Scholars debunk claims that Vedas are pillars of Indian Constitution
Claims are being made that India is the ‘Mother of Democracy’, whose democratic practices can be traced back to 5,000 BCE; how much of this is supported by evidence?
From chess to plastic surgery to Fibonacci numbers to fibre optics, WhatsApp forwards credit India with several contributions to the world. A relatively recent entrant to the list is democracy as a concept and a practice.
Claims are being made that ancient religious texts such as the Vedas and Upanishads form the basis for the Constitution of India, which was adopted on November 26, 1949. Some go a step further, claiming the world owes the concept to India — the ‘Mother of Democracy’ whose democratic practices can be traced back to 5,000 BCE.
The Federal webinar: ‘Slow death of parliamentary democracy in India’
A recent circular by the University Grants Commission (UGC) linking the Vedas with the Constitution, and remarks by Prime Minister Narendra Modi calling India the Mother of Democracy, have turned the spotlight on these claims.
Manusmriti in the mix?
Scholars The Federal spoke to outright rejected claims of vedic influence on the Constitution. The Constituent Assembly studied the pros and cons of various democracies and their constitutions, said Ramu Manivannan, former Head of the Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Madras.
If ancient religious texts were said to have been taken into consideration for drafting the Constitution, was Manusmriti also part of it, questioned C Lakshmanan, Associate Professor, Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS). Manusmriti, a religious text estimated to have originated anywhere between 2nd century BCE and 3rd century CE, deals with the social roles and obligations of various castes and gender — concepts seen as undemocratic and unconstitutional today.
“When your birth decides your position, privilege and power, how can you call it a democracy? How can you connect it with the Constitution framed by the Constituent Assembly?” questioned Lakshmanan in an interaction with The Federal.
Manivannan asserted that no nation can claim to be the sole creator of democracy. “Modern democracy began around 1,500 AD,” he said. “Any one nation cannot claim credit for being the cradle of democracy; instead, it evolved over a period, from all over the world.”
UGC’s Constitution Day directive
On November 26, Constitution Day, the UGC issued a circular to all higher education institutions to celebrate the event around the theme of “India: The Mother of Democracy”. There were also sub-themes which described khap panchayats as a form of age-old democracy in India. The UGC circular further claimed India had democracy “at least from 5,000 BCE” — which scholars dispute.
Opinion: 70 years after its first elections, India is a ‘flawed’ democracy
The reasons over which BR Ambedkar, the Father of the Indian Constitution, walked out of the Constituent Assembly reflect the state of democracy in the country then, experts observe.
“Rights and equality are the foundations of democracy. But Ambedkar was barred from adding clauses empowering women,” said Lakshmanan. “For instance, the Hindu Code Bill drafted by Ambedkar provided women with sexual rights, which was objected to by people like Dakshayani Velayudhan.”
Dakshayani Velayudhan was among the 15 women who were part of the Constituent Assembly. She hailed from an underprivileged Pulayar (Dalit) community in Kerala. “They weren’t aware Ambedkar was fighting for their democratic rights. If it is the case with drafting the Constitution after Independence, how can India claim to be the mother of all democracies?” wondered Lakshmanan.
Key landmarks
Buddha Sanghas are said to be one of the oldest forms of democracy, which too didn’t find a place in the discussion. “Democracy is not majoritarianism. It is about discussion, debate and consent. And Buddha Sangha stood for all of them,” said Lakshmanan.
Buddhism is supposed to have originated in the Indian subcontinent 2,500 years ago.
Scholars don’t deny some form of democracy would have existed in various parts of the world during various time periods.
Civilians have had channels of communication with their rulers to redress their grievances, said Manivannan. “All of those can be termed as forms of democracy. But the rise of Buddhism, Renaissance and Reformation, French Revolution, US Declaration of Independence, and US Civil War are key landmarks in the evolution of modern democracy,” he said.
Opinion: In an era of cancel culture, democracy could be in universal decline
What we call modern democracy also has its own pitfalls, said Manivannan. “We are following the Westminster model of top-down governance. That has to be kept in mind,” he pointed out.
Universal voting rights
Given the caste dynamics, it is difficult to define democracy in the Indian subcontinent, said Lakshmanan. The kudavolai (palm leaves in a box) method followed by Chola kings around 920 AD to elect village administrators is also under question.
“It is true leaflets were taken from a pot for a kind of democratic election of village administration. But what if a whole lot of people were denied from participating in it?” he asked. Caste and other forms of discrimination were prevalent in Indian society then, which kept people away from the mainstream, he added.
Watch: Indian democracy: Of, by, for the people? | Off The Beaten Track Episode 5
Voting rights, which are a key part of democracy, were denied to a large section of the population globally on various grounds. Often, only those who owned a piece of land were given these rights.
Until 1856, the rule was prevalent in the US (North Carolina). The 1909 Morley-Minto Reforms provided voting rights in British-ruled India, which was based on land ownership and education. Women suffrage too went through various challenges and time delays. This debunks the theory of contiguous flow of democracy hailing from India, as claimed.
Political leaders often play to the gallery, especially when elections are round the corner. But that the UGC, the apex body of higher educational institutions in India, is endorsing and encouraging this school of thought is of concern, said the experts.