Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
10.55041/IJSREM.NEP031
Volume:
10 |
5 |
May 2026
Pages:
1-7
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Assistant Professor of Public Administration,
Government Arts & Science College (A), Kamareddy.
The introduction of the Indian Knowledge System (IKS) within the framework of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 has generated intense academic, political, and ideological debates in India. Advocates view IKS as a decolonial project intended to restore indigenous epistemologies marginalized under colonial education, while critics interpret it as an instrument of “saffronization” associated with Hindu majoritarian nationalism. This article undertakes a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of IKS as articulated in NEP 2020 and related institutional documents. Drawing on the theoretical insights of Michel Foucault, Antonio Gramsci, Edward Said, and Norman Fairclough, the paper investigates how discourse surrounding IKS constructs notions of national identity, culture, civilization, secularism, and epistemic legitimacy. The study argues that IKS in the NEP framework embodies a complex duality: it simultaneously functions as a project of epistemic decolonization and as a potential ideological apparatus aligned with cultural nationalism. While the policy rhetorically emphasizes inclusivity, plurality, multilingualism, and constitutional values, its selective privileging of Sanskritic and Hindu civilizational narratives risks marginalizing minority epistemologies, Dalit traditions, tribal knowledge systems, and secular scientific rationality. The article concludes that the future trajectory of IKS depends less on policy rhetoric and more on implementation practices, curricular design, institutional autonomy, and pedagogical interpretation. A genuinely pluralistic and secular IKS framework is possible only when indigenous knowledge traditions are engaged critically, comparatively, and democratically rather than as instruments of nationalist homogenization.
KEYWORDS
The debate over Indian Knowledge System within the NEP framework reflects a larger struggle over the meaning of nationhood, modernity, secularism, and decolonization in contemporary India. IKS is neither inherently emancipatory nor inherently authoritarian. Its political and pedagogical significance depends on the structures through which it is interpreted, institutionalized, and taught.A Critical Discourse Analysis reveals that NEP 2020 employs a strategically ambivalent language that accommodates multiple ideological readings. On one hand, it promotes multilingualism, interdisciplinarity, indigenous knowledge recovery, and constitutional values. On the other hand, its civilizational rhetoric and selective representation risk reinforcing Hindu majoritarian narratives.The central challenge is therefore epistemic democracy. A genuinely secular and pluralistic IKS framework must move beyond Brahmanical and Sanskritic dominance to include Dalit, tribal, Islamic, Buddhist, Sikh, Christian, feminist, and regional knowledge traditions. It must encourage critical inquiry rather than civilizational glorification. Indigenous knowledge should enrich education through dialogue with scientific rationality, not through ideological insulation.The future of Indian education depends on whether IKS becomes: A democratic project of epistemic pluralism and decolonization, oran ideological apparatus of cultural nationalism.The distinction between saffronization and secularization ultimately lies not in the existence of IKS itself, but in the politics of its implementation.
1. Govinda, R. “NEP 2020: A Critical Examination.” Social Change, vol. 50, no. 4, 2020, pp. 603–607. 2. Swain, B.C., and Pranay Pandey. “Epistemological Shifts in Indian Higher Education: Implications of the National Education Policy 2020.” Archives of Educational Studies, 2025. 3. Pandit, SantishreeDhulipudi. “Reviving Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS): Bridging Tradition with Modernity.” International Studies, 2025. 4. Ara, Arzuman. “Incorporating IKS in English Language Education: Perspectives from Critical Pedagogy.” Journal of English Language Teaching, 2024. 5. Biswas, Titas. “Pedagogical Curricula and Educational Media: The Malignancy of SaffronisedOtherisation in India.” Zoon Politikon, vol. 11, 2020, pp. 146–199. 6. “The ‘Saffronisation’ of India and Contemporary Political Ideology.” World Englishes, 2020. 7. “National Education Policy 2020 and the Revival of Indian Knowledge Systems: Prospects and Challenges.” 2025. 8. Pandey, Avinash, and Renuka Ozarkar. “Reworking the Aesthetics of Language Use: The Multilingual Challenge for NEP 2020.” Contemporary Education Dialogue, 2024. 9. “Analysing the Tweets to Examine the Behavioural Response of Indian Citizens over the Approval of National Education Policy 2020.” International Journal of Educational Development, 2021. 10. Ahmed, Raja Qaiser et al. “Chosen Trauma and Saffronization of India.” International Area Studies Review, 2022.
Publication Date
6/9/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
6
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...