There is an ongoing debate in the country regarding the concept of India, although those who use the term rarely provide an explanation. Understanding its various meanings is left to the interpretation of the context and audience. Sometimes, it refers to the Indian republic established by the Constitution. Other times, it evokes the grand vision of a timeless India with all its diversities and historical periods. It may also refer to the multiple origins of India’s diverse populations and cultures, or it may even be used as a synonym for the Indian civilization.
Defining a civilization is not easy. According to the dictionary, the term “civilization” originates from the Latin word “civitas” or the English word “civil,” both pointing to “city” as the foundation of civilization. In India, the concept of a city or urban social structure first emerged during the Indus period and reached its peak for about six centuries from the 24th century BCE to the 19th century BCE before declining. This was followed by a gap of about five hundred years, about which we have limited knowledge.
The next known phase of India’s prehistory emerged with the Rigveda around the 14th century BCE, when India adopted a new system in which cities did emerge, but the larger population of India chose the village structure as its long-term “civilizational” choice. For over 32 centuries, until colonialism once again prioritized cities, most of the knowledge production, artistic expression, and metaphysical contemplation continued to originate from remote and isolated areas rather than cities. From this perspective, the term “civilization” is not entirely adequate to capture India’s past.
When we discuss “civilization,” we imply “everything that was there, great and not so great,” a pervasively binding cultural thread. In the case of South Asia, language emerges as the principle, substance, and essence of the idea of India. Linguists no longer classify Indian languages strictly into distinct linguistic families. Instead, they describe the vast array of Indian languages as a “linguistic area” with greater mutual intelligibility between a language and its neighboring languages compared to other parts of the world.
Language in India stands out not only for its great diversity but also as a key contributor to its cultural tensions and social stratification. According to UNESCO and Ethnologue, there are approximately 7,000 living languages worldwide, with about 12% of them spoken in India. However, there is no definitive number available for the living Indian languages. The 2011 census listed 1,369 “mother tongues,” but not all of them can be considered separate languages. Absurd methods used for language count by successive governments have attempted to minimize the figures. The People’s Linguistic Survey of India (2010-2013) reported 780 languages, but it may have missed around 70 languages. Therefore, we can assume that there are approximately 850 living languages in the country.
What is most remarkable about this vast diversity is that it has existed in India throughout history. When Sanskrit arrived in India 3,500 years ago, there were already languages that were later identified as the Pali group of languages, Prakrits, and ancient Dravidian languages. Local languages also developed wherever our ancient ancestors settled. Panini, in his grammar system formulated 2,500 years ago, mentioned multiple language varieties. Works such as Matanga’s and Kuntaka’s during the first millennium revolved around the idea of many language varieties. Characters in plays by Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti were seen using several languages within a single scene. Al-Biruni and Amir Khushro during the first millennium also acknowledged that being Indian meant speaking many languages. Sanskrit and Persian, despite their power, were unable to replace regional and subnational languages. The Prakrits continued to exist while Sanskrit declined. Modern Indian languages spoken in areas once ruled by Persian-speaking rulers survived, whereas Persian all but disappeared. During colonial rule, a common legal framework was imposed across the geographical span of India, but a single language was not forcibly imposed by the British.
After Independence, language diversity gained constitutional validity when the Constituent Assembly introduced the Eighth Schedule, recognizing 14 languages. The expanded list now includes 22 languages, with around 30 languages hoping for inclusion. Additionally, there are several hundred languages spoken by Adivasis, nomadic communities, as well as languages in the northeastern region and coastal communities.
In Europe, nationalism was associated with linguistic unity during the 19th century. In India, speakers of hundreds of different languages accepted being part of a single nation because the Constitution promised them the freedom of expression and mandated the state to encourage languages without harming others. Throughout history, Indians have been multilingual in their thinking, life, and habitat. The national anthem, sung with pride, primarily describes India in terms of its language communities, such as Punjabi, Sindhi, Gujarati, Marathi, Dravidian languages, Odiya, and Bangla.
Clearly, Indians know that we are one nation not because we speak one language or in spite of speaking diverse languages, but because we have many languages. It was for this reason that the Union government, after Independence, established the State Reorganisation Commission and created linguistic states. No patriotic Indian would consider our many languages a liability or apologize for language diversity. This diversity makes us proud as Indians because it is at the core of our idea of nationalism. Rejecting the linguistic texture of India is to reject the constitutional basis of India’s federalism.
Unfortunately, one of the paradoxes of the Union government’s structure is that the subject of language is divided between the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Home Affairs. Historically, the Home Ministry has often taken an anti-language-diversity stance. Following the Bangladesh war, the Home Ministry requested the census office to arbitrarily set a cut-off figure of 10,000 for a language to qualify for recognition in the census. This decision was absurd. Recently, Home Minister Amit Shah advised states to adopt Hindi as the language of inter-state communication, a decision that is the prerogative of each state. Therefore, the Home Minister should not have expressed an opinion on this matter. His comment was perceived as an extension of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s majoritarian politics, with Hindi being the language spoken by the largest number of people in the country. It also reflected the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh’s (RSS) idea of Hindi-Hindu-Hindustan nationalism as the only true nationalism. He failed to realize that this view goes against the essence of Indian civilization. India is, above all, a linguistic civilization, and its linguistic diversity is its enduring hallmark.