(To clear my thought process ) Dharma is that which bears, that which provides stability to a thing, a person, or a nation in motion. Nyaya is specific to the individual; A person who abides in Dharma may still be affected by the Adharma of another who fails to uphold it then the State/Society must inject Nyaya to tha specific person or group or even state. Jurisprudence (in my limited understanding and information ) could not ditinguish between these two concepts and confused it with morale, divine rule, command, society, economics etc. These two are related, but Dharma is what guides the Naya but here it has nothing to do with legal system, it is independent and move with truth, whereas Naya alone requires legal system. Hence, Jurisprudence has long divorced its essence of Dharma (somehow natural school using reason could hover around truth) and focus on legal system alone. ..................
Who will go through those text again... Just trying to relate some insights here There are few stories in various major (top 10) reciting how the students learned with their teacher (Bhrigu with Varuna, Indra with Prajapati,Svetaketu with Aruni). I never thought these stories and their relevance in that particular context. Upanishad is itself learning in proximity of Guru, wow just wow, and these stories are relating student and their teachers. Unlike classrom practice or guidance of Guru often prescribed in Smritis where service of Guru is the primary mode of learning or by grace of Guru one should learn, these stories simply show patience, in all these stories, Teacher(Guru or Bramhabetta) cater knoweledge that the student is capable of handaling or one can say, knowledge take one's mind in the form of insight or cloud that is full of water yet unable to shower, only there Guru strike with his enlightment and only to the extent student's insight, student will yield. Howev...