The Concept of Dharma and Purushārthas

Öz

The notion of dharma is one of the most important concepts of Hinduism. This paper deals with the semantics diversity of the term of dharma, which is a Sanskrit word derived from the root of dhṛ that means to support, hold, maintain. In addition, the concept of purushārtha, consisting of the words purusha and artha, is examined by focusing on the different usages of that term. It is criticized why purusarthas are defined as trivarga or çaturvarga and the historical and philosophical significance of the purusarthas is discussed. Besides, the connection of purushārthas with varna and ashramas has been investigated as well as it is mentioned which purushārtha orders should be observed by caste members and which purushārtha should be considered by individuals in the ashrama system.
Purushārtha is a key concept in Hinduism and refers to the three/ four proper goals or aims of a human life. The word purushārtha literally means purpose of human being or object of human pursuit. All four purushārthas are important, but in cases of conflict, dharma is considered more important than artha or kama in Hindu philosophy. Moksha is considered the ultimate ideal of human life. It is also criticized that purushārthas are defined as trivarga or çaturvarga; its historical and philosophical significance was discussed. In addition, the connection of purushārthas with varna (brahman, kshatriya, vaisya, sudra) and ashramas (brahmacharya, grihastha, vanaprastha, sanyasa) has been investigated. In the caste system, the knowledge of which purushārtha element that caste members should observe has been mentioned. It was emphasized which purushārtha should highlight in the stages.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dharma,Purushārtha,artha,Kama,Moksha

Dharma Kavramı ve Purushārthalar

Öz

Dharma, Hinduizm’in en önemli kavramlarından biridir. Sözlükte “tutmak, kaldırmak, sürdürmek” anlamlarına gelen dhṛ kökü ve bu kökten türetilen dharma, bir kavram olarak ele alınmıştır. Böylece onun anlam çeşitliliğine değinilmiştir. Ayrıca purusha ve artha kelimelerinden oluşan purushārtha (Hindu hayatının dört temel gayesi) kavramı tetkik edilip onun hangi kavramları karşıladığı ele alınmıştır. Purushārthaların trivarga ya da çaturvarga olarak tanımlanmasının kritiği yapılmış; tarihi ve felsefi açıdan öneminin ne olduğu tartışılmıştır. Ayrıca purushārthaların varna (sınıf/kast) ve aşramalar (dört aşama) ile bağlantısı da araştırılmış; kast sisteminde kast üyelerinin hangi purushārtha emrini yerine getirmesi gerektiği bilgisine değinilmiştir. Aşramalar içerisinde kişinin hangi purushārthayı ön plana çıkarması gerektiği vurgulanmıştır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dharma,Purushārtha,artha,Kama,Mokşa

Kaynakça

1. Aydın, F. (2005). Hint Dini Düşüncesinde İnsanın Özgürlük Arayışı. İstanbul: Ataç Yayınları.
2. Brereton, J. P. (2004). “‘Dhárman’ in The ‘R̥Gveda’”. Journal of Indian Philosophy 32(5/6):449-489.
3. Cole, W. O. & Sambhi P. S. (1997). A Popular Dictionary of Sikhism. New York: Routledge.
4. Dharmottara Acharya (1975). NyayabindhuTika. Meerut: Sahitya Bhandara.
5. Gethin, R. (2004). “He Who Sees Dhamma Sees Dhammas: Dhamma in Early Buddhism”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32(5/6):513-542.
6. Glucklich, A. (1990). “Images and Symbols in the Phenomenology of Dharma”. History of Religions. 29(3):259-285.
7. Hiriyanna, M. (1952). The Quest After Perfection. Mysore: Wesley Press and Publishing House.
8. Holdrege, B. A. (2004). “Dharma”. The Hindu World, editör S. Mittal ve G. Thursby. New York.

9. Horsch, P. (2004). “From Creation Myth to World Law: The Early History of ‘Dharma’”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32(5/6):423-48.
10. İtil, A. (1971). “Yabancı Dilsiz”. A.Ü. DTCF Doğu Dilleri Dergisi. 2(1). 77-87.
11. Ingalls, D. H. H. (1957). “Dharma and Moksa”. Philosophy East and West, 7(1/2): 41-48.
12. Kane, P. V. (1941). History of Dharmasastra Vol II Part I. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
13. Karataş, H. (2013). “Sakyamuni Buda’nın Tarihsel Kişiliği ve Öğretisinin Yeni Bir Din Haline Geliş Süreci”. Dini Araştırmalar. 16(42): 129-142.
14. Kaya, K. (Çev). (2017). Upanishadlar. İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
15. Kisari, Mohan Ganguli, (Çev). (1883). The Mahabharata of Vyasa. Calcutta: Bharata Press.
16. Malamoud, C. (1981). “On the Rhetoric and Semantics of Purusārtha”. Contributions to Indian Sociology. 15(1-2):33-48.
17. Malamoud, C. (1996). “Semantics and Rhetoric in the Hindu Hierarchy of the ‘Aims of Man’”. Cooking the World: Ritual and Thought in Ancient India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
18. Mees, G. H. (1935). Dharma and Society a Comparative Study of the Theory and the Ideal of Varna and the Phenomena of Caste and Class. London: N.V. Servire.
19. Moniz, J. (1996). Liberated Society: Gandhian and Christian Vision : Comparative Study. Roma: Gregorian Biblical BookShop.
20. Narayana. (2017). Hitopadeşa / Yararlı Eğitim. Çev. Korhan Kaya, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
21. Olivelle, P. (2004). “The Semantic History of Dharma The Middle and Late Vedic Periods”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32(5/6):491-511.
22. Olivelle, P. & Olivelle S., (Ed). (2005). Manu’s Code of Law. New York: Oxford University Press.
23. Prasad, R. (1981). “The Theory of Puruṣārthas: Revaluation and Reconstruction”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 9(1):49-76.
24. Qvarnström, O. (2004). “Dharma in Jainism — A Preliminary Survey”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32(5/6):599-610.
25. Schimmel, A. (1998). Sayıların Gizemi. İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınları.
26. Sharma, A. (1999). “The Puruṣārthas: An Axiological Exploration of Hinduism”. The Journal of Religious Ethics. 27(2):223-56.
27. Sharma, K. (1987). Bhakti and Bhakti Movement: A New Perspective. New Delhi: Munshriram Manoharlal.
28. Buitenen, V. J. (1957). Dharma and Moksa. Philosophy East and West. 7(1/2): 33-40.
29. Varma, V. P. (1959). Studies in Hindu Political Thought and Its Metaphysical Foundations. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
30. Vyasa. (1884). The Mahabharata. C. XI. Calcutta: Bharata Press.
31. Wezler, A. (2004). “Dharma in The Veda and The Dharmaśāstras”. Journal of Indian Philosophy. 32(5/6): 629-54.
32. Williams, M. (1872). A Sanskrit - English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
33. Yitik, A. İ. (1996). Hint Kökenli Dinlerde Karma İnancının Tenasüh İnancıyla İlişkisi. İstanbul: Ruh ve Madde Yayınları.
34. Yitik, A. İ. (2014). Doğu Dinleri. İstanbul: İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi.
35. Zimmer, H. (1951). Philosophy of India. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.