Breaking down the question
The question has two linked demands. First, justify that Indian traditions are modernising — argue and evidence the claim that tradition itself is changing, not simply being replaced. Second, discuss its contributing factors — identify the forces driving this transformation.
The framing is deliberately non-oppositional. It does not ask whether modernity has destroyed tradition; it asks you to show that tradition is modernising — adapting, absorbing and reworking modern elements while retaining continuity. This echoes Yogendra Singh's thesis of the modernisation of Indian tradition.
How to approach it
Begin by clarifying that tradition and modernity are not a simple binary — Indian tradition has shown a capacity for adaptive change. Justify the claim with concrete illustrations across religion, caste, family and ritual. Then organise the contributing factors into structural and cultural streams. Close with a balanced note that modernisation here is selective and often carries tradition within it.
Model answer
The claim that Indian traditions are modernising rests on the insight, developed by Yogendra Singh, that tradition and modernity are not mutually exclusive. Indian tradition possesses a remarkable capacity for adaptive change — it absorbs modern values and technologies while preserving a thread of continuity.
Several developments justify the claim. In religion, ritual is increasingly rationalised — temples adopt digital darshan and online donations, and reform movements have stripped many practices of superstition while retaining faith. In caste, the institution persists but its idiom has modernised — caste now operates through associations, competitive politics and reservation rather than ritual hierarchy alone, a shift Srinivas linked to Sanskritisation and westernisation. In the family, the joint household adapts into networked and nuclear forms without abandoning kinship obligation. Milton Singer's study of Madras industrialists showed how traditional identities were carried into modern industrial roles — a compartmentalisation that let tradition and modernity coexist.
The contributing factors may be grouped into two streams. The structural forces are largely a legacy of colonial and post-colonial change: Western education, a modern bureaucracy and legal system, industrialisation, urbanisation, new communication and transport networks, and constitutional guarantees of equality. These created new roles and institutions into which tradition had to be reworked.
The cultural and normative forces include the spread of rationality, individualism, secularism and democratic values, the social reform movements of the nineteenth century, and the reinterpretation of tradition by its own custodians. Yogendra Singh distinguished modernisation that flows within tradition — as when Sanskritisation raises a group's ritual status — from modernisation that transforms structures. The mass media, market economy and globalisation have further accelerated the process.
The transformation is nonetheless selective and uneven. Modernisation in India often works through tradition rather than against it — reservation modernises caste, television modernises ritual. The result is neither pure tradition nor pure modernity but a distinctive synthesis. For fuller treatment, see the note on the modernisation of Indian tradition.
Examiner's perspective
Examiners reward candidates who grasp that the question presumes tradition is changing, not disappearing, and who justify the claim with concrete illustrations across religion, caste and family rather than abstract assertion. Anchoring the answer in Yogendra Singh, and reinforcing it with Srinivas and Milton Singer, signals theoretical command. The strongest scripts separate structural from cultural factors and close by noting that modernisation in India is selective — often carried within tradition itself. That nuance distinguishes a top-band script.