We need to fight Euro-centric or West-centric philosophy of nation making, which not only opposes but also condemns the Bharatiya ethos.
Prof Ramesh C. Bhardwaj
Bharat is a great nation with a rich and old cultural history of thousands of years. The archaeological and linguistic speculations confirm that since five thousand B.C. this nation is contributing to the global society in all spheres of knowledge system i.e. science, technology, religion, philosophy, linguistics, etc. But unfortunately, even after 70 years of Independence, no Indian educational/ research institute is able to figure in top ten or even hundred institutes of the world class ranking. As I perceive, the sole reason behind this is our education system, which has no reference or concern of Bharat, a Euro-centric or West-centric philosophy of nation making, which not only opposes but also condemns the Bharatiya ethos. From basic to higher, this educational system is opposing the inclusion of comprehensive Indian knowledge systems. The authorities of the system undertake the learning of chemistry, astrophysics or mathematics of westerners with exclusion of Indian references. Same situation also prevailes in all other areas of learning i.e. social sciences and languages.
We all know language represents beliefs, history and the cultural roots of the speakers. Culture can be interpreted, as the activities, the conduct, thought process resulted in faith, art, philosophy, etc., which are expressed through the human behaviour. The Indian society has very rich tradition of creative initiatives to improve the standard of human life. In short, eternal mind (prajna) evolved such Bharatiya cultural values through which human beings can achieve the development of all their faculties (physical as well as spiritual). This makes Bharatiya Sanskriti unique and unparallel.
According to scholars, the language and culture are inextricably intertwined and language is such a powerful tool that it makes possible the preservation, growth and transmission of culture, as well as the continuity of society, with its functioning and emotional control of its people. Therefore, since Independence the colonial mind initiated multifaceted academic exercises to curse national cultural unity of the Bharatiya society. The language policies of British and post-Independent governments were supportive to their end.
Sanskrit language is the soul of Bharat in which Indian knowledge system is documented. This hard fact was well-known to West-centric policymakers (foreigners and their Indian pupil) of our country. They do understand the pivotal role of Sanskrit in the survival of major Modern Indian Language (MIL). And without death of MILs the dream of Macaulay, who destroyed the traditional learning system of India and introduced English education, could not have been realised. Therefore, they planned and implemented successfully the multi-faceted strategies to uproot the Bharatiya society from its cultural roots.
It should be further noted that the British Government resolution of 1844 declared that for public employment, preference would be given to those who had education in English. Even today all Public Commissions or Boards follow this colonial system religiously. We have not made Hindi as compulsory for All India Services and Provincial language for State Services. Each and every citizen, belonging to any strata of the society has got this impression that English education is the key to reputed job. Therefore, we are witnessing closing of vernacular medium schools and growth of English medium schools at almost every corner of remote villages.
Sanskrit is the language through which the civilisation of India found its expression for about ten thousand years. In the words of Dr. S.K. Chatterjee, “Sanskrit was the linguistic and literary expression of the great synthesis, which is identical with Bharata-Dharma, the spirit of India, or Indianism.” In the historical development of modern Indian languages we find that Sanskrit is the essential link joining up all the various regional languages, literature and culture. The knowledge of Sanskrit in the teaching of regional languages is exceedingly desirable, in the interest of these languages.
Since 1920, Congress had felt that the British system of division of the country was not appropriate. And to make administration in local languages the idea of reorganisation of nation on the basis of languages was considered as a better strategy. After Independence, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the President of the Constituent Assembly, set up the Linguistic Provinces Commission (Dhar Commission) on June 17, 1948. According to report of the Commission (December 10, 1948) “the formation of provinces on exclusively or even mainly linguistic consideration in not in the larger interests of Indian nation. Dhar Commission also recommended the reorganisation of the states of Madras, Bombay, etc. on the basis of geographical contiguity, financial self-sufficiency and ease of administration.
There were two thoughts of schools for reorganisation of provinces. Ambedkar through his memorandum (dated October 14, 1948) to the Dhar Commission, supported the formation of linguistic provinces (Marathi Majority Maharashtra). K.M. Munshi opposed the proposal of linguistic reorganisation. According to him “the political ambition of a linguistic group can only be satisfied by the exclusion and discrimination of other linguistic groups within the area. No safeguards and no fundamental rights can save them from the subtle psychological exclusion, which linguism implies.” Even the state Reorganisation Commission (SRC 1955) too clearly stated that “it is neither possible nor desirable to reorganise states on the basis of the single test of either language or culture, but that a balanced approach to the whole problem is necessary in the interest of our national unity”. Ultimately the State Reorganisation Act of 1956 established a total of 14 states on the linguistic lines. As a matter of fact, linguistic states, officially patronised its languages and culture.
In principal Bharatiya society accepts “unity in diversity” to strengthen the federal fabric of the nation. But it has shown regionalism in way of national unity, which is used to disintegrate the nation. In the last 70 years, we have only promoted diversity. But we intentionally neglected the eternal truth of Bharat that we are bound by a common cultural heritage, which flourished on this land thousand years ago. That common cultural ethos is documented in our classical languages (Vedic, Sanskrit, Pali and Prakrit) and due course of history transmitted to all modern Indian languages (Tamil to Bodo or Konkani). Provincial cultures are variation of the mainstream Bharatiya cultural ethos, which got some modification to suit their environment. The uniqueness of Indian mind lies in inclusiveness and not in exclusiveness.
Colonial intellectuals, who were in power, taught the nation Arya-Dravid theory to divide the nation on linguistic ethnic grounds. Scholars like Sheldon Pollock described Sanskrit as a language of upper castes, which is against the promotion of regional language (like Kannada). A Marathi eftist writer, who knowingly misinterprets the history of the development of Indian languages, says that Prakrit is the origin of Marathi not Sanskrit.
Pollock, as a Western philologist, compares Sanskrit with Greek and Latin merely as classical language. He is not able to understand that for Bharat Sanskrit is more than a mere classical language. Greek and Latin do not have same sort of deep and all-inclusive influence which Sanskrit still has in Bharatiya life. Sanskrit is the feeder language for all provincial languages. Its remarkable role in our religious and socio-cultural life confirms that even even today Sanskrit is still alive.
In contemporary Bharat, we are witnessing peculiar situation:—Varnacular schools are shutting down; State is providing English medium education even at primary level; petty politicians and secessionist organisations are opposing Hindi, which was adopted as a national link language by our nation builders; to promote regional identity they are opposing neighbouring language. All this have come in the way of national integration.
But following survey by Google provides hope for survival and bright future of the Indian languages: “Indian language internet user base grew at a CAGR of 41% between 2011 and 2016 to reach 234 million users at the end of 2016. This impressive growth has resulted in Indian language internet users surpassing the English internet users. This growth momentum is likely to continue with the Indian languages internet user base growing at a CAGR of 18% to reach 536 million by 2021 compared to English internet user base growing at 3% to reach 199 million. Indian language internet users are expected to account for nearly 75% of India”s internet user base by 2021.” We hope the state and its policymakers resond to the heartbeat of the nation and devise appropriate strategies for protection and promotion of the Sanskrit and Indian languages in the interest of Bharat.
(The writer is renowned Sanskrit Scholar and Prof at Department of Sanskrit in University of Delhi)
