Text 5] Chanting the Song Sung by Lord Siva 1029
the horse of his father; vidvan api—although he knew it; na jaghnivan—did
not kill.

TRANSLATION

Maharaja Antardhana had another wife named Nabhasvati, and by her
he was happy to beget another son named Havirdhana. Since Maharaja
Antardhana was very liberal, he did not kill Indra while the demigod was
stealing his father’s horse at the sacrifice.

PURPORT

It is understood from various scriptures and Puranas that the King of
heaven, Indra, was very expert in stealing and kidnapping. He could steal
anything without being visible to the proprietor, and he could kidnap
anyone’s wife without being detected. Once he raped the wife of
Gautama Muni by using his disappearing art, and similarly by becoming
invisible he stole the horse of Maharaja Prthu. Although in human society
such activities are considered abominable, the demigod Indra was not
considered to be degraded by them. Although Antardhana could
understand that King Indra was stealing the horse from his father, he did
not kill him, for he knew that if one who is very powerful sometimes
commits an abominable act, it should be disregarded. In Bhagavad-gita
it is clearly stated:

api cet suduracaro
bhajate mam ananya-bhak
sddhur eva sa mantavyah
samyag vyavasito hi sah
“Even if one commits the most abominable actions, if he is engaged in
devotional service, he is to be considered saintly because he is properly
situated.” (Bg. 9.30)

Thus even if a devotee commits an abominable act, he should be
considered a sddhu, or a pious man, because of his unflinching devotion to
the Lord. The devotees of the Lord never willingly commit any sinful
act, but sometimes they commit something abominable due to their
previous habits. Such acts should not be taken very seriously, however,
because the devotees of the Lord are very powerful, whether they are on
the heavenly planets or on this planet. If by chance they commit something
abominable, it should not be taken into account but should be overlooked.
