तदेनां विसृजानार्यां क्षत्रधर्माश्रितां मतिम्।
धर्ममाश्रय मा तैक्ष्ण्यं मद्वुद्धिरनुगम्यताम्॥
tad enāṁ visṛjānāryāṁ kṣatra-dharmāśritāṁ matim
dharmam āśraya mā taikṣṇyaṁ mad-buddhir anugamyatām
tad enāṁ visṛjānāryāṁ kṣatra-dharmāśritāṁ matim
dharmam āśraya mā taikṣṇyaṁ mad-buddhir anugamyatām
So give up this uncivilized idea based on a kṣatriya’s nature and take shelter of dharma, not cruelty. Follow My understanding.
1 The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and the Kumbhakonam editions of the Mahābhārata (12.22.5) read kṣatra-dharmo mahā-raudraḥ śastra-nitya iti smṛtaḥ indicating that a kṣatriya’s dharma is greatly terrible, always employing violence. Nevertheless, Kauṭilya’s Artha-śāstra (Part 6) elaborately recommends how to get things done duplicitously or diplomatically, still involving violence, of course.
2 The Cārvāka only accepts two human goals—artha and kāma—which he understands can be [best] achieved through the Artha-śāstra and the Kāma-śāstra respectively. He denies the existence of all supersensuous entities—God, His abode and potencies, the jīvātmās who survive death, mind, intelligence, false ego and time (as described in the scriptures) as well as karmic reactions. Consequently, he also denies the validity of the Vedic scriptures; he only accepts the recommendations of the Artha- and Kāma-śāstras resulting in worldly benefit in this very life and freely rejects the rest. The Cārvāka ideology is also appropriately called Lokāyata: “the ideology of the common man.” See Chapter 1 of Sāyana Mādhava’s Sarva-darśana-saṅgraha for more details about the Cārvāka ideology. It is also summarized in Chapter 1 of Śrī Rādhā Dāmodara’s Vedānta-syamantaka and the third section of Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s Tattva-dīpikā.
Lakṣmaṇa’s idea of killing King Daśaratha even though he was His father and usurping the kingdom from Bharata was uncivilized, that is, evil. It was based on a kṣatriya’s nature, that is, the nature of heroism alone. It was based on the nature of a kṣatriya that is accompanied by cruelty, duplicity and diplomacy for it is described as such in the Mahābhārata (kṣatra-dharmo mahā-raudraḥ śaṭha-kṛtya iti smṛtaḥ).1 Lord Rāma wanted Lakṣmaṇa to give up such a mentality and take shelter of dharma, not cruelty from now on. In other words, He should take shelter of principles that are in line with Vedic dharma, unlike the adherent of Cārvāka philosophy who accepts [any pragmatic] principles [needed for his survival].
This scripture Rāmāyaṇa establishes Vedic dharma. And it does so by denying the validity of the Cārvāka philosophy that advocates mere acceptance of [pragmatic] principles [needed for survival] without having to follow Vedic dharma.2 And it presents and expounds Cārvāka philosophy through Lakṣmaṇa here and there while Rāmacandra denies it and establishes [the necessity of accepting] Vedic dharma.