History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c62.316

v4.c62.316

Most of the ancient sūtrakāras and smṛtis try to lay down the limits of the holy land of Āryāvarta and differentiate it from the lands of *mlecchas*. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 11-18. The Viṣṇu (II. 3. 1-2), Mārkaṇḍeya (55. 21) and other purāṇas wax eloquent over the inportance of Bharatavarṣa and describe it as the land of action for those who want to secure heaven or final release or as the land where alone sin and religious merit were to be found (*karmabhūmir-iyam svargam-apavargam ca gacchatām* or *tat-karma-bhūmir-nānyatra samprāptiḥ puṇyapāpayoḥ* in Mārk.). Manu (II. 20) manifests great pride in and love for the holy countries of Brahmāvarta, Kurukṣetra, Matsya, Pañcāla and Śūrasena by glorifying the brāhmaṇas of these countries as those 'from whom all men on this broad earth should learn the actions and usages appropriate to them'. Vas. I. 10 also says the same. Śaṅkha-Likhita (q. by Viśvarūpa on Yāj. I. 2) hold that the country of Āryāvarta is endowed with high qualities, is ancient and holy (*deśa Āryo guṇavān ...... sanātanaḥ puṇyaḥ*). As however the smṛtis were composed at different times, embodied the usages of different provinces in India and as they provided for the observances of all those who followed the Veda, they do not generally lay emphasis on localities but rather on what they thought was common to all Āryas in India (*yat tu samānaṁ tad vakṣyāmaḥ*, as Āśv. gṛ. says). There was no doubt a great emotional regard for Bharatavarṣa or Āryāvarta as a unity for many centuries among all writers from a religious point of view, though not from a political standpoint. Therefore one element of modern nationhood viz. being under the same government was wanting. But it must be noted that from very ancient times there was always the aspiration among great kings and the people to bring the whole of Bharatavarṣa "under one umbrella". Even in the West the sentiment of nationality practically arose after the partition of Poland, and as a consequence of the French Revolution and of the Industrial revolution, which led manufacturing countries to search for markets and to exploit backward and less developed peoples. Vide Laski's 'Grammar of Politics' chap. VI. Modern nationalism undoubtedly leads to great self-sacrifice and produces certain virtues of high value in the individuals that are fired by that sentiment. But the ideals of the modern nation States are not high, particularly in their treatment of other peoples and in their attitude towards less favoured States. The one aim of the leading politicians of modern nation States and most of the inhabitants of these States seems to be to raise the standard of living of their citizens to a high level and to maintain it at that level even by exploiting and robbing weaker races and lands. This is not the place to discuss these matters further. Whatever the value of nationalism to the individuals fired by it may be, from the point of the welfare of the whole of mankind, modern nation States do not deserve to survive, unless the so-called progressive nation States are prepared to give up their racial pride, their spirit of grabbing and exploitation and to extend a brotherly hand to all struggling States to improve themselves in their own way and attain to higher standards of living without let or hindrance. It cannot be gainsaid that for several centuries in the past and also at the present moment all modern nation States have two moralities, one for their own nation and the other for their dealings with foreign States and races.