New Dehli, (Tamsil Shahezad Khan) : In a pivotal moment of India's history, the Constituent Assembly embarked on a passionate debate that would determine the nation's name, ultimately leading to the adoption of Article 1 of the Constitution of India. The discussion, which began on November 17, 1948, was a testament to the profound significance of this decision.
Governor General's Suggestion Delays the Debate The initial plan was to commence the debate on Article 1 on November 17, 1948. However, on the suggestion of Govind Ballabh Pant, a prominent figure in the assembly, the discussion on the nation's name was temporarily postponed.
'Bharat' vs. 'India': A Heated Exchange of Ideas
Fast forward to September 17, 1949, when Dr. B. R. Ambedkar presented the final version of the provision, which featured both 'Bharat' and 'India'. This momentous occasion sparked intense deliberations among the assembly members.
Critics of 'India' as a Reminder of Colonial Rule
Many assembly members voiced their concerns about using 'India,' viewing it as a painful reminder of the colonial past. Seth Govind Das, hailing from Jabalpur, advocated for placing 'Bharat' above 'India.' Additionally, there was a prevailing demand to emphasize that 'India' served as a substitute for 'Bharat' in the English language.
An Insight from Irish Constitution
Hari Vishnu Kamath drew parallels with the Irish Constitution to argue that 'India' was merely a translation of 'Bharat.' The Irish Constitution, he pointed out, referred to the change in the name of the land, reading, "The name of the State is Eire, or, in the English language, Ireland."
The People's Preference: 'Bharatvarsha'
Hargovind Pant, representing the hill districts of the United Provinces, made it unequivocally clear that the people of Northern India desired 'Bharatvarsha' and nothing else. He highlighted the foreign origins of the name 'India,' emphasizing the need to shed this imposed identity.
Ancient References to 'Bharat'
Several assembly members cited ancient texts and references, such as the Vishnu Purana, Brahma Purana, and the accounts of the Chinese traveler Hiuen Tsang from the 7th century, all of which acknowledged the country as 'Bharat.' This historical and cultural connection resonated deeply with many.
Conclusion: 'Bharat' Ascends
In the end, the Constituent Assembly chose to include both 'Bharat' and 'India' in the final provision of Article 1. Dr. Ambedkar reminded the assembly that the essence of the debate was whether 'Bharat' should come after 'India,' a seemingly minor yet profoundly symbolic decision.
As the nation moved forward, this choice encapsulated the rich history, culture, and aspirations of India, forging a path towards a new era while honoring its ancient heritage.
