1.4. The qualification for Dharma

[Full title: (A) The distinctive religious features of the Devala-Smriti; (I) Dharma; (4) The qualification for Dharma].

DEVALA'S VIEW: The author maintains that there is no instruction of purus artha, in case of lower beings; as they are bereft of Dharma. There is two fold purusartha, namely abhyudaya (wordly prosperity) & nihsreyasa (spiritual uplift), in case of gods & human beings. (2200-2202).

IMPLICATIONS : 875 The words of Devala reflect upon his views, about the question of qualification for Dharma. The lower beings, (animals, beasts, birds etc.) are not qualified for Dharma. But Gods & human beings are entitled to the same. Hence there is instruction of the two-fold purus artha only to them. LOWER BEINGS. NOT QUALIFIED : The author explicitly mentions that animals are bereft of Dharma. 14 In fact, the human beings have impulses for food, sleep, fear & dalliance, that are also found in lower beings. But it is the Dharma, that distinguishes them from beasts The lower beings, also follow instinctively the physical laws (Dharmas), without! disturbing the natural order, but they do not possess the knowledge of Dharma. From the traditional standpoint, the lower beings are incapable for understanding & practising Dharma. It is based upon vedic or scriptural authority (veda or sabdapramanya). The animals do not get any knowledge, from scriptural authority, due to incapability. They have only perceptual & inferential knowledge. On the contrary, human beings, right from the childhood, have to depend upon the words of an authoritative person for knowledge. Hence, as the human beings are capable of understanding & practising Dharma, prescribed in the veda, they are entitled to it.

" GODS ALSO ARE QUALIFIED : 676 Like human beings, Gods also are qualified for the Dharma, 1 constituting the two fold purusartha. Sabarasvami (on Mm.S.6.1.4 & 6. 1. 5) & Karkacarya 15 (on Katyayana Shrautasutra I. I.4) maintain that only (on Katyayana Shrautasutra I. I.4) human beings are qualified for Dharma. Gods are not at all entitled to the practice of it. Thus these commentators are opposed to the 16 above view of Devala. While Parthasarathi Misra believes like Devala, in the eligibility of Gods for Dharma. The question of qualification of Gods for the brahmavidya (spiritual knowledge) is thoroughly discussed in the Brahmasutras The view of Jaimini is that Gods are not entitled for it. But 17 Badarayana & even the commentator Sankaracarya accept the eligibility of Gods for spiritual knowledge. It is remarkable that Devala also maintains the view of Gods, being qualified for the second purus artha, namely nihsreyasa.