Source: eSamskriti

A hermeneutic tradition maintains that to understand means to understand differently. Alhough originally intended to describe our understanding of texts, the premise proves especially true in the realm of history. Historiography is necessarily selective. And it is never free of twists and distortions. If an event is remembered (and how it is remembered) is not up to its actors and witnesses. For those who have to live it, history is a mess. It is only future generations that — in a complex interplay of memorizing and forgetting — give the past a meaningful and well ordered appearance” (Reinhardt, 2005).

“There is much to be said for this point of view, which justly deprecates the vain concept based on mere race and blood, and the self-exaltation of human beings as superior beings in special favour with God. But with all respect to this laudable anti-racist plea, it cannot be gainsaid that every available evidence (ethnic, social, religious, linguistic, artistic, et al) is overwhelmingly in favour in the assumption of a movement of peoples, at least of the elite variety, rather than a mere migration of ideas, language and cultural beneficence… It is one of the cruel ironies of fate that a people who have done so much for the spiritual and material welfare of humanity should have been the target of protracted inimical criticism… But to use a phrase now popular in the American domestic scene, “We shall overcome”. Bharat had survived many denigrations in the past; I am confident it will remain unscathed by the foul attacks on its present” (Kalyanaraman, 1968).

Harvard Divinity Scholar in Spiritual Leadership, Entrepreneurship & Liberation Studies. Chief People Officer of Milan Global.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store