THE CRISIS OF INTELLECT - Part 2 of 5

The crisis of intellect – Part 2 of 5

The other manner in which the crisis of intellect expresses itself is in an orthodox setting. It is that of a dogmatic pursuit of a ritual or what one holds to be a dharmic principle. Since external exhibitions or expressions of dharma change from age to age a dogmatic pursuit of such an exposition beyond the times for which it was valid can ultimately lead us into a situation where the primary dharma of compassion  and non-violence is jeopardized. In my own experience once in my younger days when I saw the ancient custom  of shaving the head of a middle-age woman who had just been widowed I protested to my heart’s content, spoke to the elders who were responsible for it, tried to argue it out, but  I could not succeed.  I was totally bowled by the elders and I could never get over that bad feeling, more so because it was my elder sister who was the victim!

It is in this breed of arrogant upholding of the so-called Dharma that practices like sati perhaps got generated without an eyebrow being raised. While it is true that Manu Smriti talks of a woman having no independent status  because ‘in her childhood she is dependent on the father, in her youth and middle age on the husband and in her old age on the son’ – the same Manu Smriti insists very emphatically that every man should act in such a way that not a single tear rolls down the cheek of a woman, for, if it does so, continues the Smriti, ‘the person who caused that tear-drop will be destroyed with his whole clan’! If the followers of Manu Smriti had only taken this seriously, women in Hindu society would have been put on the highest pedestal – which is what perhaps is indicated in the Indian habit of addressing or greeting every unrelated woman as ‘Mother’ or ‘Sister’.  But custom and tradition forced themselves away from the spirit of ancient times.

The touchstone of Hindu Dharma is therefore the mental  attitude (bhAva-samshuddhiH, as per B.G.17 -16) with which one acts. One has to analyse oneself constantly. After all the complexities of human life are taken into account, the answer to the question: What is dharma?, repeatedly raised in the Mahabharata, is given by Bhishma to Yudhishtira in Shanti Parva (259-25): Whatever one obtains from being agreeable and loving to all, is in the opinion of the wise, what distinguishes dharma from adharma. An ordinary grocer, Tulaadhaara, instructing a vain ascetic Jaajali, says: (Shanti Parva: 262-9) He who has in his heart always the well-being of others and is wholly given in acts thoughts and speech to the good of others, knows what dharma is. Again Shiva tells Parvati in Anushasana Parva 142- 27 to 32: ‘He who frees himself from the disorder of violence and offers freedom from fear to all beings is the one in unity with dharma. Such a one will have kindness and compassion for all beings and the same sense of unity with all. Simplicity  is dharma, deviousness is adharma. Simplicity and straightforwardness (Arjavam) of character are more important than the acquisition of knowledge. He who aspires to dharma should cultivate these two traits’.

Whether it is a question of interpretation of caste rules, or a question of the meaning of partnership between husband and wife, father and son, teacher and disciple, elder and younger – whatever it may be, the choice between dharma and adharma should be made only on the basis of the presence or absence of an internal selfishness, Even if there is an iota of selfishness in what one is doing or saying, there is the contamination of adharma in it. Selfishness may be of two kinds: one which aims at an ultimate personal benefit or mundane return or psychological satisfaction; or it may be of sense gratification. Only action, word and thought which are totally free of either type of selfishness are dharmic. Pursuit of a dharmic principle as a dogma (irrespective of its social consequences) may ultimately end in nothing but self-gratification that one is upholding dharma. Any time the thought comes to you that you are the upholder of dharma and without you this dharma will decline, you may rest assured that egoism has set in and you have strayed from dharma. This is what may be called the second type of the crisis of intellect.

(To be continued)