This book is the outcome of a seminar held in February 2023 by the Indian Council of Philosophical Research on "75 Years of Indian Independence: Nation and Nationalism." This was the year we were celebrating Amrita Mahotsav of Indian Independence. 75 years had passed after we won our freedom from the British. It was thought that the students of Philosophy are much better equipped to and can more beautifully and rigorously explore the idea of Nationalism than others, as that idea is akin to the idea of Advaitism. Every non-dualist philosophy has to make some room for plurality as the plurality is very much experienced. In the same way the idea of Nationalism has to make some place for the differences.
Professor Bindu Puri cordially agreed to coordinate the seminar. The idea to organize a seminar taking Indian Nationalism at the centre of the discussion originated basically from the writings of Sri Aurobindo and Tagore and it was thought to organise a seminar on the topic to discuss the idea of Nationalism as conceived by different freedom fighters and thinkers. At first glance the thoughts of Sri Aurobindo and Tagore may appear to be contrary to each other. But it must be kept in mind that both of them are true freedom fighters. Tagore wrote the National Anthem and Sri Aurobindo is known as the prophet of Nationalism. It is commonly believed that Tagore had been opposed to the idea of nationalism. In his own words:
Nationalism is a great menace. It is the particular thing which for years has been at the bottom of India's troubles. And in as much as we have been ruled and dominated by a nation that is strictly political in its attitude, we have tried to develop within ourselves, despite our inheritance from the past, a belief in our eventual political destiny.
(Tagore 1996, 458).
He comes to this conclusion through this realization that "All the great nations of Europe have their victims in other parts of the world." He concludes, "I am not against one nation in particular, but against the general idea of all nations. What is the Nation? It is the aspect of a whole people as an organized power" (Tagore 1996, 421). A humanist understanding of Tagore gives the impression that he is against all the boundaries and appreciates that any Nation cannot be built without creating boundaries. Therefore, he is bound to reject any type of Nationalism. It is understood that any Nationalism takes pride in assertion of its supremacy and dominance. Therefore, many people disclaim any Nationality and want to be world citizens. They don't want to be associated with any country as humanity has no boundary; the love for humanity should not be limited to the citizens of a particular country rather it should go beyond all geographical boundaries.
When Sri Aurobindo the prophet of Indian Nationalism gives the slogan "Let us all work for the greatness of India," (The Mother) he is advocating for a strong nation India. Therefore, their thoughts appear to be contrary.
On a closure scrutiny it becomes clear that both these freedom fighters actually have nothing to disagree rather they both agree on the idea of Nationalism. Both of them reject the western ideal of Nation and nationalism.
In another masterpiece Sadhana: The Realisation of Life Tagore delves on the same issue. He observes:
In fact, all the modern civilisations have their cradles of brick and mortar. These walls leave their mark deep in the minds of men. They set up a principle of "divide and rule" in our mental outlook, which begets in us a habit of securing all our conquests by fortifying them and separating them from one another. (Tagore 1996, 282)
In this book he highlights the differences between India and west. As per his observation the Indian civilization developed in the forests and the other civilizations developed in the cities. Therefore, the idea of Nation as developed in the west is full of problems and hence there is a hatred in the eyes of Tagore towards it. Sri Aurobindo also moves in the same direction even he goes on further to provide the cultural foundation to Indian Nationalism.
It is sometimes assumed that India as a nation was born on 15th August 1947. I think this is a pertinent question to ask if there is something which unites us, the people of India; given so many differences of language, religions, castes, gender and ethnicity if there is something which makes us Indian. Or our unity of India is something superficially imposed; we are Indians because we are born in a particular terrain which is recognized politically as a country. If the first option is true, only then we can have strong roots of Nationalism in India. If the second option were true, we cannot have nationalism in the true sense. One may argue that as a country we are much similar to the United States; there is nothing which unites or binds the states but simply there is an agreement and on the basis of the agreement they conceive themselves belonging to the same nation. But on scrutiny I find it something inaccurate and counterfactual. The idea of India was not born in 1947, but it is a reaffirmation of a very old idea which is not based upon state rather on culture.
Hindu (935)
Agriculture (118)
Ancient (1086)
Archaeology (753)
Architecture (563)
Art & Culture (910)
Biography (702)
Buddhist (544)
Cookery (167)
Emperor & Queen (565)
Islam (242)
Jainism (307)
Literary (896)
Mahatma Gandhi (372)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist