Caste Discrimination in Educational Institution: In Context with Rohith Vemula’s Institutional Murder.

Caste Discrimination in Educational Institution: In Context with Rohith Vemula’s Institutional Murder.

The tragic suicide of Rohith Vemula, has once again brought into focus prejudice and violence faced by the Scheduled Caste community, even in revered spaces like a university. The intolerance against the minorities-be it Scheduled Castes, Tribals or Muslims, plays at various levels, right from the social to political spectrum. The circumstances under which Rohith was forced to take the drastic step of hanging himself in a hostel room inside the campus has brought attention to the systematic discrimination faced by Scheduled Caste students in higher educational institutions.

For me, this suicide is not an individual act. It is the failure of higher educational institutions in democratic India to meet their most basic obligation to foster the intellectual and personal growth of India's most vulnerable young people. Instead, Rohith now joins a long list of victims of prejudice at premier institutions in the country, where pervasive discrimination drives so many Scheduled Caste students to depression and suicide.

In South India, right from George Reddy to Rohit Vemula, the right wing castiest forces have always killed the voice of justice and equality in universities. The discrimination in educational institutions is worse than untouchability. Back then at least they told you, look you are a Scheduled Caste so stay away. Now, it is white collar discrimination. No suicide can perhaps be seen only as a result of personal frustrations, least of all, Scheduled Caste suicides. These personal frustrations have visible connections with the context around them. They are political, cultural and social and therefore need special attention. Hence it becomes important for all concerned to analyze whether these suicides were intrinsically connected to the power structure of the higher educational institutions and the entry of Scheduled Castes into it which gives pain to the bloody castiests vultures sitting out there. 

Rohith’s suicide is not the first and last which we have come across in recent times. Cases of caste discrimination have also been reported from IITs, IIMs, IISc and AIIMS. In 2008, IIT Delhi was in the news for terminating 12 Scheduled Caste students citing "poor academic performance", which led to allegations of caste-based discrimination. At least 20 Scheduled Caste students from these institutions have committed suicide in the past seven years.

Rejani S. Anand, Bal Mukund Bharti, Anil Kumar Meena(AIIMS) Ajay Sree Chandra….the list is endless who succumbed to the caste discrimination and committed suicides at premier institutions. 

On August 23 2012, Vadithya Nehru, a 20-year-old second year B. Tech student of IIT Kanpur, killed himself in Hyderabad because he faced termination. He just could not face the prospect of returning to his Tanda of fifteen Lambada households, as an adivasi colony is called in Marlinga Thanda in Telangana’s Nalgonda district, and telling his people that he had been tagged with the label of failure. After all, having bagged the 17^th rank in the ST category in IIT-JEE.

In March 2012, two Scheduled Caste student at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Anil Kumar Meena and Bal Mukund Bharti committed suicide in their hostel rooms.

Mohan Dharavath from the English and Foreign Languages Univ­ersity, Hyderabad, a PhD student belonging to an Adivasi community, was rusticated in May 2014 for two years along with two other students when they protested the university’s decision to close down the 24-hour reading room in the campus library.

Last year the dean of IIT Madras derecognized the Ambedkar Periyar study circle accusing them of spreading hatred against Prime Minister Narendra Modi without giving the student body a chance to defend the charges levied against them.

If this is not enough the very own Census data released by the government says that only 2.24 % of the 200 million Scheduled Castes become graduates. This speaks about the highly discriminative mindset of the upper caste hegemony over the educational institutions.

The UoH is one of the biggest hub of caste discrimination is a well known fact. In 2002 UoH rusticated ten Scheduled Caste students for no reasons. We don’t know what are those students doing now? We did nothing that time nor when Senthil Kumar, another PhD scholar, killed himself in 2008 in the same university. He was pursuing his PhD in Physics at HCU and committed suicide in his hostel room. At first, University authorities claimed that he died of a heart attack, but when his post-mortem revealed that he died of poisoning, the issue blew up. There was a political furor, following which a fact finding committee was set up under Professor Vinod Pavarala.

Prof.Vinod Pavarala’s findings were shocking, and showed a thriving culture of caste-discrimination in the School of Science in HCU. In Senthil’s batch, four including him were not assigned supervisors. All of them were from reserved categories. Under pressure to perform and with no guidance, Senthil failed in one of the courses, due to which he stopped receiving his fellowship stipend. Hailing from a poor family of pig-breeders in rural Tamil Nadu, Senthil succumbed to the pressure and killed himself. Two others who were not given supervisors left the program.

Prof.Pavarala’s report stated that "it is a fact that most of the students affected by the inconsistencies and ambiguities in procedures were SC/ST students and more importantly, that all the physics students that this committee could meet have reported their sense that the School was acting against the interests of the SC/ST students". Out of these four students, two eventually left the course as dropouts and one got allotted a supervisor. Obviously, all the four students were from the reserved categories. 

What makes Rohith’s murder special? When Rohit composed the suicide note, did he say to himself: “if my death begins another debate, a real debate, it can only be a good thing?” It is indeed tragic that he ended his life at a time when their fight against the castiest university was gaining momentum. I myself was in touch with them from the day one when they expelled from their rooms and forced to stay outside in Velivada. I visited several times and continuously wrote against the university attitude towards these scholars on social networks. Samata Sainik Dal – South India conducted Flag March in the university. The Flag March was one of its first kind in the history of Indian Educational institutions. And since then, the common man came to know about this issue on larger scale. I called several big names to take notice of this issue and raise voice, stand with the boys and show our solidarity, but unfortunately as usual our sensitivity rose only after Rohith’s death! 

To go into the brief chain of events started with ASA students assaulting a student in the hostel, the trigger was, in fact, a derogatory Facebook post that “ASA students are goons are spreading hoolignism” by Mr.Susheel Kumar an ABVP leader in response to the protests against the hanging of Yakub Memon and banning the screening of a documentary film called “Muzaffar Nagar Abhi Baki Hai” in Delhi on the Muzaffarnagar riots.

The Union Minister of Labour & Employment Mr.Bandaru Dattatreya has merely forwarded a representation submitted to him by ABVP students to the Union HRD ministry without going into the merits of the issue. And later on raised both hands sidelining himself from the issue.

Mr.Dattatreya, in fact, drew HRD Minister’s attention to the university having become “a den of castiest, extremist and anti-national activities”, and referred to the alleged assault on the ABVP leader Susheel Kumar. 

The Proctorial Board found no evidence of assault on Susheel Kumar. The committee had, in fact, consulted all parties and submitted its report after meeting the doctors and the ABVP activist in hospital, who claimed that the punches he suffered in the course of the scuffle triggered an acute case of appendicitis. The medical report released by the medical officer also proved that he did not suffered any physical bruises neither there are any signs of wounds on his body parts.

The HRD Ministry merely forwarded the Union minister’s letter as it had forwarded the letter sent by Congress MP Hanumantha Rao on suicides on the Hyderabad University campus. It had sent six reminders after forwarding Mahunamnth Rao’s letter in November 2014 and four after Bandaru Dattatreya’s letter in August 2015.

The facts that reminders on Hanumanth Rao’s letters did not apparently elicit any reply from the university or any privilege move by the Congress MP but reminders sent on Mr.Bandaru’s letter resulted in action speak for themselves. Nothing more needs to be said !

There are many conspiracies which are been hatched against the five scholars has become a known fact by now. The first is targeting ASA activists as Anti-National, Pro Terrorists. Seconds is, suspending these scholars based on fake medical reports and without proper investigations, without giving chance to be heard, third is, ABVP approaching BJP politicians and asking them to build pressure through MHRD. Ms.Smriti Irani, blindly ordering the VC to take stringent actions against the five scholars which ultimately resulted in Rohith Vemula’s institutional murder…!

What do all these events point at..? Was it targeting ASA..? Was it targeting the scholars who conducted debate on capital punishment and staged protest against ABVP time and again..? For me it is a direct attack on Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar’s philosophy. RSS and BJP through this issue are trying to create an atmosphere wherein they want to prove that the philosophy these boys are following is Anti National. RSS agenda and conspiracy is to prove Babasaheb Ambedkar as anti national and castiest. We as ardent followers of Ambedkar’s ideology have a major role to play now. Our efforts should be to deface them, our work should be to prove who is national and who is anti national, anti humanity anti constitutional…then only we could justify ourselves as an ambedkarites.

Constitutional Provisions: 

Now allow me to let you know the constitutional provisions which speak about educational rights to all the citizens of this great nation. Article 13, 14, 15, 21 and 21A, 28, 29, 30, 38, 41, 45, 46 speaks about educational rights of the citizen. Out of these the said rights 8 are fundamental rights and other four are from Directive Principles of State Policies – Part IV. Unfortunately the state and centre government has failed miserably in implementing the egalitarian principles of constitution. The 86^th Constitutional amendment making education a fundamental right was passed by Parliament in 2002. 93^rd amendment provided amendment to article 15, which provide reservation for SC, ST and OBC in private institutions. Including self-financed but excluding minority educational institutions and it also nullified Supreme Court’s judgment in Inamdar case that State cannot impose reservation on private unaided institutions.  In 1966 Kothari commission on education viewed education as a means of national development. And in 1976 Education was put in concurrent list from state list.

To ensure inclusion and equity, India’s Constitution states that 7.5% of seats at government-funded higher education institutions are to be reserved for Scheduled Tribes’ (STs), also known as Adivasis in India, and 15% for ‘Scheduled Castes’ (SCs) often referred to as Scheduled Castes and 25% for the OBCs. The seats have neither been filled in totality and those students who joins the educational institutitions,colleges and  universities are humiliated, discriminated and forced to either abandon the education or to kill themselves. The cases of discrimination continue to make headlines in almost all the educational institutions. Every day we come across the suicides and harassment news in TV and social media.

Rohith Vemula’s death has started a revolution I feel. From the day the ruling government has come in power, there was a high sense of inequality, threat, fear and insecurity among the SC, ST and Minorities. We have seen rampant atrocities, physical attacks and regular abuses on people who dared to raise voice against the government and fascist ideologies. Innocent people are been killed for eating their choice of food, women are been striped and paraded naked on roads, children are been doused in broad day light. The common man was losing hope that nothing can be done. They were doubtful about their life and existence, they were living under immense threat that someone will run into their houses and kill their families.  But Rohith’s death ignited the fire among everyone in the country. Because of his death, such a big agitation could rose to international level by which the government is on backfoot now. His death gave birth to hope among millions of people who were under threat of their life and voice. 

Dear friends, this is the high time to carry forward this momentum and build a strong unity. This is a high time to join hands and fight against the atrocious system with much of our strength and intellect. As we see that ambedkarite organizations are scattered here and there. We don’t see unity among them, we fight within the community for petty reasons. If we don’t resolve these petty issues now, stand together and face the enemy who is standing on our doorstep, I see there is no future...! I see the conditions can be beyond our reach and one day may come when the future generations may curse us for not giving them a bright and secured future. Therefore, my friends, let us pledge that we will not let any Rohith die from hereon, let us pledge that we will show  them if we stand together nothing can defeat us... 

Demands:-

1.     Invoke IPC section 120A and 120B against VC.Apparao, Mr.Susheel Kumar, Bandaru Dattatreya, Mr.Ramchander on criminal conspiracy with the intention killing Rohit and harassment of other scholars.

2.     Financial support to Rohit’s family.

3.     Register cases under the SC/ST (Preventions of atrocities) Act, 1989 against all the people who are involved in this issue.

4.     Register cases of abatement of suicide of Rohith and criminal intimidation against other four scholars against all the people who are involved in this issue

5.     The Institutions should appoint anti-discrimination officers to deal with complaints in future.

6.     The United Nations Should recognize caste discrimination as a priority human rights and development issue and lend its united support to the endorsement of the draft UN Principles and guidelines for the Effective Elimination of Discrimination.

Lecture given at Shanti Chakra Internationals on 26.11.2015

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar’s Contribution for India

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar’s Contribution for India

Speech Delivered on All India Radio..!

It is truly an honour to be given the opportunity to deliver a lecture on Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar on the occasion of……………

Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar was born on 14^th April 1891 in a small village called Mahu. He was the fourteenth child of Subhedar Major Ramji Sakpal and Bhima Bai. Since his mother died early, his aunt took care of Bhimrao. Subhedar Ramji was a man of principles and a strict father. He raised Bhimrao under strict discipline. From the childhood Bhimrao was a rebel. Since his father was a Kabir Panthi, he used to tell bhimrao religious stories. Bhimrao being a rebel in nature always used to question the rationality of the mythical stories told by his father.

Being born in untouchable family, Bhimrao Ambedkar suffered humiliation at every walk of life while growing. He was surprised to see the attitude of upper caste people towards him and the untouchable community. He used to question his father why is that the barber not cutting his hair and the school administration which did not allow him to drink water? Being an untouchable, he used to sit outside the classroom but still he was a bright student.  Bhimrao Ambedkar was the first student who passed matriculation in his area. It was a matter of great pride for the untouchable community that someone from their community could pass matriculation. He did his higher education in Elphinstone College, Mumbai and went to London School of Economics for his Masters. Very few people know that Dr.Ambedkar was the only person in whole of India who studied in the top universities of that time such as Oxford University, London University and Cambridge University. He was also enrolled in Germany’s Bonn University but due to lack of financial help he could not join there. His papers “Castes In India”, “Problem of Rupee” which he presented during his Masters In London is one of the best thesis papers of his time and holds significance even today among the economists fraternity. He also wrote a critique “Reconstruction of World” on Mr.Bertrand Russel’s historic book “Reconstruction of Society”.  In this critique he fearlessly criticized Mr.Russel’s opinion which forced Russel to come and meet Dr.Ambedkar. Such was the brilliance he acquired right from his student age.

Dr.Ambedkar’s vision of a new social order can be summed up in the way in which he so often did, with the great slogan, “Liberty, Equality, fraternity and justice.”  In his one of the constituent assembly speeches he says “Positively, my social philosophy may be said to be enshrined in three words: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. Let no one however say that I have borrowed my philosophy from the French Revolution. I have not. My philosophy has roots in the religion and not in political science. I have derived them from the teachings of my master, the Buddha.”

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar has emerged as the most outstanding intellectuals of the world in the 20^th century. Paul Baran, an eminent economist, had made a distinction in one of his essays between an "intellect worker" and an intellectual. The former, according to him, is one who uses his intellect for making a living whereas the latter is one who uses it for critical analysis and social transformation. Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar fits Mr.Baran's definition of an intellectual very well. Dr. Ambedkar is also an outstanding example of what Antonio Gramsci called an organic intellectual, that is, one who represents and articulates the interests of an entire social class.

Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar throughout his life worked for the social upliftment of the masses. While Dr. Ambedkar is famous for being the father of India's Constitution and for being a doughty champion of the interests of the under privileged, his views on a number of crucial issues pertaining to economic development are not so well known.

Apart from writing the constitution, Dr. Ambedkar was a strong proponent of land reforms and economic development. He recognized the inequities in an unfettered capitalist economy. His views on these issues are found in several writings; of these the most important ones are his essay, "Small Holdings in India and Their Remedies" and "States and Minorities". In these writings, Dr. Ambedkar elaborates his views on land reforms and the kind of economic order that is best suited for the people.

In many ways, his economic and political thinking can be characterized as a form of what feminists used to describe as “dual systems” theory. Just as early socialist feminists in the U.S. talked of “capitalism and patriarchy” or Black radicals of “capitalism and racism,” Dr.Ambedkar began to focus on “capitalism and Brahmanism.” These, in a famous speech at Mahad in 1938, he said, “There are in my view two enemies which the workers of this country have to deal with. The two enemies are Brahmanism and Capitalism…By Brahmanism I do not mean the power, privileges and interests of the Brahmans as a community. By Brahmanism I mean the negation of the spirit of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. In that sense it is rampant in all classes and is not confined to the Brahmans alone, though they have been the originators of it”

The RBI was formed upon his suggestions to Hilton Commission, The River Grid System, Power Project Dams, 8 Hours work timings for workers and peasants, equal property and adoption rights for women, these are the remarkable contributions which Dr.Ambedkar has gifted Indian people.

Dr.Ambedkar’s life can be looked into two perspectives. 1.As an Activist (1927-1935) and 2. As an Revolutionist (1935-1956).As an activists, he fought for the equal rights with the hindus since the untouchables were considered as a part of hindu society, he asked for the equal treatment. And that’s the reason why he fought for the drinking Water in Mahad, entered KalaRam Mandir in Nashik, did Parvathi Satyagraha, Representation in Round Table Conferences, forming the Independent Labor Party in 1935, and so on…until 1935 as an activist he fought for the equal treatment and tried to convince the upper castes. But when he understood that, the feeling of inequality is imbedded in the minds of majority of people, in 1935 at Yevla, he finely announced that “it was not in his hands to be born as a hindu, but I will not die as a hindu”. From here on we see a revolutionary Ambedkar at the national front. From here on he never agitated on roads, neither did satyagrahas for any issues, rather he choose to focus on fighting on intellectual front by writing numerous historic books and ultimately in 1956 he embraced Buddhism with his lakhs of followers.

Now let us see his Role and Contribution in Making of Indian Constitution:-

Writing a constitution of any nation is not an easy task. It becomes more difficult when we think of India wherein hundreds of castes, races, religions, traditions, beliefs, and customs are prevailing. Therefore it needs Top Class mastery on World Constitutions, Excellence in Political Knowledge, Top class Philosopher who can study the past, analyze the present and could foresee the future, it also needs great knowledge of different civilizations, society and culture and also command in legal knowledge. In depth knowledge of world history, Democracy, Anarchy, Imperialism etc., Constitution can be written only by such person who has in depth knowledge of Law and Social System of all the countries. It becomes more difficult when it comes to India wherein the larger section of people lived in thousand years in slavery, experienced several atrocities. After being ruled by Britishers for more than 150 years I feel it’s not less than a miracle to write the constitution of India. And that miracle could become possible only because of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar.

Dear Friends, the first effort of proposing the constitution of India was came in 1927 when Lord Birkenhead gave a challenge to Indians asking them to produce a constitution for India. That challenge was taken up. A committee was formed to frame a constitution. A constitution was produced and was known as 'The Nehru Constitution'. It was, however, not accepted by Indians and was buried without remorse! A second opportunity presented in 1930, when they assembled at the Round Table Conference. There again, we Indians failed to play their part and write out the Constitution. Again in 1942 britishers sent Sir Stafford Crips with few suggestions for writing up the constitution, but ultimately that effort was also gone vain and in 1945 one more attempt was made by the Sapru Committee. The proposals of this committee too have fallen flat. The reasons may be vary as per the conditions, but the fact is we were offered almost four chances in the span of 20 years to write our constitution but we failed every time.

India got freedom in 1947 and the process of writing the constitution begun. It was decided that the members would be elected by Universal Adult Franchise ie on every 10 Million population One elected representative shall be elected. Since the then congress does not wanted Dr.Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly, it played their conspiracies, however, he was elected from Khulana District of West Bengal. But under a political conspiracy after the Indian Independence Act 1947, his candidature got cancelled and resulted in his expulsion from the Constituent Assembly. Later on he was again elected from Bombay after the resignation of Mr.Mukundrao Jayakar.

The constituent Assembly came into being in November, 1946. The members were elected in July, 1946.  Out of 296 seats of British India, the Congress captured 211 seats and the Muslim League 73 seats. The rest were not filled up. The constituent Assembly met for the first time in New Delhi on December 9, 1946. On this day Dr.Ambedkar’s speech turned out to be the milestone of India’s democratic future. All the members of the house were surprised to see Dr.Ambedkar’s vision of future India as a result the constituent assembly made Dr.Ambedkar as a Chairman of Drafting Committee. At the other side, Muslim League refused to participate in its deliberations. In spite of this, the Assembly made a substantial progress. As a result of Partition under the PLAN OF JUNE 3^rd, 1947, a separate Constitution Assembly was set up for Pakistan on July 16, 1947. The representatives of Bengal, Punjab, Sind, North Western Frontier Province, Baluchistan and the Sylhet district of Assam (which had joined Pakistan by a referendum) ceased to be members of the Assembly of India and there was a fresh election in the new Provinces of West Bengal and East Punjab. The Constituent Assembly appointed a Drafting Committee on 29^th   August, 1947 under the Chairmanship of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar.  There is a different story altogether as to why and how Dr.Ambedkar was made Chairman of the Drafting Committee. Which we may discuss some other time.  Along with Dr.Ambedkar, there were 6 other members in the drafting committee…

1.N.Gopal Swami Iyangar
2.Alladi Krishna Swami Iyangar
3. Sayyed Mohammad Sadulla
4. K.M.Munshi
5.B.L.Mittal
6.D.P. Khaitan (T.T.Krishnamchary after the death of Mr.Khaitan in 1948.)


Dr.Rajendra Prasad was the President of Constituent Assembly. Before Rajendra Prasad, Sachinanand Sinha was the temporary president.

When the drafting committee began its work the problem of federation with the Native States had ceased to exist, as the Native States which acceded to India merged in India. It was Dr.Ambedkar who suggested the solution for Princely State problem to the Advisory Committee. It was he who is responsible to the united India during and after the partition, if not India could have been a next USSR or Pakistan by now!

The “Draft Constitution” prepared by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar was published in January, 1948. The people of India were given 8 months to discuss the draft and propose amendments. As many as 7,635 amendments were proposed and 2,473 were actually discussed. These all amendments were checked and studied by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar alone during the making and this has been accepted by the whole constituent assembly. Mr.T.T.Krishnamachary in his concluding speech in the assembly acknowledged Dr.Ambedkar’s work rightly. He says “There were 7 members appointed in the Constitutional Assembly, One of them resigned, whose place was empty all the time, one person died and that place was also empty, one member used to lived in America, ultimately his place also remained vacant, one member was busy with his political duties and could not spare time in the Assembly, one or two people were out of Delhi as it was impossible for them to adjust in Delhi’s cold weather. Ultimately the whole responsibility of framing of constitution shouldered on Dr.Ambedkar. We all are obliged and grateful to Dr.Ambedkar, who could complete the tough task of drafting the constitution ALONE. Therefore his work is truly appreciable.”

During the process of framing the Constitution of the Republic of India, Dr. Ambedkar proposed to include certain provisions on fundamental rights, specifically a clause to the effect that the state shall provide protection against economic exploitation. Among other things, this clause proposed that:

* Key industries shall be owned and run by the state;

* Basic but non-key industries shall be owned by the state and run by the state or by corporations established by it;

* Agriculture shall be a state industry, and be organized by the state taking over all land and letting it out for cultivation in suitable standard sizes to residents of villages; these shall be cultivated as collective farms by groups of families.

Apart from the nationalization of key industries, Dr. Ambedkar stressed on the importance of insurance and proposed the nationalization of insurance. He categorically stated: "State socialism is essential for the rapid industrialization of India. Private enterprise cannot do it and if it did, it would produce those inequalities of wealth which private capitalism has produced in Europe and which should be a warning to Indians." if we see the current scenario, his prophesy has turned out to be true. The capitalism has been dominating the market in such a way that money is into the pockets of few capitalist families. At the other hand we have more than 30% of the population below poverty line who don’t even get two times quality food!

Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar stressed on the importance of Directive Principles of State Policies in Part IV Art.36to51. According to him these directives are fundamental in nature and all the states should strive to implement the policies of DPSP which speaks about social, economical, political, educational empowerment of all the citizens. But unfortunately in the past 65 years of independence, the government has failed in realizing the vision of Dr.Ambedkar and did not think of national growth.

He was also against the special status to Jammu & Kashmir. He says “…my view has always been that the right solution is to partition Kashmir. Give the Hindu and Buddhist part to India and the Muslim part to Pakistan as we did in the case of India. We are really not concerned with the Muslim part of Kashmir. It is a matter between the Muslims of Kashmir and Pakistan. They may decide the issue, as they like. Or if you like, divide it into three parts; the Cease-fire zone, the Valley and the Jammu-Laddhak Region.” Dr.Ambedkar's views were praised by most of the national as well as international newspapers including the Manchester Guardian.

Dr.Ambedkar was against Art.370 of the constitution, which was put against his wishes. Balraj Madhok reportedly said, Dr. Ambedkar had clearly told Shaik Abdullah: "You wish India should protect your borders, she should build roads in your area, she should supply you food grains, and Kashmir should get equal status as India. But Government of India should have only limited powers and Indian people should have no rights in Kashmir. To give consent to this proposal, would be a treacherous thing against the interests of India and I, as the Law Minister of India, will never do it." Then Abdullah went to Mr.Nehru, who directed him to Gopal Swami Ayyangar, who approached Sardar Patel asking him to do something as it was a matter of prestige of Nehru, who has promised Sk. Abdullah accordingly. Patel got it passed when Nehru was on foreign tour.

Not only this, Dr.Ambedkar also proposed to have smaller state concepts. He was of the opinion that, small states are easy to administer. But this proposal was also not accepted by the then government. I tell you my friends, at the time of independence India had around 18 states and now in 2015 we have 29 states.

Dear Friends, Ever since the Constitution of India came into force on 26^th January 1950, the world looked at India with high surprise. Whole world congratulated India for adopting democracy. Glanville Austin in his words said “With the adoption of the Constitution by the members of the Constituent Assembly on November 26^th 1949, India became the largest democracy in the world, by this act of strength and will, Assembly members began what was perhaps the greatest political venture that originated in Philadelphia in 1787”.

If we look at the merits of the constitution, we see that the preamble explains us the egalitarian spirit of the constitution. We can understand by reading the Preamble what the framers intended to achieve through this constitution. “We, The People of India”. It means the constitution is emanated from the people of India and not from any other external sources. Dr.Ambedkar wanted to build the society based on liberty, equality, fraternity and justice. The whole Part IV from Art.36-51 is the reflection of the preamble.

When we look at Fundamental Rights in Part III Art.12-35, we can see that the articles speak about the rights of citizens. The Fundamental Rights, embodied in Part III of the Constitution, guarantee civil rights to all Indians, and prevent the State from encroaching on individual liberty while simultaneously placing upon it an obligation to protect the citizens' rights from encroachment by society. Seven fundamental rights were originally provided by the Constitution – i.e. right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights, right to property and right to constitutional remedies. However, the right to property was removed from Part III of the Constitution by the 44^th Amendment in 1978.

During the past 65 years, the Indian Constitution has been amended almost twice more often than America in over 200 years. There have been periodic demands for a new Constitution, without any consensus on its content. We need to understand the very spirit of the Constitution and the intention of Dr.Ambedkar to know what exactly they wanted to give us. The time has come for all of us to devote our time and energy to read, understand and promote the humanitarian principles of the greatest Indian. The responsibility lies on our shoulders to make the greatest democracy an example for the rest of the world to show that we are the greatest modern democratic nation..!

Conclusion:-

Dr.Ambedkar was a true social democrat. This we can understand by his speeches while presenting the Constitution. There he makes several important points which deserve to be emphasized today. For example, he quotes Thomas Jefferson to emphasize the inherent right to change the Constitution. Jefferson had argued that “every generation had the right to create a new Constitution for itself if it felt necessary; to refuse this right would mean that the earth belongs to the dead and not to the living.” Dr.Ambedkar cites this, adding, “What Jefferson has said is not merely true, but absolutely true.” However, Dr.Ambedkar says, “There will never be a need to reject India’s Constitution as such, because of its flexible scope for amendment”.

He was so confident on his wisdom and ability to see the future that he felt the constitution is so flexible that it will adjust in any condition the nation will come across. Unfortunately, the common man is unaware of the greatness of his wisdom and intellect. He is always termed as dalit leader, the time has come to read, understand and implement his thoughts and wisdom. The predictions he made during the making of constitution has proved right today. Every word of his is proving to be a mark on the rock. And therefore it becomes much necessary to read and understand his abundant literature and contribute in national growth.

Thank you !

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