Mimansa and Its Uses in the Interpretation of Statutes: A Study

About

The rules of interpretation are drawn from the general scope and intention of the codified legislation. Besides this, the nature of the transactions and the situation also affects the interpretation of those legislation. Interpretation is the process which is adopted for determination of the meaning of a writing and is the most important aid to determine its true meaning or the intent of the framers of the documents. It is the art of finding out the true sense of words written in those legislation the sense which their author intended to convey. It is not a science but an art to find out the meaning of words in the context of a given situation. Maxwell is the name who has greater position in the scope of Interpretation of Statutes. 

In this course of time, the discussion of the other prevalent important rules of interpretation that existed prior to Maxwell are left apart and are hardly used in the present time. Especially, in the Eastern part of the world where there is wide influence of Hinduism. There exist many scriptures which played important role in the interpretation of the Hindu Texts. These scriptures consisted of the elaborate rules for finding the actual meaning of the words and phrases used in the Vedas and Purans. Among all those scriptures, the most important scripture which consisted the rules for such interpretation is the Mimangsa 

Elaborate rules of interpretation were evolved even at a very early stage of Hindu civilization and culture. The rules given by ‘Jaimini’, the author of Mimamsat Sutras, originally meant for srutis were employed for the interpretation of Smrities also. Mimangsa can be called as the stepping stone to Dharmasasthras. 

During the post-Buddhist era, Jaimini attempted the work of systematizing the rules of Mimamsa, which had evolved since the earliest times of Vedic civilization, and establishing their validity in his work.
The aim of the Purva Mimamsa is to examine the nature of dharma. Its interest is more practical than speculative, and therefore the philosophical speculations found in it are subordinate to the ritualistic purpose. Thus the scriptures governing the Hindu life need basically to be interpreted in accordance with the Mimamsa rules. 
Dharma is the scheme of right living. Jaimini defines dharma as an ordinance or command. Dharma is what is enjoined, and it leads to happiness. Activities which result in loss or pain (anartha) are not dharma. Thus the lack of observing the commands leads not only to missing the happiness but becoming subject to suffering also. 
There is a greater scope of use of Mimangsa Principles of interpretation in the present context in the interpretation of statutes. However, if the practice of its application is concerned, it is not up to the expected level. Yet some remarkable attempts are made in this regard to ensure that the rules of interpretation under Mimangsa have the validity and applicability in the present context too. 

The Mimangsa/Mimansa

“Mimangsa” (or Mimansa) is a scripture related to Hindu Religion and is considered the most important tool for the interpretation of other Hindu Scriptures. The meaning of Mimangsa refers to the act of taking serious concern over the religious matters stated in the Vedas. It provides particular methods for interpreting the matters stated in the scriptures like ‘Vedas’, ‘Smirities’ etc. In the course of interpretation, there can be found many methods of interpretation given by Manu, Yagyabalkya, Narad, Vyas, Bhrihaspati and others but no concrete method of interpretation is given by them as given by Jaimini in Mimangsa. The Mimansa Principles were the traditional system of interpretation of legal texts. Although originally they were created for interpreting religious texts [pertaining to the Yagya sacrifice], gradually they came to be utilized for interpreting legal texts and also for interpreting texts on philosophy, grammar, etc. i.e. they became of universal application. Thus, Shankaracharya has used the Mimansa adhikaranas in his bhashya on the Vedanta sutras. There were hundreds of books [all in Sanskrit] written on the subject, though only a few dozens have survived the ravages of time. 
Mimangsa is divided into two parts the first one is the Eastern Mimansa (Purvi Mimangsa) which is propounded by Jaimini while the other is the Northern Mimansa (Uttar Mimansa or Vrahma Mimangsa). The Purvi Mimangsa is decides about the proper intrepretation rules of the Karmakandaparak Mantras and Vedas while the Uttar Mimangsa (also known as Vedanta (j]bfGt)) consists of the situation of the eternity. In the course of interpretation, the Purvi Mimangsa is the main reference. 

Rule for interpretation under Mimangsa

The Rules of Interpretation under Mimangsa can be classified into following five categories: 
a. Primary Rules of Interpretation
The primary rules of interpretation is classified into following categories:

i. Sarthakya (सार्थक्य) 

It states that every word that is stated in the scriptures consists of meaning and there is no world which is used there without meaning. 

ii. Laghav (लागभ)

This rule indicates that in the case a single rule is generated from a particular text or word, other interpretation giving different interpretation should not be resolved. 

iii. Arthekatwo (अर्थेकत्व)
This rule signifies that the single word or the sentence used must be given single meaning and should not be given different meanings. 

iv. Gunapradhan (गुणप्रधान)
It states that whenever a word denoting the secondary thought stands contrary to the primary thought, the word should either be corrected as per the primary thought or should be left. 

v. Samanjasya (सामञ्जस्य)

It states that the possible coalition between the word and sentence of the particular text should be used as per the spirit of the text itself. The contrary coalition of the words and sentence should not be used. 

vi. Bikalpa (विकल्प)

It states that whenever there arises controversy between two texts exists, any one text should be adopted as an alternative. 

b. Basic Principles of Interpretation
The basic principles of interpretation also consists of following categories:
i. Shruti (श्रुति)
It refers that the words should be taken in their simplest meaning. 

ii. Wachan (वचन)
Wachan indicates that if there arises any conflict regarding the resolving meaning of the word in terms of tense, the interpretation should be made looking at the tense used in remaining texts or words. In this regard, Maxwell has also given similar kind of rule of interpretation that the interpretation of particular text should be done in accordance to other texts as well. No interpretation of the tenses contrary to the Vedic Wachan is permitted under Mimangsa. However, a general rule under this principle has been propounded that says that the word denoting singular thing also denotes the plural things.

iii. Linga (लिंग)
This rule states that in the condition where a word cannot stand on its ordinary meaning, then the technical meaning of that word should be resolved. For example, the word denoting the masculine gender also refers to the feminine gender.

iv. Wakya (वाक्य)
This rule states that whenever a word or a sentence in the text does not give clear meaning, then the composition of such sentence or word should be taken into concern and the possible relevant meaning should be resolved.

v. Prakaran (प्रकरण)
When the words or the sentence of text fails to give concrete meaning, the meaning of those words of sentences should be resolved with the context of the text. 

c. General Rules regarding the application of texts
These rules are also divided into four categories:

i. The principle of conceptualizing the texts of compulsive, quasi-compulsive and non- compulsive nature 
The following five groups are divided under this rule:
a. Kanoon/ Bidhi (कानुन/विधि)
It defines law as a command which is positive in nature, possesses meaning and has meaningful objective. 

b. Nisedh (निषेध)
It refers to such a law which is mandatory in nature. It consists such provisions which denote “not to be done”. Thus all the texts of Smiritis which signify the works which should not be done, falls under this category. 

c. Arthavadh (अर्थभेद) and Naamdhaya (नामध्येय)
They are not mandatory in nature. It is used only in the course of helping the interpretation and clarification of law. 

d. Mantra (मन्त्र)
Mantra is considered as the formula. It is sometimes mandatory in nature and sometimes not-mandatory in depending upon the situation.

ii. Adhikar Bidhi (अधिकार विधि)
Adhikar Bidhi states to whom the law applies to. It directs towards the ownership of result of any action of someone. 
iii. Uha Bichar (उह विचार)
The general meaning of Uha Bichar becomes ‘Arguments.’

iv. Badh (वध)
Badh is such a principle of interpretation which talks about the exclusion of some things which are contrary. This principle helps to coordinate conflict of texts. It says that if two unusual procedures are such that one is former while the other is latter, the latter would prevail. 

e. Principles having special relation with the interpretation of texts and customs
According to this rule, Smirities are superior than Shrutis but the customs are superior than Smirities. Such customs can also be denied under undesirable condition. In the situation the two customs contradict to each other, the customs which is supported by the Sasthras are followed. 

f. Formula or Justice

This rule is applied in special matters. There are many such formulae in Mimangsa. The formulae on “ रात्रीसूत्र न्याय ” resembles with the modern rules of interpretation of statute. 

Applicability of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation

The application of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation although is primarily focused with the interpretation of many Hindu Scriptures like Vedas, Smirities, Shrutis etc, its application in modern times also cannot be ignored. 
There are two reasons for the application of Mimansa principles to law : (1) The Mimansa Rules deal with the Brahmana portions of the shruti, i.e., the portion which laid down injunctions, and the law, too, being largely in the form of injunctions was attracted to them; (2) Mimansa is a practical subject, and the law, too, being practical was inclined to incorporate them. The great commentators like Vijnaneshwara (author of the Mitakshara), Jimutvahana (author of the Dayabhaga), Nanda Pandit (author of Dattak Mimansa), Vachaspati, Neelkanth, etc., were all profound scholars of Mimansa, and they regularly used the Mimansa Principles when confronted with any difficulty regarding interpretation of the Smrities (which contained the law in those times).

Talking about the application of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation in the interpretation of the statutes and laws of Nepal, it is not found so much used. But in the context of India, the use of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation has been used for exploring the meaning of the legal provisions. 
The Supreme Court applied one of these principle after quoting a ‘Shloka’. In this regard, the Supreme Court of India in the case of UP Bhoodan Yagna Samiti, UP V. Braj Kishore , observed: 
“In this country, we have a heritage of rich literature, it is interesting to note that literature of interpretation also is very well known. The principless of interpretation have been enunciated in various Shlokas which have been known for hundreds of years.” 

Sir John Edge, the then Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, has referred to the Mimamsa principle in Beni Prasad v Hardai Bibi. 

Similarly, Gunapradhan Axiom of the Mimamsa principle was applied for interpretation of section 419 of UP Sales Tax Act in Amit Plastic Industry, Ghaziabad v Divisional Level Committee, Meerut .

In the case of Tribhuwan Mishra v Distt. Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh ‘Samajasya Axiom’ was applied. 

Supreme Court has recognized the value of the Mimansa Rules of Interpretation in the case of M/s Ispat Industries Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs , M/s Craft Interiors Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Excise . 

Conclusion

It can be shown how Mimansa principles can be a powerful tool in the hands of the Judge in molding the law to make it more rational, equitable and democratic. Use of Mimansa Principles gives a flexibility which Western principles of interpretation totally lack. Knowledge of the great achievements of our ancestors will inspire us and give us the confidence and strength to solve our present problems. 
If the aforementioned rules under Mimangsa Principles of Interpretation are analyzed, the Laghav and Shruti Principle signifies what the Literal Rule of Interpretation signifies.

Again, if the Linga Principle under Mimangsa is concerned, it is similar to what Section 12 of Nepal Kanoon Byakhya Sambandhi Ain 2010. 

The Vakya Rule of Interpretation is quite similar to the Mischief Rule of Interpretation. 

Similarly, the General Principles Regarding the Application of Texts has been able to segregate the rules that are mandatory in nature and those which are not mandatory in nature. 

Knowledge of the Mimansa principles enables one to infuse equity and the democratic spirit into the law in a manner unknown to western techniques of interpretation. 
"An example of this is the decision in Mahavir Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P. In that case the facts were that the petitioner had been elected Chairman of a Town Area in U.P. He was removed by the Collector after giving him a hearing, and the Collector's order was confirmed by the State Government. But the State Government had not given an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The question before the court was whether the State Government, too, had to give an opportunity of hearing before it confirmed the order of the Collector. After a great deal of consideration the present writer answered it in the affirmative, utilizing the Anusunga principle of Mimansa."

The use of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation is not so far been found implemented in Nepal. There is also an ongoing debate about whether or not these rules of Mimamsa be incorporated in the legislative form. Some say that these rules cannot be incorporated in the legislative form. It is because, according to them, the rules present in the Mimangsa is obviously the rules of extrinsic aid and if rules of extrinsic aid and construction are codified then it may be that some radical sources are kept out of purview of interpretation unknowingly. Besides, Mimangsa gives its much priority to Hindu Religion. In the case if the Economics stand contrary to the Dharmasasthras, Mimangsa rules prefers Dharmasasthras to Economics. This might look contemporary to be used efficiently in the Hindu Laws in particular but looks conservative if used in a general sense.

Mimangsa principles of interpretation gave the rules of exegesis which though primarily intended as aids for the interpretation of rules contained in the Vedas and other Dharmasasthras relating to ceremonial observances and sacrifices, were applied, though not with uniformly, in construction of texts of municipal law as well. Rules for interpretation in the form of a scientific system were developed since very early times known as Mimamsa Principles of Interpretation. These principles were regularly used by the renowned jurists like Vijnaneshwara (author of Mitakshra), Jimutvahana (author of Dayabagh), Nanda Pandit (author of Dattak Mimamsa), etc. Whenever there was any conflict between two Smrities, eg., Manusmriti and Yagnavlkya Smriti, or ambiguity in a Shruti or Smriti, the Mimamsa Principles were utilized. These Mimamsa rules were laid down by Jaimini in his Sutras written abound 500 B.C. No doubt, these principles of interpretation were initially laid down for interpreting religious texts pertaining to ‘Yagya’ (sacrifice), but gradually the same principles came to be used for interpreting legal texts also, particularly since in the Smrities the religious texts and legal texts are mixed up in the same treatises. 

From the various court decisions given by the judiciary of India in different context, it is clear that the Mimangsa Principles of Interpretation are still suitable at present context as it also contains a scientific basis for the interpretation. If the Mimangsa rules of Interpretation are also used along with other rules of interpretations like Maxwell’s or Craies’, the legal system can find it easy in the interpretation of statutes because rich and scientific methods of interpretation are also prevalent in Mimangsa which can be effective aid for interpretation of statutes in mostly India and Nepal where there is the larger influence of Hindu Religion.

References:

1. Interpretion of Laws Act 2010
2. 1fOGb|axfb'/ >]i7, lxGb" ljlwzf:q / g]kfnsf] sfg'gL Joj:yf, k}/jL k|sfzg-@)%)_,

3. Mimansa Rules of Interpretation, By MR. OM PRAKASH GUPTA, Advocate, High Court, Allahabad
4. selforum.blogspot.com/.../srimat-anirvans-integral-vision-coupled.html
5. www.sanskritclassics.com/completeworks.htm
6. www.indianetzone.com/.../mimamsa_darsana_indian_philosophy.htm
7. www.slideshare.net/.../purva-mimansa
8. www.newworldencyclopedia.org/.../Mimamsa
9. www.ebc-india.com/.../94v2a1.htm
10. www.allahabadhighcourt.in/.../MimansaRulesofInterpretationOPGupta.pdf
11. www.thehindubusinessline.com/.../2006100700011100.htm
12. www.a1books.co.in/mimansa-rules-interpretation.../8187629207