In a move that has stirred the pot of Indian politics and identity, a high-level committee established by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has proposed a change that has set off a storm of controversy. The panel, headed by C.I. Issac, a retired history professor with affiliations to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has recommended the replacement of the term ‘India’ with ‘Bharat’ in school textbooks. This suggestion has sparked outrage among opposition politicians and ignited a passionate debate on the nation’s historical and cultural identity.
.jpg)
Who is C.I. Issac?
C.I. Issac, a respected historian, and a Padma Shri awardee this year, leads the NCERT committee. He has a long history of association with the Sangh Parivar institutions, making his position as the head of the panel a point of contention for some. While these recommendations have not yet been approved, they are causing quite a stir in India’s educational landscape.
The Unanimous Recommendation
The committee’s recommendation to replace ‘India’ with ‘Bharat’ in school textbooks, from primary to high school levels, is generating significant discussion. This proposal was supported by all committee members, including ICHR chairperson Raguvendra Tanwar, JNU professor Vandana Mishra, and archaeologist Vasant Shinde, who stressed that ‘Bharat’ was a more fitting name for the nation, citing the Vishnu Purana, an ancient Hindu text.
A Broader Historical Perspective
The NCERT committee also suggested a revision in how history is presented in textbooks. They proposed that equal space be given to all dynasties that ruled India, rather than focusing predominantly on a select few. This shift aims to present a more comprehensive view of India’s rich history and cultural heritage. Additionally, the committee recommends including new discoveries, whether historical or archaeological, in the curriculum, ensuring that students are exposed to a constantly evolving understanding of their nation’s past.
A Premature Controversy
The NCERT responded to the controversy by stating that the process of syllabus development is still ongoing, and it’s too early to pass judgment on these suggestions. They noted that various domain experts are being consulted as part of the curriculum development process.
Historical Significance of ‘Bharat’
It is essential to note that Article 1 of the Indian Constitution states, “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.” This recognition highlights the historical significance of both names and underscores their dual role in the nation’s identity.
The Ongoing Debate
The controversy around the term ‘Bharat’ in textbooks gained momentum when Rashtrapati Bhawan used the name ‘President of Bharat’ in an invitation to a G-20 dinner. While the RSS and proponents of the change argue that ‘Bharat’ is the traditional name of the country, critics believe that it is an attempt to rewrite history and impose a specific ideology on the nation.
Political Reactions
Unsurprisingly, the suggestion has garnered political reactions. Opposition parties are criticizing the NCERT panel’s recommendations, with senior Congress leader K.C. Venugopal questioning the need for such a change. Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar has accused the NDA government of pressuring the NCERT into this decision. Rashtriya Janata Dal MP Manoj Jha labeled the name change recommendation as a knee-jerk response to the Opposition alliance, which uses the acronym INDIA, standing for the Indian National Developmental, Inclusive Alliance.
As the debate rages on, it remains to be seen whether this recommendation will be adopted and how it might impact the education and historical understanding of future generations in India. Regardless of the outcome, it underscores the deep-rooted connection between language, culture, and national identity.