Explain the concept of Dharma in Indian thought.

How far
the notion of Dharma reflects in Indian Legal System.
1. Introduction
Dharma is the Indian version of Natural law, how Indians
perceived it in ancient society but the vision of them was very
far-fetched and is praised by many imminent personalities like
Max Muller. Dharma as said by Jaimini is, “founded on the
revelation which is conducive to the welfare of the society,
ordained by the great Vedas”. Dharma is generally accepted
to have been derived and supersede from the vedic concept of
Rita. Rita refers to the Law of Nature, it signifies moral laws,
and based on righteousness.
Idea which made people adhere to the Dharma can be
illustrated by one verse from Brihadaranyaka Upnishad which
is, “punyo vai punyena Karmana bhavati, Papah Papeneti”,
meaning ‘everyone becomes good by good deeds and bad by
bad deeds’, in other words ‘every one reaps what he sows’
and what’s good is defined by Dharma.
2. Evolution of Dharma
Dharma evolved side by side of Rita but eventually took over
it as the old concept of Rita was not able to cope and solve the
issue emerging with increasing social complexities. Dharma
signifies Natural law.
3. Meaning of Dharma
a. Justice M. Rama Jois: “Dharma is that which sustains
and ensures progress and welfare of all in this world and eternal
bliss in the other world. The Dharma is promulgated in the form
of command”.
b. Madhavacharya in Mahabharta: “It (dharma) is most
difficult to define Dharma. Dharma has been explained to be that
which helps the upliftment of living beings. Therefore that which
ensures welfare (of living beings) is surely Dharma. The learned
rishis have declared that which sustains is Dhrama.”
4. Origin of Dharma
a. Dharma originated from Vedas which are Sruti (heard
knowledge) and they are the supreme source of knowledge for
humans, as the narration of what is heard from the ancient priests
that is Sruti.
b. Smritis and smritikars: Smriti is the interpretation of
Vedas and four sages have propounded the dharmasastras and are
called Smritikars. They are:
i. Manu
ii. Yagnavalkaya
iii. Brihaspati
iv. Narada
c. Puranas which are eighteen in number and contains
information about the creation and dynasties of god, sages and
kings and detailed description of yugas. All the sources are on
the same footstep and no one has supremacy over the other.

Justice J. Hansaria in A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu vs State Of

Andhra Pradesh & Ors. 1996 AIR 1765 by quoting Swami
Rama’s book ‘A Call to Humanity’ by the following words:

“Religion is enriched by visionary methodology and theology,

whereas dharma blooms in the realm of direct experience.
 Religion contributes to the changing phases of a culture; dharma
enhances the beauty of spirituality. Religion may inspire one to
build a fragile, mortal home for God; dharma helps one to
recognize the immortal shrine in the heart.”

5. TYPES OF DHARMA

includes mercy, truth, control ove

Samanyadharma purity , Offerings, control over th
non-violence, pilgrimage , comp
(Morality, qualities of Soul) honesty, absence of any greed an
can Criticize any of the abo

Varna Dharma applicable to the four classes of pe

is Brahman (Priest), Kshatriya (W
(Dharma of Class) Vaishya (Businessman), and Shudra

limited to a certain stage of life a

Types of Dharma

Ashram Dharma include Four type of ashrams w

Brahmacharyashram,
(Dharma acc. to stages of life) Gruhasthashram,Vanaprasthash
Sanyasasashram

Guna Dharma dharma tell duty to be performe

person who is holding A particular
(Dharma acc. to Qulaities) role.

tells to practice its own duties, rig

Sva Dharma each and every people is being pro
every person has born out of his/he
, nature and capacities which is k
swabhav.

Denoted as ‘eternal’ or set of du

responsibilities that is prescribed
Sanatana Dharma individual irrespective of class, cr
or Sect.
 6. Dharma and Indian Ancient Indian Legal system
The supremacy of Dharma can be understood from a simple
point that the King was not above Dharma, he was governed
by it, and if he didn’t than the Dharmashastrakara give right to
the public to revolt against such an unjust, arbitrary and
unrighteous king or government. The treaties of Manu,
Kautilya and others contains many rights and duties of both
the king and the public, and even recognised individual rights
like right to private property, personal wealth etc., which were
bound by the law for interest of society at large.

7. Decline of Dharma and advent of positive law

a. Pre-British rule: With the advent of Muslim rule followed
by British rule, Dharma (Hindu) started losing its gloss and roots.
During Muslim rule, the place of dharma was taken by koranic
teachings, though many practises remained, hence it remained
mainly untouched.
b. British rule: But, with the onset of British rule, and their
ignorance of the Indian laws had a devastating effect on the
concept of Dharma as they found no laws here to govern people
and they started to fix the issue by either importing western law
or say natural law with the de’ices of equality, justice and good
conscience or imposing western laws by means of codification in
fields where no law was offered by either the Hindu’s or
Muslim’s Natural law, teachings and customs. Both the civil
rights and liberties enjoyed by people were taken away. Indians
were treated ruthlessly and arbitrary suppressed in every sphere
of life ranging from political to social and economical. Indians
fought back for the rights and liberties that they enjoyed before
under the Law of Dharma. During his famous champaran trial,
Gandhiji remarked that he disobeyed the law not to show
disrespect to British law, ‘but in obedience to higher law of our
being – the vice of conscience’, by which he meant Dharma.
c. Post British Rule: The struggle for independence was a
fight for personal and civil liberties, basic rights and needs.
However after independence, Hindu law (dharma) was codified
keeping in mind the changes that were taking place in the ideals,
lifestyle and outlook of the people. It was felt that the concept of
Dharma in the ancient times should be related to the present
times and be modified in a way that suits the needs of the present
situations and still has same effect as it had in earlier times.21
Thus, post-independence, the framing of the Constitution of India
was on the basis of the supreme law i.e. Dharma, the rule of law.

d. DHARMA AND
RELIGION
e. Dharma and
Secularism:
f. “Sarva Dharma
Sambhava, which
 literally means that all
Dharmas (truths) are
equal to or
g. harmonious with
each other”. In recent
times this statement
has been taken as
meaning “all
h. religions are the
same” – that all
religions are merely
different paths to God
or the same spiritual
i. goal. As we all
know India is a secular
country. That means
 there is no official
religion of India
j. and it also respects
all the religion which
are in its territory. In
the landmark
judgment of S.R.
k. Bommai vs. Union
26
of India , the
Supreme Court also
held that secularism is
a part of the basic
l. structure of the
polity. The expression
“Socialist Secular"
 was inserted in the
preamble by the
m. Constitution (42nd
Amendment) Act,
1976. The object of
inserting this
expression was to
spell
n. out expressly the
high ideas of socialism
and secularism and the
integrity of the Nation.
In short,
o. the object of the
Government, in
making this ame
 8. INDIAN CONSTITUTION & DHARMA
i. Article 13:
Article 13 of the Indian Constitution clearly states that the laws which were
already made before the existence of the Constitution and are presently
inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights i.e. the part which is not in
accordance with the provisions of the Fundamental Rights, are to such
extent void. If the laws made after the inception of the Constitution, are not
in accordance with the provisions of the Fundamental Rights, they will be
expressly declared as void, as stated by the Clause (2) of the Article.
However, framers of our constitution failed to analyze that it is an Indian
concept not a western one. The meaning of Dharma incorporates supremacy
of law and rule of law. Even the king was required to act according to
Dharma.

ii. Preamble
The Preamble of the Indian Constitution clearly states that India
is secular in nature, and does not adhere to any particular
religion, nor does it have any religion of its own. State is above
every religion and supreme duty i.e. Dharma is above the state.
Dharma is often related to humanity, and since humanity is above
all, Dharma is above all. It also means that by not accepting any
one religion as supreme and considering itself as secular, it
promises to safeguard every religion that prevails in the country.
According to the Supreme Court of India, the definition of
secularism with respect to all the religions is “Sarva Dharma
Sambhavana”, which means that state has no religion and shall
treat all the people of different religious groups equally.
The Preamble of the Constitution sets out secularism, equity,
fraternity, liberty of worship and faith and dignity of persons as
integral scheme of the Constitution in its march to establish an
egalitarian social order. Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles seek to resuscitate them. In S.R. Bommai & Ors. v.
Union of India & Ors. [(1994) 3 SCC 1], larger Bench of nine
Judges has held that secularism is basic structure of the
Constitution. Religious tolerance and equal treatment of all
religious groups and protection of life, property and place of
worship are essential parts of secularism. Profession, actions and
conduct of persons should be consistent with secularism and they
need to be measured in that perspective.

It is the concept of Dharma that resulted in laying down Part III of the
Indian Constitution i.e. the Fundamental rights. Fundamental rights are
those rights which are available to a person by birth, and cannot be taken
away until death. They are available to each and every individual without
any discrimination based on gender, religion, caste, race, or economic
status. It is the outcome of Dharma, i.e. the highest duty of a person which
involves treating everyone equally with peace and harmony so that the
society remains at peace. Fundamental rights are the codified version of the
rights that people enjoyed in the ancient times.
9. ARTICLE 21 OF COI & DHARMA
The article needs special mention as the Supreme Court has been
interpreting this article according to the cases and has widened
the ambit many folds to cover right to livelihood (Maneka
Gandhi v. Union of India 1978), life is more than mere animal
existence (Kharak Singh v. State of U.P., 1963), right to legal aid
(Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, 1979), Rights to dignity
of a convict (Union of India v. Bhanudas, 1978) and much more
but does not include Right to die (Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab,
1967). Article 21 is ever growing not bound by time and place.
Like Dharma included every aspect and facet of human life
whether internal or external and provided a law to govern it and
safe-guard; the same is been done by Article 21 with the help of
other fundamental rights. Article 21 is large and wide and has a
potential to confer every basic human right that one needs to live
a life of a dignified human.
10.EVOLVING SCOPE OF ‘DHARMA’
The concept of dharma or simply dharma has been used by
various courts in helping them to arrive at decisions even by the
Honourable Supreme Court in many cases. One of the important
cases is Shri A.S. Narayana Deekshitulu vs State Of Andhra
Pradesh & Ors (1996), which elaborately discusses the
questions related to Dharma, ‘what is dharma?’, ‘Is Dharma same
as Religion?’ And every answered each and every doubt.
Dharma as said above is distinct from religion. Dharma even
regulates the law today, by means of morality in and outside the
courts as in the Secretary, Ministry Of Information &
Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal & ANR.(1995).
In Dattatraya Govind Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra
(1977), the court talks about the Dharma of the Constitution, and
the karma of adjudication. Dharma thought to be an orthodox
area is used in the cases much unorthodox prime facie such as
rights to transgenders (National Legal Services Authority v.
Union of India and others, 2014) . Dharma is been used by the
courts as prestigious as Constitutional benches and used in place
and equivalent of duty and truth and even the flag contains the
dharma chakra of Ashoka (N. P. Amrutesh and Another v State
of Karnataka and Others, 1995). The courts have interpreted
articles 25 and 26, in line with Dharma, they have said when the
articles are read and religion means Dharma that is co-existence
with welfare of others (Shirish Christian v Maganlal Mangaldas
Gameti and others, 2012), not an orthodox view. The concept of
dharma as said earlier is fully explored in Narayana Deekshitulu
vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors (1996), there is a comparison
between the constitutional laws and Raja Dharma, the definition
of dharma is tried to be clarified by using different verses from
everywhere, ‘Dharma in context of Rajya only means law’ and
Dharma is secular or maybe the most secular. The same view is
held until now, by all the courts and is not disputed that Dharma
is an eternal bliss, which has seen many par and parcels of human
life, mortals, but remained immortal.
11.CONCLUSION
Dharma and law, as seen above, may seem interesting, yet
their underlying principles are the same. Law is a component
of Dharma without conflict everywhere, and laws constitute a
single incorporated whole. On the one hand, dharma is
thought to be rigorous; nevertheless, this is not the case, and
the equivalent has frequently been confirmed by the
honourable Supreme Court as set out in the regions above. At
varying degrees, Dharma has directed and continues to direct
our actions, morals, and laws. On the surface, there may
appear to be no relationship between the two, yet upon closer
inspection, both are interconnected and work as a cohesive
whole. One of the many sources of modern law is "Dharma,"
which is influencing society. Thus, one might say that
‘dharma’ and law are firmly related and joined. Dharma by
finishing the assessment of time has shown its unceasing
person.
As Banjamin Cardozo has put it in his "Judicial Process", life
is not a logic but experience. History and customs, utility and
the accepted standards of right conduct are the forms which
singly or in combination shall be the progress of law. Dharma
and law as seen above may seem to be in contrast, but the
ideology behind them is same. At large, law is a part of
Dharma without disharmony and they constitute single
integrated whole. Dharma on one hand is taken to be
religious, but it is not so and the same has been approved by
the Honourable Supreme Court in many cases as pointed in
above sections. Dharma has been and is guiding our conduct,
morals and laws in varying degree. One may not find any
relation between the two on the face but on a deep analysis
both are interrelated integrated whole. ‘Dharma’ is one of the
many sources of modern law and is shaping society. Hence, it
can be said that ‘dharma’ and law are closely related and
interwoven. Dharma by passing the test of time has shown its
eternal character.