A Discourse on the Name: ‘Bharat’ Versus ‘India’ – Tracing Historical Significance and Constitutional Perspective

Introduction:

• In 2022, the Social Science committee of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) sparked a renewed conversation regarding the nomenclature of the nation, proposing a transition from ‘India’ to ‘Bharat’ in Social Science textbooks up to Class 12. This move brought to light the age-old deliberation on the nation’s name, particularly in the wake of the G20 Summit’s reference to the “President of Bharat.”

Bharat’s Historical Roots:

Puranic Literature and Mahabharata:

• The genesis of the name ‘Bharat,’ ‘Bharata,’ or ‘Bharatvarsha’ can be traced back to the annals of Puranic literature and the epic Mahabharata. It delineates the expanse between the southern sea and the northern realm of perpetual snow.

King Bharata:

• Legend has it that King Bharata, an ancient luminary, stood as the progenitor of the Bharatas, a tribe chronicled in the Rig Vedic texts, thereby establishing him as the forebear of the entire populace of the subcontinent.

‘India’ and ‘Hindustan’:

Hindustan’s Origins:

• The etymology of ‘Hindustan’ can be linked to ‘Hindu,’ the Persian rendition of Sanskrit’s ‘Sindhu,’ influenced by the Achaemenid Persian dominance of the Indus valley circa the 6th century BCE. The suffix “stan” came to fruition around the 1st century CE, culminating in the birth of “Hindustan.”

Greek Influence:

• The Greeks transliterated ‘Hind’ as ‘Indus,’ and with Alexander the Great’s 3rd-century BC incursion, ‘India’ encompassed the region beyond the Indus.

Mughal Era:

• In the 16th century, ‘Hindustan’ embraced the entire expanse of the Indo-Gangetic plain, enshrining the territories of the Mughal emperor across South Asia.

British Colonial Impact:

• The late 18th-century British cartography introduced ‘India,’ while ‘Hindustan’ shed its connection with the entirety of South Asia, emblematic of evolving perspectives and colonial influence.

Constituent Assembly’s Decision:

Article 1 of the Constitution:

• The inaugural article of the Indian Constitution commences with the phrase, “India, that is, Bharat, shall be a Union of States.”

Debate and Perspectives:

• Within the hallowed halls of the Constituent Assembly, a divergence of opinions emerged regarding the prominence of ‘Bharat’ as the preeminent appellation for the nation.

Pro-‘Bharat’ Arguments:

• Advocates contended that ‘India’ was but an English rendition of ‘Bharat,’ invoking the instance of the Irish Constitution, where “Eire” is employed in the Irish language, juxtaposed with “Ireland” in English.

Historical and Cultural Significance:

• Champions of ‘Bharat’ underscored the civilizational and cultural connotations it encapsulated, underscoring the imperative for a name befitting India’s rich history and heritage.

Dr. BR Ambedkar’s Perspective:

• Ultimately, the formulation ‘India, that is, Bharat,’ was ratified. Dr. BR Ambedkar, the luminary chairing the Constituent Assembly’s Drafting Committee, downplayed the civilizational discourse, underscoring the urgency of the tasks at hand.

Conclusion:

• The ongoing discourse revolving around ‘Bharat’ and ‘India’ unveils the intricacies surrounding identity, history, and linguistic heritage within the nation. While ‘Bharat’ boasts deep-seated origins in ancient Indian scriptures, ‘India’ bears the weight of historical and colonial import. The Constituent Assembly’s selection of ‘India, that is, Bharat,’ embodies a delicate equilibrium between venerating heritage and embracing a forward-looking identity for the nation.