Perhaps this is the most abused word in the current state of affairs, especially after the invasions, Indians have been taught that there is something called religion. Ever since, somehow the word Dharma has started to be used to denote religion.
Dharma – the Sanskrit word has several meanings in various contexts, though all are closely evolved.
The first meaning is Dharma of any entity (physical or not) denotes its character. Dharma of ice is to be cold and be solidified water. Dharma of fire is to be hot and in gaseous state. He is a saint – in this sentence, saintliness is the dharma of the person. Any quality parameter of any entity or a person is it’s or the person’s dharma.
What is character? That is natural, and not conditioned. So whatever happens the natural way is Dharma. Whatever happens the natural way without human intervention is ‘right’ or ‘correct’ and so dharma is used to denote what is right or not (Adharma denotes that is not right).
Natural principles are compiled as Law and so dharma denotes ‘justice’, for which often the word ‘nyay’ is also used. Only difference of ‘nyay’ is it varies faster than dharma. Depending on place and time, dharma changes. This is defined even by the process of evolution – to suit to the local climate and seasons.
Growth or change for improvement is the natural quality of all beings i.e., dharma. So, it is said यतोभ्युभयदयंनिःश्रेयस सिद्धि स: धर्म: | Whatsoever ensures the best of the progress or development is Dharma. Whatever a person is allowed to do for improving himself is the correct and is right. Survival is the first and foremost aspect of human life and being selfish is the primitive characteristic.
Often, there are multiple qualities that an entity exhibits. If we consider the example of ice it is cold, it is water and is solid. So, what shall identify ice? चोदनालक्षणोधर्म: The impelling quality is the dharma. So, ice is identified by its coldness.
The second part is critically explained by Pandit Girija Prasad Dwivedi in his preface to Manu Smriti. यो धर्म: तत्र चोदनैव प्रमाणमेव || Dharma is established by the compelling proof. Well, the proof that is compelling for one may not be the same for another person. Here, the psychology of examiner too affects what is dharma. If one touches cold water and says it is cold, other may simply comment “Ice is colder. This is relatively hot”.
As a person may take the rope for a snake, mistake bronze for silver and visualise water in mirage, dharma too is subjected to individual capabilities and preferences. The one with negative mind would always see the dark side of the thing. Whether the glass is half empty or half full, depends on the perception, as both are truths; and truth has many faces. So, the same thing would be interpreted by each individual the way he likes to understand it.
Dharma is defined in Samaveda Chhandogyopanishad as having three branches. त्रयो धर्मस्कंधा यज्ञ अध्ययनं दानम इति | These three branches are Yagya meaning sacrifices/prayers/worship, Adhyayana means study and Dana means donations. Considering the Vedic people were pagans who worshiped nature, dharma of a person comprises worshiping the gods/nature, enhancing to strive one’s knowledge and understanding of the worldly things and helping others.
धर्म एव हतो हन्ति धर्मो रक्षति रक्षितः । तस्माद् धर्मो न हन्तव्यो मा नो धर्मो हतोऽवधीत् ॥
If destroyed, Justice would destroy. If protected, Justice protects. Therefore, such Jusctice should not be destroyed, lest it destroys us.
It is amply clear that dharma has nothing to do with god. And it is an irony that such a superior word is used to denote ‘religion’ nowadays. Vedic people didn’t have any religion. As if transforming Vedic culture into religion is not enough, we call it ‘Sanatan Dharma’! Sanatan simply means ancient, eternal and as we don’t know the time line of Vedic period, sanatan word may be used, but calling it dharma, wherein dharm sounds like ‘religion’?
It is time to distinguish between being spiritual and being religious. Ancient Indians were known for their spirituality and not for their religious teachings. If at all, we feel there is a need to have a religion that is native, only Shaiva, Vaishnava, Shakteya would qualify to being called a religion. A religion needs a particular God and a prophet. In fact, modern of all, Vaishnava is close enough to be a religion. Irony is even these have started as various philosophies called Advaita, Dwaita, Vishishtadwaita. We forgot the spiritual philosophies that Advaita and Dwaita were, but clung to the custom centrist Shaivism and Vaihnavism. It is time for an introspection of how should we define ourselves. Perhaps, Vivekananda tried to, but since then none tried sincerely to define.
Maybe we become religious over a period, from being spiritual and thus blindly follow whatever is being given to us to read, including what I write and what others told, including Vivekananda. It is worthwhile to recall what Krishna said in Gita. That one shall analyse the fact and form an individual opinion, as per his understanding and capability.
In our scriptures, samvad was a significant variety, where in the argument is used to establish facts. Tarka Sastra was the one that used logic and reasoning. We better stop believing blindly whatever we come across and take some time to evaluate it and form own opinions, however different they may be from others. And, this is the difference between being spiritual and being religious. Religion produces clones, while spirituality guides to knowledge and wisdom. There may come a day when the word ‘dharma’ is not associated with religion.
