Bharath - The Vishwa Guru

India is the colonial call name coined by occupiers. It's the white occupier's ploy to strike on the fundamental identity of not merely a prosperous nation, but an expansive continent recognised world over as 'Bharath Khand'.

Those who specialise in divisive methods for occupation and subjugation of foreign lands know more about breaking nations than building them. British knew Akhand Bharath had strong cultural heritage which connected and bound the seamless geography of this continent.

One of the efficient ways to enslave a nation is by attacking it's individual, religious, social, cultural and national identities. That's what exactly British tried enforcing in India for over 200 years. It was this cohesive culture across Bharath, though ruled by individual kingdoms and princely states which stood the wrath of the divisive ways of British empire. The attempts to undermine history, religion and culture of Bharath miserably failed.

As a parting shot British could break this land into two pieces geographically, on their way out. They couldn't have succeeded even in this endeavour, if not for few opportunistic indigenous politicians, who were solely focused on power even at the cost of disintegration of this nation. However, they could not break the spirit of this indivisible nation, it is intact even after 70 years of independence, thanks to the inherent cohesive culture.  British never imagined this nation would last even for few years after independence, without further disintegration.

Bharath has a history of thousands of years. It has been the 'Vishwa Guru' of the world for centuries. Being one of the ancient civilisations and knowledge centres in the world, Bharath lived the glory of global leadership socially, culturally, intellectually and politically. The greatness, identity, wealth, experience, knowledge of Bharath is incomparable to any nation on earth.

Dr Ambedkar, as the chairman of the drafting committee of the constitution has led a thorough discussion on renaming the nation as 'Bharath'. The conclusion is indisputably clear that the architects of the constitution wanted India to be called as 'Bharath' after adoption of the constitution by the constituent assembly. That's why they referred in both letter and spirit in the 1st Article and 1st Part of the constitution as 'India, that is Bharath.' 

It clearly meant 'India' henceforth will be called 'Bharath'. There's no complexity in their direction. As they needed a point of reference to rename this nation as Bharath, they took then existing name of India. Why in the world would they suggest this nation has two names as being interpreted by few folks who can't still be mentally independent of slavery from the British Raj.

However, it's quite shameful that the successive Congress governments led by Jawaharlal Nehru and his family have propagated the colonial name 'India' through decades after adoption of the constitution. They have literally violated the first sentence of the Constitution throughout their dismal misgovernance of this nation for over 60 years.

What's in the name? In fact, a lot. Especially when the name in reference is 'Bharath', which has centuries of reference, history, culture, greatness associated and is linked to a glorious era of world dominance not through weapons, but knowledge and culture. Re-association of that name would have certainly brought about massive change in the mindset of the nationals of this country right after independence.

Their ambitions, aspirations and drive for accomplishment would have been quite different. The social rot, chaos, corruption and derailed national values could have been avoided. Massive religious conversions, degraded nationalism, rise of pseudo intellectualism could have not changed the nation's demographics. Loss of identity, aping of western culture, disruptions in family institutions, disgraceful education standards and erosion of ethical, moral and social values would have not occurred.

The name 'Bharath' would have consciously and consistently reminded the nationals of this nation to keep their head high in pride and respect who we were, before occupation. The legacy of Bharath could have rebuilt this nation with more congruence and regard.

Pride and Self-respect are key values for nation building. This nation never went through a rigour of a proactive nation building after independence. The political leadership at that time had other priorities of ensuring dynastic succession than nation building through resuming the discontinued journey of Bharath. 'Greatness to further Greatness' would have been the journey, instead of starting from the scratch.

Congress party has denied this nation an opportunity to start at the top, instead they positioned this nation at the bottom and termed it as 'Under Developed' from day one of Independence. Congress party ensured the nationals have zero self-respect and pride of being a great civilisation. They have purged the historic greatness of this civilisation by manipulating it and twisting it to suit their petty political needs.

Congress further divided this nation into religion, castes and sub castes with a bankrupt model of religious personal law and a weird insertion of 'secular' republic unilaterally as an afterthought in 1977 through 42nd amendment. Overriding the collective knowledge and efforts of the 'Constitution Drafting Committee' and its chairman Dr Ambedkar.'

India is a young republic of 70 years, while Bharath lived and thrived beyond the annals of recorded history. India is a growing economy and Bharath was an economic and knowledge super power. What else, other than supreme prosperity and wealth can explain the reasons for repeated invasions on this land for centuries.

The moot questions are, would the name Bharath have given us an edge in the world order or disadvantaged us? Is it not leadership and patriotic bankruptcy to be called by the same name given by our occupiers and enslavers, even after 70 years of attaining independence from them? Is it not treacherous violation of this nation's Constitution to adopt it fully but violate the first sentence by not propagating 'Bharath' as the nation's only name and confuse the nationals of this nation and the world with two call names?

Bharath is a Karma Bhoomi for many god - like men and men like gods. It's a land where Vedas and Upanishads were scripted, while the rest of human species were trying to light fire in their caves. Is it not a national crime to disallow the nationals to be the rightful inheritors of this glorious past? Can't Bharath bring back the inspiration and national values required for this nation to become a 'Vishwa Guru' of the world all over again?

It's important for this nation to realise and take stock what it has already lost by continuing with the relics of colonial era, right from it's call name 'India'. It's important that 'we right the wrong' at least now and have a single identity for this nation as 'Bharath'.  The next generations should not be robbed of their fundamental right to be the inheritors of this historic greatness, which the last two generations have unfortunately lost.

'India' a title from an occupier can never inspire this nation to become a 'Vishwa Guru' or a global 'Super Power'. It's against the basic nature of a salve to attain greatness, especially one who continue to be a slave for an occupier, who left 70 years ago. 'Bharath' only can inspire and lead every single national of this land to reclaim the global greatness, this nation once lived. Let's make Bharath great again. Let's make it a Vishwa Guru.