The Bhagavad Gītā and the Indian Constitution: Moral Foundations, Missed Opportunities, and the Crisis of Duties

Introduction: A Constitution Rooted in Civilisational Ethics

The Bhagavad Gita is not merely a religious text; it is one of India’s most influential works on ethics, duty (dharma), self-restraint, and moral action. When India framed its modern republic through the Constitution of India, it did so in a civilisational context shaped for centuries by the Gītā, the Ramayana, the Upaniṣads, and Buddhist–Jain ethical traditions.

 The issue touches a profound constitutional paradox: India constitutionally guaranteed rights before constitutionally cultivating duties. This imbalance, many argue, has contributed to moral erosion, civic indiscipline, and systemic corruption. Had duties been foundational rather than corrective, India’s democratic culture might have evolved differently.

This is an attempt to explore:

• How deeply the Gītā influenced constitutional thinking
• Why were the Fundamental Duties omitted initially while framing the Constitution
• The implications of their late inclusion
• The symbolic loss caused by removing philosophical artwork from the Constitution
• Whether a duty-first constitutional culture could have reduced corruption
• Additional neglected ethical dimensions relevant today
• 
  

1. The Bhagavad Gītā as a Moral Constitution

At its heart, the Gītā is a manual for ethical citizenship. Its central teaching—niṣkāma karma (selfless action without attachment to results)—is the philosophical opposite of corruption, which is action driven by selfish gain.

Key Gītā principles with constitutional resonance include:

• Dharma over desire: Public duty must override personal interest
• Loka-saṅgraha (social welfare): Leaders act to sustain moral order (Gītā 3.20)
• Self-governance: Mastery over greed, anger, and ego (Gītā 16)
• Equality of the Self: Spiritual equality anticipating constitutional equality

In effect, the Gītā presupposes duties first, with rights as a consequence. One earns moral entitlements through righteous conduct. This stands in contrast to modern rights-centric constitutionalism.

 2. Invisible yet Influential: The Gītā in Constitutional Thought

The framers rarely quoted the Gītā explicitly, yet its ethical imprint is evident in:

• Justice (Nyāya) as moral order, not procedural legality alone
• Equality beyond social hierarchy
• Freedom tempered by responsibility
• Work as worship, reflected in the dignity of labour

Even Dr B. R. Ambedkar, often portrayed as strictly secular, emphasised constitutional morality—a concept deeply aligned with dharmic restraint rather than unbridled freedom.

The Constitution’s soul was Indian; its structure, global.

  3. The Imperative of Reciprocity: Balancing Fundamental Rights with Fundamental Duties

 Surprisingly, enlightened members such as Dr Raendra Prasad, Dr Shyama Prasad Mukheree, and a significant member of Sanskrit scholars although present in the Constituent Assembly (1950) never discussed   the  issue of fundamental duties,  setting, aside a the valued Indian tradition. However, the possible reasons may be as follows:

 

       Post-colonial anxiety: Protect citizens from a potentially authoritarian State.

       Western liberal influence: Rights-first constitutional models dominated by global thinking.

Fear of moral coercion: Duties were seen as vague or unenforceable. Indian civilisation has always intertwined citizenship with obligation.  

Within dharmic ethics, adhikāra, or rights, arise from kartavya, meaning duties; in other words, kartavya precedes adhikāra, not the other way around or vice versa.

 

4.1. The 42nd Amendment: Correction under a Cloud

Fundamental Duties were eventually added in 1976, during the inky emergency imposed by P.M. Indira Gandhi, who incorporated Fundamental Duties under Article 51A. While the content of the duties resonated with Indian ethical traditions, the context of their insertion and timing, i.e., during an emergency, attracted criticism.

Ironically:

• The need for inclusion duties was genuine
• The method and timing of inclusion weakened moral and widespread acceptance
• Duties remained non-justiciable, lacking civic responsibility/internalisation

Had these duties been part of the original constitutional vision, they would have been seen not as State-imposed morality but as civilisational self-remembrance.

4.2.The 42nd amendment, also incorporated the words ‘Secular and socialist’ (in The Directive Principles of State Policies) passed without public consultation, is widely criticised for shifting the Constitution from a framework protecting freedoms to a blueprint for governance, thereby opening the door to vote-bank politics that appease so-called minorities and blurring the separation of powers. While subsequent amendments and judicial interpretations have mitigated some of its excesses, the 42nd Amendment's legacy remains a source of controversy, highlighting the tension between prescribing ideologies and preserving space for pluralistic political discourse in a democracy.

5. Eradicating Corruption: Cultivating a Culture of Ethical Responsibility

 Early inclusion of duties could have minimised corruption, which is not unfounded.

Corruption thrives where:

• Rights are asserted without reciprocal responsibility
• Law replaces conscience
• Accountability is external, not internal

The Gītā attacks corruption at its psychological root:

“He who restrains desire and acts without attachment is truly renounced.” (Gītā 6.1)

A constitutional culture that educated citizens from childhood in duty-consciousness—towards the nation, public property, truth, and restraint—could have:

• Reduced entitlement mentality
• Strengthened ethical leadership
• Fostered civic shame against wrongdoing

   

 6. Erasing Enlightenment: The Scourge of Removing Philosophical Illustrations  

An often-overlooked cultural tragedy is the progressive erasure of the Constitution’s original artistic and philosophical decorations.

The original Constitution was:

• Handwritten
• Illustrated with motifs from the Gītā, Ramayana, Buddhist art, and folk traditions
• A visual reminder that India’s democracy was rooted in moral civilisation

The cunning removal of these elements from later government publications reflects:

• A narrowing of secularism into cultural amnesia
• Fear of philosophical symbolism
• Bureaucratic reductionism/devaluation
• Appeasement to so-called minorities

A Constitution without its ethical imagery becomes a legal manual, not a moral covenant.

 7. Secularism Misinterpreted: Ethics vs. Erasure

Indian secularism was never meant to be anti-spiritual. It was meant to be pluralistic. The Gītā’s philosophy is not sectarian theology; it is universal moral psychology and ethical science.

To erase civilisational ethics in the name of neutrality is to:

• Weaken moral consensus
• Reduce patriotism to legality
• Produce citizens who ask, “What can I get?” instead of “What must I give?”

 8. Additional Neglected Issues

(a) Education without Ethical Anchoring

Modern civic education teaches constitutional articles but rarely constitutional character. A single educational curriculum based on traditional ethics should be followed throughout the country up to the level of class X. Of course, the languages may be different.

(b) Leadership without Moral Training

The Gītā’s model of the sthita-prajña (ethically steady leader) is absent from political grooming.

(c) Rights Inflation

Every grievance is framed as a right; few are examined as failures of duty.

  9. Reimagining Constitutional Dharma Today

India does not need constitutional revision; it needs constitutional re-education.

Possible steps:

• Reintroduce constitutional artwork in official copies published by the government every year.
• Teach Fundamental Duties alongside Rights from the elementary level.
• Frame public service as dharma(duty), not privilege.       Encourage judicial and legislative references to constitutional morality.

  Conclusion: From Legal Republic to Moral Nation

The Bhagavad Gītā did not merely influence the Constitution—it whispered its conscience. The early omission of Fundamental Duties created a moral disparity that still haunts Indian public life. The latter correction, though necessary, lacked the legitimacy of the original vision.

To fight corruption, cynicism, and civic decay, India must rediscover what the Gītā always taught:

Freedom without duty is chaos; duty without freedom is tyranny—but together, they are dharma.

Reintegrating this wisdom—textually, symbolically, and educationally, may yet renew the republic’s moral spine, consider it the call of the day.

 

Disclaimer:   Although I have made every effort to present accurate perspectives as I see, please note that individual accounts may differ. I have drawn on various printed materials and media reports as sources for this piece. As a ordinary citizen at my 79+, not an expert in the field, hope for your understanding of any limitations in my approach. As a blogger, it deeply saddens me to witness our nation forgetting the age-long inheritance of moral inheritance and plunging into all-around corrupt practices where fundamental values are unknown. Additionally, as a Bengali, I feel a profound sense of hurt when I see that Bengal is on the verge of breaking down the constitutional machinery.  I present this with the utmost respect, despite the loss of moral values.   I also encourage readers to explore a variety of sources for a fuller understanding.