This article discusses what it might mean to characterize traditional Hinduism as a dharmic faith in relation to the concepts of truth (satyam) and its opposite (anṛtam), without however expatiating on supposed contrasts between Hinduism and the “Abrahamic” faiths. The argument is conducted by recognizing two senses to anṛtam, namely, “non-truth” and “falsehood,” in contrast to satyam; and the method used is inductive in that a historically well-known episode of the Mahābhārata—the story of Kauśika and the bandits—and its authoritative interpretation by the deity Kṛṣṇa in terms of satyam and anṛtam (in the Karṇaparvan, Book 8, of the text) are analyzed heuristically to indicate how dharma is viewed in the tradition qua ethical concept. The conclusion is drawn that Hindu dharma is understood as that whose objective is ultimately to bring about the welfare of the world (lokasaṅgraha). In relation to truth (and its opposite), materially, dharma is invariably contextual in connotation (in contrast to what might be a Kantian or absolutist reading of moral imperatives), whereas formally, at the hands of one commentator or other, not least in modern times, dharma is that which defines what it means to be Hindu. The material and formal connotations of dharma thus analyzed and taken together set Hinduism apart qua dharmic faith.

中文翻译：

---

佛法的真相与真相的佛法：对印度教作为佛法信仰的反思

本文讨论了将传统印度教描述为与真理 (satyam) 及其对立 (anṛtam) 概念相关的达摩信仰可能意味着什么，但并未详细说明印度教与“亚伯拉罕”信仰之间的假设对比。论证是通过识别 anṛtam 的两种意义来进行的，即与 satyam 相对的“非真理”和“虚假”；所使用的方法是归纳法，因为历史上著名的摩诃婆罗多情节——Kauśika 和土匪的故事——以及神祇 Kṛṣṇa 在 satyam 和 anṛtam 方面的权威解释（在 Karṇaparvan，第 8 卷，文本）进行启发式分析，以表明如何在传统作为伦理概念中看待佛法。得出的结论是，印度教的佛法被理解为最终目的是为世界带来福祉 (lokasaṅgraha)。就真理（及其对立面）而言，在物质上，佛法总是具有上下文的内涵（与康德或绝对主义对道德命令的解读相反），而形式上，在一个评论家或其他人的手中，尤其是在在现代，佛法定义了成为印度教徒意味着什么。因此，对佛法的物质和形式内涵进行了分析和综合，使印度教与佛法信仰区分开来。在一位评论家或其他人的手中，尤其是在现代，佛法是定义成为印度教徒意味着什么的东西。因此，对佛法的物质和形式内涵进行了分析和综合，使印度教与佛法信仰区分开来。在一位评论家或其他人的手中，尤其是在现代，佛法是定义成为印度教徒意味着什么的东西。因此，对佛法的物质和形式内涵进行了分析和综合，使印度教与佛法信仰区分开来。