NCERT History Textbooks: Implications for India’s Future Generation in the Light of the Indian Constitution

Introduction

The Indian Constitution, adopted on November 26, 1949, serves as the bedrock of India’s democratic, secular, and pluralistic society, enshrining principles of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. Education is a critical instrument for transmitting these values, shaping citizens who uphold the constitutional vision of a united and inclusive nation. The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbooks, widely used in schools affiliated with the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and various state boards, play a pivotal role in this process by providing students with a framework to understand India’s history, culture, and civic responsibilities.

Since 2014, under the governance of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which draws ideological inspiration from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), NCERT history textbooks have undergone significant revisions. These changes include the removal of key historical episodes and figures—such as Mahatma Gandhi’s murder, his pursuit of Hindu-Muslim unity, the 2002 Gujarat riots, the Narmada Bachao Andolan, the Chipko Movement, and the Mughal era—along with the insertion of the claim that “Aryans are originally Indian and spread to the world from India,” despite contradictory scientific evidence. These revisions raise profound questions about their alignment with the Indian Constitution’s core principles and their impact on the future generation the RSS-BJP seeks to cultivate, their potential actions, and the broader consequences for Indian society.

This article critically analyzes these textbook revisions through the lens of the Indian Constitution, examining their compatibility with values such as secularism (Articles 25-28), equality (Articles 14-15), fraternity (Preamble), justice (Preamble, Article 38), and scientific temper (Article 51A(h)). It explores the ideological motivations behind these changes, their implications for shaping the worldview of India’s youth, and the potential societal impacts, both immediate and long-term. The analysis is grounded in historical context, educational theory, and socio-political dynamics, offering a rational and comprehensive perspective on the risks and consequences of these revisions.

Historical Context: The RSS-BJP and Educational Reform

The RSS, founded in 1925 by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar, is a Hindu nationalist organization that promotes Hindutva, an ideology that defines Indian identity through Hindu cultural and religious values, often prioritizing Hindu primacy over India’s pluralistic heritage. The BJP, established in 1980 as the political wing of the RSS, has sought to implement this ideology through governance, particularly since securing a national majority in 2014 under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Education has been a key battleground for the RSS to advance its vision of a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation), as evidenced by its network of Vidya Bharati schools, which educate millions of students with a Hindu-centric curriculum.

The NCERT, established in 1961, was designed to provide a secular and inclusive curriculum reflective of India’s diverse history and culture, aligning with the constitutional mandate to promote unity and integrity (Article 51A). However, under BJP-led governments, NCERT textbooks have undergone multiple rounds of revisions, often justified as “syllabus rationalization” to reduce student burden or align with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Critics, including historians, educators, and opposition leaders, argue that these changes are ideologically motivated, aimed at aligning educational content with the RSS’s Hindutva agenda, which often conflicts with the Constitution’s secular and pluralistic principles.

The specific revisions—removing references to Mahatma Gandhi’s murder, his efforts at Hindu-Muslim unity, the RSS’s ban following his assassination, the 2002 Gujarat riots, the Narmada Bachao Andolan, the Chipko Movement, and the Mughal era, while inserting the unverified claim of indigenous Aryan origins—reflect a deliberate attempt to reshape historical narratives. These changes challenge the constitutional duty to foster scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry (Article 51A(h)) and raise concerns about their impact on India’s future generations and societal cohesion.

The Deletions: A Constitutional Analysis

The revisions to NCERT textbooks must be scrutinized against the Indian Constitution’s core principles to assess their implications fully. Each deletion and insertion is evaluated below for its alignment or conflict with constitutional values.

1. Removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s Murder
   The assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948, by Nathuram Godse, a former RSS member, is a pivotal event in Indian history, marking a tragic moment that underscored the dangers of communal extremism. The removal of references to Gandhi’s murder, along with the RSS’s temporary ban following the assassination, from NCERT textbooks undermines the constitutional value of fraternity (Preamble), which emphasizes unity and dignity among individuals. Gandhi’s assassination highlighted the consequences of religious polarization, a lesson critical to upholding secularism (Articles 25-28), which guarantees freedom of religion and prohibits discrimination on religious grounds. By erasing this event, the curriculum obscures the historical context of communal violence and the state’s response to it, violating Article 51A(e), which mandates promoting harmony and renouncing practices derogatory to others’ dignity. This deletion risks fostering a generation unaware of the constitutional imperative to combat extremism, potentially normalizing silence around such events and weakening the commitment to secularism and justice.
2. Mahatma Gandhi’s Pursuit of Hindu-Muslim Unity
   Gandhi’s lifelong advocacy for Hindu-Muslim unity was instrumental in shaping India’s secular ethos, as enshrined in Articles 25-28. His efforts to bridge religious divides during the freedom struggle and partition riots reflect the constitutional principle of fraternity. The removal of these references diminishes the narrative of interfaith harmony, conflicting with Article 51A(e) and the Preamble’s emphasis on unity. This deletion sends a message that communal harmony is less significant than nationalist narratives, potentially fostering a generation less committed to the constitutional vision of a pluralistic society, which could exacerbate religious divides.
3. The 2002 Gujarat Riots
   The Gujarat riots of 2002, which resulted in nearly 2,000 deaths, predominantly Muslims, represent a significant violation of the right to life (Article 21) and equality before the law (Article 14). The removal of references to these riots from sociology and political science textbooks obscures a critical moment in modern Indian history, undermining the constitutional principle of justice (Preamble, Article 38), which requires the state to secure social, economic, and political justice. By omitting this episode, the curriculum fails to educate students about the consequences of communal violence and the state’s responsibility to protect all citizens, regardless of religion. This conflicts with Article 51A(j), which calls for striving toward excellence in fostering national unity, and risks creating a generation less equipped to uphold constitutional protections against discrimination and violence.
4. Narmada Bachao Andolan and Chipko Movement
   The Narmada Bachao Andolan, led by activists like Medha Patkar, and the Chipko Movement, rooted in grassroots environmental activism, are emblematic of the constitutional right to life (Article 21), which includes the right to a healthy environment, as affirmed in cases like M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987). These movements also reflect the directive principles of state policy (Article 39, Article 47), which call for equitable resource distribution and public health. Their removal from textbooks sidelines narratives of marginalized communities—such as Adivasis and rural populations—asserting their constitutional rights against state-driven development projects. This omission undermines Article 51A(g), which mandates citizens to protect the environment, and risks creating a generation less aware of the constitutional balance between development and social justice. It also weakens the spirit of participatory democracy enshrined in the Constitution, as students are deprived of examples of collective action.
5. The Mughal Era
   The Mughal dynasty, which ruled India from the 16th to the 19th centuries, contributed significantly to India’s cultural, architectural, and administrative heritage, reflecting the syncretic ethos of Indian society. The removal of Mughal history conflicts with the constitutional commitment to secularism (Articles 25-28) and the promotion of composite culture (Article 51A(f)). By marginalizing the contributions of Muslim rulers, the curriculum risks presenting a Hindu-centric narrative that excludes the historical role of minorities, violating the principle of equality (Article 14). This deletion could foster a generation that views India’s Muslim heritage as alien, undermining the constitutional vision of a pluralistic society where all communities are equal stakeholders.
6. Insertion of the “Aryan Origin” Claim
   The claim that Aryans originated in India and spread globally contradicts well-established genetic and archaeological evidence, such as DNA studies indicating Indo-Aryan migration from Central Asia around 1500 BCE. This insertion violates Article 51A(h), which mandates fostering a scientific temper and spirit of inquiry. By prioritizing ideological assertions over evidence, the curriculum undermines the constitutional commitment to rational and scientific education. This risks creating a generation more susceptible to nationalist myths than empirical truths, weakening the constitutional goal of building a knowledge-based society.

The RSS-BJP Vision: A Constitutional Critique

The NCERT revisions reflect the RSS-BJP’s ideological project to cultivate a generation aligned with Hindutva, but this vision raises significant constitutional concerns:

1. Undermining Secularism (Articles 25-28)
   Secularism, a basic structure of the Constitution as affirmed in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), requires the state to remain neutral in religious matters and treat all communities equally. The emphasis on Hindu-centric narratives, the marginalization of Muslim contributions, and the removal of Gandhi’s murder and efforts at communal harmony violate this principle. By prioritizing one religious identity, the curriculum risks fostering a generation that views secularism as secondary to Hindu nationalism, undermining the constitutional framework.
2. Eroding Equality (Articles 14-15)
   The Constitution guarantees equality before the law and prohibits discrimination based on religion, caste, or other markers. The selective removal of minority contributions and social justice movements sidelines the histories of marginalized groups, including Muslims, Adivasis, and Dalits. This conflicts with Article 15, which prohibits discrimination, and risks creating a generation less empathetic to the struggles of diverse communities, perpetuating inequality.
3. Weakening Fraternity (Preamble)
   Fraternity, as articulated in the Preamble, is essential for uniting India’s diverse society. The removal of Gandhi’s murder, his efforts at Hindu-Muslim unity, and the Gujarat riots undermines this value by downplaying the importance of communal harmony and accountability for violence. A generation educated in this narrative may be less inclined to foster unity, threatening the constitutional vision of a cohesive nation.
4. Suppressing Justice (Preamble, Article 38)
   The Constitution mandates the state to secure social, economic, and political justice. By erasing narratives of Gandhi’s assassination, grassroots movements, and communal violence, the curriculum fails to educate students about the struggles for justice and the state’s role in addressing them. This risks producing a generation less committed to constitutional justice, potentially normalizing social inequities.
5. Neglecting Scientific Temper (Article 51A(h))
   The insertion of unverified claims, such as the Aryan origin theory, contradicts the constitutional duty to promote scientific temper. This undermines the development of a rational and evidence-based mindset, essential for a modern democratic society.

Potential Actions of the Future Generation

The generation shaped by these revised textbooks is likely to exhibit behaviors that reflect the ideological shift away from constitutional values:

1. Prioritizing Hindu Nationalist Identity
   A curriculum emphasizing Hindu-centric narratives and erasing events like Gandhi’s murder may foster a generation that equates Indian identity with Hindu identity, undermining the constitutional principle of secularism. This could lead to increased support for policies prioritizing Hindu interests, such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which critics argue discriminates against Muslims, violating Article 14. Such a generation may be less inclined to uphold the constitutional rights of minorities, potentially exacerbating communal tensions.
2. Reduced Commitment to Social Justice
   The omission of movements like the Narmada Bachao Andolan and Chipko Movement may result in a generation less aware of the constitutional rights to life, equality, and a healthy environment. This could translate into lower engagement with environmental and social justice issues, weakening the participatory democracy enshrined in the Constitution.
3. Weakened Secular and Fraternal Values
   By erasing Gandhi’s murder, his legacy of communal harmony, and references to communal violence, the curriculum risks producing a generation less committed to fraternity and secularism. This could manifest in increased polarization, reduced empathy for minority communities, and a diminished understanding of the constitutional imperative to promote harmony.
4. Susceptibility to Ideological Narratives
   The prioritization of unverified claims over scientific evidence may foster a generation less equipped to uphold the constitutional duty of scientific temper. This could lead to greater acceptance of ideological narratives, weakening the rational discourse essential for democratic governance.

Societal Impacts: Constitutional and Social Consequences

The NCERT revisions could have profound implications for Indian society, both in the short term and over generations, particularly in relation to constitutional values.

1. Short-Term Impacts
   • Communal Polarization: The emphasis on Hindu-centric narratives and the erasure of Gandhi’s murder and minority contributions could deepen communal divides, violating the constitutional principles of secularism and fraternity. This may lead to increased hate speech or violence, undermining Article 21’s guarantee of life and personal liberty.
   • Erosion of Democratic Discourse: By suppressing critical histories, such as Gandhi’s assassination and the Gujarat riots, the curriculum risks fostering a generation less equipped to hold the state accountable, weakening the constitutional framework of justice and equality.
   • Political Consolidation: The revisions align with the BJP’s electoral strategy of consolidating Hindu votes, but this risks alienating minorities and secular citizens, threatening the constitutional vision of an inclusive society.
2. Long-Term Impacts
   • Weakening Constitutional Democracy: A generation educated in a Hindu nationalist narrative may be less committed to secularism, equality, and fraternity, potentially paving the way for a more majoritarian political culture. This could undermine the Constitution’s basic structure, as affirmed in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).
   • Marginalization of Minorities: The erasure of Muslim contributions, Gandhi’s murder, and social justice movements could lead to the long-term exclusion of minorities and marginalized groups, violating Articles 14 and 15. This risks creating a society marked by inequality and alienation.
   • Distorted Historical Consciousness: A selective historical narrative undermines the constitutional duty to preserve composite culture (Article 51A(f)), potentially perpetuating cycles of conflict and misunderstanding.
   • Global Implications: A shift toward Hindu nationalism could strain India’s relations with neighboring countries and global partners, undermining the constitutional duty to foster international peace (Article 51). A generation less committed to pluralism may hinder India’s role as a global advocate for diversity and democracy.

Critical Analysis: Constitutional and Educational Perspectives

From a constitutional perspective, the NCERT revisions conflict with the principles of secularism, equality, fraternity, justice, and scientific temper, which are foundational to India’s democratic framework. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002) emphasized that education must promote secular values and critical thinking, aligning with Article 51A. The removal of Gandhi’s murder, for instance, obscures a critical lesson about the dangers of extremism, undermining the constitutional commitment to fraternity and secularism.

From an educational theory perspective, the revisions align with Paulo Freire’s critique of the “banking model” of education, where students are passive recipients of ideologically driven knowledge. This approach contradicts the NEP 2020’s emphasis on critical thinking, inclusivity, and experiential learning, which are rooted in constitutional values. By sidelining narratives of marginalized groups, the curriculum also violates Amartya Sen’s concept of the “capability approach,” which emphasizes education’s role in empowering individuals within a just society.

Sociologically, the revisions risk exacerbating inequalities by marginalizing minority and subaltern voices, as noted by scholar Ram Puniyani. Politically, they serve as a tool for consolidating power by reshaping public memory, as historian Romila Thapar has warned, undermining the constitutional commitment to truth and justice.

Counterarguments: The RSS-BJP Perspective

The RSS-BJP argues that the revisions correct historical biases introduced by “leftist” or “Western” historians, aligning with Article 51A(f)’s call to preserve Indian culture. They claim that emphasizing Hindu contributions fosters national pride, a legitimate educational goal. The deletions, including Gandhi’s murder, are justified as syllabus rationalization to reduce student burden, as stated by NCERT director D.P. Saklani.

However, these arguments are constitutionally problematic. The selective removal of minority contributions, social justice movements, and Gandhi’s assassination violates secularism and equality, while the insertion of unverified claims contradicts scientific temper. The revisions prioritize a narrow interpretation of “Indian culture” over the Constitution’s pluralistic vision, undermining its core values.

Recommendations: Aligning Education with Constitutional Values

To ensure that education upholds the Indian Constitution, the following steps are recommended:

1. Restore Pluralistic Narratives: Reinstate content on Gandhi’s murder, his efforts at communal harmony, the Mughal era, and social movements to reflect the constitutional values of secularism, fraternity, and justice.
2. Uphold Scientific Temper: Remove ideologically driven claims, such as the Aryan origin theory, and align the curriculum with evidence-based history, as mandated by Article 51A(h).
3. Engage Diverse Stakeholders: Involve historians, educators, and community representatives in textbook revisions to ensure inclusivity and constitutional alignment.
4. Promote Critical Thinking: Adopt pedagogical approaches that encourage inquiry and debate, aligning with the NEP 2020 and Article 51A(h).
5. Strengthen Civic Education: Introduce modules on constitutional values, secularism, and communal harmony to foster a generation committed to India’s democratic ethos.

The revisions to NCERT history textbooks, including the removal of Mahatma Gandhi’s murder, his pursuit of Hindu-Muslim unity, the 2002 Gujarat riots, the Narmada Bachao Andolan, the Chipko Movement, and the Mughal era, along with the insertion of unverified claims about Aryan origins, represent a significant departure from the Indian Constitution’s principles of secularism, equality, fraternity, justice, and scientific temper. These changes reflect the RSS-BJP’s ideological project to foster a Hindu nationalist generation, but they risk undermining the constitutional vision of a pluralistic, equitable, and democratic India.

The potential consequences include increased communal polarization, reduced commitment to social justice, and a weakened democratic framework, with long-term risks to India’s social cohesion and global standing. To uphold the Constitution, the curriculum must prioritize inclusivity, evidence-based history, and critical thinking, ensuring that education shapes citizens who strengthen, rather than undermine, India’s constitutional fabric. As India navigates its future, the battle over its textbooks is a battle for its soul—a struggle to ensure that the next generation embodies the values of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity enshrined in the Constitution.

Sources:

• Constitution of India, 1949
• Al Jazeera, “How RSS textbooks are reshaping Indian history and science under Modi”
• Carnegie Endowment, “BJP Has Been Effective in Transmitting Its Version of Indian History”
• India Today, “Attempt to erase history: Opposition vs BJP over edits in NCERT books”
• The Indian Express, “NCERT textbook revision: Why it happens every few years & what makes it controversial”
• Al Jazeera, “Mughals, RSS, evolution: Outrage as India edits school textbooks”
• News18, “NCERT Textbook Revision: Bhagwat Says History Was Taught Through Western Lens”
• Stratheia, “The BJP-RSS Dynamic and Its Implications for India’s Future”
• The Diplomat, “RSS, the Ideological Mentor of India’s Ruling BJP, Enters its 100th Year”
• Academia.edu, “RSS BJP an e book” by Ram Puniyani
• Supreme Court judgments: S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala(1973), Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002), M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)