Thursday, May 9, 2024

CREATIVE COMMUNICATION
Language and Reality in Indian Tradition

Sunil Sondhi

Tagore National fellow
Indira Gandhi National Center for the Arts

Abstract

The unifying vision of reason and intuition in Indian linguistic tradition as established in the Vedas, Upanishads, and the works of scholars and sages like Panini, Patanjali, Bharatmuni, Bhartrihari, and Abhinavagupta, embraces levels and structure of language, objective reality, and the absolute reality. The search for general rules underlying the diversity of languages is ultimately an exploration of the very nature of human mind and its relation with reality. It reveals the interconnections between language, thought and reality. Panini’s grammar, Bharatmuni’s view of dramatic performance as an integrated entity, and Bhartrihari’s view of sentence as a meaningful unit reveals the unifying relationship of the parts and the whole, between the objective reality of the world and the Absolute Reality, and between reason and intuition. The essential message of Indian classical texts with regard to language and communication is that there are different levels of language between the two extremes termed as Vaikhari and Pasyanti, which correspond to different levels of consciousness of the Absolute Reality. The Absolute Reality lies outside human perceptions of space and time and is, therefore, is not expressible in ordinary language. The experience of that reality can only be indicated by words that try to go beyond words. Meaningful thought and communication requires constant interplay of lower and higher levels of speech, symbolizing constant interplay of the relative and Absolute Reality, and reason and intuition.

Keywords: Veda, Upaniṣads, Cultural linguistics, Indian culture, Intercultural communication

Introduction

Today, fury and incomprehension of words have eroded the minimum standards of discussion and debate in communication, specially in the cyberspace. We seem to be increasingly unwilling to even try to find a common ground with which to engage with people whose views differ from ours. Such violent language achieves its impact by denying any complexity, conditionality, or uncertainty. It exaggerates wildly to make its point. It is built on a presumption of bad faith on the part of the other person. It accepts no responsibility to anyone to explain anything to anybody, but instead treats the facts as they were a matter of opinion. (Thompson, 2016, p. 17).

In still many more cases, when the words are not violent or offensive, they are still inane. People merely gossip and chat. Though they talk so much they have little to say. This is true particularly of academicians and journalists in urban India. They speak compulsively, mechanically, in jargons. They use many and big words for few and small things. The television debates that we see so often these days, and seminars and conferences are often nothing else but words reacting to words with little sense of relevance and reality. (Ram Swarup, 2001, p. 91.)

A healthy language knits people together, and ultimately leads to better and more inclusive society. But when communication loses its power to explain and engage, it endangers the bond of trust between people. The critical risk from bad communication is not only in the realm of culture, but also in legitimacy and sustainability of social and political cohesion. When public discourse of a country gets vicious and partisan, democratic society as a whole starts to fall apart. The loud-mouthed rhetoric based on half-truth instead of bringing people together breeds anger, hatred and division in society.

The Indian view of communication on the other hand is one that joins, links, coordinates and brings people together. Not in the sense of monotonous uniformity, and not in the sense of erasing all the differences, but in the sense of unity in diversity, shared commonalties along with differences. One way we can frame integral communication is to describe it as holistic, innermost and multidimensional exchange. That is, communication that originates from all dimensions of being – physical, emotional, rational, cultural, and spiritual, and seeks to reach out to as many aspects as possible of the listener. Inherently, then, integral communicators will use inclusive approaches and language that evolve out of a clear understanding of the wider social and universal context of the speaker and the listener. Integral communication could be the bridge between the traditional and modern idioms of Indian and society.

A primary assumption of this view is that the Sahridyata or connection we so earnestly seek does exist in all exchanges. (Mishra, 2005, p.93). Our ideas, feelings, and beliefs spring from the rich foundation of our common humanity and cosmic identity; at the most fundamental level, we are part of the same fabric of being amidst all existence. Conflict may therefore be due to misperception between different manifestations of the same unmanifest reality, and communication can be viewed as coordination to connect and integrate multiple manifestations of the ultimate reality. However, regardless of how that accommodation and coordination is defined, the commonality principle has been understood and practiced by very few, and there is instead a strong tendency to put people into different, hierarchical and even opposing categories. The objective of integral communication is to understand and appreciate the universal aspect of being, and the interdependent nature of everyone and everything.

The objective of the present article is to state the general principles of India’s linguistic tradition and their contemporary relevance. The present context of communication studies and practice in India is the primary reason for studying India’s linguistic tradition. India’s tradition and culture have too often been treated in a historical way, as things which have been and are gone, and as wholly unrelated to, and without value for,

for the present context. The Indian tradition and culture, therefore, have not received the attention and consideration which is due to them. It is an unstated assumption of this view that values and content of tradition are impediments to modernization. It is the argument of this article that India’s linguistic tradition is essentially in conformity with the most advanced scientific and rational thought in the field of linguistics and communication today. 'India is one country in the world, best exemplifying and ageless, unbroken tradition of speculations about language and communication' (Padoux, 1992, p.1). Tradition and modernity are not contradictory. This two-valued orientation is a Western construct. In the Indian tradition of multi-valued orientation, tradition and modernity are connected and complementary.

It is the argument of this article that the negative trends in communication in India stem from a complex web of social, political, and cultural factors that go beyond any individual, ideology or situation. To find a solution to this problem we need to look within and examine the disconnect between the roots of language in the Indian society and the use to which language is being put by people who are unaware of the India‘s linguistic tradition of discipline of words. It is in this context that the classical texts on communication in India need to be explored and relevant ideas adopted for integrative and creative communication. Exploration of Indian knowledge tradition in communication is also relevant in the context of the emerging trend of scholars‘ challenge from the non-Western world against the appropriateness of Eurocentric paradigm of communication being used in non-Western societies. (Miike, 2002; Servaes, 2000; Dissanayake, 2003, 2009; Yadava, 2008; Chen, 2003).

The explorations of modern science into the world of atoms in the twentieth century have confirmed the relational or contextual view of language and reality. At the ultimate core, at the heart of the world and the universe, there is no fixed form, no solidity. There are only relationships and dynamic patterns of vibration (spandan), shadows dancing in pure rhythm (Leonard, 1978, p.34). A few types of elementary particles or waves combine together like the letters of the cosmic alphabet to tell the story of galaxies, stars, light, heat, earth, and life (Rovelli, 2017, p.150). These insights of science have far-reaching ontological and epistemological implications for our understanding and active expression of the world around and within us, as highlighted by several Noble laureates, renowned physicists, and social scientists (Bohr, 1958; Heisenberg, 1962; Schrödinger, 1962; Charon, 1977; Bohm, 1980; Spariosu, 1989; Smith, 2014; Capra, 2015; Wendt, 2015; Burgess, 2018; Tagore, 2018).

Application of new scientific knowledge in social sciences, and particularly in linguistics, communication, and psychology, emphasizes the social and contextual character of the language. Language is not a machine that can be put together on an assembly line. It is a complex system that develops with thought and action. 'Like the mythical suit of armour which was ‘in-born’ with Karṇa in the Mahābhārata, thought and language are born together' (Matilal, 2017, p.123). In the ultimate analysis, language, thought and action may be seen as connected, inseparable and complementary. Language is therefore essentially uncertain, probable, emergent, and always in a state of making or ‘languageing’ even when it appears to be formal and definite. 

Contextual factors are inextricably bound together with language in ways that are enriching, complex and dynamic (Massip, 2011, p.57). Words do not have autonomous, objective identities prior to their use in language and communication. Every word we use in real-world situations usually has several synonyms or related words in grammar which have a similar meaning and which could have been used in the same context. In recent years, a growing mass of research in linguistics and allied fields of psychology, neuroscience and anthropology has begun to probe in the sub field of cultural linguistics. (Evans, 2010; Leavitt, 2011; Lee, 1996; Ho, 1995; Lucy, 1992; Sharifian, 2011; Wilce, 2017; Laszlo 2017; Chopra, 2017).

This article explores the complementarity between the Indian communication model and modern science in what may be termed as a quantum turn in linguistics. In quantum mechanics, observation is what brings about objective and measurable reality. It is inherently a contextual process that involves first deciding what particular aspects to observe in nature and then preparing the perceptual means in such a way that observation can be made. If these steps are done differently, then different results will be obtained. Similarly, in language what brings about the transformation of ideas or impulses from potential meanings into an actual one is the speech act, which is intentional, an act of will. Language emerges from the speaker’s intention to try to communicate one meaning rather than the other out of the several meanings in the mind. 

While the intention to communicate determines the effect in a certain way, the meaning that is actually communicated depends also on the listener whose comprehension will depend on how what is said is interpreted in the context of listeners’ memory and experience. So, the idea common to the Indian communication system and quantum mechanics is that intention and cultural context relate to language in an apparently similar way as observation and measurement devices in physics relate to quantum reality. The essential message of Indian classical texts with regard to language and communication is that there are different levels of language between the two extremes termed as Paśyantī and Vaikharī, which correspond to different levels of consciousness of the Absolute Reality. The Absolute Reality lies outside human perception of space and time and is therefore not expressible in ordinary language. 

The experience of that reality can only be indicated by words that try to go beyond words (Varma 1961; Kapoor, 2019; Matilal, 2014; Sastri, 2015; Ranganathananda, 2015; Tagore, 2018; Tripathi, 2017). In this context, the present study of the concept of Sabdapurvayoga as a cultural idea that straddles across various levels of language in an integrative and continuing flow can be helpful for a better understanding of cultural roots of language and communication in India and also in recognising its role in promoting intra-cultural and intercultural communication as it is. Cosmic System The concept ṛta or cosmic order is the basic foundation of the Vedic culture, and Indian linguistic tradition. Ṛta is a multidimensional concept which is connected to other fundamental concepts like sat, satya, dharma, brahma, and atma, in the Veda, Epics, Upaniṣads and the Dharmaśāstra. In its most fundamental sense, ṛta is the law, order, system, harmony underlying all natural phenomena. Ṛta is the all-pervasive universal order that is same at all levels of existence, and the objective world is the expression of that order. The field of ṛta is physical, mental, spiritual, and ethical. 

Nature as it is known to us is not seen as a chaotic occurrence of events and objects. While it may appear as random and disorganized, the fundamental processes of nature that underlie all objective, and subjective realms too, function as a complex system in which all parts are coordinated and integrated into a larger whole. Vedic sages and scholars realized the overarching presence of a cosmic order that held together in a complex and adaptive system at the different levels, forms, and phases of all the objects and processes that comprised the cosmos. All the forms of being existing and developing in harmony within an interconnected web of relationships were seen as organized in a system which integrated all the parts into an undivided whole in flowing movement. The cosmic order which extended to all levels of existence from the infinite to the infinitesimal was seen as inviolable, never to be broken, even by the Vedic divinities who were in fact considered as the guardians of ṛta.

This universal principle of creative unity is revealed in some of the earliest stages in the evolution of multi-cellular life on this planet. A multitude of cells were bound together into a larger unit, not through aggregation, but through a marvelous quality of complex inter-relationship maintaining a perfect co-ordination of functions. The larger co-operative unit accommodates greater freedom of self-expression of individual units, to develop greater power and efficiency in the organised whole. It is not merely an aggregation, but an integrative inter-relationship, complex in character, with differences within of forms and function. There are gaps between the units, but they do not stop the binding force that permeates the whole or the dynamic identity of the units. The most perfect inward expression of such organization has been attained by man in his own body. But what is most important of all is the fact that man has also attained its realization in a more subtle body outside his physical system in the universe. (Tagore, 1931, p.2).

The question how a particular entity functions as a coherent whole sub-system within a coherent system has exercised generations of biologists and physicists dissatisfied with the mechanistic approach. Since the twentieth century, concepts of quantum coherence and the related systemic intercommunication have been used to convey the wholeness of the organism, where the whole and the parts are mutually integrated, and every part is as much in control as it is open and responsive. This internal coherence of energy underlies the unity of activity and the identity of the particular organisms. Every single organism from the tiniest quark to the largest quasar in the infinite cosmos seems to be able to exist and work autonomously while perfectly keeping in step and tune with the whole. There is no choreographer orchestrating the dance of the particles and waves in all the systems. Ultimately, choreographer and dancer are the same (Ho, 1997, p.360).

Īśa Upaniṣad brings out the systemic aspect of cosmic order most succinctly and clearly. It says that the Absolute Reality is both universal and particular. The creation of the particular from the universal does not affect the integrity of the universal. The principle or quality of wholeness and integration is prior to the principle of particular and diversity. Oneness becomes many in the image of the oneness. That is whole, this is whole, taking out a particular whole from the absolute whole leaves the absolute whole integrated and creative as before. Every particular entity has to be an integrated whole to maintain its identity amongst an integrated system of infinite entities. The wholeness or integrity of each part is the bedrock of the wholeness of the universe and the order of the cosmos, and the order of the cosmos is the bedrock of the wholeness of the particular (Radhakrishnan, 2007, p. 566).

Ṛta is the principle whereby the Absolute Reality becomes manifest and perceptible to human senses. In Ṛg Veda it is said that, 'heaven and earth exist in close unison in the womb of ṛta'. (Ṛg Veda, 10.65). Ṛta, thus, is the one single system that embraces the cosmic order. The concept of ṛta explains the course of the evolution and sustenance of the natural and human world in terms of rhythm, time cycle, seasons, and biological growth. It refers to three basic elements of birth, growth, and transformation as the components of the complex cosmic system which functions according to its own self-organizing principles and law. Scholars, scientists, and poets in all ages have always found it amazing that the Absolute Reality is so well-ordered. Ṛta is closely connected to the later concepts of satya and dharma. While ṛta may be seen as the structure of the cosmic reality at its both manifest and unmanifest levels, satya is the practical and operational aspect which is integrally connected to the Absolute reality. It is because of these two principles that in Indian tradition the cosmos is considered as ordered and not disordered or disorganized. 

These two concepts also connect the cosmic level of order to the human and social levels of life. At the human level, moral and legal order is expressed through the norms of truth, non-aggression, freedom, and ecological alignment of human existence with the cosmic order. Thus, ṛta and satya, or dharma, uphold the essential unity of the immanent and transcendental reality of the cosmos. Indian conceptualizations of ṛta, satya, and dharma, are not comparable with Western principles in the sense that they provide specific ethical permissions or prohibitions. Truth in the Western sense is the sum of what can be isolated and counted, it is what can be logically accounted or what can be proved to have happened, or what one really means at the moment when one speaks. While the Indian conception of truth is marked by an inner realization of the wholeness of reality, the Western view of truth is better described in English dictionaries as truthfulness or veracity of individual explicit statement. 

In Indian tradition, on the other hand, truth is best defined in Mahābhārata when it says, 'Satya is dharma, tapas (austerity) and yoga. Satya is eternal brahma, Satya is also the foremost yajna, and everything is established on Satya', (MB, V, p.497). In an illustration of this principle, Mahābhārata says that speaking truthfully to a criminal is not acceptable as the truth. Verbal truth is only one side of the concept which is much more general. Truth is signified by virtue of conformity to the order of righteousness, interdependence and harmony on which the cosmos is supposed to be founded.

In Indian tradition, only the language that conforms to ṛta, satya, and dharma, is possessed of special powers. Inappropriate language can bring adverse results. This is a fundamental difference between the Indian and Western conceptualization of language and communication. In Ṛg Veda, it is repeatedly stressed that only insightful speech delivers well-being, and harmony. The Vāg Sūkta makes it explicit that only the speech that originates from the depths of the ocean of creation, and which is blessed by the cosmic order of the five elements of fire, sky, air, water, and earth, is worthy of achieving success and benefits. Insightful speech in faithful persons is considered as an unseen, all-pervading, creative and liberating energy, producing, sustaining, and extending all creation. It defends the cause of righteousness and freedom, removes ignorance, confronts and overcomes evil, and rewards the meritorious with riches (Ṛg Veda, 10.125).

Similarly, Gyan Sukta speaks of the excellent and spotless treasures hidden in speech which are disclosed when there is knowledge and faith in the utterances. People with wisdom use speech that wins them friends. Only those who make effort can speak and understand insightful speech. A person who has not understood the essence of speech can only utter words that are hollow. Good speech comes to those whose action is good and who do not disown friends. People have similar eyes and ears but they do not have similar comprehension and expression. People who are neither knowledgeable nor experienced can only have meaningless speech. An energetic, and knowledgeable person succeeds in society and wins praise in society. (Rg Veda, 10.71).

In Indian communication theory only the language that conforms to rta, satya, and dharma, is possessed of moral and social value. Inappropriate language can bring adverse results for both the individual and the social order. This is a fundamental difference between Indian and western conceptualization of language and communication. In Rg Veda it is repeatedly stressed that only insightful speech that conforms to natural and social order delivers well-being, and harmony.

आ प॑वस्व दिश ां पत आर्जी॒क त्स॑म मीढ्वः । ऋी॒ती॒व ी॒केन॑ ्ी॒तयेन॑ श्री॒द्धय ी॒ तप्॑ ् ी॒त इन्द् ॑येन्दिसी॒ पर ॑ स्रव ॥

Seers of cosmic and social order, faithfully following the righteous path through truthful speech and action pay homage to the lord of four regions. (RV, 9.113)

ऋतां विन्दनृतद्य म्न ्तयां विन्दत्तयकममन् । श्रद्ध ां विन्दत्सम र्न्दध त्र ्सम पर ष्कृत इन्द् येन्दिस पर स्रव ॥

Speech that is truthful and faithful, and is purified by truthful action, flows in radiant magnificence to uphold the cosmic and social order. (ibid.)

The Asya Vāmīya Hymn of Ṛṣi Dīrghatamas in Chapter 1 of Ṛg Veda states that the ultimate abode of language is Brahma. Language is described as being the peak of the universe. It also says that 'Speech has been measured out in four divisions, the Brahmans who have understanding, know them. In that three divisions are of hidden speech, men speak only the fourth division.' Here language is related to the cosmic order and is understood as the idea of the word as distinct from the spoken word. The spoken word is a limited manifestation of the inner word that reveals the truth. Thus, it says that 'the vibration of speech creates or fashions out the manifold forms out of the waters of the infinite ocean of the ultimate Reality.' (Agrawala, 1963, p. 150).

Levels of Reality

Indian communication theory recognizes that the absolute reality that underlies all particular manifestations, all names and forms, manifests itself in human language as a form of communication. The underlying foundation of manifest thought and speech lies in fundamental process of nature which is outside space and time but generates activities and objects that can be located in space and time. As the eternal, timeless essence that underlies everything that exists, Brahma the Absolute Reality is the essence of all language and communication that produces diverse names and forms. “The Brahman who is without beginning or end, whose very essence is the word, who is the cause of the manifested phonemes, who appears as the objects, from whom the creation of the world proceeds” (VP, 1.1).

The scientific view of language in the Indian tradition as established in the Veda, Upaniṣad, and the works of Pāṇini, Patañjali, Bharatmuni, Bhartṛhari, and Abhinavagupta, embraces structure and rules of language, objective reality, and the absolute reality. The search for general rules underlying the diversity of languages is ultimately an exploration of the very nature of the human mind and its relation with reality. It reveals the interconnections between language, thought and reality. Bharatmuni’s view of dramatic performance as an integrated entity, and Bhartṛhari’s view of the sentence as a meaningful unit reveal the relationship of the part and the whole, and is seen by both as a reflection of the relationship between Brahma the absolute reality and the objective manifestations in the world.

The relationship of the general and the particular was recognized as early as in Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī. During Pāṇini’s time, there were two classes of schools, one holding that word connotes only the general category and the particular unit is derived from it, the other held that word connotes only the particular and the general cannot exist away from the particular. Pāṇini clearly showed in his work that he held both the views, former in one context and the latter in another (Sastri, 2015, p.41). Language thus has the flexibility and creativity to connect different levels of reality through its insightful use. Pāṇini’s unique contribution to the science of linguistics lies in devising a logical structure and system of language which remains unequalled in its brevity and practical validity. Pāṇini’s work, in particular, and Sanskrit grammar, in general, showed the way to the development of modern linguistics and communication through the efforts of scholars such as Franz Bopp, Ferdinand de Saussure, Leonard Bloomfield, and Lee Whorf.

Panini’s grammar describes language as a little drama of life consisting of an action with different participants, which are classified into role types called karakas, which include: actor, goal, recipient, instrument, locative, and source (Kiparsky, p.16). Panini’s system envisages the structure of language as an evolving hierarchy of inter-category and intra-category relations, from the base of physical reality, the materiality of language, the intermediate levels of increasing consciousness till one reaches the highest level of consciousness - Brahma- where the linguistic phenomena lose its autonomy and merges in the Absolute Reality. Paninian grammar symbolizes the perfect blending of science and spirituality in India’s linguistic tradition (Kapoor, p. 86). All words and meanings are different aspects of one and the same thing, strung together to form a beautiful garland of letters.

The relationship of the whole and the parts is a complex one and may be seen an adaptive process in which both are dynamic and evolving. In Brahma as the essence of all language and communication, all possibilities of expression are inherent. By virtue of its dynamic energy the absolute is charged with creative powers to express itself in diverse activities and forms. The true nature of Brahma is beyond all imagination; in itself it is unified but manifests itself in all possibilities of visible and invisible forms and parts. “Who has been taught as the One appearing as many due to the multiplicity of his powers, who. Though not different from his powers, seems to be so” (VP, 1.2).

In Brhadaranyaka Upanisad conceptualization of speech as the abode of Absolute Reality or Brahma is most clearly spelt out. In Chapter VI. 2 speech is considered as the abode of Brahma. The Absolute Reality resides in speech, it is supported by space, and it is worshipped as intelligence. This world and the other and all being are communicated through speech. All the Vedas, Upanisads, commentaries, and all material things are communicated through speech. The Absolute reality is, in truth, speech. By recognizing and imbibing the true value and energy of speech, one can even become godlike and be in the company of divinity. (Radhakrishnan, p 246).

The integral unity of the manifest and the unmanifest world, and its communication through presentation is the core content of the Bharatmuni’s Natyashastra. It integrates the Absolute Reality, the world of reflection and feeling, with that of structure and grammar. In Natyashastra, universality and specificity, abstraction and generalization, the structured and flexible are seen as interdependent and interpenetrating levels of communication. It considers a presentation good if it can communicate at varying levels to different audiences in culture specific and at the same time transcultural contexts. While being in finite time and place, it must have power to communicate beyond time and place and beyond the immediate performance (Vatsyayan, p. 89-90).

In Natyasastra the presentation of the theatre was compared in with the performative act of Vedic yagna. It treats the subject of language and communication, like Panini, as rules, and each section of the text is detailed in analytical manner. The whole concept of theatre is analyzed into parts and each part is examined in depth with a view to recreating an interconnected and interpenetrated whole. The mention of sattva as mindfulness, and the importance of musical sounds, during the presentation, are instance of drawing upon the living and vigorous tradition of Vedas at that time. The language of Natyashastra shows an understanding of the use of different languages and dialects by different groups of people and throws light on recognition and acceptance of diverse languages and dialects.

Abhinavagupta’s conceptualization of language and reality in Tantraloka makes it abundantly clear that unity and diversity are the aspects of same integrated wholeness which is in a state of constant vibration or pulsation (Spandau), and change. In verse III.100 of Tantraloka, Abhinavagupta explicitly says that if the Absolute Reality did not manifest itself in infinite variety, but remained enclosed in its own singular unity, it would neither be the supreme power nor awareness. It is the nature of Absolute Reality, as the essence of language, to expand and diversify in infinite forms. Incessant creativity or consciousness is the essence of its absoluteness, and this is the eternal source of all linguistic forms and constructions. (Siva Sutras, p. xxi, Pandit,1991, 1997)).

This view of language seems somewhat similar to the present-day view of language and reality in quantum physics. Language may be seen as a coherent wave that represents the potential of all outcomes that exist simultaneously in superposition or overlapping state, as a field of potentialities (Wendt, p. 217). While language as a whole, with all its levels from Para to Vaikhari, is in a sort of quantum coherent state, meaning is actually communicated at the level of its decoherence or Vaikhari, or speech. What brings about the transformation in language from a field of potential meanings into actual ones is the will and act of speech. It is speech as interaction that puts language into a context, with other words and particular listener. Words are stored in consciousness not as isolated entities, but as nodes in a network of connected or entangled words. They communicate meaning when intentionally and wilfully used in a certain chosen order in particular context. 

Thus, “human consciousness can coordinate and correspond the ‘motion of the atoms’ in the functioning of speech at different levels according to the laws of nature at different levels of reality” (Schrodinger, p. 93). Language, speech, sound, vibration, energy, as manifestations of Brahma or Absolute Reality, are not disorderly or disparate movement of its subtle constituent elements and forms. Both in thought and language, letters, words, and sentences are not randomly flying off in different directions, not even in insane beings. There is always a pattern, an order, which can be identified on closer consideration. The underlying pattern in Indian languages is integrative and accommodative and the objective is always interaction, coordination and sustenance. Language is creative and evolving on the hand; on the other it connects, unifies and upholds. The power of language to connect and comprehend the incessant flow of our sense perceptions and uphold the Absolute Reality is nothing short of a miracle, a divine gift. 

From the foregoing it is evident that the primary concern of Indian thought on language and communication has been its cosmic and orderly origins and discerning use to support, sustain and strengthen all existence in the world. The cosmic energy is seen in this perspective as the essence of phonic energy, which is eternal, indestructible, subtle, and illimitable, which however evolves and unfolds through different stages and forms, and brings forth, names, or identifies, minutely and precisely, all the various kinds and dimensions of objects. Language, then, is inherently endowed with creative energy. The creative energy precedes the forms and names, it is the creative energy of the Absolute Reality in the form of speech that defines and upholds the objects, their relations, and the entire order of nature. “The manifestation of the word which one with the spirit in everybody is for the purpose of communication what is within” (VP, 1.1, p.1).

The complex relationship between language, thought and reality is quite clearly visible in the connection between grammar and philosophy in India’s linguistic tradition. The structural analysis of the roots and affixes in Sanskrit grammar, into a hierarchy of levels of increasing abstractions culminating in the most general abstraction of Brahman is an illustration of the philosophical approach wherein the visible, multi-dimensional world of reality is seen to be manifestation of the one un-manifest Absolute Reality.

The explanation of the empirical facts or reality would be an abstract and general concept or image. The visible and perceptible world would be considered as manifest appearance of the highest abstraction. In Indian linguistic tradition the innumerable linguistic forms of the empirical reality of language are successively classified into a hierarchy of increasingly general and abstract notions and finally merged in the single notion of Sabdabrahman.

The goal of Indian thought on language and communication is not mere rational knowledge but also experience of the Absolute Reality or Brahma. The knowledge of language resulting in correct speech not only communicates meaning but also enables one to experience the Absolute Reality. This is the meaning of the Indian term darśana, which literally means ‘vision’ and which corresponds to the highest level of language termed as paśyantī. It is this feature that sets the Indian linguistics apart from the modern western perspectives on language. From the early Vedas and Upaniṣads, the Indian approach to language and communication has never been limited to composition and transmission of information about the objective world. All aspects of human experience, including the spiritual, were regarded as open to expression through language. Linguistics in India always had and continues to have both phenomenal and metaphysical dimensions.

It is evident that Indian scholars and sages saw that communication has both phenomenal and metaphysical dimensions. Etymologists like Yaska, and grammarians like Panini, Patanjali, and Bhartrihari, and playwrights like Bharat Muni were clearly concerned with the context of real-life situations, but they did not overlook the umbilical relationship of the empirical and the spiritual. Bhartrihari began with a metaphysical inquiry into the nature and origin of language in relation to Brahma, but also explored technical grammatical points in popular language.

By using correct speech, the mind becomes free of all subtle impressions of incorrect speech, and it gradually rises to the level of Pratibha or direct and pure awareness. Such awareness is the essence of all phenomenal creation and in such a state all the differences and contradictions in the relative world are seen in the wider context of the Absolute Reality (Bhattacharya, p.34).

Levels of Communication

Indian communication theory focuses on the creative energy of language emphasized in the Indian tradition that connects and integrates the highest and lowest levels of abstraction seamlessly, gracefully, and holistically, not losing touch with reality at different levels. Unless human life, thought, speech and action, is in harmony with the all-embracing order and system of the Absolute Reality (Rta), it remains deprived of the real nourishing energy and its serene essence or bliss, by which all creation lives and is sustained. It is based on the structure of language as an ascending hierarchy of conceptual abstraction between the base level of physical reality, through intermediate levels of abstraction, to the highest levels of abstraction - Brahma – where linguistic form merges with formless Absolute Reality beyond language and thought. While the connection of the basic linguistic terms with sense perceptions of everyday experiences is of fundamental importance, comprehension of the connections between our sense perceptions in their totality require logically derived concepts at different levels of abstraction.

Indian classical texts indicate that the eternal mystery of the reality and its comprehensibility is a miracle and a real external world would be senseless without this comprehensibility. In speaking here of comprehensibility, it implies the production of some sort of order among sense perceptions, this order being produced by the creation of linguistic concepts, connections between these concepts, and between the concepts and sense experience. 

Language therefore creates our world for us. Thus, language is always abstract, uncertain, fluid, contextual, emergent, and connected, but this uncertainty is its creativity and competence to straddle across time and space and make the dynamic reality comprehensible to human mind and enable meaningful and effective action. As the human mind works with the objective reality the changed reality has to be comprehended anew to enable successful orientation and action on the part of human civilization. In this sense language is coexistent with reality, it defines reality and also creates reality as known to us. It spans, connects, and integrates different levels of objective reality to make it meaningful and complementary.

According to Bhartrihari, nothing can be said in advance concerning the manner in which the linguistic concepts are formed and connected, and how they are coordinated with sense perceptions. The linguistic concepts are emergent and dynamic and in guiding us in the creation of such a conceptual and linguistic order of sense perceptions, contemporary relevance alone is the determining factor. All that is necessary is to formulate a set of rules of structure and function of language, since without such rules the use of language for acquisition of knowledge in the desired sense would be impossible. One may compare these rules with the rules of a game in which, while the rules themselves are constructed, it is their rigidity alone which makes the game possible. However, the structure will never be final. It will have validity only for a special field of application and will be subject to modification to fulfil its function. 

Bhartrihari also emphasized that the connection of language and thought with the complexes of sense perceptions can only be comprehended intuitively and it is inadaptable to formal and logical determination. The totality of these connections– none of which is expressible in conceptual terms–is the only thing which differentiates the living language from an empty scheme of concepts. By means of these connections, the purely conceptual propositions of language become general statements about complexes of sense perceptions. Primary linguistic concepts are directly and intuitively connected with typical complexes of sense perceptions. All other concepts are possessed of meaning only in so far as they are connected with the primary notions. The aim of language is, on the one hand, a comprehension, as complete as possible, of the connection between the sense perceptions in their totality, and, on the other hand, the accomplishment of this aim by the use of a minimum of primary concepts and relations.

In its first stage of development, language does not contain anything else other than very basic concepts directly related to sense perceptions. The first level, Vaikhari, in the evolution of abstraction and language is the formation of the concept of bodily objects of various kinds. Out of the multitude of our sense experiences we take, mentally and arbitrarily, certain repeatedly occurring complexes of sense perceptions and we correlate to the concept of the bodily object. Viewed logically this concept is not identical with the totality of sense perceptions referred to; but it is a creation of the human mind. On the other hand, this concept owes its meaning to the totality of the sense perceptions with which it is associated.

Bhartrihari says that the everyday thinking of most people is satisfied on the whole with this level. Such a state of affairs cannot, however, satisfy a philosophical mind; because the totality of concepts and relations obtained in this manner is utterly lacking in logical unity and consistency. In order to overcome this problem, a system retaining the primary concepts and relations of the “first layer” is logically constructed. This new “secondary system” at Madhyamika level pays for its higher logical unity by having concepts of the second layer which are no longer directly connected with complexes of sense perceptions.

At this level, we attribute our concept of a bodily object a name and meaning, which is to a high degree independent of the sense perceptions which originally give rise to it. This is what we mean when we attribute to the bodily object an identity. The justification of such a process rest on the fact that, by means of such created concepts and mental relations between them, we are able to orient ourselves in the chaos of sense perceptions. These notions and relations, although our mental creations, appear to us as meaningful and more stable than the sense experience itself, the character of which is little more than fleeting impressions. On the other hand, these linguistic concepts and relations, have justification only in so far as they are connected with sense perceptions.

Further striving for logical unity brings us to the level of Pasyanti, still more general in concepts and relations, for the deduction of the concepts and relations from the secondary and so indirectly of the primary layer. Thus, the story goes on until we have arrived at a system of the greatest conceivable unity at the Para Vac level of the greatest universality of concepts of the logical foundations, which is still compatible with the observations made by our senses. The supreme essence of speech at this level is like pure light which is free of the forms it takes in diminished light (VP 1.18, p.23).

The levels of language discussed above correspond to the several stages of progress which have resulted from the struggle for logical unity in the course of development of knowledge of reality. The language levels help to explain in a consistent manner the fluid boundaries between language and consciousness. As regards the final aim, intermediary levels are only of secondary nature. We have to deal, however, with the language of the day, in which these strata represent problematic partial successes which support one another but which also threaten one another, because today’s system of concepts contains deep-seated incongruities.

These levels of abstraction and levels of speech are not clearly separated and may even overlap in practice. It is not even absolutely clear which concepts belong to the Vaikhari layer. As a matter of fact, we are dealing with freely formed concepts, which, with a certainty sufficient for practical use, are intuitively connected with complexes of sense experiences in such a manner that, in any given case of experience, there is no uncertainty as to the validity of an assertion. The essential thing is the aim to represent the multitude of concepts and statements, from a basis of fundamental concepts and fundamental relations which themselves can be chosen freely (axioms). It is a matter of faith that the cosmic system – as it is perceptible to our five senses– takes the character of such a well-ordered reality. The successes achieved by language do give a certain encouragement for this faith in the comprehensibility of the infinite universe.

The Indian linguistic tradition adopts a consistent and holistic view which encompasses various levels of language thought and reality. While Panini’s grammar tells us about the structure of plurality of words, it also reveals the interrelatedness of individual entities and thereby illustrates common structures within language, cognition and real-world phenomena. Pāṇini’s grammar is valued more because it reveals the spirit of Indian tradition. (Feddegon, 1963, p. 68). The Pāṇinian system symbolizes the perfect blending of science and spirituality in India’s linguistic tradition (Kapoor, 2010, p. 86). All words and meanings are different aspects of one and the same thing, strung together to form a beautiful garland of letters.

In Natyasastra, Bharatmuni brought into one-fold the cosmic order of the Vedas, the speculative thought and philosophy of the Upanisads, and the structure of the rituals of the Brahmanas, as also the state of knowledge of the disciplines of astronomy, mathematics, and medicine. The use of the concepts of Yoga and Yajna were contextually loaded in Bharatmuni’s treatise. The text moves concurrently at the level of the physical and the metaphysical, the terrestrial and the celestial, the purely biological and the physical, the sensuous and the spiritual, with a single integral vision “to use the very language and vocabulary of name and form (nama and rupa-of identity and specificity of form) to evoke that which is beyond form or without form (pararupa), and all this through the vehicle of senses and sense perceptions and feeling, not intellection” (Vatsyayan, p.57).

Bhartṛhari’s Vākyapadīya begins with metaphysical enquiry and then goes on to empirical study of phenomenal language. In the first section of the work called Brahmakāṇḍa, are given the basic ideas concerning the concept of Śabda Brahma. In the second section called Vākyakāṇḍa, the fundamental idea of the integral nature of the sentence is discussed. The third section is the largest, in which grammatical topics mostly concerning words and their meaning are discussed. This section is called Prakarankāṇḍa. All the sections are interrelated and connected and form an integral whole. Bhartṛhari’s enquiry into the relationship of word and meaning in the Prakarankāṇḍa includes a clear analysis of the limitations and inadequacies of ordinary or secondary words to communicate all dimensions and levels of the Absolute Reality.

The common words are unable to express the nature of Absolute Reality. Words express the reality of any object or event in a manner that is only an interpretation and representation of the reality of the object or event. Words are based on cognitions which do not reveal the full reality and so present things in another form, not determined by their real form. Bhartrihari emphasizes that in ordinary cases of language use, the literal form may not convey the intended meaning. In such cases, a thorough understanding of the context is required to avoid confusions and misunderstanding in communication. In practice, the words are used on the basis of bounded sense perception and rationality. Common people may not be able to reach the level of consciousness that may have been reached by scholars and sages. They understand things in a limited manner and engage in communication on that basis. Bhartrihari says that when speech is purified by the adoption of grammatically correct forms and all deficiencies in the form of incorrect structure and pronunciation of words is removed, there results linguistic perfection which makes the attainment of worldly success and happiness possible. 

However, one must practice Sabdapurvayoga for achieving the state of oneness and harmony within and with the world. By constant practice in Sabdapurvayoga, all parts and sequences are connected into an undivided whole and the speaker reaches the level of consciousness where the words and sentences are transcended and speech becomes a flowing movement of integrated language. Sabdapurvayoga is a kind of meditation aimed at raising the level of consciousness to the highest stage of Absolute Reality. (Iyer, 1992, p. 143). Bhartrihari equates language with yoga because it makes us aware of a fusion of insightful speech with its linguistic foundation that lies beyond words in the Absolute Reality, or Brahma. Rational Intuition The concept of Sabdapurvayoga seems to be closely related to Bhartrihari’s theory of Pratibha or intuition, and the Pasyanti or visionary aspect of language. For Bhartrihari, grammar appears to be not only an academic undertaking, but also a contemplative and meditative act that allows an intuitive insight in to the nature of Brahma, and the unman fest wholeness of meaning. (Wilke, p.628). 

Through the knowledge and practice of Sabdapurvayoga one can learn to transcend the plurality of names and forms and see the unitary cause of all. This consciousness of the unitary cause helps one to place all language and communication in the holistic perspective of the cosmic order. Bhartrihari’s theory of Pratibha or intuition connects with his differentiation of different levels of language. Intuition which emerges like a flash of light does not appear out of the blue. Coming up with sudden enlightenment without ever having been closely involved with an area of study and contemplation is very improbable. A seeker has to examine the question from all sides, including new creative perspectives. To do that, one must have a good knowledge of the primary concepts. The more one knows, the easier it becomes to develop deeper insights for connecting the elements which may not seem to have anything in common. Sabdapurvayoga is rigorous and time-consuming practice through the intermediary stages of Vaikhari and Madhyamika to reach the level of Pasyanti where one can ‘see’ everything in its place in the coherent flow of the Absolute Reality.

The concept of Pratibha seems to be more effective in communicating the nature of the Absolute Reality than the concepts of scientific language, which are derived from only limited groups of phenomena. In the scientific process of experimental verification and definition the integral connection with the multidimensional and multilevel reality may be lost. On the other hand, natural language may represent some parts of reality much more clearly than by the use of scientific language, because it can influence thought in ways which are not always logical and analytical, and also because of inherent limitations of logical reasoning (Heisenberg, p.139). An indirect and secondary meaning of the word which passes through the mind only momentarily may contribute essentially to the understanding of its meaning. The fact that every word may cause many such diverse movements in our mind can be used to correlate different aspects of the reality and get a clearer understanding than is possible by the use of strictly and narrowly logical reasoning (ibid., p.115).

Poets have often objected to the emphasis on logical reasoning which makes language less suitable for its purpose. Rabindra Nath Tagore, Nobel laureate in literature, believed that all poetry is full of symbolic expressions which communicate through suggestion all that is ineffable. If language were merely for expressing grammatical rules, then using such a language would be fruitless pedantry without a spirit. Since language has for its ultimate purpose the expression of ideas, our minds gain freedom through it, and the knowledge of grammar is a help towards that freedom. “When a man is exclusively occupied with the search for the links of causality, his mind succumbs to the tyranny of law in escaping from the tyranny of facts. In learning a language, when from mere words we reach the laws of words we have gained a great deal. But if we stop at that point, and only concern ourselves with the marvels of the formation of a language, seeking the hidden reason of all its apparent caprices, we do not reach the end—for grammar is not literature, prosody is not a poem. When we come to literature, we find that though it conforms to rules of grammar it is yet a thing of joy, it is freedom itself” (Tagore, p.67).

When language assumes the harmony of forms and the balance of flow it hints at the limitless that transcends words, “like a lamp revealing light which goes far beyond its material limits, proclaiming its kinship with the sun” (Radhakrishnan, p. 944). Creative and ingenious thinkers, like the Rigvedic and later Upanishadic sages, employed poetic language to break open and extend the boundaries of expression to successfully communicate the hidden dimensions and levels of the ultimate reality (Matilal, p.151- 155). The insightful speaker delights in accepting limitations, and does not seek to evade them, for in each word he sees the manifestation of an infinite creative energy. Though speech conforms to rules of grammar it is yet a thing of infinite creativity. The creativity of speech accepts limitations of words, yet it transcends them. Only those who know that the infinite expresses itself through words can transcend the words. Words are the wings of creative speech, they do not keep it weighed down, they carry it to freedom. Words are the form of speech, creativity is its spirit. Words are the steps towards creative freedom, and creative speech or writing is the sculpture which stands on the pedestal of words.

In recent years, researches in neuroscience have further confirmed the importance of broad concepts of natural language, rather than more logical and precisely composed definitions, in providing insights into the nature of reality. Neurological evidence has shown that when listeners encounter a word or concept, a semantic field related to the word is activated in the brain in which features properties and associations of that world are connected. In the left hemisphere of the brain a relatively smaller semantic field of associations is strongly activated which closely relate to the dominant interpretation or the current context. On the other hand, the right hemisphere weakly activates a relatively broader semantic field that includes associations distantly related to the word or context. In this way, semantically distant words needed to understand metaphors, draw inferences and appreciate the many nuances of discourse, can be accessed and integrated (St. George, p. 1324).

The broader semantic relationship in the right hemisphere has one big advantage: The less sharply each word‟s meaning is specified, the more likely it is to connect with other words and concepts. This is a key ingredient for drawing inferences, extracting the essence, and comprehending symbolic language, and for insight and awareness of wholeness and integrated nature of reality (Kounios and Bemman, p. 6). Harmony between the „left brain‟ and the „right brain‟ provides an overall grasp of what is known in formal, logical terms, and also intuitively, in vision, feelings, and imagination etc. (Bohm, p. xvi). Original and creative ideas emerge from coordination of well-structured language and concepts contained in the field of empirical study with less sharply defined words and concepts in the field of philosophy and arts. Science and spirit are then in harmony, as they are different yet complementary ways of considering the ultimate reality which is an undivided wholeness in flowing movement (ibid. p.33).

Conclusion

The central feature of Indian communication system is the concept of levels of language which dates back to the Rg Veda. The levels of Para, Pasyanti, Madhyamika, and Vaikhari, are not wholly separate and mutually contradictory, but are a graduated series which is suited to different types or grades of mind-different intellectual capacities and temperaments. To each is given his stage of effort. Each stage, when reached opens the way to the higher level of speech and thought. The relation between the levels is not temporal but mental and logical. The mind, rewired and transformed in its continuing advance, moves towards higher and truer understanding and speech as manifestation of infinite creative energy of the cosmos.

In Indian communication theory, meaningful speech and clear thinking which are inseparably inter-connected, require constant interplay of higher and lower levels, and the constant interplay of the verbal and cognitive levels. This is a logical process, hypotheses being checked against factual information, and predictions against results. If statements lose touch with the reality, they will be hollow abstractions characterized by vagueness, ambiguity, and even utter meaninglessness. Similarly, lower-level speech

which does not rise above the wide assortment of facts without ever drawing any general conclusions leaves the listener with no directions as to what to do with the narration of facts and events.

The knowledgeable person who connects with people through his communication, and who achieves merit in life is the one who can integrate all levels of speech, moving coherently and timely from pasyanti to vaikhari, and from vaikhari to pasyanti in smooth and graceful manner. It would be something like the coherent flow of the goddess of speech Vagdevi in the Rg Veda, which rises from the waters in the ocean, breaths strongly like the wind, penetrates Earth and Heaven, speaks to Gods and men alike, holds together all existence, blesses the faithful and the thoughtful with well-being and wealth, and in her mighty grandeur touches the heaven with her forehead.

References

Agrawala, V. S. (1963). The thousand syllabled speech: being a study in cosmic symbolism in its Vedic Version. Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University.

Agrawala, V. S. (1953). India as Known to Panini: A Study of Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi. Lucknow: University of Lucknow.

Allen, W. S. (1953). Phonetics in ancient India. London: Oxford University Press.

Baumer, B. (2011). Abhinavagupta’s hermeneutics of the Absolute Anuttaraprakriya: an interpretation of his paratrisika vivarana. New Delhi: DK Printworld.

Beck, G. (1995). Sonic theology: Hinduism and sacred sound. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Belvalker, S. K. (2015). Systems of Sanskrit Grammar. Delhi: New NBC.

Berendt, J.-E. (1991). The World is Sound: Nad Brahma. Rochester: Destiny Books.

Bhattacharya, B. (1985). Bhartrihari’s Vakyapadia and Linguistic Monism. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Institute.

Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. London: Routledge & Kegan.

Bohr, N. (1958). Atomic physics and human knowledge. New York: John Wiley.

Capra, F., & Luisi, P. L. (2015). The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision. Delhi: Cambridge University Press.

Charon, J. E. (2005). The spirit: that stranger inside us. West Conshohocken PA: Infinity Publishing.

Chase, S. (1954). Power of Words. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.

Coward, H. G. (1980). The sphota theory of language: a philosophical analysis. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Coward, H. G., & Kunjunniraja, K. (1990). Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Deshpande, G. (2011). Pre-Paninian grammar. Mumbai: Popular Prakashan.

Doniger, W. (2000). The Rig Veda. Gurugram: Penguin.

Einstein, Albert (1982). Ideas and Opinions. New York: Three River Press.

Ellul, J. (1985). The humiliation of the word. Grand Rapids: Eardsman.

Faddegon, B. (1963). Studies on Panini’s grammar. Amsterdam: UITGAVE.

Furlinger, E. (2009). The touch of Sakti: a study in non-dualistic Trika Saivism of Kashmir. New Delhi: DK Printworld.

Ghosh, M. (1938). Paniniya Siksa. Calcutta: University of Calcutta.

Ghosh, M. (2016). Natyashastram (Vol. I). Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharti.

Hayakawa, S. (1968). Language in thought and action. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Heisenberg, W. (1962). Physics and philosophy. New York: Harper and Row.

Ho, Mae-Wan (1993). The Rainbow and the Worm: The Physics of Organisms. Singapore: World Scientific.

Ho, Mae-Wan (1997). Towards a Theory of the Organism. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, October-December 1997, Vol32, No.4, 343-363.

Iyer, K. S. (1992). Bhartrihari: a study of Vakyapadia in the light of ancient commentaries. Poona: Deccan College.

Iyer, K. S. (1971). The Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari. Poona: Deccan College.

Isayeva, N. (1995). From early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism: Gaudapada, Bhartrihari and Abhinavagupta. New Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications.

Jaidev Singh. (1980). Spanda-kārikās: The Divine Creative Pulsation: the Kārikās and the Spanda-nirṇaya Translated Into English. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsi Das.

Jaideva. (1982). Pratyabhijñāhṛdayam: The Secret of Self-recognition. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (Original work published 1963).

Jaideva. (2017a). Para-trisika-Vivarana of Abhinavagupta: The Secret of Tantric Mysticism. (Jaideva Singh, Trans.) New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Jaideva. (2017b). Siva Sutras: The Yoga of Supreme Identity. (Jaideva Singh, Trans.) New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Kapoor, K. (2010). Dimensions of Panini grammar: the Indian grammatical system. New Delhi: DK Printworld.

Kapoor, K. (2019). Text and Interpretation: The Indian Tradition. New Delhi: DK Printworld.Kaviraj, G. (1923). The doctrine of pratibha in Indian philosophy. Poona, Annals of the Khanna, Madhu , ed. (2004). Rta: The Cosmic order. New Delhi: DK Printworld.

Kiparsky, P. (2002). On the architecture of Panini’s grammar. Architecture of Grammar. Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages.

Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2014). The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Annual Review of Psychology, LXV(1), 71-93.

Kuanpoopol, P. (1991). Pratibha: the concept of intuition in the philosophy of Abhinavagupta. Ann Arbor: UMI.

Laslow, Erwin (2017), The Intelligence of the Cosmos. Rochester, Inner Traditions.

Leavitt, J. (2019). Linguistic relativity: precursors and transformations. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (p. 13). New York: Routledge.

Leonard, G. (1978). The silent pulse: a search for perfect rhythm that exists in each of us. New York: E. P. Dutton.

Lucy, J. A. (1992). Language diversity and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ludvik, C. (2007). Saraswati: riverine goddess of knowledge. Leiden: Brill.

Malik, S.C. (2004). Dynamics of Cultural Communication, in Madhu Khanna Rta: The Cosmic Order, New delhi DK Printworld.

Massip, A. B. (2011). Language as a complex adaptive system: towards an integrative linguistics. In J. Simpson (Ed.), Routledge handbook of applied linguistics. New York: Routledge.

Matilal, B. K. (2014). The word and the world: India’s contribution to the study of language. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Matilal, B. K. (2017). Logic, language and reality: Indian philosophy and contemporary issues. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Maturana, Humbarto R., Fransisco J. Varela (1998). The Tree of Knowledge. Boston MA: Shambhala.

Maxwell, J. C. (2010). Everyone communicates few connect. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Miller, R. A. (1977). The “Spirit” of the Japanese language. The Journal of Japanese Studies, III(2), 252-298.

Miller, R. A. (1977). The Japanese language in contemporary Japan. Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute.

Mishra, G. (2016). Vidyaniwas Mishra Sanchayan. Dehli: Sahitya Akademi.

Mishra, V. N. (2008). Foundations of Indian Aesthetics. Gurgaon: Shubhi Publications.

Needham, J. (1969). The Grand titration: science and society in East and West. London: Allen & Unwin.

Oliver, T. (1971). Communication and Culture in Ancient India and China. New York: Syracuse University Press.

Padoux, A. (1992). Vāc: The Concept of the Word in selected Hindu tantras. New Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications.Palmer, G. B. (1996). Toward a theory of cultural linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Pandit, B. H. (1997). Specific principles of Kashmir Shaivism. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.

Patnaik, T. (2007). Sabda: A Study of Bhartrihari’s Philosophy of Language. New Delhi: D K Printworld.

Pillai, R. K. (1971). The Vakyapadia. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Potter, K. H. (2016). Encyclopedia of Indian philosophy. Dehli: Motilal Banarsidass.

Radhakrishnan, S. (2007). The Principal Upanishads. New Delhi: HarperCollins.

Raju, P.T. (2009). The Philosophical Traditions of India. New Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.

Rajvade, V. (1940). Yaska’ Nirukta (Vol. I). Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Ram Swarup. (2001). The word as revelation: names of gods. New Delhi: Voice of India

Ranganathananda, S. (2015). The Universal message of the Bhagavadgita (Vol. II). Kolkata: Advaita Ashram.

Rg Veda (2015). Complete translation, Swami Dayananda (Vol. I-IV). New Delhi: Hasananda.

Sarup, L. (1966). The nighantu and the nirukta. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.

Sastri, P. S. S. (2015). Lectures on Patanjali’s Mahabhasya (Vol. I-14). Chennai: Kuppuswami Sastri Research Institute.Schrodinger, E. (1967). What is life and mind and matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Singh, J. (2016). Pratyabhijnahrdayam. Dehli: Motilal Banarasidass.

Sondhi, S. (2017). Communication in the global family. Indian Journal of Social Enquiry, IX(1), 1-7.

Sondhi, S. (2020). Sabdanusanam: The integral view of communication. Kalakalpa: IGNCA Journal of Arts, IV(2), 1-19.

Sondhi, S. (2021). Sabda Brahma: Science and Spirit of Language in India. Kalakalpa: IGNCA Journal of Arts, V(1), 1-21.

Sondhi, S. (2021). Sabda Sakti: Power of Words in India’s Linguistic Tradition. Kalakalpa: IGNCA Journal of Arts, VI(1), 1-20.

Staal, F. (1974). The Origin and Development of Linguistics in India. In D. Hymes (Ed.), Studies in the history of linguistics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Staal, F. (1982 ). The science of the ritual. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

Staal, F. (2008). Discovering the Vedas: origins, mantra, rituals, insights. New Delhi: Penguin.

Swarup, R. (2001). The word as revelation: names of gods. New Delhi: Voice of India.

Tagore, R. (1931). Religion of Man. London: Unwin Brothers Limited.

Tripathi, R. (2017). Vada in theory and practice. New Delhi: DK Printworld.

Tripathi, R. (2016). India’s Intellectual Traditions. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.

Vasu, S. (Trans). (1988). Panini’s Ashtadhyayi. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass.

Vatsyayan, K. (2016). Bharata: The Natyasastra. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.

Wendt, A. (2015). Quantum mind and social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Whorf, B. L. (2010). Language thought and reality: selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Wilke, A. (2011). Sound and communication: an aesthetic cultural history of Sanskrit Hinduism. Berlin: DeGruyter.

Woodroffe, J. (2019). The Garland of letters. Madras: Ganesh and Company (Original work published 1922).

Woodroffe, J. (2019). The World as Power. Chennai: Ganesh and Company.

Yadava, J. (2008). Issues in Mass Communication: The Basic Concepts. (J. Yadava, Ed.) New Delhi: Kanishka.

Monday, March 18, 2024

Dharmasastra and Modern Law

 

THE DHARMASASTRA AND MODERN LAW

Letter and Spirit of Law in Indian Tradition

 

Sunil Sondhi

Tagore National Fellow

Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts

 

 Abstract

This article on the dharmasastra and modern law uses the concept of legal pluralism that has an important place in recent debates about the nature and aims of law. The concept of legal pluralism means that law should be treated as embedded in the broader culture and tradition of society. In a sense, law is culture. Concept of legal pluralism emphasizes diversity in the professional juristic realm in different countries and societies. It refers to a general consciousness or experience of law that is widely shared by those who constitute a nation. Culture is fundamental — a kind of lens through which all aspects of law is perceived, or a gateway of understanding through which we must pass so as to have any genuine access to the meaning of law in society. [1]

In India, the social and cultural concepts of law that emerge out of the several frames of reference in the Veda, Dharmasastra, the constituent assembly debates and the judicial decisions, enable us to view the law in an integrative perspective that is closer to Indian cultural tradition. The value of such historical and sociological approach lies in its unifying vision of the social, cultural and positivist aspects of the concepts of law in Indian tradition.

A juridical system that does not correspond to the social and cultural sensitivities of a society can not be owned by the people as their system but will be seen as something foreign and imposed. Without a conducive social and cultural conceptualization mere formal law cannot create willing legal and moral obligation. A holistic concept of law including both ethical and legal perspectives seems to provide a more realistic picture of Indian legal tradition.

 Introduction

In the context of Indian knowledge tradition in general and dharmasastra in particular, there has been no misunderstanding more serious in nature than the supposition that Indian culture and tradition is fundamentally 'religious', in the sense in which the words 'religion' and 'religious' have been used in the West for centuries. These imply a belief in one exclusive God or messenger as the creator or visionary of the universe, an exclusive book containing the life and the sayings of that messenger of God, a separate code of commandments, a conclusive corpus of ecclesiastical laws to regulate thought and behaviour in the light of these, and a hierarchy of priesthood to supervise that regulation and control and promote proselytization.

 The Indian concepts of dharma and dharmasastra mean none of these. It is to this confusion that we can trace most of the Western misconceptions of Indian society, culture and law. Understanding of many of Indian social and legal institutions continues to be founded upon such misconceptions which are often the source of the social and political problems that the people of India face today. The assumptions underlying Western law and jurisprudence at different stages of its development were radically different from the assumptions of traditional Indian law and jurisprudence. It was the Western political and legal philosophy narrowly and rigidly based on the rights of the individual that dominated the constitution-making in India.

 Many Western scholars and their Indian followers with their apemanship and parrotry, vigorously refuse to accept the indigenous identity of law in India, primarily because their assumptions about ‘law’ differ from the internal categories of indigenous law. The main problem that arises in connection with understanding indigenous law, has been the regular attempt – by insiders as well as outsiders - to deny that this important legal system actually has its own capacity for internal modernisation.  India’s indigenous law is much more than state law and thus it explicitly rejects the usefulness of legal positivism as an analytical tool for understanding the actual complexity of law. The projected decline and virtual abolition of indigenous law is nothing but a constructed myth that has served certain purposes and modernist agenda – and continues to do so with much persuasion - but it cannot deny the social, cultural and legal realities of Indian culture and tradition. [2]

 Modern Law

 Contemporary Western jurisprudence is a product of long Western history and is coloured by a Western culture based on the Hellenistic and Christian view of man and society. The universalistic achievements of Western jurisprudence disguise its cultural specificity. That specificity may have been in some cases diffused by or assimilated into different specificities of different cultures, but in other cases it has conflicted with or been rejected by them. In all cases, Western jurisprudence, convinced of its illusion of universality, does not pay due attention to the cultural problems which accompany such diffusion or conflict between Western specificity and non-Western specificities.[3]

 The first attempt to create a modern scientific theory in jurisprudence was the positivist theory of the English Jurists Bentham and Austin. Bentham and Austin utilized the positivist approach of Auguste Comte to the explore subject of jurisprudence. They insisted that one should study the law, including the legal structure, the legal concepts etc. as it is, and not how we would like it to be. This was the scientific approach at that time because in science also we study objective phenomena as it is and not how we like it to be. For instance, when we study the atoms in physics we study the nucleus, the electrons orbiting around it, etc. We do not speculate how the atom should behave according to our own wishes, but we study it as it is. The same approach was adopted by Austin and Bentham in jurisprudence. [4]

Positivist jurisprudence regards law as a set of rules (or norms) enforced by the State. As long as the law is made by the competent authority after following the prescribed procedure it will be regarded as law, and we are not concerned with its goodness or badness. We may contrast this with the natural law theory which says that a bad law is not a law at all.  “The science of jurisprudence is concerned with positive laws, or with laws strictly so called, as considered without regard to their goodness or badness”. Thus, positivism seeks to exclude value consideration from jurisprudence, and confines the task of the latter to analysis and systematization of the existing laws. The separation of law from ethics and religion was a great advance in Europe from the feudal era.[5]

 It has been a general belief among both scholars and laymen that law is a special mechanism for establishing social order isolated from other social mechanisms and, for this reason, that the scientific study of law should be confined to the special capacity of positive legal jurisprudence. While positivism was a great advance over natural law and was suited to modern industrial society, it had a great defect that it only studied the form, structure, concepts etc. in a legal system. It was of the view that study of the social and economic conditions and the historical background which gave rise to the law was outside the scope of law and jurisprudence and belonged to the field of sociology.[6]

 However, unless we see the historical background and social and cultural circumstances which give rise to a law it is not possible to correctly understand it. Every law has a historical background and it is heavily conditioned by the social and cultural system prevailing in the country. The flaw in positivism therefore was that it reduced jurisprudence to a merely descriptive science of a low theoretical order. There was no attempt by the positivist jurists, like in sociological jurisprudence, to study the historical and socio-cultural factors which gave rise to the law. Positivism reduced the jurisprudence to a very narrow and dry subject which was cut-off from the historical and social realities. It deprived the individual and the society of jurisprudence of flesh and blood.[7]

 Legal Pluralism

 The cultural relativism approach that emerged in social sciences in the twentieth century in the wake of Einstein’s theory of relativity, and the uncertainty principle of Werner Heisenberg, argued that a society’s institutions and practices should be understood based on that society’s own culture. Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf, major proponents of cultural relativism, argue that the norms and values of one culture should not be evaluated using the norms and values of the other. Another way of saying this is that many features of human experience are entrenched or embedded in social and cultural conceptualizations. Cultural relativism offers both a theoretical and an analytical framework for investigating cultural conceptualizations that underlie the social and cultural practices and institutions. At the heart of the theoretical framework of cultural relativism is the notion of cultural cognition, which affords an integrated understanding of the notions of “knowledge” and “culture” as they relate to social practices.[8]

 Viewed in this context, the letter and spirit of law in India is not limited to the monistic system of state law as maintained by Western jurisprudence in accordance with methodological postulates of legal positivism. The whole structure of law as an aspect of Indian culture includes all regulations, however apparently different from state law, which the people concerned observe as law in their cultural tradition, including value systems. The very cultural identity India demands that we include all of them in a whole structure and functioning of law in the country. Thus, the nature of law in India is plural, consisting of different systems of law interacting with one another harmoniously or conflictingly.[9]

 At the same time it is true that the people and scholars of India who have cherished their own jurisprudence with specificities quite different from the Western, have not succeeded nor even attempted to present the achievements of their jurisprudence before the world circle of legal science forcibly enough to cause the proponents of Western jurisprudence to doubt their conviction of universality of Western jurisprudence. Without presenting the achievements of their own jurisprudence before world bodies specifically aimed at self-reflection of model jurisprudence, Indian scholars remain unqualified to criticize the ethnocentricity of the latter, as recently pointed out by some Western scholars.[10]

 Such a negative or passive attitude may be another reason why Western jurisprudence has in general disregarded the jurisprudence of different cultures - jurisprudence with due respect to indigenous legal cultures in non-Western countries. Vital to the proper understanding of law in Indian culture is, firstly, for Indian scholars to present their own data and views positively in order not to negate the significance of western jurisprudence, but to maintain a sound understanding of its nature when utilized in different cultures.[11]

 The assertion that law is simply the law of the sovereign State misses the point that the law gets its meaning from the intersection of legal and various other social systems of meaning. Law like any other institution of society is interconnected with other institutions. The task of legal scholars therefore, is to recognise the connections between the law and social, political and cultural systems. The interdisciplinary study of law must mean that it brings the knowledge of the legal doctrine and analyzes it in the context of the knowledge of other disciplines. In doing so it carries the responsibility to try and achieve social justice for all. Despite the never-ending debates about modernisation and secularism in India, dharmic law, governing the social majorities of India’s population, has continued to play a key role in the development of the state legal apparatus and will continue to do so. It does not matter whether scholars like this or not.[12]

 Dharma, the foundation upon which all life is based in India, is immeasurably more than 'religion'; mistakenly one has been taken to be the other. The Indian mind did not think in terms of contesting polarities of the either/or kind. It would be yet another misunderstanding if the statement that dharma is profoundly secular is taken to mean that it is for that reason anti-religion, or that it has concern with other human beings in the form of legal accountability alone. The secular nature of dharma lies in the fact that all Indian explanations of man are evidently located in man himself, in the very structure of his being. It is that which binds one human being with another. The ethical foundations, and the limits of one human being's conduct towards another, are already inherent in man's being, in the force of dharma.

 In modern times, when secularism is upheld as an ideal and religion has been separated from politics such a linkage may appear far-fetched. The Indian view is different. Morality, to have effective force in practice must be based on rules of cosmic order. The unruly conditions of the modern world could have been avoided if dharmic values had been upheld, and personal, social and national behavior had been harmonized with the complex adaptive system running through the history of cosmic creation. Dharma can be comprehended by its application in daily life, by the consideration of the diverse form it takes, by its effects both visible and invisible, the empirical evidence behind it, and and the occasion for its use and or application. Dharma stands for natural law, civil and moral law, justice, virtue, merit, duty, morality and quality.[13]

 The study of dharmic law has been neglected in the decades since independence due to a combination of declining knowledge of its classical foundations and the pressures of modern political correctness, to the effect that studying dharmic law is often seen as a regressive activity. Anything ‘Indian’ is therefore quickly dismissed in many ways, by those who imagine and assert that a modern world, by which is often meant a Western-inspired world, can do without so-called primitive religious and cultural traditions. They have conveniently forgotten that the so-called modern western traditions have their own roots in Western cultural and religious traditions. So how can India be called upon to ‘modernise’, if that means giving up the social and cultural concepts that make up the fabric of the Indian identity?[14] (Aiyangar, 2018, p.62).

 Since dharmic law has always been a reflection of the way of life of millions of very diverse people, what was abolished by the formal law was manifestly only a fragment of the entire field and of the social reality of dharmic law. The conceptual framework and the entire customary social structure of Indian culture, remained largely immune to the powerful wonder-drug of legal modernisation which had been administered in measured doses since well before 1947 and was again used during the 1950s and decades thereafter. Something as complex as Hindu personal law could not be reformed away and ultimately abolished by statute, nor could its influence as a legal normative order that permeates the entire socio-legal Indian field simply be legislated away. India’s indigenous law has always been a people’s law, whether or not the state wished to see it that way. Despite enormous internal changes, dharmic law as a conceptual entity has remained an integral part of the living and lived experience of all Indians.

  Vedic Vision

 The Vedas give us a hierarchy of different levels of reality down from the all-embracing absolute, which is the primary source as well as the final consummation of the world process. The different kinds of being are the higher and lower manifestations of the one absolute spirit. There is correspondence or underlying unity between the absolute and the relative, the unmanifest cosmic reality is not separate or isolated from the objective reality. Whatever is in the cosmos and beyond is essentially true in the individual also. Whatever is stated of the cosmic reality is applicable to the human body, and each individual is spoken of as a descendant of the cosmos.[15]

The universal is collective. The collective is of no importance without the particular and the latter cannot exist without the former. If the collective is not manifested in creative individuality, and it remains enclosed within its rigid unity, it would neither be the universal nor the highest power. The collective and the individual are not exclusive. One cannot exist without the other; individuality is the fulfillment of the collective; the collective is the underlying foundation and the individual human being is its highest manifestation. The collective is ever seeking its consummation in the individual. As Tagore summed it up “You without me, I without you are nothing”. [16]

 There are two kinds of knowledge to be acquired, namely, apara and para-lower and higher. The lower knowledge is constituted of the Vedic texts themselves, the higher knowledge is that which goes beyond the texts of the Veda. Realising the higher truth or knowing the absolute reality is more important than merely being satisfied with words of Veda or outer shell of their meaning. The person who knows the Veda but does not know their meaning is only carrying a load. Before the knowledge of absolute, mere perception can be misleading. When our understanding is enlightened with higher knowledge we can understand the relative in a more complete sense.[17] 

In keeping with this Vedic vision of reality and knowledge, Panini developed his theory of grammar in which the structure of language is seen as an ascending order of relations between words and concepts from the perceptible level of manifest reality to the highest level of abstraction which is farthest from objective perception. The intermediate levels of increasing abstraction eventually merge in the Sabda Brahman where linguistic reality loses its autonomy and merges in the absolute reality.[18] In the Natyasastra, Bharatmuni set out to use the very language and vovacbulary of name and form to evoke that which is beyond form or without form, and all this through the vehicle of verbal and non-verbal expression of feeling.[19]

 Vedic sages realized the overarching presence of rta, an invisible cosmic law that held together in order a complex and adaptive system at different levels, forms, and phases of all the objects and processes that comprised the cosmos. All the forms of being existing and developing in harmony within an interconnected web of relationships were seen as organized in a system which integrated all the parts into an undivided whole in flowing movement. The cosmic order which extended to all levels of existence from the infinite to the infinitesimal was seen as inviolable, never to be broken, even by the Vedic divinities who were in fact considered as the guardians of ṛta.[20]

 Īśa Upaniad brings out the systemic aspect of cosmic order most succinctly and clearly. It says that the Absolute Reality is both universal and particular. The creation of the particular from the universal does not affect the integrity of the universal. The principle or quality of wholeness and integration is prior to the principle of particular and diversity. Oneness becomes many in the image of the oneness. That is whole, this is whole, taking out a particular whole from the absolute whole leaves the absolute whole integrated and creative as before. Every particular entity has to be an integrated whole to maintain its identity amongst an integrated system of infinite entities. The wholeness or integrity of each part is the bedrock of the wholeness of the universe and the order of the cosmos, and the order of the cosmos is the bedrock of the wholeness of the particular.[21]

 The Vedic texts give a reasonably clear picture of the world views of the Vedic sages, of their ideas about man’s place in the world, in particular of the Vedic conceptualization of ta as macrocosmic order. Herein lies the importance of the Vedas as a source of dharma. They elucidate the early conceptual underpinnings of Vedic law which are absolutely central for understanding the emerging legal system as a whole. The central point appears to be that ‘law’ is an entity beyond direct human control. It exists, and yet does not claim institutional loyalty, as a state legal system would do.[22]

 ta is the principle whereby the Absolute Reality becomes manifest and perceptible to human senses. In Ṛg Veda it is said that, 'heaven and earth exist in close unison in the womb of ṛta'. (Ṛg Veda, 10.65). ta, thus, is the one single system that embraces the cosmic order. The concept of ṛta explains the course of the evolution and sustenance of the natural and human world in terms of rhythm, time cycle, seasons, and biological growth. It refers to three basic elements of birth, growth, and transformation as the components of the complex cosmic system which functions according to its own self-organizing principles and law. Scholars, scientists, and poets in all ages have always found it amazing that the Absolute Reality is so well-ordered. In a landmark Supreme Court judgement, Chief Justice P. B. Gajendragadkar called this ‘great world rhythm’ one of the basic concepts of Hindu philosophy.[23]

 The early key concept of ta metamorphosed gradually into dharma which may be understood as microcosmic order or duty, the central dharmic legal term, which in one form or another underlies and suffuses all the later texts. Dharma became clearly the core concept of Vedic tradition, and thus of Vedic law. Its relevance in legal terms can be explained quite simply in that life is seen as a complex experiential reality, in which everybody and everything has a role to play and is visibly and invisibly interconnected in a giant systemic network of cosmic dimensions, a kind of universal spider’s web. Individual roles and obligations are, of necessity, quite disparate for different people; they depend on contextual factors like gender, age, or place in society. Dharma as a central legal concept thus suggests unlimited plurality at the level of social reality within a dharmic systems theory that defies rational deconstruction.

 ta is a multidimensional concept which is connected to other fundamental concepts like brahma, atma, dharma, and satya,in the Veda, Epics, Upaniads and the Dharmaśāstra. In its most fundamental sense, ṛta is the law, order, system, harmony underlying all natural phenomena. ta is the all-pervasive universal order that is same at all levels of existence, and the objective world is the expression of that order. The field of ṛta is physical, mental, spiritual, and ethical. Nature as it is known to us is not seen as a chaotic occurrence of events and objects. While it may appear as random and disorganized, the fundamental processes of nature that underlie all objective, and subjective realms too, function as a complex system in which all parts are coordinated and integrated into a larger whole.

 Indian conceptualizations of ṛta, dharma, and satya are not comparable with Western principles in the sense that they provide specific ethical permissions or prohibitions. Truth in the Western sense is the sum of what can be isolated and counted, it is what can be logically accounted or what can be proved to have happened, or what one really means at the moment when one speaks. While the Indian conception of satya is marked by an inner realization of the wholeness of reality, the Western view of truth is better described in English dictionaries as truthfulness or veracity of individual explicit statement.

 In Indian tradition, on the other hand, truth is defined in Mahābhārata when it says, 'Satya is dharma, tapas (austerity) and yoga. Satya is eternal brahma, Satya is also the foremost yagya, and everything is established on Satya'. In an illustration of this principle, Mahābhārata says that the spirit of dharma exists in the khadga (sword) also. The khadga or sword is a creation of Brahma for the purpose of protection and sustenance of the people according the principles of dharma. It takes the form of verbal, material, physical or death penalty for those who consciously violate the principles of dharma for their own selfish ends.[24]

 The concepts of rta and dharma are of great significance in the ethical and legal tradition of the Vedas. It is the anticipation of the law of karma, one of the distinguishing characteristics of Indian legal thought. It is the law which pervades the whole world, which all gods and men must obey. If there is law in the world, it must work itself out. If by any chance its effects are not revealed here on earth, they must be brought to fruition elsewhere. Where law is recognized, disorder and injustice arc only provisional and partial. The triumph of the wicked is not absolute. The shipwreck of the good need not cause despair.[25]

The ideal is envisaged as a fluid ordered universe, or a complex adaptive system, in macrocosmic as well as microcosmic dimensions, in which every element of that giant cosmic order simply does what is most appropriate. In other words, the Vedic conceptualization of order reflects a kind of ecologically sound symbiosis in which every component part plays its proper role. But this is merely the conceptual ideal: real life is a never-ending chain of contradictions, role conflicts, and processes to ascertain specific duties. It can also be viewed as a struggle to find one’s path, especially later in the more individualistic contexts of realization-centred beliefs.

 More pointedly for a legal analysis, awareness of ta and dharma involved a continuous process of harmonizing individual expectations with concern for the common good, a constant obligation to ascertain the appropriate balance between individual and society, good and bad, right and wrong, the permissible and the prohibited. Vedic law, in other words, is from the start based on a complex and continuous interactive process[26] Much of this remains invisible and internalized, a truth later brought out forcefully in the dramatic illustrations of the great epics, which can be seen as ancient tools for teaching ‘order’ in every sense of the word.

 The divinely inspired Vedas, the dharmasastra reflecting the Vedic ideals, virtuous conduct of the learned and finally, one’s own conscience formed the four-fold bases of dharma. The common conscience of the community, emerging in the form of immensely diverse customary practices of different communities and villages formed dynamic source of law. While customs were elevated to the status of law, they too had to be sanctified by good conscience. Thus, in the Vedic tradition we find indigenous versions of many of the principles that constitute the foundations of our legal system even today: impartial rules of procedure, principles of equity and even the subjection of the sovereign to over-arching ideas of justice.[27]

 Dharmasastra

 Dharma means much more than what is commonly understood by religion, and the dharmasastra means much more than religious texts. While there is something in the very nature of semitic religion which is divisive, conclusive and exclusive, dharma is inclusive, open and it unites. Religion excludes all that it is not in a particular religion, dharma includes every form and view of life. Religion often makes claims that are not based on experience, the claims of dharma are the claims of life and science. While religion and politics must necessarily be separated for a safe and sane world, legal and political thought and practice must necessarily have its basis in dharma.

 As far as basic aspects of Dharma are concerned, they were clearly set out in Manu Smriti and Yajnavalkya Smriti as follows:- Veda is the first source of Dharma. Smriti texts, the virtuous conduct of those who are well versed in the Vedas, and lastly, what is agreeable to the good conscience, are the other sources.[28] The Vedas, the Smritis, good conduct or approved usage, what is agreeable to conscience proceeding from good intention, are the sources of law.[29]

 The common conscience of the community, emerging in the form of immensely diverse customary practices of different communities and villages formed dynamic source of law. While customs were elevated to the status of law, they too had to be sanctified by good conscience. Being essentially a scheme of just social order, dharma was the goal set for king and the subjects. It was declared to be the king of kings by means of which the weak could prevail over the strong. Thus, their structure of law had dharma as its axis. In identifying appropriateness of action, multiplicity of views expressed in different dharmashastras prevailed, thus allowing plurality-conscious universalistic principles.[30]  

 Dharmasastra provide comprehensive guidance to regulate human conduct in accordance with the given system of cosmic creation and fulfill the purpose of one’s life. The whole life of a person considered both as a an individual and as a member of social groups, as well as a person’s relationship with fellow individuals, to the other living beings, to cosmic reality generally and to one’s conceptions of God come within the purview of the concept of dharma. Among the duties that were laid down are both self-regarding and other-regarding, those to the living, those yet to be born and those no longer alive.[31]

 The dharmasastra were an attempt to explain facts of moral life within the terms of a cosmological order. The structure of dharmasastra law had dharma as its axis. In identifying appropriateness of action, multiplicity of views expressed in different dharmashastra prevailed, thus allowing plurality-conscious universalistic principles. The office of king was regarded as an institution necessary for the maintainance of the order established by the creator for the good of creatures.[32]

 The king had the duty to establish what may have been practised by the virtuous and learned Brahmins, unless it was opposed to the customs of the region, clan or caste. The king’s duty to act with a sense of proportion in the matter of imposition of punishments demonstrates the link between equality and justice and equity as the corrective and supporting principle. Quantification of punishment in proportion to the evil was a sign of a mature legal system. Similarly, by affirming strongly that in case of doubt punishment will not be imposed, the legal system exhibited great wisdom.[33]

 Brihaspatismriti categorically rules: No sentence should be passed merely according to the letter of the law. If a decision is arrived at without reasoning and considering the circumstances of the case, there is violation of dharma. This approach of transcending the letter of the law in the light of the spirit of justice reflects the functional character of the legal system aiming at a benevolent result. The idea that justice will prevail over law reflects the acceptance of the limitation of man-made law and a notion of higher moral law as the superior principle. The larger discretion in the interests of justice gave scope for application of equity and good conscience.[34]

 This view of law is not confined to India alone; it is characteristic also of the Indianized states of Southeast Asia. In Cambodia, the Hindu doctrines of law were followed in their original form-although, as the epigraphy shows, some modifica- tions were made. In Burma, the dhammasattha was an attempt to use the Hindu system as a model in an environment entirely given over to the Buddhist faith. For example, the Code of Wagaru retains the sastric classification of contentious matters into eighteen types; but the content of the texts is very much a matter of local Burmese rules. The Hindu system was not introduced as such; rather, it was used as a guide to form.[35]

 Although the Buddhist religion did not contain any revelation on the social order, the dhammasatthas were held to have originated on the cakkava-la (the wall that surrounds the universe) and to have been given to man by the hermit Manu. This personage has nothing in common with the Manu of the smrti except his name, but the choice of his name does emphasize the separation of the texts from the world of Buddha. The laws of Buddha reveal the conditions of salvation; those of Manu, the bringer of the law from the walls of the world, determine the conditions of social life. However, the law of the dhammasatthas, like the sastras, transcends the world it rules. It is bound to the cosmic order and is free from the will of men. It was a universal law in the Hinayana Buddhist world.[36]

 In pre-twentieth-century Thailand, we also have a dhammasattha dating from the fourteenth century. According to this text the law laid down had authority only when it conformed to dhammasattha precepts, only when it expressed the royal will in accordance with the view of nature expressed in the texts of the law. But it did have the effect of putting the king in the center of the legal world, and the texts became a more immediate foundation for the justification of kingly power than was the case in India.

 This is characteristic also of the Javanese and Malay texts; indeed, the over- whelming impression one gets from such texts is that, although they do contain rules for the distribution of obligation, their main characteristic is concern with the nature of royal power, its acquisition and its use according to the precepts of the received texts.[37]

 Power in Javanese thought is both concrete and constant in quantity. It follows, then, that later generations may acquire and utilize the power of long-dead heroes and gods. It means also that power is concentrated at the center, in the ruler, so that central government is essentially an extension of the ruler's personal household. The ideal form of temporal power is a world-empire into which all entities are com- bined in a coherent unity. The existence of this unity is itself defined in the proper use of power and through the proper conduct of individuals, which must be in accord with dharma.[38]

 Dharmarajya

 To the question whether there was a rule of law prevalent in ancient India, evidence for a resoundingly affirmative answer is borne out by the great epic texts. The message of these texts is clear that the King was not above the law.  Sovereignty was based on an implied social compact and if the King violated this traditional pact, he forfeited his kingship. It refutes the view that the kings in ancient India were despots who could do as they pleased without any regard for the law or the rights of their subjects. Coming to the historical times of the Mauryan Empire, Kautilya described the duties of a king the Arthasastra in the following terms, “In the happiness of his subjects lies the King’s happiness; in their welfare his welfare; whatever pleases him he shall not consider as goof, but whatever pleases his people, he shall consider as good.”[39]

One of the most distinguishing aspects as between the concept of the law as defined in the Western jurisprudence and that as defined in Dharmasastras is that whereas the imperative command of the king constituted the law according to the former, under the concept of dharma, the law was a command even to the king and was superior to the king. This meaning is brought out by the expression 'the law is the king of kings'. The doctrine 'the king can do no wrong' was never accepted in ancient Indian constitutional system. Tirukkural, says that a king is assured of heavenly status if he makes the wrongdoer feel the weight of falling sengol, provided the light of justice is hidden in that blow of sengol.[40]

 Another aspect discernible from the definition of 'law' given in the Brihadarayaka, Upanishad and accepted in the Dharmasastras is that the law and the king derive their strength and vitality from each other. It was impressed that the king remained powerful if he observed the law and the efficacy of the law also depended on the manner in which the king functioned, because it was he who was responsible for its enforcement. There was also a specific provision which made it clear to the king that if he was to be respected by the people, he was bound to act in accordance with the law.

Thus the first and foremost duty of the king as laid down under dharmasastra was to rule his kingdom in accordance with the dharmic law, so that the law reigned supreme and could control all human actions so as to keep them within the bounds of the law. Though dharma was made enforceable by the political sovereign -the king, it was considered and recognised as superior to and binding on the sovereign himself. Thus under Indian ancient constitutional law (Rajadharma) kings were given the position of the penultimate authority functioning within the four corners of Dharma, the ultimate authority. Rules of dharma were not alterable according to the whims and fancies of the king. The exercise of political power in conformity with "dharma" was considered most essential. This principle holds good for every system of government and is a guarantee not only against abuse of political power with selfish motives and out of greed but also against arbitrary exercise of political power.

 The most rigid enforcement of obligations and duties form, side by side with the most lavish grant of rights and privileges to, both the governor and the governed explain the seeming inconsistency and paradox that characterise the dharmasastra, and the great complementarity between the theoretically despotic and the practically democratic features of the political organisation. This is a sound political maxim and is based on the observation of the fact that the peoples’ interests and opinions do in most cases differ, and insightful decision making is required at the political. Random scattering of the public opinion requires mediation and guidance from the government.[41]

 In deciding upon measures the king should be guided by the truth ‘voice of people is voice of god’. Thus though the king is himself a god, the god of the king is the people. The king has been described in dharmasastra as their servant getting remuneration for his work. The peculiar dualism and integration in the king’s position have been very unhesitatingly indicated in the Sukraniti.[42] The king is a god no doubt, but Dharmasastra do not consider him infallible. The limitations are fully recognised, and moral as well as constitutional restrictions are imposed upon him as upon other men.

 The Theory of the Divine Right of Monarchs has therefore to be understood with great modifications and the Western notions of about the infallibility and divinity of Kings and Popes must not be transplanted into the study of Indian Socio-political institutions.[43] The theory that a man may be omniscient is rejected altogether in the Dharmasastra for the very nature of the case goes against the idea. To the argument of physical magnitude, extensity and vastness of political interests is added that of intellectual limitations and incapability of man. Man cannot be omnipresent, he cannot also be omniscient, and therefore he must never be made omnipotent.[44]

 The true character of Indian jurisprudence is therefore different from that of the Anglo-American system. The obedience to the Shruti and Smriti etc., was not due to any political authority of their authors, but the veneration in which they were held by those for whom these writings were intended. These lawgivers showed admirable practical good sense in prescribing rules. While apparently professing to follow the Divine Laws and Commands as found in the Vedas and claiming simply to interpret and explain them to the general public, in reality the Dharmasastra so moulded these texts as to bring them in conformity with the general sense of their followers—a fact which secured them a following and obedience which was as universal and strong as that secured by a political authority.

 It has also to be understood well that the area of the jurisdiction of central power in ancient India was limited by the wide autonomy of the local bodies, of village and town governments, and of autonomous, economic, religious and military organizations. Their consent in the rules of dharma, which touched them also, had to be taken into account by any ruler. The idea that the central power was the monistic sovereign did not reflect the reality of social life in India. In the life of the common man, the direct impact of the central power in the country or region was not significant. Society was constituted of many social groups which were voluntary, hereditary, functional and provisional with several groups performing multiple functions. The legitimacy and authority of all these social groups was derived from the same source of dharma.

 The economic and social support of the central power came from the allegiance and cooperation of these diverse social groups which were fairly autonomous in their day to day functioning. They followed their own dharma which was usually in consonance with the dharmic law or legal culture of the land. Thus the central political organisation was not omnipotent or omnipresent like the fictional sovereign of the legal positivism. It was only one of the many governing social and religious organizations, often the primary, but not one that touched the lives of people deeper than the others. Dharmic law was essentially a pluralist legal culture which included and transcended the formal command of the political sovereign.[45]

 As a holistic legal system Indian jurisprudence emphasized and instrumentalised the intricate connection between different interlinking elements of the whole experience of human life. Indian law principles were in opposition to the classical positivist theories of law. Indian law concepts thus fall firmly within the theoretical parameters of the sociological school of jurisprudence, which treats legal rules as organically grown and socially tested normative orders and therefore does not accept the domination of legal absolutism or positivist.

 A deeper analysis of ancient Indian legal culture yields a systemic, multifaceted truth inherent in dharmic law, which never developed the aspiration to rule from above in absolutist legal fashion but sought to rule from within the society and individuals. Legal regulation from above, in the absolutist sense, may be apparently prominent, but there are deeper levels of legal regulation which can be ignored only at great cost. Dharmic law and its underlying philosophy and legal culture does not simply accept the simplistic impression that legal rules can solve all problems. In Indian cultural conceptualization, law is eternally and intrinsically connected with other and higher  spheres and levels of life.[46]

 It was the influence of the Hindu view of life, as given in the dharmasastra, that influenced the ruler and the ruled, and promoted their harmonious relations, and facilitated for both the moderation of their actions in accordance with the common ideals of coexistence. The best of all guarantees of good government in the dharmasastra was in bringing up the king and his ministers in the same ideals as the common man, and make both realize the supremacy of dharma as the both the letter and the spirit of the human law. It is only when human life is seen in the perspective of cosmic coexistence, and how important the self is as part of the cosmic reality and how all existence is interconnected in the common process of creation and transformation, that a proper sense of rules and values can be gained. The function and value of dharmasastra is to show the path to this realisation.[47]

 India’s legal culture or Dharmic law is alive and well at several conceptual levels of law, and it enables modern India’s creative use of Indian concepts in seeking to construct a justice-focused legal system that does not need the crutches of a foreign legal order, but remains open to modification and reform as and when circumstances suggest it. Thus, to argue that the ancient Indians did not have ‘law’ would be plain nonsense. If indeed all human societies have law, why should ancient Indian societies be any different? The simple answer is that the ancient Indians conceived of law differently from Western cultures. Dharmic law, as is widely acknowledged, represents a culture-specific form of natural law.[48]

 Both at the conceptual level and within processes of official law-making and policy formulation, concepts and rules of dharmic law retain a powerful voice in how India, in the 21st century, is seeking to achieve social and economic justice for over a billion people. It holds its position as a major legal system of the world, often despised and largely unrecognised, but massively present in the world of the twenty first century. At least a billion people, roughly a seventh of the world citizenry, remain governed by dharmic law in one form or another. Numerous decisions of the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts and subordinate judiciary bear witness to this social reality.

 State law and dharmic law are not incompatible, both interact with each other in many ways that we cannot even begin to analyse. Indian traditions are manifestly much more than folkloristic decorations, and dharmic law is a demanding multi-disciplinary arena which seems to put researchers off. Dharmic law has always been much more than a fossilised book law that could be abolished by the stroke of a pen. It could not simply be reduced to redundancy in the Austinian fashion, that taught Indian leadership to embrace legal positivism as a philosophy and top-down law-making as a magic tool of development. Justice Katju has observed that in ancient and medieval India there was tremendous development not only in the fields of science and philosophy, but also in the field of law. However, he lamented that the advent of British rule denied us the benefits of these developments as the alien rulers made it a policy to demoralise and denigrate us by propagating the idea that Indians were a race with no worthwhile achievement to their credit.[49]

 Rajdharma

 The foregoing brief discussion will make it clear that the rules contained in the dharmasastra relating to dharmarajya as the force of law had their roots deep down in the most ancient Vedic tradition and that the authors of the dharmasastra were quite justified in looking up to the Vedas as a source of dharma. But the Vedas do not profess to be formal treatises on dharma; they contain only disconnected statements on the various aspects of dharma; we have to turn to the smrtis for a formal and connected treatment of the topics of the dharmasastra. Indian classical texts like the Manusmriti, and Sukraniti, which are in the category of Nitisastra, Arthasastra, Dharmasastra, Tirukkural, or Dharmasutra deal mainly with the specific topics implied by such categories as Dharma (morals), Artha (interests) and Kama (desires) as opposed to Moksa (salvation).[50]

 Dharmasastra texts like Manusmriti, Yagyavalkyasmriti and Sukraniti reveal keen insight into the principles of strong and good government and political wisdom that find place in Indian texts of the time. These works are based on the principle that the security of the state depends not on the passive virtue of obedience to the laws promulgated by it but on the active cooperation of the people with it in carrying these laws into effect. The structure and functioning of the Indian political system of these times has many points which have anticipated the latest principles of good governance administration and which have yet to be realised by modern States. [51]

 In these texts the existence of conflicts, disunions, rivalry and factional spirit is considered to be the greatest of all dangers to social peace and political security. The bond of civil society is torn asunder when the moral system is disrupted. Hence the greatest political offender and the most criminal sinner is he who by his conduct promotes the breach between those who should normally live in amity and peace. The general violence of criminal activity in hindu jurisprudence is seen as the most insidious threat to the order of law.

 The main problem with violence is less the injury it causes to some person or group than the threat it poses to the state or other legal authority. Sukraniti provides against such offences by the socio-political decree issued by the king.[52]. “According to the dictates of Sukraniti the execution of bad men is real ahimsa i.e., mercy. One is deserted by good people and acquires sins by always not punishing those ought to be punished, and punishing those who ought not to be, and by being a severe punisher”. [53]  

 A state is a state because it can coerce, restrain, compel. Eliminate control or the coercive element from social life, and the state as an entity vanishes. Dharma is the very essence of statal relations. No danda, no state. A sanctionless state is a contradiction in terms. The absence of dharma is tanta-mount to matsya-nyaya or the state of nature. It is clear also that property and dharma do not exist in that non-state. These entities can have their roots only in the state. The whole theory thus consists of three fundamental rules : no dharma or sengol, no state; no state, no dharma; and no dharma, no individuality and property.[54]    

 Manusmriti considers dharma to be a tremendous force for discipline, hard to be controlled by persons with undisciplined minds, it destroys the King who has swerved from duty, along with his relatives. Then it will afflict his fortress and kingdom, the world along with movable and immovable things, as also the sages and the gods inhabiting the heavenly regions. Therefore punishment shall be given appropriately to men who act unlawfully, after having carefully considered the time and place, as also the strength and learning of the accused. When meted out properly after due investigation, punishment makes all people disciplined and happy; but when meted out without due investigation, it destroys all things.[55]   

Discipline cannot be justly administered by one whose mind is not disciplined, or who is addicted to sensual objects, or who is demented, or who is avaricious, or whose mind is not disciplined, or who is addicted to sensual objects. Discipline can be administered by one who is pure, who is true to his word, who acts according to the Law, who has good assistants and is wise. The King who metes out punishment in the proper manner prospers in respect of his three aims of virtue, wealth, and pleasure; he who is blinded by affection, unfair, or mean is destroyed by that same punishment.[56] In the same spirit, Tirukkular says that if the sengol of the king does not rest on justice, and if he acts without wisdom, he will see his wealth and prestige fade away.[57] 

Having duly ascertained the motive and the time and place, and having taken into consideration the condition of the accused and the nature of the offence, punishment should be given to those deserving punishment.  Unjust punishment is destructive of reputation among men and subversive of fame; in the other world also it leads to loss of heaven; he shall therefore avoid it. The king, punishing those who do not deserve to be punished, and not punishing those who deserve to be punished, attains great ill-fame and goes to hell.[58]

In Sukraniti, punishment emphasizes rectitude and deterrence over retribution. In fact, dharma in this view is what makes law practical at all as it contains a recognition of human imperfection and fallibility. Law in its fullest sense can only exist in the world if dharma is there to correct the inevitable failings of human beings. Without dharma, law remains an elusive ideal to which no one can aspire. With dharma law becomes satya, the truth that upholds social and individual righteousness. Dharma simultaneously guarantees the overall stability of the social system and development of the individual. In Tirukkural, the value of the word of the priest, and the value of the honour for men, is considered to rest on the value of the sengol held by the king.[59]

 Sukraniti sees dharma as a two edged sword that cuts both ways. On the one hand it is a corrective of social abuses, a moralizer purifier and civilizing agent. As the Sukraniti says it is by the administration of dharma that the State can be saved from a reversion to matsya-nyaya and utter annihilation and it is by dharma the people are set on the right path and they become virtuous and refrain from committing aggression or indulging in untruths. Dharma is efficacious moreover in causing the cruel to become mild and the wicked to give up wickedness. It is good also for preceptors and can bring them to their senses should they happen to be addicted to an extra dose of vanity or unmindful of their own vocations. Finally, it is the foundation of civic life, being the ‘great stay of all virtues’ and all the ‘methods and means of statecraft’ would be fruitless without a judicious exercise of dharma. Its use as a beneficent agency in social life is therefore unequivocally recommended by Sukra.[60]

 But on the other hand dharma is also a most potent instrument of restrain the ruler himself, to the powers that be. The maladministration of dharma says Kamandaka leads to the fall of the ruler. Manu ls does not hesitate to declare that dharma would smite the king who deviates from his duty from his ‘station in life’. It would smite his relatives too together with his castles territories and possessions. The common weal depends therefore on the proper exercise of the dharma. Manu would not allow any ill disciplined man to be the administrator of dharma. The greatest amount of wisdom accruing from the help of councillors and others is held to be the essential precondition for the handling of this instrument.[61]

 Brihadaranyaka Upanishad declares that the ruler too is obliged to follow dharma on pain of sanction for infraction. Dharma was all encompassing from natural justice, to equality, to considerate treatment of all mankind and exhortation, to codetermination for betterment of humankind. Betterment of each individual is the raison d’etre for later societies to identify and recognise human rights as basic and inherent in humans”.[62]

 In the two edged sword of the dharma then we encounter on the one side interests of the State and on the other individual morality, virtue, dharma, etc. In fact, it is to ‘educate’ man out of the primitive license and beastly freedom that government has been instituted. The State is designed to correct human vices or restrain them and open out the avenues to a fuller and higher life. And all this is possible only because of dharma. The conception of this eternal co-relation in societal existence is one of the profoundest contributions of the political philosophy of the Hindus to human thought. This concept changes the emphasis from what law restrains to what law enables. It suggests that every legal system must contain morals and ethical elements which can be understood in religious terms.[63]

 In accordance with the doctrine of dharma, the state is conceived as a pedagogic institution or moral laboratory, so to speak. It is an organization in and through which men's natural vices are purged, and it thereby becomes an effective means to the general uplifting of mankind. The Hindu theorists therefore consider the state to be an institution " necessary " to the human race if man is not to grovel in the condition of matsya-nyaya under the law of beasts. Man, if he is to be man, cannot do without political organization. He must have a state and must submit to sanction, coercion and punishment — in a word, to dharma.[64]

 In recent years social scientists have proposed a link between social cohesion, religion, and law. Social scientists have argued that participation in religious and cultural rituals strengthens group solidarity and improves social harmony. Recently, researchers have tested this hypothesis through both systematic field studies and laboratory experiments. Laboratory studies, for example, have shown that synchronous activities foster greater solidarity and more cooperation. This suggests that deep in our evolutionary history, social cohesion was favoring social norms and practices that increased solidarity.[65]

 While group-bonding rituals initially evolved to make face-to-face communities cooperative and cohesive, gradually these practices transformed for the scaling up of cooperation to larger imagined communities in which thousands of individuals interact, exchange, and cooperate. To facilitate this degree of scaling up, researchers have argued, cultural evolution, by anchoring on human species’ innate capacities to entertain the existence of supernatural agents, led to the emergence of increasingly powerful and morally concerned deities (or supernatural forces) who monitor and punish non-cohesive or antisocial activities, such as murder, theft, or adultery.[66]

Over time, faith and beliefs about these supernatural forces evolved further to increase their effectiveness: Gods expanded their range of moral concerns (e.g., openness toward strangers), ability to monitor norm violators (e.g., mind-reading abilities, omniscience), and power to punish (e.g., controlling the afterlife). Here, consistent with models of social norms based on punishment, gods were turned into super punishers who could impose penalties in this life and the next.[67]

 Researchers have shown that individuals from diverse cultures and traditions who report stronger beliefs in more powerful moralizing gods are more fair-minded in experiments with anonymous persons and more supportive of public goods. To examine whether supernatural agents can indeed cause people to behave more cooperatively, many studies have shown that when imbued with thoughts of god and specifically thoughts of supernatural punishment, believers become more fair-minded, cooperative, and honest with strangers. Together with historical and cross-cultural data supporting the claim that gods became increasingly morally concerned, powerful, and punishing over historical time, the psychological evidence suggests that certain religions may have evolved culturally in ways that have altered people’s psychology and thereby permitted the cohesiveness of societies.[68]

 Conclusion

 In the quest for perfection in individual conduct and social order, the dharmasastra explored and prescribed the ways of good conduct of individuals and arrangements for considerable degree of social cohesion by balancing between harmonious coexistence and individual autonomy. Flowing gracefully with skill and brevity in poetic expression, the insightful revelations of Vedic sages blended intuition, philosophy and conviction to explore and conceptualise a macrocosmic order of high moral and social conduct in which individuals and societies could grow and flourish in the path of justice through willing obedience to the laws of nature and society.

 A golden thread of the spirit of justice inspired the dharmasastra texts and the institutions of legal systems to internalise the high moral and cosmic order. The availability of a diversity of adjudicating mechanisms to suit the location and profession of the litigants and serve the people in their own intimate environment, collegiate character and strict impartiality of courts and simplicity of procedure were the predominant features of the legal and judicial system given in the dharmasastra.

 The approach of the dharmasastra of combining truth with justice, equity with law and discretion with reason has a universal message for modern law and jurisprudence. The law and justice system in ancient India was influenced by a dharma based understanding of justice as the expression of the absolute reality. The persuasion of all human beings to do good and avoid evil was the means chosen by the dharmasastra for conformity to a high moral and social order. Although these systems were a product of their times they have an abiding value for truth and justice in contemporary human society.

 While Western society stressed on worldly progress and acquisition of material comforts, ancient Indian society emphasised both pravritti and nivritti, shreyas and preyas. Pravritti was the urge to actively engage in material pursuits while nivritti denoted the pursuit of spiritual pursuits.

 Kathopanishad teaches us that preyas is material happiness while there is yet another, spiritually attainable, happiness of a permanent nature called shreyas. It is hardly a wonder therefore that with this worldview Indians emphasised dharma as the instrument for achieving both.

 ] Capra, 2015; Glen, 2010; Sarat, 1993.

[2] Altekar, 1952; Apte, 1954; Jois, 2022; Lingat, 1973.

[3] Chiba, p.2.

[4] Katju, p. 17.

[5] Menski, p.6.

[6] Chiba, 2009, p.1

[7] Cardozo, 2020, 2021; Schauer, 2022.

[8] Einstein,1982; Heisenberg, 1989; Carrel, 2019, Chiba p.4.

[9] Chiba, p.4.

[10] ibid. p.2

[11] ibid.

[12] Jois, 1993; Jois, 2000; Kane, 1962-75, Moghe, 2003.

[13] Aiyangar, 2018, p.62.

[14] Aiyangar, 2018, p.62.

[15] RV, 1.164.4-5.

[16] Tagore, 113).

[17] RV, 1.164.39.

[18] Kapoor, p. 86.

[19] Vatsyayan, p.57

[20] Khanna, 2004; Menski, p.90.

[21] Isavasaya, p.64-67.

[22] Tripathi, 2022; Narang, 1988

[23] 1966 SCR (3) 242.

[24] Mahabharata, p. 512.

[25] Radhakrishnan, 2019, p.80.

[26] Derrett, 1968, p.2–3.

[27] GOI, p.13.

[28] Manu Smriti, II-6.

[29] Yagyavalkya Smriti, V 1-7.

[30] GOI, p.33.

[31] Banerjee, 1998; Baxi, 1986.

[32] Lingat, p. 207.

[33] GOI pp.39-43.

[34] ibid. p. 34.

[35] Hooker, p.217.

[36] ibid.

[37] Ibid., p.216

[38] Ibid.

[39] Nazeer, p.7.

[40] Tirukkural, 61.

[41] Sukraniti, p.51.

[42] ibid.

[43] ibid., p.54

[44] ibid., p.56

[45] Aiyangar, 2018, p.179.

[46] Menski, 2003, p.42; Pal, 1958; Purohit, 1984; Spellman, 1964; Rocher, 1972.

[47] Aiyangar, 2018, p.180.

[48]  Jayaswal, 2004; Dutt; 1979; Swain, 2004; Motwani, 1958.

[49] (Katju, p. 7).

[50] (Buhler, 2008, 2018; Oliville, 2000; Lariviere, 1984; Lingat, 1973).

[51] (Sukraniti, p. 39-40).

[52] Sukraniti, p. 40.

[53] ibid. p. 13).

[54] Sarkar, 1922, p. 197.

[55] Manusmriti, Vol.5, p.289-90.

[56] ibid. p. 292-93.

[57] Tirukullar, 57.

[58] Manusmriti,  p. 282.

[59] Tirukkural, 55.

[60] Sarkar, 2016, p. 513-14.

[61] (ibid.).

[62] GOI, p.29.

[63] Sarkar, 2016, p.514.

[64] Sarkar, 1922, p.203.

[65] Henrich, 2016, p.230.

[66] Norenzayan et al. 2019, p.2; Lombard, 2022.

[67] (Purzycki, p.1)

[68] (Henrich, ibid.).

 

Bibliography

 

Agarwal, Vasudev Sharan, India as Described by Manu. Varanasi: Prithvi Prakashan, 1970.

Agarwal, V.S., The Thousand Syllabled Speech, Varanasi, Prithvi Prakashan, 1963.

Agarwal, V.S., Bharatiya Dharma Mimamsa, Varanasi: Prithvi Prakashan, 1979.

Agarwal, V.S., Rachna Sanchayan, New Delhi: Sahitya Academi, 2012.

Aiyangar, Rangaswami, Some Aspects of The Hindu View of Life, New   Delhi: Lifespan, 2018.

Aiyangar, Rangaswami, Rajadharma, Adyar: Adyar Library, 1941.

Altekar, A S, Sources of Hindu Dharma in its Socio religious Aspects,    Sholapur: Institute of Public Administration, 1952.

Apte V. M., Social and Religious Life in the Grhya Sutras, Bombay : Popular            Book Depot, 1954.

Arthasastra, Tr. R P Kangle, Delhi: Motilal Banarasidas, 2021.

Arthasastra, Tr. R Shamasastry, Bangalore: Government Press, 1915.Arya, Pratibha, Smritiyon Mein Rajniti aur Arthasastra, Gyanpur,Vishwabharati, 2007.

Banerjee, Nikunja Vihari, Studies in the Dharmasastra of Manu, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1980.

Banerjee, Suresh Chandra, A Companion to the Dharmasastra, New Delhi: D K   Printworld, 1998.

Banerjee, Dharma Sutras: A Study in their Origins and Development. Calcutta, 1962).

Baxi, Upendra, Towards a sociology of Indian law. New Delhi: Satvahan, 1986.

Bhagvadgita, Tr. S. Radhakrishnan, New Delhi: Harper, 2010.

Bhattacharya, Dinesh Chandra, ‘ The Nibandhas’, The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol.II. Calcutta: Institute of Culture, 2016.

Bhattacharya K K, (Trans), Institutes of Parasara, Asiatic Society Calcutta, 1887.

Bhattacharyya, Parnasabari, Conceptualizations in the Manusmrti, New Delhi: Manohar Publishers, 1996.

Bowles, Adam. Dharma, Disorder and the Political in Ancient India: Apaddharmaparva of the Mahabharata. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Buhler George, (Trans), The Law of Manu with Extracts from Seven Commentaries, The Sacred Books of the East Series, No XXV, Delhi: Motilal Banrasi Dass, 2018.

Buhler, George, The Sacred Laws of the Aryas as Taught in the Schools of Apastamba Gautama Vasistha and Baudhayana (2 Vols). Delhi: Motilal Banrasi Dass, 2008.

Capra, Frirzof, and Ugo Mattei, The Ecology of Law: Towards a Legal System in Tune with Nature and Community, New Delhi: Harper                        Collins, 2015.

Cardozo, Benjamin, The Growth of the Law, New Delhi: Law and Justice, 1924/2020.

Cardozo, Benjamin, The Nature of the Judicial Process, Satyam Law, 1921/2021.

Carrel, Alexis, Man the Unknown, New Delhi: R Sons, 1935/2019.

Chandra, Aparna, et al, Court on Trial, New Delhi: Penguin, 2023.

Chiba, Masaji, ed. Asian Indigenous Law. London: Routledge, 2013.

Coomarswamy, Ananda K. Spiritual and Temporal Power in the IndianTheory of Government, New Delhi: DK Publishers, 2013.

Dandaviveka of Vardhman Upadhyaya. Trans. Bhabhatosh Bhattacharya. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1973.

Datta, D.M. The Six Ways of Knowing, Delhi: MLBD, 2017.Dave, Jayantakrishna Harikrishna, Manusmriti, 5 Vols. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, 1972.Davis, Jr., Donald R. The Spirit of Indian Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Davis, Donald R., Jr. 2004. Dharma in Practice: Acara and Authority in Medieval Dharmasastra. Journal of Indian Philosophy 32.5:813–830.

Davis, Donald R., Jr. “Intermediate Realms of Law: Corporate Groups and Rulers in Medieval India”. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 48.1: 92–11,2005.

Day, Terence P. The Conception of Punishment in Early Indian Literature. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 1982.

Derrett, J. Duncan M. Religion, Law, and the State in India. London:   Faber, 1968.

Derrett, J.D.M. Hindu Law Past and Present. Calcutta: A. Mukherjee & Co, 1957.

Derrett, J.D.M., An Introduction to Modern Hindu Law. London and    Bombay: Oxford University Press, 1963.

Derrett, J.D.M. Essays in classical and Modern Hindu law. Vol.3. Leiden:Brill,1977.

Dharmasutras: The Law Codes of Apastamba, Gautama, Baudhayana, and Vasistha. Delhi: MLBD, 2000.

Dhavan, Rajeev, ‘Dharmasastra and Modern Indian Society: A preliminary exploration’. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, pp.515-             540, Vol.34, No.4 1992.

Doniger, Wenddy, and Brian Smith, The Laws of Manu. Gurgaon: Penguin, 2000.

Dutt, Manmath Nath, The Dharmasastra, Hindu Religious Codes, Vol. I-V, New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1979.

Dwivedi, Kapildev, Vedon Mein Rajnitisastra, Gyanpur: Vishwabharati, 2009.

Dwivedi, Kapildev, Vedik Darshan, Gyanpur: Vishwabharati, 2006.

Dwivedi, Kapildev, Vedik Sahitya aur Sanskriti, Gyanpur: Vishwabharati, 2021.

Einstein, Albert, Ideas and Opinions, New York: Three Rivers, 1982.

Francavilla, Domenico. The Roots of Hindu Jurisprudence: Sources of Dharma and Interpretation in Mimamsa and Dharmasastra. Torino: Union, 2006.

Gajendragadkar, P.B. ‘The historical background and theoretical basis of Indian law’. In: AIR 1963, Journal section, pp.18-26.

Gharpure, J.R., Manusmriti with the Bhashya of Medhatithi. Bombay: Hindu Law Texts, 1917.

Glenn, H. Patrick, Legal Traditions of the World, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Glucklich, Ariel. Religious Jurisprudence in the Dharmasastra, New York:Macmillan, 1988.

Glucklich, Sacred Pain: Hurting the Body for the Sake of the Sou, New York:Oxford, 2001.

Govt. of India, Courts of India: Past to Present, New Delhi: Publications Division, 2016.

Hardas, Balshastri, Glimpses of Vedic Nation, Madras: Kamakoti, 1967.

Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and philosophy, New Delhi: Penguin, 1989.

Henrich, Joseph, et al. The Origin and Psychology of Cooperation, Annual Review of Psychology, 2021. 72:207-40.

Hooker, M.B., The Indian Derived Texts in Southeast Asia, The Journal of Asian   Studies, Feb. 1978.

Huxley, Andrew,  Religion Law and Tradition, New York, Routledge, 2002.

Isavasya Upanisad: God in as everything, Mubai: ChinmayanandaTrust, 2021.

Jagannathan, R. Dharmic Nation, New Delhi: Rupa, 2023.

Jayaswal, K. P., Manu and Yagyavalkya. New Delhi: Cosmo, 2004.

Jha, K. P., Hindu Polity; Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times. New Delhi: Chaukhamba Publications, 2006.

Jha, Ganganath, Studies in Hindu Law, Varanasi: Sampurnananda, 1992.

Jha, The Purva Mimamsa Sutras of Jaimini. Delhi: Parimal Publications, 2018.

Jois, Rama, Legal and Constitutional History of India: Ancient Legal, Judicial and Constitutional System. Gurugram: Universal Lexis Nexis,            2022.

Jois, Rama, Seeds of Modern Public Law in Ancient Indian Jurisprudence. 2nd ed. Lucknow: Eastern Book Company, 2000.

Jois, Rama, Dharma : The Global Ethic, Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay, 1996.

Jolly, Julius, Indian Law and Custom. Varanasi and Delhi: Bhartiya Publishing House, 1975.Joshi, Lakshmanshastri, Vaidik Sanskriti ka Vikas, New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 2017.

Kane, P. V. History of Dharmaśāstra. 5 vols. Poona: Bori, 1962–75.

Kangle, R.P., ‘Manu and Kautilya’. Indian Antiquary 1.1., 1964.

Kangle, R.P. The Kautilya Arthasastra. Bombay: University of Bombay. 1972.

Kapoor, Kapil, Text and Interpretation: The Indian Tradition, New Delhi; DK Printworld, 2019.

Kapoor, Kapil, Dimensions of Panini Grammar, New Delhi: DK Printworld, 2020.

Katju, Markandey, Ancient Indian Jurisprudence, Speech delivered on 27th November, 2010 at Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi.

Khanna, Madhu, ed., Rta: The Cosmic Order, New Delhi: D K Printworld, 2004.

King, L.W., The Code of Hammurabi, New Delhi: DOB Classics, 2021.

Kuppuswamy, Bangalore. Dharma and Society. Delhi: Macmillan, 1977.

Lal, Makkhan, Political and Legal Ideas and Institutions, Delhi: Pragun, 2019.

Larivière, Richard W. ‘Dharmaśāstra, custom, ‘real law’ and ‘apocryphal’ Smrtis’. In: Kőlver, Larivière, Richard W. (ed.) Studies in Dharmaśāstra. Calcutta: Firma KLM, 1984.

Lingat, Robert. The Classical Law of India, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.

Lipton, Bruce H., The Biology of Belief, New Delhi: Hay House, 2023.

Lombard, Jay, The Mind of God, New York, Harmony, 2022.

Lubin, Timothy, Donald R. Davis, Jayanth K. Krishnan. Ed. Hinduism and Law: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Mahabharata, Vol. V, Tr. R.N. Pandeya, Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 2015.

Manusmti: with ‘Manubhāya’ of Medhātithi, Jha, Ganganath. 10 vols., 2nd edn. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2016.

Markandeya Purana, Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 2021.

Matsya Purana, Gorakhpur: Gita press, 2020.

Menski, Werner. Hindu Law: Beyond Tradition and Modernity. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Menski, Werner. Comparative Law in a Global Context. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Moghe, S G, Some Aspects of Studies in Dharmasastra, Delhi: Bharatiya Kala Prakashan, 2003.

Motwani Kewal, Manu Dharmasastra: A Sociological and Historical Study, Madras Ganesh & Co. 1958.

Mukerjee, Radhakamal, The Philosophy of Social Science, New Delhi: Radha publications, 2005.

Naradsmriti. Ed. And trans. Richard Lariviere. Delhi: MLBD, 2001.

Narang, Sudesh (ed.) Dharmasastra in contemporary times. Delhi: Nag Publishers, 1988.

Nath, Kamleshwar, Glimpses of Ancient Indian Law, Bharatiya Manyaprad, Vol.4, No.1, 2016, pp. 37-50.

Nazeer, Justice Abdul, Decolonisation of the Indian Legal System, Speech delivered in Hyderabad, 26 December 2021.

Nivedita, Sister, Religion and Dharma, Kolkata: Advaita Ashram, 2012.

Norenzayan, Ara, et al. Supernatural norm enforcement, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , March 2019.

Olivelle, Patrick, Dharmasutras: The Law codes of Apastamba, Gautama, Baudhayana and Vasistha. Delhi et al.: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Olivelle, Patrick, ‘Penance and punishment: Marking the Body in Criminal Law and Social Ideology in Ancient India. Journal of Hindu Studies, 4, 2011.

Olivelle, Patrick, Hindu law: A New History of Dharmasastra, New Delhi: Oxford, 2018

Olivelle, Patrick, “Kantakshodhana: Courts of Criminal Justice in Ancient India”, in Francois Voegeli, et al, eds. Devadattiyam, Bern: Peter Lang,          2012.

Pal, Radha Gobind, The History of Hindu Law, Calcutta, Calcutta University Press, 1958.

Purohit, S.K. Ancient Indian legal philosophy. Its relevance to contemporary   jurisprudential thought. New Delhi: Deep & Deep, 1994.

Purzycki, Benjamin, et al., Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality, Nature, March 2019.

Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli. Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1. Delhi: Oxford, 2019.

---. The Spirit of Religion, New Delhi, Hind Pocket Books, 2009.

---, The Principal Upanisads, New Delhi: Oxford, 2017.

---, An Idealist View of Life, New Delhi: Harper Collins, 2012.

Raghavan, V., ‘The Manu Smriti’, in The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol. 3, Calcutta. Institute of Culture, 1959.

Ramamoorthy, R., ‘Concept of Punishment Under Manusmriti’, Indian Philosophical Quarterly 2:1, 1974.Rg Veda, Tr. Dayananda Saraswati, 4 Vols., New Delhi: Hasananda, 2007.

Rocher, Ludo. “Hindu Law and Religion: Where to Draw the Line?” in Malik Ram Felicitation Volume, 1972.

Rovelli, Carlo, Seven Brief Lessons on Physics, New Delhi: Penguin, 2016.

Sarat A. and T. Kearns, eds. Law in Everyday Life, eds. Ann Arbor: University of      Michigan press, 1993.

Sarkar, Benoy Kumar, The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology, Motilal   Banarasidass, Delhi. 1985.

Sarkar, Benoy Kumar, The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus, , Verlag, Leipzig. 1922.

Sarkar, Benoy Kumar. “Some Basic Ideas of Political thinking in Ancient India”, in The Cultural History of India, Vol. 2, 509-529. 2016.

Sarkar, Benoy Kumar. “The Indian Theory of the State,” Political Science Quarterly 36(1) (1921): 79–90.

Sarkar, Kishori Lal, The Mimansa Rules of Interpretation, Tagore law   Lectures, 1905.

Sastry, K.R.R. Manu and Thiruvalluvar: A Comparative Study. Madras: Sangam Publishers, 1973.

Sastry, V. Kutumba, “Semantics Of Dharma”, in Dharma the CategorialImperative, ed. Ashok Vohra, New Delhi: DK Printworld, 2005.

Satyprakashananda, Swami, Methods of Knowledge, Kolkata: Advaita, 2022.

Schauer, Frederick, The Proof: Uses of Evidence in Law, Politics, and Everything Else, Cambridge, Harvard University press, 2022.

Sen, Prosonto Kumar, Penology Old and New, Tagore Law Lectures, Calcutta: Longman Green’s, 1943.

Sharma, R.N., Ancient India According to Manu. Delhi: Nag, Publishers, 1980.

Singh, Chhatrapati ,‘Dharmasastras and contemporary jurisprudence’. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, pp.179-188, Vol.32 No.2, 1990.

Sivaramayya, B. ‘Dharmaśāstra and Contemporary Indian Law’. In Narang, Sudesh (ed.): Dharmasastra in Contemporary Times. Delhi: Nag Publishers, pp.67-76. 1988.

Spellman, John, Political Theory of Ancient India, Oxford: Clarendon, 1964.

Sukraniti , Tr. Benoy Kumar Sarkar, Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi. 1975.

Swain, Brij Kishore, Dharmasastra: A Link Between Tradition and Modernity, Varanasi: Chaukhamba Publications, 2003.

Swain, Brij Kishore, Dharmasastra: An Introductory Analysis, Delhi: Akshay  Prakashan, 2004.

Tagore, Rabindra Nath, Sadhana, Chennai: Naven, 2021.

Tirrukural, Tiruvallur, Tr. Gopal Krishan Gandhi, New Delhi, Aleph, 2015.

Tripathi, Upendra Kumar, and Anoop Kumar, Vedic Tradition of Law and Legal System. New Delhi:BHU, 2022.

Twining, William. 2000. Globalisation and Legal Theory. London: Butterworths.

Twining, William, General Jurisprudence: Understanding Law from a Global Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge Pniversity Press, 2009.

Varga, Casba (ed.). Comparative Legal Cultures. Aldershot: Dartmouth. 1992.

Vatsyayan, Kapila, Bharata: The Natyasastra. New Delhi, sahitya Akademi, 2016.

Vyavaharachintamani Of Vachaspati Misra. A Digest on Hindu Legal Procedure.

Ed. And trans. Ludo Rocher. Gent: University of Gent, 1956.

Wezler, Albrecht. “Dharma in the Veda and the Dharmasastra”. Journal of Indian Philosophy, 32:629-65, 2004

Yagyavalkyasmriti with the Mitakshara of Vigyaneswara. Ed. Narayan Ram Acharya. Delhi: Nag, 1985.