How 'Bharat vs India' debate ensued while finalising Constitution text

It is not the first time that a debate on replacing the name ‘India’ with 'Bharat' has picked up pace.

A nomenclature war started on September 5 when dinner invitations to G20 leaders were sent out in the name of ‘President of Bharat,’ instead of the usual ‘President of India.’ This is perhaps the most intensified nomenclature war waged by the ruling regime after a series of name changes of important roads and cities across the nation, because now it is the country’s name itself that has spiraled into focus.

Opposition leaders lashed out at the Union government saying that the BJP government now wants to change the name of the country "just because the opposition got together and called itself I.N.D.I.A". However, BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Ajay Alok have defended the government saying that there is not going to be any name change “as according to the Constitution, Bharat and India are synonymous.”

It is not the first time that a debate on expelling the name ‘India’ has picked up pace. The Samajwadi Party, engulfed in its ‘Hindi’ nationalism, had called for India to be renamed 'Bharat' in its manifesto for the 2004 general elections.

The Sangh Parivar's Vishwa Hindu Parishad had voiced the demand for 'Hindustan' in 2003, and BJP's Subramanian Swamy did the same in 2013.

Amid all the chaos over 'India vs Bharat' debate, let’s look into what constituent assembly deliberations on naming of the country suggested.

The first draft moved in by Dr Ambedkar on November 4,1948 didn’t have the name 'Bharat'. Though some members flagged the omission of native name, it was only one year later that the issue was discussed at length. On September 18,1949, Ambedkar moved an amendment to the Article 1 of the earlier draft, mentioning, “India, that is Bharat shall be a Union of States”.

However, Constituent assembly member H V Kamath had suggested two alternatives : "Bharat, or in the English language India, shall be a union of states" and "Hind, or in the English language India, shall be a union of states". He stressed on specifying ‘in the English language’ as in many other countries "India was still known as Hindustan". When asked to pick one, he chose Bharat over Hind. This was followed by an intense debate with many members demanded the usage of the word 'Bharat'.

Seth Govind Das argued that not India, but Bharat is mentioned in Vedas, Mahabharata, Upanishads, etc.

Kallur Subba Rao said the name 'India' suited Pakistan more, because the name has origins in Indus river, which was in Pakistan. Ram Sahai Tiwari also rooted for 'Bharat', saying that the Union of Gwalior, Indore and Malwa called itself ‘Madhya bharat'.

Kamlalapati Tripathi thereafter said that "Bharat, that is India" was more proper to use as it in accordance with the "sentiments and prestige" of the country.

Ambedkar, who was in a hurry, responded to him saying, “Is all this necessary sir..there is a lot of work to be done.” After one more intervention by Hargovind Pant, who suggested 'Bharat varsha', a vote of hands was taken. With 38 ayes and 51 noes, the original wording of the Constitution remained.

(With inputs from The Times of India)