Indian ideal of Sat-anarchy : flexible even in firmness

Sri Aurobindo writes that 'Life is too complex to admit any arbitrary ideal simplicity which a moralizing theorist loves. Nature, position, aim and bent, call of life, call of spirit, the degree and turn of development and capacity all make a difference. He explained that this was the basis of Varnashram system. All ought not to be put under the same table of law for that would mean a senseless geometric rigidity which will destroy the plastic truth of life.' Hinduism or

Sanatana dharma in this way is less a dogma or a creed but a continuously enlarging tradition of Godward endeavor of human spirit. It is in fact an immense many sided and many staged provision for spiritual self-building and self-finding, said Sri Aurobindo. D.B. Thengadi explained it as follows. Rig Veda declared the dream of perfect anarchy. No kingdom, no rule of king, nobody is afraid of punishment, there is no state officials, no judiciary, the society is sustained only by dharma. Dharma here is not religion, an ever changing socioeconomic order in the light of unchanging universal eternal laws is dharma. Dharma envisages autonomy of each group to seek its own fulfillment, using own formula and suiting their nature, and then psychological integration of these groups in a common and mutually complementary framework. Each has something to contribute to the collective wisdom of humanity and so diversity is essential for true unity: diversity should be neither pampered nor steamrolled. For destruction of even a small strand, may mar beauty of the entire design. The small self-governed democratic units were called Visha. They could decide all matters of civil and at times even judiciary and defence. Deendayalji’s dream of State without Statism was based on such local autonomous units called Janapada, very much linked to the ancient Visha. Rule is of dharma and that is why, a sanyasi felt it necessary to be a kingmaker and overthrow an oppressive conqueror while a king offered his entire kingdom to his spirtitual guru as dakshina, only to get it returned by him. The present model of democracy and state is not an adequate idea as per Sri Aurobindo. State is not an organism, it is a machinery and it works like a machine, without taste, delicacy or intuition. It tries to manufacture but what humanity is here to do is to grow and create. State leads to uniformity for that is easy for it. But uniformity is not life, it is death. According to Sri Aurobindo, the guardians of India’s destiny wisely compelled the centralized rule to fail to safeguard the inner spirit, to ensure that the soul is not bartered for a temporary security. That is why ‘the persistent principle of regional autonomy which is essential to the life of India reasserted itself to the detriment of artificial unity established.’ Organization thus should be like fibers in muscles, not like parts of a machine. It should be decentralized, autonomous, non-hierarchical and organically structured. The image of Virata purusha, a tree, or a great being used in ancient literature for existence is significant to emphasize this insight.