Dharma defined
विद्वद्भिः सेवितः सद्भिर्नित्यमद्वेषरागिभिः ।
हृदयेनाभ्यनुज्ञातो यो धर्मस्तं निबोधत ॥ १ ॥
vidvadbhiḥ sevitaḥ sadbhirnityamadveṣarāgibhiḥ |
hṛdayenābhyanujñāto yo dharmastaṃ nibodhata || 1 ||
Learn that Dharma, which has been ever followed by, and sanctioned by the
heart of, the learned and the good, who are free from love and hate. — (1)
2 Manu defined it straight. That which emanate from the Vedavit, well
learned (not from mind or tongue or thought but) springing from the heart
(Hridayam) (why, that is the mother point; as mother, only, purely for the
welfare of the society as mother to her children, VEDAM itself is a
mother), and that person is a sthithapragnan, without any bias, neither
hate nor love, [no favouritism or tricks deployed.) and a good person also,
; and what kind of dharma a way of life?; generally everyone shall be able
to follow it up; 1 vidvatbi sevitha: 2 sad bir nithyam 3 advesaragibi: 4
hrdayena abyaanu jatho (by self practice arising out of the heart)
–yes—that is the dharma (nibodhata)
3 The First Discourse was undertaken for the purpose of showing the real
character of the subject-matter dealt with by the Treatise; the description
of the creation of the World and such other subjects have also been
explained as supplementary to the said delineation of the subject-matter of
the Treatise. It is now that the Treatise actually begins. As the promised
subject of the Discourse, interrupted by the description of world-creation
and such other subjects, may have been lost sight of,—the Teacher again
addresses his pupils with a view to recall the subject to their minds.
4 That ‘Dharma,’ which you desired to learn is now being expounded by
me,—please now ‘learn,’—i.e., be attentive and listen.
In Discourse I, five or six verses (85—91) were meant to point out the
purpose of the Treatise; the rest of it is mere ‘declamatory description’
(Arthavāda). So that, if all that has not been carefully learnt, there is
not much harm; in the present Discourse however ‘Dharma’ itself is being
directly expounded; hence this subject should be carefully learnt. This is
the meaning of the re-iteration (in this verse, of Dharma being the
subject-matter of the Treatise).
5 The term ‘dharma,’ as already explained, denotes the performance of the
Aṣṭakā and such other prescribed acts. External philosophers regard as
‘dharma’ also such acts as the wearing of ashes, the carrying of
begging-bowls, and so forth; —and it is with a view to exclude these from
the category of ‘Dharma’ that the author adds the qualifications—‘followed
by the learned, ‘and so forth.
6 WHO IS REALLY A LEARNED?
The ‘learned’ are those whose minds have been cultured by the study of the
sciences; those that are capable of discerning the real character of the
means of knowledge and the objects of knowledge. The ‘learned’ (meant here)
are those who know the real meaning of the Veda*, and not others. In fact,
those persons that admit sources other than the Veda to be the ‘means of
knowledge’ in regard to Dharma are ‘unlearned,’ ‘ignorant’;* in as much as
their notions of the means and objects of knowledge are wrong. That this is
so, we learn thoroughly from Mīmāmsā (Sūtra, Adhyāya I).
7 WHO IS A GOOD RIGHTEOUS MAN?
The ‘Good,’—i.e., righteous men; those who translate into action what is
known from authoritative sources, and who *always try to obtain what is
wholesome and avoid what is not wholesome*; —what is ‘wholesome’ and ‘not
wholesome’ among visible things is well known; among the ‘Unseen,’ that
which forms the subject of ‘Injunction’ is ‘wholesome,’ *while that which
forms the subject of ‘prohibition’ is ‘not wholesome.’* Those who are
outside the said *pale of acting* in accordance with the said authoritative
sources of knowledge are called ‘not good’ (unrighteous). It is for these
reasons that both knowledge and acting have been mentioned here (by means
of the two epithets, ‘learned’ and ‘good’).
8 It is not possible for the term ‘saṭ' (in ‘sadbhiḥ’) to be taken in the
sense of existing at the present time; because in this sense the epithet
would be entirely superfluous: when a certain thing is ‘followed’ by one,
it is only when this latter exists at the time [so that existence would be
already implied by the other epithet.]
9 By ‘following’ in the present context is meant capability of acting
(in conformity with). The Past-participial affix (in ‘sevitaḥ,’
‘followed’) indicates
the fact of the Dharma having been in force from times without beginning.
As a matter of fact, such Dharma as consists of the Aṣṭakā and other rites
are not, like ordinary Dharmas or Duties, set up by any person during the
present time. {DHARMA IS THE WAY SHALL SUIT ALL TIMES PAST, PRESENT AND THE
FUTURE] This same fact is also indicated by the term ‘ever.’ (The sense is
that) this Dharma has continued ever since the world-process has been going
on. All other extraneous Dharmas, being set up *by ignorant and wicked
persons,* though they may obtain currency for some time, drop out in course
of time; no mere delusion can continue for thousands of ages. True
knowledge on the other hand, even though it may for a time be shrouded by
ignorance, shines forth in all its brilliance, upon the destruction of that
ignorance. Being by its very nature, pure and brilliant, it can never
undergo entire destruction.
10 ‘Who are free from love and hate’—What is referred to here is another
cause that leads men to take to *heterodox dharmas*. ‘Delusion’ having been
already described (as leading to the same end), the present phrase serves
to indicate greed and the rest; the direct mention of ‘love and hate’ being
meant to be only illustrative; e.g., it is by reason of Greed that people
have recourse to magical incantations and rites. Or ‘Greed’ may he regarded
as included (not merely indicated) by ‘Love and Hate.’ People who are too
much addicted to what brings pleasure to themselves, on finding themselves
unable to carry on their living by other means, are found to have recourse
to such means of livelihood as the assuming of *hypocritical guises and so
forth.* This has been thus described—‘The wearing of ashes and carrying of
begging bowls, being naked, wearing of discoloured clothes—these form the
means of living for people devoid of intelligence and
energy.’ { Mazhitalum neetalum vendaaavaam Yakkikku ulagam
pazhithathu ozhithu vidin}(Tirukkural)
11 ‘Hate,’—leads to the performance of acts contrary to those prescribed.
People filled with hate are not quite capable of comprehending the truth;
and hence they come to regard the wrong act (adharma) as the right one
(dharma).
12 Or, both ‘Love’ and ‘Hate’ may be regarded as obstacles to the
discernment of truth. As a matter of fact, even when some slight knowledge
of the scriptures has been acquired, and the man has acquired the name of
being ‘learned,’—there is every possibility of his acting otherwise (than
in strict accordance with the scriptures), if he happens to be under the
influence of love or hate. For instance, people, though fully conversant
with the scriptures, do commit such wrong acts as the giving of false
evidence, with a view either to do harm to someone whom he hates, or to do
good to someone whom he loves, and certainly one cannot be sure that such
acting of these people is based upon the Veda; for the simple reason that
there are present other forces (controlling his action), in the shape of
Love and Hate. It is for this reason that these are prohibited.
13 The following objection is hero put forward: —“In the word
‘sadbhiḥ,’ the term ‘saṭ’ has been explained as denoting righteousness; but
what sort of righteousness could belong to the man for whom it is
considered possible to do wrong under the influence of Love and Hate?
Consequently, it is not necessary to add the epithet ‘free from love and
hate’ (this being already implied by the word ‘good’).”
[Our answer to the above is as follows]—As a matter of fact, the epithet in
question (‘free from love and hate’) is mentioned as the reason or ground
(of the aforementioned ‘goodness’ or ‘righteousness’); the sense being that
‘it is because they are free from Love and Hate that they are good.’
What is really meant is the absence of undue predominance of Love and Hate
(and not absolute absence); because no man, even though there be forces at
work tending to make him free from Love and Hate, can get rid of these
entirely, as declared by Śruti (Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 8-12-1)—‘So long as one
has a body, there can be no cessation of the agreeable and the
disagreeable.’{LOGO
BINNA RUCI:}
‘Love’ here stands for hankering after the enjoyment of things; and ‘Hate’
is that which leads one to avoid or escape from a certain thing. ‘Greed’ is
the jealous hankering after the sole possession of an object; the feeling
being in the form ‘may all this prosperity, fame and the like not belong to
any other person.’ All these are functions of the Mind. Or, ‘Love’ may be
taken as standing for the affection one feels towards sentient beings, like
one’s wife, son, relations and so forth; and ‘greed’ for the longing that
one has for riches and such insentient things.
‘By the heart.’—‘Heart’ here stands for the Mind;—‘sanction’ is
satisfaction of mind. The real condition of things is this: Buddhi and
other principles are located {not the mind and brain; manasu Enna
solludhu?; mind and heart.] inside the Heart; { BECAUSE Jeevatma is here
ashtishtasya dasangulam} and even though deluded persons have recourse to
such unrighteous acts as the killing of animals apart from sacrifices, the
eating of prohibited food and so forth,—thinking them to be right
‘Dharma,’—yet they have compunctions in their hearts; in the case of the
performance of actions prescribed in the Veda, on the other hand, the Mind
feels satisfied.
14 The sense of all this is as follows:—‘The Dharma that I am going to
expound is not one beset with the said defects;—it is one that is actually
followed by high-souled persons and towards which the Mind itself urges us.
For these reasons it is only right that great regard should be paid to the
Dharmas that are going to be propounded.’
Or, ‘Heart’ may be taken as standing for the Veda; the Veda, duly studied
and borne within the heart in the form of ideas and conceptions, is called
‘heart.’
The present statement refers to the following three cases:—(1) when a
person, without much thought, undertakes an action, through sheer
impulse,—it must be right; this is what is meant by ‘sanctioned by the
heart’;—(OR) (2) the same expression also includes the case when one acts
according to custom, depending upon the dictum ‘that is the right path by
which great men have gone’;—(OR) (3) when ‘learned’ persons, without any
ulterior motives, are found to act in a certain manner they are never
blamed for it, and even when people do not find their action authorised (by
the Veda), they accept the fact that it must be based upon the Veda. In
every way the present verse makes men have recourse to activity.
15 Other people explain this verse as serving the purpose of providing a
general definition of ‘Dharma’; the sense being—‘that which is done by such
persons should be regarded as Dharma’; this definition is applicable to all
forms of Dharma,—that which is directly prescribed by the Veda, that which
is laid down in the Smṛti and also that which is got at from Right Usage.
In accordance with this explanation, however, the right reading would be—‘yaḥ
elaih sevyate tam dharmam nibodhata.’
16 ‘Hṛdayenābhyanujñātaḥ’—The term ‘hṛdaya’ stands for the
heart—conscience. The phrase stands for what is spoken of later on, in
verse 6 below, as ‘ātmanastuṣṭih’ Medhātithi has suggested that *‘hṛdaya’
may stand for the Veda.*
Medhātithi (p. 48. l. 15). ‘Mīmāṃsātaḥ’—This refers to Mīmāṃsāta Sūtra I.
i—2 ‘Chodanā lakṣaṇo'artho dharmaḥ.’
This verse has been quoted in the Parāśara mādhava (Ācāra, p. 80), in
corroboration of the definition of Dharma provided by Viśvāmitra, that ‘Dharma
is that which when done is praised by good men learned in the scriptures.’
{WHEN ALL, PUBLIC SAY THAT IS RIGHT AND THAT GOVT IS THE DHARMIC ONE} From
this it follows that according to this writer ‘hṛdayenā vhyanu jhātaḥ’
means the same thing as ‘Yam āryāḥ praśaṃsanti’ in Viśvāmitra’s definition.
—It is quoted in Hemādri ( a scholar in his treatise) (Vrata, p. 10), which
explains hṛdayenā bhyanu jhātaḥ as ‘*which is definitely known in the mind,
for certain,’* find ‘adveṣarā gibhiḥ’ as ‘persons free from improper love
and hate—in the Viramitrodaya (Paribhāṣā, p. 80), which adds the following
notes—This verse supplies a definition of Dharma in general.
17 ‘Vidvadbhiḥ’ those conversant with what is contained in
the Veda;—‘Sadbhiḥ,’ those who have the right knowledge of things;—these
two qualifications are meant to indicate that ‘Dharma’ is rightly known by
means of the Veda;—‘adveṣarā gibhiḥ,’ free from such love and hate as are
conducive to evil this is meant to indicate that Dharma is that which is
not conducive to any undesirable effects; —‘ hṛdayena bhyanu jhātaḥ
indicates that Dharma is conducive to all that is good; as it is only the
good to which men’s minds are attracted:—thus then the complete definition
of Dharma, as indicated by the text, is that it is that which, not being
conducive to any evil effects, is known through the Veda as conducive to
good. The three qualifications serve the purpose of excluding such acts as
the performance of the Śyena sacrifice. —This definition of ‘Dharma,’
‘Right,’ also implies that of ‘Adharma,’ ‘Wrong,’ as that which is known
through the Veda as conducive to evil.’
This is quoted in the Smṛti candrikā (Saṃskāra, p. 13); and in the
Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Saṃskāra, p. 156).
18 Comparative notes by various authors
1 Vaśiṣṭha, Dharmaśāstra—‘Dharma is that which is enjoined in Śruti and
Smṛti.’
2 Jaimini, Mīmāṃsā-Sūtra, 1.1.2.—‘Dharma is that which is described in
the Veda as conducive to good.’
3 Kaṇāda, Vaiśeṣika-Sūtra, 1.2.2.—‘That is Dharma which brings about
prosperity and the highest good.’{HE HAD DESCRIBED THHE QUANTA LONG AGO}
4 Āpastamba, Dharma-Sūtra, 1.20.7.—‘That the doing whereof gentlemen
praise is Dharma, and that which they deprecate is Adharma.’
5 Kumārila, Ślokavārtika, 2.14.—‘The fact of these acts being conducive
to good is, in every case, learnt from the Veda; and in this sense are they
regarded as Dharma; and for this reason Dharma is not perceptible by the
senses.’{ HE ARGUED AGAINST THE ADI SHANKARA ADVAITHI}
6 Viśvāmitra (quoted in Parāśara mādhava, p. 80).—‘That the doing of which
men learned in the scriptures praise is Dharma; that which they deprecate
is called Adharma.’
Under all these definitions ‘Dharma’ is the name of the ‘meritorious act’;
but the term has also been used in the sense of the merit acquired by the
doing of the act.
7 Nyāya view (quoted in Vīramitrodaya-Paribhāṣā, p.29).—‘Dharma is that
quality of man which is brought about by the performance of the enjoined
act: Adharma is that quality of man which is brought about by the
performance of the forbidden act.’
K RAJARAM IRS 24624 25624
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqMu7iczXUnxAjgmntyr2a-dXRMxsWUxheQQ2qczaPrJw%40mail.gmail.com.
