5.4.1. D.P. Mukerji on Tradition and Change

It was through his dissatisfaction with Indian history and economics that D.P. turned to sociology. He felt very strongly that the crucial distinctive feature of India was its social system, and that, therefore, it was important for each social science to be rooted in this context.

D.P. Mukerji began his journey into sociology because he was not satisfied with the way Indian history and economics were understood. He believed that understanding India's unique social system was vital for any social science discipline. His stance emphasizes that each area of social study should be grounded in the specific cultural and social realities of India.

Think of it like trying to understand a painting without knowing what it represents. Just as an art critic must consider the cultural and historical context behind a painting to properly evaluate it, a sociologist must understand the social framework of India to analyze its history and economy.

Given the centrality of society in India, it became the first duty of an Indian sociologist to study and to know the social traditions of India.

According to Mukerji, the primary focus for sociologists in India should be to investigate and comprehend social traditions. He argued that these traditions serve as the backbone of Indian society, and to truly understand how society functions, one must delve into these traditional practices.

This is similar to how a historian must learn about the customs and ways of life of people from the past to explain how societies have evolved. Just as a tree's growth rings tell a lot about its age and the environment it has lived in, understanding social traditions can reveal much about a community's values and development.

For D.P. this study of tradition was not oriented only towards the past, but also included sensitivity to change. Thus, tradition was a living tradition, maintaining its links with the past, but also adapting to the present and thus evolving over time.

Mukerji defined tradition as something dynamic and not static. He believed that while traditions maintain connections to their historical origins, they also evolve by incorporating new ideas and practices to remain relevant in contemporary society. This perspective allows for a more nuanced understanding of how cultures adapt over time.

Consider how festivals are celebrated. While the core essence of festivals like Diwali or Eid remains the same, the ways people celebrate may change with new technologies, styles, and influences from different cultures. Just like a river that flows steadily, taking along with it rocks and branches from its banks, traditions can flow through time while adapting to current realities.

D.P. argued that Indian culture and society are not individualistic in the western sense. The average Indian individual’s pattern of desires is more or less rigidly fixed by his socio-cultural group pattern and he hardly deviates from it.

Mukerji emphasized that Indian society has a collective orientation, meaning individuals are often influenced by their social and cultural groups rather than acting purely on personal impulses or desires. This suggests that social ties, practices, and the expectations of one's community heavily shape individual actions.

Think of a sports team: players must work together and align their strategies to succeed, much like how individuals in Indian society often harmonize their goals with cultural expectations. An athlete might make sacrifices for the team that they wouldn't consider if they were focused solely on their personal achievements.

D.P. believed that there were three principles of change recognised in Indian traditions, namely; shruti, smriti and anubhava. Of these, the last — anubhava or personal experience — is the revolutionary principle.

The three principles that Mukerji recognized are shruti (heard knowledge), smriti (remembered knowledge), and anubhava (experience). He highlighted that personal experience, or anubhava, is the principle that drives change in society. This means that individual and collective experiences create the catalyst for transformation in traditions.

Imagine a school curriculum. While textbooks (shruti and smriti) provide foundational knowledge, it's the students' experiences (anubhava) in the classroom that truly shape their understanding and perception of the subject. Schools often change their teaching methods based on the feedback received from students, acknowledging the importance of experiential learning.

However, in the Indian context personal experience soon flowered into collective experience. This meant that the most important principle of change in Indian society was generalised anubhava, or the collective experience of groups.

Mukerji pointed out that individual experiences often consolidate into a shared, collective experience that can effect broader societal change. In Indian society, when many individuals share similar experiences, it often leads to movements or shifts in traditions that reflect those collective sentiments.

Think about how social movements work. The civil rights movement in the U.S. was driven by the collective experiences of individuals facing racial discrimination. Their shared experiences galvanized a larger call for change that transformed societal norms and laws. Similarly, in India, collective dissatisfaction or experience can bring attention to issues and instigate reforms within traditions.

Conflict and rebellion in the Indian context have tended to work through collective experiences. But the resilience of tradition ensures that the pressure of conflict produces change in the tradition without breaking it.

Mukerji observes that while conflict and rebellion are natural elements of society, traditions are resilient and can adapt without being completely dismantled. Instead of completely discarding old practices, society tends to integrate changes into existing traditions, allowing evolution while still honoring roots.

This is akin to how a tree withstands storms. The branches may bend and some leaves might fall, but the core structure and roots remain intact. Similarly, societies can face upheaval and still evolve, embracing changes while respecting their foundational traditions.

D.P.’s views on tradition and change led him to criticise all instances of unthinking borrowing from western intellectual traditions, including in such contexts as development planning.

Mukerji criticizes the tendency to uncritically adopt Western ideas without considering the unique social context of India. He warns against blindly following Western models of social science or development, advocating for a more thoughtful integration of tradition with modern practices. This ensures that India's unique cultural landscape is respected and considered.

Imagine trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. If you apply a Western model of development directly to India without altering it to fit local contexts, it might lead to ineffective or inappropriate results. Instead, it's essential to adapt those ideas into something that complements and enhances the existing social fabric.

--