Let me further try to dissect the term ,' Dharma' and find out its proximity and distinction with the term , 'law' as we understand this term in its imperative sense. Law in its imperative sense means the existence of a superior force that would compel obedience. Imperative law mandates train travel only on a rail ticket. Violate the mandate and reap the consequence. Likewise, one has to adhere to left hand driving. Take to right hand drive and reap the consequence. Law will chase. The reason why i have cited these examples is to deal with that confusion which an analogy respecting such examples may or must arise in a prudent mind. A questioning mind may shoot back a question, referring to only exceptional cases in our land where law really enforces itself. We have seen the law carrying begging bowl, beseeching compliance from the powerful and the mighty. All W.T passengers do not get consigned to jail or even subjected to fine. Breaking traffic rules too rarely invite the law to chase the offender. 

Therefore, by equating Dharma with law, a distinct dilution to its definition occurs, in that , in a confused state in which we mostly prefer to dwell, it is forgotten that in the above instance, the  law as a chaser does not seem faltering. What dilutes the chase factor of the legal system is not the enforceability and might of the law, but rather it is the failure or negligence of the enforcing agency. The failure and negligence subsists due to human lapses.

Now see. Is it possible for the enforcing agencies that nature employs to be failing or negligent in sparing your finger that is forced inside a burning flame. If analogies confuse, better try this, for an unequivocal answer. But ,for heavens sake, please don't try the other one, the drowning option, for we still need you, if not for other things, at least for your feed back.

Visit

www.rajeshsahai.blogspot.in