JOIN USPreventing future Ambedkars from being born
The guidelines for the National Overseas Scholarship Scheme (NOS) of the Union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment meant for the students from the SC, ST communities and landless labourer families seeking to study abroad have been changed. The new circular says, "topics/courses concerning Indian Culture/heritage/History/Social studies on India based research topic shall not be covered under NOS. The final decision as to which topic can be covered under such category will rest with Selection-cum-Screening Committee of NOS."
Students who want to study with the best scholars, working on the barred topics, in such universities cannot avail of this scholarship. Moreover, they are being told that the final decision on the topics for which the scholarship will be given rests with the screening committee. The students from these communities are being told that they have to follow the government's guidance while deciding their areas of study if they want to earn this fellowship. The universities outside will find it bizarre, but for the Indian government, it is common sense. "I am giving you money. So, I have the right to tell you what you should study by using it," is the message.
One can easily see the insecure minds behind this decision. To take away from the students their freedom to decide what they should study is driven by the fear that if left to themselves, the students might come in contact with a critical understanding of their culture, heritage, history and society and their country.
Ironically the best scholars of Braj, Awadhi, Sanskrit, Urdu, Persian, Arabic are to be found in universities outside India. These universities do have Indian and South Asian faculty members, but scholars in the fields mentioned are not necessarily Indian. Studying with David Shulman, Allison Busch, Francesca Orsini, Imre Bangha is a dream all aspiring scholars of their fields have.
Scholars interested in the Hindi of the 19th century would have felt privileged if given a chance to study with Vasudha Dalmia, who was at the University of California, Berkeley, before retirement. Similarly, the archives which give you a window into our history are also housed at many places abroad. If you want to get all the Hindi small magazines and journals, you go to Heidelberg University.
With the new notification, the government is basically saying that it would not support students from the SC, ST communities and landless labourer families if they want to access this knowledge.
The scholarship scheme, meant to help students from SC, ST and landless agricultural labourer families pursue postgraduate education at the top universities outside India, was started in 1954 under the government of prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru. For a newly independent country to take such a policy decision shows that it wanted its youth, especially from those sections of the society which had been kept out of the field of knowledge for centuries, to work with the best minds in the world. Even if the number of students getting it was small, it showed the intent of the government. It was to create a critical mass of scholarship within these communities. To give intellectual leadership in their knowledge areas.
The students were unfettered in their choice of knowledge areas while seeking support under this scheme. Why are they being restrained now? The government has given a laughable explanation: "Topics related to India-based research such as Indian culture/heritage/history/social studies can be undertaken in top Indian institutes, central universities, etc., as the student will get more practical expertise and knowledge by learning/studying from Indian professors who would have more experience and practical knowledge about the subject than their counterparts in foreign universities. In any case, students pursuing these topics need to spend a large portion of their course period in India for conducting their research."
It is not a case of having more experience and practical knowledge. It assumes that you are bound to know more about it since you were born in India. Scholarship is about diversity and not only about the mass of information and your proximity to your subject. Indian universities cannot claim to have names comparable to those mentioned above in their areas. If you want to study Dara Shukoh, you must go to Supriya Gandhi at Yale University. And what better name to teach you Mahatma Gandhi than Anthony Parel, an Indian working in Canada? Why can't Indian students have the freedom to work with them?
It is not very difficult to understand the reason behind this decision. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government believes in cultural nationalism and wants the universities to tailor all their academic programmes to spread this ideology. We know that research institutions like the Indian Council for Historical Research (ICHR) and Indian Council For Social Science Research (ICSSR) have been taken over by people subscribing to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) ideological line. They ensure that their research grants are used to strengthen this ideology. Given the long history of scholarship in India, the government has not succeeded in vulgarising the syllabi of all universities, but it is constantly working towards that. It becomes evident if you look at the model syllabus of history and Sanskrit proposed by the University Grants Commission (UGC). It also does not want the category of caste to be studied critically.
The new regime wants people to forget the meaning of scholarship, which is primarily aimed at inculcating a critical mind eager to examine everything. It harps on Vedas but does not want a critical study of the Vedas. It only asks people to worship them. I saw hoardings put up by the government on the roads of Delhi with the inscription: "Science is worshipped everywhere". But science is impossible without scientific temper, and science is not an object to be worshipped! If India had all the knowledge it has somehow forgotten, and all you need to do is go back to the Vedas, then there is no need and no possibility of new knowledge.
It is becoming more apparent that if it continues like this, true scholarship about the history, culture and society will only be possible in universities outside the country where there is no intellectual censoring and policing.
Restricting the freedom of the knowledge seeker from communities, which were never considered to have minds and only as resources for the upper castes to build their material and cultural life, fits into a pattern. It is an expression of the Brahmanical order that the regime in power wishes to install by creating a 'Hindu Rashtra'. In its desperation to gain control over all aspects of national life, those in the current government want to define what knowledge is and who qualifies to be certified as 'knowledgeable'. It fears young minds from marginalised communities turning into questioning minds. They cannot be allowed to be intellectual leaders. They can be the backroom boys and carriers of the RSS ideology.
What contact with the best and the free do to someone from an underprivileged background can be seen from the example of Baba Saheb Ambedkar. He brought the republican values of US philosophers and thinkers with him after studying abroad. It must be remembered he availed the scholarship given by the Gaekwad of Baroda. He had instituted it for students who wanted to study abroad. He placed no restrictions on the areas of study. It helped the young Ambedkar get intellectual nourishment from great minds like Professor John Dewey, Professor James Shotwell, Professor Edwin R A Seligman and others. It shaped his thinking and made him what he finally became. Can we imagine him without interaction with these minds?
It is somewhat disquieting for the cultural nationalists that it is Dr Ambedkar who is defining India that we live in. For no future Ambedkars to be born, it is important to clip the wings of people from his background freely seeking knowledge from the best scholars around the globe. That is what the new guidelines aim to do. They must be opposed for two reasons: Firstly, you cannot dictate to a scholar about their research question. Second, this is a sinister attempt to restrict the growth of independent intellectual leadership in the SC/ST communities.
(The writer teaches at Delhi University)