“
1. The suppression of wrath (akrodha),
2. truthfulness of speech (satyavacana),
3. justice (saṃvibhāga),
4. forgiveness (kṣamā),
5. begetting children upon one’s own wedded wives,
6. purity of conduct (śauca),
7. avoidance of quarrel (adroha),
8. simplicity (ārjava), and
9. maintenance of dependants (bhṛtyabharaṇa),
these nine duties belong to all the four orders (equally).”
“akrodhaḥ satyavacanaṃ saṃvibh
prajanaḥ sveṣu dāreṣu śaucam adroha eva ca
ārjavaṃ bhṛtyabharaṇaṃ
This is from Chapter 60 of the Shānti Parva of the Mahābhārata {12.60.7-8}.
I shall come to the importance of this passage – and other passages such as this one – in a few days’ time.
It should be remembered that every word is capable of multiple interpretations.
This may be a bad thing, or a good thing – but that’s how it is.
Thus, while śauca, here, is defined as “purity of conduct” – it can also include physical, external purity of body, i.e. good hygiene – and the Hindi translator says so.
“purity of conduct” stresses the internal, psychological & ethical aspect.
So, for instance, one is reminded of the Manusmṛti:
“Among all modes of purification (śaucānam, fr. śauca, fr. śuci), purity in (the acquisition of) wealth (artha) is declared to be the best (para); for he is pure (śuci) who gains wealth with clean hands {i.e. through rightful, lawful, proper means}, not he who purifies himself with earth (mṛda) and water (vāri).” {The Laws of Manu 5.105 (George Buhler translation)}
The dictionary definition of adroha is: “freedom from malice or treachery”.
This is a very distinct idea from “avoidance of quarrel”.
akrodha – translated as “suppression of anger” – has a totally different connotation from being translated as “freedom from anger”.
“avoidance of quarrel” has a profoundly negative connotation, as compared to “freedom from anger”.
Even a coward may avoid quarrel, or someone who simply feels helpless, or one who is manipulative: but “freedom from anger” is a powerful spiritual quality, which can only be cultivated over several years of knowledge, patience, introspection, foresight & patience.
It is an internal virtue which affects the whole character of a man, not merely manifesting in external inaction {i.e. not getting into fights, avoiding situations of conflict: one can avoid situations only for so long}.
“suppression of anger” – again, at least to us moderns – has a completely different meaning than “freedom from anger” .
Suppression makes us think of anger which is being quashed, though it may keep rising up within a man.
This would lead to immense pent-up frustration, and an internally swelling & smoldering rage, which will either manifest itself in some deleterious outburst of anger one day, or will manifest itself over time in form of depression, lethargy, continual sullenness, cantankerousness, or withdrawal.
It would finally manifest itself in poor health, low energy, and general pessimism & overt skepticism, or {in extreme cases} even a total nervous-breakdown.
“freedom from anger” implies a victory – a triumph of the higher self over the lower – a liberation from negative & painful emotions: it does not imply any sort of repression, something forced upon oneself with great pain or effort – or mere inaction, but a positive change within one’s being which leads to, or forms the basis of, many other good qualities, like patience & forgiveness.
So one must be careful before adducing meanings to specific words.
The Hindi translator says: “Never getting angry with anyone”.
This can be differentiated from the other two meanings, and yet, they all may mean the same.
One who is free from anger will intelligently avoid getting into heated arguments, situations replete with conflict, or close relationships with quarrelsome people. “Never getting angry with anyone”, though probably good advice, does not convey a very clear view of the internal change within a person.
The Commentators & Translators have chosen some specific meanings, but they needn’t be absolute & exhaustive.
I am not necessarily convinced about each & every world of the indigenous scholiasts.
I’d give first preference to the ideas, definitions & references within our texts – next, to indigenous commentators, and only last of all to any 19th or 20th century modern innovations & re-interpretations.
The Hindi translator is more convincing when he understands saṃvibhāga as “enjoying wealth after having distributed it” – i.e. after having shared it with others.
Ganguli’s “justice” is a little vague.
The term seems to have a distinct connotation of giving, sharing, distributing.
The important point is that mention is specifically made of “all the four orders” –Ganguli adds “
Question is: how are all four orders expected to know their duties – and how are {or, were} they expected to actually follow their dharma?
Where does the knowledge of dharma come from?
How is it disseminated amongst people?
And how are people to inculcate them in their characters & lives?
Are Hindus today, aware, of what does their dharma consist of?
Do they have a clear perception of its fundamental tenets, at least?
As of now, from the text, it is evident that all the 4 castes had the same fundamental dharma outlined for them – i.e. the same ethical code.
Please note that point.
It is important, because the most logical inference to be drawn from this, is that there was a system of instruction, of edification, and of character-building, which was very much in place, in Ancient India, and all four varṇas participated in it, and were to learn from it, to benefit from it.
That no caste was debarred from this knowledge, & this training, is something I shall demonstrate in coming days.
The sources of knowledge were the same for all of them.
Also note that this is not the only list – the only set of injunctions – given in our texts.
There are many such, given in various texts.
The vocational activities of the four orders are very different, which may call for differences in behavior {a soldier who is trained to cut & slash in a war needs to have certain qualities uncalled for, & undesirable in, a surgeon or a mathematician – the spy of a king has to have a different character than a mathematician or astronomer}, but there are some fundamental principles which ought to be the object of inculcation & attainment by all four castes.
Each caste is instructed to follow its own distinct dharma in addition to the one delineated above.
As for the rest, if Hindus paid as much attention to these injunctions – made over & over again – than to feeding cows – {feed cows by all means, but don’t make that the symbol & defining characteristic, of Hinduism} – I’m sure India would be a much better place to live in.
It is a lofty moral code.
