________________
506
The Philosophy of the Bhagavad-gītā
[CH.
example, the Brahmin in performing religious sacrifice must not appropriate another's property, non-appropriation being one of the common and universal duties. In this way he serves his own community as well as subserves (though in a negative way) the common good of the community-and so, in an indirect way, serves the common good of humanity. Thus the individual of a specific community who observes the duties of his class does not serve his own community merely, but also and in the same process all other communities according to their deserts and needs, and in this way the whole of humanity itself. This, it will be seen, is also the view of Plato, whose virtue of justice is the common good which is to be realized by each class through its specific duties; but this is to be distinguished from the common good which constitutes the object of the sādhāraṇa-dharmas of the Hindu classification. The end in these common and universal duties is not the common well-being, which is being correctly realized in specific communities, but the common good as the precondition and foundation of the latter; it is not the good which is commonin-the-individual, but common-as-the-prius-of-the-individual. Hence the sadhāraṇa duties are obligatory equally for all individuals, irrespective of their social position or individual capacity1." The statement that the common good (sādhāraṇa-dharma) could be regarded as the precondition of the specific caste-duties implies that, if the latter came into conflict with the former, then the former should prevail. This is, however, inexact; for there is hardly any instance where, in case of a conflict, the sadhāraṇa-dharma, or the common duties, had a greater force. Thus, for example, non-injury to living beings was a common duty; but sacrifices implied the killing of animals, and it was the clear duty of the Brahmins to perform sacrifices. War implied the taking of an immense number of human lives; but it was the duty of a Kṣattriya not to turn away from a battle-field, and in pursuance of his obligatory duty a as a Kṣattriya he had to fight. Turning to traditional accounts, we find in the Rāmāyaṇa that Sambūka was a Śūdra saint (muni) who was performing ascetic penances in a forest. This was a transgression of caste-duties; for a Sudra could not perform tapas, which only the higher caste people were allowed to undertake, and hence the performance of tapas by the Sūdra saint Sambūka was regarded
1 Ethics of the Hindus, by S. K. Maitra under Dr Seal's close personal supervision and guidance, pp. 3-4.
