A STUDY ON FRIENDSHIP A CATEGORY OF

SOCIAL RELATIONS

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree
B.Com., LL.B. (Hons)

Submitted by
ANUJA KHANDELWAL
BC0170009

Submitted to
Assistant professor Hemlatha Bhatt

TAMIL NADU NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL

TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 620 009

 DECLARATION

I do hereby declare that the doctrinal judgment review entitled A study on friendship a
category of social relations submitted to Tamil Nadu National Law School in partial
fulfilment of the requirement of the award of the degree of Undergraduate Department is a
record of original work done by me under the supervision and guidance of Dr. Hemlatha
Bhatt Law Department of Tamil Nadu National Law School and that has not formed the basis
of any degree or diploma or fellowship or any other title to any candidate of any university.
 Introduction

Govind Sadashiv Ghurye (1893-1984) was a great figure in scholastic circles for his
exceptional commitment in the field of Indian humanism. He has regularly been acclaimed as
the father of Indian sociology, the doyen of Indian sociologists or the image of
sociological innovativeness. Ghurye developed the entire first generation of Indian
sociologists in post freedom period. Ghurye endeavored to set up his proposition with perfect
case, from the Vedic to the present-day India.1

Ghurye utilized literature in sociological investigations with his knowledge of Sanskrit

writing, widely cited from the Vedas, Shastras, legends, and verse of Kalidasa or Bhavabhuti
to reveal insight into the social and social life in India. He made use of the literature in
vernacular, e.g., Marathi, and referred to from the literature of modern writers like
Bankimchandra Chatterjee also2

The researcher in this article tries to brief us the idea of and the behavioral example of
companionship in various cases. The author took the idea of fellowship from eighteenth
century in England to Europe and after that to Ancient India.

Friendship was contemplated by numerous sociologists and logicians around the globe and
they all had distinctive assessment about the fellowship yet they all spoke to some degree
same thing in the finish of their investigations on friendship.

From ancient times, this relationship was perceived and homed in India and had an
extraordinary significance in the general public. Indeed, even the Vedas and content of
Mahabharata had this term friendship, so by this we can discover that this term existed in the
Indian culture from that time and was no new idea to Indians.

1
Govind Sadashiv Guhurye : Biography and Contribution to Indian Sociology, Puja Mondal, Your article
library, http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/govind-sadashiv-guhurye-biography-and-contribution-to-
indiansociology/35012/

2
Ibid
 DETAILED CONTENT ANALYSIS

Friendship in European history

G.S. Ghurye has discussed the advancement of the term friendship from the past and made us
acquainted with the significance of friendship in our social lives. He considered the historical
backdrop of fellowship in Europe. Friendship in Europe began from the acculturated English
society of eighteenth century. Presently the author makes us comfortable with the friendship
of Johnson, he had scholarly mammoths and social worthies as his companions, for example,
- Edmund Burke, Joshua Reynolds and David Garrick, Oliver Goldsmith. Johnson had
phenomenal scholarly and talking capacity.

Macaulay had given us a record of the friendship existing between Garrick and Johnson.
"The friendship between Garrick and Johnson was not as solid as it was supposed to be in the
first place3 As Garrick was ten years younger than Johnson, both worked as theatre
supervisor (Garrick) and dramatist (Johnson). The issue of sudden success bought the feeling
of disagreeableness and unfriendliness between the two friends behaviours. But because of
the early memories in common, on many points focuses they sympathized with each other on
which they havent identified with any other person.

The assortment of relationship existed between the Johnson and Burke. Johnson learned the
politics, governmental issues from Burke and built up his own abilities in the field of politics
with no feeling of envy for each other. David Hume said that love and benevolence or
friendship is unique constituents of the psychic and moral nature of man.

The friendship between Goethe and Schiller began when Schiller published a few letters in
his new journal. Both of them were ideologically unique and opposite to each other however
that thing did not influence their friendship. In this Goethe offered much to the Schiller and

3
The Life of Samuel Johnson, Second edition, by sir John Hawkins, Google Books,
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=5b1cAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA377&lpg=PA377&dq=friendship+between+garr
ick+
and+johnson&source=bl&ots=9LNJEv4kJF&sig=ZrsL10BO6E92_ESXsNaJ_zLyjs&hl=en&sa=X&sqi=2&ved
=0a
hUKEwjbcqi5fSAhVGmpQKHfCfBpMQ6AEIIzAD#v=onepage&q=friendship%20between%20garrick%20an
d%2 0johnson&f=false
later Schiller gave Goethe sympathy and motivation. Goethe wept bitterly when his friend in
Germany a friendship was started between Goethe and Schiller which was more significant
and acclaimed. Goethe was ten years senior in age than Schiller. Their friendship came into
existence when died and portrayed that this example resembled "half of the existence had
gone for him" that demonstrates the amount of understanding and friendship between the
two. Goethes views on companionship are especially significant in light of the fact that he
had an extensive friend network and being a biological scholar had the poet's vision and a
thinker's profundity. This kind of friendship shows us the differences between two
individuals can not affect the bond of friendship between the two persons.

GOETHE:

As per Goethe "true, active and productive friendship implied that the friends should keep
step through life". The one must regard the aims of each other and this kind of feeling ought
to be there from both the sides. Despite the different thinking and way of life, the two friends
must share their actions with each other in light of the fact that as indicated by him activities
unite the two people.

Friendship is important for the development of the persons identity/personality because

whatever a friend does for you turns out to be a part of your life and enhances personality of
an individual. He compared friend and a picture which gives us satisfaction when we talk
with him/her. He said that the friendship is stable and indestructible nature of life till one of
the friend kicks the bucket and it is not like the the ones which blur with time.

JOHNSON:
Johnson had stressed upon the identity of friendship and said that there is no delight higher
than the friendship. He related it demise of a friend with the little delights of life. Friendship
gives assistance with ones circumstance of uncertainty, ones appraisal of doubtful situations
and balancing the miserable times. His statement with respect to the pattern of behaviour and
characteristic of friendship is that it not only improves ones personality but also totally
changes ones life. Friendship should be judged by the readiness of a man to help his/her
friend whenever required. If the complaints are not heard consistently in this relationship then
they would become hard to be dealt with, so this ought to be heard frequently. Friendship is a
blend of bliss and sorrow shared together.

In nineteenth century, the Emerson gave its contribution towards by its clarification and
understanding of friendship.

ANDRE MAUROIS:
In fourth decade of twentieth century Andre Maurois writing on the art of living and had
given one section of his book to friendship. Friendship as indicated by Maurois comes
immediately after the family life. He said that family is augmentation of relationship inside
the hover of family on the grounds that specific relations inside the family are purchased
together. The dealings between friends must not resemble business one; rather it ought to be a
dealing which one should forget after giving it and should not remember for future and one
should give this assistance even without asking of that assistance by the friend. He compared
the networking of friendship with the nerve cells of our body which are complexly unite by
one another

HUME:
Hume describes friendship in a more plausible and sensible way. He equates friendship with
affection and depicts it as a virtue among equals. He considers opposite of friendship as scorn
or hatred. He tells that when a person whom we cherish is also related to us by blood, nation
or companionship, whose ownership is felt by us. He talked about friendship as distinct from
love and tells us that the ties of friendship in the case of a humane and beneficent person. We
consider friendship in tough times, for example, chapter 11. Benevolence is of two types 1)
General 2) Particular. He identifies friendship only with specific benevolence and not with its
general variety. Friendship inclines us to feel fulfilment in one man's company over another's
and to want the welfare of our friend. Friendship is a characteristic constituent of the mental
and moral aspects of man it is his need.
A.F SHAND:
He sees benevolence as the highest form of disinterested love and distinguishes it from sex
love, family fondness and friendship. Friendship is not only familiarity with the loved person
but it is also happiness in his presence, company, sadness and distress. The qualities of
generosity, tenderness, and truthfulness are altogether called into play in friendship. The
duties which friendship should have are constancy, dedication and truth. Friendship is related
with love and is an incredible power in the building up of a persons character and
personality.

He separates friendship from sociability because he feels that in the event that you have many
friends you wont have any connection to a particular person. For such rich social people love
of individual is not there rather than for them there is love of society. Among ordinary
people, socialization appears as general wishing, grinning and talking. It makes social life
happy as well as satisfies a fundamental need of man.

The next phase of sociability is neighbourness. Its presence makes social life cheerful as
well as satisfies fundamental want of a man. But the approach, appeal and satisfaction are not
that much, so in this way it can't be said to enrich the individual personality. This became
popular because of town planning and community planning schemes. Neighbourness includes
mutual help in the desperate hour involving borrowing and lending and give and take
between each other.

Third phase of sociability is friendship. Just choosing a few or one individual from a group
of individuals and binding your friendliness them only is friendship. Relationship of
friendship is identified with adoration, basic use and some to a few relations inside family
circle. Friendship includes obligations and rights, esteem and bliss. He said that fruitful
kinship talks about ability to disregard and bargain as well as preparation to relinquish and
endure.

Friendship fulfils some of the needs of human nature and enhances one's personality.
Friendship, which is a part of sociability and at some extent, is an extension of kinship. It is
based on individual choice and calls which cannot be seen in other social behaviors
FRIENDSHIP IN INDIAN HISTORY
In our civilization of kinship and caste, where status of groups and individuals was fixed, the
lack of such treatment of friendship might create the wrong impression that the friendship was
not valued or it had no scope. In Sanskrit literature friend is known to have a specific kinship
connotation. The most ancient and the most common word in Indo-Aryan languages for friend
is 'mitra'. In the Rgveda, composed about 2500 B. C. the word means friend as well as stands
for Sun both in context of masculine gender.

In early Sanskrit the word for friend is 'sakha' or 'sakhi'. In classical Sanskrit term
'vayasya' means a person who is of more or less the same age as oneself and usually between
the persons of same age. But due to some reason this word failed to find a place in modern
Indian languages.

Another word is 'subrid' its meaning is one whose heart is good and this word beautifully tells
us the whole meaning of friend in just one word.

Another word is Sauhar-da' means good-heartedness, affection, friendship but this word also
does not contain a place in modern Indian languages.

The word 'Snehi' means one who is oily, affectionate, has come to mean a friend. And 'sneha'
is defined in Sanskrit literature as the situation where sight, touch, voice and conversation melt
one's inner heart and its characteristics are hardly short of love.

In the later Dharma 'kulamitra' means 'family friend', is mentioned as one of the persons whose
food may be accepted in contravention of caste rules regarding food.

Today institutionalized family friendship is found in two areas, Nepal and Coorg. In
this four varieties of friends are mentioned 1) hereditary through family descent 2) one born as
a relative 3) one freshly cultivated 4) one helped out of his difficulties and one non mentioned
variety was swabhavaja. Natural friend may be trusted more than one's mother, wife, brother
and even oneself. The compliment for the closest friendship describes the friend as one's double
outside one's body, 'bahiscarah pranah'. The word 'mitra' is composed of two words means that
a friend, is an invaluable asset. The importance of a friend is shown in the sentence that the
house of a person without a good friend is as vacant as that of one without a son.
 The author also has given account of Kalidas who said friendship is to be formed in
seven paces and also in Mahabharat which says to take seven steps in the company of the good
is to become their friend. This idea is partially at the basis of the rite of seven steps which is
considered the binding ceremony of a Hindu marriage. In the union of marriage the parties
takes seven steps is homage to friendship.

The moralist Bhartrihari had laid down the duties of a good friend as 1) the one who
wards one off from sinful acts 2) leads one to beneficial activity 3) conceals one's secrets and
weak points 4) proclaims one's good features 5) gives bounties to one when in need 7) does not
desert one in adversity.

Once Lord Krishna had said during Mahabharata when he went to visit Kauravas to
make a final effort to bring about a peaceful settlement between them and his friends Pandavas
and was offered to have meal with them that people take meals at other's either because they
are poor and cannot afford a meal or because of affection, neither of these qualities is possessed
by me towards you and refused to have food. Invitation to meals and acceptance of it were
based on affection towards the person. At that time invitation to dinner had then not taken the
position of a diplomatic or commercial institution.

Literature creates the mindset that friends were valued for the practical services they
provided rather than for themselves. There is also a saying that with friends one is able to
complete their projects which are otherwise impossible, so one should therefore make friends.
Real friend is said to be like a mirror of the happiness or misery of his friend means that a friend
feels joy at one's good fortune and sorrow at one's misfortune same as the other feel (which is
also described in Marathi drama Saubhadra in which Arjuna declares that Krisna friend of
the Pandava family is the person who grieved at their sorrow and happy at their joy).

Justice M. G. Ranade used to describe his relations one gentleman describes this aspect
of friendship which is "Sivasya hridaye Visnnr Visnosca hridaye Sivah" means God Visnu is
embedded in the heart of God Siva and God Siva in that of God Visnu and cant be separated.

The pattern of behavior expected of friends revealed in Sanskrit literary sources is very
much same as expected by Dr. Johnson or by Goethe. A pattern of behavior is found to be the
same in European and in Indian society. And in the end the author introduced us with the
Marathi literature and different novels written by Marathi novelist about friendship which
described friendship not between just two people but also between their father and their family.
 Conclusion

The author of this article tries to tell us the concept and the behavioral pattern of friendship in
different cases said by different persons. He talks about friendship between different people.
He tells us about friendship in the 18th century in England. His thoughts on friendship were
related to the psychic and moral nature of man.

Also, he said that in a friendship there can be differences between the person and
ideology but it doesnt affect the emotional bonding between them that is known as friendship.
He said that friendship is an eminent part of human life without which the life of a person is
empty. Friendship plays an important role in morally supporting a person in its hard times and
also gives joy simultaneously. We cannot separate bonding of friendship from our daily life. It
is a relationship which helps us in building our personality and also enhancing it. He said that
friendship is essentially an individual and a social relationship.

He said that in India from ancient times this relationship was recognized and practiced
in India and had a great importance in the society. He points out many words in our literature
which only means the relation of friendship. Author told about the friendship and its importance
in the society by the help of ancient texts and by tracing the history of European and Indian
people.
 Synopsis

Friendship is fully related with the socialization of the person and enhancing personality of an
individual. Friendship is a means by which a person can share its feelings with the other person,
due to this sharing of feeling one can reduce its sorrow in its difficult times and one can also
enjoy equally by sharing the happiness among his/her friend.

In friendship, every person has a role to play which is different from the role played in the
family. In this role, one should do the things even without letting other to speak about his/her
problem, these roles are not specified but one has to perform these rules when friend is in need
or facing some problem.

Another thing is that this process of selecting friend is an achieved status of a person because
one makes friends according to his or her will and is not like other relationships which are
ascribed status like one cannot decide his/her father or mother and neither could change them.