Judgement of India's Supreme Court Re:Sanskrit

[Guest guest]

Judgement of India's Supreme Court Re:Sanskrit

Judgement of the Supreme Court of India Regarding Sanskrit

Judgement of India's Supreme Court Re:Sanskrit

URL:

http://www.geocities.com/ifihhome/articles/scjudgmentonsanskrit.html

 

Judgement of the Supreme Court of India Regarding Sanskrit

 

In the Supreme Court of India*

Civil Original Jurisdiction

 

Writ petition © No.299 of 1989 (along with WP © Nos 13-3189,

1184189, 601189, 571189 and 1041189)

 

 

 

Shri Santosh Kumar & Ors. etc. ¾ Petitioners

 

Vs.

 

The Secretary

 

Ministry of Human Resources Development and Anr. ¾ Respondents

 

Judgement

 

 

 

1. A professor of Cambridge University is deeply, engrossed in his

studies in his calm chamber: An agitated English soldier enters the

study room and accuses the professor in not sharing the trauma of war

which he and many others like him are facing while fighting Germans.

The

professor calmly asks the young soldier for whom he is fighting for.

Quick comes the reply that it is to defend the country. The wise man

wants to know what is that country to defend which he is prepared to

shed his blood. The soldier replies it is the territory and its

people.

On further questioning the soldier says it is not only this but the

culture of the country which he wants to defend. The professor quietly

states that he is contributing to that culture. The soldier calms down

and bows in respect to the professor and vows to defend with more

vigour

the cultural heritage of his country.

 

2. This is what is said to have happened during the Second World War

when England was fighting almost a last ditch battle of survival and

all

Englishmen contributed in their own way to the ultimate victory of

England.

 

3. The above shows the concern for culture evinced even by the

westerners. So far as "We, the people of India "are concerned, they

have

always held in high esteem the cultural heritage of this ancient land.

And to foretell our views, learning of Sanskrit is undoubtedly

necessary

for protection of this heritage. The stream of our culture would get

dried if we were to discourage the study of Sanskrit, and that too on

the most tenable ground that if the Central Board of Secondary

Education

(for short 'the Board') were to do so, it would have to make

facilities

available for learning of Arabic and Persian ¾ these being also

classical languages, which is the ground advanced by Addl. Solicitor

General, Shri Tulsi, appearing for the Board, in it not being in a

position to accept the prima facie view expressed by us on 19.7.94,

when

these cases had come up for hearing that Sanskrit should be included

by

the Board as one of the elective subjects in the syllabus along with

Assamese, Bengali etc. which are the languages specified in an Eighth

Schedule of our Constitution, mentioning about Sanskrit being also an

Eighth Schedule language. The desire to keep Sanskrit out does not

stop

here, as the submission also is that if Sanskrit comes, the Board

shall

have to bring in languages like French and German. This is not all, as

it is contended by the Addl. Solicitor General that the Board feels

that

arrangement may have then to be made for imparting education even in

Lepcha, a language whose name many of the Indians might not have even

heard.

 

4. We fail to appreciate at all the stand taken by a responsible body

like the Board, who has been entrusted with the onerous duty of

educating the youths of this country "in whose hands quiver the

destinies of the future," as the same is wholly untenable. Without the

learning of Sanskrit it is not possible to decipher the Indian

philosophy on which our culture and heritage are based.

 

5. The question raised being important requires us, to answer it

appropriately, to first know what our policy makers have said about

the

importance of Sanskrit. We shall then apprise ourselves about the

place

of Sanskrit in our educational ethos and shall finally see whether

teaching of Sanskrit is against secularism?

 

Our Education Policy qua Sanskrit

 

6. Being called upon to decide whether Sanskrit is required to be

included in the syllabus of the Board as an elective subject so far as

teaching in secondary school is concerned, may we say at the

threshold a

few words on the importance of education as such. This point is not

required to be laboured by us in view of the Constitution Bench

decision

of this Court in Unnikrishnan's case, 1993 (1) SCC 645 in which the

majority Judges well brought home the importance of education. It

would

be enough to mention what Mohan, J. (as a majority Judge) stated in

that

judgement. According to the learned Judge, education is a preparation

of

living and for life here and hereafter and education is at once a

social

and political necessity. It was also observed that victories are

gained,

peace is preserved, progress is achieved, civilisation is built up and

history is made, not in the battle fields but in educational

institutions which are seed-beds of culture. Education was, therefore,

regarded as enlightenment and one that lends dignity to a man.

 

7. As we are concerned in these cases with the teaching in the

secondary

schools, we may say something about the importance of education in its

early stages. It has been well recognised that it is this education

which lays the foundation for a full and intense life and so this

education must carefully keep alive the spark of curiosity and fan it

into a beautiful, bright flame whenever it comes. It has been stated

that it is the education received in early stages, which widens the

contacts of child or youth with the surroundings of the world; and

with

every new and fruitful contacts with the world of things, the world of

men and the world of ideas, life of the young becomes richer and

broader. It is early education which seeks to broaden the mind by

exposing the learner to the world of thought and reflection, which can

inspire him with lofty idealism by giving him the glimpses of a good

life which a worthy education is capable of bringing.

 

8. We may now advert to the broad framework of our education policy as

accepted by the Central Government. For our purpose it would be enough

if we refer to the policies as formulated in 1968 and 1986. Here

again,

we would confine our attention to what was stated in these policies

regarding Sanskrit. In the 1968 policy the following found place qua

this language:

 

"Considering the special importance of Sanskrit to the growth and

development of Indian languages and its unique contribution to the

cultural unity of the country facilities for its teaching at the

school

and university stages should be offered on more liberal basis.

Development of new methods of teaching the language should be

encouraged, and the possibility explored of including the study of

Sanskrit in those courses (such as modern Indian philosophy) at the

first and second degree stages, where such knowledge is useful."

 

9. The 1986 policy has to say as below in this regard in para 5.33 :

 

"Research in Indology, the humanities and Social Sciences will receive

adequate support. To fulfil the need for the synthesis of knowledge,

inter-disciplinary research will be encouraged. Efforts will be made

to

delve into India's ancient fund of knowledge and to relate it to

contemporary reality. This effort will imply the development of

facilities for the intensive study of Sanskrit." (Emphasis supplied)

 

10. It would be of some interest to note that when Sir William Jones,

one of the most brilliant men of 18th century, came to India in 1783

as

a Judge of the then Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort Williams in

Bengal, he got Interested to learn Sanskrit and it grew so strong that

within six years he not only became the master of the language but

translated Kalidasa's Shakuntala. After about two hundred years it has

fallen to the Judges of the present Supreme Court to highlight the

importance of Sanskrit and to see that it finds its due place into the

niche of our national life.

 

Place of Sanskrit in our Educational Ethos

 

11. It is well known that Sanskrit is a mother of all Indo-Aryan

languages and it is this language in which our Vedas, Puranas and

Upanishads have been written and in which Kalidasa, Bhavabhuti,

Banabhatta and Dandi wrote their classics. Teachings of

Shankaracharya,

Ramanuja, Madhawacharya, Nimbarka and Vallabhacharya would not have

been

woven into the fabric of Indian culture if Sanskrit would not have

been

available to them as a medium of expressing their thoughts.

 

12. The report of the Sanskrit Commission (set up by the Government of

India) which was submitted in 1957 speaks eloquently about the

importance of Sanskrit. We do not purpose to burden this judgment with

all that was said by the Commission in this regard. It would be enough

for our purpose if we take note of some passages finding place in the

report which highlight the quality, substance, content and strength of

Sanskrit. At page 71 of the report it has been mentioned that Sanskrit

is one of the greatest languages of the world and it is the classical

language par excellence not only of India but of a good part of Asia

as

well. At page 73 the report states that the Indian people and the

Indian

civilisation were born, so to say, in the lap of Sanskrit and it went

"hand-in-hand with the historical development of the Indian people,

and

gave the noblest expression to their mind and culture which has come

down to our day as an inheritance of priceless order for India, nay,

for

the entire world." The report further speaks at page 74 about

the "great

mental and spiritual link" of Sanskrit and of it being the elder

sister

of Greek and Latin, and cousin of English, French and Russian.

 

13. There is no need to dilate on the importance of Sanskrit further

in

our national ethos in view of what was stated by no less a person than

the first Prime Minister of the country, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, in

this regard, which is as below:

 

"If I was asked what is the greatest treasure which India possesses

and

what is her finest heritage, I would answer unhesitatingly ¾ it is the

Sanskrit language and literature, and all that it contains. This is a

magnificent inheritance, and so long as this endures and influences

the

life of our people, so long the basic genius of India will continue."

 

Is teaching of Sanskrit against secularism?

 

14. Of the three objections mentioned by the Addl. Solicitor General

regarding the inability of the Board in acting in accordance with the

prima facie views expressed by us in our order dated 19.7.1994, the

only

objection which merits our close look is that if Sanskrit were to be

included as an elective subject, Arabic and Persian shall also have to

be so done. The two other objections, namely inclusion of French and

German also in the syllabus and of language like Lepcha do not deserve

any consideration for obvious reasons.

 

15. The first objection needs our consideration because in some

quarter

there may be a feeling that by conceding to Sanskrit alone as an

elective subject, we would act against secularism, which has been

accepted by a nine-judge Bench of this Court in S. R. Bommai Vs. Union

of India, 1994 (3) SCC 1, as a basic structure of our constitution. It

is apparent that we cannot give any direction about which it can be

said

that it is against the secularist requirement of our Constitution.

 

16. For the disposal of the cases at hand it is not necessary to

elaborately discuss what are the basic requirements of secularism

inasmuch as in Bommai's case this exercise has been well done by the

learned Judges. It would be enough for our purpose to note what some

of

the learned judges said in this regard. Sawant J., with whom one of us

(Kuldip Singh, J.) agreed, quoted in para 147 of the report what Shri

M.

C. Setalvad had stated on secularism in his Patel Memorial Lectures,

1965. One of the observations made by Setalvad was that secular state

is

not hostile to religion but holds itself neutral in matters of

religion.

The further observation in para 148 is that the State's tolerance of

religion does not make it either a religious or a theocratic State.

Ramaswami, J. stated in para 179 that secularism represents faiths

born

out of the exercise of rational faculties and it enables to see the

imperative requirements for human progress in all aspects and cultural

and social advancement and indeed for human survival itself.

 

17. It would be profitable to note that according to Justice H. R.

Khanna secularism is neither anti-God nor pro-God; it treats alike the

devout, the agnostic and the atheist. According to him, secularism is

not anti-thesis of religious devoutness. He would like to dispel the

impression that if a person is devout Hindu or devout Muslim he ceases

to be secular. This is illustrated by saying that Vivekananda and

Gandhiji were the greatest Hindus yet their entire life and teachings

embodied the essence of secularism (see his article "The Spirit of

Secularism" as printed in "Secularism and India; Dilemmas and

Challenges" edited by Shri M. M. Sankhdhar.)

 

18. We also propose to refer to what was said by the Sanskrit

Commission

on the subject of "Sanskrit and National Solidarity" in Chapter IV of

its report. The Commission has, in this context first stated that

Sanskrit is the "embodiment of Indian culture and civilisation." It

then

observes that the Indian people look upon Sanskrit as the binding

force

for the different people of this great country, which was described as

the greatest discovery which the Commission made as it travelled from

Kerala to Kashmir and from Kamarupa to Saurastra. The commission,

while

so travelling, found that though the people of this country differed

in

a number of ways, they all were proud to regard themselves as

participants in common heritage and that heritage emphatically is the

heritage of Sanskrit. According to the Commission one of the witnesses

which appeared before it went to the length of suggesting that if the

Sanskrit commission had come before the States Reorganisation

Commission

many of the recent bickering in our national life could have been

avoided (pages 80 and 81).

 

19. From what has been stated above, we entertain no doubt in our mind

that teaching of Sanskrit alone as an elective subject can in no way

be

regarded as against secularism. Indeed, our constitution requires

giving

of fillip to Sanskrit because of what has been stated in Article 351.

in

which while dealing with the duty of the Union to promote the spread

of

Hindi, it has been provided that, it would draw, whenever necessary or

desirable, for its vocabulary, primarily on Sanskrit. Encouragement to

Sanskrit is also necessary because of it being one of the languages

included in the Eighth Schedule.

 

20. We, therefore, conclude by saying that in view of importance of

Sanskrit for nurturing our cultural heritage, because of which even

the

official education policy has highlighted the need of study of

Sanskrit,

making of Sanskrit alone as an elective subject, while not conceding

this status to Arabic and or Persian, would not in any way militate

against the basic tenet of secularism. (Emphasis supplied). There is

thus no merit in the first objection raised by the Board.

 

21. In the aforesaid premises, we direct the Board to include Sanskrit

as an elective subject in the syllabus under consideration. Necessary

amendment in the syllabus shall be made within a period of three

months

from today.

 

22. The writ petitions are allowed accordingly. No order as to costs.

 

Sd / -

(Kuldip Singh)

 

Sd/-

(B. L. Hansaria)

 

 

New Delhi

4 October 1994