Good morning. The decision of Lord Sewel to resign yesterday was welcomed by many of his fellow peers concerned that the allegations against him might have damaged the reputation of the House of Lords.
This has raised the debate about what actions constitute disrepute. Does the violation have to be illegal? Or, against specific rules of, in this case, Parliament? Or, perhaps it’s the contravention of a more nebulous notion of personal honour.
Context is crucial and whilst we’re all expected to follow the laws of the land, there are other higher standards required of us when we take up various roles and responsibilities in society. The Hindu concept of dharma offers one way of understanding what this may mean for us as individuals.
Dharma is often translated as morals, ethics or even religion – and it certainly informs all of these. But, it is more profound than that. Dharma is the essence of something – that quality which makes it what it is. So, in terms of social identity, dharma entails being authentic – being true to who we claim to be. Dharma invokes an attitude of service to society. It arises from the responsibilities of our many social relationships and calls us to act to uplift the lives of others.
For instance, if I say I’m a parent, I automatically have the dharma to serve, nurture & love my children; and if I also claim to be a teacher, I’ve another dharma: to serve my students through learning. Without being true to these dharmas, my claims of being a parent and teacher have little meaning.
And when we take up the identity of a particular group in society, we assume the inherent dharma that characterises that organisation. This becomes particularly important the more power, influence or responsibility that’s wielded by that entity. In such circumstances, we choose to accept additional levels of self-discipline. To those who’d suggest that we shouldn’t expect a higher standard of behaviour from a person, say in a government role, than we do from the rest of us, Hinduism suggests: the real comparison should be to consider our own actions and character remains true to the dharma of the specific roles we have assumed. It isn’t intended to be a judgment of how one individual matches up with another – ideally, it should be a matter of personal self-analysis. Am I living up to all of my dharma?
But, it’s easier to see other people’s faults than to recognise our own failings. So, sometimes we need a bit of help with that. And, the example shown in some Hindu texts is that this should be done privately & kindly within a group of those sharing the same dharma – peers, if you like.