Let us evaluate things in a very liberal neutral sense which is indispensable and truly certified wherewithal of the dissertation. Neutrality and liberalism are complementary to each other. They go hand in hand.
“Nationalism is the last refuge of the scoundrel”
Samuel Johnson
“Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious”
“Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons”
“Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism”
“India is no more a political personality than Europe. India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator”
‘Sir’ Winston Churchill
I do not claim this to be the ultimate compilation of all the eminent personalities that have enlightened us about their conception of nationhood, nation states and identities and in one case with special focus on India.
This can never be a comprehensive list on the topic of territorial expansionism as evident from the above retorts on the idea of a sovereign state, empire, kingdom, superpower etc.
This disgust and condemnation for all these ideas might stem for various methods of bloodshed that human’kind’ invented in order to suit their own malicious ambitions. If we analyze this closely, we will see that modern-day Africa, America or even Europe has not even a remote similarity with the present day boundaries. So, yes this is a modern construct. Before, the advent of the Hebrewic religions, regional culture formed the norm in most parts of the world. But, as the semities from their theological presuppositions, started to conquer the world due to their compulsion to homogenise based on their debatable concept about God, we started to see the most of countries as they are.
Europe was busy in fighting with many of kingdoms emerging later. The regional tribes were going at each other hammer and tongs for supremacy.
Later with the rise of Christianity and Islam we get a hunch of what modern-day Europe looks like.
The ancient Greeks, the cradle of European civilization got digested by the Spartans, Romans and then later by Christianity. The Arabs with their conquest of Northern Africa, Turkey, Mongolia and central Asia gave rise to the modern nation-states after defeating the Byzantine empire, Sassanids and even fighting with the Christians in Europe.
With the crusades defeating the caliphate after years of war, Europe was “taken over” by them. Crusades was a series of religious war commissioned by the church to recover ‘holy lands’ and can be used by other church sanctions, similarly the sanctions of the caliphate and their concept of jihad.
The Ottoman Empire (1300-1922) ruled a vast territory that included much of the Balkans, Anatolia, the central Middle East to the borders of Iran, and most of North Africa. It was a multiethnic, multi-religious state ruled through an extensive administration under laws derived from Islam and by the sultan dictates. The Ottoman Empire was a world power and a significant player in European politics. By the turn of the 18th century, Ottoman power was beginning to weaken. In 1683, the Ottomans had staged an ultimately unsuccessful siege of Vienna, the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Less than 100 years later, in 1774, for the first time in their long history, the Ottomans were forced to give up significant Muslim territory to an opponent, Russia, in the Treaty of Kucuk Kaynarca.
This didn’t happen in new lands taken from the ‘heathens’ in Asia particularly in India, due to a constant struggle from the rulers in Indian State. But what was the Indian State?
While the caliphate focussed on new lands snatched from the indigenous cultures in central Asia, subcontinent and south-east Asia, the infighting among Europe over territories resulted in the thirty years’ war. This concluded with the treaty of Westphalia(1848). It pitted Protestant against Catholic, the Holy Roman Empire against France, the German princes and princelings against the emperor and each other, and France against the Habsburgs of Spain. The Swedes, the Danes, the Poles, the Russians, the Dutch and the Swiss were all dragged in or dived in. Commercial interests and rivalries played a part, as did religion and power politics. Modern day Europe appeared as it is today and the prospect of a Roman Catholic reconquest of Europe vanished forever. Protestantism was in the world to stay.
This was preceded by the Treaty of Tordesillas, (June 7, 1494), an agreement between Spain and Portugal aimed at settling conflicts over lands newly discovered or explored by Christopher Columbus, Vasco da Gama, and other late 15th-century voyages. The other side of the world was divided a few decades later by theTreaty of Zaragoza, signed on 22 April 1529, which specified the anti-meridian to the line of demarcation specified in the Treaty of Tordesillas.
Under this, the ‘doctrine of discovery’ and the ‘white man’s burden to civilize indigenous cultures’ sprung about from ecclesiastical scriptures. The Spanish, Portuguese were joined by the Dutch, Belgians, German, French and of course, are very own British. Within a matter of time, the Americas and Africa were colonized. With a series of revolutionary wars, the Americas and Africa fought for independence. But there was a big problem.
Here, the concept of ‘nation states’ comes in. In the case of Africa, The Berlin Conference of 1884–85 regulated European colonization and trade in Africa during the New Imperialism period and coincided with Germany’s sudden emergence as an imperial power. Its outcome, was the formalization of the as the occupation, division, and colonization of African territory by Western European powers during the period of the New Imperialism, between 1881 and 1914.
A nation-state is a sovereign state of which most of its subjects are united also by factors which defined a nation such as a language or common descent. This created a big problem in Africa, as common ethnic cultures and languages were destroyed by colonial forces. Thus, the Berlin conference formed the new nation-states on the basis of European Colonies and it did not involve any single representative from Africa. Similarly, as regional groups started taking independence via force from the colonizers, new nation-states were formed on European parameters as their local cultures were destroyed. Americas was comparatively less painful as the local cultures and their people were totally annihilated in upper parts of North America(Canada, USA). Similarly, like the South American countries, 5 central Asian countries like Tajikistan, etc. disintegrated from USSR. The Ottoman Empire divided under the Paris Peace Treaty of 1919 after the end of world war 1, but in spite of inner struggles, still, aspire for solidarity.
This is not a Eulogy on the great civilizations like Incas of Peru, Native American (red Indians of present-day US,as Colombus wanted to find India), Bisons of Canada, Maoris of New Zealand,Aboriginals of Australia, Tengris of Turkey and Mongolia, Zorastrian-Buddhists of Iran, Hindus of Pakistan, Bangladesh, Jews of Europe etc.. <disclaimer: these nations signify the modern locations, as these countries did not exist in olden times> and how brutishly and Barbically destroyed and good attributes were digested by our fellow Abrahamics or Europeans/Arab-Turks.
Or how did the only pagan civilization like the Hindus of India did JUST manage to survive but still face an existential threat? These are topics for another post.
But this does explain the current geopolitics of our world, recent mass genocides in Rwanda, Ethiopia, Syria, Israel etc. and forceful occupations of Offence(not defense) industries of powers like USA and Russia. How these leftovers of colonial sins resulting in the fighting of ethical/racial belief systems related cultures who have lost their roots and in no way find peace?
Enter Bharat.
As Sadhguru explains that our ancient Puranas and Itihasas clearly state as I paraphrase that one of the great kings of our past was Bharata. People say the country is named after him, but actually, he was named after the country. King Bharata had nine sons, but when the time to hand over the empire came, he gave it to Bhumanyu, who was the son of the sage Bharadwaj. (benchmark of Democracy and personal sacrifice).
Bharat comes from bha – ra – ta. Bhava means sensation. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching is different types of sensations. Ra means raga or the tune. The tune is not yours – existence has already set it. Now you have to find the rhythm, which is the tala.
Rajiv Malhotra states that our own left wing-right wing business is fixated in that corollary of the west which is incorrect and does not suit us. He explains that we have the Rajya, which is the government and their officials. Then we have Rashtra, the people who make the nation. The Rashtra makes the Rajya, it is not top to bottom like the west and middle east did throughout their history.
The above are examples from Bharat’s past about their philosophical, cultural and traditional unity, not just geographical as the mass murderer Nobel laureate Churchill claims who wanted to fight the Germans with the last Indian and killed 2.5 million in Bengal famine in 1943, whose effects still reverberate us today.
Our liberals try to fix same eurocentric models over our Rashtra. This not only gave rise to the term they love ie Populist Majoritarianism but also fear monger with their identity politics which is facing a global collapse with the rise of Erdogan, Ader, Trump, Putin, Modi, Xi etc. clearly, these same size fit all model is down to shreds(which their fellow white men try to instill in them, still due to their inferiority complex or big money or even blood money).
Clearly, Rajyas like China(clearly tracing its root now), Japan and Korea and even Southeast Asia with ASEAN are progressing and advancing in all fields without the free, fair, let live model of our liberals. The don’t try to homogenize their Rashtra with these debunked and inherently faulty theories of the subalterns.
When the admirers of the ‘Delhi Sultanate’ or the ‘British Raj’ claim that India was never a nation, and question Bharat’s philosophical unity it is not only a direct assault of the sacrifices of the personalities which have no epithets in the colonial dictionary to dedicate them with of a Rashtra which never invaded any country, respected all beliefs, lead the way with their knowledge of Astronomy,cosmology,mathematics, philosophy, Literature, Dance, Music, Arts , Sculpting and Painting etc. but also ignorance which destroyed their libraries, temples and encouraged infighting dividing people on the basis of religiosity, languages, communities, gender etc, which was a never a part of Indian ethos. Plenty of further rebuttals are enlisted in the book Indra’s Net by Rajiv Malhotra and his collaborators like Sankrant Sanu and even in the pulse of the nation.
We probably didn’t have a Rajya, but clearly, the Identity was there probably the reasons we lived on the relentless and still continuing onslaught. But till when can we survive this?
Verse 1 states, there is a land having the Himalayas in the North and an Ocean in the South, the name is Bharat.
Verse 2 outlines, that we are all Bharat’s sons and daughters and must protect her sanctity.
We are not unlucky as the other extinct civilizations were, we should get rid of all this nonsense which hands over the remote control to immoral and unethical people of foreign lands and our own people who have collaborated with them, but revive our own systems for not only saving ourselves but the world.
We have lost land, we have lost lots of people. But we must rise above fear and sabotage anyone who threatens us.
May we stand in front, keep waking in our nation
– Yajurveda – 9.23
Earth is my mother and I am the son of her.
– Atharvaveda – 12.1.12
For all those who think, Bharat Mata is a modern construct or even communal.
यो नो द्वेषत्पृथिवी यः पृतन्याद्योऽभिदासान्मनसा यो वधेन ।
तं नो भूमे रन्धय पूर्वकृत्वरि ॥१४॥ 14.1-14.2 Bhumi Sukta, Atharveda
He who hates us, O Earth, he who attacks us or mentally considers us as Enemies, or he who strikes us,
Him, O Mother Earth, subdue, as You have done since earliest times.
To further reiterate, the kinship of the “Nation states” can never ever, even in their dizziest daydreams or a prudish sense of conquering the world in the name of God or some kind of twisted ideologies that they might want to invent; I think it is very burdensome and intellectually challenging for these social convenors and terror sympathizers to actually see the all-pervasive and pervading sense in the sacred(and not holy) scriptures of this ‘entity’ that the concept of Rashtra is embedded in their Chitti. The very notion that there is clear direction about the location of the region and why is it worth worshipping. It might seem hogwash for these dignitaries of imminence that the Conviction of Rashtra is perspicuously manifested in their dangling dances, surreal songs, phenomenal paintings, extravagant dramas, classic literature and the list is incessant and unrelenting.
Now to the topic, the ‘last lesson’: As Dr. Koenraad Elst illustrates
Bharat Bhagya Vidhata “dispenser of India’s destiny”, while not it’s past or present ruler, unambiguously signifies the divine Guide, the eternal Guru, Krishna.
The Jana-Gana-Mana
India’s anthem is not rule-oriented like Heil dir im Siegerkranz(Germany). It is not ruler-and God-oriented, like the Wilhelmus(Dutch), God save the Queen(UK), or Gott erhalte unsern Kaiser(Austrian). It is not secularly nation-and-state-oriented, like the Marseillaise(French), the Star-spangled Banner(USA), the Brabançonne or Das Lied der Deutschen(Belge). It is emphatically nation-and-God-oriented, God in this case probably being identifiable as Krishna, or more abstractly, the idea of the Divine involving Itself in this world whenever Dharma requires it.
The song does not commit itself to a specific political system, such as monarchy, by glorifying the ruler. It merely expresses love for the nation through all its variegated landscapes and experiences – plus a veneration for the divine Guru. Usually, only the first stanza is publicly sung. But if you read on or sing on to the third stanza, it all becomes clear enough. The iconography of Vishnu and Krishna (chariot, conch, the expression yuge yuge, “age after age”) is exuberantly sung there, and the singers describe themselves as yatri, “pilgrims”. This was clarified by Tagore to the British Officials in a letter in 1937.
According to Rabindranath Tagore, and according to all Indian citizens who intone or honor his anthem, India is not complete without a heaven-oriented, sacred dimension much to the dismay of foreign media and very own sold out sepoys.
leonis_regalia 