K. Venkatagiri Gowda Memorial Lecture at the Institute of World Culture, Bangalore, on 27-6-2018.delivered by VR Panchamukhi; 1. Slides of Power Point Presentation; 2. Text of lecture; 3. Article by VR Panchamukhi titled, "Meemaamsa Rules of Interpretation".
Panchamukhi makes a distinction between Western Economic Science (WES) and Indian Classical Economic Science (ICES) with the following:framework:
Focus of WES is on a rational economic man, maximization of materialistic economic benefits (self-interests) only.
ICES is a blend of materialism and spiritualism; the latter stands for values, ethical norms, contentment, and faith in the divinity, commitment to traditions and culture. Focus of ICES is on a Holistic man, Economic benefits and Non-economic rewards.
Mimamsa Rules of Interpretation
Vachaspati. Dr. V.R.Panchamukhi
Chancellor, Sri Gurusarvabhouma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Mantralayam.
and Former Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth (Deemed University), Tirupati.
Preamble:
The purpose of this article is to describe as to how the Mimamsa Principles of interpretation are useful in the Judiciary system, in addition to its usefulness for interpretation of Vedic Texts and Vedantic discourses and also in the context of the interpretation of the Smriti prescriptions, of injunctions and prohibitions (Vidhis and Nishedhas).
The article is divided into four parts. In the first part, the preamble of Vedas, Brahmasutras, Madhva Bhashya, TatvaPrakashika and its commentary Tatva Prakashika and the sub-commentary of Tatparya Chandrika are described, to set the context of discussion of the Mimamsa Rules. The second Part describes in brief, as to how the Mimamsa Principles are utilised in the Tatparya Chandrika, for deriving the interpretations of Madhva Siddhanta and for refuting the interpretations of the opponent schools of Thought. The Third Part sets the Mimamsa Principles of Interpretations, in their general setting and gives some practical illustrations of the use made in the Judicial System in India, for interpreting the Legal Rules and for giving Judgments by quoting the use of the Mimamsa Principles.
The last part gives some concluding remarks on the Subject.
BrahmaSutra Bhashya, Tatva Prakashika and Tatparya Chandrika:
BrahmaSutras constitute the most important Treatise in the domain of Brahma Mimamsa Shastra. Their main aim is to facilitate correct interpretation and understanding of the meanings of the Vedas. They are regarded as an aide for VedarthaNirnaya. They have Four Adhyayas, each Adhyaya categorised into four Padas and a number of Adhikaranas. There are 564 BrahmaSutras. The four Adhyayas are termed respectively, as, Samanvayaadhyaya, Avirodhadhyaya, Sadhanadhyaya, and Phaladhyaya, as per their contents. In Samanvayaadhyaya,it is argued that allthe words are supposed to ultimately describe the attributes of Paramatma, thus depicting Him as Sarvagunaparipurna. The Avirodhadhyaya is aimed at removing all apparent contraditions in the different parts of the Shrutis. Thus, it is demonstrated that Paramatma is sarvadosha vidura. The third Adhyaya is supposed to spell out the instrumentalities for realising the Ultimate Goal, viz.Mukti. these instrumentalities include, the modalities, such as, Vairagya, Bhakti, Upasana and Jnana,Finally, the last Adhyaya is supposed to describe the contours of the Ultimate Goal, viz. Moksha. After understanding the modality of Sadhana Marga, one is supposed to follow them and realise the same.
Sutras are enigmatic statements, giving some clues for interpretation of a particular portion of the Shrutis. (अल्पाक्षरमसंदिग्धं सारवद्विश्वतोमुखमस्तोभमनवद्यं च सूत्रं सूत्रविदो विदुः) They are 564 in number.
Inthe ancient literature, the approach of Sutras is common. There are Panini's Vyakarana Sutras, Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, Jaimini's Nyaya Sutras, etc. Brahma Sutras are the only Sutras which are referred to as simply Sutras, without anyspecifications, i.e. mention of the authors.(निर्विशेषितसूत्रत्वं ब्रह्मसूत्रस्यचाप्यतः)।
To understand the meanings of the Brahmasutras, we need Bhashyas. Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya had composed Bhashyas on the Brahmasutras and presented their own interpretations. That is how Advaita, and Visishtaadvaita schools of thought originated. There are supposed to be 21 Bhashyas on the Brahmasutras, giving different Variants of interpretations of the Shrutis. Madhvacharya wrote the 22nd Bhashya, after refuting the contents of the earlier 21 wrong Bhashyas (कुभाष्य).After Madhva Bhashya was written, the Vedavyasa's true interpretation became known and it has been termed as Dwaita Siddhanta, or Tatva Vaada.
Madhva Bhashya is very crypt, short and suggestive. In any case, it is difficult to be understood by the uninitiated and the less scholarly. Therefore, further Commentaries (Tikas) and Sub-Commentaries (Tippanies) have become necessary. Such Tikas and Tippanies are written by many celebrated scholars of Madhva Lineage.
Jayatirtha Muni- commonly called as Tikacharya, came on the space of Madhva Philosophy, as an illustrious Commentator on Madhva Granthas, and thereby, illuminating the many subtle hidden meanings of Madhvacharya. It is often stated that if Tikacharya had not come on the scene, Madhva Granthas would have remained like a riddle.
Tikacharya wrote a comprehensive commentary on Madhva Bhashya on Brahma Sutras, which is called as Tatvaprakasika. Tikacharya's commentaries- or Tikas are quite elaborate and insightful. But some more elucidation is required to comprehend the inner meanings of TatvaPrakashika also.
Sri Vyasatirtha wrote the famous Tatparya Chandrika as a sub-commentary on Tatva Prakasika. And Raghavendra Tirtha also wrote a sub-commentary on Tatva Prakasika, called Bhavadipa. There are many other sub-commentaries on Tatva Prakasika.
Tatparya Chandrika:
Vyasaraya wrote three major treatises on Madhva Philosophy. They are: Nyayamruta, Tarka Tandava and Tatparya Chandrika. In Guruguna Stavana of Vadindra Tirtha, these three Treatises are described as the three eyes of Lord Narasihma named Madhva Siddhaanta for understanding Madhva Siddhanta:
मायातंत्रारिस्मयमपनयतो मध्वसिद्धांतनाम्नो ।
नेत्राणीव त्रयोऽपि त्रिजगति नृहरेरिंधते यत्प्रबंधाः ॥
यद्वागद्वैतविद्याचलकुलकुलिश प्रौढिमाढौकते सः ।
श्रेयो भूयो विदध्यात्सुमहितमहिमा संप्रति व्यासराजः ॥
Tatparya Chandrika is distinct from Nyayamruta and TarkaTandava, in so far as the latter two have specialised in refuting oppenents schools of Thougts, Tatparya Chandrika has the feature of elucidating the meanings of the different Sutras, compiling at one place the viewpoints expressed in many other important Treatises, refuting the Advaitins, Visishtadvaitins, Using Mimamsa Rules extensively to refute the othe other's viewpoints and asserting Madhva Siddhanta etc.
In the Mangala slokas of Bhavadipa, Raghavendra Tirtha writes as follows:
तत्वप्रकाशिकाकूतं चन्द्रिकातः प्रकाशितम्।
अपि मंदकृते सर्व विषया च कृतिर्मम ||
नूतनैरुदिता ये तु दोषास्तेषामलग्नताम् ।
संप्रदर्शयितुं चातः प्रसन्नाः संतु सज्जनाः ॥
The inner meaning of Tatvaprakaasika has been brought out by the Tatparya Chandrika of VyasaTirtha; but for the sake of the intellectually less endowed persons, this work- Bhavadipa is meant for providing insights into all the subjects of Tatva Prakaashika.Further, many new objections and blemishes are imposed by some new critiques and this Bhavadipa is meant to refute all these new allegations and demonstrate that Tatvaprakasika is a blemishless commentary.
Thus, Raghavendra Tirtha, clearly states that Tatparya Chandrika is a profound Treatise, not easily understood by the common students of Philosophy.
Somnath Kavi, the illustrious Poet, who was contemporary of Sri Vyasatirtha and who was honoured by Vyasatirtha in his Gurukula, writes a very charming sloka, in his famous Champu Kavya- Vyasa Yogi Charitam- the most celebrated Sanskrit Composition, as follows:
...भगवान् स तपोनिधिः........सकलधर्मजीवातवे तत्वमतस्थापनाय तात्पर्यचन्द्रिकातर्कतांडवन्यायामृतप्रमुखानि ...महनीयार्थगर्भितानि द्रूढपदबंधनानि .....अलीकवादिमर्मभंजनानि भूयांसि क्रमेण व्यरीररचत् ।
विसृमरजगन्मिथ्याज्ञानांधकारभिदाकृता ।
महितविभवं संतन्वत्या च मध्वमतांबुधेः ॥
विमलितमभूद्योगिव्यासाननेंदुसमुत्थया ।
सपदि भुवनं सर्वं तात्पर्यचंद्रिकया तया ॥
One question comes to my mind, incidentally. Somanath Kavi, the contemporary of Sri Vyasatirtha, categorically mentions that the compositions of Vyasatirtha, were Tatparya Chandrika, Tarka tandava and Nyayamruta, in that order. The traditional belief is that Nyayamruta was composed before Chandrika, since references are there to Nyayamruta, in Chandrika. Without commenting anything further, this raises a debatable point. Are the so-called references to Nyayamruta, interpolations? Anyway, this issue is besides the main theme of our article.
Mimamsa Nyayas in Chandrika:
Sri Vijayindra Tirtha has done an invaluable service to the students of Philosophy by compiling at one Place the Mimamsa Nyayas quoted in Nyayamruta and Chandrika, in the Treatises, named, respectively as"Nyayamrutodahruta Jaiminiya NyayaMala" and "Chandrikodahruta Jaiminiya Nyaya Mala".
In the beginning ofChandrikodahruta Nyayamala, Sri Vijayindra Tirtha states as follows:
ये न्यायाः पूर्वतंत्रीयाः चंद्रिकावागुदाहृताः ।
गुरुपादैः क्रमात्तेषां विषयाद्यंगपूर्वकम् ॥
शरीरं विजयींद्राख्यभिक्षुणेह प्रदर्श्यते ।
सुखेन प्रतिपत्यर्थमतत्तंत्रविदामपि ॥
Those purva Mimamsa Rules, that are quoted in the Tatparya Chandrika, are being presented in this grantha, by Vijayindra Tirtha, in their details, for the benefit of easy understanding by the students.
We have no intention of going into the details of the applications of Mimamsa Nyayas in resolving some issues of Philosophy. We will only illustrate only with 1-2 examples.
In the beginning itself, the issue that the Vedas have the blemish of being anuvadaka, since they describe the Siddha Chaitanya, who is already established. is taken up. By taking the Purva Mimamsa Nyaya, it is argued that anuvadakatva is no problem. वायुर्वै क्षेपिष्टादि वाक्यवत्, , विद्वद्वाक्यवत्.
In the context of establishing that रूढिis superior to यौगिकार्थ or लाक्षणिकार्थ; that ओंकार is applicable in जन्माद्यस्ययतः, and onwards; thatउपसंहारis superior to उपक्रम; and establishing many such Theses useful in Vedanta, Mimamsa principles have been utilised. Vijayindra Tirtha has done greatest service to the students of Tatparya Chandrika, by bringing these usages of Nyayas in Chandrika. Those, who are interested in this subject should study "चंद्रिकोदाहृत जैमिनीयन्यायमाला"under the guidance of a Guru.
The Mimamsa Principles -General Setting and Examples of Applications in the Judiciary*:
The Mimamsa Principles distinguish between obligatory statements and non-obligatory statements. The main obligatory rule is called a Vidhi (or a Pratishedh, if it is in negative form). Vidhis are of 4 types, (1) Utpatti Vidhi, or a substantive injunction (e.g. 'perform the agnihotra'), (2) Viniyoga Vidhi, or applicatory rules (e.g. 'with curdled milk perform the agnihotra'), (3) Prayog Vidhi, or rules of procedure, and (4) Adhikara Vidhis (rules regarding rights and personal competence). Apart from these Vidhis proper (mentioned above) there are also certain quasi Vidhis called niyamas and parishankhyas, but it is not necessary to go into details here. Vidhis are found in Brahmanas.
The main non-obligatory statement is known as an Arthavada. An Arthavada is a statement of praise or explanation. Most of the Vedas proper consist of Arthavadas as much of the Vedic hymns are in praise of some god, and do not lay down any injunction. Arthavada is like the preamble or statement of objects in a statute. Six axioms of interpretation have therefore been developed for the interpretation of shastras. They are:
(1) The Sarthakyata axiom, which means that every word and sentence must have some meaning.
(2) The Laghava axiom (Gauravah doshah), which states that that construction which makes the meaning simpler and formation shorter is to be preferred.
(3) The Arthaikatva axiom, which states that a double meaning should not be attached to a word or sentence occurring at one and the same place. Such a double meaning is known as a Vakyabheda, and is a fault (dosh).
___________________________________________
* The material in this and the next sections is drawn from the Tagore Memorial Law Lectures delivered by K.L.Sarkar, entitled " Mimamsa Rules of Interpretation" delivered in Calcutta, in 1905 and from the Introduction to a Book entitled with the same caption edited by Justice Markandeya Katju.
4) The Gunapradhan axiom, which states that if a word or sentence purporting to express a subordinate idea clashes with the principal idea the former must be adjusted to the latter, or must be disregarded altogether.
(5) The Samanjasya axiom4 which states that all attempts should be made at reconciliation of apparently conflicting texts. Jimutvahana has applied this principle for reconciling conflicting texts of Manu and Yajnavalkya on the right of succession. (6) The Vikalpa axiom, which states that if there is a real and irreconcilable contradiction between two legal rules having equal force, the rule more in accordance with equity and usage should be adopted at one's option. Thus where one of the rules is a higher legal norm as compared to the other, e.g. a Shruti in relation to Smriti, by the Badha principle5 the former prevails. It may be mentioned here that the Mimamsakas made every effort to reconcile conflicts, and held that Vikalpa was to be resorted to only if all other means of reconciliation failed, for Vikalpa had eight faults (dosh).
Apart from the above mentioned axioms of interpretation there are the four well-known general principles of interpretation in Mimansa, viz.:
(1) the Shruti Principle, or the literal rule. This is illustrated by the well-known Garhapatya maxim. There is the Vedic verse "Aindra garhapatyam Upatishthate" (with the Indra verse one should worship Garhapatya). Now this Vidhi can have several meanings e.g. (1) One should worship Garhapatya (the household fire) with a verse addressed to Indra, (2) One should worship both Indra as well as Garhapatya, (3) One should worship either of the two. The correct interpretation, according to the Shruti principle, is the first interpretation.
(2) the Linga principle (also called Lakshana artha) or the suggestive power of words or expressions. This principle can be illustrated by the decision of the Supreme Court in U.P. Bhoodan Yagna Samiti v. Brij Kishore, where the words "landless person" were held to refer to landless peasants only and not to landless businessmen. (3) the Vakya Principle, or syntactical arrangement, and
(4) Prakarana, which permits construction by referring to some other text in order to make the meaning clear.
The first principle (Shruti) is to be resorted to if (1) the meaning of the text is clear, and (2) it accords with the intention. But there are texts whose meaning seems to be clear, but to give that literal meaning would totally undermine its intention. The modern method of interpretation is to seek the intention rather than to follow the literal rule. The Mimamsakas were great intention seekers, and the Linga, Vakya and Prakarana principles all aim at finding the intention of the law.
Only the broad outlines have been indicated above, but it has to be noted that the Mimamsa Principles go into minute details and systematically arrange the principles of interpretation into categories and sub-categories with all their ramifications. For example, the Vakya principle (mentioned above) include adhyahara and anusanga (supplying of missing words and expressions), upakarsha and apakarsha (transference of clauses up or down in the sentence), etc.
To give an illustration of the anusanga principle (elliptical extension) it is interesting to see how Jimutavahana interpreted the text of Manu which states "Of a woman married according to the Brahma, Daiva, Arsha, Gandharva and Prajapatya form, the property shall go to her husband, if she dies without issue. But her wealth, given to her on her marriage in the form called Asura, Rakshas and Paisacha, on her death without issue shall become the property of her parents". Jimutavahana employing the anusanga principle interpreted this text to the effect that the words "wealth given to her on her marriage" should also be inserted in the first sentence after the words "the property". Utilization of Mimamsa Principles in the Judiciary:
Knowledge of Mimamsa Principles enables one to creatively develop the law. A few examples of utilization of Mimamsa Principles in some of the judgments is given below:
1. In Sardar Mohammad Ansar Khan v. State of U.P. the controversy was as to which of two clerks appointed on the same day in an Intermediate College would be senior, and hence entitled to promotion as Head Clerk. Now there is no rule to cater to this situation. However, Chapter 2, Regulation 3 of the U.P. Intermediate Education Regulations states that where 2 teachers are appointed on the same day, the senior in age will be senior. Using the Atidesh Principle of Mimansa, it was held that the same principle which applies to teachers should be also applied to clerks, and hence the senior in age would be senior. The Atidesh principle originated in the practical difficulty of performing certain yagyas. There are some yagyas (e.g. agnihotra, darshapurnamani, etc.) whose method of performance is given in detail in the Brahmanas. These are known as prakriti yagyas. However, there are other yagyas whose rules are not given any where, and these are known as vikriti yagyas. The question arose how these latter are to be performed. The atidesh principle was created to resolve this difficulty, and according to this principle, the vikriti yagya is to be performed according to the rules of the prakriti yagya belonging to the same genus. 2. In Tribhuwan Misra v. D.I.O.S. (supra) the Samanjasya principle was used to reconcile 2 apparently conflicting Division Bench rulings. This technique avoided reference to a Full Bench which would have tied up 3 or more Judges for several days in resolving the conflict. No doubt this decision (as a Single Judge) curtailed the full effect of the 2 Division Bench decisions, but that was done on the authority of the maxim of the lost horse; and burnt chariot (Nashtashva Dagdharatha Nyaya). This is based on the story of two men travelling in their respective chariots. One of them lost his horses and the other's chariot was burnt through the outbreak of fire in the inn, where they were spending the night. The horses that were left were harnessed to the remaining chariot, and the two men pursued their journey together. Its teaching is union for mutual advantage, which has been quoted in the 16th Vartika to Panini, and is explained by Patanjali. It is referred to in Kumarila Bhatta's 'Tantravartika'.
3. The Anusanga Principle of Mimansa has been used in a case in UP. The conclusion reached in this decision could not have been reached by any principle of Western Jurisprudence, and this illustrates the great use which can be made of Mimansa Principles to make the statute more democratic and equitable.
4. The Laghava Principle has been used in Vinay Khare v. State of U.P. The controversy in this case was that if in a competitive examination two candidates got equal marks whether the candidate who got more marks in the oral interview should be placed higher in the select list or the candidate who got more marks in the written test. It was held in this case that the candidate who got more marks in the written test should be placed higher because to interpret general suitability on the basis of marks in the written test is a short and simple interpretation and provides a clear objective test, whereas the criteria in the oral interview involves consideration of the candidate's personality, dress, physique, etc. which is complicated and in which there are more chances of favouritism and arbitrariness.
5. Laxana Principle. In yet another Legal Battle, Laxana Principle has been utilised for issuing Judgement. That is the case concerned with the matter of controversy in interpreting the Rules of the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) in giving Compensation for a person whose right leg and hand was paralysed in an accident. The rule stated that Full Compensation should be given only when the person is disabled due to the amputations. The LIC had refused the compensation on the ground that paralisation was not included in the Compensation Rules. The Court took the stand that with Laxana Principle,Paralysis should also be included in the meaning of disability, in addition to imputation, and then ordered Full compensation to the Victim.
Concluding Remarks:
Mimamsa has been categorised as Purva Mimamsa and Uttara Mimamsa. The latter is often referred to as Brahma Mimamsa or Vedanta. The former , viz. Purva Mimamsa is concerned with Karma Kanda viz. performance of Yajnas and other Karmas. Jaimini muni, disciple of Lord Vedavyasa, composed the famous Nyayas, or principles, useful in resolving the conflicts in the interpretations of the rules of performance of Yagnas. These Rules are so universal, that their applicability to interpret the Shruti Vakyas was discovered by Vedantins. In the Smriti granthas, such as ManuSmriti, Yajnavalkya Smriti, also their applications are found useful
In recent years, the Jurists in India have found their usefulness in interpreting the Legal Acts, and given judgements by quoting the Mimamsa Principles in their Judgments.
The purpose of this article is to provide the insights into the use of the Mimamsa Rules made in Vedanta, in particular in Chandrika and to bring out, with some illustrations as to how they are used in the Judgments in the Indian Judiciary system. The scholarly Judiciary has discovered that Mimamsa Rules/Principles of Interpretations are superior to the Western rules, of Maxwell etc, and more comprehensive than the latter.
I hope that the inquisitive Sanskrit students, who are normally, not familiar with the applications in the Judiciary system, would get interested in this wider perspectives and appreciate the relevance of Sanskrit Shastras, to the problems of the modern times.
Development Paradigm: Where we should go?
By
Vachaspati
Dr. V.R.Panchamukhi
Former Chairman, Indian Council of Social Science Research,
(ICSSR) New Delhi
And Former Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth
(Deemed University), Tirupati;
Currently Chancellor, Sri Gurusarvabhouma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Mantralayam.
Professor K. Venkatagiri Gowda Memorial Lecture
At the Conference Hall of
Institute of World Culture, Bangalore
27th June, 2018
Development Paradigm: Where we should go?
By.
Vachaspati
Dr. V.R.Panchamukhi
Former Chairman, Indian Council of Social Science Research,
(ICSSR) New Delhi
And Former Chancellor, Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth
(Deemed University), Tirupati;
Currently Chancellor, Sri Gurusarvabhouma Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Mantralayam.
Introduction:
I consider it as my proud privilege for having got the opportunity of delivering this year’s, Dr. Venkatagiri gouda Memorial Lecture, at the prestigious Venue of the Institute of World Culture. I feel doubly honoured by this occasion. First Honour is the Invitation for delivering the Dr. Venkatagiri Gouda Memorial Lecture. The Second Honour is that this event is being presided over by the most venerable personality, viz. Justice Venkatachalaiah, former Chief Justice of India, whom I hold in the highest esteem.
I am privileged to have had close contact with Justice Venkatachalaiah, while he was judge, Supreme Court of India and later Chief Justice of India, in New Delhi. Justice Venkatachalaiah, is known for his knowledge of the Laws and the Judiciary Systems, of different countries of the world, and also for his knowledge of the Indian Heritage and Culture, in particular, the Haridasa literature of the Indian Philosophical System. Justice Venkatachalaiah, was also known for his uprightness, perceptive insight into and comprehensive over-view of the judicial cases that come for his scrutiny.
Dr. Venkatagiri Gouda has been a personality of unique capabilities and strong convictions. Though a Teacher by profession and genuine interest, he has had stints as Member of Loka Sabha, and member of political Parties. He was prolific writer and frank and spirited advocate of his convictions and crusader against corruption and pettiness in public Life. What I have appreciated in his career, is his genuine love for mother land and serving the mother land, even though he had many opportunities to go abroad and settle on a cosy life there.
Even though so much has been said about my career, I would like to describe myself as a totally indigenous product and a genuine efficient import-substitute. I have never failed in competition with the so called foreign-trained scholars. I have a special respect for those who have lived in India, to serve the profession, even though they could have had many opportunities for settling abroad. To name only some such scholars, I could mention, the names, of Professors V.K.R.V Rao, D.M. Nanjundappa, P.R.Brahmananda, S. Chakrabarty, D.T.Lakdawala, A.K.Dasgupta, and of course, Venkatagiri Gouda.
I am grateful to the organizing committee of this Memorial Lecture, in particular,Dr. Ramu B.K, Chairman, Dr. R. Nisarga, , Secretary and Dr. Rekha Jagannath, Member of this committee, whose persuading power did not leave any scope for me to deny the Invitation despite my indisposition. I hope that I would prove worthy of the faith that they have reposed in me.
I had had a dream of delivering a lecture or attending a lecture at the Institute of World Culture. I feel delighted that my dream is coming true today by the opportunity of delivering a lecture at IWC.
Choice of a Theme for my Lecture:
I have chosen a Theme concerned with the Development Paradigm pursued in India, in its historical and future perspectives. I am sorry that I have deviated from the field of Monetary and Fiscal Economics, which was the main field of interest of Professor Venkatagiri Gouda. Since policies are in a way part of the Development Paradigm, I decided to deal with the more fundamental Issue of the Choice of Development Paradigm.
In this brief paper, I raise the basic question as to whether the Development paradigm that is normally pursued in India or elsewhere, is based on the framework of Economic Science, which truly reflects the world in reality.
Since I am speaking in the Conference Hall of the Institute of World Culture, I would like to relate my presentation to the roots of our cultural heritage, which has been heralded as the Guru for the World Culture.
Civilization and Culture:
I make a distinction between Civilization and Culture. The former refers largely to the material progress while the latter refers to the Values and Ethical foundations of a Society. To possess a high-tech car, is a symbol of Civilizational progress, while observing the traffic rules is the symbol of Culture. Possessing the most sophisticated Watch is the sign of civilizational advancement, while maintaining timeliness is a symbol of Cultural nicety. Thus we have to blend the Values of life with Materialistic Progress. This idea provides the conceptual foundation for my lecture today*.
This perception highlights the supremacy of the Indian Thought Heritage to that of the rest of the world, because India has always conceived the supremacy of Values and Ethical Norms to the materialistic development. The paper begins by recounting some of the Development Paradigms, that are pursued in the past years. It raises the question as to whether the development processes have raised the welfare levels of the people.
*Some quotes on the distinction between Civilization and Culture: Defining civilization MacIver and Page (1962) said, ‘by civilization we mean the whole mechanism and organization which man has designed in his endeavour to control the conditions of life’.
Culture relates to the inner qualities of society like religion, customs, conventions, etc., while civilization relates to the outer form of society such as TV, radio, fans, etc.
Culture is more stable than civilization—cultural change takes place in years or in centuries but civilization changes very rapidly.
William F. Ogburn (1964), in his theory of social change, pointed out two aspects of culture, viz., material and non-material. For him, material aspect represents civilization and the non-material aspect is the culture proper. Gillin and Gillin (1948) designated the material or tangible part of culture as civilization or culture equipment which man in his endeavor has modified from environment. Mukund Hambarde; National Informatics Centre Culture is the set of values that shapes the behavior of the society at different levels while civilization is apparent in the physical development in form of man-made environment. Culture is the mind of society and civilization is the body. Information, Knowledge and Wisdom:
I make a distinction between Information, Knowledge and Wisdom. Information refers to vast mass of materials that becomes available to us, when we sit before the computer and open the Net, or when we read a common News Paper, or when we last heard a learned Man’s Lecture. We are now in an Information Age where flood of Information of all sorts is submerging us. We are wrongly calling this period as Knowledge Age.
To convert Information into Knowledge, we need special skill development efforts. In the absence of the skills to convert Information into Knowledge, the vast Information is of no use. We have created a society where such vast unused and unusable Information becomes a burden on the mind.
In contrast to Information and Knowledge, we identify Wisdom, which refers to the faculty of sifting the right from the wrong, and separating the good from the bad, desirable from the undesirable. This is called as Viveka inthe vernacular jargon. What we need to do today is to create a society of Wise people and not just Information-Loaded or Knowledge-Loaded people as is happening today.
We experience that the world has been moving from one Crisis situation to the others, with the mirage of Improvement of welfare of the people, at large, when Paradigms shift with focus on Materialistic advancement!! We start doubting as to whether the Economic Science which provide the basis for these paradigms is the correct one reflecting the realities of the worldly life.
Thus we should move towards a Paradigm of Development, which creates materialistic Growth along with fostering of Culture and Wisdom, in the people of the nation.
The listeners of my lecture or the readers of my paper, would realize the import of my statement, only after full listening to my lecture or full reading of my paper.
Holistic Development:
Let me introduce the concept of Holistic Development to make clear as to what is the main message of my lecture.
The Holistic Development consists of three Components:
(i) Optimum level of Growth of GDP;
(ii) Social Aspects of Development, including, goals of employment creation, reduction of inequities, increase in empowerment of deprived sections of the society, etc.;
(iii) Fostering of Values and Ethical Standards of life.
In recent times, we are giving excessive focus on Growth of GDP alone as the target. I advocate in this lecture that the most desirable Development Paradigm, to which we should move is one of Holistic Development.
Let me now elaborate on my propositions.
I would first present the Development Paradigms and the Global Monetary and Financial order, in their historical perspective to bring home the point that shifts in them have generated a series of new crisis situations, instead of fully resolving the earlier crisis situations.
Development Paradigms: Historical Perspective:
If we consider the shifts in Development paradigms, pursued in India since independence, we find lot of varieties. We started our development paradigm, with focus on import-substitution and quantitative restrictions on imports and industrial activities. It was in 1962, that we inducted some focus on export promotion and adoption of price-based policies, explicit in the devaluation of Rupee in 1966 and relaxation of some quantitative restrictions. It was in 1977-78 that we moved towards a paradigm of liberalization in trade policies and removal of industrial licensing and quantitative restriction on economic activities. This shift was prompted by the recommendations of the Alexander Committee (for which I had had the privilege of being Member-Secretary and that of drafting the Report) and it was recognized as the beginning of the Liberalisation Era. Many initiatives were launched, to remove the paradigm of quantitative restrictions and adoption of that of price-based policies. It was in 1991 that the second phase of liberalization was launched with complete elimination of quantitative interventions and the elimination of quotas and physical controls in the framework of trade and industrial Policies. This phase also coincided with the emergence, globally, of Market-based Policies, heralded as a policy package of Liberalisation, Privatisation and Globalisation (LPG Paradigm). It was perceived that with the adoption of LPG Paradigm, all countries would experience rapid increase in Growth Rates of GDP, reduction of intra and inter-countries inequalities, spread in industrial development culture, reduction in un-employment rates, increase in the efficiency in resource use, improvement in the empowerment of deprived sections of the society. Financial Liberalisation at the national and the Global Levels, etc. also accompanied, the policy package LPG. This was expected to ease the supply of Funds for Investment.
In contrast to these perceived outcomes, in practice, the opposite results have emerged, after initial spurt of the perceived results. The nation and the world have been experiencing slowing down of the Growth process. Both, intra-national and international inequities have widened. There is no substantial increase in employment rates. Efficiency increase has been at the cost of employment expansion, since efficiency is measured in terms of efficiency of Capital. Perceived expansion of Industrial activity has been at the cost of small and medium industries, which were employment-intensive. Further, the expansion of industrial activity and urbanization have taken place, at the cost of environmental factors, thereby causing non-sustainability of the development process. The over-emphasis on Growth alone strategy has been such as to destroy the indigenous life styles and traditional Values of the Society. Empowerment of the deprived sections of the society has not occurred satisfactorily.
In view of these failures of the perceived results, the paradigm of LPG has been discredited and a search for a new paradigm of development has now been launched all over the world. Instead of outright Globalisation, limited extent of Globalisation is being advocated. Reversal of the strategy of total trade liberalization and adoption of selective protectionism, so as to suit the domestic interests, are being pursued by the very countries, which were strong advocates of Trade Liberalisation. It is now being increasingly recognized thatsome sort of regulation of the private industry and the private capital flows is required to avoid the uncertainties of the Private sector’s behavior, in regard to the goals of fostering of social welfare. Further, volatility in private capital flows introduces lot of uncertainty in the foreign investment scenario of the host country, thereby adversely affecting the monetary and financial stability, as also the exchange rate stability of the economy. Thus, unrestrained liberalization and privatization are not cherished as desirable policy options.
Global Monetary and Financial Order:
Along with the shifts in the framework of Development Policies, there have been radical shifts in the Global Monetary and Financial Order.
The first major disturbance in the global order began with the two oil-price hikes in 1973 and 1979. With the beginning of the Petrodollars, the financial center shifted to OPEC countries, in particular, to the Middle East Countries. Europe entered the unprecedented stagflation situation.
It was in 1974 that there was a UN resolution to evolve a new International Economic Order, (NIEO), with the renewed focus on the development of the developing countries. But this Resolution was never implemented due to the vested interests.
There was a strong demand for a New Financial Architecture, in response to the failures of the established Institutions of the Global Financial Institutions, like IMF, IBRD, Asian Bank. Since there was growing demand for regulating the uncontrolled flow of private Capital Funds, due to the instabilities that such a phenomenon was creating, there was a proposal to have Tobin Tax on the indiscriminate Transaction of foreign Exchanges.* Tobin Tax, though a brilliant idea, was never implemented.
The world is still gripped with financial instabilities, due to inaction of the identification of a new Financial Architecture, due to the prevalence of Vested Interests.
It was in the early part of the 1980’s that the Asian developing countries became the Growth-leaders of the world. The survival of the developed countries was possible with the increasing import-demands in the Asian countries,
________________________________________________________________________________
Richard Nixon announced that the United States dollar would no longer be convertible to gold, effectively ending the system. This action created the situation whereby the U.S. dollar became the sole backing of currencies and a reserve currency for the member states of the Bretton Woods system, leading the system to collapse in the face of increasing financial strain in that same year. In that context, Tobin suggested a new system for international currency stability, and proposed that such a system include an international charge on foreign-exchange transactions. The tax on foreign exchange transactions was devised to cushion exchange rate fluctuations. The idea is very simple: at each exchange of a currency into another a small tax would be levied - let's say, 0.5% of the volume of the transaction. This dissuades speculators as many investors invest their money in foreign exchange on a very short-term basis. If this money is suddenly withdrawn, countries have to drastically increase interest rates for their currency to still be attractive. But high interest is often disastrous for a national economy, as the nineties' crises in Mexico, Southeast Asia and Russia have proven. My tax would return some margin of manoeuvre to issuing banks in small countries and would be a measure of opposition to the dictate of the financial markets.[4][5][6][7][8]
in particular, Asian Tigers- (Korea, Hongkong, Singapore China Taiwan) and the Asian Cubs ( Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia). But this scenario soon got frustrated due to economic and financial crisis in the Asian Economies. Indonesian Crisis, South-East Asian Crisis, Japanese Property Market crisis etc.
The nature of Capital flows shifted from official transfers to private capital flows. There was intensive debate on the need for evolving a system of global free trade and the result was the creation of World Trade Organisation with pressure for similar free flow of Capital through an Global Agreement on Investment Flows. (Multilateral Agreement on Investment).
Now the time has come for discrediting all these initiatives and looking for some new Paradigm of International Trade and Capital Flows.
The Underlying Economic Science is Faulty:
In view of the above-given reflections, I would argue that not just the Economic Policy framework or the Policy paradigm is faulty but that the Economic Science, on which the choice of policies is based, is also faulty.
I have to make a distinction between, Western Economic Science, (WES) on which all the received paradigms are based and what one may call as Indian Classical Economic Science (ICES), which provides an alternative premises. In the following paragraphs, I would elaborate on these premises to bring home the point that the Indian Classical Economic Science provides hitherto more appropriate premises for making choice of appropriate Development or Policy Paradigms. The sources of Knowledge about the Indian Classical Economic Science/Thoughts are couched in Sanskrit. Since we have lost touch with Sanskrit, we are unable to perceive the contours of ICES and benefit by its more relevant thoughts and paradigms for Human Welfare. Forgive me if I occasionally give quotations from the original Sanskrit Literature
This is what Macaulay wanted the Indians to be reduced to. He wanted that the Indian should lose their contacts with their own rich Cultural and Knowledge Heritage and become subservient to the British Supremacy. The following quote from his famous speech in British Parliament, in 1835, is worth recalling: (I am aware that the genuineness of this quote, though viral on social media and quoted by even Honourable Abdul Kalam ji is sometimes questioned!!!)
Lord Macaulay’s address to the British Parliament in 2 February, 1835:
"I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."
I would like to bring out the distinctions between the two premises, under the following heads or Themes: (i) Economic Man vs Holistic Man; (ii) Holistic Goals of Development; (iii) Determinants of Activities, in a Holistic Framework; (iv) Focus on Human Resources as against that Capital and Technology;(v) Attitude Towards Consumption; (v) Growth Rates of GDP alone is not sufficient; (vi) Gross National Welfare Product as against Gross National Materials Product; (vii) Foundations of Socialistic Principles; (viii) An Integrated View of Environment; (ix) Labour Market and Work Culture; (x) Classification of Assets; (xi) Life Style and Resource Balance; (xii) An Integrated Paradigm of National Welfare.
Even though these themes are disjoint and unconnected, a brief discussion on them would bring out the distinctive features of ICES in contrast to the features of WES.
Let me briefly deal with each one of these Themes.
Economic Man vs Holistic Man:
WES conceived Man- the focus of analysis as the Rational Economic Man, there by making materialistic self interest as the basic Goal for Human Behaviour. The ICES has conceived Man in a holistic framework, as a blend of Materialistic Man and what one may call as Spiritualistic Man. Thus, the goals of life become a blend of materialism and values and ethical norms.
Holistic Goals of all activities:
It is worth noting that Goals of activities as per the WES is to maximize or optimize the realization of material Benefits like, Income, Profits, Exports etc. all in the materialistic framework. However, as the ICES, the Goals are mentioned in a four-fold frameworkas, Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha. It should be noted that Dharma has been wrongly understood as Religion and rituals. Dharma stands for Values, Ethics, Commitment to one’s own prescribed Duties etc. DharaNaat Dharma ucchyate; Swa Swa vihitavRuttyaa bhaktyaa bhagavadaaraadhanameva paramo DharmaH, tadviruDDhaH sarvo api adharmaH etc. Artha stands for Capital Formation or Materialistic Wealth, Kamameans, fulfillment of one’s basic Needs, Moksha means freedom from all prejudices and biases which adversely affect efficiency. Thus, the four-fold framework, implies, optimum realization of Material wealth and fulfillment of Basis Needs of all the needy ones, in a framework of Values and Ethical Norms and in the premises of maximum efficiency of human behavior. This Holistic Framework of Goals is to be applied in every activity of Human life.
Holistic Determination of Activity:
The WES describes the Theory of Activity in the forms of Production Functions with Labour, Capital and Technology as the determinants of an Activity. As against this, the ICES model sets out a Holistic Model on the Determination of Activities. Its contours are laid down in Bhagavadgita as follows:
(1)Adhisthaanam- Initial Conditions, (2) Performer, (3) different Instruments or Means of activity, (4) Their interse interactions and (5 The Imponderble factor of Divinity are the five determinants of any activity).
Focus on Human Resources:
Karta or the Performer holds the key position. There are three types of Performers. Satvika Karta, Rajasa Karta nad Taamasa Kartaa. Of these Satvika Kartaa is the one who possesses the following attributes: Dispassionate commitment, Not appropriating the Credit to Himself, endowed with courage and enthusiasm and equanimity in situations of successes or Failures. All performers should endeavour to possess the attributes of a Satvika Karta. The proper efficiency in a value-based framework would be realized.
The ICES distinguishes itself from the WES, in so far it focuses on the purity and efficiency of Human Resources. Capital and Technology are secondary inputs, while the attributes of Human Resources determine efficiency of an activity. All Philosophy focuses in advocating the appropriate attributes of Human Resources.
Attitude towards Consumption:
WES is based on the premises of Maximisation of Consumption at the individual level. Development Paradigm is such as to ensure maximization of Consumption Demand. As against this, ICES advocates the restraints on personal consumption with a view to making the resources available to a large number of individuals whose basic needs could be fulfilled. Today’s consumerism is the root cause for adverse consequences, such as Global Warming, un -sustainability of the development. Sustainable consumption can alone lead sustainability of Development. Sustainable Consumption is advocated in the ICES.
Five Types of Growth should be avoided:
The WES advocates maximisation of Growth Rates of GDP. There is a tendency to measure the rate of progress only in terms of GDP Growth Rates, which is very misleading. The UNDP’s Human Development Report had advocated that the following Five types of Growth of GDP should be avoided: (i) Jobless Growth---Growth, which does not generate additional job opportunities; (ii) Ruthless Growth- Growth, which increases income inequalities; (iii) Future-less Growth --- Growth which generates non-sustainability; (iv) Voice less Growth—Growth, which does not enhance the empowerment of the deprived sections of the society; and finally, (v) Root-less Growth –Growth profile, which destroys the roots of culture, traditional faiths, cherished Values of the society.
The recent tendency to condemn the growth process which implies lower growth rates compared to other countries, has distorted our assessment practices for the development experiences. Moreover, Professor VKRV Rao, the great expert on National Incomes has decried the tendencies to compare the growth rates across countries arguing that such comparisons are not tenable and not advisable.
Gross National Welfare Product:
The ICES advocates the need for measuring the Development Experiences, not in terms of Gross National Materials Products, only, as is the case in the WES, but in terms of a Holistic Framework, as Gross National Welfare Product. Gross National Welfare product= Gross National Materials Product + Gross Values Product. The latter to be measured through parameters of commitment to Values and Moral Standards of the people of the Nation. Gross National Welfare Product is an extension of the approach of Gross National Happiness Index, which is pursued in some countries, such as Bhutan.
Foundations of the Socialistic Principles:
The ICES has laid down the foundations of the Socialistic Principles. Isavaasya Upanishad has laid down that ownership of all resources lies with the Almighty and not with any individual. It advocates that that one should have access only to that much of the Resources that are legitimately required for his existential purposes. The rest should be earmarked for the rest of the society. What a wonderful principle of Socialism, denying even the ownership of excess resources of production!!!
Karl Marx denied only excessive ownership of income or wealth, while ICES denies even ownership of the means of production.
An Integrated View the Environmental Problems:
The WES conceives Environment as consisting of Earth,(prithvi), Water (Up), Fire (Tejas), Air (vaayu), and Ether (AAkaaSa); Pollution of any of these is regarded as the source of environmental Pollution. But the concept of Environment, in ICES, is much wider in scope and content. In addition to the above, the concept of Environment includes Time (kaala), Direction or Space (Dik), Conscience (Atma) and Mind (Manas). If consideration of Timeliness is disturbed then that means that Time as a resource is polluted. If proper concerns for Directions are not shown then, Dik as a factor is polluted. If actions are done against our conscience, then Atma is polluted. If, more than anything else, Mind is polluted, thereby generating perverted Thoughts, then, all the other factors become polluted. Today, we are suffering from the pollution of the Mind. Hence, even if the other five elements of the Nature are freed from pollutions, and if the Mind is polluted, then pollutions of the other factors would be repeated.
Labour Market and Work Culture- ICES’s Holistic View:
The most important distinction between WES and ICES arises due to the approach towards Labour and the Work Culture. While the Labour’s response to work is a function of wages and salaries as also of the threats of punishments (Carrots and Sticks), in the WES, but in the ICES it is a function of labour’s commitment to duties and its aptitude to perform his duties, with a mind-set of dispassionate service to God, without expectations about the Rewards. (NiShkamaKarma Approach). This work culture prescribes performance of one’s duties, without any expectations about the rewards or returns. In is unfortunate that the concept of Nishkaama Karma has been ridiculed as an exploitative Labour Policy. By not recognising the fundamental principles of this approach, we have ended up in a tendency of encouraging the approach of Nishkarma Kaama- i.e. a tendency of expecting to have desires fulfilled without doing any work. By this perversion in thinking our work-culture has been one of laziness, passing on the responsibility to the others, thus not caring for the efficiency in resource use.
Classification of the Assets by the attributes of the owners of the Assets:
The WES has the tendency of classifying the Assets or Capital, by the Rate of Returns on the Assets/Capital. As per the WES, the Asset or Capital is considered as a Non Performing Asset (NPA), when the rate of Return on the Asset is low or negative. But as per the ICES, the Assets are classified as Daivi Sampat/Asuri Sampat,
( Divine Capital/Demonish Capital), depending upon the nature of the attributes of the Owners of the Assets/Capital. Bhagavadgita narrates the list of these attributes in great details.
To give an example, Take for instance, the simple example of a Cell Phone. If it is held by a person with Divine attributes, this asset would be used for communication purposes and hence productive asset. If the owner is having attributes of evil design, he may use it for triggering an explosive device. Then the same asset becomes a destructive Asset.
One can predict about the nature of the assets by examining the attributes of the owners of the assets- as potentially productive or potentially unproductive or non-performing. Thus ICES provides a more meaningful classification of the Assets.
If the owners have tendencies of corruption and evil designs of using the assets for their personal benefits (For example, the software Company of Hyderabad, which became non-performing, due to corrupt practices of its owner),, the asset becomes non-performing.
Life Styles and Resource Balance:
The ICES provides an interesting approach to structural transformation of a Society, which ensures Resource Balance.
The society is classified into a four*four matrix classified by Four Professional categories, as Brahmana (Those engaged in Learning, Knowledge and Research), Kshatriya (Those engaged in defence and police activities), Vaisya (Those engaged in trading, production and commerce activities) and Sudra (Those engaged in Service activities). And Four Life Style Systems, viz. Brahmacharya (Initial situations of life of discipline and Restraint on claim on resources), Grihastha (Married and Household Situation, implying considerable demand for resources), Vanaprastha (Situation of withdrawal from normal consumption Situation implying less than normal demand for resources) and Sanyasa (Total Withdrawal from worldly activities, implying negligible demand for resources).
Ideally, the classifying the population into 4*4 matrix, implied balance between demand and supply of resources.
In my view, what one called as Varnashrama system, was meant for evolving a configuration of the society, which ensured resource demand match with resource supply. The figures in the enclosed Table give the configuration of Population, at a particular time, in the 4*4 matrix. The figures in the bracket give the net Resource Balance created by the population in a cell of the matrix. The configuration is such that there is a resource surplus of 2 units on the whole. It is possible to have a configuration in such a way that total Net Resource Balance could be negative or Zero, which means that there is a Resource Balance.
There is a voluntary shift of the Population in such a way that there is a Resource Balance in the Economy as a whole.
Table
Composition of a population of One Lakh, into professional categories and Life styles
(figures in brackets in hundreds, the rest in Thousands)
Profession/Life Life Style Life Style Life Style Life Style Style_______|______ I________II______III______IV____
1. Education, Health 2 3 2 3 10
And R&D activity: (1) (2) (-1) (4) (18)
2. Defence, Adm.n 5 7 6 2 20
And Governance (-2) (0) (-3) (0) (-28)
3. Production Trade 10 20 8 2 40
And Commerce (-1) (-2) (4) (-1) (-20)
4. Service Activities 8 11 10 1 30
(0) (1) (2) (1) (32)
Total 25 41 26 8 100
(-18) (-23) (32) (11) (2)
(Figures in the Brackets give per capita Net Resources Rate (resource regeneration rate- resource demand rate) of a particular category of the population). The figures in Brackets in the last column and last Row give the Net Resources generated (in Lakhs) by the particular configuration of the Population. The figure in the south-east corner gives the total Net resource situation. In this Table, it is Rs. +2 lakhs as the final Net Resource Situation.
For example, For Profession 1, Net Resources generated =100*2000+200*3000+(-100)*2000+400*3000=1800000 i.e Rs 18 lakhs. Similarly for other Rows, i.e. Professional categories.
Any other configuration of Population, there could be a situation of Negative or Balanced Resource situation. Thus, by manipulating the configuration of the Population, we can derive the desired results on the Net Resource Situation.
In the traditional system, there were continuous shifts in the configuration of the Population by free will and conventions. For example, aged persons and even Kings, moving to Vanaprastha, i.e. Life Style III, voluntarily. Hence Resource Balance was ensured by the shifts in the Population structure, and not by taxes and subsidies.
Thus the Varnashrama System was such that the Resource deficit could be avoided at any cost.
My argument is the Varnashrama System is not equivalent to Caste System, meant for dividing the society. But it was a system for ensuring Resource Balance without Taxes and Subsidies. Unfortunately, it has been reduced to that derogatory status, by those who have not understood its significance in our lives.
An Integrated Model of Human Welfare:
Kautilya’s Artha Sastra gives an Integrated Model of Human Welfare. It runs as follows:
Sukhasya Mulam DharmaH; Dharmasya Mulam ArthaH; Arthasya Mulam Raajyam; Rajyasya mulam indriya JayaH; IndriyaJayasya Mulam VinayaH; Vinayasya Mulam vRuddhopasewa; vRuddhopasevayaH Mulam vijnaanam; vijnaanen aatmaanam vindet.
The first factor for generating Happiness and Welfare is the Value System. Dharma does not mean Religion or Rituals. It is a set of Values and Ethical Norms. For being able to generating a good framework of Values, one needs a good Capital formation. Capital or Investment is not the primary Factor for generating the right kind of Happiness. For generating a good System of Capital Formation, one requires a good political System and Governance System. For realising a rewarding Political and Governance System, one requires Leadership, which is selfless and free from corruptive tendencies. For generating such a System, one would need Leaders who are modest and willing to learn from others. For generating such an attribute, one would need an aptitude of respecting the elders and the knowledgeable. For that aptitude to grow as a natural phenomenon, one would need deeper knowledge of the people and the Nation. It is only through such a Knowledge and Wisdom, One can become truly accomplished and productive.
The above Model is multi-disciplinary, incorporating Economics, Political Science, Ethics and Morality, Social Principles, and Governance.
Choice of a Development Paradigm:
Finally, our message is that we should pursue the prescriptions of the Holistic Principles of Indian Classical Economic Science. Western Economic Science has done the damage of giving stress only on the Materialistic aspect of life, without caring for the value-based spiritual Dimensions of Human Being. This has distorted the path of Development, there by generating forces of Instabilities and sowing the seeds for a sequence of Crisis situations. There is need for a paradigm of sustainable consumption and over-emphasis on Growth alone strategy, would destroy the very fabric of development for Human Welfare.
The subtle need for paradigm shift would require deliberate efforts and conscious initiatives, on the part of the Intellectuals, Politicians, Practitioners and the general public at large. Shall we hope that we would rise to the occasion of New Challenges and seize the opportunity of playing a leadership role, in the present juncture, when we are in search of a New Paradigm of Development?
Finally I would like to thank the organizers of this lecture, for giving me this opportunity. My Thanks are also due to you for your patient hearing. I would like to request you to view the lecture, with a Hamsa-Ksheera Nyaya, by accepting the Milk and discarding the Water in it.
Om ShantiH, ShantiH, ShantiH.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/ft-bahrain-main-courtyard-56a023ab5f9b58eba4af21c5.jpg)
![Indus Seals (2600-1900 Bce) Beyond Geometry: A New Approach to Break an Old Code by [Talpur, Parveen]](http://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61kqE6XlJZL.jpg)
Target Online publication November 2017 ISBN 9781108160186
Variant orthograph on āyāgapaṭa-s
Coins issued by Hindu Kushan Dynasty's kings of ancient Afghanistan. These coins display Mazdaen-worshiped deities, because the Hindu kings were tolerant of social diversity and wanted to promote harmony between them. Even in Dunhang city of the ancient Tarim Basin one can see Zoroastrian and Hindu figures.
Although some western depictions falsely show him as European-looking with brown hair and eyes, and white skin, the Bahram Yasht declares Athravans are black-haired
A mural of Zarathustra in a Tehran temple. Unlike his western depictions, here his skin is depicted dark brown like many Indians.
Zarathustra portrayed on a pillar of the Shakta-Vaishnava Birla Mandir, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Hinduism's pluralistic tradition recognizes the pious sage as a saint in the list of the world's spiritual gurus.
Zarathustra portrayed on a mural of the Shree Saibaba Satsang Mandal, Surat, Gujarat. He is shown next to Jalaram (left) and Vivekananda.
Zarathustra is always shown wearing a dhoti, (Indian-fashioned garment), unlike the Balkhans to whom he preaches.
Zarathustra's birthplace Urni Jabbar (Avesta's Jabr Mountain) and his city of residence Raihan Bag (Avesta's Rai.)
Arapath (Diti) rises in Hairbal Ki Galli and flows southward until it merges with Bring, which in turn merges with Lower Jhelum near Danter village.
The (Dareja) Lower Jhelum River coming out of Wulur Lake.
Haro River has 2 streams. Zend is its northern branch.
Map from Aelianus' De natura animalium.
Map of the ancient Silk Route, which connected major cities and peoples of the ancient world.
Detailed map of Tibet showing the mountainous Gangdise region and Mt. Lionbo Kangri A.K.A. Kangdez.
A medieval painting of Gayomard and living beings, displaying that humans and animals lived in harmony.
Ateshgah of Baku fire temple in Baku, Azerbaijan which was utilized by Hindu priests from India.
Kashmiri Pandits in traditional white phiran (tops), shall, and turban wear sporting a beard. This strikingly resembles Zarathustra's fashion.
Lion-headed Zurvan from Mithraic Mazdaen temple.
Four-armed Anahita sitting on lion while holding the sun in the form of a chakra in her right hand. (A 4th century Sassanian Dynasty silver bowl.)
