Changing our nation’s name is an assertion of cultural continuity, affirmation of national pride and repudiation of colonial vestiges
The decision to potentially rename India as Bharat has ignited a spirited discourse about identity, history and culture. This proposed alteration transcends a mere linguistic shift; it holds profound implications for the nation's collective consciousness. During his Independence Day address, Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised the imperative to liberate the nation from a subservient mindset, highlighting the need to discard colonial vestiges. What may elude many is that 'Bharat' is the ancient nomenclature for India, rooted in Sanskrit antiquity, symbolising a cultural continuum and national identity antedating the colonial era. The transition from 'Bharat' to 'India' marks a profound journey of cultural, political and linguistic evolution.
Historical Origins
Both “India” and “Bharat” possess deep historical roots in the nation’s annals. The term “India” finds its genesis in the Indus Valley Civilisation, a sophisticated society dating back to 3300 BCE. Conversely, "Bharat" finds its roots in the legendary king, Bharata, a forefather of the esteemed Kuru Dynasty, from whom the name is believed to have emanated. His reign epitomised prosperity, unity and a fervent adherence to dharma.
The characterisation of India as the "land of the Hindus" had not solely a religious connotation; it was also linked to the Indus. The term 'India' shares a similar origin story. As per research from the Pune-based Bhandarkar Oriental Institute, the earliest documented mention of the term 'Bharat' can be traced to the Rig Veda and the pivotal Dasarajna war, in which Sudas of the Bharata clan emerged victorious. The legitimacy of 'Bharat' as a descriptor is widely acknowledged, and its adoption might very well become customary in official protocols and foreign affairs communications.
Colonial Influence
In the epoch of Mughal dominion, 'Hindustan' was commonly employed to denote the subcontinent. Nevertheless, with the advent of British colonisation, 'India' gained ascendancy due to its derivation from the river Indus, a pivotal geographical feature of the region. The linguistic and administrative sway of the British gradually propelled the widespread adoption of 'India' in official documentation, albeit never entirely erasing 'Bharat' from the collective memory of the Indian populace.
Significance of Name Change
The contemplation of renaming “India” to “Bharat” transcends a mere semantic alteration. For many, it embodies a profound immersion into India's opulent cultural and historical essence. Advocates contend that this change could galvanise national unity, fostering a renewed sense of pride in India's rich heritage. It emphasises the diversity that is India, unifying under a shared, indigenous term. “Bharat” harmonises intimately with Hindi, projecting a more authentic representation of the nation’s diverse culture. Advocates posit that this renaming could potentially galvanise national unity and rekindle pride in Indian heritage.
Official Recognition
In 2016, an appeal was presented in the Supreme Court of India to amend Article 1 of the Constitution, officially acknowledging 'Bharat' alongside 'India'. The plea contended that employing 'Bharat' would evoke a sense of pride in the nation's culturally rich heritage. Although the plea was not granted, it ignited a nationwide discourse on the relevance of 'Bharat' in contemporary times. Advocates argue that using a term from vernacular languages preserves linguistic diversity and bolsters the nation’s cultural tapestry.
The name 'Bharat' encapsulates a profound affinity for the land, culture and traditions of the Indian subcontinent. It serves as a poignant reminder of the age-old wisdom and philosophies that have sculpted the nation over millennia. By embracing 'Bharat' as a concurrent identity, India pays homage to its roots and exalts the diversity that defines its character. The Constituent Assembly, convened in 1946, engaged in extensive discussions regarding the country's nomenclature. The majority advocated for the original name, Bharat.
Dr Ambedkar agreed that there was a long historical tradition that alluded to the entire land by the name 'Bharat'. But he also said that there was no reason to go so much into history to justify the name since the name Bharat was quite commonly used by people. Dr Ambedkar suggested that a way out could be to have the phrase 'India, that is Bharat...' in the Constitution. The National Anthem has a verse “Bharat BhagyaVidhata”, where again we find the mention of Bharat.
The ancient Sangam Tamil literature has also mentioned the term Bharat in its verses. The Sangam literature historically is known as 'the poetry of the noble ones that connotes the ancient Tamil literature and is the earliest known literature of South India.
The Modi government's recent decision to extend invitations to G20 summit delegates in the name of “President of Bharat” and “Prime Minister of Bharat” underscores a deliberate choice. While not negating 'India', the emphasis on 'Bharat' aligns with the BJP's de-colonisation endeavour, seeking to reassert India’s Hindu heritage and sever ties with a colonial past.
Should "Bharat" assume a more prominent role in official parlance, it would signify a significant shift in India's self-perception and international representation. This change would resonate not only with a deep-rooted historical narrative but also evoke a sense of pride in the nation's rich heritage. Ultimately, it encapsulates India's ongoing journey of self-definition in a global context.
(The writer is a political activist and an advocate; the views are personal)