What is wrong with importing Euro-centric nationalism to India?

A criticism on Romila Thapar’s ‘ON NATIONALISM’

Note: Due to BLOGGER Tech problems, replace '.in' in the links to '.com', if the links failed to open in the new window.

“Historians see the nation as a modern concept and do not trace it to antiquity. It emerges at a specific point of time that dates back to the post-Enlightenment  period in Europe”                  – Romilla Thapar ( Page 8, ‘ON NATIONALISM’-ALEPH 2016)

To understand the harmful dimensions of importing the Euro-centric nationalism to India, one must first study a similar damage through the western import of the classical-folk divisions to India.

Like Nationalism, Folk and Classical divisions were rooted in the European social history encompassing music, dance, etc.

The term "classical music" did not appear until the early 19th century. The earliest reference to "classical music" recorded by the Oxford English Dictionary is from about 1836. A more accurate term is also used to refer to the period from 1750 to 1820 as the Classical period.

But ‘the origins of Indian classical music can be found in the Vedas, which are the oldest scriptures in the Hindu tradition dating back to 1500 BCE.’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_classical_music )

Who imported the above Euro-centric term ‘classical’ to India, and on what justification, it was applied to the Indian music, that too to the pre-19^th century Indian music? Did it result in the ‘post-colonial’ degrading of some of the Indian music as ‘folk music’? 

The present concert form of Carnatic music and the consequent Tamil version portrayed as ‘Tamil Music’ are all post-colonial musical development, as my research on ‘Physics of Tamil Music’ had revealed.

The influence of the French Revolution to the birth of ‘Nationalism’, and ‘Classical/Folk’ divisions, and the social factors responsible for their ‘birth’, will clarify the ‘pitfalls’ in importing the concepts of ‘Nationalism’, and ‘Classical/Folk’ divisions, to India; 

the 'national' separatist groups, 'availing' human rights support from the foreign funded NGOs; & the field of ‘folk’ research, dominated by the foreign funded NGOs; both mostly disrupting the  'Indian nation' building, & adding fuel to the anti-Hindutva noises. ('Hindu'-  a mischievous western origin word)

Thanks to the citation of the Magsaysay award to T.M.Krishna, 'the above cat is out of the bag'.
('Magsaysay For T.M. Krishna: Citation An Insult To Carnatic Music'; http://swarajyamag.com/culture/magsaysay-for-tm-krishna-citation-an-insult-to-carnatic-music ) 

In this context, I like to clarify that the Indian Marxists, with the import of ‘Marxism’ into India, did not bother whether the ‘homogeneous’ mode of production was ever present in Indian social history, and the ‘valuable’ results of the historical research including the pro-Marxist historians like D.D.Kosambi, Romila Thapar, etc, warranted to explore ‘the ‘heterogeneous’ mode of production, unknown to the founders of Marxism, like Karl Marx and Engels. (Is globalization a new Marxist Avatar?;  (Or Heterogeneous Societies and the Mode of Production); http://tamilsdirection.blogspot.in/2013/12/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.html   )

Hope the observations of Romila Thapar ( pages 13- 15; ‘ON NATIONALISM’) w.r.t “the most notable achievements in knowledge of various kinds , from literature to mathematics", during the pre-colonial period of the Indian history, will ‘enlighten’ the pro-EVR & staunch anti-Hindutva followers in Tamilnadu, who may start acknowledging the similar achievements in Tamilnadu, during that phase, and stop decrying the Tamil language, literature, heritage, and culture.

Also her observations w.r.t JNU could be compared with my blog post ‘Is JNU student leader Kanhaiya Kumar aware of the 'discrimination' in the 'human rights support ', with the probable 'hidden agenda’? What about the azadi  from the lack of   transparency, accountability, & social justice in funding the universities?; ( http://tamilsdirection.blogspot.in/2016/03/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.html )

While discussing “Negritude” w.r.t “black African Identity’, Romila Thapar had observed: “The point that I would like to make is that any term used in one historical context can be differently used in another.”

Her discussion on nationalism w.r.t “Negritude” and w.r.t ‘Hindutva’, seemed to follow two different scales of approach.

On reading Romila Thapar’s article in  ‘ON NATIONALISM’, one will be surprised, as why she failed to take note of the following pro-Hindutva writings/evidences, instead of selectively referring to those, that would fit into her branding of the Hindutva style nationalism. 

The semantic trap of the western origin words;

like caste  (The English word "caste" derives from the Spanish and Portuguese casta, which the Oxford English Dictionary quotes John Minsheu's Spanish dictionary (1599) to mean, "race, lineage, or breed".[10] When the Spanish colonized the New World, they used the word to mean a "clan or lineage." However, it was the Portuguese who employed casta in the primary modern sense when they applied it to the thousands of in-marrying hereditary Indian social groups they encountered upon their arrival in India in 1498;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste  ;  "colonialism in India produced new forms of civil society which have been represented as traditional forms; chief among these is caste itself.................
colonialism seems to have created much of what is now accepted as Indian "tradition," including an autonomous caste structure with the Brahman clearly and unambiguously at the head, village based systems of exchange, .  isolated ceremonial residues of the old regime state, and fetishistic competition for ritual goods that no longer played a vital role in the political system."
'THE INVENTION OF CASTE: CIVIL SOCIETY IN COLONIAL INDIA'
Nicholas B. Dirks (1988);

 religion, Hindu, nation, nationalism, classical & folk;

denying the evolution of the Indian rooted meanings and concepts through the process of modernization without westernization, is now effectively challenged, as the following evidences/writings prove.

1. "One well, one temple and one crematorium" for all Hindus— that's going to be the key strategy of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in the next three years as it seeks to unite all those who profess the faith by ending caste discrimination and bringing back to the fold those it sees as having moved away. It's also looking to make the Northeast a focus area, expand in the south and push to give regional languages greater importance as opposed to the learning of "a foreign language".

The Economic Times Mar 16, 2015,

2. ‘Meet the RSS leader who changed fortunes of a Muslim village’; Villagers in Jharkhand’s Hafua say he is a befitting example to contradict those who equate the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangha (RSS) with the terror group Islamic State and its leaders with terrorists.; http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/sidhi-nath-singh-rss-leader-who-changed-fortunes-of-a-muslim-village/story-TzNs5QU2WgGw4iQiLYUVAN.html

3. The BJP had also laid emphasis on teaching in local Indian languages as these are considered “repositories of rich literature, history, culture, art and scientific achievements.” 

The New Indian Express- 04th September 2015

4. ' Call it quality, or an urge to get good education from wherever it comes, there has been a sharp rise in the number of Muslim students in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-run schools in UP.'

The Times of India Jun 20, 2016

5. Excerpts: “ The concept of secularism evolved in the mono-religious Christendom. As a result of the misapplication of this Christian concept to the multi-religious Hindu Dharma, which does not distinguish between different faiths and accepts all faiths, the Hindu Dharma was itself equated to the exclusive Abrahamic faiths. This has made an understanding of the meaning of Hindu Dharma even more difficult.

Secularism is a concept evolved within Christianity; it was never designed to handle a multi-religious situation. Only the Hindu tradition, and certainly not Christian secularism, has accepted and handled a situation where multiple religions are accorded validity. This fact has not been internalised in the understanding of secularism in free India. We have refused to understand that outside the history and geography of India there is no multi-religious social, cultural and political matrix which can be presented as a benchmark for this ancient nation. We have tried, incorrectly and inappropriately, to make the secularism of Christendom as benchmark for this ancient nation’s modern polity. Consequently, understanding of different elements of ancient India has been rendered difficult in modern conditions, conditions for which the rules have been laid by Christendom…….

To understand Hindu Dharma one has to be clear about the meaning of the   word Hindu and also the import of what Dharma means. Both words are difficult to define, but the word “Dharma” is even more difficult to comprehend, particularly in English. This is a word that the ordinary people of this country understand and apply in their day-to-day life, but it is difficult for even scholars to properly define for scholarly discussion. For, Dharma is based on experience, rather than explanation. For the intellectual, explanation is more important than experience; and, for the ordinary, experience is more important than explanation.

If the word ‘Hindu’ signifies the collective identity of the people of this ancient land, than their experience of the world and life enshrined in a continuously evolving belief system approximates to the idea of Hinduism. The Hindu experience, or Hinduism, is the longest known and living continuity in the world. And perhaps the most chequered one. The Hindu tryst with humans – why? – with all living creatures, and with nature and in fact the entire creation, has been a fascinating story of a civilisation that grappled with the complexities of humans and of the creation as whole on a practical plane.

This civilisation had the wisdom to let the accumulated human experience to handle current human problems, even as it firmly believed that the eternal values of creation would continue to guide the destiny of humans….

As a faith, Hinduism is inclusive, and inner-directed. It does not impose itself on its own adherents. So no question of its imposing itself on others arises. This principle of life has been observed and unfailingly put into practice by the inhabitants of this land since time immemorial. That was why they could receive invading Sakas and Hunas and assimilate them and integrate them into their society. That was why they could receive the Jews, Parsis, Shia Muslims and the early Christians – all of whom came as refugees, with their thoughts and beliefs orphaned in their own lands – and treat them as equal members of this ancient society. There was no modern constitution that guaranteed rights to minorities then; there were no secularists to protect them from the majority. It was the majority inhabitants, seeped in their Hindu Dharma, who protected them. The non-conflicting nature of Hindu Dharma is not just a matter of theory, but an observed practice that has been followed and adhered to for ages. “

Hindutva: the kinetic effect of Hindu Dharma
by S. Gurumurthy

( http://cpsindia.org/index.php/art/132-articles-by-s-gurumurthy/179-hindutva-the-kinetic-effect-of-hindu-dharma  )