāmāṃs tvaṃ bravīṣi pṛthagāśrayān | avaboddhuṃ svabhāve tān na hi lakṣaṇam asti tān ||
As for dharma, artha, and kāma, you speak of them as resting on separate and incompatible bases; yet in their true nature there is no defining mark that makes them absolutely separable.
"The virtues, worldly gain and sensuous pleasures give results separately as you said. They are incompatible with what you said and that it is its nature you said. what is the proof?"
FAQs
It cautions against simplistic moral compartmentalization: dharma, artha, and kāma interrelate, and dharma must guide the pursuit of artha and kāma rather than being treated as wholly separate.
A debate on policy and values unfolds in the Rakshasa court, examining whether life-goals (dharma/artha/kāma) are separable or mutually conditioning.
Discriminative wisdom (viveka): the ability to analyze doctrines carefully rather than asserting rigid categories.