D.P.

Mukerji

Dhurjat rasad Mukerji

ofofthe
one the founding fathers(1894-1961),
of
sociologypopularly called DP, was
as
Oeober 1894 in West Bengal 1n middle
a
in India. He was born on5
d fairly long tradition of class
a
intellectual Bengali family that
Srven Bose, the tamous
physicist, when
pursuits. According to
DP
emination of Calcutta University, he, like passed the entrance
the sciences, but
finally settled tor economics, Bose, wanted to study
sience. He got MAs in
economics and history, history political
and
proceeded to England for further and was to have
First World War studies, but the outbreak of the
precluded this.
DP began his career at Bangabasi
pined the
newly founded Lucknow College, Calcutta. In 1922 he
University as a lecturer in
OmICS and sociology. He stayed there for a fairly long period ot
-two years. Radhakamal Mukerjee, the first
Partment, had been responsible for protessor in the
ttired bringing DP to Lucknow. He
2Professor and Head of the Department in 1954. For one
ar(1953)
he he served
serv as a Visiting Professor of Sociology at the
national
Institute of Social Studies, The Hague. After his
 D.P. Mukerji

218
he was
from the
Lucknow,
University of versity of
of Aliga invited to the
AlioVite

five years whi

cof h he
University whi.
the
t five
retirement

Economics
at
his last
Chair of distinction
dur1ng I n d : r s of active

occupied
with great
the first
President. of the Indian Soci
of
n Soci activ
academic life.
He w a s
remained
Vice-Presida
the sident of the Interna
Conference.
He also
tional Sociological Association.

outstanding
Indian whose satile interest
versatile
stsh
have.
was an field of socioloo
of sociolo
DP
landmarks not only in the gy but also
has in
art. Yet,
socia.
made music and
economics,
literature,
from his
erudite
contributions. DP, besides
DP bejbeen
eSbein
benefited most
was an extremely
cultured sensitive person His
and sensitive
scholar,
remarkable for its power in influencj
personality was g and
him.
who came in touch with himn Hev
moulding the young people Was a
to call him a Marx1ologist, i.e. a
Marxist but preferred SOC
cil
Indian society fro
scientist ofMarxism. He analysed

of dialectical materialism.
Marxian
perspective

As a Scholar

Perhaps of much greater importance than his writings were his

lectures, discussions and conversations. It was through these that he
shaped the minds of youth and trained them to think for
themselves. "Shaping men is enough tor me", he often told his
students.
His command over diverse tields of
knowledge was incomp
rable; he talked with equal facility
on the subtleties of systems ot
philosophy, history of economic
thought, sociological theories,
and theories of
art, literature and music. He combined in a
manner a
protound scholarship with an uniqu
critical faculty, which enabled him to extremely well-developu
the
problems tacing men and culture relate all scholarly detais
and brilliance of todav. In acuteness or t ought
have
inspired expression, he had no peer. These qualities of Dr
These quain
carry his deep innumerable students and in whateverer they dothe
DP was impress.
work is an a pioneer in the field of This
endeavour to focus sociology of
or culture.
upon an area,
his
urea, which
which was
 D.P. Aukerji

219
a adest attempt and it
modest
isonly
yhere convergence may
is
that thereis a have many
e l e e t

this work
that
of ideas that makedeficiencies
will
tis
hoped

the related elicit interest aunified

olarsin fields. among sociolo
s and

schon Indian History: A

scho

lndian
on

Marxist method to Studly in Method, DP discusses

his
work
efevance of
he need for
he need understand history.
hasizes th
philosophy and
historical matrix
He also
nderstanding
understan
any society. He fails to examine as
philosophical
r philos dialectical materialist the
distinguished Marxist premises about human
which

approach from the idealist,

mechanistic postulates about what man is.
8 u
l e o c h e r

a5 an intellectual included, most

prominently, his
P sc a r e e r

rbutions as a teacher. He had much greater and

a
atribr

eon others through the abiding

spoken, rather than the written,
hvence

he freedom that the class room, the coffee house, or the

dawng
room gave h1m to explore ideas and elicit immediate
ponse was naturally not available via the printed page.
eover, the qual1ty of his writing was uneven, and not all that he
ote could be expected to survive long. Theretore, he loved to be a
xcher and was very popular amongst his students. He encouraged
alogue and interchange ot ideas with his students. Thus, he was a
Student, a co-enquirer, who never stopped learning. He had such
a intluence on his students that he lives in the minds of his
tudents even today.

Methodology in
DP. Mukerji popular of the pioneers
was perhaps the most
at the
dan sociology.
y. Like all of them,
he resisted any attempt
to
social science. He
came
in
partmentalization of knowledge
However, he ended up
BColog more as a social philosopher.
feelings.
e as an advocate of empiricism, involving spiritual and nature
the
He w interested in understanding
s deeply tradition. He
Indian
ning of Indian s
ndian social reality
rooted in the
of how to change
it

equally inter
nterested in finding out
the ways
 aa odest att 2
[ tis
only

there is tempt and it

a
may have
e leel t
convergence
Athat this work will of ideas thatmany deficiencie
cholars in the related elicit
interest make aa unifie-
on Indian
on Indiani fields. among f
vance ofMarxist History:
htIn
his
Televanceof
Televance
Work

A
Study in Method, socio lc
method to
need for
Aphasiees the need for understand DP discusse
phianylosophy and historical
history. He alsc
a t a l
t o r

derstanding
understan
Lial society. He fails matrix a
o t hilosophical.
dialectical materialist
examine the to
which
iBSWhuch distinguishe Marxist premises about human
approach from the idealist,
al oorr mechanistic postulates about
hologrcal
what man is.
$aTeacher

eer as an intellectual
included, most
had a much prominently, his
DP's
butions
o n t r i b a
teacher.
as a He
others through the spoken, rathergreater
uence on others
an and abiding
than the
The freedom that the class room, the coffeewritten,
drawing room gave him to explore ideas and elicithouse, or the
immediate
was naturally not available via the
response

printed page.
oreover, the quality of his writing was uneven, and not all that he
Moreover,
Ote could be expected to survive long. Theretore, he loved to be a
zcher and was very popular amongst his students. He encouraged
lalogue and interchange of ideas with his students. Thus, he was a
wstudent, a co-enquirer, who never stopped learning. He had such
n intluence on his students that he lives in the minds of his
students even today.

Methodology
of the pioneers in
popular
Mukerji was perhaps the most
resisted any attempt
at the
he
SOCIology. Like all them,
of
social science. He
came to
in
mentalization of knowledge However, he
ended up
Baology
ore r e as a
social philosopher.
spiritual feelings. and
involving
as an advocate
of empiricism, nature
the
He was interested in
understanding
tradition. He
S
af deeply in the Indian
how tO
ne of Indian social reality rooted it
change it
1S ng
*as eay of
to change

out the ways

n t e r e s t e d in finding
 D.P. Mukerji
220

weltare ot the c o m m o n people h.

for promoting
forces of modernity to
the speciticity of Indian t
acknowledged to be a Marxist. Nevertheless, he tro
dapt.
adapting the
adition.
H
edhimse
SOCI

as from the
doctrinaires or dogmatic Marxist. It i ed h
followed Marxism as a
method of analysis, rather
thar
th
a Dol
ed that he
politicd
like

of Indian
barr

His dialectical analysis history

ideology.
tradition and modernity,
colonialism and uggested t
nationalie8ested
indi
dialecticallvin, ind
shar

botl

collectivism could be s e e n as
alism and
ing wth
a n a

India.
each other in contemporary con

DP contributed the perspective of Marxian social.

He was tolerant of western ideas, concepts a n d " nd
there is a need for
nda,
and analytca Wn
categories. He viewed that for an indig .
DE
but he certainly did gen
sociology and social anthropology, did not D
insulate these disciplines in India from the western sociol want
attto
traditio
As we have mentioned above, DP preferred to call
imsef
Marxologist' rather than "Marxist and attempted a diale
interpretation of the encounter between the Indian tradition
modernity which unleashed many torces of cultural contradictidand
during the colonial era (Singh, 1973: 18-20). He focused more
historical specificity of India's cultural and social transformat e
which was characterized less by class struggle and more by ation,
vle
assimilation and cultural synthesis that resulted trom the encounte:
between tradition and modernity (see Madan, 1977: 167-68).
Apart from the broad perspective, Radhakamal Mukerjee and
DP had little in common as intellectual. DP's
contribution to
sociology and social anthropology in India differs significanty
from those of Radhakamal
were his
Mukerjee and D.N. Majumdar who
contemporaries in Lucknow. DP was never involved n
any empirical exercises of data collection of surveys. Not that, e
did not believe in the inherent
value of empiricism.
It was just tnal
temperamentally preferred to be an armchair social cr1tic, sou
he
philosopher and culturologist. His academic interests were a
they ranged trom 'music and fine arts as peculiar Indaa
creations o
culture to the 'Indian tradition in relation to modernity
1948, 1958). He was not a
prolific writer
Lucknow. Yet, as an intellectual and anlike his contemporaion
inspiring he let
iring teacher, n o
behind
powerful
a
Indian sociolog1sts inlegacy that influenced the later gen
no small
measures.
 D.P. Mukerji

220
people
c o m m o n

y
for
promoting
welfare

to
of
the
the
speciticity
eless, he
he intro
of Indian te
traditi He i n t o pn. aptHeing tw
he
forces of
modernity
to be
a
Marxist.
Nevertheless,

Marxist.
Marxist. Ir
It ;uce ducedhimseh
acknowledged or
dogmatic
rather
analysis, rather
implieda thar
than
doctrinaires

from the of analysis,

method

polepohid ititehcaa
as a
Marxism as an history
of Indian
followed

ieology.
His
dialectical
analysis
colonialism and
and
nation.88st
nationali, ggest
, ind:
ractiinngdivwiidh
and modernity, dialecticallu
tradition s e e n as
could be
collectivism

alism and India.

contemporary

each other in
the perspective
larxian socio
of Marxian sociolog
andn n
DP
contributed
western 1deas, concepts Inda
He was

categories. He
tolerant of
viewed that there 15
a need for an 2naly.
but he certainlydiddgen
analytic
social anthropology,
sociologyand India from the western socis antto
insulate these disciplines
in soCial traditions
mentioned above, DP preferred to cal!
As we have
Marxologist' rather
than Marxist' and attempted a himsel
interpretation of the encounter between the Indiant Indian traditialectici
n and
modernity which unleashed many forces of cultural contradictio
He tocused more
focused more ont
during the colonial era (Singh, 1975: 18-20).
historical specificity of India's cultural andsocial transformati
which was characterized less by 'class struggle' and more
value
assimilation and cultural synthesis that resulted from the COunter
between tradition and modernity (see Madan, 1977: 167-68).
Apart from the broad perspective, Radhakamal Mukerjee and
DP had little in common as intellectual. DP's
contribution t
sociology and social anthropology in India ditters significantly
from those of Radhakamal Mukerjee and D.N.
were his
Majumdar who
contemporaries in Lucknow. DP was never involved in
any empirical exercises of data collection of
did not believe in the inherent surveys. Not that, he
value of
empiricism. It was
temperamentally he pretcrred to be an armchair social critic,justsOctal
tn
philosopher and culturologist. His academic interests were
they ranged from 'music and fine arts as aive
culture' to the Indian peculiar creations of ln
tradition in relation to modernity'(Muker
1948, 1958). He was not a
prolific
modernity (MuA
Lucknow. Yet, as an writer like his contemporarie
behind intellectual and he.
a
powertul legacy
that influenced
inspir1ng tea o an ing teacher,
ndian sociologists in no small the later genca
measures.
 221
DP's approach to
ncerning D p

Conc
change, two pointsthe
e l Culture
c u l t
and

dhakamal, he was
ka very much
understanding
need rstanding
to
ofof Indian
be stressed.Indian
Social science
ne sog
tween one
against First,
discipline and maintaining
TMeTs
bet

perspective in their rigid

another, and both
studies. However,
h i s t o r i c a l

had an
ke Ghurye, had abiding interest
d ctange
in Indiansociety, in their in the
study although
of structure
framework as such (Unnithanworks,
et al.,
we 1965:
we do
do not
not15-16).
find
find a
ncpual new

Mitings
atile scholar. He wrote
versatile
P w a sa
nineteen
books, including
58); ten in Bengali and nine
ppersathes( 1 9 5 8 ) :

poblhicatio nclude: Basic Concepts in

in English. His early
he
andtheSocial
ns
Sociology (1932) and Person
n Sciences(1924).
Some of the other
publications
Culture (1942, revised enlarged edition
ndian
Modern
in 1948),
Hoblemns
of
of Indian
Indian Yo
Youth (1942), and Vews
and Counterviews
a odern Indian Culture (1942) and Diversities
his
known a s .
(1958) are
best works. His versal1ties can be seen from his other
butions such as Tagore: A Study (1943), On Indian History: A
in Method (1943), and Introduction to Music (1945). Apart
Sinay
he also enjoys a unique place in Bengali literature as a
fomm these,
1Ovelist, essayist and literary critic.
Perspective

DP was one of the very tew social scientists in the academic world
who recognized the importance of Marxism to analyse
sOio-economic torces operating in human society. He considered
Narxism as a theory, which was founded on the priority of society
nd group which are separate and exterior to man,
the individual a
unfoldment of the
ort of environment to facilitate and hinder

pacities of the autonomous individual isolate.

Marxian method rather than
DP's deepest interest was in the 'A Word to Indian
y dogmas. In a short paper entitled, he
Counterviews (1946: 166),
Marxists', included in his Views and
Marxist ran the
hadiwarned that the 'un-historically minded' young
itself could "lose
its
isk of dng
ending up as a 'fascist', and
Marxism
 D.P. Mukerji
222

Nevertheless
of slogans'. wo
embrace uld not be
effectiveness in a maze

DP did n o t indeed
say that
misleading to

various ways, ranging from

a simple emphasis upon
thee
ar
Marxisma in
factor in the making
of culture to a n elevation of

of a test of theory.
It was a
ctice
close but practiceeconomic
uncomfortable to
the
status

In his basic two

and
books o n Personality and the

Basic Concepts
1n SocioloY (1932), DDa
embrace
DP SciScences
(1924)
personal documents
products of his endeavour to formulat
s c i e n c e s . From the verv nulata
considered
adequate concept
organized his ideas
of social
around the n o t i o n of personality 5nine

individual should le
t be n
an
ginning,
He took he
position that the abstract up
the science theories. He pleaded for ocus e foc
of social a

psycho-sociological approach. It
was
this synthesis of
and the soCialization of the
holistic,
40listi
doubjaouble
process of individuality
the uniquene
of individual life, that a personality could be ueney
eness
(Mukerji, 1924). understood
Looking back to the work ot his litetinme, DP said in h.
dential address to the first Indian Sociological Conference e
that he had come to sociology trom economics and historv h
he was interested in developing his personality through kno
(1958: 228). The office of a comprehensive ledge
social sciend
transcending the prevailing compartmentalization of sOCial
social
sCience,
sciences, was conceived by him to be the development af.
an
integrated though many faceted personality. This is an idea, as A.K.
Saran (1962: 167) has pointed out, in some ways parallel to the ideal
suggested by Moore in his Principia Ethica.
DP asserts that knowledge and knower ought to be seen
together. Knowledge has to be philosophic, albeit based on
empirical data. It has transcendent disciplinary boundaries. The
Indian intellectuals had borrowed worldview, based on western
liberal outlook. The element of 'purpose' has been stressed as prog
ress 1s not a stage in automatic self-generating evolution. Progress is
a movement of treedom. For DP
progress involves balancing o
values and he draws from religious scriptures to identuty the
hierarchy of values.
to the
"
Here, we would like to highlight DP's contribution
following:
 D.P. Mukerji
223

Personality

ModernIndian Culture
Traditions

Nature and Method of Sociology

Na
Role
fNew Middle Classes
Making
fIndian
of History
M o d e r n i z a t i o n

Music

Pesonality

D Po n c o
rold with a sense of humour that he propounded the thesis
d
PuhThe 'purusha i5 not isolated from society and
purusha'

dual. Nor is he under the hold of group mind. The purusha

ablishes the relationship with others as an active agent and
discharges responsibilities. His argument is that the purusha'
OS
a result of
ws as a result
of his relations with others and, thus, occupies a
hetter place among human groups.
DP admits that the Indian social life is like the life of bees and
heavers and the Indians are almost a regimented people. But "the
beauty of it" is that the majority ot us do not feel regimented. DP
doubts whether the western individual man dominated by the
market system has any treedom at all. He is exposed to the manipu-
Mation of advertisements, press-chains, chain stores and his purse is
continuously emptied. All this does not leave much scope for
Indvidual's right of choice and consumer's soveregnty.
Ontrastungly, the low level of aspiration of an average Indian,
ich 1s moderated by group norms, results into greater poise in
Ihis should not be missed in our urge for uplifting the level ot
h e Indian sociologist thus will have to accept the group as
I t and eject the individual. For that is the tradition of India.
The Indian
sociologists will have to understand the specific nature
of this tradition.

Modern Indian Culture

Yereus works has changed through passage of time. DP
very sensitive:and was influenced
by environment around him.
 224
D.P. Mukerji 6
He drew from
traditional culture
Culture: A Sociological as well as
as modern Moderm
revised edition in 1947 Study was first
of publishe in 194 and
the year-

Synthesis has been the dominant

culture. The British rule
in 19h partitione
organ1zing Imdia without nar

society. T'he middle class providedin

in India, but
later
helped the
challenged it consolidati
a

rinciple.
oint to
turning prir
eal turnin.nciple
real
ot
the Ind
on of the Indon
ndependene traditions is
esteemed. I-
was a
peaceful, progressive Indiasuccessfully. DP's
elements, of distinctive regional born out of 'urvisionBritiof Ingrd
and social sc

Dynamics of
was an
essential condition of
cultures.
moving
union' oi divey
Reorientatie Tradition, t
was Marxist; he
claimed to be forwadation
only
sarily conse
The national movement
a

was
'Marxologist de dition principles
generated idealism and moral fervour.anti-intellectual Smriti, Anu
ruined althou
He concluded: "Poit the revolut

possible
our culture." DP believed concluded. "pgh
that no genuine on it.
through imitation. He olitics
Modernization is a
process of
teared modernizatio
cultural imn
But
saint-founc
traditional values and culturalexpansion, elevation, revitalizatie into collec
continuity. It gives us treedompatterns. ation d
adition is aa principle
Tradition socio-religi
tives. Modernity
to choose
should be detined in from different principled
atemx spontaneit
spontaneit
in the Suf
of, tradition. relation erne
to, and not in denid accommoc
DP's
arguments have been criticized. Saran
that DP does not
latitude to
has pointed ou result has
takes its benign subject the socialist order
character on trust. He fails to itself to analysis and disadvanta
ogy-oriented realize that a techack
society cannot easily be Dialectics
Dialectics
anti-man; and the
traditional and the
non-exploitative and na
The stren
rooted in ditferent modern worldviewsa
conceptions of time. DP's concern is seen as values es
of westernized
Hindu intellectual. There is a need to read
emotionas
reprint his works and examine his conservec
ideas (Madan, 1993). however
Tradition Indian
What is meant bureaucra
from the root
by tradition? DP points out that tradition com
that DP
'tradere', which
out
r The Sansk
ansmit". Sanss almost g
means "to
equivalent of tradition is
either
transmt Suco ession have
have dor
dor
aitihya, parampara, that 13;

itihasa, or history scripture flexibilit-

which has the same
root as
Traditions are supposed to have a source. It
many
many ofof
or statements of stages ma roes w cultures
roes with

(apta vakya), or mythical

 D.P. Mukerji

225
ghout names. Whater
Whatever
may be the
oam hitons i s eognized byby most
cognized
people. source, the
fact,
fact, their age
their age-long They are historicity of
succession ensuresquoted, recalled,
nce. dsocialsolidarity.
social cohesion
San amics of Tradition
dan
rule performs the act of
huts,
adition, thus,
ndia cOnservative. DP asserts thatconserving. But it is not
verse paincples of change are traditions
s do
do ch Deces
neces
uon 8nized in change.
It is an recognized in Indian tradition. Three
at eiarit,
he Sgnrt,
Anubhava.
Anubhava.

anubhava or Person
personal tradition: Sruti,
jerevolutionary
therevolut

principle. Certain Upanishadsexperience, which is

iButtit did not end there.
did
are
entirely based
founders Personal
panths soonexperience
unders of differer
erent sects or of the
lism. nto collective experience
producing blossomed forth
-religious he experience ot change
order. in the
love andprevailing
n of
spontaneity of these saints and prem or
leof followerstheir sahaj or
erna
erna- the Sufis among the Muslims. The noticeable
traditionalwassystem gradually
also
also
en:
enial ommodated the dissenting voices. Indian social action
litude to align rebel within the mitsof action has given
limits of the constitution. The
out has been the Caste
caste societ.
society blunting the class-consciousness
and
and dsadvantaged.
dvantaged
of
anol
aolk
olectics of Tradition and
not
The
Modernity
are strength of the Indian tradition lies in its
that AES emerging trom past happenings in thecrystallization of
life-habits and
LDIOnS ot
DP men and women. In this
way, India has
cOnserved many values: certainly
some
good and others bad. The point,
ver, Is that of utilizing the
forces, which are toreign to
raditions, e.g., technology, democracy, urbanization,
mes Dureaucracy,
DP
etc.
skrit is convinced that adjustments will certainly
n or imost 5uaranteed that Indians
It is occur.

ibility
ave done, at the touch will not
of western vanish,
culture. They tribes
primitive
as have sufficient

jres,
or
eKblity for
o r that. Indian culture had assimilated tribal culture and
eendogenous
res and modern dissents. It had developed Hindu-Muslim
lern Indian culture is a curious blending,
 226 D.P. Mukeri

varansankara. "Traditionally, theretore, living in

India's blood, so to speak". adjustn nent is in
DP does not worship tradition. His ideaof
of "comnl.
"well-balanced personality" calls for a blend of (1) m a "complete
man?
and aesthetic and intellectual sensibility with (2) theseneeerv Oral fervo
ense of hi
.

and rationality. The qualities of the second category are isto

more by modernity, than
dialectics between tradition
by
and
the Indian
tradition. He pnastzed
erein lies inthe
modernity herein in th
e, the
for understanding the tradition. DP observes that "the ka
of traditions shows the way to break them with the ledgg
social cost". leas
DP's most popular and signiticant
writings on 'traditio
modernity' help us in understanding the authentic
entic measuring
measurin
and
these two bipolar concepts. He argued that there
is diale
relation between India's tradition and ctical
colonialism and nationalism and individualism modernity,
and British
Sangha. His concept of dialectics was collectivity.i
anchored in liberal
humanism. He argued all through his works
that traditions are
central to the
understanding of Indian
between modernization which came to society. The relations
India
periods and traditions are dialectical. It is from during the British
this perspective of
dialectics that, DP argued, we shall to
The encounter of tradition
define traditions.
with modernization created certain
cultural contradictions,
contlict also.
conflict adaptations and in some cases situations of
Describing the of the tradi
tion-modernity encounter, Yogendraconsequences
Singh (1986) writes:
n D.P. Mukerjï's writing we find some
analysis of Indian social systematic concer with
reterence. He processes from a dialectical frait
mainly focuses upon the encounter of the ion
with that of the
west which, on u
the hand,
tactors of cultural one
contradictions and, unleasneu to a
new middle class. The
on the other, 8aV rise

rise of
these forces, accora to
him,
generates a dialectical
be given a push by process of conflict and synthes1s w
must

class structure of bringing into play the conserved

frhe
ved energies
Indian society. enc-b
 D.P. Mukerji
227

encounter
between tradition and
enconseguences: (1) contlict, andmodernity, therefore,
(2) synthesis. Indian
is
P envisages, the result of the interaction
modernity. is
It this between
and dialectics, which helps us to
Indian society.
t a l y s e
t h eL n d i a r

setheconcept ot traditio
tradition
DP's
DA
appeared for the first time in the
book
when his Modern Indian Culture: A
a t y
94
1942

Was

ished. His characterization

p u b l i s h e d
Sociological
of tradition
WTndian culture runs as below:
oantexo
t fL n d i a r
in the

Asa cial and historical proces... Indian culture represents certain

that have given rise to a number
n traditions
as
of
ritudes. The major intluences in ther shaping havegeneral
been
Buddhism, Islam, and western commerce and culture. It was
through
the a8similation
and contlict of such
varying forces that Indian
rulnure became what it is today, neither Hindu nor Islamic, neither
a
plica of the western mode of living and thought
Asiatic product (1948: 1).
nor a
purely
The central thesis of the book was that the
key to the history
dIndia was cultural synthesis creative
response to the internal
-

adexternal political cultural challenges and that the history

and -

andia was more than its past notwithstanding the views of

adMarx on the subject. DP did not regard the Hegal
tReBritish rule as a permanent injury: it was disruptivenessot
only an interruption.
e Tecognized that the Hindu-Muslim cultural
2aKest at the level of cognitive categories, butsynthesis
was the

stressed shared
OmiC interests, and applauded achievements in music, archi-
ECArree and literature. DP did not consider the partition of the
nent as more than an event in its geopolitics. The future,
almost
confident, would transcend the present in a true
dectical movemer
The agoreement. Let us not politicize culture, he used to
study restates DP's thesis about the
say.

omparing Tagore with Bankimchandra importance

of
es "His Tagot Chatterji, he
*er, hence
ehen gore's] saturation with Indian traditions was
he
tern could more easily assimilate a bigger dose of
nought." And again: "The influence of the West upon
 228 n ot
not be
be
s h o u l d

it
uld
p o e t r v
but
g r e a t . . prose,
poetry,
exaggerated...
rama, ted..
was
his prose,
o fhis
music an
evolution wing upon
u p o n some
Tagore drawing basic reservsi
the Tagore em
in find and d
stage spirit,
we
and emergingwith
p e r s o n a l i t y
ofthe
spirit, he capac
people,(Mukerji,
ople, of 1972: 50 50).
ofthe (Muk
investment"
thesoil,
for larger
C o m p o s i t i o no fT r a d i t i o n s

in
hist.
historical
resultant
of c e r t ain
tradition
is the s t r u c t u r e
of Indian culture
structure
Indian the
c o n s t r u c t

Buddhism, such
ch aass Bu
Chr Islam,
TheseOcesses.tradiThetion
actually
several
Indiaonstruclogies su ideologies
The
Chries. raditiom
to
The proces of
modernity.
belong western
process synthesia !
traditions.
tribal these
belongand
life and west
constructed
is respect, it
traditions are
therefore,
hese traaare Hindu
In
woulud
that only. In fac
believe
mistaken to groups of
f
various
the
the ethnic
fact, the
traditions of country Ho
combine ideologies shaped
various
religious
of
ed the India
the principles by T.N. Madan as
undeer:
traditions has
been interpreted
has been the dominant
this historical proces, synthesis inant organzng
In Buddhist and the Muslim
the
principle of the Hindu,
worldview in which according to D.P. thef act ci
together shaped a
His favourite
was lasting signiticance'. quotation from te
being
Upanishads was charaivati, keep moving torward. This meant th
there had developed an indiffterence to the transient and the sensit
and a preoccupation with the subordination of the little self to t
ultimately its dissolution in the 'supreme reality' (1948: 2).
DP tried to provide a classification of Indian traditions unda
three heads, viz., primary, secondary and tertiary. The primay
traditions have been primordial and authentic to Indian Ciey
The
socr
secondary traditions were given second ranking, w
Muslims arrived in the Brti
country. And, by the time of the
arrival, Hindus and Muslims had
traditions at all levels of yet Sured
not achieved a fulsynthess
existence. a There was D p r o p t
agreement between them greac aDprop
ation of natural regarding the utilization
xtent in respecr
aesthetic and resources and to a lesser eXL*
religious traditions. the tertiary traditions In the
conceptual thought, however, tertiary nent
nces survived
differences surviveu pr
 D.P. Mukerji
229
W e So fT r a d i t i o n

C e s

lagists have talked enough about traditions but

soc
l n d i a ns o c i c

f o r th a s b e e n en made to
identify the sources
little
and content of tradi-
tonsA And this goes very well when we talk about D.P.
ditions occupy a central place in
tedly, traditi Mukerji.
Aitterions and modern1zation. But DP has notanalysis of
India's t r a d i
any
these
o f traditions. The major sources of given the
contents
traditions are
tenBuddhism,
Hinduism, Buda Islam and western
Hindufor instance, of Hinduism or Islamculture, but what tradi-
constitute the broader
DIOns,

traditions has been made specific

not
by DP.
ghis respect has been identified by T.N. Madan whoHissaysweakness
that the
i ths make up of Indian traditions
general accord1ng to DP could be a
ynthesisesis of Vedanta, western
liberation and Marxism.
But, what
the synthesis of Islam and Buddhism? DP fails
about
enthesis of other major traditions. Madan
toprovide any
Such
of DP as under:
(1993) comments
an this tailure
An equally important and difticult undertaking would be the elabo-
ration and specitication of his conception of the content of tradition.
Whereas he establishes, convincingly I think, the relevance of
tradition to modernity at the level of principle, he does not spell out
its empirical content except in terms of
general categories.. One has
the uncomfortable feeling that he himself
operated more in terms of
institution and general knowledge than a deep study of the texts. A
controntation with tradition through field work in the manner of
the
anthropologist was, of course, ruled out by him, at least for
himself.
Nature and Method
of Sociology
DP was
by trainins economist. He was, however,
an of the
imitat
He ns ot the practices of other economists. They were inter
aware

mastering and applying sophisticated techniques and

abstract
oview
to generalizations followingthe western model. They failed
view the economic
development in India in terms of its historical
d cultural pecificities. that our
noted with concern
He
econorSSIVe groups failed
Onom in thhe field of intellect and also in
or their
Oran of d political actions, "chiefly on account
norance
Ce of and unrootedness in Indian social reality
 D.P. Mukerji

230
and different aspects andit
has many
understand
Social reality stand this social reali
future.
To
have a comprehensive
and and synoptic view of () the atureone
of intera
tradition shoud
and the interplay.
interplay of
nd (i):
(i) the its raditjo
various aspects, Narrow
future. Narrow special
tradition and
tions ofits to a
changed
leading this 1 zations in
the forces cannot help this understanding. Social.
disciplines floor and aa .ceilin ogy
particular has aa floor
here. "Sociology ke
be great help However, the specialityiality ofsociolno
sociolog amy
other discipline." floor of all types of social die onsitsts n
the ground discioplines
its floor being the Neglect of social
sky".
open to
ibase and
its ceiling remaining
abstractions
economics. On
as in recent economics. ththe oten
leads to arid other
research
in anthropology and
much of empirical psychok
hand,
has been rendered useless because of its narrow scope. Sociolos
of lite and social reality T
helps us in having an integral view
look into the details but it will also search for the wood behind t.
he
trees. DP learnt from his teachers and peers the need for asynoni
view of the vast canvas of social lite. He, theretore, consistenth
harped on the synthesis of social sciences. Sociology might help tis
attempt at synthesiz1ng.
The first task of sociology is to understand the specific natur
of forces that sustain a particular society over the time. For ths
reason, DP stresses that sociologists of India must understand the
nature ottradition, which has conserved Indian soCIEy
centuries. But
sociology is never defence of the status quo.
asserts that ofthe
"sociology should ultimately show the way ou
nation". DP
social system by
analyzing the process of transformat
sociological analysis of the Indian
that the Indian
is
society has the meritofshowig disinte
society but without much
changing, SOCId
gration. He was, Indians
of the
therefore, aware that the study of
thec
system requires a ditterent
to
of
nom"
tradition, its special symbolsapproach sociology be econo
and and its there
technological
DP changes in patterows
specialsymbols red
after. observes: "In my culture and symbois follows th
and objective than
ng
view, the thing changing
more
change per se.
DP declares that
chang* g i s0t
s ,h e uSociologist
be sociologist. He "it is not enough for i nt h
must be the Indian " share
to
is
he is
an Indian, that is,
 D.P. Mukerji
231
w a y s ,m o r e s ,
customs and traditions for
system and what lies the
nding

thn
this

beneath purpose of under-

The
sOCiologist
Indian sociol.
he nadopt a com will it
try a synthesis of and beyond
yond it".
it".
comparative approach. A two approaches:
highlight
p r o a c hw i l
the features shared by truly
eties and also the
comparative
the Indian
of its tradition. society
theiologist will specificity
other
son, thesocIoloeis
aim at
understanding the For this
raditnon.H e w i l
ill carefully examine its symbols andmeaning of the
hevwill also take a dialectical values. At the
snthesis of the opposing approach
atne
tune

t
contihcta n d
to understand the
torces of conservation
and
c h a n g e

Marisn
and Indian Situations
DP hac a great
d faith in Marxism. Marxism
gives an idea of a
desirab. higher stage in the development of human society. In that
her stage, personality becomes integrated with the others in
through a planned, socially directed, collective endeavour
i historically understood end, which means a socialist order. But,
EDIessed doubts about the efficacy of the analysis of the Indian
he

OCial phenomena by the Marx1sts. He gave three reasons for it:

The Marxists would analyse everything in terms of class
conflict. But, in our society, class contlict has for a long time been
covered by the caste traditions and the new class relations have not
of
yet sharply emerged. (2) Many of them are more or less ignorant
The way
of India. (3 economic
the socio-economic history
mechanical torce moving a dead
pressures work is not that of
resistance. Change of
matter. Traditions have great powers of
resistance. A speed change
of production may overcome this
ES revolutions only. But, if a
t i s nature may be achieved by violent
it
consent and
without bloodshed,
Hy opts for revolution by and
dialect of economic changes
hPaently work out the
Tadition. immediate duty
of the
first and
C p h a s i z e s that
it is the should
And, it
Indian to study Indian
traditions.

Precedesociolog1st
Indian
in the
Prte the of changes
SOCialist interpretations
d itions in terms of economic forces.
 232 D.P. Mukerji

Rejection of the Positivism of Western Social Sciences

DP was against the
positivism of western social scieno.
reduced individuals into biological or nces. FoYFo
industrial culture of the west had psychological
turned ts. "The
self-seeking agents. The society in the
west had
individduals mt
ethnocentric. By emphasizing
individuation, i.e.,
roles and rights of the individual,
positivism had recognitionbecome
on of the
of th
from his social moorings. DP observes, our
purusha and not the individual or vyakti". The word of manmaris
uprooted
conception
occurs in our
religious texts or in the say1ngs of the saints. wrwsha
saints p. rare
vyakti
or
person develops through his
around him, through his sharing of values co-operation
with the
the thers
and
the members of his
group. India's social
interests of life
normative orientation of system is basical
group, action, but notally ofa
sect or caste
voluntaristic individual action. As a no
result, a common Indian
not
experience the fear of frustration. DP makes
doe
between the Hindu and the
Muslim, the Christian and thedifferen
no
in this matter.
Budhis
Role of the New Middle
Classes
The urban-industrial
aside the older order, introduced by the British in
institutional networks. It also India, set
traditional castes and classes. discovered many
It called for
adaptation adjustment. In the new
and kind of social
a new
classes of the urban set-up the educated mddle
centres of India
society. They came to became the focal point of te
sOcial forces, that command the knowledge of the
is, science, technology, modern
historical democracy
society development, which the west would
of India stand tor. The ur
and a sense
calls for the
services of the
middle utilization of these d the
classes qualities a
lifestyles. And theyhaveremained
1deas and been soaked with the tern
wes
contemptuously,
oblivious to the ignorant of Indian culture blissfully, and
often

of Indian traditions. and realities. are

resistance and But traditions have **e
geography and absorption". Even "on the g ma
in the demographic
transtiguration of pattern, traditions have
surtace
role
1unm

o to play
pl
physical adjustments and a
ro
biologh
 D.P. Mukerji

233
e ample, things like
for city
that planning
India,To
h
tied up with
lndiá,

traditions and
ied the architect family planning
t s ot i e d

gnore them only at the and the social

peril
rmer can

of their
classes, thus, would not be in a schemes. India's
The nudle
clas

along modern position

lines. They were to lead
the masses to
into India

ome
traditions. They have
digenoustra lost contact uprooted from their
on to the with the masses.
the
the ndia
India can moveon
road of
ditions if the middle classesmodernity only by
man
t oh e rt r a d i t i o n s

heThey should not be either re-establish fortheir link adapting

an is with
rely boastul of their apologetic or
traditions. They should try to harness its
unneces
ausba
seraly

acCommodat1ng changes required by

hers
uliy

balance
herween
between individuation
individuation and
and asccias modernity. A
association nodernity.
will be achieved
with thereby
Tadia and the world will be
enriched with the
ly cxperience.
new
t of

does gking of
Indian History
ence this point it seems just pert1nent enough to point out that, while
nist DP followed Marx closely in his conception of history and in his
haracterization
characterizati of British rule as
uprooting,
he differed signifi-
cantly not only with Marx's assessment of the positive
cosequences ot British rule, but also with his negative assessment
set
of pre-British trad1tions. It is important to note this because some
any Marxists have claimed on their side, despite his denials that he was a
Cial Marxist; he jestingly claimed to be only a "Marxologist' (Singh,
ddle 973:216). Some non-Marxists also have, it may be added, described
the
him as MarxIst.
ern
It will be recalled that Marx had in his articles on British rule
of
n lndia asserted that India had a strong past but "no history at
ew all,
the east no known history"; that its social condition had "remained
ern
unaliered since its remotest antiquity"'; that it was 'British steam
and science which "uprooted, over the whole surtace of
ten
are findustan, the union between agriculture and manutacturing
ers
mdustry". Marxhad listed England's 'crimes' in India and
nan
proceeded to point out that she had become 'the unconscious tool
lay history' whose action would ultimately result in a 'fundamental
es
volution' (seeMarx, 1853). He had said: "England had to fulfill
doublemission
mission in India: one destructive and tne
otuet
 D.P. Mukerji
234
old Asiatic
ofold
Asiati

regenerating-
the
annihilation

foundations of stern soc

society, and th
society in Indjia
western

of the
material

Marx, as for so many

others sinceh
me since his time,1959. 3
Thus,for
intellectuals of
various
has to be its
of opinion, the
shades of
westernizatioon.
opinion,
the mod
mdudi
ivnationn
India above, DP was
been stated
As has already ectua, lectual
to this view about India's
emotionally opposed
from Marx o r from liberal bourge
and past
it
hipast.
storuao
came
whether
He refused to
be ashamed or apologetic about India's
was unambiguous:
statement of his position

Our attitude is one of humility towards the given fund D

an awareness of the need, the utter need, of recreatine.
ne ven a
making it flow. The given of India is very much in ourselves.
want to make something worthwhile out of it (1945: 11)

Indian history could not be made by outsiders; it

ha
enacted by the Indians themselves. In this endeavour, thev notto
had to be firm of purpose but also clear headed. He on
wrote:
Our sole interest is to write and enact Indian
history. Action male
making; it has a starting point this specificity called India; oriftha
-

ae
be too vague, this
specificity ot contact between India and Englad
or the West.
Making involves changing, which in turn requres a
scientific study of the tendencies which
make up this spec1iticity, a
(6) a deep
understanding of the crisis (which marks the beginnng
less than the end
of an epoch). In all
method these matters, the Ma
it can be
is
...

likely to be more useful than other

methods.
discarded. After all, the
object survives (1945: 0
former
Specificity' and 'crisis' are the key words in this passage
ponts to the
the latter to its importance of the encounter or
Marxist's consequences. When one speaks ra0
o tradition,
of
oro

ative specification'
obduracy of
, he/she means inDP's speaks
DP's words,
woru "the
the
culture pattern". He expec the Man
approach to be
45; 1946: 162f9),grounded he specificicy ofexpe
in the ctory
as
indeed
Indian capitalism, the Marx himself specificicy of
Inaa
nself had done by 1focus
tocusing

his times.
Marx, it willdominant don
ns of western soo
SOciety

be institutions o
said, was
Was interested in precipiua
"ecipitating

intereste
 D.P. Mukerji
235
risisofcontradics
dictory class interest in capitalist
f society (1945: 37).
conterested
D Rt o o ,W a s

O
interested in the study of
in
tradition and
ndlia
This
uld be
ould be
couldbe done ne by focusing first on modernity in
tradition and then
dia.
y on change.

Thefirst task for us, therefore, is to

The study the social traditions to
ave been born. This task
which
whC
we
includes the study of the
changes in he traditions by external and
internal
ost economic... Unless the economic forcepressures.
The
is extraordi-
str and it is only
-
when
the modes of
red traditions survive by adjustments. Theproduction
nari
capacity are
for
adjustment is the measure of the vitality of traditions. One can have
full vitality
full vitality of this treasure only by immediate experience. Thus, this
hatI give top priority to the understanding (in Dilthey's sense) of
traditions even for the study of their changes. In other words, the
traditic

cudy of Indian traditions.. should proceed the socialist interpreta

tions of changes in Indian traditions in terms of economic forces
(1958: 232).
He hovered between Indian traditions and Marxism and his
adherence to Marxist solutions to intellectual and practical
problems gained salience in his later work, which was also charac-
terized by heightened concern with tradition.

Modernization: Genuine or Spurious?

for DP the history of India was not the history of her particular
om of class
struggle because she had experienced none worth the
ame. The place of philosophy and religion was dominant in is
kiSOry,
sto and it was
exercise in cultural
fundamentally long-drawn
a
nesIs. For him, "Indian history was Indian culture" (1958: 123).
India's recent woes, namely, hatred and partition, had been the
result of arrested assimilation of Islamic values (ibid.: 163); he

leved that history halts until it is pushed (ibid.: 39).

he moral tervour
national movement had generated much
but DP com anti-intellectual. Not only had d
Complained, it had been
there been much unthinking borrowing from the west,
there had
resuitor
as a
emerged hiatus
a between theory and practice
 D.P. Mukerji

236
become
impoverished and ction
acti on ineffecq
had and articr
which
thought
for
intellectual
artistic creativit
have concluded: "pol
poliics ruined
concern

Given his should have

that he
surprising
culture (1958: 190).
there weresigns of this
no
What was
worse,
schis ben
nediately after inden chi.
in the years
immediately
independence. he
healed
state policy
in the early
DP 1950s,
planning
arrived as
concern, for instance, in an important 1953 paper on "Man and

30-76), that a
expressed
clear concept of theMan and p
in India' (1958: about the endeavoure
formulate a negative judgment build atn
the cause ot the rampantine
India, and also
He said in 1955:
diagnosed
"I have seen how our progressiveellectual sslonh
failed in the field of intellect, and hence also
also in
in economic
political action, chietly
on account of their ignor e
unrootedness in India's social reality" (1958: 240).
orance of a
The issue at stake was lndia's modernization. DP'
esseni
stand on this was that there could not be genuine moderni.
through imitation. A people could not abandon their ownrnizaton
culturi
heritage and yet succeeded in internalizing the historical experien
of other peoples; they could
only be ready to be taken over. E
feared cultural imperialisms more than
any other. The only val
approach, according to him, was that which characterized te
efforts of men like Ram Mohan Roy and
who tried to make the Rabindranath Tagot.
main currents of western
action... run
through the Indian bed to thought
in order that the remove its chok1ng wed
ancient
formulated this view ofmight
stream flow" (1958: 33).
DP
and
modernity several years beforethe dialectics between tradiu
Tagore published in
1943, independence, in his
su
modernization. It emerges asDPa views the nature and dyna
expansion, an elevation, historical cess which
whicn is at onced
process
larger investment of deepening and revitalization-
a
- inshor
not a total
departure traditional values and cultural patterns,
traditional and the from them, n,
resulting cultua ay o oft

modern. from the

theinterplay
condition of rather than From this perspective,trad1tion
obstacle to per
modernizatiol;
modernization; it gives
 D.P. Mukerji
237
om to
ase
choo se
between alternatives and evolve a
but be
of the old and cultural
cannot
teawhich
h a
synthesis
NeV A l u e sa n r
institutions must have a soil in the new.
Joeshich to imbibe
character. which to take root
and not in denialModernity
dromwhic

ation to must,
of tradition. therefore, be
h ei n t e r m e d i a t e

ate stage in the dialectical

e n .

Conflict is only
triad: the movement
Coincidentia oppoSitorum. is
Needles
to
emphasize, the
toregoing argument is in
uancewath the theMarxist dialectic which sees accor
relations as determined
Other therefore bases a
other and the
b yo n e a n o t h

'proper understanding of
on
uch a relatic
such relationship.
a
Synthesis of the opposites is not,
nhistorical inevitability; it is not a gift given to a
hen

nSCIOusness (1958: 189); it is "dynamic social

ess (1958 a people
process and not
othernam for traditionalism" (ibid.:
100-2). History for DP was
going concern (1945:
oncern (1945: 19), and the value of the Marxist
.Gully awakened endeavour. The approach to
alternative to self-conscious
haige-making is mindless imitation and
loss of autonomy
therefore, dehumanization, though he did not put it
these words. quite in
Self-consciousness, then, is
the torm of modernization. Its
content, one gathers trom DP's
writings in the 1950s, consists of
nationalism, democracy, the utilization of science and
tor
harnessing technology
nature, planning for social and economic devel-
pment, and the cultivation of The rationality. typical modern man
5tne engineer, social and technical (1958: 39-40). DP believed that
* torces were
becoming ascendant:
S 1 a bare historical fact. To transmute that fact into a value, the

t requisite is to have active faith in the historicity of the fact...

The second
requisite is social action topush.. consciously, delib-
...

y,collectively, into the next historical phase. The value of

raditions lies in the ability of their conserving torces to put a
brake hasty
on
hasty pas
passage. Adjustment is the end-product of the
dialectical cor
connection between the two. Meanwhile (there) is
 etung
e e
rOgh aplanne

alvematin
en thr fart
the
'enly
from naire
hgh
endrovru 05 6)

of tath ((it
In thit ear expresson s wa
n M urpringthat he shouli
demontrwTnt

1045) that their first task

.

n
iat
and should have remin.
tradtaons18 212).
contlict
them that
t o R gru through

he in the context of this emphas1is on tradr.on

ommendation for the study Mahatma Gandhi

ar machune and technology. betore going ahead with'ae
technologucal (1958: 225), was made. It wa
development not m
matte that irom the Gandhian perspective, which streses
stresed
vaiur owantiessness, non-exploitation and
non-possession
ver notaons of economic development and underdevelogm
could be questioned (bid.: 206). But, this was
perhaps a
gesture (a response to a poser), for DP maintained that Gandhi u
taled ndacate how to absorb the new social torces wa
to

cmerged trom the West; moreover, the type ot acw Su

enveloped the vulgarized notion of Ramararya Was ut
-usircal bu! anu-historical"
(ibid 38). But he w
cOVhccd thal Gandhan nsistence ol raditional vaue
iclp 1o savc
lndians irom the kind of evils (tor exainpic,
and
cunsuuet asu) to which the west had fallen
prey (
20
Thc talure to
clearly detined the terms nguu
Eaamne ac
prucess ot synthesis, as a
here agaD and
mdeed
already noied a reul

'selt-cancellatuon as Guptarepeatedly
,
work. The
w in
n his
hou
(1977) puts t,
it, proVI
uts provided
certaun
 D.P. Mukerji
239

sting as a to
s t o DE DP's sociology. In fact, he himself
subject ain
pathos
recognized
desirable. The
zh a plannedghe
higherof irtahe described
when he des his lite to A.K.
whed (Saran, 1962: 162). Saran concludes: DP did
Saran as a series
ha
planned, socially
ly understood ends
reluctances"
tern liberalism, Marxism - which all beckoned to him

there. ends,
1 not ease Vedanta,

om nature, I: it is to
not
mix

work andnd
high and
strenuous Musi
nduction to Music (1945) is a sociological piece which can
(it is Dp's e d with The Rational and Social Foundations of Musicby
what,
not
be
compared

and ed. by Don Martindale, London, 1958). DP's

have hold Indian a
Max Webe eber (tr.
remains only of its kind. It shows that "Indian
he study ofs
he of
'social even today
of sounds; being Indian.
w o r k

d them that music, is just an arrangement

being music,
1at
tradi-
trad. sic, being
musIc,
ofIndian history". He further shows both
certainly a product
i sc e r t a i n i
.

and difterences between Indian music and western

radition that
tion that hishis similarities
laa andhi's
Gandhi's viewssic
views In both regions, religious and tolk music had been the inevi-
mus

music. In
both, classical music at
with large scale hle context of classical
with 'a moments

. lt was not smalldcrisishad drawn from people's music for

It fresh life, elaborated its
.
was not small
Music
and imposed sophisticated forms upon it in return.
ich stressed the esure,
-possession, the was equally intimate with functions of collective living and equally
worked upon the culture
derdevelopment SuSceptible to the genuine intluences that and
perhaps only a pattern. So long as the princely courts, the priestly dignitaries
hat Gandhi had strongly entrenched guilds fixed the rule of living, Indian and
l forces which European music alike betrayed the rudiments of melody and
has been slower in India
ot new society armony. Since then, the tempo of change
was not
was not only
ony than in Europe, according, partly, at least, for the so-called 'spiritu
of
t he was
also of her music. In
uy the community and the homogeeity
fact,
I values might ndian music are astonishing (1945: 8).
mple, scientism

(ibid.:227) Conclusion
fathers of
nd rigorousyhurati rasad Mukerji was o n e of the founding
intellectual
ve, re-appears
ociology
°BY in India. He had fairly long tradition of
to DP. First,
The resultant
Pursuits. Being
Being an intellectual meant two things
in the
potentialities of social reality
e r t a i nh o n e s t y

ering the sources and

leC
dialect of developing an
Eradition and modernity, and, second