Hindu Bioethics for the Twenty-first Century

CHAPTER 1. HINDU ETHICS

CHAPTER 1 HINDU ETHICS Satyam eva jayate nanritam. Truth alone is victorious and not falsehood. THE CONCEPT OF DHARMA The Sanskrit word for ethics is dharma (“to hold”). It signifies that which upholds or embodies law, custom, and religion, and is analogous to the concept of ‘Natural Law’ in Christian ethics, though the idea of ‘law’ should not detract from its dynamic character. Dharma is activity, mobility , and is possessed of catalytic qualities. By contrast, a-dharma is stasis, stoppage, and therefore unnatural. From the beginning of Indian civilization, the Indian mind has chiefly been preoccupied with the notion of dharma. K. N. Upadhyaya notes that “the persistence and intensity with which the inquiry into dharma has been pursued is mainly on account of the firm conviction of the Indian people that dharma constitutes the differentia of man,” just as in Western philosophy, following Aristotle, rationality has been upheld as the mark that distinguishes humans from all other creatures.1 Notwithstanding this historic preoccupation with dharma, the Hindu scriptures do not have systematic discussions of moral doctrines, fashioned in the manner of Aristotelian or Thomistic models. At the same time Hindu scriptures are rich repositories of certain theoretical statements that define the shape of reality and the nature of things, along with prescriptive and practical sayings, aimed at the cultivation of moral behavior . The terminology in which these ideas and ideals are expressed is richly suggestive, making it possible to reconstruct these fertile fragments into models of systematic ethics. Crawford: Hindu Bioethics page 11 The common scriptural ground on which the whole system of Hindu ethics is founded is the postulation of a summum bonum and the proper means to achieve it. This highest ideal is the state of liberation or mokÓsa. In it a person finds self-fulfillment and deepest bliss. It is established on the metaphysical conviction of the oneness of Reality, which is attainable through direct experience. MokÓsa serves as the ultimate standard of right conduct. An act is of value or disvalue to the extent it either helps or hinders the attainment of freedom. Actions most distinctively oriented to mokÓsa are those characterized by truth, non-violence, sacrifice, and renunciation . At first glance the philosophical ideal of mokÓsa, which calls for detachment and progressive resignation, appears antithetical to ethics, because ethics involves a person’s active role in the world. There is no doubt that the Hindu philosophical ideal transcends the ethical ideal, but, as with the rungs of a ladder, the higher and lower levels are connected and cannot function separately. Thus while Hinduism draws a sharp distinction between the spiritual and material, the eternal and the temporal, these dimensions of existence are not polarized but correlated within the inclusive concept of dharma. Dharma incorporates the metaphysical and practical wisdom of the Hindus. The unity between philosophical wisdom and ethical excellence is clearly illustrated in the doctrine of adhik¯ara. This doctrine teaches that before a disciple can aspire after knowledge, he must first be morally qualified. The UpaniÓsads are replete with references correlating prajñ¯a or saving knowledge with moral practice. The KaÓtha UpaniÓsad clealy states: Not he who has not ceased from bad conduct, Not he who is not tranquil, not he who is not composed, Not he who is not of peaceful mind Can obtain Him by intelligence (prajñ¯a).2 Commenting on this verse, R¯am¯anuja explains that it “teaches that meditation, which should become more perfect day by day, cannot be accomplished without the devotee having broken with all evil. This is the indispensable condition of pleasing the Lord and winning His grace.”3 The adhik¯ara doctrine underscores the intrinsic connection between rationality and morality. A truly rational person is bound to demonstrate qualities that are moral. In the pursuit of truth he or she is obligated to be free of bias, self-interest, and double standards. All of these are moral Crawford: Hindu Bioethics page 12 12 Foundations qualities. It follows that to be rational is to be moral, and just as a sound mind requires a sound body, a sound philosophy requires a sound ethics. Saksena says: “The moral and spiritual qualification of a philosopher is . . . a condition of his philosophizing properly. Passion or ethical failings cannot but distort the vision of even a philosopher. In fact, what is called...