In the Sanatan worldview, dharma is the foundation of rights, where every individual is granted freedom of truth, life, dignity, thought, and faith, provided they fulfill their duties toward society and nature.
This spirit is reflected in the Constitution through the Right to Equality (samata), the Right to Freedom (speech, thought, conduct), religious freedom, and the protection of life and dignity. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (5.7) teaching “Atmavat sarvabhuteshu” and the Bhagavad Gita’s principle of lokasangraha clearly state that one person’s rights cannot exist in opposition to the rights of others.
This balance is established in the Constitution through reasonable restrictions and judicial protection. Thus, Part III of the Constitution expresses the Sanatan principles of dharma, compassion, equality, and human dignity in modern legal language, where Fundamental Rights do not make an individual unrestrained, but a just, responsible, and nation-oriented citizen.
The objective of Fundamental Rights is to provide Indian citizens the opportunity to live a life of dignity. Fundamental Rights are a living document of dignified life, civic duty, and national consciousness.
However, this is not a new concept for India; its reflection has existed in the Indian Sanatan tradition from the very beginning. In the Sanatan Indian tradition, the concept of rights has always been linked to duty, dharma, and human dignity.
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28)
Under the Right to Freedom of Religion, all citizens of India have the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate any religion. In the Indian knowledge tradition, dharma is not confined to a single creed, sect, or mode of worship; rather, it is regarded as a universal moral principle that sustains life.
The famous Rigvedic verse (1.164.46)—“Ekam sat vipra bahudha vadanti”—clearly conveys that truth is one, but it can be expressed in many ways. This pluralistic vision has been the fundamental basis of religious freedom in Indian civilization.
The freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion is naturally present in the Upanishads, Buddhist–Jain traditions, and the Bhakti movement. Buddha emphasized conscious acceptance rather than imposing his views on others. The Kalama Sutta of the Anguttara Nikaya mentions “Ehipassiko”—“come and examine for yourself.”
The Jain tradition strengthened the spirit of coexistence of ideas through Anekantavada. In the Bhakti tradition as well, individuals had the freedom to choose their deity, path, and form of worship, making religious practice a matter of personal faith.
The freedom to manage religious institutions is also clearly found in Indian tradition. Maths, ashrams, sanghas, viharas, and temples functioned as autonomous institutions, governed by their own rules, codes of conduct, and traditions. State intervention was considered limited to the protection of dharma, not religious control. Kings were instructed that governance must be conducted through justice and dharma.
The Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata states—“Dharmen rajyam sancharet”. Thus, the Right to Freedom of Religion provided in the Constitution is the modern constitutional form of the same Sanatan spirit of tolerance, pluralism, discernment, and spiritual freedom inherent in the Indian knowledge tradition, where religion is both a matter of personal faith and a means of social harmony.
Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29–30)
Cultural and Educational Rights include the right of every citizen of India to preserve their culture, language, and script, as well as the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. The Indian knowledge tradition has fundamentally been pluralistic and inclusive, where diverse languages, cultures, and educational traditions have received equal respect.
“Unity in diversity” is a central element of Indian civilization, evident since the Vedic period. The Rigveda’s acceptance of the coexistence of different communities, languages, and traditions demonstrates that culture was viewed not through uniformity, but through harmony.
The right to protect language and culture was considered natural in the Indian tradition. Many languages such as Pali, Prakrit, Apabhramsha, Tamil, and Sanskrit developed simultaneously, and were not suppressed by the state or society, but were protected and nurtured. The Bhakti and Sufi traditions imparted spiritual dignity to local languages and cultural expressions, thereby strengthening cultural diversity.
The tradition of establishing and protecting educational institutions was also highly developed in ancient India. Gurukuls, maths, viharas, madrasas, and pathshalas were community-based educational institutions, independently managed by different sects and groups. Universities such as Nalanda, Takshashila, and Vallabhi hosted students of different ideologies, philosophies, and regions without discrimination.
Thus, granting cultural and educational rights to minorities in the Constitution is the modern constitutional expression of the same spirit of tolerance, pluralism, and cultural preservation found in the Indian knowledge tradition, enabling every community to safeguard its identity while participating in national unity.
Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32)
The Right to Constitutional Remedies provides that in case of violation of these rights, every citizen has the right to approach the courts (the Supreme Court and High Courts). The Supreme Court has been described as the guardian of Fundamental Rights. In the Indian knowledge tradition, justice was not seen merely as a function of governance, but as an essential element of dharma. The Upanishads and Smritis regard justice, dharma, and truth as the foundation of social order.
The Mahabharata clearly states—“Dharmena rajyam sancharet”, meaning that the state must be governed according to justice and dharma, where dharma signifies impartial justice and the protection of rights.
The concept of seeking justice in cases of violation of rights also existed in ancient India. The king was regarded as the highest judge, but his judicial authority was not absolute. Assemblies, councils, village sabhas, and republican bodies (gana–sanghas) provided alternative forums for citizens to obtain justice.
If a king acted against dharma, society possessed the moral right to remove him—this was the core spirit of rajadharma. The philosophical foundation of judicial concepts such as writs can also be traced to Indian tradition. Kautilya’s Arthashastra lays down clear provisions for checks on rulers and officials, penal systems, and grievance redressal mechanisms, which may be considered precursors to the modern writ system. Making the king and ministers accountable to the people was regarded as an essential duty of governance.
Thus, the constitutional Right to Constitutional Remedies is the modern constitutional form of the Indian knowledge tradition’s principles of justice, dharma, public welfare, and accountable governance. This is why Dr BR Ambedkar described it as the “soul” of the Constitution, because without it, rights become meaningless.
Dr Alok Kumar Dwivedi holds a PhD in Philosophy from Allahabad University. He is currently working as an Assistant Professor at KSAS, Lucknow. This institution is the India-based research center of INADS, USA. Dr. Alok’s academic interests include philosophy, culture, society, and politics.
