“DAYA KRISHNA’S UNDERSTANDING OF ‘PURUṢĀRTHA’ AS A MYTH”

Abstract

Puruṣārtha literally means as “object of human pursuit”. It is a key concept in Hinduism, and refers to the four proper goals or aims of a human life. The four Puruṣārthas are Dharma (righteousness, moral values), Artha (prosperity, economic values), Kāma (pleasure, love, psychological values) and Moska (liberation, spiritual values). Almost all philosophical thinking focuses on humans and their life-related problems. The concept of Puruṣārthas is also one of those that contemplates humans and their problems. Any discussion of traditional Indian thought about man and society usually revolves around the notions designated by such terms as Varna, Āśram and Puruṣārthas.  Is is also generally assumed that the three are so intimately related to each other each cannot be understood without the other. But even amongst these, the notion of Puruṣārthas is perhaps more fundamental as it defines those ultimate goals of human life which give meaning and significance to it. In Indian context, among the four values or puruṣārthas, artha and kāma are agreed to the worldly matter and hence, can be considered as secular and Dharma and Moksa are admitted as spiritual. But Prof. Daya Krishna has discussed these all as secular or worldly values. He does not deny that dharma, artha, kāma, and moksa have occupied a central place in the systems of values Indians have pursued in their social and moral life. However, he is concerned with various ambiguities surrounding these concepts, which constitute the fourfold system of purusārathas or goals of life. He discusses morality as a unitary concept of value, desire, freedom, reason and law. Here, Daya Krishna discusses the concept of desire and freedom in association with the creation (in morality also) of something new. Hence, morality is a unitary concept of desire and freedom. The study of purusārathas has been comparatively neglected and the doctrine has even been dubbed a myth. The aim of this article is twofold: to establish the cogency of the doctrine of the purusārathas in the face of such criticism and to indicate the directions in which the doctrine could be developed further.