Transcribed from an interview with Dr. Nirmala Mani Adhikary
(Transcriber: Suyasha Priyadarshini Adhikary)
The Sadharanikaran Model of Communication is primarily rooted in Natyasashtra by Bharatmuni . The time of Natyasashtra is not certain as it goes to antiquity. Another principal text that has been drawn on while constructing the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication is Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari which is considered about 2000 years old. These two ancient texts written in Sanskrit - Natyashastra and Vakyapadiya - were the principal sources while theorizing the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication (SMC), which was constructed in 2003. If we look into the original document - the dissertation I submitted as part of my Masters in Mass Communication and Journalism (MA MCJ) - then the two ancient texts (Natyashastra and Vakyapadiya) have been reviewed, and relevant aspects have been taken from these texts for the construction of Sadharanikaran Model of Communication.
I come from a family background which is rich in Vedic rituals and knowledge systems. My father being a very prominent scholar in Sanskrit allowed me the exposure to Sanskrit texts and Vaidik Hindu rituals from my childhood. The culture in which I lived is enriched with Hindu tradition so an affection towards it was always present. Formally I was a student of Science and Technology however I was also working in journalism since early years of college. When Nepal witnessed the historic initiation of the Masters in Mass Communication and Journalism I considered joining this discipline I have already been working on. So I switched from my science background to Mass Communication and Journalism academically nevertheless I was quite active in writing prior to this having published many articles and a few books.
One of the major areas of my writing was Hinduism Hindu Dharma, various aspects of Nepali society, culture and so on. A critical point of view had developed within me so when I saw things such as the university curriculum, books or even movies I would analyze them from an indigenous perspective. As I joined Masters in Mass Communication and Journalism the reading materials were supplied. I found that the reading materials starting from the curriculum to the textbooks were heavily west centric and indigenous contents were virtually absent. Later on I discovered this was the norm everywhere in the world. The discipline which is called Communication was institutionalized in the US and a linear expansion of it happened to other countries. Nepal was no exception. It was the same in other Asian, African even South American countries.
It struck me and I raised this point during conversations with my teachers and friends . Many of them took to it with surprise and some even ridiculed me saying that you who have come to a discipline such as Mass Communication and journalism are finding something from ancient times, Sanskrit literature and culture. They insisted Mass Communication and Journalism was something borrowed from the west and we shall be happy with what is provided. But I was not satisfied so from that point when I was met with laughter at the mere thought I decided to search there ought to be something relevant to communication discipline because we had such a developed civilization, the philosophical systems starting from the mainstream Vedic schools: Sankhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Mimamasa and Vedanta along with other schools like Buddhism, Jainism and Charvaka system. We have well developed philosophical systems and philosophy may not be lacking insight useful for communication such was my conviction at the time. In my continued exploration I came across an article by J.S. Yadava in which he had discussed that the concept of Sadharanikaran may be useful in theorizing communication in fact it is relevant for this discipline which inspired me a lot.
I continued my reading with Natyashastra and Vakyapadiya originally. I came to know that while explaining the Rasa Sutra in Bharatmuni's Natyashastra, Bhatta Nayaka theorized it, and came up with the theory of Sadharanikaran. As i worked further taking insights from Vakyapadiya as well, the outcome was the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication in 2003.
There are various communication theories and models and virtually all of them in the modern time were constructed ,developed and institutionalized in the west and the non western countries simply continued that as a linear expansion.So, the common characteristics among those theories and models was heavily dominated by western discursive paradigm. There was a one sided presumed universality and totalizing tendency.
Some scholars came up with the concept of indigenization, that theory shall be localized let us adapt theory in the local context but when the discourse continued the scholars realized that every society has its unique features and every culture has its own characteristics. Communication is highly influenced by and cannot be separated from culture because they are so bound together. So, with that there was a need for constructing communication theories and models from our own cultural locations. Therefore, the first and foremost thing that distinguishes the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication from hundreds of other models is that it is the diagrammatic representation and illustration of the communication process as envisioned in Hindu society or Bharatvarshiya society.
This has far reaching consequences. For instance, the role of communicating parties would be completely different and what the goal of communication is. If you take communication models from the west, they may not incorporate the three dimensional goals. Adhibhautika, Adhidaivika, and Adhyatmika are the three dimensions of human life, and Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha are the four goals of life. Here any Shastra would lead ultimately to Moksha. Before the construction of the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication, communication discipline was not able to explain this aspect of Hindu society but with the construction and development of this model here is one model: Adhibhautika, Adhidaivika, and Adhyatmika, all of these dimensions of human life, communication dynamics and roles related to them. One very significant aspect that it explains is how communication is possible and has been possible since a millennia in such a diverse society.
Bharatvarsha that includes Nepal, India and many other countries is very diverse and there is a hierarchy as well. There is visible asymmetry but despite this there is a living civilization since millennia. It is not possible to have such a developed civilization without a highly developed communication theory, communication philosophy and a sophisticated communication system. That means there is some mechanism, theory, philosophy related to communication. In fact we can say these in plurals mechanisms, theories , philosophies and so it represents that. For instance the encoding aspect as seen from the perspective of veda shall be fourfold: Para, Pashyanti, Madhyama, Vaikhari. But if you take for example modern philosophy then it may be just two layers. Likewise I can give numerous examples regarding what distinguishes Sadharanikaran Model of Communication from other models developed from the West but in essence what we can say is it is enriches with culture, philosophy and practices of Bharatvarsha or Hindu society.
When the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication was constructed I received polarizing feedback. Some appreciated the idea of exploring ancient texts and making them relevant in the modern time. The idea of a diagrammatic model visible for the first time itself was tremendous so it was celebrated by teachers, colleagues, academic fraternity first in Nepal and India and then in the West . But there were those who were doubtful especially in Nepal that there could be anything relevant to Mass Communication and Journalism in our ancient knowledge. They disliked the idea that a person amongst ourselves could be a theoretician or theorist it went against the belief that theorists shall be something from an Eurocentric paradigm. Some criticized it as a claim much too big for a person from Nepal especially when it has not been done even by Indians or Chinese. It was declared incapable to stand against the academic evaluation by the global fraternity according to some. However, as time went on it was published in various languages from different countries, universities started incorporating this into their curricula and prominent scholars as well as senior professors started writing on Sadharanikaran Model of Communication not just as citation but theoretical framework along with further research. As it happened many critics and skeptics have turned to admirers.
When I see those exposed to the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication in Nepal, India, Indonesia and some parts of the West not only appreciating this but using it as a theoretical framework and for conducting further research it signifies a global mainstreaming. If people start working in the field of non western communication then it has become a milestone. Some writers and scholars have mentioned this as the epitome of non western or indigenous communication theorization. It has been included in the International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy. Various Universities across the world have included it in their curriculum and many scholars are conducting further research on it.The number of publications by myself maybe fewer in number but many others who have quoted and cited or further used Sadharanikaran are vastly increasing.
Now I do not view it as personal it has been institutionalized Kathmandu University, where I have been working for eighteen years, has owned it and organized an international seminar on two decades of the Sadharanikaran Model of Communication. The whole university and academics from different countries are celebrating it as it is going to the mainstream global academia more importantly it has inspired many young scholars to explore indigenous sources. Reorientation has commenced.
There were scholars who actually started De-westernization, who wanted critical discussions on the western communication theories. They did not want the limitation of Euro-American discursive paradigm and desired multiculturalism, multidisciplinarity and tradition. They wanted to shift the focus to Asian, African, South American and other cultures as well. So with the advent of this model the process of reorientation has got a definite shape and encouraged other scholars to conduct research in indigenous fashion. This has caused me immense satisfaction and pleasure.
When asked about the future prospects of Sadharanikaran
Model of Communication, I feel hesitant to speak on it as we cannot be
certain. When I worked on this model I did not know it would go so far. But
people have embraced it, the academic fraternity, academics from diverse
disciplines have been using it which I had not imagined at that point of
time. It has diversified. There is a concept of Sarvatantra theory in Charaka Samhita. According to Charaka, there are different theories and Saravatantra theory
is such that it goes beyond disciplinary boundaries and can be generalized in a
manner making it useful for
virtually all disciplines of knowledge.
The trend so far shows that people are liking this model and applying it to
different disciplines. If this continues there is prospect of becoming
Sarvatantra theory, applicable to diverse disciplines.
Another area is its application. It is fundamental or basic research so theorization is there but many scholars have started the discussion on its practical implications so this will lead to the area of applied research.I am expecting to see application of Sadharanikaran Model of Communication in various applied sectors.
The construction and development of Sadharanikaran Model of Communication is not to reinforce the binary division of west versus rest. The East West dichotomy is a living reality but the goal of this theorization lies elsewhere. We shall move to reorientation and finally reach reconciliation so that the useful knowledge irrespective of whether it is from the east or the west has to be used by humankind. So I urge all amongst the academic fraternity to work on indigenous theories but not ignite identity politics. Ultimately it is for enrichment of the disciplines the, human mind and in fact to find some reconciliation among the diverse societies including the east and the west.
