HVK Archives: Haunted by Macaulay's ghost
Haunted by Macaulay's ghost - Organiser
Francois Gautier
()
November 29, 1998
Title: Haunted by Macaulay's ghost
Author: Francois Gautier
Publication: Organiser
Date: November 29, 1998
As a foreign journalist, one cannot understand all the excessive
noise made about the Education Agenda of Murli Manohar Joshi:
What is wrong in trying to "Indianise, nationalise and
spiritualise" education in India? Joshi's critics-and there have
been many-have called it "a hidden Hindu agenda". So what?
With 800 million souls, Hindus constitute the majority of this
country. Why should Hindus then be ashamed of a "Hindu
education"? Traditionally and historically, Hinduism has always
been the most tolerant of all religions, allowing persecuted
minorities from all over the world, whether the Jerusalem Jews,
the Parsis from Persia, Christians from Syria, or even Arab
merchants, to settle in India over the centuries and practice
their religion in peace. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said
of India's invader, be they Muslims, who ruthlessly tried for 10
centuries to stamp out this most peaceful of all religions; or
the Christians missionaries, who used every means at their
disposal to convert Hindus to the "true" religion (and are still
trying today).
But Hinduism, never tried to convert anybody, never sent its
armies or missionaries to neighbouring countries, to impose its
religion and ways of life-not even by non-violence means, as the
Buddhists did all over Asia. It should also be said that
Hinduism is much more than a religion, it's a way of life, a
universal spiritual outlook, which has allowed numerous sects,
branches, philosophies, to develop within its fold, as long as
they were faithful to the central truth of Hinduism: Dharma. It
even recognises the truth and validity of other creeds-and it's
perfectly normal for a Hindu to have pictures of Guru Govind,
Christ, Buddha and Krishna in their homes. For are they not
avatars? And is that not true secularism (and not the
.opportunistic secularism of India's politicians, which has
divided India along caste and religious lines)?
Then why should Hindus not be proud of Hinduism? It has not only
shaped the psyches of Hindus, but also of Indian Christians,
Jains, Parsis, even Muslims, who are like no other Muslims in the
world. And why should Indians be ashamed of their own
civilisation whose greatness was foremost Hindu? Why should they
refuse to have their children read the Vedas, which constitute
one of the great Mountains of spiritual wisdom, or the Bhagavad
Gita, which contains all the secrets of eternal life? Or the
Ramayana and the Mahabharata, which teach the great values of
human nature: courage, selflessness, spiritual endeavour, love of
one's wife and neighbours. ...
Are the French ashamed of their Greeco-Roman inheritance? Not at
all! On the contrary they even think that civilisation started
with the Greeks. Would you call the Germans or the Italians
"nationalists" because they have Christian Democrats Parties?
Christianity is the founding stone of Western civilisation and
nobody dares deny it. Clinton goes to the mass and swears on the
Bible and none finds anything to say. We French are brought-up
listening to the values of Homer's Iliad, or Corneille's Le Cid.
It is true that in France there has been a separation of the
State and the Church; but that is because at one time the Church
misused its enormous political power and grabbed enormous amounts
of lands and gold. But no such thing ever happened in India. The
Brahmins never interfered in politics and today they are often a
neglected lot.
When they took over India, the British set about establishing an
intermediary race of Indians, whom they could entrust with their
work at the middle level echelons and who could one day be
convenient instruments to rule by proxy or semi-proxy. The tool
to shape these "British clones" was Education. In the words of
Macaulay, the 'Pope' of British schooling in India: "We must at
present do our best to form a class, who may be interpreters
between us and the millions we govern; a class of persons,
Indians in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions in
morals and in intellects". Macaulay had very little regard for
Hindu culture and education: "All the historical information
which can be collected from all the books which have been written
in the Sanskrit language, is less valuable than what may be found
in the most paltry abridgement used at preparatory schools in
England".
It seems today that India's Marxist and Muslim intelligentsia
could not agree more with Macaulay or with Charles Grant. For the
dream of Macaulay has come true: Nowadays, the greatest
adversaries of the "Indianised and spiritualised education" of
Joshi, are the descendants of these "Brown Sahibs' the "secular"
politicians, the journalists, the top bureaucrats, in fact the
whole Westernised cream of India. And what is even more
paradoxical, is that most of them are Hindus. It is they who upon
getting independence, have denied India its true identity and
borrowed blindly from the British education system, without
trying to adapt it to the unique Indian mentality and psychology;
and it is they who are refusing to accept "an Indianisation,
nationalisation and spiritualisation" of India's education
system, which is totally western-oriented. And what India is
getting from this education is a youth which apes the West.
But then, what does makes Indian unique? Take the proposal of
Joshi to make Sanskrit compulsory in school. Great idea!
Sanskrit is the mother of all languages, and it could become the
unifying language of India, apart from. English, which is spoken
only, by a tiny minority. "Sanskrit. ought still to have a
future as the language of the learned and it will not be a good
day for India when the ancient tongues cease entirely to be
written or spoken", admonished 50 years ago Sri Aurobindo,
India's great Sage and Seer.
A dead language, you say! Impossible to revive? But that's what
they argued about Hebrew. And did not the Jewish people, when
they got back their land in 1948, revive their "dead" language,
so that it is spoken today by all Jewish people and has become
alive again? The same thing ought to be done with Sanskrit. Let
the scholars begin now to revive and modernise the Sanskrit
language, it would be a sure sign of the dawning of the
Renaissance of India. In a few years it should be taught as the
second language in schools throughout the country, with the
regional language as the first and English as the third. Then
will India again have its own unifying language.
The Ministers walked out when the Saraswati Vandanam was played.
But why should anyone object to Saraswati, the Goddess of
Learning who bestowed so much grace on India. In 1939, a
disciple told Sri Aurobindo that: "there are some people who
object to singing of Vande Mataram as a national song; Sri
Aurobindo had replied; "in that case Hindus should give up their
culture". But the disciple had continued: "the argument is that
the song speaks of Hindu- gods, like Durga and that it is
offensive to Muslims". Said Sri Aurobindo: "but it is not a
religious song, it is a national song and the Durga spoken of is
India as the Mother. Why should not the Muslims accept it? In the
Indian concept of nationality, the Hindu view should be naturally
there. If it cannot find a place, the Hindus may as well be asked
to give-up their culture. The Hindus don't object to "Allah-Ho-
Akbar".
It is then obvious that Education in India has to be. totally
revamped. The kind of Westernised education which is standard in
India, does have its place, because India wants to be on par with
the rest of the world, and Indian youth should be able to deal
confidently with the West: do business, talk, and relate to a
universal world culture. But nevertheless, the first thing that
Indian children should be taught is the greatness of their own
culture. They should learn to revere the Vedas, they should be
taught the genius of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, they
should be told that in this country everything has been done,
that it was an unsurpassed civilisation, when the West was still
mumbling its first words, that Indian civilisation reached
heights, which have been since unsurpassed. But they should be
taught early that India's greatness is her spirituality her world-
wide wisdom. India's new education has to be spiritualised, it
has to be an inner education, which teaches to look at things
from the inner prism, not through the western artificial looking
glass.
India's Dharma, her eternal quest for truth, should be drilled in
the child from an early age. And from this firm base, everything
then can be taught - from the most modem forms of mathematics, to
the latest scientific technologies.
(The author is correspondent in South Asia of Le Figaro, France's
largest circulated newspaper)
(The Hindustan Times, 8-11-1998)
Back
Top
|
