People's Democracy

Urgent Need To Detoxify The IIAS, Shimla

  Abhay Kumar

THAT the detoxification drive to remove the communal biases and unscientific and obscurantist contents in the educational system, which were vigorously introduced by the former HRD minister M M Joshi during the NDA regime needs an acceleration is evident from the interim report of the D Bandhopadhyay Committee on Indian Institute of Advanced Study (IIAS), Shimla. This report, which has already become public after The Hindu published an article on it, provides clinching evidences on not only how deep the RSS has penetrated the premier academic institutions of the country like the IIAS, Shimla but also gives an insight into how public funds were misappropriated and illogical, unscientific and communal researches were carried out to suit the communal and brahminical outlook of the RSS.

G C Pande, the then chairman, Governing Body of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study (IIAS), Shimla sent a proposal to M M Joshi, the then HRD minister on October 28, 1999 for the establishment of a Centre for Study of Indian Civilisation at the IIAS, Shimla. However, instead of a centre “a project on Indian Civilisation” was approved by the HRD ministry in 2000-01 for which a substantial sum of Rs 1.39 crore was allotted by the HRD ministry. The then chairman of the IIAS Prof G C Pande assured that the project would explore new heights in Indian Civilisation.

PROJECT ON INDIAN CIVILISATION

The 'Project on Indian Civilisation' was initially pursued on the basis of three objectives that are as follows:

1. Preparation of a 'Dictionary of Indian Culture'

2. Translation of Indian Classics in Hindi and Regional Languages

3. Preparation of Standard Monographs on the Development of Indian Civilisation. 

However a fourth objective that was added after the lapse of three years reads as follows:

4. Preparation of Standard Monographs Relating to Different Aspects and Dimensions of Indian Civilisation from Different Approaches for General Readers.

There is hardly any difference between the third and fourth objective but for the minor modification 'for the general reader'. These types of modifications that too three years after the initiation of work are quite unusual and indicate the lack of depth and the casual manner with which the whole Project was drawn.

As per the original arrangement the Project is supposed to be completed on or before March 2005. The progress realised by the Project in the last four years is marked by a series of lapses such as inconsistency, duplication, lack of depth and inept handling of public funds. Above all, whatever material has been churned out through the Project betrays an excessive eulogisation of the 'Vedic Culture' as the single foundational vision of Indian Civilisation. This is reflective of a communal, casteist and elitist mindset, which totally ignores the independent existence, cultural achievements and contributions of the diverse regional cultures of our vast country as well as the different strata of our society.

OTHER PERTINENT LAPSES

There are various other pertinent lapses that are as follows:

1. While approving the project the HRD ministry did not elaborate upon the administrative control structure of the Project. It seems that the then chairman of the IIAS G C Pande acted as a de facto controller of the Project and gave directions. This happened with the full connivance of the Director of IIAS.

2. Contrary to the agreement with the ministry, the Project failed to undertake a detailed literature survey to avoid any duplication.

3.  The first activity undertaken by the Project was to prepare the 'Dictionary of Indian Culture' in collaboration with the Allahabad Museum. A five days long workshop (in which one lakh fifty thousand rupees were spent) was held in this connection in Allahabad and the Annual Report of IIAS 2000-01 mentions that the glossary of the Dictionary has already been prepared. But there is not even a single academic paper in the IIAS, which was presented in the workshop. Other than the list of participants, the IIAS does not have any document to suggest what happened in that workshop. Thus the IIAS had misled the parliament and the people by making false claims in their Annual Report.

4. After the Allahabad fiasco the task of preparing the Dictionary was assigned to an institute in Bangalore in the following year, namely the 'Academy of Sanskrit Research'. The proposal submitted by the Academy of Sanskrit Research explaining the scheme and structure of the dictionary was approved by the IIAS. However, the proposal prepared by the Academy was a thoroughly communal one, which mentioned defining the true Indian race as its primary objective.

5. The academic credential of the 'Academy of Sanskrit Research' is shrouded in mystery. The Director of the academy M A Lakshmithathachar who was appointed as the Chief Editor of the Dictionary did not have even a single book or article to his credit. The two other editors did not have a column in their bio-data indicating even a single publication.

6. The IIAS withdrew the assignment of preparing the Dictionary from the Academy of Sanskrit Research after a year, when even they were convinced that the Academy was not only incapable of executing the assignment but was siphoning public funds. However, no efforts were made to recover the sum of Rs 10 lakh released earlier to the Academy.

7. Following this, the work of preparing the Dictionary changed hands for the third time to Kapil Kapoor of JNU, New Delhi. The work on this controversial Project is now going on in JNU in an intransparent manner.

8. Another important objective of the project was to translate Indian classics in regional languages and Hindi. The selection of classics for translation was biased, random and devoid of any thematic pattern. The selection of Indian classics for the purpose of translation was arbitrary to the extent that not even a single classic in Marathi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Manipuri, Oriya, Assamese, and Punjabi were selected. Only those regional classics that contain vedic elements were given preference to arrive at the pre-determined conclusion of establishing vedic culture as the single foundational vision of Indian Civilization. Many classics such as the Natyasastra, Arthasastra and Vedmimansa changed into many hands for translation within a short period of time without any academic output. Thus at every stage money was released and no effort was made to recover the same in cases of failure to complete the task.

9.  Several classics such as Arthasastra, Bijaganitham and Amuktamalyada were selected for translation though good and academically sound translations are already available. Moreover another 19 classics such as Divya Prabandham, Basava Purana, Samba Purana, Mahabharata, Ain-i-Akbari etc. were selected at different points of time for translation only to be dropped subsequently. It is not clear how much of public funds were drained in these cases.

10. In another interesting case a sum of Rs 1.5 lakhs was paid to one Jeevan Rai of Varanasi to prepare a monograph on “Buddhism in Afghanistan”. However, Jeevan Rai could not complete the work, and no attempt was made to recover the money paid to him.

11. Four years have elapsed since the project took off but till today only one translation titled “Maheliya” authored by G C Pandey has been published.

12. The received manuscripts were sent for publications without any academic scrutiny or review by competent experts. Thus the usual practice of ensuring that the academic content and production standard of the publications are befitting the reputation of the IIAS was severely compromised.

It should be noted that the Indian Institute of Advanced Study was established largely due to the efforts of the former president of India Dr. S.Radhakrishan, who envisaged the necessity to launch a research institute in India on par with some institutes of international repute such as the Princeton and Oxford research institutes. Dr S Radhakrishnan's vision was realised in large measure by the IIAS, Shimla through its constant quest for academic excellence, which gave the institute an enviable status as the premier research institute in India. As is well known, the core activity of the institute has been to disburse fellowships to scholars who intend to pursue serious research in challenging themes that would transcend disciplinary boundaries in social sciences. Such an esteemed institute of academic excellence stands discredited today on account of pursuing a research project with an objective of churning out a body of literature that would sustain and justify the illogical claims and interpretations of the communal fascistic sangh parivar vis-à-vis the history and culture of India.

SUGGESTIONS FOR RESTORING CREDIBILITY

In view of the serious nature of the above mentioned points, it is suggested that:

1. All activities pertaining to the 'Project on Indian Civilisation' must be stopped forthwith and if at all it has to continue later it should be preceded by a thorough review by competent scholars to ensure that the Project does not provide any scope for communalisation of education.

2. The Director of IIAS, Shimla, Bhuvan Chandel should be removed from the post immediately since she is mainly responsible for the improprieties of the Project as detailed above. Reportedly, she has also been trying to impede the probe by the Bandhopadhyay Committee.

Unless these steps are taken on an immediate basis, the credibility of a premier academic institution like the IIAS, Shimla would get irreparably undermined.