[Guruvayur/Guruvayoor] desire

May 14, 2005

Dear Balagopal,

Really you hv raised an interesting question as we talk abt Dharma but many may be ignorant abt what exactly the term signifies.We hear Dharma as a great thing to be pursued and Krishna was an embodiment of dharma etc.It is actually a concept which can be intrepreted in different context in different ways,I feel.So what is dharma to one may not be the same for another.In generic terms Dharma means following the tenets of ahimsa,non-violence,truth,righteousness in words and deeds,obedience to elders,compassion,devoid of anger,jealousy and all such noble virtues that one practice shuld go by the name of Dharma.In a sense what I feel is that which holds together the mankind and support is dharma.It alone holds the human race to ensure that mankind does not become annihilated.People can eat only if there is food and are allowed to eat.For that a gud harvest must be there.However here also the crops can be destroyed due to floods,infest attack etc.It is a term very difficult for us

to explain convincingly.

Hence the immortal sages had thought about the concept and understood the power of living a righteous life,made a well documented observation about different times-hard times,good times,times when mankind faced natural calamities,times when there were social and political upheaval so on and so forth.After repeated observations they concluded that humanity lived well when they practiced truth,non-violence,compassion etc and they called as the principles of Dharma.But as said what is dharma for one may be adharma for another.So also what is dharma yesterday may be adharma tomorrow.Finally they concluded that Dharma does not lie in the acts we perform but in the intentions behind the acts.To do ones duty with dedication is also form part of dharma.For a butcher killing the animals is his dharma.For a soldier killing an enemy during war is not adharma.But the same yardstick cant be applied to all.If others also imitate then the acts become sinful and becomes an adharmic act with the

intention to wound one.

Sage Vyasa has reflected in Mahabharatha

Tapo nan kalkodhyayanam na kalkah

Svaabhaaviko vedanobhir na kalkah

Prasahya vittaarhavanam na kalkah

Taanyava bhaavopahataani kalkah

In this the term kalkha means sin.Vyasa says penance is not a sin.studying scriptures is not a sin,performing deeds in accordance with the Vedas is not a sin,taking away one's wealth by force is also not a sin.The attitude behind these acts decides if they are acts of sin (or merit).

Who said penances etc are sinful acts?Even though no one has said so,why did Vyasa need to affirm that they are not acts of sin?Again why did Vyasa say that taking one's wealth forcibly is not a sin?Why this contradictions?For that the answer lies in the last line 'if one does these acts with bad intentions in mind each of the above acts becomes sinful ones.'This is his verdict.So here for understanding Dharma the attitude of the act is the sine qua non to consider whether they are Dharmic or Adharmic one.Now we can consider some of the acts of the mythological persons:

Ravana with all his erudition and learning did penance not for the welfare of humanity but with the intention of tormenting the gud people of the world.It was not a meritorious act and hence certainly sinful and against dharma.

Karna in the battlefield bereft of all his armaments and the arrows piercing his body and when the Lord commanded arjuna to kill karna he pleaded 'O,Lord,Knower of all Dharmas how could you order killing me when I don't hv any weapons to defend and that go against the Dharma and for that Lord replied, 'Karna,the great warrior you now preach dharma and where was your dharma when draupati was offended in the court of duryodhana when you were there and enjoying the scene,where was your dharma when the little lad abhimanyu was killed by the everso many warriors when he did not hv any support and what right you hv to preach dharma now'.Since Karna was a mute spectator and wanted to take revenge on the pandavas his dharma preaching has no validity as he never followed the same.

Again the old day kings or the present day rulers by adopting various taxes collect money from the citizens but with the avowed object of spending the same for the welfare of the country.It is not a sinful act.(how they utilise the money is a question to ponder and is outside the scope of this.) They collect money within a legal frame work and hence the same is not a sinful act.

With the passage of thousands of years new situations hv cropped up.That put us in a dilemma whether Dharma preached by the sages of the yore is relevant to the present day.So the better way is to interpret the sayings abt dharma can be adopted with some modifications to the present day world though the basic principles have the same effect.So in essence the principles as expounded by the sages can be modified to suit the present age..It is too much to expect that all people can be adopting dharmic methods when the main purpose seems to be ends justify the means..As far as desires are concerned all hv different types of desires and when the desires go awry or knowingly sinful such desires don't come within the ambit or parameteres of Dharma as far as I know.Anyways you hv put a nice question and I hv stated what I felt.

Hare Krishna,

agramanbalagopal ramakrishnan <rbalpal wrote:

Hari Aum !Desire -one of the most confused of human emotions-what to Desire and what not!Bhagavan gives us a simple solution:'Balam balavatam chaham kamaragavivarjitamDharmaavirudho bhutheshu kamosmi bharatharshaba'It is pertinent to note that he allows only thoseDesires which are'not against the Dharma'; so forget adharmic ones in toto.But this will remain an enigma till 'Dharma' itself isnot clear.Can anyone help in defining 'Dharma'- the essence ofhuman existence.Shree Krishnaya Thubhyam NamahBalagopal______________________ India Matrimony: Find your life partner onlineGo to: http://.shaadi.com/india-matrimonyOm Namo

Narayanaya:

India Matrimony: Find your life partner

online.