This is my second post on the same question, What is India? Who is an Indian? What do I mean when I say "Im proud to be an Indian"?
Today in the Gandhi course, Pranav raised this issue and we had some discussion on it. Though in the end the discussion became a bit aggressive (mainly because of me, dont know what I get aggressive), but the question is still unresolved in my mind. Who am I? What is being Indian?
Prior to 1947, everyone on this part of the world was Indian (or hindustani). Then there was a power struggle and some bad politics was placed, which resulted in modern India and modern Pakistan. Does that change the identity of the people living in it? All of a sudden people in a village became Pakistanis, while half a mile towards east, their friends and relatives continued to be Indians. And in this decision, they had no role to play. If tomorrow say India was to get divided again into India 1 and India 2, then what will I be? Will I still be an Indian? What identity will I give to my children.
This is difficult for me to imagine, but I'm sure it's a real question to the people two generations back who faced partition. This question is also relevant to those living on either side of LOC in Kashmir.
Does our identity come from the 'name' of the land we live in, we were born in, our ancestors belong to? Do we identify ourselves with the land or the 'name' of the land? Do we identify ourselves to land or the people? Am I born in the land called India or am I born in a family, in a society which consists of people. Will I still relate to India the land, if the people change (say we go to Europe and Europeans come here)?
These questions are still unanswered in my mind, and the more I think on it the more aggressive I get. I dont know why.
But if someone was to ask me how to identify Indians, or what is distinct about Indians, then the closest answer I can think of is, Indianess is a way one relates to land. In this region of the world, I feel there is a distinct way of relating to land, of the way one sees land (matr bhoomi). This definition of course does not hold true for those of us who live in cities. But I feel, one who is born in a village, who lives in a village, who does farming, for him there is a distinct relation with land. And this relation is the same in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Srilanka, Nepal, Bhutan etc. But as I said this is the closest answer I could think of, and its not fully accurate. Im still looking for a better definition of what an Indian is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
True that no country can merely be defined by physical boundry. May be it's the culture and the kind of the mixed-region/religion practises being followed in India that we don't find anywhere else.
If you think of an India before division, I belive I would have been able to relate my Indianness while staying in Lahor, as I would find the same kind of oneness of the culture-mix being followed there too (of course with some minor changes here and there). But if someone throws me in Lahor now, when it has become Pakistan terretory, I dont think I would be able to relate to anything there, even though the very land on which I would stand remains unchagned. In fact what exactly have changed in that part of the land? Soil is the same. People are also the same (x-Indians). Only change is, instead of mix-flavour of culture, now I find only one flavour being followed, which I am not the part of!
Still just as you, I too don't have the true definition of a country!
Obviously, the notion of a country has got a lot to do with borders. But, I sense that your quest for defining an Indian goes much deeper. For me, it's mainly the history, the culture and the way we live.
Ever wondered why I always think/say that I wanna do something towards a just "world", as opposed to a just "India"? That's not because I wanna reach out beyond India as well. I mean, I don't mind doing it, but I really don't have any such plans because my country has enough people being treated unjustly.
The real point is that I wanna work for people in general, innocent people to be precise. If I start limiting them based on borders, I may as well say I am a Gujarati, so I won't help a Kannadiga or a Marathi. The fixation with borders has to be given a serious look-in.
- Pulkit [http://pulzinponderland.wordpress.com]
Post a Comment