History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c96.s2.98

v7.c96.s2.98

There is a great ferment of ideas in India at present. Many of our countrymen, whether young or old, do not derive any inspiration from their religion. It is not the fault of religion, but the fault lies with us and our predecessors who did not and do not exhibit to us the core of our culture and religion, do not sift the essentials and separate them from the unessential accretions due to superstitions and wrong emphasis. Ordinary men of to-day feel bewildered by the disagreements between scientific knowledge and the traditional beliefs. The result is that traditional values and codes of conduct are disintegrating and various views are being bandied about. There are now several distinct thought-forms on matters religious or spiritual. One class calls itself *sanātanis* whose view is that the traditional codes of conduct and beliefs were established by the all-wise sages of old and therefore modern half-baked reformers have no right at all to introduce changes in them. There is another class (allied to these) of those who have studied such modern sciences as eugenics and biology, who oppose change on the ground that our traditions embodied in the caste system and the restrictive rules about marriage are most scientific and no change should be made in them and if made disaster will follow. There is another class of people who say 'why do you quarrel with us? Time will bring about all necessary changes'. There are other people who go to the other extreme and deny the existence of any divine or spiritual realities and values in the world. Some believe in the efficacy of laws to introduce desired changes. There are people who say 'take the essential values of Indian culture as foundation and build thereon a structure in keeping with the needs of the times'. Hinduism has always been growing and changing traditions (vide for examples above pp. 1267-72 and 1471). The changes, however, were not brought about by legislation but were the work of commentators and digest-writers, the result being a bewildering variety of laws, customs and usages, religious and spiritual views in different parts of India. India, being always divided into many kingdoms before the advent of the British, there did not exist any legislative authority that could pass laws for the whole of India. Ancient and medieval Dharmaśāstra writers held the view that the king had no authority to interfere with Śāstric rules governing *varṇas* and castes. Vide H. of Dh. vol. III pp. 98–101 for the proposition that there was almost total absence of legislative power in the king according to Dharmaśāstra writers. Changes in practices and beliefs, however, did take place, but it was learned commentators that by various devices tried to support changes that had already taken place (vide pp. 1267–1272 above). There are really three well-marked classes of people, viz. *Sanātanīs* or no-changers, the iconoclasts and those who want a synthesis of the old and the new.