India, that is Bharat..!

A new controversy rose in the name of “Bharat Mata”. Ever since the BJP government has came  in the name “Development”, “Vikas”, we all believed that the dark phase of Congress governmen lutt of scams, corruptionB will fade away with the glorifying statements of the so called modern statesman of the century. As a common man, I too felt that as a party BJP should be given a fare chance since democracy speaks about change of government every five years. But unfortunately,except controversies we Indians could not see any development promises be momining fulfilled. Days after days new issues, communal tensions, caste killings, religious hatred, religious impositions/sanctions on the oppressed classes and minorities have become a norm of the day. Nationalism, Patriotism is been defined in a way to facilitate certain ideologies (?) Students are been killed, scholars are threatened; thinkers are abused and killed in broad day light. It’s not that these incidents were not happening during the past government, the atrocities on oppressed people and minorities were always there since the centuries, but the way these atrocities have become rampant and open during the past two years, is raising many concerns as to where this great nation is leading to..!

In connection with several social, educational, political and ideological controversies we have seen in the past few months, to name a few such as FTII students issue, Madras University, Akhlak lynching, HCU, JNU, Jadavpur University, etc., we have seen the “Rise of Nationalists/Patriots” all of sudden. As it is always good to love our country, we also have a duty to protect its dignity as enshrined under Art.51A (a to K) Part IVA of the Constitution of India. However, it does not mean that someone should impose the nationalists (?) feeling on others by force just for the sake of the feeling that one is more nationalist than others. As a common people we love our country as and we do not need to be certified by anyone.

Recently, Mr.Mohan Bhagwat during his speech said that, “Kids and youngsters should be taught to say Bharat Mata Ki Jai”, in response to his statement, Mr.Asaduddin Owaisi created another controversy by saying that “He will not say Bharat Mata Ki Jai, since the Constitution of India nowhere mention our country as “Bharata Mata” and no slogan such as “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” has anywhere been glorified ibid. The BJP, RSS and other right wing organizations opposed Mr.Owaisi’s statement and named him as “Anti National”. Since we, the common people are already facing may issues and controversies almost every day, this new controversy has ignited a new debate as to “Bharat”, “Bharat Mata” and “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”. Those who chant the slogans claims to be Nationals/Patriots and those who don’t are supposedly “Anti Nationals...” It makes me surprised to even understand that how can someone be proved nationalists merely by shouting the slogans? Having seen the drama on news channels and social media, the biggest question which is coming into my mind is, whether our country is a Male, Female at the first place.  How our country is named as “Bharat. And how this “Bharat Mata” came into place? Chanting a slogan is not a big deal though..!

Prima facie, I believe, we should know about the history of India being named as “Bharat”. Whether Bharat is/was a male or female.  The question of calling our country as “Bharat Mata” or “Bharat Pita” can be solved only after understanding the background of the word “Bharat”. Any rational thinker would introspect on this aspect before claiming to be nationalist.

Now lets study the background of the Name “Bharat/Bharata”, “Bharatavarsha”.

Theory No.1:-

India has been called Bharatavarṣa (the country of Bharata) after a king name Bharat, Bhārat is an official name of the Republic of India[1][2] as per Art.1(1) of the Constitution of India. As per the stories we read, Bharata was the son of Dushyanta and Shakuntala. The original name of King Bharata was “Sarvadamana” kept by Sage Kanwa. However, Mahabharata traces several events after which Sarvadamana came to be known as Bharata.( The Cherished). King Bharata, ruled over the whole of Indian Subcontinents and that’s the reason why the whole sub continents was famously known as “Bharatavasha”. Vishnupurana refers Bharatavarsha as…

उत्तरं यत्समुद्रस्य हिमाद्रेश्चैव दक्षिणम् ।
वर्षं तद् भारतं नाम भारती यत्र संततिः ।।

"The country (varṣam) that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bhāratam; there dwell the descendants of Bharata."

ऋषभो मरुदेव्याश्च ऋषभात भरतो भवेत् |

भरताद भारतं वर्षं, भरतात सुमतिस्त्वभूत् ||

Rishabha was born to Marudevi, Bharata was born to Rishabha,

Bharatavarsha arose from Bharata, and Sumati arose from Bharata.

ततश्च भारतं वर्षमेतल्लोकेषुगीयते |

भरताय यत: पित्रा दत्तं प्रतिष्ठिता वनम ||

This country is known as Bharatavarsha since the times the father entrusted the kingdom to the son Bharata and he himself went to the forest for ascetic practices.[3]

As far as the information available on Wikipedia is concerned, it is said that, King Bharata ruled very virtuously. He gained name and fame and was also known as “Chakravarthy”. I do not see any reason to understand that this “Chakravarthy” was no other than “Emperor Ashok.” Because there is no other kind in the entire world history who ruled 4/3 of the geographical area of that time without provoking any war and hatred. The distortion of history is evident by seeing that how one of the greatest king is projected as someone else.

Further to speak on the historical background of “Bharata”, Matsyapurana too has a reference in this view which says, “The Bhāratas were an vedic tribe mentioned in the Rigveda, notably participating in the Battle of the Ten Kings.” The realm of Bharata is known as Bharātavarṣa in the Mahabhārata[4]

“..the king (Bharata) who conquered the whole of Bharatvarsa is styled as samrat, universal sovereign.[5]

Theory No.2:-

The second theory of the name “Bharata” related to the Bharat Chakravarthy. As per the Jain literature, “Bharat Chakravarthy” was the son of Lord Rishbhdev Jineshwar (The First Tirthankar). As per the Brahmandpurana, Lord Rishabdev was the son of Nabhiraja and Marudevi(Kshatriyas) of Ikshavaku dynasty( First Ancestry of Ayodhya).

Agnipurana Says, “Rishabh was born to Marudevi. Bharata was born to Rishabh and hence India got its name from Bharata the son of Lord Rishabhdev.”

Manusrmity also has a reference to Rishabhdev. It says, “Marudevi was the sixth lineage and Nabhi was the Seventh. Rishabh(First Tirthankar) who was born to Marudevi and Nabhi. Rishabhdev was a great man with high valor. He became great King in the beginning of Yuga.”

Since King Bharata ruled over the whole of Jambudwipa, this nation was named after him.      

Theory No.3:-

According to Sanjeev Sanyal’s Land of Seven Rivers: History of India’s Geography,  “the Rig Veda, describes a terrible war known as ‘Dasharajnya’ or war of ten kings. The war was between ten powerful tribes who plotted to overthrow King Sudasa of the Bharata tribe. The mighty battle took place on the banks of the river Ravi in Punjab. According to legend, the Bharata tribe was outnumbered yet King Sudasa, led them to victory due to his highly advanced military skill and established his power throughout the sub-continent. King Sudasa‘s diplomacy ensured that the Vedas did not just record his victories but the ideas of the sages, including the famed Vishwamitra, from other tribes were also meticulously recorded.” This led to the popularity of King Sudasa and eventually more and more people started identifying themselves as members of the Bharata tribe. The name ‘Bharata’ stuck on and ultimately, India was named ‘Bharat varsha’ meaning the land of Bharata.[6]

Here, Mr.Sanjeev Sanyal is referring to one Bharat tribe who fought against King Sudasa. In this theory Bharata is neither a man nor women. He is referring to a tribe named as Bharata.

If we take the above theories into consideration, we can understand that Bharat name reflects to one King who is a “Man”. Though he is a mythological character referred in the very texts of highest reverence, one simple doubt comes in my mind that why a male name has been projected as a female name? I am sure the nationalists and the media will initiate a rational debate in this regard.

The rise of slogan “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”:-

Bharat Mata’s image and “Bharat Mata ki Jai” slogan was rapidly used during the Indian Independence. The genealogy of the figure of Bharat Mata has been traced to a satirical piece titled “Unabimsa Purana”, by Bhudeb Mukhopadhyay, first published anonymously in 1866. Bharat Mata is identified in this text as Adhi-Bharati, the widow of Arya Swami, the embodiment of all that is essentially 'Aryan'.[7]

The first play depicting Bharat Mata was performed by Kiran Chandra Bannerjee in 1873.  The first portray of Bharat Mata was painted by Mr.Abanindranath Tagore depicting her as a four armed goddess wearing saffron colored robes, holding the manuscript, sheaves of rice, a mala and a white cloth. This image became iconic during the freedom struggle and used extensively to provoke freedom fight. The imaginary figure of Bharat Mata and the slogan “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” has also been promoted extensively by the congress during freedom struggle and now by the RSS, BJP and other right wing organizations. In India, the imaginary bonding between nation and citizen is often mediated in and through religion. Unfortunately, in the dominant discourse of recent decades, the complexity of the relationship between nation and religion has been reduced to an analysis of communalism.  

The pictorial depiction of Bharat Mata, and the Slogan Bharat Mata Ki Jai was to encourage and involve the freedom fighters against the Britishers. Though the intention of the freedom fighters was to free India from the slavery of the Britishers, any rational thinker would question as to why the then thinkers must have changed the “Gender” of a “Mythical Character” “King Bharat” into a female goddess and use her to provoke innocent people. Is it not to confuse people and mislead them by giving the issues communal color? Is not to create a fake national figure and use it for political gains? Let us consider that their intention was honest and no malicious thoughts were raking up in their minds. But the logical question which comes into my mind as to why the Mother India was given a communal face? Why she was depicted as a goddesses pertaining to particular faith and religion? Why she was given a saffron flag into her hand since the whole freedom struggle was fought glorifying the Tri Color flag throughout the freedom fight.  How the Mother India of whole nation before the independence has turned out to be the Mother India only for certain class of people after independence?

Do we Indians really love our Mother India?

There is no doubt that every Indian loves their country in some or the other way. Basically, the very definition of love for country and respect for the country though seems to be interlinked and similar meaning, I feel there is lot of difference between loving and respecting the country and pretending to be nationalists. If we love our country, respect ought to be there, and where there is love and respect for the country, the feeling of nationalism will always be there. But these days, the love, respect and nationalism has been projected negatively. The pseudo love for country has suddenly rose up like a tsunami among all the party men and cadres of the right wing organizations. Anything spoken against the party and ideology is projected as Anti National.

The lovers of the nation and mother land forgets that, every day our mothers, sisters, friends are been brutally raped, killed, abused, harassed by us. The mother india must be ashamed of seeing that the brutality on her daughters has gone beyond a prudent man’s imagination where she is not only been raped but raped inhumanly and her private parts are been severed as if she is not a human being at all..!  The cases of Priyanka Bhotmange rape/murder, Nirbhaya’s incidence and the recent case of Badalapur where a teenage girl was brutally raped  and killed. These are very few incidents which I have mentioned, such incidents are the norm of day. The people who shouts for mother india have never seen that our daughters, sisters, mothers, are paraded naked on roads on fake charges, the families kills their own daughters in the name of honor killed who marry outside their castes, we also don’t let our daughters think, speak for their rights. What love we talk about…? What kind of respect we show to our mother India is a question to introspect. The incidents not only shows the inhuman mentality of the people who have done this but also proves our hypocratic mindsets where at one side we show our pseudo love for our mother land and other side, insult her own daughters..!  

To conclude my words, I would like to say that neither, shouting slogans, nor pretending to be greater nationalist would prove anyone a nationalist/patriot. The real love for our country is to keep us above our caste, class, religion and so called cultural beliefs. The pseudo love of the so called nationalists for the country and mother India can only be proved when they speak of real issues such as rapes, harassments, honor killing, inequality, poverty, castiesm, unemployment, malnutrition, child labor and many other social and national issues which are far more important than the pseudo love for the nation. We are nationalists only when we speak beyond our Caste, we are patriots only when we speak about the welfare of masses and try to remove the social inequality which is increasing every day. We are nationalist only when we respect and cherish the great philosophy (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity and Justice) enshrined in the Constitution of India.

Yours…

Adv Mahendra Jadhav

---

[1] Wikipedia

[2] The Mahabharata, Volume 1: Book 1: The Book of the Beginning

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_India#Bh.C4.81rata

[4] ibid

[5] Matsyapurana 114,9-10

[6] http://blog.sterlingholidays.com/how-india-got-the-name-bharat/

[7] Sadan Jha : The life and times of Bharat Mata: 2004