PRACTICAL CONDUCT AND VIRTUE

Works

Dayanand's concept about works and their significance appear to be akin to that of the Bhagavadgita. The view held by it has already been stated. Man has the right to work, but not to their already been stated. Man has the right to work, but not to their fruit. Nor must work be abandoned, for without them even existence is not possible. In the eighth chapter of the Satyathaprakasha he says 'the jiva' (soul) is free in doing work, but dependent on God in the fruit of works'. The test of right and wrong, he says, is one's own conscience. That, which the heart concedes as right, is the true dharma.

In the world, he says, extreme desire and absence of desire (i.e. desirelessness) both are not to be preferred. Work done according to the Vedic injunctions fulfills all desires. If one says, I will become desireless and not expect any fruit (reward) from work, that cannot be, because all works like yajnas, fasting, vows and true speech - follow from having the desire for them. All the motions of the hands, feet, eyes and so forth are possible because of desires (willing). If there is absence of desire, one can't even open or close one's eyes. There appears to be some confusion of thought here, for this view somewhat contradicts the one mentioned earlier.

There is a difference between works and desire. Works are prompted by volition (exercise of the will). Desire means expectation that the act done will bring some advantage or reward. The Gita is not against works as volition. It goes so far as to say that even God works to maintain the world-order. But it is against expecting reward from works or that a particular act must bring one what he seeks.

The difficulty before Dayanand obviously was that the Vedas, which he set much store by, favoured works for accomplishing certain ends. The yajnas, sacrifices, oblations and acts mentioned therein were for achieving some specific desire. There was no concept in them, which raised a man above works. That's why the Gita speaks of them as flowery words but not bearing frui t- pushpitam vacham. There are two stages of wisdom. The Gita says there are those who have not risen to the higher knowledge, and a very few who have achieved knowledge of Brahman. For the latter, works lose their significance: 'The man who delights in the Self alone, who is content with the Self, who is satisfied with the Self, for him there exists no work that needs to be done'. For the others, however, the way of works is essential.

It is true that the Gita also says that the scriptures should be the guide for our works: jnatva shastravidhanoktam karma kartum iha rhasi. But this does not imply that work should be done with desire of reward. There are three stages, firstly 'the prompting of desire, the guidance of the law and the spontaneity of the spirit'. Dayanand's enthusiasm for the Vedas was due to his disgust with the various schools of Hinduism decrying one another in their bid for supremacy and he goes as far as saying that 'those who speak ill of the Vedas are atheists!'

Recalling the famous Upanishadic metaphor of the chariot whose horses are under control, Dayanand says that one should subdue his senses which run after sense-pleasures and thus forcibly carry away the mind-studd (chitta). The person who has gained victory over his senses, does not rejoice on being praised, nor is grieved on being disparaged; does not gladden at the pleasant or shrink from the unpleasant; is not happy at having good food to eat, or miserable on getting bad food; is not pleased by good odour or repelled by an unpleasant one.

The man of wisdom should keep quiet when his counsel is not asked, or is asked with an evil or cunning intent. But he should teach those who are eager for knowledge. Five coveted objectives are mentioned by Dayanand, namely wealth, relations, family and clan, position, excellent works, and superior knowledge. These are in ascending order of importance, with wealth at the lowest end and knowledge at the top. Dayanand's stand regarding what make man learned or experienced (vriddha) is peculiar, in as much as he believes this varies with the class. A brahman should be considered vriddha because of knowledge, a kshatriya by his strength, a vaishya by his wealth, and a shudra by his years. This concept appears to be based on the caste division made according to occupation. But it is rather uncomplimentary to shudras, because he does not give any reason for the shudra being considered vriddha, except age, which of course is a common factor for gaining experience, whatever a person's caste.

Dayanand was not in favour of image worshipper - worship of God with form. We have already discussed about this before. He considered true worship to be serving one's mother and father, teacher and guest. It is the duty of human beings to do those works by which others are benefited [i.e. public service], and to avoid doing what is harmful to living beings. The company of non-believers in God, voluptuaries, betrayers of trust reposed in them, thieves, hypocrites, persons who are selfish, cunning cheats and so forth; should be shunned. Those who are truthful, followers of dharma and who do well to others, should be befriended.

Foreign travel

In Dayanand's time a great deal of stigma was attached to going abroad. Anyone who did so was ostracised and had to undergo shuddhi ceremonies which were cumbersome and expensive before he was taken back. Dayanand opposed such an attitude, which, he said, was illogical and not conducive to a country's development. Inner and outer purity, speaking the truth and so forth developed virtue, wherever one may be, he reasoned. And if one did vicious deeds, even though he remained in Aryavarta, he would be considered to be of evil conduct.

Dayanand proves by historical examples that the ancient Indians went abroad. He says: at one time the sage Vyasa used to live in Patala i.e. modern America, along with his son, Shuka, and his disciple. In ancient times Iran and other countries which were north of Meru (the Himalayas) were known as Harivansha. 'Hari' means'a monkey'. The people of this country are still of red faces i.e. of faces like monkeys with brown eyes. These countries are now known as Europe. From there the Huns (Yayudis) came to China. From China they came to Mithila through the Himalayan passes.

Shri Krishna and Arjuna went to Patala (America) on the ship known as 'Agniyana' and brought Uddalaka rishi to participate in the yajna of King Yudhisthira. Dhritrashtra married Gandhari princess of Gandhara, also known as Kandhara. Madari, wife of Pandu, was the daughter of the King of Iran. Arjuna married Ulopi, daughter of the King of the Patala country i.e. America. Thus Arjuna took an American wife. When Emperor Yudhisthira performed the rajasuya yajana, Bhima, Arjuna, Nakula and Sahadeva were sent by him to all the directions of the globe. The Manusmriti mentions ships, which were used by the inhabitants to sail the oceans. This shows that it was considered necessary for the development of Aryavarta to go out to distant lands. How could there be any evil attached to such voyages?

Dayanand believed that it was only fools who thought that going to foreign lands destroyed one's dharma. In fact such contact was necessary for trade and development of the country. The good points of other races ought to be adopted. But he cautioned against Indians going abroad and taking to meat eating and the use of alcohol.