EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

CONCEPTUALIZING TRIBES FROM DIFFERNT DISCIPLINARY AND IDEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES

RAHUL PUNARAM SONPIMPLE*
*Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

ABSTRACT The preceding discussion on the concept of indigenous and its implication in the academics is largely contextualized by westernized idea of indigenous people. However, the controversy in India revolves primarily around whether or not the Scheduled Tribes are the descendant of the original inhabitants of the territories which they now inhabit. It is argued that irrespective of time and place of origin or their present habitat in India, many tribal communities had self regulating economic and political systems hence ideologically they maintained their identity as indigenous despite actual cohabitation with other groups. This paper offers broad and critical perspective on the concept of indigenous people in the context of India. The modernity in the context of Indian caste society often locates as a necessary facilitator of change in socioeconomic conditions of marginalized groups. By contrast, it is quite evident modernity in the context of tribal society seen as a destructive factor. Therefore, this paper tries to examine perspective of tribes on modern colonial state and modernity in post-colonial period. Having discussed the relative socio- economical aspects of concept of ingenious people, the paper will discuss cultural subordination of tribes both in the colonial and in the post-colonial period. KEYWORDS: Indigenous, Modernity, Scheduled Tribes, Subordination. ______________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Indian society is marked by considerable heterogeneity and has therefore, been perceived more in terms of differences than similarities. The major social categories in terms of which the differences have been perceived are religion, territory, language and caste. These categories were reinforced during the colonial period and turned into groups. These categories were reinforced during the British rule through the decennial enumerations and classification of the population into groups and categories, one of the major intellectual and administrative preoccupations of the colonial state. To these existing categories, a new category was added during this period. This was the category of tribes. The study of groups that latter came to be described as tribes began with the establishment of the Asiatic society of Bengal in 1874. (Xaxa. V 2005). From then on scholars administrators wrote general works on the land and people of different regions in which references were made to castes and tribes. They also made inventories of castes and tribes in the form of handbooks, monographs, and gazetteers. The period when anthropology came to be introduced as curriculum in the universities in India and latter to the adoption of an analytical or action oriented approach in the study of tribes, particularly in the post- colonial period, resulted into a flood of literature on tribes. This came

107

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

from three main sources Anthropological Survey of India, University Department of Sociology and Anthropology, and Tribal population. The research institutes that were established in the mid 1950s mainly undertook problem- oriented research for the effective formulation and implementation of development programmers in the tribal areas. Considerable research was carried out in these institutes in the early phases, and it was widely disseminated. However, the research outputs of these institutes have steadily declined both in quantity and quality terms. The scenario has just been the opposite in case of the Anthropological Survey of India. Information and data collected by it had remained for a very long time within the four walls of the organization itself. It is only in recent years that efforts are being made to make these data available to a wider readership. Some anthropologists have described the categories of caste and tribe as colonial construction in the sense that the character of these groups was solidified by the British through the process of classification and enumerations. Further the category of caste was not only confined to the intelligentsia but was also part of the thinking of the common man much before the advent of the of the British. However, hardly anything corresponding to this existed in the case of those we know as tribes today. It is on this count that the category of tribe has been described as a colonial construction (Beteille, 1995). It is was not that in the pre- colonial period there were no social groups corresponding roughly to those identified as tribes in various administrative reports of the British, but such groups which had distinct local and regional nomenclatures ( for example, Santhal or Nagas) were not categorized together under the general category of tribe. There were also no literati cutting across these groups who wrote or reflected on the nature of tribal society. In this sense the category of tribe is part of the modern consciousness brought into being by the colonial sate and confirmed by its successors after Independence. Finally, some attempts have been made to identify the category of Jana in Indian history as roughly corresponding to the modern category of tribe, associated with an egalitarian system of social organization and in categorical opposition to Jati or caste, with a hierarchical system of organization. Others caution against an identification, arguing that the notion of Jana was more amorphous, overlapping in many instances with other categories that would be classified as non- tribes. TRIBES AND THE CONCEPT OF MODERNITY www.zenithresearch.org.in The term indigenous people is often used interchangeably to mean tribes and other original natives in the Indian context. Adivasi people is also argued to be more apt to mean indigenous people. The contention behind these terms is to use them to mean a certain category of people. Over the last few decades the term has been a source of a lot of contention and political movements. There has been a shift in the approaches of people belonging to certain lingual and regional groups for a claim to these terms. As the question of tribes is closely linked with administrative and political considerations, there has been increasing demands by various groups and communities for their inclusion in the list of schedule tribes of the Indian constitution. The focus of the entire logic of creation of the list was conceptualized from features such as geographical isolation, simple technology and condition of living, general backwardness to the practice of animism, tribal language, physical features etc. These however varied across different contexts, leading to striking

108

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

differences with respect to each other, marking a clear distinction between what Indian anthropologists defined as tribes and what their discipline was obliged to define as tribes. The demarcation of tribes from castes came, though vague, in 1901 when the census definition of tribes was associated with people who practiced animism. Since Indias pre-independence period, three different schools of thought or ideology regarding the tribal population are still persisting: (a) ideology of tribal separation, isolation or alienation, (b) ideology of tribal assimilation, acculturation or absorption, and (c) ideology of tribal integration or harmonization. India is not only a multilingual and multiethnic country, but also multicultural. Indian society is stuffed with various tribes, castes and religions. In such a country, the first school claims that the tribal population should be kept cut off from the orbit of mainstream non-tribal population, while the second school claims that they should be assimilated, acculturated or absorbed in the non-tribal mainstream society. But the third school views that they should be civilized or socialized, and more fully integrated into the mainstream society retaining their distinctive tribal culture. The third school acts as a reformist, which seeks to bring about over all development of tribal communities and peaceful integration or harmonization with the mainstream non-tribal larger society without dismantling their own cultural identity. There has been considerable difference in the approach of colonial ethnographers and the native ethnographers. While the primary aim of the former has been to distinguish tribes from caste, showing tribes to be living in complete isolation from the rest of the population and therefore without any interaction and therefore without any interaction or interrelation with them, that of the latter was to show the close association of the tribes with larger society or civilization (Xaxa, 1999). Tribes are viewed in such a conceptualization in terms of their relations with the larger mainstream society, jeopardizing the identity of the tribal group or community and placing their individual existence at risk. Tribes are viewed as devoid of the positives of the modern society, presented as a backward and illiterate society. However, with the advent of the so-called modernization in the tribal context, it would cease to be tribal and become modern. Such a definition negates tribes the right to exist as a society in itself and similar to any other kind of society. BEING INDIGENOUS The term indigenous to be used in such a case for tribes or other groups and communities would overcome some of the inherent conceptual problems. The definition of indigenous people as given by the ILO convention of 1989 and the Working Group on Indigenous Population set up by the Human Rights Commission of the UNO are conceptualized in three aspects. Firstly, they are those people who lived in the country to which they belong before colonization or conquest by people from outside the country or the geographical region. Secondly, they have become marginalized as an aftermath of conquest and colonization by the people from outside the region. Thirdly, such people govern their life more in terms of their own social, economic and the cultural institution than the laws applicable to the society or the country at large. This definition looks at indigenous people as victims of conquest and colonization; to demarcate and easily identify outsiders. www.zenithresearch.org.in

109

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

To locate tribes in the conquest of the above definition of indigenous people in the Indian context is with the use of the term adivasi, the word used in the Indian language for indigenous people. This term has however been used effectively to mean tribes for more than a century now to distinguish people different in terms of features, culture, language, social organizations etc. Ghurye (1963) uses the term aborigines to define tribes as with the contention that tribes would be autochthonous to India if not to the exact geographical location. Today only those who have been historically subjected to domination and subjugation are said to compose the category of indigenous people. In India, the coming of the Aryans is taken as the historical factor for determining the original people of India. However, those belonging to the Dravidian language speaking group have not been considered as indigenous people, even though it is recognized that they were the inhabitants before the coming of the Aryans owing to their non-marginalization. There can be claims by several groups of people who are now absorbed in the mainstream Hindu society, as much as by other groups who were pushed out of areas they first settled in and could not find shelter elsewhere. Also the migratory nature of traditional tribes makes it difficult to limit the definition to people settled and expanding in a particular geographical locale for a considerable period of time to classify them as natives of that particular place. Many tribes as in the north-east as the Nagas, the Mizos and the Kukis are said to arrive much later than other non-tribes (Xaxa, 1919). This poses the problem of including all tribes as earlier settlers before the Aryans and hence concluding that all tribes are indigenous and non-tribes are not. Roy Burman (1992) points out several groups as till recently being autonomous in terms of politico-legal structures and a self regulated economy and hence belonging to the indigenous identity. However, since most of such groups today are brought under administrative control today, this definition does not succeed in defining such people as indigenous people as even many groups with even simple technology were integrated with the wider society (Burman, 1983). The politicization and administrative constructions are stronger today for identification of indigenous people and has come to be understood more in terms of oppression and marginalization. The need to define these groups comes from the territorial and linguistic insecurity from the others in terms of resources and share of power. This is the precise reason that various regional groups have tried to raise the theory of the sons-of-the-soil across various spaces of time to maintain the domination of the groups in power against the marginalized in the manipulation of the concept of indigenous people, denying groups, especially tribes of their own cultures and beliefs, control over natural and mineral resources. They are denied the privileges and rights over their habitats, providing constant ground for contest and exploitation. INDIGENOUS CULTURES ENVIRONMENT THE CASE OF ORAONS UNESCO report on the Indigenous People and relationship to land : A working paper (2000) observes Professor James Sakej Henderson attempts to illustrate this distinct relationship and conceptual framework by stating that the Aboriginal vision of property was ecological space AND THEIR RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE

110

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

that creates our consciousness, not an ideological construct or fungible resource ... Their vision is of different realms enfolded into a sacred space ... It is fundamental to their identity, personality and humanity ... [the] notion of self does not end with their flesh, but continues with the reach of their senses into the land. Such a relationship manifests itself in the elements of indigenous peoples cultures, such as language. For example, an Inuit elder tried to articulate this relationship by stating that our language contains an intricate knowledge of the Arctic that we have seen no others demonstrate. The forest is not just economically important for the tribals, it also has deep religious significance. Tribal people inhabiting the Phulwari ki Nal wildlife sanctuary in Rajasthan can be said to worship their environment. Bhils, for example, revere Magra Baosi, their name for the living mountain who is believed to possess bones, blood, and hair in his rocks, rivers, trees, and mosses. Magra Baosialong with other spiritual entities, such as animal and plant spirits but also ancestors and ghosts, who are said to prefer a jungle residenceare installed(sthapa hua) in a network of forest shrines and sacred groves, referred to variously as devrasthans, devrasthals, and devravan Burman,(1994). These spiritual entities are tended by various categories of religious specialists. For example, shaking, trembling, and emotionally charged shamans (spiritual healers), are defined locally as those able to channel spiritual energy from the forested mountain into their own bodies for the purpose of healing. The Oraon tribes in the Chotanagpur plateau have a deep and intimate relationship with the environment. It is also associated with their traditional world-view that views nature as a harmonic whole. They believe that the order of nature must be maintained in order to assure human survival and well-being. This view is more eco-centric in the world-view which regards ecology as the closely linked factor for existence. The Oraon world-view indicates that such efforts cannot succeed and humanitys living conditions cannot be improved unless the surrounding environment is respected and cared for in a responsible manner. An interesting and significant aspect of Oraon mythology which signifies the construction of close association with nature is the theory of construction, destruction and reconstruction of Earth. Their god, Dharmes had destroyed the Earth when he saw it filled with vices by reigning fire on it. He had earlier created it by the suggestion of Mother Sita (supposed to be the consort of Dharmes, signifying his wisdom). The monkey, Hanuman, forgot to inform the god when half the world was cleansed and hence humans perished except for a pair who hid in a cave. After a while when the god realized that he was wrong to had mistakenly destroyed humans, he went to Sita for advice who advised him to go hunting. It was at this place he found the bhaia-bhain, the pair who had hid themselves. He gave them the knowledge of better agriculture, taught them to make rice beer for offerings in case of crop failures and also gave them the knowledge of procreation. He instructed them to sleep with a log in between and instructed the boy that if he crossed the log, mankind would multiply. The boy in course of time crossed the log and had an offspring and in that process the earth was filled again (Xalxo, 2006). The peculiar aspects of the construction of sexuality which emerges from this mythology, is significant because for them this mythologies and religious constructions define the way of life, explaining the dominance in their own world-views on every aspect of life, social, economic or household. The chief God has personified wisdom in the name of Sita, a woman

111

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

shows the high regard given to women as being the embodiment of wisdom. However, Sita herself never gets to act in situations and it is Dharmes who has the power to act. He decided against the will of Sita to destroy the Earth which he regretted eventually. Still Sita advised her only when he chose to do so and hence she was constructed to be, even of higher wisdom, of secondary importance. The construction of the control of sexuality is quite evident in the fact that in the remaining pair of bhaia-bhain, to whom the God allotted the responsibility of reproducing and filling up the Earth again, it was the boy who could cross the log and reproduce. The woman was not considered to be the one who could initiate such a process. Hence the moral regulation over procreation and reproduction was gendered in their mythological world-views, considerably impacting the social norms and cultures among the Oraon people. Another aspect which needs to be analysed further but is beyond the scope of this paper is the Hinduisation /Sanskritisation of this tribe and their construction of world-views suggested by the nomenclature of gods and mythical figures (e.g. Sita, Hanuman etc.) The extent of closeness of this tribe to their nature and environment can also again be explained in the traditional beliefs in Dharmes as the giver of all life. He taught them to use seeds for agriculture not only for their own survival and sustenance, but to continue the creative acts of Dharmes even in nature. Therefore, products of land and increase in cattle are all signs of Dharmes creative act that is being continued by the human beings. This sense of being the participants of this process of creation makes the Oraons conscious towards everything that is around them, especially their ecological surroundings. Everything in the creation has been given to them by Dharmes to make use of them, and at the same time, to let them grow and multiply in their own way. Therefore undue and excessive exploitation or overuse of natural resources including birds, animals, trees, plants, land and water is prohibited by the Oraon community. INDIGENOUS CULTURES AND THEIR PERCEPTIONS IN THE COLONIAL AND POST-COLONIAL PERIOD I would argue now on the formation of the indigenous identity, especially tribes exclusively as being backward, non-progressive and the impact of the colonial mindset as being the driving force for the maintenance of the colonial relation. As the colonial ideology was based on the moral obligation of the colonizers to bring order among the savages, it was imperative in the colonial discourse, through ethnographic and other descriptive accounts to label the original natives as uncivilized, wild and savages (Guha, 1996). As mentioned earlier on the development of the discourse of indigenous people as a concept, it was the colonial constructions of wilderness which classified the Indian people into caste and tribes, although such demarcations were not very clear. Anachronistic (the politics of time) means were employed to prove cultural superiority of Europe over its colonies. Level of technologies, race theories and modes of subsistence were used to rank order societies with each other. Anachronistic thought focused on the primitives or aborigines- on those who were wild because they were at the bottom of the civilization.

112

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

By the later part of the 19th century, tribes were starting to get recognized as different from other cultures. They were however thought of as aborigines without caring much about their exact origin. It was understood to be fundamentally different from caste in the sense of nonHinduisation and separation of cultural practices and beliefs of the Hindu people, as beef eating, food sharing etc. The significant aspect in the entire discourse is the attributing of a primitive status to them. Basic amongst these, from the mid-eighteenth century, was the hierarchy of modes of subsistence. Hunting was considered the lowest stage in social evolution; it was succeeded by pastoralism and then agriculture, and industry was the culmination of development. Similarly, the ways in which societies had transformed their physical environment was treated as emblematic of their relationship with the time of modernity. Many of the groups that came to be called tribes lived in forests or hills, seen as the "wild" portions of the land, away from the "civilization" associated with plains or riparian areas. Indeed, the association of forests with wildness was so strong that many colonial officials were to recommend that forests be cleared, that these communities be removed from forests as a way of civilizing them, or that they be introduced to "humanizing tendencies" of settled agriculture (Government of Bombay 1898) The post-colonial construction of tribes and the language associated with the erstwhile wild people saw a clear distinction of the nationalist and elite leaders of allotting caste a superior status and subverting the tribes as wild and uncivilized, as most of the British officers. So, as far as the politics of time went, proto-nationalist and nationalist understandings colluded with the colonial discourse of anachronism, developing if anything, a much stronger emphasis on how advanced the castes were relative to the tribes. But the politics of time was and is intertwined with and inseparable from that of gender, and this politics was so different that the kind of sympathy that colonial officials had for Bhil men accused of witch killing no longer came easily. In an important and highly insightful article, Kaushik Ghosh (n.d.) has explored the theme of primitivism in Bengali modernity, focusing specifically on how Kol societies were imagined by the Bengali middle class. Pointing out that Bengali nationalism internalized the colonial characterization of Indians as effete, he suggests, first, that the ascription of masculinity to Kol society was part of an attempt to recover masculinity for the middle class. Second, he suggests that the sexual objectification of Kol women was especially significant since it occurred at a time when nationalist discourse was constructing Bengali womanhood in a language that erased her sexuality, and cast her basically as an embodiment of motherhood and sacrifice. These two attitudes- adivasi society as highly male, and adivasi women as highly sexual and erotic figures-were in all likelihood common to late-nineteenth and early- twentieth-century Indian middle-class attitudes towards tribes. Both were different from colonial ascriptions. Colonial officials harped on shared masculinity; middle-class discourse dwelt on the need to become masculine, somewhat (though not quite) like the tribes. Colonial officials often cast savage women not as wildly sexual beings but as responsible and stabilizing figures in the family; middle-class writers, in contrast, reserved these qualities for middle-class women, denied the sexuality of upper- or middle-caste women, and displaced that ascription of sexuality onto the "tribal woman." Thus it is that in nationalist accounts and post independence ethnographies there is a far greater and more consistent emphasis on the "sexual freedom" of

113

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

adivasi society and the sexuality of adivasi women than in colonial accounts!' The emphasis on the sexuality of adivasi women continues today. But the ascription of the masculinity to adivasi society was a more complex and tenuous affair. Late Indian nationalism often denied masculinity to adivasi societies, or at least marginalized the implications of such masculinity. The nationalist movement was, in ways that have been demonstrated over and again by scholars, a claim for the masculinity of the Indian people, and especially of the Indian middle classes and upper castes. What made the Indian middle classes and upper castes especially masculine, in this representation, was their claim to control the project of modernization. Modernity, rather than a splotchy palette of truthfulness, loyalty, bravery, and primitiveness came to be the central defining parameter of masculinity (Skari, 1997). The paternal attitude of the colonial rulers described Bhils as brave, honorable, wild yet simple and ignorant. The feminizing of the colonized was an important ideological stance which sought to justify the colonial rule. The categorization of castes in general as deceitful, untrustworthy and lying and corrupt and comparing them to tribes in general as being principled, honest and courageous sought to effeminate castes. They extended the colonial agenda with this concept that castes which were effeminate were ruling the innocent and masculine tribes and thus they had to be protected from the lazy and lying people. Therefore, we can see the use of metaphors of traditional descriptions of feminity to describe the Hinduism as a religion and Hindus as a people. It draws on the parallel in the portrayal of the feminine as the site of disorder. In some of these aspects then, a corollary can be drawn that the tribe in colonial understanding was to caste as male was to female. In a departure from dominant British understandings, protection was not sought for an endangered masculinity threatened by effeminate castes; rather, it was for a fragile adivasi culture-metaphorically feminine, and only about a marginal masculinity at best-which could not survive the onslaught of the masculine modernity of the Indian nation (Guha, 1996). CONCLUSION The historical experience of the Indian people in terms of colonization has indeed created a very significant understanding of how the nation views its indigenous people and how these people view the nation. There has always been a lot of speculation over the nature of development paradigm to be followed for the indigenous people in the country, which has come to be understood as tribes, not without its own inherent problems in terms of definition and conception. Peculiar customs, traditions and cultures separate these people from the mainstream civilization, often thought to be modern and progressive. What is significant is to understand the importance of their perceptions about these notions. The modern state has a very different political and economic agenda which usually comes in direct conflict with the traditional rights of these people. Legal and customary rights and laws are usually framed within these people on the basis of their own beliefs and practices. To understand and deliberate on any issue concerning the indigenous people in the country, their own understandings and perceptions need to be understood in the appropriate context before trying to mainstream or develop them.

114

www.zenithresearch.org.in

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

REFERENCES 1. Bhasin Veena, 2007 Status of Tribal Women in India. Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi, Delhi 110 007, India. 2. Beteiley, A.1995. Construction of Tribe. The Times of India (19 June). 3. Dasgupta Samira, Sarkar Amitabha 2009. Aspects of Tribal Culture in the Forest Environment of Bastar. Anthropological Survey of India, Kolkata 700 016, West Bengal, India. 4. Ghurye, G.S.1963. The Scheduled Tribes. Bombay: Popular Prakashan. 5. GHOSH, KAUSHIK. n.d. "Primitivism in Bengali Modernity: The Imagining of Tribal Society in 19th Century Bengali Nationalist Culture." Unpublished Manuscript. 6. Guha, S. (1999), Environment and Ethnicity in India, 1200-1991, New York: Cambridge University Press. 7. Guntupalli, A. Meera and Chenchelgudem, P. (2004) Perceptions, causes and consequences of infertlity among the Chenchu tribe of India. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 22, (4), 249-259. 8. Indigenous peoples and their relationship to land, Report on Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 3/13/2012. 9. Poonacha, V. Rites de Passage of Matrescence and Social Construction of Motherhood: Coorgs in South India. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 32, No. 3 (Jan. 18, 1997), pp. 101-110. 10. Roy - Burman, B. K. (1992). indegenous Peoples and their Quest for Justice. In B.Chaudhuri, ed., Tribal Transformation in India, vol.3. Delhi: Inter-India Publications. www.zenithresearch.org.in 11. Roy-Burman, B. K. (1983): 'Transformation of Tribes and Analogous Social Formation, Economic and Political Weekly. 12. Roy-Burman, B. K. (1994): Tribes in Perspective Delhi: Mittal Publication 13. Selections from the Records of the Bombay Government, Vol. 366: Survey Settlement of the Talukdari Villages of Jhalod. Bombay: Government of Bombay Press(1898). 14. Skari,A. Shades of Wildness Tribe, Caste, and Gender in Western India: The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Aug., 1997), pp. 726-745.

115

EXCEL International Journal of Multidisciplinary Management Studies

Vol.2 Issue 3, March 2012, ISSN 2249 8834 Online available at http://zenithresearch.org.in/

15. Thapan, M. (1997), Embodiment: Essays on Gender and Identity, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. 16. Xaxa, V, Transformation of Tribes in India: Terms of Discourse. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 34, No. 24 (Jun. 12-18, 1999), pp. 1519-1524. 17. Xaxa, V, Tribes as Indigenous People of India. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 34, No. 51 (Dec. 18-24, 1999), pp. 3589-3595. 18. Xalxo, Prem. 2006. Complementary of Human Life and other Life Forms in Nature: Gregorian University Press. Piazza della pilotta. Rome, Italy.

116

www.zenithresearch.org.in