Dharma -perplexing

[Guest guest]

Namaste all.

 

My humble homage to departed Pope- Swami John Paul II. May his soul rest in

eternal peace.

 

Coming to Raghavji's message on Gita Chapter I - Raghavji has indeed opened

a very important topic for discussion. I wish to draw special attention to

'Dharma'.

The word 'Dharma' has several meanings but in the present context I suppose

it stands for one's 'duty'. Duty as it pertains to one's station in life.

e.g a Kshatriya's Dharma.

 

Several problems arise here, not at advaitic level, but rather at the

phenomenal level.

 

Gita was taught because Arjuna failed to abide by his Dharma. In Arjuna's

case it was easy to define his Dharma. In those days the social systems of

Varna and Ashrama were water tight. For someone born in the Kshatriya clan

one's duties were well defined and barring few exceptions like Vishvamitra,

one stuck to one's duty as prescribed by the scriptures.

 

In the current millennium, the Varna and Ashrama systems have gone haywire.

The social system has become vastly complex. One takes up one's Vocation not

by birth but by choice and/or aptitude, and several people continue to work

life-long. One may change several vocations during a lifetime. Does one's

Dharma change when one changes Vocation? What happens to ' svadharme

nidhanam shreyah, paradharmo bhayAvahah?'

 

But that is only a part of the confusion. Apart from one's professional

duty, there are several other roles to play and 'duties' to fulfill. Like

'family', 'citizen', 'human being' etc. These duties are also Dharma. Many

of these or incompatible or conflicting. One finds it very difficult to

decide which 'duty' takes precedence over others. Gita advises us-

' Niyatam kuru karma twam'.

 

What is exactly meant by Niyatam? Is it 'predefined?'.

 

Ravi