Social Consciousness: Dharma – Who Decides?

We have to take lessons from The Mahabharata, the unparallelled discourse on dharma, by sage Vyasa. It explores dharma with all its intricacies and tells that it is not the monopoly of the learned. In one episode a learned brahmin named Kausika was asked to go to a butcher, Dharma-vyadha, to learn about the subtle nature of dharma. In another episode, a sage who felt proud of his spiritual attainments was asked to go to Tuladhara, an ordinary trader in oils, to learn dharma. The trader gives highly learned discourse on the subtle nature of dharma. He says, ‘guided by reason, one should decide his dharma in a situation instead of blindly following what others do’

A curious debate is going on in the last few days regarding the authority to guide the Hindu community. A leader of a Hindu social organisation said, ‘Let us not look for a Shiva linga in every mosque’, he told the community, making a strong appeal not to raise fresh temple-mosque disputes. He also commented on the atrocities committed by people in the name of religion, ‘It is due to wrong understanding of religion’, and appealed for a proper interpretation of religion in the light of eternal human values.

These comments were caustically set aside by religious leaders who claimed their right to direct the Hindu community. They belittled the social leader that he was trying to become a neta by making such statements. “We direct the Hindu society. It is we who command him and not he to guide us’’, an acharya commented.

Anybody will realise that the appeal made by the social leader is touching all religions – those which committed genocides in the name of God (either in the past or continuing in the present) and those which denied equal religious privileges to certain sections of people, which, surely, is an atrocity on the social level in the present context. He referred to Sanatana dharma, which is universal in nature, which regards every being as divine, and which asks the human being to decide his actions in the light of such dharma.

One can also see that his comments were based on an understanding of the ground reality, the need for harmonious existence, and the need for economic growth of the country. Actions which make us bogged down in internal squabbles would be adharma, as they would be exploited by the host of hostile agencies trying to weaken the country.

A question would arise in the mind of an ordinary Hindu, ‘who has the authority to discuss dharma and direct the community? And what action is needed to take society forward? Any action which would ensure harmony and ensure larger good is dharma.

We have to take lessons from The Mahabharata, the unparallelled discourse on dharma, by sage Vyasa. It explores dharma with all its intricacies and tells that it is not the monopoly of the learned. In one episode a learned brahmin named Kausika was asked to go to a butcher, Dharma-vyadha, to learn about the subtle nature of dharma. In another episode, a sage who felt proud of his spiritual attainments was asked to go to Tuladhara, an ordinary trader in oils, to learn dharma. The trader gives highly learned discourse on the subtle nature of dharma. He says, ‘guided by reason, one should decide his dharma in a situation instead of blindly following what others do’ (Shanti parva, Ch.262-53). Reason is an important tool in deciding the right course of action in a situation and not religious authority only. If acharyas alone were to decide dharma, we would be dismissing great characters like Shabari, the sage Matanga and several others who attained eminence and liberation by austerities.

Are we disrespecting the religious leaders? No, we are just saying that dharma depends on the situation, and it has to be decided rationally. In the present faceoff the acharyas seem to assume that the whole of Hindu society is with them, but it is doubtful. A good number of people think that while we have to protect dharma and check fresh aggressions, the course of temple-mosque friction does not appeal to them. They have greater anguish and anger on a personal level, about not having spiritual equality by virtue of their birth in a caste.

Here the Hindu acharyas have full authority to review the situation. They can throw away the albatross of caste, unjustly tied round their neck. Ethical code is given by God in other religions, whereas the dharma texts in Hinduism are by humans. Religious leaders have all the power to clarify that caste is not a creation of religion. Four varnas were told based on the innate nature and tendency of people but the thousands of castes which came up for sociological reasons have nothing to do with religion. Such clarification would liberate people from anguish and lead to greater harmony in community than the fight for a temple covered by a mosque.

(The writer is a former DGP, Andhra Pradesh)