Is Hindutva bringing Hinduism a bad name, and harming India’s interests? Do we need post-Hindutva schools of thought immediately?

 

Hindutva is a political ideology that also provides a basis for Hindu nationalism and the desire to establish Hindu hegemony within India. It is often associated with Hinduness, and the state or the quality of being a Hindu with an interplay between cultural, religious, and national identities. This ideology traces its roots to the ideals of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 1922 in reaction to the pan-Islamic Khilafat movement, and due to fears that Hindu culture and Hindu values were being trampled upon by colonialists. It was however used much earlier, in the 1890’s by Chandranath Basu, and others. It has  also been used extensively for political and non-political purposes by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and other similar or affiliated organisations,  which are collectively referred to as the Sangh Parivar. The RSS had been founded by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar in 1925 who also operationalized most of its activities at a grassroots level. For Savarkar, in his work “Hindutva: Who Is a Hindu?”, Hindutva is an inclusive term of everything Indic. The three essentials of Hindutva in Savarkar's definition were the common nation (rashtra), common race (jati), and common culture or civilisation (sanskriti).  Savarkar had also made a clear distinction between Hinduism and Hindutva, that they are not same things as Hindutva does not concern religion or rituals but the basis of India's national character. Savarkar himself was not overly religious, and his ideas bordered on atheism.

Hindutva proponents also seek to uphold Hindu values, and Hindu dharma. Some Hindutva proponents even go to the extent of claiming that only adherents of Indian religions are true nationals, and Christians and Muslims can be called Indians only if they accept Indian culture in toto. There are varying levels of intensity within Hindutva, though it is indeed true that extreme versions border on fascism. Many Hindutva proponents have however mellowed down, and many have even begun to adopt a much softer stance towards Muslims and other minorities. Critics of the Hindutva ideology however allege that the movement bears some resemblance to European fascist movements that were common in the early part of the twentieth century. It is therefore a form of right-wing ethno nationalism, in tune with similar movements in other parts of the world, they allege. Some critics also allege that the term Hindu as it describes a religion is a relatively more recently constructed term in reference to a geography, and is partially foreign in origin. It is also a nebulous and a hazy concept, and is difficult to define with any degree of precision.

According to Arvind Sharma, a noted scholar of Hinduism, Hindutva has not been a "static and monolithic concept", rather its meaning and context has gradually changed over time. Its early formulation incorporated the racism and nationalism concepts prevalent in Europe during the first half of the twentieth century, and culture was in part designed on the basis of the concept of "shared blood and race". Savarkar and his Hindutva colleagues also eventually adopted the social Darwinism theories that were common in the 1930s. After India’s independence, according to Arvind Sharma, the concept has begun to suffer from a high degree of ambiguity and its understanding has been aligned on "two different axes" – one of religion versus culture, another of nation versus state. In general, the Hindutva thought among many Indians has "tried to align itself with the culture and nation" axes. Therefore, there are extreme variations in the concept of the term today, right from the innocuous to the radical, and even Hindutva proponents are sometimes not clear of the boundaries and the precise connotations and implications of the term. Some Hindutva proponents are harmful and fascist. Some others are mere mischief makers. Some are of course, utterly innocuous, and may only be swimming with the tide.

There are also allegations in some quarters that Hindutva is a form of Brahminism and neo-Brahminism associated with Aryanism. According to Chetan Bhatt, Hindutva is nothing but a “dense cluster of ideologies of primordialism”, and some concepts associated with orientalism and romanticism also lent their weight and credence to Hindutva. These statements and assertions may be partly true. While the RSS has actively written against the caste system, and even promoted inter caste dining in the 1920’s, (the RSS is open to all members), it is indeed true that Brahmins continue to be its most enthusiastic supporters.  Hindutva groups have also attempted to rewrite history infamously in the 2000’s drawing inspiration from the fact that the historical models prevalent then, were indeed obsolete. Their justification was also partly based on the biased interpretation of Indian history by some colonialists. They however, went on to fallaciously emphasize Brahminical versions of India. History. Some kind of an extremely innocuous form of Hindutva may be tolerable, but extremely virulent versions must be chasticized. Hindutva groups must not:

1.       Misrepresent history to suit a narrow version of Hinduism, namely Brahminsm, or promote other altered forms of history.

2.       Must not interfere with the inculcation of a scientific temper, and the inculcation of scientific values. Also refer to our works on twenty-first century intellectualism. Most Indians unfortunately do not possess a scientific temper even to this day.

3.       Must not promote hatred against other religious groups; however, all religions are open to criticism. There must be a spirit of religious harmony at all times.

4.       Must not discriminate between people of different faiths.

5.       Must not seek to override or overturn the constitution, and values of fair justice.

6.       Religious values must not be allowed to override universal human values.

7.       Must not otherwise, and in any other way or fashion, interfere with internal or international peace and harmony. Indian and Hindu culture, values and traditions may be allowed to flourish and thrive if they do not trample upon other people’s rights.  

If all these ideas are being compromised with, we need to think twice, and think again. It is time to marshall all our resources to ruminate and ponder how post-Hindutva schools of thought can be articulated and concretized. After all, the interests of society must always reign supreme, and must override all other considerations at all times.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Towards a Vijnana or a Vaignanika school of Hinduism

Hinduism is a truly diverse religion, and has no founder. It therefore stands to reason and logical thought that Hinduism can easily be interpreted as being wholly compatible with science. This is unlike many other religions that originated from a single text, and are therefore, sometimes seen as being in conflict with science. It also stands to reason that this is the definition of Hinduism that we must seek to project if Hinduism is to thrive, flourish, and prosper in future. Indian science took off in a big way in early ancient times, and Indian innovation can be traced back to Mehrgarh, a pre-Indus valley civilization site, now in Pakistan. Harappans developed metallurgy, irrigation, agriculture, architecture, their own form of writing besides other inventions and innovations such as weights and measures. Alphabetic scripts and iron-making took off in Post-Harappan cultures in the Gangetic plains, where there was some continuity with Harappan cultures, and Ancient Indians made contributions to mathematics, astronomy and medicine too. In the fifth century BC, the grammarian Panini made important contributions to the study of Sanskrit grammar. An account of Ancient India is provided by Megasthenes in his book Indica which is now considered to be lost. Indians also contributed greatly to philosophy and intellectual thought as evidenced by the Upanishads and Buddhism as well. In sum, Indian philosophical traditions include both orthodox (or Astika) systems which include the Nyaya, Samkhya, Vaisheshika, Purva-Mimamsa (or Mimamsa), Yoga and Vedanta schools of philosophy, and unorthodox (or Nastika) systems, examples being Buddhist and Jaina traditions. Ancient Indian scholars and intellectuals included Bhaskara, Varahamihira, Sushruta, Bramhagupta, Aryabhatta and Bihana.

 

Let us now attempt a somewhat more detailed narrative. The Indus Valley Civilization or the IVC in short, also commonly, widely and popularly known as the Harappan Civilization, was a large Bronze Age civilization which flourished in the northwestern part of South Asia, from 3300 BC to 1300 BC, though its mature period was between 2600 BC to 1900 BC. Along with Ancient Egypt and Ancient Mesopotamia, it was one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and spatially the most spread out. This civilization was an ancient river valley civilization, and flourished along the course of the Indus river and the now dry Ghagra Hakkar river, sometimes also known as the Saraswathi river.  The civilizations most important sites, Mohenjodaro and Harappa were excavated in the 1920’s, though its ruins were noted as early as the middle of the nineteenth century. The cities of the Indus valley civilization were well-planned, had baked brick houses and multi storey tenaments, underground drainage and sewerage systems, external water supply systems, irrigation systems etc, besides metallurgy, and long-distance maritime trade. Mohenjo-daro and Harappa may have had over fifty thousand individuals, and the civilization may have contained between one and five million individuals during its peak.

 

The people of the Indus civilization also achieved an impressive accuracy in measuring length, mass, and time. The people of the Indus valley civilization are also believed to have developed an elaborate system of weights and measures based on cubical stone weights, with a fairly high level of standardization, though differences from region to region were also noted. These weights and measures were believed to have been used in trade, commerce, and construction. According to the site Harappa.com, Harappan weights conformed to a standard Harappan binary weight system that was used in almost all the settlements. The smallest weight in this series is thought to be 0.856 grams and the most common weight weighs approximately 13.7 grams, in a 1:16 ratio. However, decimal increases were noted in case of the larger weights. Chert weights were in multiples of 28 grams, similar to the English imperial ounce, or the Greek unia. Bricks were in the ratio of 4:2:1. It is obvious therefore, that Harappans had some knowledge of geometry.

Ivory rulers were also used. Harappans also were expert metalworkers, and used a wide variety of metals such as copper, bronze, tin, silver and gold, besides other types of precious stones. They also produced and developed a wide variety of ceramics. They also developed new techniques in metal working, and could even test the purity of gold. Interestingly, they also developed polished metal mirrors, and used furnaces, kilns and hearths to attain controlled temperatures of several hundred degrees centigrade. The Harappans also built docks and ports such as Lotha, and elites even traded with West Asia. They also therefore possessed knowledge of the tides and ocean currents. Complex canal systems were also used for irrigation, along with dams. Farms were ploughed used oxen and ploughs.

In Vedic India, we have evidence of use of basic geometrical concepts, as evidenced from the Shatapata Brahmana, a text published in the ninth century before Christ, and from the works of Baudhyana who lived in the eighth century before Christ. Large numbers and relatively complex calculations were also being routinely employed and used. By the time of the Yajur Veda which is the last Veda, numbers as high as ten to the power of eighteen are believed to have been used. It is even claimed that concepts similar to Pythogorean statements were used, and some formulas were provided by Baudhayana, and others. The earliest Indian astronomical text was the Vedanga Jyotisa and and dated back from 700 to 600 BCE, though it was perhaps only compiled in the final centuries of the pre-Christian era, according to more conservative scholars like Witzel, and others. This text contained both astronomical calculations, as well as calendrical studies. The Sushruta Samhita was an ancient Sanskrit medical treatise penned by Sushruta. It describes several medical illnesses, and proposes treatments for them, including treatments from plant and animal sources. It also contains descriptions of different forms of surgeries. Additionally, the Atharva Veda also contains a description of some medical treatments. Metal currency was also minted in ancient India by the fifth century before Christ. Chariots were also used in ancient India, and these have been archaeologically attested since 1500 BC in places such as Sinauli. The Harappan did not know the use of iron; however, the use of iron is attested in the Gangetic plains from around 1800 BC, implying a complex acculturation process.

Some other scholarly fields of study such as linguistics also flourished in Ancient India. During the fifth century before Christ, the grammarian and philologist Panini  made several advances in the fields of phonetics, phonology, and morphology. He also wrote the first treatise on Sanksrit grammar. The most important of Panini's works, the Astadhyayi is a grammar that details the features of the Sanskrit language. Though this largely deals with classical Sanskrit, the text also describes some characteristics of the much older Vedic Sanskrit. The Tamil grammar Tholkappiyam was penned by Tholkappiyar in circa 500 BC.  Nalanda was an early centre of learning and was believed to have been founded around 2000-1500 years ago, or so. It ruins occupy a total areas of fourteen hectares, and scholars from different parts of the subcontinent may have come here to study. Scholars such as Aryabhatta are also believed to have taught there. Taxila is believed to have been another centre of learning. This is believed to have been around 2500 years old.

An account of Ancient India is provided by Megasthenes in his book Indica which is now considered to be lost. Indians also contributed greatly to philosophy and intellectual thought as evidenced by the Upanishads and Buddhism as well. In sum, Indian philosophical traditions include both orthodox (or Astika) systems which include the Nyaya, Samkhya, Vaisheshika, Purva-Mimamsa (or Mimamsa), Yoga and Vedanta schools of philosophy, and unorthodox (or Nastika) systems, examples being Buddhist and Jaina traditions. The Mimimsa school of thought employed rational and critical thought and investigative analysis. The Charvaka school of thought did not believe in the existence of God, or a supernatural entity. Ancient Indian scholars and intellectuals included Bhaskara, Varahamihira, Sushruta, Bramhagupta, Aryabhatta and Bihana.

Sushruta was the listed author of the Sushruta Samhita, a treatise that is considered to be one of the most important surviving ancient treatises on medicine and is considered a foundational text of Ayurveda. He probably lived in Kasi, Benares, or Varanasi one of the Mahajanapadas around 800 to 700 BC. Baudhayana who lived around the same period, i.e. 800 BC to 700 BC is credited with having made many important contributions to mathematics.  He is also often credited for authoring the earliest Sulba Sutras. Charaka was another important physician who lived in the fourth century before Christ probably in Kashmir. He is the author of Charaka Samhita which is one of the foundational medical texts from Ancient India. Likewise, Agnivesha may have also contributed to Ayurveda at an earlier date, but this is disputed.  

Brahmagupta who lived in the seventh century after Christ, was an important Indian mathematician and astronomer. He was the author of two very early works on mathematics and astronomy, namely, the Brahmasphuta siddhanta , and the Khandakhadyaka . Brahmagupta also is believed to have been the first to describe gravity, and used the Sanskrit term gurutvakarsanam to describe it. Bhaskara II, was another important mathematician and astronomer from the twelfth century. He is known was his work Siddhanta Shiromani which was written in 1150 AD, and is a treatise on algebra. He must be distinguished from Bhaskara I who lived in the seventh century. Vaisesika Sutra or Kanada Sutra was authored by the philosopher Kanada before the second century BC, and was an important philosophical and scientific treatise. Nagarjuna was an important Buddhist philosopher of the second century after Christ. Varahamihira was an important philosopher who lived in Ujjain in the sixth century after Christ. He is known for works such as Pancha-siddhantika, Brhat-samhita, and Brihajjataka. Chanakya of the fourth century before Christ was a political strategist and a well-read polymath. He is known for his work Arthasastra. 

Aryabhata, or Aryabhata I was another extraordinary and brilliant astronomer and mathematician that India has produced. He lived in the fifth century, and is sometimes called the “Father of Indian Mathematics.” His seminal work, Aryabhatiya, introduced the concept of zero, decimal notation, and a precise approximation of the value of pi. He also furnished calculations of the planetary positions, eclipses, and the rotation of the Earth. Aryabhatta II was less influential and lived in the tenth century. He authored the book Maha-Siddhanta. In the Seleucid era and the Sassanid period, there were cross-cultural exchanges between India, Persia and Greece, and a flow of ideas often took place between disparate geographical territories. In the twelfth century, Kalhana’s Rajatarangini gives a detailed account of irrigation networks and hydraulic engineering. Let us now examine the various schools of Hindu philosophy.

We also had astika and nastika schools of philosophy in ancient India, depending on whether their followers accepted the authority of the Vedas or not. The Vaisheshika school was one of the six schools of Hindu philosophy in ancient India. In its early stages, the Vaisesika was an independent philosophy with its own concepts of metaphysics, epistemology, logic, and ethics. Over a period in time, the Vaisesika system became similar in its philosophical procedures, ethical conclusions and soteriology to the Nyaya school of Hinduism, but retained its difference in epistemology and metaphysics. This school of thought spoke about different forms of knowledge at great length. It spoke about direct observation, perception, postulation, and inference as well. This school also provided insights into naturalism. For example, it spoke about paramanu or atoms and other concepts. It also postulated that reality comprised earth, water, air, fire, and space.

The Charvaka or the Lokayata school, is an ancient school of Indian materialism. It is considered as one example of the atheistic schools in the Ancient Indian philosophies. According to this school, direct perception, empiricism, and conditional inference are the proper sources of knowledge. This school embraces philosophical skepticism and rejects ritualism. It was a well-attested belief system in ancient India. Brihaspati, a philosopher, is traditionally referred to as the founder of Charvaka or Lokāyata philosophy. Charvaka developed during the Hindu reformation period of the first millennium before Christ, after the emergence of Buddhism.  The Nyaya school, which literally meaning justice, rules,  method or judgment, is one of the six orthodox schools of Hindu philosophy. Nyaya's most significant contributions to Indian philosophy were the systematic development of the theory of logic, methodology, and its treatises on epistemology. This school accepts perception, inference, comparison and analogy as reliable means of knowledge.  The Ajnana school was one of the nastika or heterodox schools of ancient Indian philosophy. This school was the ancient school of radical Indian skepticism. This school conflates greatly with Buddhist and Jaina traditions. Sanjaya Belatthiputta was one of the major proponents of this school of thought.

Mīmamsa is a Sanskrit word that means "reflection" or "critical investigation" and refers to a tradition of contemplation which reflected on the meanings of certain Vedic texts. This tradition is also known as Purva-Mimaṁsa because of its focus on the earlier Vedic texts dealing with ritual actions, and similarly as Karma-Mimaṁsa due to its focus on ritual action or karma. It is one of six Vedic "affirming" schools of Hindu philosophy. This tradition has both newer and older versions, as well as several sub schools. This school also contributed greatly to linguistics by analyzing language deeply, and influenced other schools. The vijnana or vaignanika school (the name is just a handy moniker we must coin) must follow scientific method or scientific methodology at all times. It must also embrace innovation, creativity, and scientific progress. It must also be in tune with modern realities, and with modern times. Only then can Hinduism thrive, prosper, and flourish.  

Is It Time for India to Abandon Its Antiquated Rajbhasha Policy?

Is It Time for India to Abandon Its
Antiquated Rajbhasha Policy?

Sujay Rao Mandavilli

Published in Languages in India, January 2008

---

The History of the Language Policy in India

In 1906, Mahatma Gandhi wrote in his book Hind Swaraj or Home Rule,

A universal language for India should be Hindi, with the option of writing it in Persian or Nagari characters. In order that the Hindus and the Mohammedans may have closer relations, it is necessary to know both the characters. And, if we can do this, we can drive the English language out of the field in a short time.1

In spite of significant differences between Mahatma Gandhi and other Congressmen at the time (Mahatma Gandhi also supported Hindustani at times), the ideas of Mahatma Gandhi reigned supreme, and the policies of Mahatma Gandhi tended to be widely accepted in the Congress. This was in spite of the fact that the seeds for linguistic provinces were sown in the early 20th century itself. For example, the Indian National Congress in 1917 decided to constitute a separate Andhra Congress Provincial committee. A consensus was also slowly emerging that administration had to be provided in a language that was understood by its people. In spite of a potential conflict between Hindi as a national language and the concept of linguistic provinces, however, the Congress, at that time naturally wanted to avoid partition and show that it was not opposed to the interests of the Muslims, and emphasized religious harmony over linguistic identity. 2

Protests Against the Language Provisions of the Indian Constitution

Accordingly, the Indian constitution provided that Hindi and English were to be the languages of the Central Government until 1965, when a switch to Hindi would be necessary. Provinces were however free to use their own languages. Even at the time the decision to select the language of a region as a national language proved controversial and invoked protest from several parts of South India, Western India, North Eastern India but particularly in Tamilnadu. The strongest of these protests took place in December, 1964 and January 1965 in Tamilnadu when the 15 year mandate for phasing out English at the Central government was to expire. Several hundreds of people were killed in these agitations.

India Before and After 1991: Did India Survive and Prosper in spite of Its Language Policy?

Since independence, India has pursued a so-called mixed economy where the public sector was in the commanding heights of the economy, and the private sector had a relatively less important role to play. The public sector apparently failed to meet the aspirations of the burgeoning middle class both in terms of career avenues and its ability to provide the requisite number of career opportunities to meet the growing numbers of the educated classes, and people had to look for other career options both in India and abroad.

Implications of the Language Policy

The national language policy remained stagnant because of the fear that to change it in favor of some other language, say, English, or even Hindi exclusively, overriding the roles of regional languages, would create a discrimination based on language and would therefore be incompatible with the principles of a democracy.

The so-called Three-Language-Formula was developed as a compromise, and as an imperfect solution to what may then have been termed an intractable issue because many Hindi zealots at the time may have been unable to think beyond Hindi and many of those opposed to it were similarly unable to think beyond English.

If one were to retrospect over this situation four decades later, we would come to the conclusion that this policy has caused more confusion and chaos than good. While it may have lured one part of the country into a feeling of Rajbhasha complacency, many were genuinely angry at it and saw it as a blatant sign of discrimination based on language. If one were to analyze the Three-Language-Formula, the Hindi-speaking states saw little need to implement it, and even if they did so, taught a language like Sanskrit which was clearly out of the economic equation.

Points of Discrimination - Job Markets, etc.

As a result of this, some states had two and some had three languages. National Language Policy was perceived to be the first point of discrimination. Many who opposed Hindi claimed that if Hindi zealots had their way, English would soon be removed. However, for most people this itself was always in doubt because Hindi was only the official language of the Central government, and did not seem to reach the status and efficiency needed to achieve a language of corporations, industries, businesses, etc. Those who learnt Hindi in the Hindi-speaking states had it as their native language, their mother tongue; those who learnt it elsewhere did not. This was perceived to be the second point of discrimination. Again, those who learnt Hindi in a Hindi medium school learnt their mother tongue as their first language; those who learnt it elsewhere learnt it as an alien language as a second or a third language. This was perceived to be the third point of discrimination.

Theoretically, it may have allowed a part of the country to take over the job market through unnatural means, triggering, as a result a series of other reactions inimical and antithetical to the nation's integrity and may have even encouraged laziness at the expense of merit and greatly hampered productivity.

English was, on the other hand, perceived to be neutral. In spite of this, politicians even in many non-Hindi speaking states abandoned English or greatly reduced its power with unabashed political motives. Nonetheless, all these factors coupled with the fundamental irreconcilability between the policies followed in Central and most State governments, and the need to look elsewhere for job opportunities may have clearly triggered a demand for English.

This was aided in no meager measure by a series of fortuitous happenings.

Enter Globalization!

One was the process of globalization dictated by the suzerainty of the USA and the impregnability of English as the language of global commerce. Another was the advent of the computer and the Internet.

Economic Reforms in Tandem with the Collapse of the USSR System

In addition, India's economic reforms coincided perfectly with the collapse of the USSR and the process of globalization.

Another factor may have been ingrained in the very nature of the Indian economy: India is a complex country and many parts of the country have economic connections with other parts of the world and not necessarily with the Hindi heartland. This is one reason why India may have become an economic success story after economic reforms.

Deceleration of Secessionist Movements in India

It may also be interesting to note that all secessionist movements within economically strong States have ceased after liberalization and economic reforms, and many historians may one day see 1991 as a turning point for India. India after 1991 is more or less a completely different country.

Late in the 20th century, most Communist countries collapsed due to inherent contradictions in their own economic and political structures. The major objection to India's language policy in the 21st century, may be, that the spread of a language native to one particular region in a multilingual and multiethnic country through political power is normally associated with Marxist countries and failed or failing states and if pushed beyond a point, may be even incompatible with minority rights.

Lessons from the Neighborhood

Two classic cases in our own neighborhood, in addition to the erstwhile USSR, were Pakistan and Sri Lanka where perceived discrimination based on language sowed the seeds of instability and led to disintegration or civil war.

Interpreting the Constitution

In the case of India, which loosely follows a policy on similar lines, some checks and balances in the Indian Constitution were and are available.

A complete incompatibility between the language policies of the Centre and the States could be constitutionally imagined and adopted by various States. We could also interpret the provisions of the Constitution to sustain an incompatibility between India's language policy and the Constitution, which only decreed that Hindi was the official language of the Central government and that it would replace English for use in Central government offices and for correspondence with States only after all States have unanimously agreed.

This provision, when insisted upon, could have led to several other interesting counter-reactions that may one day become a topic of discussion between historians, linguists and even economists.

Now, in the seventh decade of India's independence, such a switchover at the Central government level shows no signs of happening. Instead, the usage of Rajbhasha even in central government offices has only been declining and is only being propped up through artificial and clearly unsustainable means.

Unity in Diversity and State-sponsored Discrimination Based on Language Identity

Most other multi-ethnic societies like Canada, Mauritius, the European Union and Switzerland emphasize on Unity in Diversity, and do not allow state-sponsored discrimination between languages. Therefore, putting all this in perspective, India may have survived and prospered as a result of natural and automatic course corrections to outdated language policies and not because of them.

Private Sector Corporations and Language Use

In recent years, private sector companies have clearly shown that they cannot support the language of a community in a multi-lingual country. Private sector companies opt for neutral languages like English, or always and without exception, start their services in multiple Indian languages simultaneously. Hindi may have spread because it may have provided a kind of emotional bonding that an alien language like English cannot. For example, the Three-Language-Formula in later years was a vehicle that popularized Hindi cinema outside the Hindi heartland.

Spread of Hinglish

Another interesting but most certainly unintended outcome in the post-1991 era was the spread of a certain kind of pidgin Hindi or Hinglish as an entry level link language, because it may have been more closely related to Indian languages than English. Hindi also may have been able to provide a certain feel-good factor necessary to sustain national integration in early years of independence.

However, spreading the language of one region through artificial means may be a very dangerous long-term strategy. It can perhaps even promote fanaticism and hatred in the long run, by allowing the people of a particular region to think themselves as superior to others.

Discourse of Coercion and Suicidal Consequences of Attempts to Revive Rajbhasha Rhetoric

Hence, after providing a superficial level of unity just enough to compensate for the weaknesses of English as a link language, the language of one particular community may begin to divide beyond a point, and, as a result, encourage English even more. Hindi may not provide a win-win proposition at any other level, either. Hence as a written language, or as a language used exclusively in formal communication, it is well and truly defunct outside the Hindi belt.

It may be extremely dangerous and suicidal to attempt to revive it through artificial means, and such efforts would only be synonymous with words such as enforcement and imposition, terms not associated even with the spread of English in India, either during the British Raj or after. Complaints about Hindi imposition continue even to this day and this is clearly not good either for long-term National Unity or for Centre-State relationships. The government should not keep on promoting such policies.

Anomalies in India's Policies - Failure to Develop Mutual Respect for Other People's Languages

India's policies may have had other anomalies. While India was in most cases genuinely secular, it may not have been able to create a framework which created a mutual respect for other people's languages in India. The concept of linguistic states only fructified in the 1950's after Potti Sriramulu intensified his agitation for a Telugu-speaking state. Nehru initially opposed him, only to yield later.

As discussed, India's policies may have encouraged English even more, and may have even encouraged the learning of other foreign languages at the expense of Indian languages, by not promoting a healthy atmosphere where Indians could learn each other's languages. In English medium schools, one cannot generally learn their own mother tongue, if it is not Hindi, and certainly not if his or her mother tongue is different from the state he or she is residing in, and cannot learn the language of the state either if it is a non-Hindi speaking state.

English and Hindi in Collusion to Kill Other Languages

This has allowed both English and Hindi to kill other Indian languages. People often learn languages, including foreign ones, which are not useful to them. With the growing craze for English medium schools, where Hindi is the only available option as a second language, other Indian languages are slowly getting destroyed.

Again, politicians or rulers have never selected national languages in the five Thousand-year old history of human civilization, and Hindi is only the Official Language, according to the Indian Constitution. Such concepts may also have something to do with Marxism. Rulers, however, selected administrative languages in consultation with their subjects. Since Ancient times, polyglot countries like India have always had neutral link languages like Sanskrit which was the lingua franca of the elite in ancient India. We can argue that neutral link languages can be selected but only if all states and union territories agree beforehand.

Peculiar Developments, Strange Scenarios

Such policies may have thrown up other interesting results. This is a policy, which encourages Mumbaikars to speak in Hindi and write in English, but not the other way round, even in their own state, for example, although their mother tongue is Marathi.

A policy, which may have ensured that some educated South Indians did not speak to educated North Indians in Hindi to protest against discrimination and show that they respect their minority rights, but later encouraged them to use it sparingly and in informal situations once they realized that Hindi was losing the battle. Speak in Hindi and they reply back in English. Keep speaking in English and they may speak to you in Hindi, but only very sparingly, if they know it, perhaps just to show you that they have nothing against Hindi as a language. Other North Indians may have done a quick Arithmetic; those who felt that Hindi was more beneficial to them may have supported it. Things may be changing now, as the English fever catches on.

India's Language Policies Not Working as Intended

India's language policies have, therefore, not worked as intended. Clearly, they cannot. Instead they have been producing a series of interesting counter-reactions, which historians may one day ponder over. If pushed through artificial means, they can only further destabilize the country.

Many eminent scholars have come to the conclusion that India's language policies are against the interests of the country and potentially extremely dangerous. One may want to read Mohanram's Hindi against India or a series of short articles by eminent historian Ramachandra Guha in the columns of The Hindu titled "Hindi Chauvinism" and "Hindi against India". The book, Constitution and Language Politics of India, by B.V.R. Rao is another good read among a couple of others. All of them are patriots.

What About Non-Constitutional Languages?

Let us move to another interesting topic for debate. Are languages such as Bhojpuri, Mythili, Urdu, Angika and Santhali really a part of Hindi? Bhojpuri with 150 million speakers has a flourishing rival entertainment industry and a distinct literature.

Many linguists think it is a distinct language in its own right and may soon be included in the Eighth schedule as a separate language. Mythili with 45 million speakers may have a recorded history even older than Hindi and has its own traditional script. Urdu with 75 million speakers, despite many similarities with Hindi, is clearly a different language with a different script. Angika (25 million speakers) and Santhali (8 million speakers) may again not technically be a part of Hindi. Many of these like Mythili and even Marwari are separate languages according to the Eighth schedule.

At the time of independence, Dhulekar supported the cause of Hindustani while Purushottam Das Tandon supported the cause of Hindi. All this is good food for thought.

So, What are the Alternatives?

Sanskrit was offered as an alterative choice at the time of independence in some circles in Kolkata and in South India, and may have eventually been accepted even by Tamilnadu, on account of its neutrality. However, Sanskrit may not have been a strong contender initially. Hindi and English spread because vested interests spread them. Who will promote Sanskrit? Maybe patriotism and its simplicity may enable it to spread. One might, however, want to note that even a dead language like Hebrew has successfully been resurrected in recent times. What about an option between Sanskrit and Urdu? What about Prakrit?

India may not have been ready for a United States of India model in the early years of independence. Now it probably is and has already been moving in that direction. It perhaps may have no other option but to move in that direction. Centralization may be antithetical to the very idea of India and can only serve to destroy it. Nehru's Statist policies may have been opposed to the very idea of India.

One may be surprised to learn that there may be a range of other possible solutions. In vernacular schools, people may learn the language of the State, English and Sanskrit. Those who don't want to take Sanskrit may opt for Urdu. In English medium schools people may learn English and Sanskrit or Urdu. However, people may be asked to learn a little bit of the local language.

Alternatively, we may implement a completely different kind of a proposal. People may opt for any one living Indian language, which in most case may mean their mother tongue, the precondition being that they learn the local language of the state in which they are residing in. Schools can decide to introduce them depending on the demand. We can also have a composite third language taught which would include two or three living Indian languages. We can have a combination of all these. Alternatively, the Centre can set up a body to promote Indian languages, set up libraries, research institutes, in every town and district, translate international books into all Indian languages, make technical information available to the common man, especially information which is most needed by him in areas such as Agriculture, give away prizes to scholars, provide translation services in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha in all Indian languages so that only people from a few states do not benefit.

There may be thousands of other possible solutions, literally thousands. We can even opt for a combination of all these.

Hindi for UN?

The Central Government cannot ask the UN to consider its request to make Hindi an official language of the UN without a formal endorsement of all States and Union territories.

Recently, the Ministry of External Affairs asked the UN to consider its request to make Hindi an official language of the UN. If the Centre does this without a formal endorsement by all States and Union Territories, it will only be an endorsement of its arbitrary USSR type, Rajbhasha policies, i.e., politicians "selecting" languages. This may be antithetical to the long-term stability of the Union since "selecting" the language of a region and spreading it through political power is clearly a Marxist paradigm and has already been associated with terms such as enforcement, imposition, demands for independence and over 500 deaths in India and would be tantamount to interfering in the process of the natural spread of languages in India by resorting to artificial methods, affect long-term communal harmony and will even make a mockery of economic reforms.

These people may be completely out of their breadth in understanding the difference between an official language and an entry-level link language and may not be even able to understand the complexity of the language issue in India. This will be a big step backwards. They cannot take us back to the Nehruvian era. Furthermore, India's language policy was never in line with the principles of federalism.

Did all states get together and draft India's language policy? Or was it a hasty compromise?

The Concept of Federalism

"Selecting" the language of one state is even fundamentally opposed to the concept of Federalism and the concept of equal states because it is heavily biased towards some States and heavily biased against some others. Such paradigms are not even workable if one were to consider the natural spread of languages and the principles of a free market economy and will keep on throwing up counter-reactions. However, the Central Government may want to make both Sanskrit and Urdu official languages in the UN after a thorough debate and a discussion. Any proposal would need to be carried only after consensus-building after obtaining the written endorsement of all States and Union Territories, which, in turn, have to discuss it with communities within their states. This must be done, even if it takes years or even decades, only after all objections are sorted out.

Any other approach is extremely dangerous, especially since India's language policy has been extremely controversial and has been associated with terms such as imposition, enforcement and demands for separation.

Revise the Language Policy

India's language policy should have been revised a long time ago, possibly even as early as 1956, and even now it is not too late. Since India is an emerging economic Superpower, all other developing nations will look forward to India for light and inspiration. The Central Government must to set up a committee with representatives of people from all States, linguists and scholars to draw up a new language policy for India. It may also want to draw up a plan to undo the possible damage caused by old policies.

Since India's greatness is its unity in diversity, the logical stand may be to identify common elements in Indian culture right from Kerela to Assam and use them as a tool for national integration. One cannot however, blindly keep endorsing Rajbhasha policies anymore. It is clearly time for a change.

---

Notes

1 Early Gandhi and the Language policy of the India National Congress, M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D., Language in India http://www.languageinindia.com/april2005/earlygandhi1.html

2 The roots of Linguistic Reorganization of Indian provinces Dr Annie Besant and her home rule movement. M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D., Language in India http://www.languageinindia.com/feb2005/lingreorganization1.html

My blog url's

 Please note my blog url's 

https://sujayraomandavilli.blogspot.com/

https://abhilashathisisnotutopia.wordpress.com/

Sujay Rao Mandavilli