The Discovery of India: Jawaharlal Nehru
An insight into Chapter 4 of the book The Discovery of India authored by the first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru when he was lodged at the Ahmadnagar Fort Prison Camp from 9 August 1942 to 28 March 1945. Incidentally, the concerned Chapter is titled, The Discovery of India.
The main context of the chapter is that it seeks to discover Indian history from the beginning of civilization in the subcontinent area, i.e. the Indus Valley Civilization and the Harrapan Civilization. The author argues that the Indian civilizations must be recognized, along with Persia, Mesopotamia and Egypt, as one of the most critical areas where the civilization process took place. The ancient history of the entire civilization and how it plays out on the culture and interactions with other civilizations of the time sets an informative and exciting context for the “discovery” of India.
The book was written during World War II and when the Indian freedom struggle was at its peak and was a several decades-long fight, and hence this also sets the context for the text in many forms. One instance of the war setting the tone is when the book reminds the reader of that current time when “we are witnessing an undermining, (of Indian thought and philosophy as well) in repeated wars and crises, of a proud and advanced civilization.” He also mentions in the text that he hopes something finer will emerge for the west as well as the east, out of the of war and that will retain the great achievements of humanity and add to what we lacked. Very importantly, Nehru, in his texts, maintains that the war is causing destruction not only of material resources and human lives but of essential values that give meaning to life. Through the context of the war and the freedom struggle, Nehru critiques some current thoughts and ideologies in the minds of Indians, especially the revivalist or the past-glory seeking that Indians wallow in when talking of the ideas prevalent in the minds of Indians. Indians, as Nehru wished, should look at the future with hope and towards building the future free from foreign domination and not seek validation in past or ancient glories.
To summarize some of the most essential points in the chapter, we ought to look at the various sections and subsections of the document. The texts relay the story of the history behind the Indian civilization. The Indus Valley and the Harrapan Civilizations which extended to the Gangetic Plains, and even though there exist many gaps and periods in the subsequent India of today, of which little is known, the author talks of continuity in customs, rituals reflected in one or the other customs, traditions or habits of today.
On religion and prima facie – on the notion of Hindu or Hinduism, Nehru dwells on the origins and etymology of the words. The inclusive term for religion of the Indian masses, Nehru argues citing scriptures and historical facts that the word Hindu was used by the peoples of western and central Asia for a thousand years or more for the people living on the other side of the Indus river. The first time in an Indian text, the word Hindu was used was for everyone who assimilated on this subcontinent and lived here in a Tantrik work of the 8th century AC. The word clearly derives from Sindhu, the old name as well as the present Indian name for the Indus. From Sindhu, came Hindu and Hindustan as well as Indus and India. Basing the religion of India on scriptures and mythology, Nehru further explains the old inclusive term for religion in India being the Arya Dharma which included all faiths that originated in India. (Buddhists and Jains as well as those who accepted the Vedas, where the term Vedic Dharma was also used.
Furthermore, Nehru reiterates the idea of the Aryans coming to India, which raised new problems- racial and political. Dravidians were the original or indigenous inhabitants with a long history of civilization, and also there were aboriginal tribes, nomads or forest-dwellers. Nehru argues that there is little doubt that the Aryans considered themselves vastly superior and extensive differences arose between the races. Caste, however, may not be either Aryan or Dravidian, but it emerged as an attempt at social organization of different races and later division of labour. Degradation, social injustice occurred much later, and that is what is prevalent today. A similar organization was also seen with the other branch of Aryans- the Iranians where there too existed a four-fold division but it did not petrify into caste. Old civilizations such as Greece did not need a caste system as they depended on mass slavery and India never had a history of such scale large slavery. This historical information becomes of anthropological nature as the Indian psyche developed around the notion of caste, manifesting itself into the evil it is today.
Philosophy from the Upanishads, Individualistic Philosophy, Materialism and the continuity of Indian culture are briefly discussed in the text. And most prominently, through these subsections, Nehru tries to make a distinction and arrive clearly at the differences or similarities of Indian philosophical thoughts on the ideas of Affirmation of Life versus the Negation of Life. Indian thought is detachment but not absenteeism from life and hence even though the idea of maya which is the idea of life being an illusion exists prominently, Nehru draws parallels of it with Plato’s Shadow of Reality.
Nehru speaks of the Epics. History, Tradition and Myth, explicating the Mahabharata and The Bhagavad Gita and again the Upanishads as forebearers of Indian thought. The richness of these ancient texts holds testimony to the great civilization of India and the maturity of the Indian thought system. In a very small way, Nehru does in the text what he himself earlier criticized, i.e. looking at the past glories for validation at present, but he does so to paint a picture of the historical significance of these epics and how it shaped Indian thought and the Indian civilization.
“A country under foreign domination seeks to escape from the present in dreams of a vanished age and finds consolation in visions of past greatness. That is a foolish and dangerous pastime in which many of us indulge.” Very simplistic, this idea reverberates with me and my thoughts since, till date, we have seen a repetition of the same claims. The idea of looking at the past and glorifying it while ignoring the problems of the present and sweeping them under the rug. Nehru critiques the religious, metaphysical and revivalist thought in the political sphere that the orthodox Hindus or Indians of the time and even currently espouse. Before Independence, when this text was written, Nehru argues that these thoughts in the political or day to day life sphere were the greatest impediment to the course of national liberalism. Nehru comments and talks a lot on the importance of religion and of spirituality but of them being a private and society or community-based practice and that religion and revivalist tendencies in the public sphere harm the idea of our nation. It can be implied from the texts, that these were some aspects of the highly acclaimed ideas that were in later years known as Nehruvian Secularism that had a profound positive impact on the secular tendencies on which Independent India was founded and governed.
Building on similar lines, another idea that I greatly agree with was the Nehru’s critic of the western notion of Indians being other-worldly, or the idea that we are still spiritually great in the world even though we have come down in other respects, i.e. from the days of the fictional notion of ‘Golden Bird’. Nehru argues that spiritual or any other cannot be founded on the lack of freedom and opportunity, or on starvation and misery. This idea becomes easy to understand and to agree with since a hungry man is not fed or satisfied with notions of past greatness or spiritual greatness but by food. And hence, it is imperative that we look at the real issues first, before seeking out past glories.
For points of contention, Nehru writes on the history of the functioning of caste as, “Thus at a time when it customary for conquerors (the Aryans in this context) to exterminate or enslave the conquered races, caste enabled a more peaceful solution which fitted in the growing socialization of functions.” While it may have been a saving grace then, inequality was rooted in the caste system since the system at its very beginnings talked about the vanquished and the conqueror, and it is them who decided the fate of the races or the classes, dividing them up into castes which later became a rigid social structure. Although the author argues that a certain fluidity existed in caste in the period, it is noteworthy that the author speaks in parables and possibilities, which seem rare and highly unlikely. The transition from one caste to another from the very beginning of the system, which was rooted in the superiority complex of the Aryans seems highly unlikely and rare.
All in all, the book and specifically this chapter becomes a thoughtful and introspective journey through India’s history ranging from ancient history to the founding of the Indian civilization throughout the ages, the ideas governing or shaping Indian thought and Philosophy and the systems of India of religion and caste, and the India of epics, traditions and myths.
It is more than twenty months since we were brought here, more than twenty months of my ninth term of imprisonment. The new moon, a shimmering crescent in the darkening sky, greeted us on our arrival here.
The moon, ever a companion to me in prison, has grown more friendly with a closer acquaintance, a reminder of the loveliness of this world, of the waxing and waning of life, of light following darkness, of death and resurrection following each other in interminable succession.
~Jawaharlal Nehru, Ahmadnagar Fort, 13th April 1944
The main context of the chapter is that it seeks to discover Indian history from the beginning of civilization in the subcontinent area, i.e. the Indus Valley Civilization and the Harrapan Civilization. The author argues that the Indian civilizations must be recognized, along with Persia, Mesopotamia and Egypt, as one of the most critical areas where the civilization process took place. The ancient history of the entire civilization and how it plays out on the culture and interactions with other civilizations of the time sets an informative and exciting context for the “discovery” of India.
The book was written during World War II and when the Indian freedom struggle was at its peak and was a several decades-long fight, and hence this also sets the context for the text in many forms. One instance of the war setting the tone is when the book reminds the reader of that current time when “we are witnessing an undermining, (of Indian thought and philosophy as well) in repeated wars and crises, of a proud and advanced civilization.” He also mentions in the text that he hopes something finer will emerge for the west as well as the east, out of the of war and that will retain the great achievements of humanity and add to what we lacked. Very importantly, Nehru, in his texts, maintains that the war is causing destruction not only of material resources and human lives but of essential values that give meaning to life. Through the context of the war and the freedom struggle, Nehru critiques some current thoughts and ideologies in the minds of Indians, especially the revivalist or the past-glory seeking that Indians wallow in when talking of the ideas prevalent in the minds of Indians. Indians, as Nehru wished, should look at the future with hope and towards building the future free from foreign domination and not seek validation in past or ancient glories.
To summarize some of the most essential points in the chapter, we ought to look at the various sections and subsections of the document. The texts relay the story of the history behind the Indian civilization. The Indus Valley and the Harrapan Civilizations which extended to the Gangetic Plains, and even though there exist many gaps and periods in the subsequent India of today, of which little is known, the author talks of continuity in customs, rituals reflected in one or the other customs, traditions or habits of today.
On religion and prima facie – on the notion of Hindu or Hinduism, Nehru dwells on the origins and etymology of the words. The inclusive term for religion of the Indian masses, Nehru argues citing scriptures and historical facts that the word Hindu was used by the peoples of western and central Asia for a thousand years or more for the people living on the other side of the Indus river. The first time in an Indian text, the word Hindu was used was for everyone who assimilated on this subcontinent and lived here in a Tantrik work of the 8th century AC. The word clearly derives from Sindhu, the old name as well as the present Indian name for the Indus. From Sindhu, came Hindu and Hindustan as well as Indus and India. Basing the religion of India on scriptures and mythology, Nehru further explains the old inclusive term for religion in India being the Arya Dharma which included all faiths that originated in India. (Buddhists and Jains as well as those who accepted the Vedas, where the term Vedic Dharma was also used.
Furthermore, Nehru reiterates the idea of the Aryans coming to India, which raised new problems- racial and political. Dravidians were the original or indigenous inhabitants with a long history of civilization, and also there were aboriginal tribes, nomads or forest-dwellers. Nehru argues that there is little doubt that the Aryans considered themselves vastly superior and extensive differences arose between the races. Caste, however, may not be either Aryan or Dravidian, but it emerged as an attempt at social organization of different races and later division of labour. Degradation, social injustice occurred much later, and that is what is prevalent today. A similar organization was also seen with the other branch of Aryans- the Iranians where there too existed a four-fold division but it did not petrify into caste. Old civilizations such as Greece did not need a caste system as they depended on mass slavery and India never had a history of such scale large slavery. This historical information becomes of anthropological nature as the Indian psyche developed around the notion of caste, manifesting itself into the evil it is today.
Philosophy from the Upanishads, Individualistic Philosophy, Materialism and the continuity of Indian culture are briefly discussed in the text. And most prominently, through these subsections, Nehru tries to make a distinction and arrive clearly at the differences or similarities of Indian philosophical thoughts on the ideas of Affirmation of Life versus the Negation of Life. Indian thought is detachment but not absenteeism from life and hence even though the idea of maya which is the idea of life being an illusion exists prominently, Nehru draws parallels of it with Plato’s Shadow of Reality.
Nehru speaks of the Epics. History, Tradition and Myth, explicating the Mahabharata and The Bhagavad Gita and again the Upanishads as forebearers of Indian thought. The richness of these ancient texts holds testimony to the great civilization of India and the maturity of the Indian thought system. In a very small way, Nehru does in the text what he himself earlier criticized, i.e. looking at the past glories for validation at present, but he does so to paint a picture of the historical significance of these epics and how it shaped Indian thought and the Indian civilization.
“A country under foreign domination seeks to escape from the present in dreams of a vanished age and finds consolation in visions of past greatness. That is a foolish and dangerous pastime in which many of us indulge.” Very simplistic, this idea reverberates with me and my thoughts since, till date, we have seen a repetition of the same claims. The idea of looking at the past and glorifying it while ignoring the problems of the present and sweeping them under the rug. Nehru critiques the religious, metaphysical and revivalist thought in the political sphere that the orthodox Hindus or Indians of the time and even currently espouse. Before Independence, when this text was written, Nehru argues that these thoughts in the political or day to day life sphere were the greatest impediment to the course of national liberalism. Nehru comments and talks a lot on the importance of religion and of spirituality but of them being a private and society or community-based practice and that religion and revivalist tendencies in the public sphere harm the idea of our nation. It can be implied from the texts, that these were some aspects of the highly acclaimed ideas that were in later years known as Nehruvian Secularism that had a profound positive impact on the secular tendencies on which Independent India was founded and governed.
Building on similar lines, another idea that I greatly agree with was the Nehru’s critic of the western notion of Indians being other-worldly, or the idea that we are still spiritually great in the world even though we have come down in other respects, i.e. from the days of the fictional notion of ‘Golden Bird’. Nehru argues that spiritual or any other cannot be founded on the lack of freedom and opportunity, or on starvation and misery. This idea becomes easy to understand and to agree with since a hungry man is not fed or satisfied with notions of past greatness or spiritual greatness but by food. And hence, it is imperative that we look at the real issues first, before seeking out past glories.
For points of contention, Nehru writes on the history of the functioning of caste as, “Thus at a time when it customary for conquerors (the Aryans in this context) to exterminate or enslave the conquered races, caste enabled a more peaceful solution which fitted in the growing socialization of functions.” While it may have been a saving grace then, inequality was rooted in the caste system since the system at its very beginnings talked about the vanquished and the conqueror, and it is them who decided the fate of the races or the classes, dividing them up into castes which later became a rigid social structure. Although the author argues that a certain fluidity existed in caste in the period, it is noteworthy that the author speaks in parables and possibilities, which seem rare and highly unlikely. The transition from one caste to another from the very beginning of the system, which was rooted in the superiority complex of the Aryans seems highly unlikely and rare.
All in all, the book and specifically this chapter becomes a thoughtful and introspective journey through India’s history ranging from ancient history to the founding of the Indian civilization throughout the ages, the ideas governing or shaping Indian thought and Philosophy and the systems of India of religion and caste, and the India of epics, traditions and myths.
Adios. Thank you for reading. :)
Comments