“India that is Bharat”, as written in the first article of the Indian constitution, has been a divided nation since its independence over the debate of its “right” name. “Words have meanings and names have power.” A name represents a deep feeling of belongingness and is very significant to its bearer. Our country is known as the nation with two names, one which is in the national language and the other a probable English translation for international convenience. Both the names have a historical origin. The origin of the term ‘Bharat’ has been associated with various stories. The most accepted story is that the nation is named after King Bharata Chakravarti who is said to have merged different regions into one nation and named it “Bharatvarsha”. From a literal perception, the word Bharat comes from the Sanskrit root “bhr” which is synonymous to light. Bharat means to be devoted to light which signifies the nation’s constant search for knowledge.
On the other hand the term ‘India’ comes from the river Sindhu. When people from the west ventured to India, they had to cross the river. As a result they started referring to the people living here by the name Sindhu. As the name passed on, the name of the river became Indus and the land around it became India which means the land of the Hindus. In Sanskrit ‘Sindhu’ means a stream or a great river which from a linguistic point of view is not a meaningful name.
Majority of Indians do not converse or are comfortable in English, thus the need of an English name seems out of place. This is simply a terrible after effect of colonialism. However many countries have renamed their names after gaining independence from the colonialists. Such as Ceylon became Sri Lanka and Burma became Myanmar. In our nation the dispute started as there are people who support the name India. According to them Bharat is a ‘Hindu’ name which is not appropriate for a secular country. I strongly disagree to the notion that India is a ‘neutral name’ for the nation. The name given by foreign invaders that robbed the nation’s freedom and pride should not be the one representing it. The word Bharat has a long history behind it and is thus very significant to the people. It should not be considered as Hindu centric. Its origin may come from Hindu scriptures and myths but that is because Hinduism has been in India since ancient times. Eventually as other religions became a part of the nation they adopted the name Bharat and acknowledged it. It was also argued that the word Bharat is difficult for foreigners to pronounce. As a solution to this problem we can follow in the footsteps of Germany. The nation is referred as Germany by foreigners but its citizens refer to their motherland as Deutschland. Moreover, naming the nation India will be an injustice to the long independence struggle where our leaders fought hard to free the country from any foreign influence. The naming of the country as India by the British is a sign of dominance and white supremacy. The nationalists braved many challenges to promote indigenous made goods, traditions and languages. The whole struggle of trying to remove the stigma that the oriental education system was backward and retrogressive was long and hard, but nationalists such as Rabindranath Tagore and Sarojini Naidu made it to the other side by publishing various books and encouraging people to converse and preserve their own regional languages. After such a traumatic struggle, naming the nation an English name, is disrespecting and insulting to our brave leaders. The nationalists used slogans such as “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” and “Jai Hind”, referring to the nation as Bharat and not India. Even today after being constitutionally named as India, we use these slogans because ‘Bharat’ is a word of our regional languages, one that is much closer to our hearts than ‘India’. The national movement was a process of creating an identity that is unique to the country. Thus selecting an English name as opposed to a regional one equates to succumbing to the west.
This whole debate of India versus Bharat also brings upon the discussion of modernisation versus tradition. Modernisation is defined as a process of adaptation of new values and technology. While doing so the society modifies the traditional norms and values. However, modernity does not mean undermining our indigenous cultures. Some might argue that selecting a name in an international language like English helps in international matters and having a traditional name might come in the way of putting the nation forward in international grounds. However, cultural heritage is important as it gives us a connection to the past that allows us to identify and deepen our sense of unity and national pride. Thus, people need to know that in order to develop as a nation we need to be connected with our pasts while also keeping up with the present. A traditional name strengthens our connection with our history. Being traditional is not a liability but rather an asset. There are social evils in our history that were considered to be a part of our culture in the past but now we have been educated and evolved. Traditions are not carved in stone. They are supposed to evolve in order to keep up with the times but not be completely abandoned. We can weed out the harmful ones and propagate the good ones. In the words of Gustav Mahler, “Tradition is tending the flames not worshipping the ashes”. Modifying our cultures according to the present is an ideal way to develop the nation. A country that has been a victim of foreign invasions numerous times should make an effort to retain its unique identity. Thus as Seth G Das suggested, “Bharat that is known as India in foreign countries” is better suited than “India that is Bharat”.
Note from author:
My name is Garyashi Kashyap, a student of class 9, Don Bosco School, Guwahati, Assam. I am also learning Bharatnatyam and Sattriya (Assamese classical dance). I love reading novels and writing.
Comments