President Murmu Advocates Decolonising Education Through Indigenous Knowledge Revival and Multilingual Equity in Indian Academia

Murmu’s call echoes global indigenous movements (e.g., Māori revitalisation of te reo, Native American language nests) that frame linguistic revival as resistance to epistemicide. However, the focus on Sanskritised Hindi risks sidelining non-Sanskritic traditions like Tamil Sangam literature or Adivasi oral knowledge, which are equally marginalised in mainstream education. Indigenous knowledge systems in India—such as the ecological wisdom of the Gond or the medicinal practices of the Irula—remain underrepresented in policy discourse despite their proven resilience. A truly decolonial approach would centre these traditions rather than instrumentalise them for nationalist projects.

The British colonial state systematically dismantled indigenous education through policies like the 1835 Macaulay Minute, which privileged English and Western science while denigrating local knowledge. Post-independence, India’s education system inherited this hierarchy, with Hindi imposition in the 1960s exacerbating linguistic divides (e.g., the 1965 anti-Hindi agitations in Tamil Nadu). Gandhi himself critiqued industrial modernity but also advocated Hindi as a unifying force, revealing the tensions in his own thought between pluralism and homogenisation. The current revival discourse must grapple with these historical contradictions to avoid repeating past mistakes.

Comparative studies show that linguistic revival movements often succeed when tied to broader epistemic justice (e.g., New Zealand’s Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi, which integrates Māori knowledge into tertiary education). In India, however, the focus on Hindi risks replicating the colonial model of a single ‘national’ language, whereas plurilingual models like Switzerland’s or Canada’s demonstrate how multilingualism can coexist with national cohesion. The African concept of *ubuntu*—‘I am because we are’—offers a framework for valuing linguistic diversity as a collective good rather than a zero-sum competition.

Cognitive science research (e.g., work by Lera Boroditsky) demonstrates that language shapes thought patterns, making multilingual education critical for cognitive flexibility. Studies on bilingualism in India (e.g., the *Multilingual India* report by the Azim Premji Foundation) show that students educated in their mother tongue perform better in critical thinking tasks. However, the revival of indigenous knowledge systems requires rigorous validation—Ayurveda, for instance, has been co-opted by pseudoscientific narratives, necessitating evidence-based integration with modern science.

Indigenous knowledge systems in India are deeply intertwined with artistic and spiritual practices—from the oral traditions of the Bhils to the classical dance forms rooted in temple traditions. The marginalisation of these systems reflects a broader desacralisation of knowledge under colonial modernity, where spirituality was divorced from academic inquiry. Reviving these traditions requires reclaiming their performative and ritual dimensions, as seen in movements like the *Jagriti* theatre collectives that use folk forms to teach constitutional values.

Scenario modelling suggests that India’s education system could adopt a tiered model: primary education in mother tongues, secondary in regional languages, and tertiary in a mix of English and indigenous languages for STEM fields. This aligns with UNESCO’s *Education 2030* framework but requires investment in teacher training and curriculum development. The risk lies in top-down imposition—successful models like Finland’s rely on grassroots participation rather than state mandates. Long-term, such reforms could position India as a leader in epistemic pluralism, but only if they avoid majoritarian pitfalls.

The discourse centres upper-caste, Hindi-speaking elites while erasing the voices of Adivasi, Dalit, and non-Hindi linguistic communities (e.g., Tamil, Bengali, or tribal groups). Dalit intellectuals like Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd argue that caste hierarchies are embedded in traditional knowledge systems, necessitating a critical reappraisal rather than romanticisation. Women’s groups point out that indigenous knowledge is often gendered—e.g., women’s role in seed preservation or folk medicine is rarely acknowledged in revival narratives. True inclusion requires redistributing epistemic authority to these communities.