Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g78kv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T09:30:18.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transcending Tradition: An Examination of the Manner in Which the Law Induces Change in Institutions Defined by Religion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2015

Abhinav Shrivastava
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper, I want to consider how the law navigates the space lying between the concepts of faith and religion so as to effectively induce change in institutions defined by their religious expression without distorting the faith reposed by individual believers in their religious institution. In order to consider whether this is possible, we must first consider whether the seemingly twin concepts of faith and religion are so intertwined that they are inseparable, or whether they lie in different planes, with the law regulating conduct that expresses the faith, and thereby potentially affecting both concepts.

In considering this problem, I would suggest that religion or religious dictates generally offer to guide the believer toward the attainment of salvation, often conceived of as adherence to religious dictates. In my view, however, reducing the concept of salvation to adherence to religious dictates would rob it of its character as a comprehensive set of beliefs and commitments held by individual believers, whatever the particular religion they follow. In essence, “salvation” lies within the individual believer and while compliance with religious dictates may be part of that process, ultimately, whether one has achieved salvation is entirely determined by the individual. “Salvation” resonates from the faith held by the individual, while religion is simply a means of expressing that faith.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Law and Religion , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , 2008 , pp. 463 - 474
Copyright
Copyright © Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Wilson, Bryan, Religion in Sociological Perspective 27 (Oxford U. Press 1982)Google Scholar.

2. Wolterstroff, Nicholas, Locke's philosophy of religion, in The Cambridge Companion to Locke 172, 186 (Campbell, Vere ed., Cambridge U. Press 1994)Google Scholar.

3. Id. at 179 (quoting Locke, John, Essay Concerning Human Understanding 678–688, Bk. IV, XVII.24)Google Scholar.

4. Id.

5. Id. at 194 (quoting John Locke).

6. See id.

7. Berman, Harold J., The Interaction of Law and Religion 15 (Abingdon Press 1974)Google Scholar.

8. Wallace, James E., Relationships between Law and Religion in American Society, 7 Rev. Religious Research 63, 63 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. Cahn, Edmond, A Lawyer looks at Religion, 15 Theology Today 100, 104–105 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. Wallace, supra n. 8, at 67.

11. Durkheim, Emile, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (Cosman, Carol trans., Oxford U. Press 2001)Google Scholar.

12. Holland, Thomas Erskine, The Elements of Jurisprudence 82 (10th ed., Oxford U. Press 1906)Google Scholar; Hohfeld, Wesley N., Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as applied in Judicial Reasoning, 23 Yale L.J. 16, 34 (1913)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. Berger, Benjamin L., Law's Religion: Rendering Culture, 45 Osgood Hall L.J. 277, 281 (2007)Google Scholar.

14. Coing, Helmut, Die Obersten Grundsätze de Rechts 19 (1947)Google Scholar; Bodenheimer, Edgar, Jurisprudence: The Philosophy and Method of Law 176 (Rev. ed., Harv. U. Press 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. de Soto, Hernando, The Other Path: The Invisible Revolution in the Third World 19 (Abbot, June trans., Harper & Row 1989)Google Scholar; see also Jacobson, Arthur J., The Other Path of the Law, 103 Yale L.J. 2213, 2228 (1994) (discussing de Soto's The Other Path)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16. Bodenheimer, supra n. 14, at 182.

17. Spinoza, Benedict, Tractatus Theologico-Politicus: Tractatus Politico, ch. I, 5 ¶ (Elwes, R.H.M ed., Gosset, A.H. trans., G. Bell & Son 1883) (copy with author) (available at http://www.constitation.org/bs/poltreat.txt)Google Scholar.

18. Bodenheimer, supra n. 14, at 195.

19. Aristotle, Politics, Book III, Part IX (B. Jowett trans.) (available at http://www.constitution.org/ari/polit_03.htm); id. at 197.

20. Nussbaum, Martha, Frontiers of Justice, Disability, Nationality and Species Membership 78–81 (Oxford U. Press 2006)Google Scholar. This paper is not concerned with determining the precise contours of the term “justice,” only in locating its relation to the law and the manner in which it legitimizes the functions performed by the law.

21. Sorley, William R., The Moral Life and Moral Worth 95–113 (Cambridge U. Press 1911)Google Scholar.

22. Hohfeld, supra n. 12, at 30-32.

23. Hart, H.L.A, The Concept of Law 155 (Oxford U. Press 1961)Google Scholar. See generally id. at 153-155.

24. Bodenheimer, supra n. 14, at 208 (quoting Justinian, Corpus Juris Civilis, Digest I, i. 10).

25. Bodenheimer, supra n. 14, at 234.

26. Slosson, Preston W., Decline of the Chartist Movement 25–26 (Colum. U. 1916)Google Scholar.

27. India Const. art. 14 (available at http://www.servat.unibe.ch/law/icl/in00000_.html).

28. St. Stephen's College v. U. Delhi, A.I.R. 1992 SC 1630, ¶ 104 (Jagannatha Shetty J.); Andhra Pradesh v. U.S.V. Balram, A.I.R. 1972 SC 1375, ¶ 52 (Mathew J.); M.P. Oil Extraction Co. v. St, Madhya Pradesh, 1997 (4) S.C.A.L.E. 515, ¶ 31 (G.N. Ray J.).

29. Nussbaum, supra n. 20, at 79.

30. Id. at 346.

31. Jacobson, supra n. 15, at 2213.

32. Id. at 2223.

33. Id. at 2228.

34. Shue, Henry, Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy 18 (Princeton U. Press 1980)Google Scholar.

35. Id. at 19.

36. Schneider, Herbert W., Faith, 21 J. Phil. 36, 38 (1924)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37. Sati is a ritual that involves the self-immolation of the widow on her husband's funeral pyre. This practice was banned, and penal consequences were attached to the grant of any aid in its commission, in 1829. See generally Mani, Lata, Contentious Traditions: The Debate on Sati in Colonial India 11–20 (U. Cal. Press 1998)Google Scholar and Sharma, Arvindet. al, Sati: Historical and Phenomenological Essays 25 (Motilal Banarsidass Publishers 1998)Google Scholar

38. Hindu Widow's Remarriage Act, 1856, § 1 (notified July 25, 1856) (available at http://www.bdlaws.gov.bcfpdf_part.php?actjtame=&vol=&id=9) (accessed Jan. 11, 2009).

39. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, § 5 (notified May 18, 1955) (available at http://www.sudhirlaw.com/HMA55.htm) (accessed Jan 17, 2009).

40. Diwan, Paras & Diwan, Peeyushi, Law of Marriage and Divorce 2–6 (3d ed., Universal L. Publg. Co. 1997)Google Scholar; Mayne, John Dawson & Kuppuswami, Alladi, Mayne's Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage 96, 155 (Mishra, Ranganath ed., Bharat Law House 2006)Google Scholar.

41. Macdonell, Arthur Anthony & Keith, Arthur Barriedale, 1 Vedic Index of Names and Subjects 484 (1912)Google Scholar.

42. Id. at 478-479; John D. Mayne, supra n. 40, at 96.

43. A text of the Manusmriti states that a wife, a son and a slave can have no property and that the wealth that they earn is acquired for him to whom they belong. Mayne, supra n. 40, at 1028.

44. See generally Sharma, Ram S., Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India 157 (4th rev. ed., Motilal Banarsidass Publishers 1996)Google Scholar; Winbush, Vincent L., Theorizing Scriptures: New Critical Orientations to a Cultural Phenomenon 216 (Rutgers U. Press 2008)Google Scholar; Thomas, Paul, Indian Women Through the Ages 237–248 (Asia Publg. House 1964)Google Scholar.

45. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Preamble (notified May 18, 1955) (available at http://www.sudhirlaw.com/HMA55.htm) (accessed Nov. 17, 2008).

46. Id. at §§ 5(i), 9.

47. Id. at §§11-12.

48. Mayne, supra n. 40, at 664-669.

49. Id. at 719-722; Bhaskaran v. Kasavarayudu, 31 Mad 318 (1908); Kumar v. Husnain, A.I.R. 1944 All 243; Chetty v. Chetty, 26 Mad 544, 553; Ramchandra v. Chinabhai, A.I.R. 1944 Bom 76, 79.

50. The Mitakshara and Dayabhaga Schools of Hindu Law apply differing interpretations to the manner in which entitlements are determined within the Hindu Family. These schools derive their content primarily from the works of Sage Vijnanesvara and Sage Jimutvahana respectively. See Strange, Thomas, Elements of Hindu Law 315 (Payne & Foss 1825)Google Scholar; Gangasahar v. Lehkraj Singh, 9 All 253, 292 (1887) (Mahmood, J.); Mayne, supra n. 40, at 42.

51. Maistri v. Narasimhulu, 24 Mad 149 (1902); Rameshwar Mistry v. Babulal Mistry, 1991 AIR Pat 53; CED v. Harish Chandra, 167 ITR 230 (1987).

52. Hindu Succession Act, 1956, § 6 (notified June 17, 1956) (available at http://www.sudbirlaw.com/HSA56F.htm) (accessed Nov. 17, 2008).