India, that is Bharat…
Excerpted from an email by Shri Srinivasan Kalyanaraman on FHRS USA (emphasis mine):
“The term ‘hindu’ comes from ‘sindhu’. The word ‘sindhu’ is used many times in Rigveda and the meaning in most occurrences has been established to be ‘natural ocean frontier’. Thus, the term, ‘hindu’ is a geographical connotation in very early days of Hindu civilization. For those who think that the nation of Bharat is a British creation, they should be reminded about Rigveda verse by Vis’vamitra RV 3.53.12: vis’va_mitrasya raks.ati brahmedam bharatam janam, (this mantra of Vis’vamitra will protect the nation of the people of Bharatam). In Tamil bharatam (written pa_ratam) refers to the Hindu ra_s.t.ra. ”
*** UPDATE ***
Please also read: This must be the last word on origin of “Hindu”… AND “Hindu, India and Bharat – The Story behind Word Origins“.
See also this comment explaining the origin of the word, “BhArat” (the real name for India)
https://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/12/01/source-of-satyameva-jayate/#comment-10009
India is a English name and that was given to us by British. After Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata and Bengaluru have chnaged thier name, it is time now change India to Bharat. I think Bharat is the ancient name and does not have religious or regional reference.
Dear Shri Natarajan: Thank you for your comment. As you may know, the Constitution of India begins with the words, “India, that is Bharat”
“Bharat” is very much the official name of India.
I have also updated the post above with links to some of my more detailed posts on this subject…Please have a look. Thanks.
https://satyameva-jayate.org/2006/05/27/hindu-india-and-bharat-word-origins/ AND
https://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/03/04/origin-of-the-word-hindu/
as well as
https://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/12/01/source-of-satyameva-jayate/#comment-10009
Shantanu,
>For those who think that the nation of Bharat is a British
> creation
You really need to read this:
http://karnatique.blogspot.com/2009/04/bjps-anti-federal-stance-root-cause.html
Kannadiga: Thanks for the link…Interesting and thought-provoking…I had a hurried look and will certainly revisit (also to read your other posts).
Just one small point here: We can keep on arguing about whether there was any concept of Indian nationalism pre-British or not, but I hope you realise that there was a cultural and civilisational continuity throughout the ages.
Shantanu,
>(also to read your other posts)
I am not the owner of the blog. I’m just a reader.
But the main message I get from that blog (someone please correct me if I am wrong): Don’t confuse shared spirituality through ages with nationality. Trying to invent such a coherent (politically) past without sufficient evidence will be counter productive AND Don’t force hindi on us. 🙂
I just brought it to your attention since your blog is proudly devoted to “Bharat”. Read the other posts on that blog and I would like to see if you can honestly argue that a a notion of a greater identity of “Bharat” has always existed thoughout ages. May be, May be, May be it is one of those things that has been drummed into us so many times by uber nationalists, that we fail to question it.
Continuation of spiritual/cultural ideas is another story.
Kannadiga, do you want to say – or do you believe – that there was a kannadiga nationlism prevailing though the historical past which was subverted by the Indian or Bharatiya nationalism?
Kannadiga: I will most certainly have a look…
In the meantime, you may find this post interesting:
The Idea of India by Sh Krishen Kak.
Mod Prakash,
there was a kannadiga nationlism prevailing though the historical past which was subverted by the Indian or Bharatiya nationalism?
I’m not informed enough to answer your question. I’m still exploring this topic and haven’t reached any conclusion to answer your question.
Shantanu,
Thanks for the link to Krishen Kak’s article. I do agree with many parts of the article regarding Aryan theory, origin of Hindu word etc. But his main argument idea of
“India” existed in the past is based on Vishnu Purana.
I’m still not convinced that one shloka from Vishnu Purana is proof enough. We need to look at the evidence. Just take a look inscriptions found in South India.
Examples here:
http://www.whatisindia.com/inscriptions/south_indian_inscriptions/volume_9/rashtrakutas.html
http://inscriptions.whatisindia.com/
I am really interested to know how many inscriptions or rather in any of the inscriptions you find any references or paying homage or declaring allegiance or affiliation with a larger political entity called “Bharat” ! Ancestors mostly fought for land, resources, money, expansion etc. time and time again, dynasty and dynasty again. The only question I always end up asking my self always is: why didn’t or couldn’t they see beyond pettiness if they really “believed” in a greater India or “Bharat”!! May be, it took a common enemy, British, and a shared cultural heritage to make people of the landmass start thinking in terms of a united-political-entity.
Whether it makes sense to have a united political country now or not is another discussion. That shouldn’t prevent us from correctly interpreting the historical evidence. I’m still not convinced that people in the past actually considered themselves the sons/daughters of the same united political entity. I have my doubts and I am very open to see the hard evidence confirming if it is a fact.
On the other hand, scientific evidence shows that all of us homo sapiens evolved into our present forms not so long ago and left Africa to occupy the rest of this tiny rock circling a star. Infact, this makes all this discussion even more interesting 🙂
It would be good not to make any assumptions which may end up being counter productive to all of us humans eventually. If history shows us that we have always fought for resources ,then so be it. It may makes us warm and comfy and be a wonderful feel good factor imagining our ancestors ALWAYS envisioning a greater bharat. But does the hard evidence support that?
So far, I think past kingdoms in the Indian subcontinent may share a lot of cultural or spiritual background but have disagreed and fought [wars] with each other just like any other human tribes would do. This is hardly Akhand-bharat! I wish it was true, but I am afraid it is not.
I’m still exploring. And would like to learn from what evidence others have to offer. I hope our gifted leaders don’t waste their energy & talent coming with a vision/policy for the country based on false premise. After all, we all want to work towards a better tomorrow.
Kannadiga, Did you read this first?
I am yet another Kannadiga who is opposed to fanning flames of narrow “kannadiga nationalism” that is prevailing only in the narrowest of narrow minds of kannadigas like ‘kannadiga’ coming from (usually) illiterate sections of Mandya/Mysore region of Karnataka. These are the same folks who have reaped political mileage with slogans like “mannina maga” ( son of the soil ) for more than a decade – Devegowda, Kumaraswamy clan.
For this clan Karnataka is limited only to the region mentioned earler. With their political influence waning and opportunistic mentality exposed in the last elections and inability to hoard any more real estate wealth in Karnataka they are getting desperate and are willing to go to any length to divide people. Karnatique is unfortunately linked to this clan and the political party affiliated to it. Just a look at the topics on that web site and the amount of censoring involved ( if you tried to comment ) will show where their heart is. These elements will no wonder be nurtured by anti-national elements and western forces for their own agendas. They are even ready to lick their colonial masters. See this example.
– a proud Kanndiga but a Bharatiya first and foremost.
Thanks for showing where your heart is.