ETHICS contd...

Speaking the truth means, according to Dayanand, speaking truth, which does not hurt. For example one should not call a one-eyed man, one-eyed [kana] to his face. Nor should one speak a lie merely to praise someone. Speech should be gentle and pleasing, keeping the good of others in mind. Never should one disparage or revile another. He should follow dharma, and act according to scriptural injunctions. The way of dharma only can redeem a person. In the other world (after death) neither mother nor father, nor wife nor son can be of any assistance. Only dharma can plead for the soul when it is before its Maker.

We have already spoken about niyoga, which was favoured by Dayanand to do away with the odium attached to widows. In his view, men and women when young, cannot suppress the sexual instinct, So instead of its leading them into vicious channels, it could be chanelised into some kind of sanctioned union. Another object of niyoga was to have children or a son, which, according to Hindus was essential, for only thus could the family be continued. A son was necessary not only because of this, but also for carrying out the funeral rites of his father.

If the husband has gone away to distant lands in pursuance of dharma, the woman may enter temporary sexual union with another, under niyoga after waiting for his return for eight years. The husband's absence for other purposes makes the wait different depending on the object of his going - if for acquiring knowledge and fame, six years; if for seeking wealth, three years. When the husband returns after these periods of waiting, the niyoga relation ends and the wife and the husband revert to married life. So too, the man may take a woman in niyoga if he cannot get a son from his wedded wife - if she is barren, eight years after marriage; if a son is born but thereafter dies, the tenth year after marriage; if a girl is born repeatedly, after the eleventh year and if the wife speaks improperly without any affection, he may forthwith take another woman. Niyoga has its good points as well as bad, just as any other institution. On the plus side there is the social upliftment of widows, and prevention of moral depravity. But it would certainly appear that it is rather like sanctioned adultery. Dayanand's argument is that it is not, because it is approved by the shastras as much as marriage is. Nonetheless when practiced after marriage, it loses much of its authority in as much as it negates something, which is more authoritative than it. Among Hindus [as among many other races too, like Christians], marriage is a sacrament, while niyoga can at best be something which finds mention in a particular shastra. Secondly, niyoga can also be misused, for the terms which bind it are rather loose. Then there is the question of the children born from niyoga. Disclaimed by the husband, and disowned by the temporary partner, they would have a very dubious status in the family.

Post-family life: "Sannyasa"

After having lived a virtuous family life and conquered the senses, those belonging to the higher castes, namely the brahman, kshatriya and vaishya should depart for the forest. This should be done when grey hair and folds on the skin appear. It should be remembered that for Dayanand, brahman, kshatriya and vaishya do not have their usual conotation. They are not castes but divisions of human beings according to nature and works. In the forest they should subsist on fruits and roots and grain which can be grown there. If the man's wife accompanies the forest dweller, the two should not have any conjugal relations. They should sleep on the ground and under a tree. Thereafter, when the man has the desire to take sannyasa, he should send his wife to her sons and become a sannyasi. This should be from the fiftieth to the seventy-fifth year. The person who has gained victory over his senses earlier, may adopt sannyasa earlier too, straight after the student life. The sannyasi should acquire knowledge, wean the mind from other thoughts and fix it in the atman. God cannot be reached by mere action. So he should seek a guru who is knower of Brahman, and remove all his doubts.

The duties of the sannyasis are as follows: freedom from partiality, love of justice, truthfulness, rejection of falsehood, carrying out the commands of God according to the Vedas, doing good to others, saying what is correct and so forth. Dayanand also gives a detailed account of how a sannyasi should behave. When he walks, he should keep his eyes fixed to the ground and not look this way or that. He should drink water after straining it, he should always speak the truth, and even if one reviles him he should not show anger towards him and always think about his good. This recalls the famous observation of Tulsidasa about a saint: 'the doings of a saint and an ordinary person resembles the axe and the sandalwood tree. When the axe falls on the sandalwood tree the wood imparts to the blade of the axe its perfume. But the ultimate consequence is that the blade of the axe is beaten after being heated in the fire at the forge, and the paste of sandalwood adorns foreheads'. The saint's main duty is to increase dharma and knowledge in the world. Outward observances and signs like donning the ochre robe, bearing a staff and water-bowl and so forth are not so relevant, although the sannayasi should adopt them.

The virtues to be practised by the sannyasi are the usual ones mentioned as yamas and niyamas in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. These are: tolerance, forgiveness, shaucha i.e. purity of mind, asteya i.e. non-stealing, not appropriating what is another's, keeping to the path of dharma (dama), abandonment of intoxicants and so forth, knowledge, truth and non-anger (akrodha). Dayanand believes that only brahmans have the right to adopt sannyasa. Of course, for him a brahman means, as we have already said, a brahman by works and deeds, not by birth. He quotes Manu in holding the view that only brahmins are entitled to sannyasa. He condemns other sadhus, vairagis and so forth, who wander about in the garb of sadhus, but are really impostors. They do not have any of the characterstics of sannyasis. They do no have knowledge of the Vedas, and in fact go against its precepts. They praise their own practices and hoodwink others. They beguile people for their own selfish interest. They cannot be counted among sannyasis. Although Dayanand himself took sannyasa early, he does not speak about the subject as exhaustively as one would have expected him to do. He devotes only about seven pages to it in his Satyarthaprakash and disposes of vanaprastha in just a page. Perhaps he realised that in the Kali-age the grihastha asharama (family life) was of primary importance because adopting the two other asharamas required such determination as could not be expected from people in the Kali-age.