If India is South Asia, then where is North Asia?
- In Current Affairs
- 05:28 AM, May 29, 2016
- Dr. Bal Ram Singh
In a meeting on March 3, 2005 there was a tense conversation amongst myself, Dr. Maureen Hall of the Education Department, and Dr. Timothy Walker of the History Department at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth regarding the use of word India or Indic vs. South Asia while discussing a proposal by the Center for Indic Studies to the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) to conduct some workshops on Indian art and history for Massachusetts high school and middle school teachers. Some of the email communications are reproduced below.
“Thank you for your call this morning, Maureen. Please do not feel bad about this issue. This is an issue we at the Center have discussed quite at length, and consider strongly that South Asianization of India is one of the misrepresentations repeated quite often, first by politicians, then political scientists, and now by historians and rest of the humanities.” This was written by me as the Director of the Center for Indic Studies.
My historian friend, Professor Timothy Walker wrote, “Bal Ram, I am happy to substitute Indic for South Asia occasionally through the text, but I really believe we gravely prejudice our chances of being funded if we employ "Indic".” To which I had posited, “I fully understand your and Tim's concerns about NEH funding for Indic vs. South Asians. I did a quick research of the NEH website, and here is what I got.”
“A search on South Asia yielded 60 hits, with only one referring to South Asia, rest had the word South associated with other things. A search on India yielded 65 hits, all of them with India being referred for Indic context.”
The above communication represents the core of the debate about what appears to be a well- orchestrated effort to South Asianize India to which initially only college professors were expected to kowtow if they wanted to advance in their career through grants and publications, but which is now being imposed on the middle school and high school textbooks in California. This skewed view of India is forced upon the students by the same biased (for perhaps more than one reasons) group of faculty suspects who are seen and known for their political activism.
When establishing the Center for Indic Studies in 1999 we had debated the idea of South Asia vs. India, and it was clear to the faculty involved in establishing the Center that what was missing from many India related programs in American universities was the indigenous perspective of India. The programs with focus on colonial, religious, leftist, and liberal scholarship have existed at many places but the indigenous perspective was missing from them all.
Scholarship of any kind is good and useful, but every perspective is not a proper perspective to define someone as an individual or a society. As if that is not enough, there is a demeaning tendency to keep changing the identity of a great civilization that is arguably the mother of most other civilizations in the world. And, that is India, a name acquired by the presence of Indus river, and a name that was most prominently given by the Greeks thousands of years ago.
Are we targeting to change the name of the Indus river to South Asian river? I have had some sensible discussions with a few of these scholars, and have posited the following questions – If India is South Asia, then where is the North Asia? Would that be China and part of Russia, right? Problem with history is that it cannot be defined by geography, and involves humanity. These suggested changes are nutty ideas which do not belong to even 140-character twitter, forget about the scholarship, and let alone school curriculum!
I have been struggling to find a phrase or concept that will identify and perhaps explain the behavior of some scholars who are bent upon changing the name of India to South Asia. Intentional parapraxis is a concept that might explain why Western scholars (even of Indian origin) and westernized media continue to insist calling India with names at their whims? It reflects an intellectual error thought to reveal unconscious wishes or attitudes. In reality, it is the concept of India itself that bothers them, a concept that includes unity in diversity, not only freedom of certain things but also freedom from many things, and that everyone has something good to offer. Sadly, these ideas do not fit into the binaries that we are used to in modern times.
Of course, generally the name by which someone or a country is called should not matter, it is only a reference of addressing someone. There is a concept in India that Ekam Sat Viprah Bahudha Vadanti, the truth is one sages call it with various names. However, when there is a political motivation, and when you are singled out for this treatment, the sageness of people like the South Asia scholars is suspect. Why is India conflated with South Asia when China and Russia are not put together as North Asia?
There are much better examples where names should be changed. Try visiting the websites - http://www.indianaffairs.gov/, http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/BIA/, or http://www.indian.senate.gov/, and you will see! Why are native Kraunchdweepa people (that is how they will be referred from the knowledge of ancient Indian texts) are called American Indians or Indians? Don’t these scholars have any compunction to fix naming of people in their own neighborhood before launching themselves into other continents?
The name of India is originally Bharatvarsha which is part of the Jambudweepa, part of a larger ancient classification of the continents on Earth. India is the only country with continuing civilization, and it prefers and is referred to in India as Bharatvarsha. It has a unique culture of diversity, powerful philosophy of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the whole planet is a family), and great tradition of equality by seeing divinity in everyone and everything. Today, these traits have come to be known as the Hindu concept that has provided the humanity with Yoga, Ayurveda, Astronomy, Mathematics, and rich source languages. These are the defining concepts of India, which are defiled by portraying India as South Asia.
My experience with high school and middle school teachers, for whom I have been directing a weeklong immersive training programs for the past seven years at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth or at Bridgewater State University, tells me that the teachers are interested in bringing relevant, engaging, and truthfully practical information to their classes. Scholarly debates, such as Aryan Invasion theory, or even politics of caste, are of least utility and interest to them, although are part of the curriculum requiring proper clarifications.
Then why are these issues being brought up with gusto by the group of South Asian scholars, who you can find in every political controversy, including their vehement opposition to the visit of a democratically elected popular prime minister of India to USA? These are left oriented, some outright communist sympathizers, academics misusing their position to ensnare education boards.
This latest battle is critical. The textbook representation in California is critical not only because a large population of Indian Americans live there, but also because California textbook contents are adopted in other states. Community leaders, teachers, students, and scholars have already made representations to the California Board of Education, and let’s hope the board listens to saner side of the arguments and does not get trapped into the sinister designs of hollow shouters.
Comments