The process of urbanization should not unilaterally be associated with forces of modernization or secularization, even though in some limited sense, as stated by Milton Singer and R. Redfield, in the metropolitan urban centers as growth occurs from the stage of primary (orthogenetic) to secondary (heterogenetic) urbanization, traditional literati may be transformed into professional intelligentsia, whose function in the changed circumstances may be to mediate between tradition and modernity.

Urbanization even in the 'secondary' phases may strengthen the sinews of the Great tradition because the communication channels which otherwise could be used for transmission of modern values, such as modern means of transport, press, radio, sound amplifiers, etc. are used to further the diffusion of the value system of the Great tradition. Every step in the intensification of communication thus means not only a benefit to modernity but equally, or probably more than equally, a benefit to the cause of the reinforcement of the Great tradition.

Cultural renaissance and reformation as processes of change have relevance for Great tradition. Their significance has been both textual and contextual. Sanskritization as a process of cultural change has primarily a contextual significance; it is particularistic in origin and therefore belongs to the little tradition, and above all describes an empirical process in cultural change that has been most widespread.