...
The
word "dharma" has multiple meanings depending on the context in which
it is used. Monier-Williams' Sanskrit-English Dictionary lists several,
including: conduct, duty, right, justice, virtue, morality, religion,
religious merit, good work according to a right or rule, etc. Many other
meanings have been suggested, such as law or "torah" (in the Judaic
sense), "logos" (Greek), "way" (Christian) and even 'tao" (Chinese). None
of these is entirely accurate and none conveys the full force of the
term in Sanskrit. Dharma has no equivalent in the Western lexicon.
Dharma has the Sanskrit root dhri, which means "that which upholds"
or "that without which nothing can stand" or "that which maintains the
stability and harmony of the universe." Dharma encompasses the natural,
innate behavior of things, duty, law, ethics, virtue, etc. Every entity
in the cosmos has its particular dharma -- from the electron, which has
the dharma to move in a certain manner, to the clouds, galaxies, plants,
insects, and of course, man. Man's understanding of the dharma of
inanimate things is what we now call physics.
British colonialists endeavored to map Indian traditions onto their
ideas of religion so as to be able to comprehend and govern their
subjects; yet the notion of dharma remained elusive. The common
translation into religion is misleading since, to most Westerners, a
genuine religion must:
1) be based on a single canon of scripture given by God in a precisely defined historical event;
2) involve worship of the divine who is distinct from ourselves and the cosmos;
3) be governed by some human authority such as the church;
4) consist of formal members;
5) be presided over by an ordained clergyman; and
6) use a standard set of rituals.
But
dharma is not limited to a particular creed or specific form of
worship. To the Westerner, an "atheistic religion" would be a
contradiction in terms, but in Buddhism, Jainism and Carvaka dharma,
there is no place for God as conventionally defined. In some Hindu
systems the exact status of God is debatable. Nor is there only a single
standard deity, and one may worship one's own ishta-devata, or chosen
deity.
Dharma provides the principles for the harmonious fulfillment of all
aspects of life, namely, the acquisition of wealth and power (artha),
fulfillment of desires (kama), and liberation (moksha). Religion, then,
is only one subset of dharma's scope.
Religion applies only to human beings and not to the entire cosmos;
there is no religion of electrons, monkeys, plants and galaxies, whereas
all of them have their dharma even if they carry it out without
intention.
Since the essence of humanity is divinity, it is possible for them
to know their dharma through direct experience without any external
intervention or recourse to history. In Western religions, the central
law of the world and its peoples is singular and unified, and revealed
and governed from above.
In dharmic traditions, the word a-dharma applies to humans who fail
to perform righteously; it does not mean refusal to embrace a given set
of propositions as a belief system or disobedience to a set of
commandments or canons.
Dharma is also often translated as "law," but to become a law, a set
of rules has to be present which must: (i) be promulgated and decreed
by an authority that enjoys political sovereignty over a given
territory, (ii) be obligatory, (iii) be interpreted, adjudicated and
enforced by courts, and (iv) carry penalties when it is breached. No
such description of dharma is found within the traditions.
The Roman Emperor Constantine began the system of "canon laws,"
which were determined and enforced by the Church. The ultimate source of
Jewish law is the God of Israel. The Western religions agree that the
laws of God must be obeyed just as if they were commandments from a
sovereign. It is therefore critical that "false gods" be denounced and
defeated, for they might issue illegitimate laws in order to undermine
the "true laws." If multiple deities were allowed, then there would be
confusion as to which laws were true.
In contrast with this, there is no record of any sovereign
promulgating the various dharma-shastras (texts of dharma for society)
for any specific territory at any specific time, nor any claim that God
revealed such "social laws," or that they should be enforced by a ruler.
None of the compilers of the famous texts of social dharma were
appointed by kings, served in law enforcement, or had any official
capacity in the state machinery. They were more akin to modern academic
social theorists than jurists. The famous Yajnavalkya Smriti is
introduced in the remote sanctuary of an ascetic. The well-known
Manusmriti begins by stating its setting as the humble abode of Manu,
who answered questions posed to him in a state of samadhi (higher
consciousness). Manu (1.82) tells the sages that every epoch has its own
distinct social and behavioral dharma.
Similarly, none of the Vedas and Upanishads was sponsored by a king,
court or administrator, or by an institution with the status of a
church. In this respect, dharma is closer to the sense of "law" we find
in the Hebrew scriptures, where torah, the Hebrew equivalent, is also
given in direct spiritual experience. The difference is that Jewish
torah quickly became enforced by the institutions of ancient Israel.
The dharma-shastras did not create an enforced practice but recorded
existing practices. Many traditional smritis (codified social dharma)
were documenting prevailing localized customs of particular communities.
An important principle was self-governance by a community from within.
The smritis do not claim to prescribe an orthodox view from the pulpit,
as it were, and it was not until the 19th century, under British
colonial rule, that the smritis were turned into "law" enforced by the
state.
The reduction of dharma to concepts such as religion and law has
harmful consequences: it places the study of dharma in Western
frameworks, moving it away from the authority of its own exemplars.
Moreover, it creates the false impression that dharma is similar to
Christian ecclesiastical law-making and the related struggles for state
power.
The result of equating dharma with religion in India has been
disastrous: in the name of secularism, dharma has been subjected to the
same limits as Christianity in Europe. A non-religious society may still
be ethical without belief in God, but an a-dharmic society loses its
ethical compass and falls into corruption and decadence.
Akshit Kapoor
