Sri Krishna Singh Vs. Mathura Ahir & Ors [1979] INSC 274 (21 December 1979)
SEN, A.P. (J) SEN, A.P. (J) FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA
CITATION: 1980 AIR 707 1980 SCR (2) 660
ACT:
Hindu Law-Whether a Sudra can enter the order of Yati or Sanyasi-'Sant Math' Sampradaya, denomination of Dasnami Sect-Whether a Sudra cannot enter the order of sanyasi in the Sant Math and whether a Brahman alsone can be a sanyasi among Dasnamis-Essential ceremonies for the initiation of Dasnamis-Performance of Atma Sradh and reciting Pravesh Mantra Sant Math Sampradaya-Mode of succession among the Sant Math-Raght to after-acquired property of a Mahant out of Math funds, whether accrues to natural son.
Abatement of appeal-Maxim of "actio personalis moriture cum persona", applicability of in the case of suits by Mahant for the recovery of Math property -Order XXII Civil Procedure Code.
HEADNOTE:
Respondent Mathura Ahir alias Swami Harswanand, the Mahant of Garwaghat Math filed a suit for declaration of title to and possession of house No. C/27/33 situate in Mohalla Jagatgunj, Varanasi, for arrears of rent and mesne profits in respect thereof. The said property was purchased by his Guru Atma Vivekanand Paramahans (ne Baikunth Singh) from out of the income of the Math i.e. the offerings (Bhent) made by the devotees. The appellant who was impleaded as defendant 5 to avoid further litigation claimed that this property acquired by his late father Baikunth Singh alias Swami Atma Vivekanand, after he became a Guru and out of Math funds devolved upon him the natural son and disciple. Since the claim went in favour of the respondent Mahant the appellant came in appeal by special leave to this Court. The original plaintiff died during the pendency of the appeal.
The contentions of the appellant were: (i) the plaintiff Mathura Ahir being a Sudra could not be ordained to a religious order and become a Sanyast or yati and therefore installed a mahant of the Garwaghat Math, according to the tenets of the Sant Math Sampradaya, (ii) In the absence of proof of the performance of Atma Sradh and the recitation of Pravesh Mantram, neither the plaintiff nor his two predecessors Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atma Vivekanand could be regarded as Hindu Sanyasi; and (iii) the first respondent Harsawanand the original plaintiff having died during the pendency of the appeal, the appeal abated in its entirety.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. A math is an institutional sanctum presided over by a superior who combines in himself the dual office of being the religious or spiritual head of the particular cult or religious fraternity and of the manager of the secular properties of the institution of the Math. [671 D-E] The property belonging to a Math is in fact attached to the office of the mahant, and passed by inheritance to no one who does not fill the office. The 661 Head of a Math, as such, is not a trustee in the sense in which that term is generally understood, but in legal contemplation he has an estate for life in its permanent endowments and an absolute property in the income derived from the offerings of his followers, subject only to the burden of maintaining the institution. [671 A-B] In the instant case, the evidence on record sufficiently establishes that a Math came to be established at Garwaghat and the building known as "Bangla Kuti" and certain other buildings including the house in suit constituted the endowment of the math itself. [671 E-F] Sammantha Pandara v. Sellappa Chetti (1879) ILR 2 Mad. 175; Gyanasambhandan Pandara Sannadhi v. Kandaswami Tambiram (1887) ILR 10 Mad. 375; Vidya Purna Thirthaswami v. Vidyanidhi Thirtha Swami (1904) ILR 27 Mad. 435; Ram Prakash Das v. Anand Das (1915-16) 43 I.A. 73 (PC); Vidya Vanthi Thirtha v. Baluswami Iyer (1920-21) 48 I.A. 302; referred to.
2. The math at Garwaghat belongs to the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya, which is a religious order and the suit property is Math property. Though the Math at Garwaghat established by Swami Sarupanand was of recent origin, the religious order denominated as 'Sant Math' has had large following in Punjab and some other parts of India since more than a century. In a sense, therefore, Swami Sarupanand himself did not for the first time evolve any new religious order. [672 E, 673 F-G] The institution was really built up by Swami Atma Vivekanand, who was held in great veneration by the followers of the sect. He preached the tenets of 'Sant Mat' and had a large following. His 'Sant Mat' fraternity comprised of thousands of Girhastha and Virakta disciples who made large Offerings. Such offerings in cash or kind or in the shape of immovable property which were endowed to the Math. Swami Atma Vivekanand was the Mahant of the Garwaghat Math. The two houses at Varanasi including the suit house were purchased by Swami Atma Vivekanand from out of the offering (Bhent) made by his disciples. [675A-D]
3. Succession to Mahantship of a Math or religious institution is regulated by custom or usage of the particular institution, except where a rule of succession is laid down by the founder himself who created the endowment.
[675 G-H] Genda Puri v. Chatar Puri, [1886] 13 I.A.100 @ 105;
Sital Das v. Sant Ram, A.I.R. 1954 SC 606; Mahalinga Thambiran v. La Sri Kasivasi, [1974] 2 SCR 74; followed.
4. The succession to the office of the Mahant according to Sant Sampradaya is by nomination, i.e. from Guru to Chela, the Guru initiates the chela after performing the necessary ceremonies. The person initiated as a Chela adopts the life of a sanyasi and is pledged to lead a life of celibacy and religious mendicancy. The sitting Mahant hands over the management of the Math to one of his virtuous Chelas fittest to succeed when he nominates and when he wishes to install as Mahant after him in his place. He makes clear this desire to the members of his Sampradaya, and also authorises the nominated chela to give Bhesh Dikshwa. After the death of the Mahant, the Bhesh and Sampradaya give Chadar Mahanti of the math to the said disciple at the time of the Bhandara. [672 A-C] 662
5. Asceticism in India has been under the definite and strong sanction of religion. In the doctrine of the four asramas, asceticism was made an integral part of the orthodox Hindu life, and it became the duty of every Hindu, as advanced age overtook him, homeless and a wanderer to chasten himself from earthly ties, and of realizing union with Brahman. And a religious motive was thus supplied for that which in itself was a welcome release from responsibility, care and the minute requirements of an elaborate social code. In due course, with the advancement of knowledge, the shackles of the caste system were broken through and the privileges and powers of the ascetic life were extended to Sudras and in due recognition of their status, they were treated as Hindu Sanyasis. At the present time, there is no distinction or barrier; any one may become an ascetic, and the vows are not necessarily lifelong. Some sects, however, still restrict membership to Brahmans, or at least to men of the three higher castes. [681 E-H, 682 G-H]
6. One who enters into a religious order severs his connection with the members of his natural family. He is accordingly excluded from inheritance. Entrance to a religious order is tantamount to civil death so as to cause a complete severance of his connection with his relations, as well as with his property. Neither he nor his natural relatives can succeed to each other's properties. [676 A-B] Any property which may be subsequently acquired by persons adopting religious orders passes to their religious relations. The persons who are excluded on this ground came under three heads; the Vanaprastha or hermit; the Sanyasi or Yati, or ascetic and the Brahmachari or perpetual religious student. In order to bring a person under these heads, it is necessary to show an absolute abandonment by him of all secular property, and a complete and final withdrawal from earthly affairs. The mere fact that a person calls himself a Byragi or religious mendicant, or indeed that he is such, does not of itself disentitle him to succeed to property.
Nor does any Sudra come under this disqualification, unless by usage. This civil death does not prevent the person who enters into an order from acquiring and holding private property which will devolve, not of course upon his natural relations, but according to special rules of inheritance.
But it would be otherwise if there is no civil death in the eye of the law, but only the holding by a man of certain religious opinions or professions. The after-acquired property passes on his death not to his natural but to his spiritual heirs. [676 A-E, 683 A-B] Dharmapuram v. Vivapandiyan, [1899] I.L.R. 22 Mad. 202, Harish Chandra v. Alia Mahamed, [1913] I.L.R. 40 Cal. 545, explained.
7. The 'Sant Mat' sampradaya is a religious denomination i.e. a sub sect of one of the Dasnami sects founded by the Great Sankracharya. Sankara was an ascetic and founded schools of ascetics. Sankara established four Maths or seats of religion at four ends of India-the Sringeri Math on the Sringeri Hills in the South, the Sharda Math at Dwarka in the West, the Jyotir Math at Badrikashram in the North, and the Govardhan Math at Puri in the east.
The monks ordained by Sankara and his disciples were called Sanyasis. Each Math has a sanyasi at its head who bears the title of Sankaracharya in general. Sankara is said to have four disciples who were all brahmans, from whom the 663 ten divisions of the order-hence named as the ten-named or 'dasnami Dandis' originated. They are: Thirtha, shrine;
Ashrama, order; Vana, wood; Aranya, Forest or desert;
Saraswati and Bharati, the goddesses of learning and speech;
Puri, City; Giri and Parvata, a hill; and Sagara, the ocean.
[683 C-G] Dandis or staff bearers occupy a place of pre-eminence.
They worship Lord Siva in his form Bhairava; the 'Terrible' and profess to adhere Nirguna and Niranjana, the deity devoid of attribute or passion. A sub section of this order are the Dandi, Dasnamis or Dandi of ten names, so called from their assuming one of the names of Sankara's four disciples and six of their pupils. [658 B-C] The Dandis keep themselves very distinct from the rest of the community. They are Brahmans, and receive disciples only from the Brahmans. They lead a very austere life. They do not touch fire or metal or vessels made of any sort of metal. It is equally impossible also for them to handle money. They shave their hair and beard. They wear one long unsewn reddish cloth, thrown about the person. [686 A-B] There are but three and part of a further ascetic class, or those called Tirtha, Asrama, Saraswati and Bharati who are still really regarded as Sankara's disciples. The rest i.e. the remaining six and a half of the Dasnamis who are considered as having fallen from the purity of practice necessary to the Dandis, are still, in general religious characters usually denominated and are Atits. These are the Atits or A'Dandis viz. the Vanas, Aranytas, Puris, Giris, Parvata, Sagaras and half the Bharatia, reputed to have fallen to some extent from orthodoxy, but are still looked upon as religious avatars. Unlike the Dandis, the Atits do not carry the shaft i.e. a Trishul. They differ from the former also in their use of clothing money and ornaments, their methods of preparing food and their admission of members from any order of Hindus. Some of them lead an ascetic life, while others mix freely in the world, carry on trade and acquire property. Most of them are celibate but some of them marry and are often known as Samyogi or Gharbari Atits. They are collected in Maths and monastries.
They wear ochre coloured garments, and carry a rosary of rudraksha seeds sacred to Lord Siva. Their religious theories (when they have any) are based on the advaita Vedanta of their founder Sankaracharya. [686 H, 687 A-D] There is also a sub division of the Puri division of the Dasanami Sect. They have tenets much in common, based on the central idea that the Supreme diety is incomprehensible or 'unseeable'. They denounce idolatory. This more or less conforms to the tenets of the 'Sant Mat' Sect. [678 D-E] The followers of the 'Sant Mat' treat the Guru as the incarnation of God. They have no faith in inanimate idols installed in temples nor do they worship them in their cult.
There are no caste restrictions and any one can be admitted into the Sant Mat fraternity. According to the custom and usage of the Sant Mat Sampradaya, the initiation of a chela by the Guru results in complete renunciation of the world and he ceases to have all connection with his previous Ashramas before becoming a Sanyasi. For becoming a sanyasi it is not necessary that he should be of a particular Varnashram previously, i.e. even a Sudra can become a Sanyasi. [671 G-H, 672 E]
8. Though according to the orthodox Smriti writers a Sudra cannot legitimately enter into a religious order and although the strict view does not 664 sanction or tolerate ascetic life of the Sudras, the existing practice all over India is quite contrary to such orthodox view. In cases, therefore, where a Sudra can enter into a religious order in the same way as in the case of the twice-born classes, such usage should be given effect to.
[670E-F]
9. In order to prove that a person has adopted the life of a Sanyasi, it must be shown that he has actually relinquished and abandoned all worldly possessions and relinquished all desire for them or that such ceremonies are performed which indicate the severance of his natural family and his secular life. It must also be proved in case of orthodox sanyasis, that necessary ceremonies have been performed such as Pindadana or Birajahoma or Prajapathiyesthi without which the renunciation will not be complete. [687 G-H] Amongst Dasnamis, a ceremony called the Bijla Homa i.e.
the Biraja Homa has been considered essential. The recitation of the Pravesha Mantram or the renunciation formula is of course indispensable. [688 A] In the instant case: (a) there is overwhelming evidence in proof of the fact that the requisite ceremonies of Biraj homa or Prajapathiyesthi were performed in case of Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atma Vivekanand. If the Prajapathiyesthi or Biraj Homa ceremonies were performed then it must necessarily give rise to the irresistable inference that Swami Atma Vivekanand must have performed his Atma Sradh before he was initiated as a chela; (b) The appellant was precluded from contending that his father Baikunth Singh was not a Hindu Sanyasi in view of his express admission in the plaint filed in an earlier suit.
The burden of proof shifted upon him to disprove it; (c) Swami Harsewanand (Mathura Ahir) was the validly initiated chela of Swami Atma Vivekanand and upon his demise was duly installed as the Mahant of 'Garwaghat Math' according to the tenets of 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya. [689 G, H, 693 C-D]
10. The question whether a suit abates in its entirety or not upon the death of the plaintiff must necessarily depend upon the nature of the suit. This is not a class of case to which the maxim, actio personalis moritur cum persona applies. [694 C-D]
11. According to Hindu jurisprudence, a religious institution such as a math is created as a jurisdic entity with a legal personality capable of holding and acquiring property. It therefore follows that the suit instituted by the mahant for the time being, on its behalf, is properly constituted and cannot abate under the provisions of Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the death of the mahant pending the decision of the suit or appeal, as the real party to the institution is the institution. The ownership is in the institution or the idol. From its very nature a math or an idol can act and assert its rights only through human agency known as a mahant or shebait or dharmakarta or sometimes known as trustee. It follows that merely because the mahant for the time being dies and is succeeded by another mahant, the suit does not abate. [695 B-C, E] Ram Swarup Das v. Rameshwar Das v. ILR 29 Pat. 989, over-ruled.
12. The general rule is that all rights of action and all demands whatsoever existing in favour of or against a person at the time of his death survive to or against his legal representative within the meaning of s. 2(11) of C.P.C. [699 A,F] Muhamed Hussain v. Khushalo, ILR 9 All. 131; approved.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1802 of 1971.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 2-11-1971 of the Allahabad High Court in S.A. No. 768 of 1964.
Y. S. Chitale, Lalji Sahai Srivastava, B. P. Singh and Mukul Mudgal for the Appellant.
R. K. Garg, S. P. Singh and Sudama Ojha for Respondent No. 1.
S. T. Desai and Uma Datta for Respondent No. 3.
S. C. Patil for Respondent No. 2 M. Veerappa for Respondent No. 4.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN J.-This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and decree of the Allahabad High Court dated November 2, 1971 in a suit for declaration of title to, and possession of house No. C-27/33 situate in Mohalla Jagatganj, Varanasi for arrears of rent and mesne profits in respect thereof.
The principal point in controversy between the parties in this appeal is, whether the plaintiff, Mathura Ahir, being a Sudra could not be ordained to a religious Order and become a Sanyasi or Yati and, therefore, installed as a Mahant of the Garwaghat Math according to the tenets of the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya. A subsidiary question arises as to whether in the absence of proof of the performance of Atma Sradh and the recitation of Pravesh Mantra neither the plaintiff nor his two predecessors Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atmavivekanand could be regarded as Hindu sanyasis. It also raises a further question namely whether the first respondent, Harsewanand, the original plaintiff having died during the pendency of the appeal, the appeal abates in its entirety.
The facts of the case are set forth with utmost particularity in the judgment of the High Court. It will, therefore, not be inconvenient to deal with them as briefly as possible. The history of the Garwhaghat Math is as follows: In 1925, Swami Sarupanand Paramhans, disciple of Swami Advaitanand, a Hindu ascetic belonging to the 'Sant Mat' sect, came from the North-Western Provinces, and took his abode at Garwaghat, Mouza Ramna Malhija, in the vicinity of Varanasi City. He was a religious preceptor of great learning and from his hermitage preached the tenets and precepts of the 'Sant Mat' and soon had a large following.
He was treated with great veneration and some of his devotees by a registered gift deed dated March 666 18, 1935 endowed the land and building, which he named as 'Bangla Kuti'. Subsequently the said Bangla Kuti and other lands and buildings appurtenant and adjacent thereto came to be known as the Garwaghat Math of which Swami Sarupanand was initially the mahant. He paid a visit to village Khuruhja for a couple of days and Baikunth Singh, father of defendant No. 5, Sri Krishna Singh, the appellant, was greatly influenced by his preachings and left for Varanasi for good.
In due course, Baikunth Singh was initiated as chela by Swami Sarupanand who named him as Atmavivekanand. Swami Atmavivekanand Paramhans was the chief disciple of Swami Sarupanand and was given full rights of initiation and Bhesh by his Guru. Swami Sarupanand took his samadhi at Meerut in 1936 and after his death, according to his wishes, his Bhesh and Sampradya gave Swami Atmavivekanand Chadar Mahanti of Garwaghat Math and made him the mahant. Swami Atmavivekanand also had a large following and his 'Sant Mat' fraternity which comprised of thousands of Grihastha and Virakta disciples made large offerings and gifted extensive properties to him as their religious or spiritual leader.
In 1937, Swami Atmavivekanand initiated the plaintiff Mathura Ahir as his chela and named him as Harsewanand according to the custom and usage of the 'Sant Mat' sect.
During his lifetime, he purchased the two properties viz., house No. C-27/33, situate in Mohalla Jagatganj and house No. C-4/83, situate in Mohalla Sarai Gobardhan in the city of Varanasi by registered sale deeds dated December 3, and December 22, 1942 from out of the income of the math i.e., the offerings (Bhent) made by the devotees and formed the properties of the math. Swami Atmavivekanand died at Varanasi on August, 23, 1949. A Bhandara was held on October 3, 1949 and according to the wishes of Swami Atmavivekanand, the mahantas and sanyasis of the Bhesh and Sampardaya gave the Chadar Mahanti to the plaintiff and installed him as the mahant of the math in place of Swami Atmavivekanand on October 4, 1949 in accordance with the custom and usage of the Sampradaya. The mahants and sanyasis of the 'Sant Mat' Bhesh who had assembled for the Bhandara also executed a document to that effect acknowledging him to be the mahant.
The plaintiff having been installed as the mahant, the entire property of the Garwaghat Math along with the two houses in the city of Varanasi, devolved upon him as successor to Swami Atmavivekanand.
On August 21, 1951 the plaintiff-respondent No. 1, Harsewanand, brought the suit, out of which this appeal arises, in the court of the City Munsif, Varanasi for ejectment of respondents Nos. 2 to 5 from 667 house No. C-27/33, situate in Mohalla Jagatganj, Varanasi.
It was pleaded that respondent No. 2, Avadesh Narain, defendant No. 1, had taken the house on rent from Swami Atmavivekanand, the late mahant. It was alleged that he had unlawfully sub-let the premises to the respondents Nos. 3 to 5, who were defendants Nos. 2 to 4. The suit was contested by these respondents who denied the tenancy and inter alia pleaded that they were in occupation of the house as chelas of Swami Atmavivekanand in their own right by virtue of the licence granted to them by him. They denied the plaintiff's title as well as right to sue alleging that he was neither a chela of Swami Atmavivekanand nor his successor. It was also alleged that the house in suit was the personal property of Swami Atmavivekanand and, therefore, on his death his natural son and disciple, Sri Krishna Singh, the appellant became the owner thereof. The suit which was originally framed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 1, Harsewanand, as a suit between a landlord and tenant had, therefore, to be converted into a suit for possession based on title by impleading the appellant, Sri Krishna Singh as defendant No. 5.
It is not necessary to mention in detail the other averments in the plaint, nor is it necessary to mention the various pleas raised in the written statement filed by the defendants. It will be sufficient, however, to mention that the appellant Sri Krishna Singh in his written statement denied the existence of the math as pleaded by the plaintiff and asserted that the house in it, in any case, was not math property. He further pleaded that the plaintiff Mathura Ahir being a Sudra, was legally incompetent to become a sanyasi, and that the plaintiff was not the mahant of the Garwaghat Math. He further claimed that after the death of Swami Atmavivekanand, he became the owner of the house in suit by inheritance, as also of the properties alleged by the plaintiff to belong to Garwaghat Math. All these properties, according to the appellant, were secular and personal properties of his father Baikunth Singh, who was also known as Swami Atmavivekanand.
In the trial, the issues, as finally framed by the learned Munsif were seventeen in number. Of these, the following are relevant: (1) Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the premises in suit? (8) Whether the plaintiff was nominated as a mahant and given Chadar in accordance with the custom? Is there any custom as alleged by the plaintiff? (12) Was Swami Atmavivekanand a sanyasi and had he ceased to be a Grihasti? (13) Is the plaintiff a Sudra and not entitled to become sanyasi according to Hindu law? (14) Is the 668 plaintiff chela of Swami Atmavivekanand and entitled to succeed to properties left by him in preference to his son Sri Krishna? (15) Is the house in suit a Math property? It appears that the case came up for hearing before the learned Munsif on October 5, 1953 when the plaintiff's counsel accompanied by his parocar made oral pleadings under O. 10, r. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the effect:
"The 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya is one of the Dasnami sanyasis founded by the great Sankaracharya, and is governed by Naranjini Math Akhara." The learned Munsif found each and every of these issues in favour of the plaintiff and accordingly decreed the suit.
x x x x x x x x x On appeal the III Addl. Civil Judge, Varanasi by his judgment dated January 14, 1964 reversed some of the aforesaid findings while maintaining the rest.
From the judgment of the Addl. Civil Judge, the appellant alone preferred an appeal to the High Court which by its judgment dated November 2, 1971 on a careful marshalling of the entire evidence, in the light of well- settled principles, agreeing with the learned Munsif, set aside the findings of the learned Civil Judge and decreed the plaintiff's suit in its entirety.
A learned Single Judge, Kirty J., in the course of his judgment observed that the evidence on record sufficiently established that there had come into existence a math at Garwaghat, of which Swami Atmavivekanand was the mahant. He referred to the overwhelming evidence led by the plaintiff showing that the building known as 'Shanti Kuti' and certain other buildings constituted an endowment to the math itself, which was a monastic institution presided over by the mahant. He further held that the house in dispute was not the personal property of Swami Atmavivekanand but formed an accretion to the math as it had been acquired by him from out of the offerings (Bhent) made by the disciples to him as their religious or spiritual leader for the purposes of the spiritual order of the fraternity and, therefore, the natural heirs of Swami Atmavivekanand could have no claim to the property, which must descend to the plaintiff as a successor to him.
x x x x x x x x On the question whether the plaintiff and his two predecessors, Swami Atmavivekanand and Swami Sarupanand were not legally com- 669 petent to hold office of the mahant of the math in question, the learned Single Judge observed:
"The finding of the court below on this point is in appellant's favour, the reason given therefor being that the plaintiff failed to prove that he or his predecessors had performed Atma Sradh and uttered Pravesh Mantra as mandatorily prescribed by Hindu law.
The factual part of the finding, viz., the performance of the Sradh and the utterance of the Mantra, is binding in second appeal, but the conclusion drawn therefrom is one of law." After referring to the authorities on the subject, he observes:
"A reading of the judgments in the above-noted cases will show that the various observations therein in regard to performance of Atma Sradh and other rites (Prajapathiyesthi Viraja Homam etc.) and the utterance of Pravesh Mantra etc. were made with reference to particular sects or categories of sanyasis claiming to belong to a particular religious order or class of such order, or with reference to "Sanatan", i.e., orthodox, Hindu Dharma. It is true that on cursory reading it would appear as if the observations formulate indispensable legal requirements of the Hindu law universally applicable to every (Hindu) ordained sanyasi, but, upon a careful analysis I have found that that is not so. The law as stated therein is generally or usually, but not invariably, applicable." In conclusion, he observes:
"In the absence of any proof that the followers of Sant Math or the tenets of that Math required of its Mahant that he must necessarily belong to the twice- born class of Hindus and be a Sanyasi in accordance with all the rites and ceremonies mentioned in the aforesaid cases, I am not prepared to hold that Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atmavivekanand were legally incompetent to be Mahants of the Math or that the plaintiff is a person disqualified from assuming and holding that office." He accordingly held that the plaintiff and his predecessors, Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atmavivekanand were not legally incompetent to be the mahants of the math. They did not inflict themselves on the religious fraternity of Sant Mat Sampradaya nor had they been foisted into the office of mahant against the will or in spite of the disapproval of the religious fraternity. In any event, even if the 670 plaintiff was disqualified being a Sudra, he was entitled to sue as the de facto mahant.
During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent- plaintiff Mahant Harsewanand having died, respondent No. 1, Mahant Harshankranand was brought on record as an heir and legal representative.
It would be convenient, at the outset, to deal with the view expressed by the High Court that the strict rule enjoined by the Smriti writers as a result of which Sudras were considered to be incapable of entering the order of yati or sanyasi, has ceased to be valid because of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. In our opinion, the learned Judge failed to appreciate that Part III of the Constitution does not touch upon the personal laws of the parties. In applying the personal laws of the parties, he could not introduce his own concepts of modern times but should have enforced the law as derived from recognised and authoritative sources of Hindu law, i.e., Smritis and commentaries referred to, as interpreted in the judgments of various High Courts, except where such law is altered by any usage or custom or is modified or abrogated by statute.
On the main, in agreement with the High Court, we are inclined to take the view that though according to the orthodox Smriti writers a Sudra cannot legitimately enter into a religious Order and although the strict view does not sanction or tolerate ascetic life of the Sudras, it cannot be denied that the existing practice all over India is quite contrary to such orthodox view. In cases, therefore, where the usage is established, according to which a Sudra can enter into a religious order in the same way as in the case of the twice born classes, such usage should be given effect to.
The first question, therefore, to consider here is:
Whether there was a math in existence at Garwaghat, and if so, whether the house in suit was an accretion to the math? Math means a place for the residence of ascetics and their pupils, and the like. Since the time of Sankaracharya, who established Hindu maths, these maths developed into institutions devoted to the teaching of different systems of Hindu religious philosophy, presided over by ascetics, who were held in great reverence as religious preceptors, and princes and noblemen endowed these institutions with large grants of property. Dr. Bijan Kumar Mukherjea in his Tagore Law Lectures on the Hindu Law of Religious and Charitable Trusts, 4th ed., p. 321, succinctly states:
"'Math' in ordinary language signifies an abode or residence of ascetics. In legal parlance it connotes a monastic institution presided over by a superior and established for the use and benefit of ascetics 671 belonging to a particular order who generally are disciples or co-disciples of the superior." x x x x x The property belonging to a math is in fact attached to the office of the mahant, and passed by inheritance to no one who does not fill the office. The head of a math, as such, is not a trustee in the sense in which that term is generally understood, but in legal contemplation he has an estate for life in its permanent endowments and an absolute property in the income derived from the offerings of his followers, subject only to the burden of maintaining the institution. He is bound to spend a large part of the income derived from the offerings of his followers on charitable or religious objects. The words 'the burden of maintaining the institution' must be understood to include the maintenance of the math, the support of its head and his disciples and the performance of religious and other charities in connection with it, in accordance with usage. See: Semmantha Pandara v. Sellappa Chetty [1879] ILR 2 Mad. 175 Giyana Sambandha Pandara Sannadhi v. Kandasami Tambiran (1887) ILR 10 Mad 375; Vidya Purna Tirtha Swami v. Vidyanidhi Tirtha Swamy (1904) ILR 27 Mad 435; Ram Prakash Das v. Anand Das (1916) 43 I.A. 73 (PC), Vidya Varuthi Thirtha v. Babuswamy Iyer (1920-21) 48 I.A. 302; Kailasam Pillai v. Nataji Thambiran (1910) ILR 33 Mad, 265.
From the principles, it will be sufficiently clear that a math is an institutional sanctum presided over by a superior who combines in himself the dual office of being the religious or spiritual head of the particular cult or religious fraternity, and of the manager of the secular properties of the institution of the math. In the instant case, the evidence on record sufficiently establishes that a math came to be established at Garwaghat and the building known as 'Bangla Kuti' and certain other buildings, including the house in suit constituted the endowment of the math itself.
From a review of the general mass of evidence the High Court, agreeing with the learned Munsif, held that the followers of the 'Sant Mat' fraternity are members of a religious order. The long line of witnesses who were all disciples of Swami Sarupanand and/or Swami Atmavivekanand have clearly established that it is a religious institution of monastic nature. It is established for the service of the 'Sant Mat' cult, the instruction in its tenets and observance of its rites. The Swamiji who is the Guru is the Mahant, the spiritual and religious leader of the fraternity.
According to the custom and usage of the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya, as pleaded by the plaintiff, the initiation of a chela by the Guru results in complete renunciation of the world, and he ceases to have all con- 672 nection with his previous Ashramas before becoming a sanyasi. For becoming a sanyasi it is not necessary that he should be of a particular Varnashram previously, i.e., even a Sudra can become a sanyasi. The succession to the office of the Mahant is by nomination, i.e., from Guru to chela, the Guru initiates the chela after performing the necessary ceremonies. The person initiated as a chela adopts the life of a sanyasi and is pledged to lead a life of celibacy and religious mendicancy. The sitting mahant hands over the management of the math to one of his virtuous chelas fittest to succeed whom he nominates and whom he wishes to install as mahant after him in his place. He makes clear this desire to the members of his Sampradaya, and also authorises the nominated chela to give Bhesh Dikshawa. After the death of the mahant, the Bhesh and Sampradaya give Chadar Mahanti of the math to the said disciple at the time of the Bhandara.
The Courts below have concurrently found that the custom or usage, so pleaded has been established. They further found that the plaintiff Mathura Ahir was initiated as a chela by Swami Atmavivekanand and nominated to be his successor. They have also found that at the Bhandara held after Swami Atmavivekanand's death, the plaintiff was installed as the Mahant of Garwaghat Math by the Mahants and Sanyasis belonging to the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya, according to the wishes of Swami Atmavivekanand Paramhans.
From the evidence on record, there can be no doubt that the math at Garwaghat belongs to the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya, which is a religious Order. No doubt, the plaintiff Harsewanand, P.W. 15, asserts:
"Followers of any religion can become a sanyasi in our cult. The practice of becoming sanyasi has been prevalent since Satyuga. Man's life is divided into three Ashramas. (Again said): there are four Ashramas viz., Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Vanaprastha and Sanyas.
Varnas are three, Dashnami Sanyasis came into existence after Shankaracharya. They are Puri, Giri, Bharti, Vana, Tirtha, Aranya, Parvat, Sagar and Saraswati. I am failing to recollect the name of one of them. The Sanyasis of Sant Mat are not Dashnami Sanyasis.
Swarupanandji my Guru or I are not Dashnamis, but all these cults are related with Sant Math. I know Niranjani and Nirvani Akharas. They belong to Dashnami Sanyasis and Sant Mat Sanyasis. We have connections with Nirvani and Niranjani Maths. Some customs of the Maths of those Akharas are observed by us also." (Emphasis supplied) 673 This is, however, contrary to what he had stated in his oral pleadings under O.10, r. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure .
The fact that the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya is one of the Dashnami sects cannot be doubted.
There is unimpeachable testimony of Swami Viveksukhanand, who along with Swami Atmavivekanand and others was initiated as a chela by Swami Sarupanand on the same day, at the same time. During his cross-examination, this witness states:
"Sri Swarupanandji was Sadhu of Sant Sanyas Sampradai. Sant Sanyas Sampradai has been obtaining from ancient time. This Sampradai is of those ten Sampradai which were founded by Swami Shankracharji.
This (Sampradai) out of the Das-nam is Purinama. There is no branch in Purinama (Sampradai).....Niranjani and Nirvani Akharas are the Akharas of Giri Sampradai. If a Sanyasi of Giri, Puri, Bharti, or of any Das Nam Sampradai abandons sanyas and re-enters into the Grahast Ashram he is called a Gosain. The rules for making disciples in Giri and Puri Sampradai for making chief disciples, and appointing successor are also one and the same. The rules, rituals and the ceremonies which are performed at the time of installation to gaddi in both these Sampradai are also one and the same. There is no difference in Giri and Puri Sampradai. The rules, practices, rituals and customs followed at the time of installation to gaddi in all the ten sampradaiyas founded by Swami Shankracharyaji are one and the same.' (Emphasis supplied) Though the math at Garwaghat established by Swami Sarupanand was of recent origin, the High Court observes that the religious order denominated as 'Sant Mat' has had large following in Punjab and some other parts of India since more than a century. In a sense, therefore, Swami Sarupanand himself did not for the first time evolve any new religious order.
As regards the origin of the Math, it observed:
"I have, therefore, no hesitation in holding, in agreement with the finding of the trial court, that there had come into existence a Math at Garwaghat, Varanasi of which Swami Sarupanand was the Mahant. Here I may also mention that from the evidence on record it appears that 'Sant Mat' is not of very recent origin.
Although the evidence is somewhat scanty on the point, yet it sufficiently indicates that this Math 674 has had numerous followers in Punjab and some other parts of India since more than a century. In a sense, therefore, Swami Sarupanand himself did not for the first time evolve any new religious order. Here it may also be mentioned that defendants other than the appellant did not seriously dispute the plaintiff's allegation in regard to the Math in question and the allegation that Swami Sarupanand and thereafter Swami Atmavivekanand were its Mahants." Referring to the nature of the property, it said:
"Swami Atmavivekanand before becoming a follower of the Sant Mat was a Grihasth with a family. From the evidence on the record it transpires that he became a devotee and a disciple of Swami Sarupanand and severed all connections with his family. In course of time he was held in high esteem by the followers of the Sant Mat at Varanasi and other places and large offerings were made to him by the devotees. Swami Sarupanand had nominated him to be his successor and after his death Swami Atmavivekanand did assume the office of Mahant of the math. There is no evidence from which it can be reasonably inferred that he treated or set apart the offerings either in their entirety or some portion thereof as belonging to him personally. On the contrary the evidence on record and the circumstances show that there was a complete blending of such offerings with the funds of the math and used for its purposes. There is also no reliable evidence to establish that the offerings which were made to him were made not for the purposes of the spiritual order or the fraternity but for his personal aggrandizement. Indeed, when a person renounces his family connections and takes to ascetism it would be difficult to hold that he would thereafter start amassing wealth and property for his personal benefit or for the benefit of his family with which he had severed his connection. Unless specifically proved to the contrary, under such circumstances it must be held that the offerings made to such a person were not offerings made to him personally for his personal benefit but had been made for the benefit of the math or the religious institution itself. In such a case, to my mind, the natural heirs of the person concerned could have no claim to the property which the person came by in his capacity as the religious or spiritual leader. The house in suit must be held to be an accretion to the Math." 675 All this is borne out by the testimony of plaintiff's witnesses. The institution was really built up by Swami Atmavivekanand, who was held in great veneration by the followers of the sect. He preached the tenets of 'Sant Mat' and had a large following. His 'Sant Mat' fraternity comprised of thousands of Grihastha and Virakta disciples who made large offerings. All the witnesses speak of such offerings in cash or kind or in the shape of immovable property which were endowed to the math. There are a number of documents showing the endowment by the disciples of their properties to the math, wherein they have described themselves as 'disciples of Swami Atmavivekanand' and he is described therein as 'Mahant of the Garwaghat Math'. Even Avadesh Narain, a Judicial Magistrate, D.W. 1, who practised as a lawyer at Varanasi before he was appointed as a Judicial Officer, admits that Swami Atmavivekanand had a large number of disciples in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, and that the property of 'Bangla Kuti' might be worth lakhs of rupees. The two houses at Varanasi, including the suit house, were purchased by Swami Atmavivekanand from out of the offerings (Bhent) made by his disciples. We have, therefore, no hesitation in upholding the finding of the High Court as regards the existence of a math at Garwaghat and the suit property being the math property.
We may now deal with the main questions on which the decision of the appeal must turn. It has been argued that according to the Smritis a Sudra cannot be a sanyasi and, therefore, the plaintiff could not enter the Order of a yati or sanyasi. It has further been argued that there is no evidence on record in proof of the fact that the plaintiff and his two predecessors Swami Sarupanand and Swami Atmavivekanand had performed Atma Sradh or recited Pravesh Mantra and, therefore, they cannot be regarded as Hindu sanyasis. It, therefore, becomes necessary to trace the origin of Hindu sanyasis belonging to the Dasnami sects founded by the great Sankaracharya, of which the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya appears to be a religious denomination i.e., a sub-sect. The first question is, whether a Brahman alone can become a sanyasi among Dasnamis? The second question is, what are the essential ceremonies prerequisite for the initiation of a Dasnami sanyasi? The third question is, what is the mode of succession to the office a mahant of a math or Asthal belonging to any of the Dasnami sects? It will be convenient to take up the last point first.
The law is well settled that succession to mahantship of a math or religious institution is regulated by custom or usage of the particular institution, except where a rule of succession is laid down by the founder himself who created the endowment: vide Genda Puri v. Chatar Puri [1886] I.A.
100 @ 105, Sital Das v. Sant Ram A.I.R.
676 1954 SC 606; Mahalingam Thambiren v. La Sri Kasivasi [1974] 2 S.C.R. 74.
x x x x x x x x x x One who enters into a religious order severs his connection with the members of his natural family. He is accordingly excluded from inheritance. Entrance to a religious order, is tantamount to civil death so as to cause a complete severance of his connection with his relations, as well as with his property. Neither he nor his natural relatives can succeed to each other's properties. Any property which may be subsequently acquired by persons adopting religious orders passes to their religious relations. The persons who are excluded on this ground come under three heads, the Vanaprastha or hermit; the Sanyasi or Yati, or ascetic, and the Brahmachari, or perpetual religious student. In order to bring a person under these heads it is necessary to show an absolute abandonment by him of all secular property, and a complete and final withdrawal from earthly affairs. The mere fact that a persons calls himself a Byragi, or religious mendicant, or indeed that he is such, does not of itself disentitle him to succeed to property. Nor does any Sudra come under this disqualification, unless by usage. This civil death does not prevent the person who enters into an order from acquiring and holding private property which will devolve, not of course upon his natural relations, but according to special rules of inheritance. But it would be otherwise if there is no civil death in the eye of the law, but only the holding by a man of certain religious opinions or professions(1).
Special rules are propounded for succession to the property of a hermit, of an ascetic, and of a processed student. Yajnavalkya states a special rule of succession in regard to the wealth of ascetics and the like: "The heirs who take the wealth of a Vanaprastha (a hermit), of a Yati (an ascetic) and a Brahmacharin (a student) are in their order, the preceptor, the virtuous pupil, and one who is supposed brother and belonging to the same order". The Mitakshara explains thus(2): "A spiritual brother belonging to the same hermitage (dharmabhratrekatirthi) takes the goods of the hermit (vanaprastha). A virtuous pupil (sacchishya) takes the property of a yati (as ascetic). The preceptor (acharya) is heir to the Brahmachari (professed student). But on failure of these, any one belonging to the same order or hermitage takes the property; even though sons and other natural heirs exist." The property that is referred to is explained in Mitakshara and in the Viramitrodaya as consisting of clothes, books and other requisite 677 articles. Practically, however, such cases seldom arise.
When a hermit or ascetic holds any appreciable extent of property, he generally holds it as the head of some math or as the manager of some religious or charitable endowment, and succession to such property is regulated by the special custom of the foundation.
Succession to the office of the Mahant or Mathadhipathi or Pandara Sannadhi is to be regulated by the custom of the particular institution. Even where the Mahant has the power to appoint his successor, it is the custom in the various Maths that such appointments should be confirmed or recognised by the members of the religious fraternity to which the deceased belonged.
According to the text of Yajnavalkya referred to above, the property of a life-long student goes to his preceptor, that of a hermit or Vanaprastha goes to his religious brother and that of a sanyasi or Yati goes to his virtuous disciple. The principle, so far as it affects maths, is shortly this, viz., 'a virtuous pupil takes the property'.
The particular mode in which the virtuous pupil, that is, not merely a chela, or a shishya, fittest to succeed, is ascertained or selected is a matter either of express direction on the part of the founder or of custom in the case of each foundation. There are instances of maths in which the mahantship descends from Guru to chela i.e., the existing mahant alone appoints his successor, but the general rule is that the maths of the same sect in a district, or maths having a common origin, are associated together-the mahants of these acknowledging one of their member as a head who is for some reason pre-eminent; and on the occasion of the death of one, the others assemble to elect a successor out of the chelas or disciples of the deceased, if possible-or if there be none of them qualified then from the chelas of another mahant.(1) According to the Dharmasastras, in the strict legal sense, a Sudra cannot become a sanyasi or ascetic.
Mahamopadhya Dr. P. V. Kane in 'History of Dharmasastra', Vol. 2, Pt. 1, p. 163, observes:
"As the sudra could not be initiated into Vedic study, the only asrama out of the four that he was entitled to was that of the householder. In the Anusasanaparva (165. 10) we read 'I am a sudra and so I have no right to resort to the four asramas'. In the Santiparva (63. 12-14) it is said, 'in the case of a sudra who performs service (of the higher classes), who has done his duty, who has raised offspring, who has only a short span of life left or is reduced to the 10th stage (i.e. is above 90 years of age), the fruits of all 678 asramas are laid down (as obtained by him) except of the fourth'. Medhatithi on Manu, VI. 97 explains these words as meaning that the sudra by serving brahmanas and procreating offspring as a householder acquires the merit of all asramas except moksa which is the reward of the proper observance of the duties of the fourth asrama." Although the orthodox view does not sanction or tolerate ascetic life of the Sudras, the existing practice all over India is quite contrary to such orthodox views. In Mukherjea's Hindu Law of Religious and Charitable Trusts, 4th ed., p. 328, it is said:
".... the practice of establishing Maths which began with Brahmin ascetics gradually spread to the Sudras and in course of time it was adopted by dissenting religious sects like the Jains, Kabir Panthis, Nanak Panthis, Jangamus and others though they do not believe in the authority of the Vedas or in the tenets of orthodox Hindu religion." At page 338, it is observed:
"..... according to orthodox Smriti writers, a Sudra cannot legitimately enter into a religious order.
Consequently, the texts of Hindu Law relating to exclusion from inheritance applicable to a yati or a sannyasi do not, in terms, apply to Sudra ascetics. On this view, it has been held in a series of cases that a Sudra ascetic is not incapable of inheriting the property of his natural relations under the ordinary law of inheritance. Although orthodox view does not sanction or tolerate ascetic life of the Sudras, it cannot be denied that the existing practice all over India is quite contrary to such orthodox views. In cases, therefore, where the usage is established, according to which the property of a Sudra ascetic devolves in the same way as the property of the ascetics of the twice born classes, such usages should be given effect to." (Emphasis supplied) In the words of the Privy Council in Collector of Madura v. Moottoo Ramalinga(1), 'under the Hindu system of law, clear proof of usage will outweigh the written text of the law'.
Golapchandra Sarkar Sastri in his Hindu Law, 8thed., at pp. 65356, in a passage based on translation of slokas from Maha-Nirvana Tantra, observes that in Kali Yug, with numerous sects having their 679 peculiar rites for being ordained to a religious order, there are five castes (varnas), i.e., a fifth caste comprising of all other beings. He further observes that sanyasam according to Vedic rites does not exit and that all the five castes can become Avadhutha Sanyasis:
"... in the advanced state of the Kali age, the Brahmanas and the other (four) castes are all entitled to these two orders of life. The Brahman, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, the Sudra, and the general body of human beings, these five are entitled to be initiated as Sannyasis or ascetics according to Tantric system." The orthodox rule laid down in the Mitakshara that only the Brahman can enter the fourth Asram of life and are eligible to become sanyasis, has therefore, been commented upon by Golapchandra Sarkar Sastri at p. 662:
"It has been held that a Sudra cannot become a sannyasi or ascetic. This is undoubtedly the doctrine propounded in the Smritis. But the learned Judges have not taken into consideration the modern usages introduced by the Vaishnava and Tantrika and other systems according to which a Sudra and even a non-Hindu such as Mohamedan may become a Hindu sannyasi. There are many religious sects of ascetics among whom caste distinction is unknown, who accordingly initiate and admit Sudras into their brotherhood if otherwise qualified. In esoteric Hinduism also, caste is individualistic not hereditary, it being determined by qualification and not by birth. The highest virtue taught by the Hindu religion is that a man should regard other persons and beings as his own self reproduced in them, as the same Supreme Soul pervades them all." (Emphasis supplied) Here the question arises as to what classes of Hindus should be denominated as Sudras. It is undoubted that there were originally four classes: (1) the Brahmanas, (2) the Kshatriyas, (3) the Vaishyas, and (4) the Sudras. The first three were the regenerate, or twice-born, classes; the latter, the servile class. The three regenerate classes exist, it is true; but it often becomes difficult to distinguish a Sudra from one of the regenerate classes. It is pointed out by Golapchandra Sarkar Sastri at p. 113:
"The Smritis, which have thrust into prominence this system, divide men into two large classes namely, the Sudras 680 and the Twice-born. The study of the sacred literature forms the principle of this distinction. They ordain that by birth all men are alike to Sudras, and the second birth depends on the study of the sacred literature. Thus Sankha, one of the compilers of the Dharma-Shastras, declares "Brahmanas (by birth) are, however, regarded by the wise to be equal to Sudras until they are born in the Veda (i.e., learn the sacred literature), but after that (i.e., this second birth) they are deemed twice-born".
Passages to the same effect are found in most of the codes, according to which the recognition of the title of the Twice-born to superiority over the Sudras, depends upon acquisition of the knowledge of the Vedas." The learned author then goes on to say at p. 184:
"According to the Smritis, every man is by birth a sudra; it is by learning the sacred literature, that a man becomes twice-born. The privilege of studying the sacred literature is, no doubt, denied to the sudras as well as to the females of the so-called twice-born classes. But the status of being twice-born depends on the acquisition of knowledge of the sacred literature.
Manu ordains that a twice-born man shall abide with the preceptor, and study the Vedas for thirty-six years or half or a quarter of that period, or until knowledge of the same is acquired." The consequence of omitting to do the same, according to Manu, is that a twice-born man, who without studying the Vedas, applies diligent attention to anything else, soon falls even when living together with his descendants, to the condition of a Sudra. The learned author has observed that the majority of the so-called twice-born classes have accordingly become long since reduced to the position of Sudras by reason of neglecting the study of the Vedas from generation to generation.
The learned Single Judge accordingly observes:
"It will thus be seen that originally every person was deemed to be born a Sudra and that it was by virtue of intensive study of Vedas that a person attained the status of a twice-born person. With the passage of time running into thousands of years, it is evident that the original hall-marks for classification of Sudras and twice-born people gradually disappeared and degenerated into the rigid caste system based on birth." 681 As Dr. Mukherjea observes, the disciples of Sankara were all Brahmans and originally, according to the rule laid down in Sanyas Grahan Paddhati, the authorship of which is imputed to Sankara himself, only the twice-born people can become sanyasis of the Dasnami orders. As the four stages of life have, in the Vedas, been prescribed only for the twice- born, no Sudra can, strictly speaking, become an ascetic, and that is the view entertained by the Smriti writers.(1).
According to the Mitakshara, only the Brahmans can enter the fourth Asram of life and are eligible to become sanyasis; and this view is supported by certain passages from Manu where 'Pravrajya', i.e. exit from the house, has been spoken of or prescribed for the Brahmans alone, and a text of the Sruiti which says "the Brahmans should become ascetics". According to Nirnaya Sindhu, which has been quoted in West and Buhler's Digest of Hindu Law(2), a Kshatriya and a Vaishya can also enter into an order of sanyasis.
Upon a view of all these authorities, it was held by the Madras High Court in Dharampuram v. Virapandiyan(3) and the Calcutta High Court in Harish Chandra v. Atir Mahamed(4), that a Sudra cannot become a sanyasi under Hindu Law, and consequently the devolution of property of a Sudra who purported to renounce the world and become an ascetic would be governed by the ordinary law of inheritance.
Asceticism in India, perhaps more than in any other country, has been under the definite and strong sanction of religion. In the doctrine of the four asramas, asceticism was made an integral part of the orthodox Hindu life, and it became the duty of every Hindu, as advanced age overtook him homeless and a wanderer to chasten himself with austerities.
Formally this was to be done for the sake of detaching himself from earthly ties, and of realizing union with Brahman. And a religious motive was thus supplied for that which in itself was a welcome release from responsibility, care, and the minute requirements of an elaborate social code. In due course, with the advancement of knowledge, the shackles of the caste system were broken through and the privileges and powers of the ascetic life were extended to Sudras.
682 Hindu asceticism represented, further, a revolt from, or at least a protest against, the tyranny of caste. In its origin probably remote from Brahmanism, and conveying the ordinary idea that bodily pain was profitable for the advancement and purification of the spirit, the ascetic life became, in association with Hinduism and under the prescriptive sanction of Hindu law itself, a refuge from the burden of caste rules and ostracisms.(1) In Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Ed. by James Hastings, Vol. II, p. 91, it is observed:
"....In the first instance apparently, the right and privilege of asceticism, according to Hindu custom or law, belonged to Brahmans alone; it was then extended to all the twice-born, and finally all restrictions were removed, and admission into the ranks of the ascetics was accorded to men of every position and degree." This is based on the following passage from the Ramayana, Uttara Kanda, 74.9ff., quoted in J. Muir's Original Sanskrit Text, i.119f:
"Formerly in the krta age Brahmans alone practised tapas; none who was not a Brahman did so in that enlightened age.... then came the treta age,.... in which the Ksatriyas were born, distinguished still by their former tapas ..... Those Brahmanas and Ksatriyas who lived in the treta practised tapas, and the rest of mankind obedience..... In the dvapara age tapas entered into the Vaisyas. Thus in the course of three ages it entered into three castes; and in the three ages righteousness (dharma) was established in three castes.
But the Sudra does not attain to righteousness through the (three) ages.. such observance will belong to the future race of Sudras in the kali age, but is unrighteous in the extreme if practised by that caste in the dvapara." (Manu: i. 86) It is, therefore, evident that with reluctance the right to ascetic life was extended to Sudras and in due recognition of their status, they were treated as Hindu sanyasis. At the present time, there is no distinction or barrier; any one may become an ascetic, and the vows are not necessarily lifelong. Some sects, however, still restrict membership to Brahmanas, or at least to men of the three higher castes.
The principle laid down by the Madras High Court in Dharmapuram v. Virapandiyan (supra) and the Calcutta High Court in 683 Harish Chandra v. Atir Mahamed (supra) regulating the mode of devolution of property of a Sudras who becomes an ascetic is, however, not applicable to after-acquired property of a Hindu sanyasi. As has been said above, when a layman becomes an ascetic, his connection with his natural family and existing property rights are extinguished. If he acquires any property subsequent to his becoming an ascetic, such property passes on his death not to his natural but to his spiritual heirs.
It would be convenient next to deal with the question, firstly, as to whether in the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya which being a sect of the Dasnamis, a Sudra cannot enter the order of a yati or a sanyasi; and secondly, whether performance of Atma Sradh and the recitation of Pravesh Mantra are ceremonies essential for the initiation of a chela in the 'Sant Mat' fraternity. That depends on whether the matter falls to be governed by the Smritis or is regulated by the custom or usage of the 'Sant Mat' Sampradaya which was one of the Dasnami sects.
About the eighth century A.D., Sankaracharya, the greatest Hindu scholar and philosopher of modern India, defeated the Buddhists in argument and re-established Hinduism as the dominant religion of India. Sankara was an ascetic and founded schools of ascetics. Hindu scholars and philosophers like Mandana Misra, attempted to prove against him that such ascetism was against the law of the Hindus.
But all opposition was overborne by the commanding influence of Sankara, who established four maths or seats of religion at four ends of India-the Sringeri Math on the Sringeri Hills in the south, the Sharda Math at Dwarka in the west, the Jyotir Math at Badrikashram in the north, and the Govardhan Math at Puri in the east and Mandana himself became a Sanyasi disciple under the name of Sureswara. The monks ordained by Sankara and his disciples were called Sanyasis. Each of the maths has a sanyasi at its head two bears the title of Sankaracharya in general. Sankara is said to have four principal disciples who were all Brahmans, from whom the ten divisions of the Order-hence named the 'ten- named' or 'Dasnami Dandis' originated. These are: Tirtha, 'shrine'; Ashrama, 'order'; Vana, 'wood'; Aranya, 'forest', '
