What we owe to the British

Kishore Gandhi The Pioneer Thursday, September 09, 2005

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's observation at Oxford provoked a long and acrimonious controversy in the media. Among those involved in the academic debate was Mr Khushwant Singh who, in a rare display of righteousness, took the critics of the Prime Minister to task. True, the storm has blown over, but, nonetheless, one must look into the Prime Minister's statement as they are reflective of an ethos.

Though there were aberrations like the Jalianwalla Bagh tragedy, the most fascinating legacy of the British rule in India has been the liberal humanistic tradition that it firmly implanted in the country. Looking at the British rule from a literary perspective, one is moved by the dialogue between Fielding and Dr Aziz in EM Forster's classic, A Passage to India (1924). In the novel, Dr Aziz vociferously asserts: "India shall be a nation! No foreigners of any sort! Hindu and Moslem and Sikh and all shall be one! Hurrah! Hurrah for India! Hurrah! Hurrah!"

"...India a nation! What an apotheosis!" ridiculed Fielding. But Dr Aziz retorted with anger: "Down with the English anyhow. That's certain. Clear out, you fellow, double quick, I say. We may hate one another, but we hate you most. If I do not make you go, Ahmed will, Karim will. We shall drive every Englishman into the sea..." But Dr Aziz concluded the argument with an emotional touch; he kissed Fielding and said, "You and I shall be friends." Perhaps it was this sentiment that Mr Manmohan Singh was carrying forward when he recounted the contribution of the British rule in India.

But the defence put forward by certain experts in favour of the British rule in India was quite intriguing. They seemed to ignore the fact that the impact of the British was deep and multi-faceted. They have only highlighted the developmental dimension relating to the introduction of modern educational, legal, administrative and social reforms that - explicitly or implicitly - contributed towards the growth of national consciousness and finally the end of the British Empire.

What they have overlooked is the most significant contribution of the Raj. The philosophy of the East India Company was brilliantly summed up by Warren Hastings, the first Governor General of Bengal: "To rule effectively, one must love India, her people, communicate with her people and acquire her language and culture." The most important contribution of the British rule occurred during the governor generalship of Lord Bentinck. In fact, no single act of British policy has had a more lasting influence than the decision in 1835 "to support education in the English language" and "adopt the curriculum prevalent in English schools".

The efforts of Sir William Jones to establish the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784 was an important move forward. After all, it was under the aegis of this society that Sir William Jones translated Kalidas's classic, Abhijnana Shakuntalam, in 1789, which aroused European interest in the orient. Further, it was the efforts of European archaeologists, philologists, indologists and linguists that helped in deciphering ancient Indian scripts, writing regional histories and developing modern Indian languages.

Carrying this tradition forward, Professor Wilson published an edition of Kalhan's Rajtarangini - a history of Kashmir - in 1825. Similarly, Brian Hodgson wrote the History of Nepal, Grant Duff published the History of Maratha, Cunningham wrote the History of Sikhs and J Todd compiled the Annals and Antiques of Rajasthan. Further, Monier Williams and Max Mueller did a pioneering work to bring forth the classical history of India.

These sustained efforts of English scholars stirred the soul of a long slumbering nation, which led to the birth of nationalism. KM Pannikar has correctly summed up the impact of English education in the following words: "English was in fact the language of Hindu reformation and without it, though the Hindu religion would no doubt have been reformed and society reorganised, any movement would have been regional and the unity of India would have been further broken up."

One should not ignore the fact that some of the outstanding personalities in Hindu reformation - Swami Vivekanand, Sri Aurobindo, Rabindranath Tagore, Mahatma Gandhi, S Radhakrishnan, etc. - were mostly educated in English universities, and wrote extensively in the language of their colonial masters. While viewing the strengths and weaknesses of the British rule, one must not overlook the economic exploitation and mass poverty perpetrated by the Raj. But this must not belittle the role of the British in arousing the soul of India. The British rule had profound influence not only on the future of India's politics, but also every facet of the country's life.

In true spirits of Rig Veda - "Let noble thoughts come to us from all side" - India has always been receptive to innovative ideas and impulses, and imbibed modern technology that could stimulate creative thought process. Later, this receptivity was discouraged due the degeneration of Indian society in the post-Gupta period, when the sublime philosophical doctrines and mystical traditions were put beneath narrow caste loyalties and social restrictions. Herein lies the importance of the British rule, which revived the essence of Indian culture. If Mr Manmohan Singh humbly accepts this reality and appreciates the role of the British in stirring the soul of India, one must appreciate it wholeheartedly. Graceful appreciation of this fact will only vindicate the claim that India has matured as a nation.