It appears that the writer has some traditional terminology defined and promoted by the western Historians. This is about the term Unity. British has define unity of people means the unity of political borders. It means that when there were several periods of empires there was a national unity. This is because the writer of the article is of the conclusion that British had provided unity to India. There after to prevent political disintegration, Sardar Patel had been a leader who had sustained the unity.
If the people moves freely irrespective of the political borders in common faith or otherwise too, has to be define as unity. This is because it was not only Muslims or Greeks who had termed this country as India but even in Vayu Puranam which had been written more than 400 years BC (because its most part is in un-Panian Sanskrit) has termed this country as Bharat Varsh and the subcontinent as Jambu-dweep where the common culture had been existed. Now if the views of the writer of the article is basically appear to be defective, there is no need to contradict him further. In our tradition it is called criticism by SHALAKA PARIKSHA. However here we have taken his most prominent view he felt.
‘Statue of Unity’ on one side : Asthi Kalash Yatra on the other
No comments:
Post a Comment