‘The Triple Stream’

‘TRIVENI’ HAS SHED LIGHT ON MY PATH.
BLESSED BE HER NAME!

‘THE TRIPLE STREAM’*

Ten Years of Freedom

Having achieved freedom through peaceful means under the leadership of a saintly statesman–the Father of the Nation–India took rapid strides to a position of honour and dignity among nations. It was part of her great destiny that the leadership passed from Gandhiji to Nehru, his lieutenant in the freedom struggle and an embodiment of purposive idealism. The decade from1947 to 1957 marks the transition from the old to the new, fromsuppression to self-fulfillment.

A period of transition has its problems, and our new Democracy had to face them. The aftermath of Partition, the accentuation of communal and linguistic antagonisms, and the pressure of the relics of feudalism made the task of the nation-builders exceedingly arduous. But these and other problems of equal urgency, like the training of the personnel for the military and civil services and the provision of funds for large schemes of expansion, have been tackled with efficiency. The re-organisation of the States has set at rest many controversies and general satisfaction prevails all over the country except in bilingual Bombay.

Well meaning and friendly observers are, however, agitated over certain symptoms. They point to the lowering of standards in education and administration, Self-government has been vouchsafed to us, but are we satisfied that there is ‘good’ government? Within recent months, the volume of criticism has grown, and even the men at the helm recognise that there is a slackening of effort, a desire to ‘take it easy’ and to shirk responsibility. Enormous sums have been expended on new schemes without adequate results, and there has not been the requisite co-operation between the officials in charge and local non-official agencies. There is an evident lack of initiative, coupled with a pitiful dependence on the State power for everything.

Much of this criticism is well-founded. We seem to be too much in a hurry. And we are obsessed by the need for publicity. The actual work may be of poor quality, but the loudspeaker, the flash-light photograph, and the glaring headlines in the newspapers compel our attention. In our anxiety to achieve ‘progress,’ we are perpetually on the move, rushing from one thing to another without an opportunity to think or to plan.

At the commencement of the second decade of freedom, the leaders and the common people must resolve to dedicate themselves anew to the service of the nation through simple, un-ostentatious activity inthe spheres of education, economic uplift and sound administration. A greater measure of seriousness and humility has to be imported into our public life as well as private. Only thus can the sense of frustration now prevalent be dispelled. We are a great nation with a tradition of culture and refinement and a correct sense of values. We ought therefore to regain that quiet strength of spirit which results in noble, un- selfish action.

The Kher Report

After considerable delay the report of the Official Language Commission has been published. The recommendations relate mainly to the means to be adopted for the progressive use of Hindi as the language of administration, education and inter-provincial contacts The change-over from English to Hindi is fraught with serious consequences, and in the non-Hindi States even the wisest and most patriotic of individuals are amazed at the excessive zeal displayed by the advocates of Hindi.

The antagonism to English as a foreign language imposed by autocratic rulers was at its height when our Constitution was framed, and a very short lease of life was given to it–just fifteen years! There was really no need to set a time-limit. It would have been quite in order to declare that English and Hindi were both official languages of the Union and to leave the ultimate decision to the vote of the legislatures of the States. Since a majority of the States are non-Hindi, any change in favour of Hindi as the sole official language of the Union and as the sole means of communication between the States and the Centre, and between the different States, could be brought about only with the willing consent of these States. Such a solution would have been wise and farsighted. To imagine that a language comparatively ill-equipped for the many purposes of legislation and administration could be installed in the place of English within fifteen years is the height of unwisdom.

The Commission rightly decided to leave the target date to be settled by a subsequent Commission in 1960. It recommends that steps should be taken to teach Hindi as a second language in all non-Hindi States, though they shy at the suggestion that a non-Hindi language, preferably South Indian, should be similarly taught in the Hindi States. Except in certain parts of South India, there is no serious opposition to the proposal to make Hindi a compulsory subject in all secondary schools, and to impose a Hindi test on all persons seeking Government service in any State of the Indian Union. The Commission recognises that the language test so imposed should not be a severe one, and that, in the case of competitive examinations for all-India services, Hindi cannot be the sole medium. The candidates can employ English, and, in certain circumstances, their regional language.

One welcomes the spirit of moderation which characterises the recommendations of the Commission, though they are vitiated by the dominant feeling that English must yield place to Hindi, irrespective of the wishes of the people of the non-Hindi States who are primarily affected by the change.

Two members of the Commission–Dr. P. Subbaroyan of Madras and Dr. S. K. Chatterjee of Bengal–have submitted their notes of dissent. They express the viewpoint of large sections of the Indian people who are not less patriotic than the advocates of Hindi but who are seriously alarmed that a too-sudden elimination of English may result in a disastrous lowering of standards in many spheres of national life. Their views must be given due weight when Parliament applies its mind to the report, in spite of the fact that the dissentients are only two out of thirty.

In the case of the Universities, it is only proper that they should be left free to determine the medium of higher education at the University level, as also the language of post-graduate research. Judging from the trends of opinion expressed in University circles, English may continue to be preferred for several years, while every effort will be made to equip the regional languages so that they may eventually become the media of instruction at the degree stage. Even so, the standard of attainment in English should be high so as to enable the students to keep in touch with the latest thought in the Sciences and the Humanities. And every University in India may be required to make provision for the advanced, but optional, study of Hindi and other Indian languages.

* August 16