Ageing with dis-Grace.. India: A 5000 year old civilisation
This idea has been knocking around in my head for sometime now. There was a time in the 60’s and 70’s when only the Jansangh (predecessor to the BJP) leaders used to proclaim the greatness of India by constant reference to the past. I guess they had nothing else to counter Nehru’s forward looking rational “western” outlook. But nowadays its not only the BJP/ VHP and their ideological brethren, but people from all kinds of political and non-political backgrounds who keep mentioning and praising India as a 5000 year old civilization. Sometimes one even hears foreign publications and authors using this concept...(and this of course delights us Indians to no end)
Now, we certainly have a 5000 year old history. But the question in my mind is, does that make us a 5000 year old civilization ? In my opinion, NO. I must add that if I were to pride myself on being a member of a 5000 year old civilization, I would think it was an unbroken 5000 years of cultural and social development. Now my specific problem comes with the word “unbroken”
I look at this issue with 2 view points. The historical/ chronological and the empirical.
Historical: The Indus Valley Civilization (IVC), which “makes” us a 5000 year old civilization, certainly existed in 3000 BC, but how much did it contribute to its follower the Vedic civilization? Now I haven’t done a great amount of googling on this, but I know a few things
Thus, on the historical count I am not so comfortable in including the IVC as a part of a 5000 years of unbroken civilization in India. So my friends, I am sorry, but I have just made us at least 1000 years younger.
Empirical: When we say with pride that we are a 5000 year old civilisation, what we are also saying that as far as membership to civilisations goes, the older the better. So it’s better to be 5000 years old than to be a mere 2000 year old. This pride also assumes that a 5000 year old civilisation is a good thing and is better than a civilisation which is 2000 years old. Now what is “better” ? I would say that a civilisation or culture is “better” if it has highly developed forms of art and literature, architecture, philosophy, technology, etc. But above and before all this, for a civilisation to be better, it must provide for its citizens a life without want or fear, with justice and equity, and with opportunity. Now let’s take a look around and see how India is doing on this score as a 5000 year old civilisation
In many ways , I can say that India is a place where human life is not valued at all. Surely a civilisation that does not value human life cannot claim a 5000 year heritage with any pride whatsoever.
This idea has been knocking around in my head for sometime now. There was a time in the 60’s and 70’s when only the Jansangh (predecessor to the BJP) leaders used to proclaim the greatness of India by constant reference to the past. I guess they had nothing else to counter Nehru’s forward looking rational “western” outlook. But nowadays its not only the BJP/ VHP and their ideological brethren, but people from all kinds of political and non-political backgrounds who keep mentioning and praising India as a 5000 year old civilization. Sometimes one even hears foreign publications and authors using this concept...(and this of course delights us Indians to no end)
Now, we certainly have a 5000 year old history. But the question in my mind is, does that make us a 5000 year old civilization ? In my opinion, NO. I must add that if I were to pride myself on being a member of a 5000 year old civilization, I would think it was an unbroken 5000 years of cultural and social development. Now my specific problem comes with the word “unbroken”
I look at this issue with 2 view points. The historical/ chronological and the empirical.
Historical: The Indus Valley Civilization (IVC), which “makes” us a 5000 year old civilization, certainly existed in 3000 BC, but how much did it contribute to its follower the Vedic civilization? Now I haven’t done a great amount of googling on this, but I know a few things
- Historians are not clear how the IVC dwindled. Was it the rivers shifting course ? Or were they massacred and obliterated almost completely by the invading central Asian “Aryans” who then laid the foundation of the Vedic culture? Or some other reason? In any of these cases, is it logical to assume that a people who disappeared so mysteriously and so completely would leave a major influence on the next culture that came along? What I am trying to say is that if a culture disappeared so anonymously, their impact on the succeeding culture would have to be negligible. So we have a break in cultural lineage,
- Do we see any influence of the ICV in our day to day life, as we see the influence of Vedic culture? Again the answer is no. An example I always remember from school is that the IVC had under ground drainage. Now if IVC had really influenced us, why didn’t we have any underground drainage till the idea was imported from Europe and executed only in the 19th century in India.
- Another point, though perhaps not a major one is that all the IVC sites are restricted to a few places in Pakistan, Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat. It wasn’t really a pan-Indian phenomenon.
Thus, on the historical count I am not so comfortable in including the IVC as a part of a 5000 years of unbroken civilization in India. So my friends, I am sorry, but I have just made us at least 1000 years younger.
Empirical: When we say with pride that we are a 5000 year old civilisation, what we are also saying that as far as membership to civilisations goes, the older the better. So it’s better to be 5000 years old than to be a mere 2000 year old. This pride also assumes that a 5000 year old civilisation is a good thing and is better than a civilisation which is 2000 years old. Now what is “better” ? I would say that a civilisation or culture is “better” if it has highly developed forms of art and literature, architecture, philosophy, technology, etc. But above and before all this, for a civilisation to be better, it must provide for its citizens a life without want or fear, with justice and equity, and with opportunity. Now let’s take a look around and see how India is doing on this score as a 5000 year old civilisation
- In our country we routinely kill people in the name of religion, caste, community, political affiliation and for a hundred other things. You name anything and we kill people for it. The State blatantly sponsors the killing of innocent citizens as happened in Delhi and in Gujarat.
- We allow, through our inaction and complacence at all levels, people to die of hunger, disease and accidents. This in a country which now has its citizens swamping the Forbes Top 20 billionaires list !!
- For a 1000 or more years , we have kept 65 percent of our people deprived of education and participation in the mainstream. These are the people in the Scheduled Castes, Tribes and Other Backward Classes.
- We consistently elect political leaders about whom the less said , the better. We recently (in 2008) had the sad case from Bangalore of a young man who committed suicide because his vehicle met with an accident with the vehicle of a political leader , and the young man felt so terrorized that he saw suicide as the only way out.
In many ways , I can say that India is a place where human life is not valued at all. Surely a civilisation that does not value human life cannot claim a 5000 year heritage with any pride whatsoever.
No comments:
Post a Comment