Hindu Vedic Philosophy (Sanatana Dharma, Morals, Rituals and Articles)

Dev Life

Trividhan

Trivarg

Trisutr

Trividhan – The Three Fundamental Laws – The First Law refers to oneness

of the cosmos. The Second Law can be summed up as – What you sow is what

you reap. The Third Law is the Law of Divine Paradox.

Trivarg – The Trivarg (Dharm, Arth, Kaam) are the three acceptable reasons

for any action of an individual. An individual is supposed to accord top priority

to Dharm, second priority to Arth and the lowest priority to Kaam. While one is

advised to accord different priorities, one must not ignore either of the three.

While keeping one’s focus on Trivarg or the three acceptable reasons or

inspirations for human actions, one must always take care of avoiding the

negative list - Lobh (Greed), Krodh (Anger), Ahamkar, Maan, Abhimaan (Ego,

Status, Conceit), Moh (Delusion), Pratishodh (Revenge), Eirshya (Jealousy),

Bhay (Fear), Ghrina (Hatred)

Let us understand each foundation block in some detail. We could begin at any point

in the circular diagram shown above and proceed in any direction. Let us begin with

Trisutr.

F. Trisutr – Satyam, Shivam, Sundaram – Truth,

Goodness and Beauty

SATYAM – The first fundamental condition for Hindu Dharm is Satyam or truth. The

cosmos or the world is experienced by us through our senses and we make an

image of the world or parts of it on our mind. If the image corresponds to the world

as it exists, the image is truth or else it is not truth. Our capacities and abilities to

see, observe, experience and understand are limited. Hence, our ability to create

mental images of the world is limited. Just as four blind men described an elephant

in four different ways, we make different images of the world. For example, a

biologist and a poet look at a flower in different ways. Hindu accepts this difference

in perspective and the ensuing difference in opinions, while at the same time giving

utmost importance to Satyam or truth. If any idea or thought is against truth, a Hindu

can never accept it.

The evaluation of the correspondence between the image and the world is by means

of evidence or proof. There can be an epistemological debate about the suitability of

different types of possible evidence and proof. It is likely that some types of evidence

are accepted by one while the same types of evidence are rejected by others. Such

a difference of opinion is well-accepted.

It is important to compare the commitment of a Hindu towards truth with that of the

followers of other religions. For a Christian, every word in Bible is the ultimate truth.

During the reign of the Church, any attempt to even collect evidence that might

contradict something written in the Bible was considered blasphemy and was

punishable by death. Apparently, some holy book says that a man has more teeth

and ribs than a woman has. During the medieval period, it was blasphemy and

criminal offence to try to gather evidence against the sacred book by counting the

teeth or ribs of men and women. For hundreds of years no one in Europe could

hence count teeth or ribs. In any single-book-based religion such problems are likely

to occur at some time or the other. Both Christianity and Islam have at some points

in their history opposed science since it clashed with the truth as provided in their

sacred books.

Hinduism has never been and can never be opposed to science due to the

fundamental belief in truth. It was this belief in truth that led to the development and

growth of science and knowledge in ancient India. The glow of science and

knowledge made the Hindu full of light and the region that was illuminated by this

shower of light was called Bharatvarsh.

SHIVAM - After accepting Truth, it is necessary to go a step further and look at the

welfare of the world. Every act, belief and thought of a human being must be

evaluated on the basis of the criterion of welfare of the world. An act or belief or

thought is not proper or acceptable if it does not promote the welfare of the world

even though it may be based on Truth. For example, a person’s strong desire may

be a reality or a truth but if the satisfaction of the desire does not lead to universal

welfare, it is not proper to permit the person to satisfy his desire. Just as there can

be differences of opinion and perception in matters related to truth, there may be

differences of opinion regarding the concept of universal welfare, which may change

from time to time and from region to region and also based on the nature and

aptitude of various individuals. Such differences of opinion are well accepted and

though there may be debate or discussion to resolve the differences, there is no

attempt to iron out all differences and arrive at a uniform standard code. The

acceptance of differences based on the needs of place-time and individuals has led

to Hindu Dharm becoming different for each person, for every region and from time

to time. However, if anyone ignores the argument of welfare and advances

quotations from any book as an argument, he is not a Hindu.

The concept of SHIVAM as universal welfare based on the realities of time and place

is deeply embedded in the Hindu psyche. On various occasions this has been

demonstrated. For example India was one of the first few countries in the world to

accept abortion since the majority of the population (Hindus) appreciated the benefits

of legalized abortion without any religious restrictions. Even in matters like giving

electoral rights to women there has been no dispute since the issues are examined

on merits rather than on the basis of books written a few centuries ago. The

examples of accepting contradictory actions and beliefs based on different ground

realities are too numerous to cite. There are Hindus who are strictly vegetarians

while there are others who are permitted to eat meat. There are Hindus who fast on

some days during the year while on the same days there are Hindus who would eat

meat and offer meat to their family deities. The opposites are always justified by logic

of welfare or Shivam as might be existing at that time and place.

SUNDARAM – Along with Satyam and Shivam, the third fundamental foundation

stone of Trisutr is Sundaram. Anything that leads to nice (or “Su”) feelings in the

inner being of a person can be called as SUNDARAM or aesthetic. It is very difficult

to define the nice feelings in the inner being and each person may have his own

opinion in the matter. The purpose of all arts is to give pleasure by creating nice

aesthetic feelings. A Hindu accepts all arts and accepts each person’s version of

SUNDARAM. Hindu accepts freedom of the individual in this regard, subject, of

course, to Satyam and Shivam.

It may seem strange that something as obvious as aesthetics needs to be defined as

a key fundamental block of a belief system. Yet if we look at the treatment of the

subject by other religions, the distinction is too glaring. Islam treats all visual arts like

painting and sculpture as forbidden and even puts strictures on music. Christian

churches have also from time to time made attempts to prescribe what is right and

what is wrong in arts. In more than five thousand years of history of Hinduism there

have never been any attempts of similar nature.

The Trisutr expresses very well the essential nature of Hindu Dharm. In a way,

Trivarg is not different from Trisutr. We shall however skip such aspects of the

relationships between different foundation blocks of Hindu Dharm in this document.

G. Respecting the Learned

We could have used the word Brahmin instead of the Learned. Unfortunately, in the

past thousand years Brahmin has started denoting a caste instead of people who

devote their life to intellectual pursuits.

In the true sense and as prescribed in ancient Hindu texts, being a Brahmin is not

easy. There are strict conditions that a person is compulsorily required to follow to be

able to qualify as a Brahmin. For example, a Brahmin can not own land; a Brahmin

can only do any of the following six sets of activities – read, teach, conduct yagy

(also called yagn, by some), help conduct yagy, accept daan (alms) and give daan.

A person can not qualify to be a Brahmin if he has not acquired a certain level of

proficiency in some branch of knowledge. Above all, a person does not qualify to be

a Brahmin if he can not control his desires and if he does not live a duly disciplined

life.

It must be mentioned that a person does not need to be a Brahmin’s son / daughter

to qualify as a Brahmin. All the greatest Hindu rishis (sages) were born to either

non-Brahmin parents or were of mixed parentage. Ved Vyas, Vishwamitra, Valmiki

are some names that come to mind immediately.

The texts also mention a clear hierarchy – rishi, muni and Brahmin. In ancient times,

rishis were the ones who wrote the books of knowledge. They were the ones who

lived in universities, imparted higher education and were involved in discovering and

developing knowledge. Rishis were like the scientists and professors of modern

world. Munis do not seem to have had such a direct role in knowledge discovery and

development. Munis were surely people who lived in or around the universities and

followed a life style which was no different from that of the rishis. Munis and rishis

were expected to live a life free of negativities.

Rishis and Munis are also referred to as Brahmins. However, generally speaking,

Brahmins represent a class that in ancient India had the duty of transmitting the

knowledge of the Rishis to the masses. Brahmins were the teachers, physicians,

law-givers and moral compass for the society. It may be said that knowledge flowed

from Rishis to Munis to Brahmins to common people.

Hindu Dharm rests on the role played by the Brahmins in the true sense of the word

and not in the sense of either priests or hereditary functionaries. Respect for the

Brahmin is an essential foundation block of Hindu Dharm.

As Hinduism seeks to rise up as a global religion, it can do so only if a new class of

Brahmins is raised up to lead the world through the morass it has fallen into in the

last one or one and a half millennium. Simultaneously, a habit of respecting the

learned has to be inculcated in every one. The present generation across the world

has learnt to respect everything else – beauty, glamour, success, wealth, power etc.

The new class of Brahmins can not be effective unless the people learn to respect

knowledge and all those who discover it, preserve it and transmit it.

A few words of caution at this point are in order. While we seek to create and build a

new intellectual class, we must not insult or disgrace the learned ones of the

present-day – the professors, scientists, teachers, authors etc. The new Brahmins

can not emerge out of vacuum; they will have to emerge only from the learned ones

in the society today.

The important part to understand is that Brahmins will always debate and disagree

on different points – that is the way of development of knowledge. A belief system

that is based on satyam and shivam has to accept such debates and disagreements.

The final decision in matters, where hard facts can be obtained as proof, will be

based on evidence. However, in cases of moral dilemmas and key issues related to

life-direction, the role of Brahmins is limited to that of acting as a guide. The final

decision always rests with the individual who has to take his own decisions and also

face the consequences that arise as a result of his actions.

At this point, it is necessary to put forth the concept of the Muni that lives in each

individual’s inner being. The Muni appears when an individual removes from his

mind and heart all the negatives – Lobh (Greed), Krodh (Anger), Ahamkar, Maan,

Abhimaan (Ego, Status, Conceit), Moh (Delusion), Pratishodh (Revenge), Eirshya

(Jealousy), Bhay (Fear), Ghrina (Hatred). The Muni is the final arbiter of right and

wrong.

So while a Hindu respects the Brahmin and seeks his guidance in all matters, the

decision making rests with him and him alone. He is advised to listen to all the

Brahmins and then submit the matter to the Muni who lives in his inner being. A

Hindu must follow what the Muni tells him.

In essence, a Hindu must respect the learned ones, but there is no compulsion to

blindly follow the advice given by the learned ones. Even a learned one may be

wrong, but the Muni who lives in the inner being is never wrong and one must always

follow him.

H. Dev Life

The concepts of Dev and Danav are central to Hinduism. Synonyms for the two

words in Sanskrit are Sur and Asur; or Devta and Daity. The two words are wrongly

translated into English as Gods and Demons. Such translations distort not just the

meaning of the words but also the cultural context and philosophical paradigm in

which the words are used.

Dev or Devta is someone who gives without any direct expectations in return. A dev

becomes divine by his selflessness. Sun, moon, fire and water are devs. But the

phenomenon of being a dev is not restricted merely to these natural bodies or forces.

Every human being, as and when he or she, indulges in giving selflessly, acquires

the property of being a dev (or devi, for women).

In contrast to the daivik (derived from dev) relationship, a danav is self-centered and

tries to maximize what he can grab. A dev gives out of love, compassion and

because giving is a pleasure. A danav does not derive any pleasure from giving. For

him the pleasure is from acquiring or possessing. He gives only when he is forced to.

A mother is a devi because she gives love and care to her child. A wife may be a

devi for her husband and a husband may be a dev for his wife. On the other hand, it

is possible for a husband-wife relationship to be a danav-danavi relationship. In a

sexual relationship between a danav and danavi, both are working on their own

pleasure / value-maximization equation - each trying to give away as little as

possible, while simultaneously trying to grab as much as possible. In a society of

danavs, children are viewed as nuisance to be endured till they reach the legal age

of maturity.

For a dev, every person is an opportunity to give. Children, in particular, are so

lovable and caring for them (even after they attain majority) is pleasure that needs no

justification.

Every human being has the potential to be a dev as well as to be a danav. The fact

is that most of us become dev at some times and danav at other times. Conflict

between being dev or danav is a perpetual war that goes on in the mind and heart of

each one of us. To be a dev or to be a danav - that is a choice, which one faces at

every step of one's life.

To qualify as a Hindu, a person must try to be a dev in every aspect of his or her life.

A danav cannot be called a Hindu irrespective of his family, community, race,

country etc. Ravan was son of a rishi. He was born in the community of Brahmins.

Yet, due to his danav lifestyle and attitude, he was considered fit to be killed.

If one tries to be a dev in all the relationships, one is truly a Hindu. In contrast, a

person who is born of Hindu parents; goes to temple every day and remembers a

thousand verses in Sanskrit; but is trying to grab more and more of money,

pleasures, material beings etc. by hook or crook from everyone without giving away

anything cannot be called a Hindu.

I. Trividhan – The Three Fundamental Laws

Laws in science are distillation of the results of repeated observation. A law is

assumed to be true by inductive logic. For example, one has only seen black crows

so one derives a law that all crows are black. Philosophers of science often

differentiate between universalizations that are non-laws and the ones that can take

the status of laws. Without getting involved in the controversy of laws and non-laws,

let us note that all scientific laws are supposed to be true by virtue of the fact that

contradictory instances are either not known at all or are not known in the limited

situations to which the law is generally applied.

It may be pointed out that scientific laws do not need to be reasonable or sensible or

rational (whatever those terms mean). Some scientific laws can appear to be truly

ridiculous. One is not permitted to ask how the phenomenon that the law describes

takes place. The two questions that are clearly forbidden when one handles scientific

laws are – How and Why.

Let us look at an example. Newton's law of universal gravitation states that every

point mass in the universe attracts every other point mass with a force that is directly

proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square

of the distance between them. In common man’s language the law states that the

spoon on my dining table knows all the objects that are in your house irrespective of

which part of the globe you live in. The spoon knows the distance to your kitchen and

also knows whether you have kept the bottle of ketchup on the kitchen shelf or on

the dining table. The spoon also knows whether the ketchup bottle is full or empty.

And after all this great knowledge about every reader’s house, it performs the

complex math of calculating the force by which to pull every single object in the

universe. Wow! Surely the spoon on my dining table is more intelligent than me and

is also probably more intelligent than all super-computers put together. How does the

spoon do all this? Why does the spoon do this? No, despite all the advances in

sub-atomic physics, one is not allowed to ask such questions. Is the law of gravity

ridiculous? Probably, it is. Is it irrational? Depends on how you define rational and

irrational. As mentioned earlier, rationality and ridiculousness are no considerations

when studying laws. Let us keep this in mind when we study the Three Fundamental

Laws.

It may be mentioned here that The Three Fundamental Laws are universal. They do

not apply to Hindus alone. They relate to natural phenomenon. Laws of physics

relate to only inanimate objects while Trividhan relate to the totality of cosmos along

with human beings. Just as the law of gravity applies whether one believes in it or

not, the Trividhan applies even if one does not believe in it.

Hindus believe in the Three Fundamental Laws even though it may not be stated by

them in such explicit terms. Faith in Trividhan can be said to be an essential

condition for being a Hindu.

Having stated the background on which Trividhan rests, let us look at the three

fundamental laws.

First law – Universe is ONE and Man is part of the ONE.

The first law is the basis for a holistic thought process. The cosmos or the universe,

which has no boundaries either in space or time, (called Brahm) is one whole being.

The quality of oneness of the cosmos is a result of linkages between various parts of

the whole being. The linkages or relationships between various parts may or may not

be seen or understood by human beings. Inability of human beings to perceive or

understand can not be a reason for denial of the relationship. For example, just

because we cannot understand how light travels from sun to earth, we cannot deny

that light travels from sun to earth.

Talking of relationships between various parts of the cosmos, we must understand

that each part of the cosmos has a role in the schema of the universe. Role of any

part is only with reference to the whole. No part has any importance or relevance

independent of the overall schema of the whole. For example, every part of a tree

has a certain assigned function. The moment a branch ceases to do the function that

a branch is supposed to carry out, the tree sheds away the branch as dead wood.

Shedding away of dead wood is a natural phenomenon in every part of the cosmos –

whether it be plant kingdom or human society.

A corollary of the first law is that a whole is more important than its part. The focus is

therefore on preventing damage to the whole even at the cost of damage to any

particular part. For example, if one’s leg gets injured and starts putrefying, the doctor

will advise amputation of the leg. Even though it is not a happy development, one

agrees to lose the leg to save the whole body. Similarly, if the need arises one

should sacrifice an individual to save a family; should sacrifice a family to save a

village; should sacrifice a village to save a state; and one should sacrifice a state to

save a nation. This is a principle on which strong societies and communities are

built.

In modern times, there has been a strong emphasis on individual’s rights,

aspirations, dreams, desires and wishes. The way western society’s mainstream

thought has been shaped, the purpose of society appears to be to cater to every

whim and fancy of each individual irrespective of whether the whim or fancy will aid

the social fabric or damage the society. This is exactly opposite of the message of

the First Law of Trividhan.

The First Law of Trividhan has an implicit message to each individual to see one’s

own self as a part of the various wholes to which one belongs. Each individual is a

part of a family, a village (or town), a state, a country and the global community.

One’s focus should not be oneself but the wholes to which one belongs. One should

see one’s life as a part of a long unending journey where this life is just one small

segment. The body that one is blessed with will be replaced with some other after

some time. So, shedding away this body for the benefit of any of the wholes to which

one belongs is a sacrifice that one should be willing to make happily.

An individual’s primary link with the cosmic whole is through the Muni that lives in

each individual’s inner being. We discussed about this Muni earlier. In the process of

being willing to sacrifice one’s body, wealth and physical possessions for the greater

whole to which one belongs, one must give the ultimate respect to the Muni. One

must obey the Muni even if one has to make sacrifices to do so.

Second Law – Law of Karm - What you sow is what you reap.

The Second Law is an offshoot of the First Law. Every action of an individual

produces some effects (or triggers a chain of events) in the cosmic being. In the

infinite space-time reality of cosmos the chain of events that an individual’s action

triggers is too complex to be mapped.

The first underlying principle of Second Law is that no action is free of effects. Every

human action is a seed that brings fruits some time in future. It may not be possible

to predict the quantum of fruit that a seed will yield. It is also not possible to predict

the time at which the fruit will appear. Nevertheless, no one can deny the principle

that if one sows oranges one can only reap oranges.

This principle when extended to human actions means that an individual who cheats

will be paid back by the cosmos in the same coin, while one who acts out of love and

kindness will receive love and kindness. It sounds very simple. But in real life there

are various occasions when people tend to forget it.

Let us say that a man goes to buy vegetables from a vendor. The vegetables that he

has bought are worth Rs. 35. He gives a Rs. 50 note to the vendor. There were

many buyers on the shop. While catering to other customers, the vendor forgets that

the man had given him a Rs. 50 note and starts thinking that the note was of

Rs. 500. So, the vendor returns to the man Rs. 465 instead of Rs. 15. The man is

happy with the extra cash that he has got. He knows that the vendor has made a

mistake but decides to keep silent. He thinks that no one has seen him and therefore

he can “act smart”.

The man forgets that he is a part of the cosmos (First Law) and that his action of

keeping silent and pocketing the extra cash has triggered a chain of events in the

cosmos. The chain of events and the resulting process will at some future time

produce effects for him which will be of the same nature that his act was (Second

Law). In other words, his act of cheating has been noted in the cosmic reality and he

will receive the results of this act at some time. No one can predict what the effects

will be for the man and when the effects will appear. But the fact that his action will

bear fruits, and that too bitter fruits, cannot be denied.

This brings us to an important concept – DHRUTI. Dhruti can be understood as

“carry-over”. It is like the balance in an account that one carries forward. One is born

with an opening balance which also determines the parents to whom one is born. As

one moves through life, one’s actions keep adding or subtracting to the dhruti.

Someone with a strong dhruti will be able to achieve much more with the same

efforts compared to someone with a weak dhruti. It is like when I go to bank and try

to cash my cheque for Rs. One million the bank manager throws me out; but when

another person does the same act the bank manager is too glad to oblige. The same

effort (of signing and presenting a cheque) produces insult and injury for me while it

produces cash for someone else. More or less, the same holds true in life too.

Law of Karm is often used by some to argue for a fatalistic view of life which says

that whatever has to happen will happen and there is very little that a person can do.

Nothing could be farther from truth. Success in any endeavor in life depends on five

factors which can be summed up as follows:

􀀹 Dhruti – discussed above

􀀹 Dakshta – (Resources, Expertise and skills) One cannot do a job till one has the

resources, knowledge, skills and expertise to carry out the job.

􀀹 Desh – (Place) One cannot grow coconuts on North Pole. A tropical climate is

more appropriate for growing coconuts. Similarly, one has to be near a water

body if one wants to do fishing.

􀀹 Kaal – (Time) There is a time to sow and there is a time to reap – every farmer

knows it. The same holds true in life.

􀀹 Parakram – (Efforts) Even though all the above factors are right one cannot

achieve success unless one makes the efforts for it.

On one hand, Law of Karm is not fatalistic. On the other, the Law negates the Free

Will Theory which states that a person is free to do everything that one wishes and

only efforts can achieve success. Law of Karm takes a complex holistic view of

human efforts and results. It is neither simplistic (like fatalism) nor extremist (like free

will theories).

It may be added here that the Law of Karm applies not just to individuals but also to

families, communities, societies and countries. Unfortunately, most present-day

history text books take a myopic view of history missing out on the patterns of

actions and effects that span a much larger time frame.

Third Law – The Divine Paradox - In a war between Dev and Danav,

though apparently Dev might appear to be weaker, the ultimate victory

will always be of Dev only.

The oneness of the universe discussed in First Law truly manifests itself in the

operation of the Third Law. This is when a person can feel the cosmos acting with a

will and a purpose.

Both sacred texts of Hinduism – Ramayan and Mahabharat – seek to bring forth the

concept of The Divine Paradox.

To understand the Divine Paradox, one has to go back to the concepts of Dev and

Danav. A dev keeps giving while a danav keeps gathering. So, common sense tells

us that in a fight between the dev and the danav, the victory will go to the danav.

Third Law tells us that the opposite will happen.

In Ramayan, Ram was moving around in forests with his brother and wife when his

wife was abducted by Ravan. Ram had no army, no money and no kingdom. In

contrast, Ravan was an imperial power drawing on resources from a very large land

mass. Ravan had the world’s largest army. No one could have predicted that Ravan

would lose to the man who had practically no resources to fight a war. This paradox

is the essence of Ramayan.

Similarly in Mahabharat, Pandavs had lost their kingdom, had been through twelve

years of forest life and had just spent a year incognito doing menial jobs. On the

other hand were the Kauravs, who had the world’s largest army at command. The

fight between Pandavs and Kauravs seemed to be heavily tilted in favor of the

Kauravs even halfway through the war. Events turned against the Kauravs after the

nine days of war and in the next nine days Kauravs lost everything. The victory of the

Pandavs illustrates the Third Law.

Faith in the Third Law does not have to stem only from Ramayan and Mahabharat.

The Law is always true. There are times in one’s life when one sees the dev side

losing but one has to keep watching and in due course the dev wins. Surely, it is a bit

unnerving when a dev (Ram or Yudhishitr) is seen to be suffering and the bad ones

are enjoying a life of luxury. It is critical at such times to not lose faith in Trividhan

and rest assured that the ultimate victory will belong to the dev alone.

It will not be inappropriate to say that the Third Law is an offshoot of the Second

Law. While discussing the Second Law, we discussed about Dhruti and the five

factors of success. The focus of a danav is to collect resources and skills (dakshta)

by hook and crook without bothering about the negative dhruti acquired during the

process. The dev carries with him a strong positive dhruti which ensures the cosmos

adding its force and strength to the dev’s efforts. The hidden power of the positive

dhruti ensures dev’s victory which appears almost paradoxical to one who sees only

the external visible factors.

J. Trivarg – Dharm, Arth and Kaam

Of the five foundation blocks of Hindu thought, the one that touches human life most

directly is Trivarg which deals with the motivation or reason of any action carried out

by any individual. Hindu thought system does not prescribe do’s and don’ts in

detailed specific terms. Decision about doing or not doing any specific act is left to

the wisdom of the individual concerned. The individual is only guided about what

should be his / her reasons for doing or not doing any specific act.

Hindu thought condemns some motivations while advising individuals to do actions

based on Trivarg. There is a Negative List of reasons for human actions, while the

positive list consists of only three categories called Trivarg. The Negative List

typically represents a danav way of life. In any society where the danav way of life is

glamorized, the Negative List ceases to have any negative connotations.

Let us look at the Negative List before we understand Trivarg.

Lobh (Greed) – Greed is defined as desiring more of something that one

already has. One does not have a house and desires to have a house – this is

not greed. But a person already has one and he desires two more – this is

greed and is not justified.

Krodh (Anger) – One is never supposed to act out of anger, though anger can

be used to help one gain some extra push when one is engaged in a war or

war-like situation. All through the war in Lanka, Ram often gets angry. The

anger is justified in this case since anger is not the primary purpose of the

action of war.

Ahankar – The word that comes close to it in English is ego. Ahankar means

the feeling of I being important. Ahankar is when a part starts feeling that it is

not a part of the whole subject to the rules of the whole. It is when one sees

oneself as the doer instead of seeing oneself as a tool or medium through

whom the cosmos is acting.

Maan (Status) – The respect that others give to one is Maan. Surely, when one

does good deeds one gets respect. The problem arises when one starts doing

deeds with the purpose of getting respect. For example, it is not unusual to

meet rich persons who are doing social service not for the purpose of helping

some needy person but for getting good coverage in local newspapers. The

motivation of such persons is only Maan or status. This obviously deserves all

the condemnation.

Abhimaan (Conceit) – Often one starts thinking of oneself as superior to

everyone else around. This feeling of superiority manifests itself in many ways.

In business organizations, there are managers who think that everyone else is

incompetent. There are political leaders who think that no other leader (or

human being) measures up to them. This conceit can be a strong motivator, but

is an avoidable one.

Moh – There is no equivalent word in English. Moh is a type of delusion,

whether temporary or permanent. It arises from attachment, from possession

and it seeks to possess. It is often confused with love. In this context it may be

worthwhile to quote from another article by the author – “Love is giving while

moh is holding and being held. Love gives and lets go, while moh gives with

one hand and tries to tie up with the other. Love liberates while moh enslaves.

Love has no expectations while moh is full of expectations. Love does not

possess, moh is based on a sense of possession”.

Pratishodh (Revenge) – In Mahabharat, Draupadi, who had faced the insult of

being stripped in public, wanted her five husbands to fight a war as an act of

revenge. Krishn did not want a war based on revenge. He made sure that the

war was for other reasons. In present day Western literature, it is not

uncommon to hear that revenge is sweet. Novels and films describe in great

detail the revenge that some man or woman took. It appears as if acting

revengeful is the morally correct path for any man of honor. This is in sharp

contrast to the theories of jurisprudence that are well accepted in western

world. A wrong doer must be punished – there can be no doubt about that.

However, the duty to punish rests with the state and not with the individual who

has been wronged. Even in case when the state does not act for whatever

reasons, in any civilized society, an individual is not supposed to avenge the

wrong done.

Eirshya (Jealousy) – Neighbor’s house is larger than mine – this is not a

justified cause for any action. This is a negative emotion that must be

suppressed. Sadly, in the present world commercial interests often stroke this

emotion to sell more goods and services.

Bhay (Fear) – Fear makes one run away and also makes one do various acts.

However, one should act without fear. Does that mean that if one faces a lion in

a jungle one should not try to climb the nearest tree? Surely not! It is one’s

dharm to protect one’s body from harm. Acting for dharm is always

recommended. However, the disapproval of fear comes when one has to do a

dharm and one fails to do it due to fear. For example, a soldier who hides in the

trenches and refuses to look out for fear of being seen by the enemy is not

acting as per his dharm due to fear. Going back to the earlier example of facing

a lion – it is good to climb a tree to save one’s life but it is horrible if one gets so

crippled by the fear of lion that one is unable to climb up a tree.

Ghrina (Hatred) – Hating people for whatever reason cannot be an acceptable

ground for any action.

Having looked at the bad reasons, it is time we look at the three categories of good

reasons, called Trivarg of Dharm, Arth and Kaam. The two rules with reference to

Trivarg can be summed up as follows:

Rule 1 – One must follow all three - Dharm, Arth and Kaam. Ignoring any of the

three leads to loss of the other two also, leading to all round destruction of the

individual concerned.

Rule 2 – The order of priority must be Dharm (1st priority), Arth (2nd priority) and

Kaam (3rd priority).

With these rules in mind, let us try to understand the three elements of Trivarg –

Dharm, Arth and Kaam.

DHARM

Dharm can be best understood as the obligation that falls upon one due to the

existence of a relationship. It is not proper to use the term “duty” for dharm since

duty connotes a burden, while dharm can often be a pleasure. For example, having

sexual intercourse with one’s wife is a dharm for a married man – this dharm is

surely a pleasure and will hardly fit into the narrow meaning of the word “duty”.

Dharm is what links one to everyone else and to the whole cosmos. Let us look at

some examples of dharm.

 Body (Deh) – The first relationship that one has is to one’s own body. So, the

first dharm one must fulfill is body-dharm (called deh-dharm in Sanskrit).

Body-dharm includes food, water, sleep, sex etc.

 Aptitude (Vritti) – One is born with some vritti (aptitude / vocation). This does not

mean that a person has necessarily the same vritti as one’s parents. A person

may have vritti of a scholar even though no one in the family has ever been a

scholar. There are obligations cast upon one by virtue of one’s vritti. A person

with the aptitude of a scholar must spend his life in learning and teaching. Such a

person with his sharp mind may take to stitching shoes but the activity will not

satisfy him and he will either be unhappy or quit the activity soon enough.

 Son / Daughter – Every person is a son or a daughter. The obligations that one

has to fulfill to one’s parents are a dharm for each individual.

 Husband / Wife – The relationship of marriage is a special one in Hindu context.

It is what makes two individuals one. The oneness casts obligations upon each of

the two. The husband’s dharm becomes wife’s obligation and vice versa.

Operating in the context of dev lifestyle, the dharm of the husband becomes more

important to the wife than her own dharm. So, for a wife deh-dharm of the

husband must take precedence over her own deh-dharm and vice versa. In

specific terms, it has been advised that a wife must not eat till she has given food

to her husband; and a husband must not eat till he has made sure that there is

food for his wife, children and all those who are dependent on him. It is

interesting to note that one great adharm (anti-dharm) that has been repeatedly

mentioned is a man not having sexual intercourse with his wife when she is going

through her fertile period and wishes to have intercourse.

Parent – Becoming a parent is surely one of the greatest pleasures in almost

every culture and community across the world. Hindu texts mention that the best

touch is touching one’s own son or daughter. Parenting is not a burden. It is a

pleasure to see children grow and be a part of their growth. As a parent, one has

obligations that are truly pleasurable for a person who has a dev mindset. These

obligations are a parent’s dharm.

The above list is only illustrative and not exhaustive. One’s relationships to siblings,

grandchildren, other family members, teachers, employer, colleagues, neighbors and

friends also cast obligations upon one. Each of these obligations created by virtue of

the relationship concerned is a dharm.

Often, there may be conflict between two dharms. For example, it is a person’s

dharm to take care of his body and one is required to sacrifice one’s life when the

situation so arises in a war field. Such dilemmas between two conflicting obligations

are challenges that every human being faces at various points of his life. Ram faced

such a dilemma when his beloved brother Lakshman had fallen in the war-field and

there seemed no hope of Lakshman’s revival. Ram even considered giving up his life

if Lakshman did not recover. Ram was in a state of doubt whether he had followed

the correct course in putting his brother at risk for the sake of his wife. This is a

classic case of conflict between dharm to one’s brother and to one’s wife.

Many of us face similar dilemmas in less dramatic situations. For example, the issue

of work-family balance can be seen as the issue of deciding between the dharm to

one’s family and to one’s employer.