India’s Discovery, Ancient Glory and the Challenges of the 21 Century: Facts, Claims, and Reality

These days, India is hosting a conference on artificial intelligence, that is, AI. Hosting a conference is not a small opportunity—especially for a country that is spoken of as a ‘World Guru.’ A country that is said to have invented zero; that has produced many scholars such as Aryabhata, Dhanvantari, Kanad, and others. The great mathematician Aryabhata of the fifth century, in his treatise ‘Aryabhatiya,’ spoke of the Earth rotating on its own axis. He gave an accurate value of pi (π) (close to 3.1416). He also provided a scientific explanation of lunar and solar eclipses. A popular claim is that he stated the distance to the Moon—he certainly made astronomical calculations, but a clear mention of precise distance measurement in the modern sense is not found. He explained eclipses through the scientific principle of shadow, which differed from the mythic explanations prevalent at that time. Later, the mathematician Bhaskaracharya mentioned ideas akin to gravitation. He presented early forms of principles like calculus (Calculus). Brahmagupta systematized the mathematical use of zero. In fact, zero and the decimal place-value system are such Indian contributions without which it would be impossible to imagine modern science, engineering, and the computer age. Arab scholars adopted Indian numerals, and from there this method reached Europe, where it came to be called the ‘Hindu-Arabic numeral system.’

From the standpoint of philosophical thought, Kanad’s Vaisheshika philosophy is noteworthy. He considered matter to be composed of subtle, indivisible particles called atoms. Although this was not an experimental theory like modern atomic physics, it still reflects an abstract intellectual height—an attempt to understand the structure of matter on the basis of reason and analysis. This intellectual curiosity places India in the अग्रिम (forefront) of world thought.

In medical science, the works of Sushruta and Charaka remain subjects of research even today. The surgical procedures described in the ‘Sushruta Samhita’—cataract operation, descriptions of instruments, and the technique of nasal reconstruction—indicate that surgical science had developed in a systematic manner. Western medical historians have also acknowledged that early methods of plastic surgery were prevalent in India. This text also mentions more than 300 surgical procedures. The ‘Charaka Samhita’ is a comprehensive treatise on internal medicine and pharmacology. He developed Ayurveda’s system of internal medicine. Dhanvantari is regarded as the symbolic founder of the Ayurvedic tradition; as a historical person, evidence is limited, yet in the cultural memory of the medical tradition his place is extremely important.

From the fifth to the twelfth century, the world’s leading universities were Nalanda and Takshashila, where there were more than 10,000 students and 2,000 teachers. Students came from China, Korea, and Tibet. Scholars like Chanakya and Panini were associated with Takshashila. Chanakya wrote a treatise called ‘Arthashastra.’ From the perspective of political thought, Kautilya’s ‘Arthashastra’ presents a scientific analysis of governance, the economy, tax policy, and diplomacy. This text shows how the administration of the state should be maintained in a balance of ethics and practicality. Emperor Ashoka’s inscriptions are unique in world history—by engraving moral messages on stone and establishing public communication, a ruler signaled transparency in governance. The Chinese traveler Xuanzang, in his travel account, mentions Nalanda’s vast library and intellectual atmosphere. The fact that students from various Asian countries came to India for study gives the idea of a ‘World Guru’ a cultural meaning. This word was not a symbol of spiritual arrogance, but a symbol of the spread of knowledge.

In metallurgy, the approximately sixteen-hundred-year-old Iron Pillar of Delhi is noteworthy, which has remained rust-free for nearly sixteen centuries. This is evidence of the proficiency of ancient Indian metallurgy. In South India, the roughly one-thousand-year-old Chola-era temple architecture—especially the Brihadeeswara Temple—is an example of engineering skill. The massive tower and complex structure were built without modern instruments.

If we return to the third millennium BCE, the archaeological remains of the Indus Valley Civilization tell us that in the Indian subcontinent, urban planning, drainage systems, and standardized construction techniques had already developed. The grid-like streets, baked bricks, underground drains, and public bath of cities like Mohenjo-daro and Harappa indicate that this was not a primitive settlement but a well-organized urban culture. Contemporary with the world’s ancient civilizations—Egypt, Mesopotamia, and China—this civilization proves that the Indian landmass was, from the very beginning, a center of organized life and technical efficiency.

In the fields of philosophy and spirituality, we gave the Vedas, the Upanishads, and the Gita. We gave the traditions of yoga and meditation. Our Sanatan, Buddhist, and Jain philosophies exerted global influence. Economically, India’s position was extremely strong. According to the research of economist Angus Maddison, in the first millennium India constituted nearly one-third of the world economy. Gold came to India from the Roman Empire; trade in spices, textiles, steel, and gems took place globally. This very prosperity became the basis of the metaphor of the ‘Golden Bird.’

The meaning is clear: the tradition of calling India a ‘World Guru’ and a ‘Golden Bird’ is far older than modern political speeches. This concept did not arise from emotional excess, but from that historical reality in which India for thousands of years remained a central site of knowledge, commerce, philosophy, medicine, mathematics, astronomy, and cultural exchange. A country that is among the oldest civilizations in the world; that is the oldest republic and the largest democracy; that taught the world lessons of peace; that demonstrated the widest practice of nonviolence; whose Father of the Nation is revered in more than a hundred large and small countries across the world. Yet while speaking of this glory, there is a serious responsibility: one must maintain a clear distinction between myth and evidence. National pride does not mean we declare exaggeration to be history. Rather, it means we present verified achievements on the basis of solid research.

Because it is the misfortune of this country that the discussion or mention of its achievements has been done less by its own citizens and more by foreigners. History bears witness that in the latter half of the eighteenth century, when Sir William Jones founded the Asiatic Society in Calcutta, the West’s view of India did not remain merely administrative or commercial. Rather, it began to take the form of an intellectual curiosity. Jones studied Sanskrit and made the historic remark that Sanskrit has deep similarity with Greek and Latin. This was the moment when the concept of the Indo-European language family began to take shape. Sanskrit suddenly was no longer merely an ‘eastern language.’ It became a cornerstone of world linguistics. This discovery became a reason for a new respect for India in Western academia, though the shadow of colonial power-relations also lay within it.

In the nineteenth century, Max Müller edited and translated the Vedas and introduced Europe to Vedic literature. The series edited by him, ‘Sacred Books of the East,’ brought the Upanishads, Dharmashastras, and Buddhist texts to Western readers. His interpretations were also criticized—questions were raised about his methods of dating and his colonial mindset—yet it is also true that without the broad translation of the Vedas and Upanishads, the European intellectual world of the nineteenth century might not have become acquainted with the philosophical depth of India. This Western discovery did not remain limited to text-editing alone. It deeply influenced the German Romantic movement, comparative study of religion, and linguistics.

In understanding India’s ancient scripts and history too, the role of Western scholars was decisive. James Prinsep succeeded in reading the Brahmi script and thus uncovered the mystery of Emperor Ashoka’s inscriptions. Before this, Ashoka had become almost lost in Indian public memory. His pillars and inscriptions stood silently. Prinsep’s efforts revived Mauryan history and proved that in the third century BCE a well-organized ethical-political system of governance existed in India. This discovery was not merely archaeological. It gave a new dimension to India’s historical consciousness.

The task of establishing India’s linguistic diversity on the world stage was carried out by George Abraham Grierson through the ‘Linguistic Survey of India.’ He documented hundreds of languages and dialects. This survey was certainly a project of colonial administration. Yet it proved that India is a multilingual civilization whose linguistic wealth is extraordinary. This study enriched comparative linguistics and gave Indian languages a place in global academic discourse.

The West’s ‘discovery’ was not only a product of the colonial period. Long before that, in the medieval era, Al-Biruni came to India and in ‘Kitab al-Hind’ he described Indian mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy in fine detail. He mentioned Indian numerals and scientific methods, which later reached Europe through the Islamic world. Similarly, in the seventh century, the Chinese monk Xuanzang gave a detailed account of Nalanda University and the Indian education system. His accounts introduced East Asia to India’s intellectual splendor. This too was a form of India’s discovery—from both east and west.

The entry of the Upanishads into Europe is also an important chapter. The French scholar Abraham Anquetil-Duperron presented a Latin translation of the Upanishads as ‘Oupnek’hat.’ This work reached the German philosopher Schopenhauer, who called the Upanishads a source of consolation in his life. In this way, Indian philosophical thought entered the European philosophical tradition. The German thinker Friedrich Schlegel also made Sanskrit and Indian philosophy a foundation of European Romantic consciousness. India was no longer only a colony; it became a place of philosophical inspiration.

In the twentieth century, the historian Arnold Toynbee described the Indian spiritual tradition as important for the future of human civilization. According to him, if the West’s material progress does not find inner balance, crisis will arise, and for this balance India’s spiritual vision can be guiding. This remark was the result of that long process in which the West began to see India not merely as an ‘other,’ but as a possible teacher.

Even so, it must be accepted that this Western ‘discovery’ was not pure. Colonial power-relations affected the production of knowledge. Many scholars interpreted Indian texts according to European standards, which sometimes distorted original contexts. Yet it is equally true that through modern techniques of documentation, printing, and translation, India’s intellectual tradition became part of global discourse. In this process, respect and dominance both moved together. Therefore, the West’s discovery of India is a dialectical story—on one side, curiosity, admiration, and study; on the other, power, classification, and control. Yet the result of this entire process was that the Vedas, the Upanishads, Sanskrit grammar, Indian mathematics, Buddhist philosophy, Mauryan history, and linguistic diversity became subjects of study in the world’s universities. If the West discovered India, that discovery also changed the West itself. Modern disciplines of linguistics, comparative study of religion, philosophy, and history were enriched by Indian material.

Ultimately, the question is not why the West discovered India. The question is: today, with what vision (दृष्टि ) does India itself look at its heritage? If we neither drown our tradition in blind pride nor abandon it in self-negation, then India can itself write the next chapter of ‘India’s discovery.’ The West’s discovery opened a door. Now, passing through that door, beginning a new journey of self-confidence, critical विवेक (discernment), and global dialogue is in our hands.

But if we look closely at the twenty-first century, we are continuously being left behind in all these journeys. The twenty-first century has witnessed the greatest transformations across the world in renewable energy, the social media revolution, and artificial intelligence. Yet if we evaluate our progress in all these fields, a deeply disappointing picture emerges.

In renewable energy (Renewable Energy), in solar technology (Solar Technology) the United States and Germany, in solar panel manufacturing (Solar Panel Manufacturing) China, and in wind turbine technology (Wind Turbine Technology) Denmark are leading the world. India did not lead in technical invention, but many of the world’s largest solar parks are in India. India initiated the International Solar Alliance (ISA). In solar installation capacity, India is among the top countries. We can say that India has not been a technology creator, but has been a large-scale adopter and implementer.

The global renewable energy market is approximately USD 1,498 billion (2024), and it is estimated to grow to USD 5,840 billion by 2034. India’s renewable energy market is approximately USD 25.95 billion (2025), and it is estimated to become USD ~52.6 billion by 2034. Globally, this market is enormous (roughly ~1.5 trillion dollars today). India’s share is also rising, but it is still a small part of the global total.

In the social media revolution, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp are American. India’s role is that it has the world’s largest user base, and it has the capacity for an explosion of digital consumer power and content creation. But no global social media platform has emerged from India; the technology architecture was not developed in India. Yes, after the TikTok ban, Indian apps came, but they could not become global at scale. India is a market leader here, not a technology originator.

The global social media analytics/market—different reports indicate that the analytics portion is about USD ~16–20+ billion, and it is estimated to grow further to ~USD 70+ billion.

The market for AI in social media (AI technology used within social media) is itself expanding at scale—estimated from ~USD 2.7–3.4 billion to ~USD 10+ billion in the future. The actual “social media platform” market is so large that its commercial value (such as advertising, data, analytics) and the worldwide user-based market valuations of social apps are assessed in different components.

In India, about 500 million people (about 50 crore) use social media. On average, an Indian spends about 3.2 hours daily on social media. India is the world’s second-largest social media user market.

If we speak of artificial intelligence, the United States (OpenAI, Google DeepMind) and China (Baidu, Alibaba AI) can be called leading countries. But India’s role is only that scientists of Indian origin are leading in Silicon Valley. There are large numbers of AI engineers. There is a strong presence in the IT service sector. But no foundational AI model is from India. No global AI platform is of Indian origin. India is again a human-capital contributor, not a platform creator.

The global AI market—according to reports—has reached around USD 288.8 billion around 2025. India’s AI market—around USD 6.05 billion in 2024—and is estimated to grow rapidly with 2025–30 growth. The AI market in the world is huge (~200+ billion+ dollars). India is still in an early stage, but in terms of user base (AI usage) it has become a large market.

India is not a global leader as a creator of AI technology, but it is growing rapidly in AI usage, development, user base, and services. AI startups, research, and government policy from India are also working to grow the AI sector.

If the backbone of the twenty-first century’s energy revolution can be called one technology, it is the battery—especially lithium-ion (Li-ion) and now emerging solid-state, sodium-ion, and green hydrogen storage technologies. Now the direct question: where does India stand in battery manufacturing? The answer is neither despairing nor exciting—rather, it is transitional.

In battery manufacturing, global leadership is with China’s CATL and BYD, South Korea’s LG Energy Solution, Japan’s Panasonic, and America’s Tesla and QuantumScape. More than 70 percent of the world’s lithium-ion cell manufacturing is in China. India’s current position is that it has not been a large-scale battery cell manufacturer. It is not a major player in lithium refining. It is not a leader in battery technology patents.

But India does battery pack assembly. The EV market is growing rapidly. It is working aggressively on energy storage policy. The Government of India has started the PLI (Production Linked Incentive) scheme for “Advanced Chemistry Cell (ACC)” production. Under this scheme, a target of 50 GWh manufacturing capacity is set and domestic cell manufacturing is promoted. Major Indian groups such as Reliance, Tata, and the Ola Electric group are included. But raw material is a major challenge. India is not a major producer of lithium, cobalt, and nickel required for batteries. Although news came in 2023 of lithium reserves found in Jammu and Kashmir, commercial mining is still at an early stage.

India ranks third in the world in renewable energy installed capacity and in usage. It is attracting global investment and moving toward the 500 GW target. India has already achieved around a 25% renewable share in power generation, which indicates a solid global role.

In India, some startups and research institutes are working on sodium-ion batteries. Sodium is abundant in India, the cost is low, and energy density is somewhat lower, but it is suitable for grid storage. If India succeeds in this direction, it can become a leader from being a follower. ISRO developed lithium-ion technology and transferred it to the private sector, but expansion at commercial scale remained slow.

The global energy storage (battery) market is about USD 50.8 billion (2025) and is estimated to grow to USD 105.96 billion by 2030. CAGR is about 16% (2025–30).

India’s battery market is estimated to grow from USD 14.01 billion (2026) to USD 23.3 billion (2031).

This means: the demand and investment in batteries across the world is enormous, and India is also emerging rapidly, but it is still a smaller market at the global level.

India is the fastest-growing EV market in the world. If cell manufacturing is established domestically, the recycling industry develops, and research investment increases, then India can become an important player by 2030. The reality is that India is still import dependent (especially on China). It is moving toward production based on technology licenses. It is limited at the innovation stage. But demand is strong, policy support exists, and capital investment is coming.

So again the same question arises: is India behind? The straight answer is—yes, if we compare it with China, the United States, or South Korea. The strategic question is: when in the twenty-first century data is the new oil and the battery is the new energy currency, if India does not become self-reliant in cell technology, it will remain dependent in the EV revolution.