115 Chapter 3 Interpreting Tradition Tradition is defined as the handing down of knowledge or the passing of a doctrine or a technique^ ^ It is an active process; it entails a very strong and often predominant sense of respect and' duty; it often presents values and standard. It is not so, as it is generally believed that it comes to be handed down in an unchanging form; in fact by its very nature, it involves both continuity and change. It needs to be studied in its various phases of development. It is in this context, that the meaning of the term culture becomes more meaningful. Romila Thapar has used the term 'culture' in its wider sense to include language, tradition, customs and institutions.^ '' The meaning of the term culture becomes clear when used in the context of tradition for it links the past to the present. In the context of India the tradition is ancient and complex; and in regard to its origin, it can only be pointed out that there are multiple of origins of Indian tradition. Indian tradition can be broadly categorized into : (1) Brahminical Traditions, (2) The Renouncer Traditions and (3) Popular Traditions. Though it is not the purpose to discuss all the three traditions, however, a few observations about the dominant Brahminical tradition can be made, since most of the debates that took place in Maharashtra during the period of this study remained mainly concerned with it. These observations are made * Kluckhohn's definition of Culture is as follow : (1) "the total way of life of a people", (2) "the social legacy the individual acquires from his group"; (3) "a way of thinking, feeling, and believing", (4) "an abstraction from behaviour"; (5) a theory on the part of the anthropologist about the way in which a group of people in fact behave". (6) "a storehouse of pooled learning", (7) "a set of standardized orienta­ tions to recurrent problems"; (8) "learned behaviour"; (9) "a mechanism for the normative regulation of behaviour"; (10) "a set of techniques for adjusting both to the external environment and to other men"; (11) "a precipitate of History." Geertz, Clifford, The Interpretation of Cultures (London, Fontana, 1993), pp. 4-5 See also : Jenks, Chris, Culture (London, Routledge, 1993), pp. 11-12 116 with a view to bringing out the relative importance of the various sources of the dominant Brahminical tradition in respect of interpreting them. In this context one may understand that during the nineteenth century what constituted the authentic tradition was the cardinal issue of the debates that took place between the reformers and the supporters of the status quo. The Sruti literature is considered as the oldest and most authentic fountainhead of almost all traditions in India. It is interesting as well as instructive to note that various transitions tend to define their position with respect to the authority of the Vedas; they either express their acknowledge­ ment or denial of the authority of the Vedas.^ ^ But, as a matter of fact the Vedas are not legal codes and therefore not useful for getting direct statement of rules of law.^ ^ The Sutra literature covers the entire area of human activities as it is conceived on the basis of vama and asrama. It was useful in proving how the Smriti literature as a whole was free from any literal contradictions.^ '' All authoritative writings outside the Vedas are comprehensively referred to as Smriti (that which is remembered). There are many Smritis written by different persons at different periods. Therefore, the conflict was bound to be there in interpreting these texts. Smritikars provided rules to resolve conflicts between Smritis and between the texts of the same 'Smriti'.^'' The Dharma Sastra are a group of texts elaborating upon the topics of the Sutra literature. After giving a long list of the topics that has been included under Dharmasastra P. V. Kane, the author of the 'History of Dharmasastra' has been led to opine that 'how the conception of Dharma was a far reaching one, how it embraced the whole life of man'.^ ^ The rules of dharma merge into jurisprudence and they become important texts in Hindu legislation and litigation. It is clear that in the event of conflict between the texts of the Veda and that of the Dharmashastra the former shall prevail. The two epics, the Ramayana and 117 the Mahabharata are considered as repositories of various kinds of knowledge and of great ethical and human values and therefore regarded as sources of 'dharma'. The epic literature contributed towards popularizing dharma, leading to a remarkable development in the traditional religion. The epics deal with Smriti topics which fall under the heads of Dharmasastra matters, viz. Acara, Prayascitta, Vyavahara, Rajadharma. Both the epic works have been cited as an authority in Smriti works. It is observed that the religious traditions in the Puranas dates back to the non- vedic culture of pre-Vedic period.*^^ In fact, it is opined that both the Vedic and non-Vedic religious traditions came together in the making of the Puranic culture. Many of the Puranas contain chapters dealing with smriti material.^ ' They attained high authority in the remote age as is attested by Mahabharata. In fact, the Smrti digests, based on the earliar original Smriti works, utilized puranas and copiously quoted them.^ ^ Both Manu and Yajnavalkya acknowledged the authority of the Puranas.^ ^ The purpose of the Dharmasastras is to teach Dharma which refers to a cosmic, eternal principle and also to the world of human transactions. Katyayan defines custom as 'all that man practices whether or not it conforms to dharma, simply because it is the constant usage of the country.'^ ^ Dharma has been observed as 'context sensitive' meaning it can be adopted to particular situation.' ^ The adoption of custom is possible only when it is admitted to the realm of Dharma. This explains why Manu regarded custom as one of the sources of dharma.' ^ Later Law-texts also uphold the authority of customs prevailing at that time and thus transformed them into written law or declared law.^ ^ All these observations would certainly help one in understanding how Vishnubuwa Brahmachari used all these sources of tradition to justify his statement about the ideal Vedic society. There were some other 118 reformers too, who attempted at convincing the pubUc that the reforms they were advocating were in harmony with the sacred texts. Lokhitwadi and Phule considered tradition as social reaHty. They, on the basis of the principles of rationalism, critically examined the various aspects of tradition i.e. social reality that caused making society decadent. It has been stated by Dr. R. S. Shrama that the weapons employed by the reformers to remove the practices of Sati, lifelong widowhood, polygamy, child marriage, caste endogamy and purdah system were not of 'reason drawn from the armoury of rationalism and utilitarianism.^ -' This is true only in case of reformers justifying change in accordance with the sacred texts. It is to be pointed out here that Lokhitwadi and Phule most certainly based their stand on the principles of rationalism. Rationalism does not denote one simple doctrine "D". Rationalism is man's ability to reason - 'to organize our ideas in a coherent logical pattern'.^ ^ A rationalist places special emphasis on man's rational capacities. He also has a special belief in the value and importance of reason and rational argument. Rationalism implies a commitment to the standards of rationality and they are : logical precision, consistency, coherence, a commitment to follow the argument where it leads.^ ^ There are three important strands in rationalism and they are.*- • (1) innatism : The idea that the mind is equipped from birth with certain fundamental concepts or with knowledge of certain fundamental truths. (2) a priorism : There exists the possibility of genuine knowledge independent of the senses (3) necessitarianism : The notion that philosophy can uncover necessary truths about reality. Epistemological Rationalism was first explicitly formulated by Plato, however, it reached its height in the l?"" and 18"" centuries of which most important representatives are Descartes 119 (1596-1650), Spinoza (1632-1677), and Leibniz (1646-1716). They assert that human reason unaided is competent to attain objective truth. Their stress is on the superiority of the deductive over all other methods in point of certainty. Epistemological Rationalism came under attack from the British empiricists, especially John Locke (1632-1704), and Davis Hume (1711-1776) who were guided by the idea that all our ideas are ultimately derived from experience. They emphasized the necessity for empirical data in the acquisition of scientific knowledge. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) propounded his critical theory of knowledge in his work entitled 'Critique of Pure Reason', in which he sought to reconcile the theories of rationalism and empiricism, maintaining that knowledge is neither wholly a priory nor wholly a posteriori, but it consists of both a priori and a posteriori factors.^ ^ Ethical Rationalism is the application of epistemological rationalism to the field of morals. Theological Rationalism asserts the claims of reason against those of revelation or authority. It rejects religious beliefs as being without rational foundation.^ -' It will be interesting to see how the critical view-point came to be developed against the methods of theology and metaphysics that had traditionally dominated men's thinking in the West. Conveniently, one may begin with Martin Luther. Luther's nailing of the Ninety-Five Theses relating to indulgences to the doors of the Wittenberg Church meant : "To deny what authority tacitly approves, is to deny authority; and to appeal from the pope to the Bible is to appeal from a higher authority to a lower."^ ^ Luther directed his Reformation not only against 'the abuses of the church but the church itself.'^ ^ His attack on entire theology and church structure led him to declare positively that every individual has the right to interpret the Bible in his own conscience.