Such a powerful point here- "None of those people were in the room when he chose. None of them had a voice in it."
Dharma is doing that which no one is going to enforce upon you, that you do because, you inherently understand that it is justice. Even when half the world sees it as injustice. Take a Vibheeshana or Yuyutsu...
Glad that line landed. And the first half is the mechanism exactly: Dharma is the thing no one enforces, that you hold to anyway because it's been internalized, not imposed. Fully with you there.
The one place I'd frame it a little differently is the keying. I read Dharma as system-maintenance first, with justice as what that usually produces rather than the thing it aims at. Most of the time the two are the same act, which is why they sit so naturally together. When they split, Dharma sides with what holds the system, not with what looks just.
Those divergence cases are the ones I find most interesting, and a fair bit of where the series is headed. Less a disagreement than a slightly different load-bearing wall.
Justice as a by product rather than goal- I can't disagree with that. And yes, your next line is 100% true. The immediate aftermath may not seem just but, in the long run, that is what is best for the system. Is that what u mean?
Yes, exactly that. Justice, truth, non-violence, all the attributes we normally file under Dharma, are side effects of systemic stability rather than the goal. An act can look unjust or immoral in the moment, but if over the long run it removes a threat to the system's stability, it's Dharma. The appearance and the function diverge, and Dharma tracks the function.
Beautifully said. There is a conversation somewhere in the MB where this point is laid out explicitly- Dharma is that which benefits the MOST, in any given situation. If there is a conflict between two things that seem dharmic, then that which offers more widespread benefits is automatically the dharma in that context. My sieve-like memory simply won't let me recall exactly where it is said though :(
My own derivation doesn't lean on a passage. It comes straight from the root: if dhr means to hold, to sustain, the word is already keyed on maintenance, not on justice or truth or the many other things filed under the same umbrella.
But you're right that the text states it outright, and I went and found the spot. It's Vidura counselling Dhritarashtra, in the Vidura Niti (Udyoga Parva, Debroy 700(37)):
"A man must be abandoned for the sake of the lineage. A lineage must be abandoned for the sake of the village. A village must be abandoned for the sake of the country. The earth must be abandoned for the sake of the soul."
Krishna repeats it almost word for word later in the same parva, 789(126), in his embassy to the court. The larger scale winning at every step, stated plainly.
Thank you. And a sharp pointer; the Dharmavyadha story is a favorite of mine for exactly this. I've read about 60% of Debroy's unabridged Mahabharat translation, and of what I've finished it's one of the most detailed, pedagogical treatments of Dharma in the epic. Shanti Parva may well have richer ones further on, but so far this is the one that stands out.
Such a powerful point here- "None of those people were in the room when he chose. None of them had a voice in it."
Dharma is doing that which no one is going to enforce upon you, that you do because, you inherently understand that it is justice. Even when half the world sees it as injustice. Take a Vibheeshana or Yuyutsu...
Glad that line landed. And the first half is the mechanism exactly: Dharma is the thing no one enforces, that you hold to anyway because it's been internalized, not imposed. Fully with you there.
The one place I'd frame it a little differently is the keying. I read Dharma as system-maintenance first, with justice as what that usually produces rather than the thing it aims at. Most of the time the two are the same act, which is why they sit so naturally together. When they split, Dharma sides with what holds the system, not with what looks just.
Those divergence cases are the ones I find most interesting, and a fair bit of where the series is headed. Less a disagreement than a slightly different load-bearing wall.
Justice as a by product rather than goal- I can't disagree with that. And yes, your next line is 100% true. The immediate aftermath may not seem just but, in the long run, that is what is best for the system. Is that what u mean?
Yes, exactly that. Justice, truth, non-violence, all the attributes we normally file under Dharma, are side effects of systemic stability rather than the goal. An act can look unjust or immoral in the moment, but if over the long run it removes a threat to the system's stability, it's Dharma. The appearance and the function diverge, and Dharma tracks the function.
Beautifully said. There is a conversation somewhere in the MB where this point is laid out explicitly- Dharma is that which benefits the MOST, in any given situation. If there is a conflict between two things that seem dharmic, then that which offers more widespread benefits is automatically the dharma in that context. My sieve-like memory simply won't let me recall exactly where it is said though :(
My own derivation doesn't lean on a passage. It comes straight from the root: if dhr means to hold, to sustain, the word is already keyed on maintenance, not on justice or truth or the many other things filed under the same umbrella.
But you're right that the text states it outright, and I went and found the spot. It's Vidura counselling Dhritarashtra, in the Vidura Niti (Udyoga Parva, Debroy 700(37)):
"A man must be abandoned for the sake of the lineage. A lineage must be abandoned for the sake of the village. A village must be abandoned for the sake of the country. The earth must be abandoned for the sake of the soul."
Krishna repeats it almost word for word later in the same parva, 789(126), in his embassy to the court. The larger scale winning at every step, stated plainly.
And again, simply beautifully analysed and laid out in such clear terms.
In the Dharmavyadha story we have a nice example for moral dilemma. Do read: https://aitihasika.substack.com/p/when-satya-is-not-dharma?r=nq4jh&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Thank you. And a sharp pointer; the Dharmavyadha story is a favorite of mine for exactly this. I've read about 60% of Debroy's unabridged Mahabharat translation, and of what I've finished it's one of the most detailed, pedagogical treatments of Dharma in the epic. Shanti Parva may well have richer ones further on, but so far this is the one that stands out.
Dharmavyadha story is beautiful in it simplicity. Shanti parva somewhat fails there, being more pedagogical.