Translated from Bengali – https://tagoreweb.in/Essays/bharatbarsha-28/bharatbarsher-itihas-1404 – on ChatGPT:
The history of India that we read, memorize, and take exams on is merely a narrative of a nightmare during India’s night. Various groups came from different places, fought and slaughtered, and engaged in power struggles for the throne. When one group left, another rose to power—Pathans, Mughals, Portuguese, French, and English all contributed to making this dream increasingly complex.
However, if we look at India through this blood-stained, ever-changing nightmare, we fail to see the true India. These histories do not provide answers to where the Indian people are. It’s as if Indians do not exist, only those who engaged in violence are visible.
Even during those dark times, the primary affairs of India were not just about violence and killing. Just as in a storm, the storm itself is not the most significant event despite its noise—during those times, life continued in the village homes with births, deaths, joys, and sorrows, which, though overshadowed, remained central to human life. To a foreign traveler, the storm appears predominant, and the dust overshadows everything else because they are outside, not inside. Hence, in the foreigner’s history, we only find tales of dust and storms, not the stories of homes. Reading such history, it seems India did not exist then; it was just the uproar of Mughal-Pathan storms sweeping from north to south and west to east.
But when foreigners were present, the nation was also there. Otherwise, who gave birth to Kabir, Nanak, Chaitanya, Tukaram, and others amid these troubles? During those times, there was not only Delhi and Agra, but also Kashi and Nabadwip. The life stream flowing within true India, the waves of efforts rising, and the social changes occurring—these are not found in history.
Yet, it is with this India outside of the current textbooks that we are connected. Without this historical link spanning many years, our hearts find no refuge. We are not weeds or parasites of India; our thousands of roots have secured India’s core through centuries. But unfortunately, we read such history that makes our children forget this very fact. It seems like we are nobody in India, only foreigners appear to be everyone.
When our connection with our own country is perceived as insignificant, where will we draw life from? In such a state, it’s not difficult for us to replace our homeland with foreign lands—India’s disgrace does not evoke extreme shame in us. We easily say that we had nothing in the past, and now we must beg from foreigners for food, clothing, and manners.
Fortunate countries find their eternal homeland within their history; history acquaints them with their country from childhood. Our case is the opposite. Our history obscures our homeland. The tales from Mahmud’s invasion to Lord Curzon’s imperial boasts form a strange mist over India, obscuring our view of the homeland. It casts artificial light in places that make our country seem dark. In that darkness, the jewels of the dancers in the Nawab’s luxurious halls shine, the blood-red froth of the emperor’s wine appears like the fierce eyes of madness; in that darkness, our ancient temples bow their heads, and the marble tombs of Sultan’s beloved rise to kiss the stars. In that darkness, the sound of horses’ hooves, the trumpeting of elephants, the clanging of weapons, the pallid waves of distant camps, the golden glimmer of the brocade coverlets, the foamy domes of mosques, the silence of mystery in the palace interiors guarded by eunuchs—all these combine to create a magnificent illusion that we call the history of India. But what good is it? It has covered the sacred texts of India with a marvelous Arabian tale—no one opens those texts, and children memorize every line of that Arabian tale. Then, when the Mughal Empire is dying in the night of destruction, the deceit, tricks, and conflicts among distant vultures at the burial ground—is this the history of India? And then, the checkerboard British rule, dividing into five-year segments, makes India even smaller; indeed, the checkerboard differs only in that it is not equally black and white—fifteen-sixteenths of it is white. We buy good governance, justice, and education from a grand wholesale shop called the White Way, but all other shops are closed. This factory may excel in everything from justice to trade, but India’s place in a corner of the clerical office is very insignificant.
One must abandon the superstition that all history should be the same. Someone seasoned with the biography of Rothschild might demand accounting ledgers and office diaries when studying Christ’s life; if unable to collect these, he may scorn and say, “What life is there for one who had no money?” Similarly, those who despair at not finding political documents from India’s royal genealogies and battles in India’s history seek brinjal in a paddy field, and if they don’t find it, they dismiss rice as grain out of frustration. The wise person expects appropriate crops in their proper place.
Reading Christ’s ledger may generate scorn, but seeking his other qualities diminishes the importance of ledgers. Similarly, considering India impoverished in political matters, one can overlook this poverty from another perspective. We belittle India and ourselves from childhood by not seeing it from its perspective. An English child knows his ancestors conquered lands and thrived in trade; he too aspires for martial, wealth, and state glory. We know our ancestors didn’t conquer lands or expand trade—this is the only purpose of India’s history. We don’t know what they did, so we don’t know what to do. Therefore, we imitate others. Whom to blame? The method of education from childhood daily disconnects us from our country, gradually creating a rebellious attitude towards it.
Even our educated people, bewildered, often ask, “What is the special essence of our country, where is it, where was it?” Asking these questions yields no answer because it is so subtle and vast that it cannot be grasped by reason alone. Neither English nor French can succinctly express their national essence or the core of their country— it is a self-evident truth, like life in the body, yet elusive to definition and concept. It enters our knowledge, love, and imagination from childhood through unseen paths, shaping us profoundly—preventing a gap between past and present. By its grace, we are significant and not disconnected. How can we express this diverse, dynamic ancient strength to a skeptical inquirer with a few definitions?
India’s primary achievement, if someone clearly asks, has an answer; its history will support this. India has always sought to establish unity amidst diversity, aligning various paths towards one goal, and realizing the one amidst many—integrating differences without destroying them, recognizing the deep connection within apparent differences.
Perceiving the one and striving for unity is very natural for India. This nature has made it indifferent to state glory, for state glory’s root is the feeling of opposition. Those who don’t perceive others as entirely alien can’t consider political glory as life’s ultimate goal! The effort to establish oneself against others is the basis of political progress, while the effort to bond with others and establish harmony amidst internal divisions is the basis of moral and social progress. European civilization bases its unity on opposition; Indian civilization bases its unity on integration. Europe’s political unity harbors seeds of discord, keeping it tied against others but failing to provide internal harmony. Thus, it perpetually awakens division and discord among individuals, rulers, subjects, rich, and poor. They are not collectively supporting society with their respective rights, but are opposed to each other—each side striving to prevent the other’s empowerment. Where there is a struggle, there can be no balance of power—over time, population surpasses merit, enterprise outshines virtue, and merchant wealth overpowers household treasuries—this destroys social harmony and requires constant new laws to barely keep these disparate forces together. This is inevitable. Discord breeds discord; the flourishing sight in between is the robust tree of discord’s crop.
India has tried to bind the discordant in relationships. True differences must be organized and restrained to achieve unity. Simply decreeing unity does not make everyone one. Those who are not meant to be unified must be connected by proper means—dividing them into distinct rights. Forcing the distinct to be one leads to eventual violent separation, resulting in destruction. India knew the secret of harmonious integration. The French Revolution tried to erase all human differences with blood, but the result was opposite—Europe’s power divides into ruler and ruled, rich and poor, increasingly opposing each other. India aimed to bind all in unity, using distinct means. India divided and limited competing social forces, making society one and diverse for various functions, without perpetually igniting discord by continuous overstepping of rights. It didn’t stir constant unrest in religion, work, and home through relentless struggle among all powers. Unity, integration, and full achievement and liberation in peace and stability were India’s goals.
The creator has drawn diverse races to India. Indian Aryans have had the opportunity to practice their strength since ancient times. The unifying civilization, which is humanity’s ultimate civilization, India has always been constructing with diverse elements. India has neither expelled anyone as alien nor ridiculed anything as inappropriate. It has accepted everything. Despite taking in so much, to preserve itself, India had to establish its own order and discipline among these accumulated materials—it cannot let them clash like beasts in a battlefield. They must be divided, disciplined, and united by a fundamental idea. The materials may come from anywhere, but the discipline and fundamental idea are India’s. Europe keeps outsiders at bay to secure society; we see this in America, Australia, New Zealand, and Cape Colony. This is because Europe lacks internal order
. A fortress can stand amidst foes, but a country cannot. India never built a fortress for this reason. In this way, a solid, inclusive Indian civilization emerged over centuries, managing so much without losing itself. This civilization, based on unity and diversity, and the ability to harmonize and integrate, flourished naturally and internally without any external intervention or reason. In India, where such internal order prevails, only a disaster like the Plague can disrupt it, whereas in Europe, constant changes in work and wages, sudden interruptions in professions and businesses, and individual shifts of strength unsettle society, requiring numerous methods of order maintenance—yet, actual order remains absent.
The power Europe sees as state-building and human development, the old Indian vision cannot perceive. It knows the futility of such external effort. Therefore, foreigners label Indians as weak and divided. It’s natural they would, for they see no eternal human effort except in state-building and external success. They can’t acknowledge the eternal efforts in India, for such efforts are indeed rare. The way India has organized itself—this eternal human civilization has its evidence. And such civilization isn’t prone to ruin easily. Europe’s modern civilization is fundamentally discordant. It must face attacks from within and without. When the fall is near, even the highest external civilization cannot preserve it. Therefore, the materials Europe has built, becoming more unstable as it progresses, might get blown away with a light touch. Europe does not aim for peace; therefore, it neither gets peace nor can give it. It carries the unrestrained power of both good and evil, unable to preserve the balance between the two.
What India has found in its thousand-year history is peace, harmony, and balance of power; this is the gift of the divine. Therefore, the civilization Europe calls blind and insensible might be blind and insensible from the European perspective, but the history of these millennia in India holds a significant meaning. It has survived because it is truly and fundamentally human.
Know Thyself 