• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Assasination Of Mahatma Gandhi
I could not help wonder if the cooling off of the hindu emotions had something to do with Mahatma Gandhi's assasination. From what I read (I was not born then), the average hindu was more pro-hindutva and that event push the secular agenda on hindus. It was as though hindus were ashamed to be associated with a ideology that killed the father of the nation. That made it easy for commies and congress party to push the secular agenda. Commies, who during the freedom struggle, considered Gandhi and hinduism as the greatest obstacles to "the revolution", used the death of Gandhi to suppress hinduism. The congress party, which was to be dissolved as per Gandhi's wishes, under the socialist Nehru became pro-minority after Sardar's death. Many of the constitutional amendments that were made could possibly be traced to suppressing the hindu unity. Government control of temples was one such measure.

My idea of starting this discussion is following:

1) What if Gandhi had not been killed

2) How his death impacted hindu psyche

3) How to correct this change and make hindus pro-hindutva
Following Gandhi's death, the Hindu population in general went into a guilt complex because time and again they were told that 'a Hindu killed Gandhi', and that 'RSS did it.'

The real motive and reason behind the assasination was never made public, and Nathuram's side of the story was covered up.

Step one would be to make hindus aware why Gandhi was killed and get a closure on it.

Given here is Nathuram Godse's Defense. May it please your honour.


“If devotion to one’s country amounts to a sin, I admit I have committed that sin. If it is meritorious, I humbly claim the merit thereof. I fully and confidently believe that if there be any other court of justice beyond the one founded by the mortals my act will not be taken as unjust. If after the death there be no such place to reach or to go, there is nothing to be said. I have resorted to the action I did purely for the benefit of the humanity. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to lakhs of Hindus.”


(Courtesy and Copyright Shri Gopal Godse. These excerpts are verbatim from the book, May it Please your Honor.)

It is obvious that the High Court was struck by the conduct and ability of Nathuram. It has made a special reference to it while recording the judgement. Says Justice Achhru Ram :

"Of all the appellants Nathuram V. Godse has not challenged his conviction under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code, nor has he appealed from the sentence of death passed on him in respect of the offence. He has confined his appeal and also his arguments at the Bar only to the other charges, which have been found, proved against him--- He personally argued his appeal, I must say, with conspicuous ability evidencing a mastery of facts which would have done credit to any counsel."

As regards Nathuram's power of thinking, the Judge noted:

"Although he failed in his matriculation examination, he is widely read. While arguing his Appeal, he showed a fair knowledge of the English language and a remarkable capacity for clear thinking."

In the course of arguments, Nathuram had made a plea that on January 20, 1948 he was not present at the Birla House. The judges rejected the plea. In support of their rejection, they referred to their observations of the strong will power of Nathuram. Shri Achhru Ram says:

"We have seen quite enough of Nathuram during the period of more than five weeks we were hearing these appeals and particularly during the eight or nine days while he was arguing his own case, and I cannot imagine that a man of his caliber could have even entertained the idea (of remaining behind)."

Justice Khosla after retirement, in a pen picture of the Court scene as it then passed before his mind's eye has said:

“The highlight of the appeal before us was the discourse delivered by Nathuram Godse in his defence. He spoke for several hours, discussing, in the first instance, the facts of the case and then the motive, which had prompted him to take Mahatma Gandhi's life--

The audience was visibly and audibly moved. There was a deep silence when he ceased speaking. Many women were in tears and men coughing and searching for their handkerchiefs. The silence was accentuated and made deeper by the sound of an occasional subdued sniff or a muffled cough-

I have however, no doubt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse's appeal. They would have brought in a verdict of 'not guilty' by an over-whelming majority.”

Nathuram had displayed the same ability while arguing his case before Shri Atma Charan Agrawal, the Judge of the Special Court, Red Fort, Delhi. These are excerpts of his defence before Judge Agrawal.

The number 15, 16,.. is the para number as it appears in the book.

The statement in the following pages is a part of the record of the Gandhi murder case, which can be found in Printed Volume II, Criminal Appeals Nos 66 to 72 of the 1949 Punjab High Court (then at) Simla.

2.1 Answer to Charge-sheet

15 - I have never made a secret about the fact that I supported the ideology, which was opposed to that of Gandhiji. I firmly believed that the teachings of absolute Ahimsa as advocated by Gandhiji would ultimately result in the emasculation of the Hindu community incapable of resisting the aggression of other communities especially the Muslims.

To counter this evil I decided to enter public life and as a part of the propaganda started a daily newspaper Agrani. I might mention that is not so much Gandhi's Ahimsa that we were opposed to but his bias for Muslims, prejudicial and detrimental to the Hindu Community and its interests. I have fully described my point of view and have quoted instances when how Gandhi became responsible for a number of calamities which the Hindu community had to suffer and undergo.

16. On 13th of January 1948. I learnt that Gandhiji had decided to go on fast unto death. The reason given for such fast was that he wanted an assurance of Hindu-Muslim unity in Indian Dominion. But I and many others could easily see that the real motive behind the fast was not merely the so-called Hindu-Muslim Unity, but to compel the Dominion Government to pay the sum of Rs. 55 crores to Pakistan, the payment of which was emphatically refused by the Government.

25. Having reached Delhi in great despair, I visited the refugee camps at Delhi. While moving in the camps my thoughts took a definite and final turn. Chancely I came across a refugee who was dealing in arms and he showed me the pistol. I was tempted to have it and I bought it from him. It is the pistol which I later used in the shots I fired. On coming to the Delhi Railway station I spent the night of 29th thinking and re-thinking about my resolve to end the present chaos and further destruction of the Hindus. I shall now deal about my relations with Veer Savarkar in political and other matters of which the prosecution has made so much.

26. Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctitively came to revere Hindu religion, history and culture. I had been instinctively proud of Hinduism as a whole. Nevertheless as I grew up I developed a tendency to free unthinking unfettered by a superstitious allegiance to any ism political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I publicly joined anti-caste movements and maintained all that Hindus should be treated with equal status as to rights social and religious, and should be high or low on merit alone, and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession. I used to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which of Hindus broke caste rules and dined the company of each other.

27. I have read the works of Dadabhai Naoraji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries in the world like England, France, America and Russia. Not only that I studied tolerably well the current tenets of socialism and Communism too. But above all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gji had written or spoken, as to my mind, these two ideologies had contributed more to the thought and action of modern India during the last fifty years or so, than any other any single factor had done.

28. All this reading and thinking brought me to believe me that above all it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and the Hindu people.

29. I have worked for several years in the R.S.S. and later joined the Hindu Mahasabha and volunteered myself to fight as a soldier under its pan-Hindu flag. About this time Savarkar was elected as the president of the Sabha. The movement got electrified and millions of sanghatanists looked up to him as the chosen hero, as the ablest and most faithful advocate of the Hindu cause. I too was one of them, in the process came to be personally acquainted with Savarkarji.

30. Later on my friend Apte and myself decided to start a daily paper devoted to Hindu Sanghatan Movement. After securing sympathy and financial help from a number of Sanghatanist we met Savarkar as the President of the Mahasabha. He advanced a sum of Rs 15,000/ as his quota of the capital required, on the condition that a limited company should be registered at the earliest and his advance should be transformed into so many shares.

31. Accordingly, we started the Daily Marathi paper, Daily Agrani. The sums advanced by Savarkar and others were converted into shares of Rs 500 each. Among the directors and donors were such leading men as Seth Gulab Chand (brother of Seth Walchand Hirachandji), Mr Shingre, an ex-Minister of Bhor, Shreeman Bhalji Pendharkar, the film magnate of Kolhapur and others. I was the editor with Apte and myself being Managing Directors of the company.

33. But it must be specifically noted that our casual visits to Savarkar Sadan were restricted generally to this Hindu Sanghatan office, situated on the ground floor. Savarkar was residing on the first floor. It was rarely that we could meet Savarkar personally and that too by personal appointment.

34. Some three years ago, Savarkar's health got seriously impaired and since then he was confined to bed. Thus deprived of his virile leadership the activities and influence of the Mahasabha got crippled and when Dr Mookerjee became its President it was reduced to the position of a handmaid to the Congress. It became quite incapable of counteracting the dangerous anti-Hindu activities of Gandhite cabal on the one hand and the Muslim League on the other. Seeing this I lost all hope in the efficiency of the policy of running the Sanghatan movement on the constitutional lines of the Mahasabha and began to shift myself. I determined to organized a youthful group of Sanghatanists and adopt a fighting program against the Congress and the League without consulting any of those prominent but old leaders of the Mahasabha.

35. I shall just mention here two striking instances only out of a number of them which painfully opened my eyes about this time to the fact that Veer Savarkar and other old leaders of Mahasabha could no longer be relied upon by me and the Hindu youths of my persuasion to guide or even to appreciate the fighting program with which we aimed to counteract Gandhiji's activities inside and the Muslim League outside. In 1946 or thereabout the Muslim atrocities perpetrated on the Hindus under the Government patronage of Surhawardy in Noakhali, made our blood boil. Our shame and indignation knew no bounds, when we saw that Gandhiji had come forward to shield that very Surhawardy and began to style him as ‘Shahid Saheb-a Martyr Soul (!) even in his prayer meetings. Not only that but after coming to Delhi, Gandhiji began to hold his prayer meetings in a Hindu temple in Bhangi Colony and persisted in reading passages from Quoran as a part of the prayer in that Hindu temple in spite of the protest of the Hindu worshippers there. Of course he dared not read the Geeta in a mosque in the teeth of Muslim reaction would have been if he had done so. But he could safely trample over the feelings of the tolerant Hindu. To belie this belief I determined to prove to Gandhiji that the Hindu too could be intolerant when his honor was insulted.

36 to 39 - Apte and I decided to stage a series of demonstrations in Delhi at his meeting and make it impossible for him to hold such prayers. Seeing the protest Gandhi slyly took shelter behind barred and guarded doors. But when Savarkar read about the report of this demonstration he blamed me for such anarchical tactics. Another incident was the treatment of the post Independence Indian government by the Mahasabhaites. Savarkar felt that the government needed all support to prevent a Civil War and enable Muslims to realize their mission to turn the whole of India into Pakistan. My friends and others were unconvinced. We felt that time had come to bid good-bye to Savarkar and cease to consult him in our future policy and programs, nor should we confide in him our plans.

40. Just after that followed the terrible outburst of Muslim fanaticism in the Punjab and other parts of India. The Congress Government began to persecute, prosecute, and shoot the Hindus themselves who dared to resist the Muslim forces in Bihar, Calcutta, Punjab and other places. Our worst fears seemed to be coming true; and yet how painful and disgraceful it was for us to find that the 15th of August 1947 was celebrated with illumination and festivities, while the whole of the Punjab was set by the Muslims in flames and Hindu blood ran rivers. The Hindu Mahasabhaites of my persuasion decided to boycott the festivities and the Congressite Government and to launch a fighting program to check Muslim onslaughts.

45. I began to criticize the Mahasabha and the policy of its old leaders in my daily paper Agrani.

47. I would not have referred to the above details in his statement but for the learned prosecutor's opening speech in which he painted me as a mere tool in the hands of Savarkar.

2.2 Gandhiji's Politics X-rayed

51. In my writings and speeches I have always advocated that the religious and communal consideration should be entirely eschewed in the public affairs of the country. At elections, inside and outside the legislatures and in the making and unmaking of Cabinets I have throughout stood for a secular State with joint electorates and to my mind this is the only sensible thing to do. (Here I read parts of the resolutions passed at the Bilaspur Session of the Hindu Mahasabha held in December, 1994. Annexure Pages 12 and 13), Under the influence of the Congress this ideal was steadily making headway amongst the Hindus. But the Muslims as a community first stood aloof and later on under the corroding influence of the Divide and Rule Policy of the foreign masters were encouraged to cherish the ambition of dominating the Hindus. The first indication of this outlook was the demand for separate electorates (conceded by the Congress firstly by the Lucknow Pact of 1916 and at each successive revision of the constitution thereafter) instigated by the then Viceroy Lord Minto in 1906. The British Government accepted this demand under the excuse of minority protection. While the Congress party offered a verbal opposition, it progressively supported separatism by ultimately adopting the notorious formula of neither accepting nor rejecting in 1934.

52. Thus had originated and intensified the demand for the disintegration of this country. What was the thin end of the wedge in the beginning became Pakistan in the end.

54. Under the inspiration of our British masters on one hand and encouragement under G's leadership on the other, the Muslim League went on increasing its demands on Communal basis. The Muslim community continuously backed the League, each successive election proved that the League was able to bank on the fanaticism and ignorance of the Muslim masses and the League was those encouraged, in its policy of separatisms on an ever-increasing scale year after year.

56. I will consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and if possible to overpower such an enemy by the use of force. Shree Ramchandra killed Ravan in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita. Shree Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness. In the Mahabharat Arjun had to fight and slay, quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma, because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence is to betray a total ignorance of the springs of human action. It was the heroic fight put up by the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj that first checked and eventually destroyed Muslim tyranny: in India. It was absolutely correct tactics for Shivaji to kill Afzul Khan as the latter would otherwise have surely killed him. In condemning Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Govind as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit.

59. As pointed out herein below Gandhi's political activities can be conveniently divided under three heads. He returned to India from Emgland sometime about the end of 1914 and plunged into the public life of the country almost immediately. Unfortunately after his arrival Sir Pherozeshah Mehta and G.K. Gokhale, Gandhi called the latter his Guru, died within a short span of time. Gandhi's began his work by starting an Ashram in Ahmedabad on the banks of the Sabarmati river, and made Truth and Non-Violence his slogans. He had often acted contrary to his professed principles and it was for the appeasing the Muslim he hardly had any scruple in doing so. Truth and non-violence are excellent as an ideal, to be practiced in day-today-life and not in the air. I am showing later on that Gandhiji himself was guilty of glaring breaches of his much-vaunted ideals.

61. When Gandhiji returned to India at the end of 1914, he brought with him a very high reputation for courageous leadership of Indians in South Africa. He had placed himself at the head of the struggle for the assertion and vindication of the national self-respect of India and for our rights of citizenship against white tyranny in that country. He was honored by Hindus, Muslims and Parsis alike and was universally acclaimed as the leader of all Indians in South Africa. His simplicity, devotion, self-sacrifice etc had raised the prestige of Indians. In India he had endeared himself to all.

62. In South Africa Indians had claimed nothing but elementary rights of citizenship, which were denied to them. Hindus, Muslims and Parsis therefore stood united against the common enemy. The Indian problem at home was quite different.

We were fighting for home-rule, self-government and independence. We were determined to overthrow an Imperial Power, which was determined to continue its sway over us by using all possible means including the policy of Divide and Rule which had intensified the cleavage between the Hindus and Muslims. Gandhiji was thus confronted at the very outset with a problem the like of which he had never encountered in South Africa. But in India communal franchise, separate electorates and the like had already undermined the solidarity of the nation. Gandhiji, therefore found it most difficult to obtain the unquestioned leadership of the Hindus and the Muslims in India as in South Africa. It was absurd for his honest mind to think of accepting the generalship of an army divided against itself.

63. For the first five years there was not much hope for the attainment by him of supreme leadership in Indian politics. The stalwarts Tilak, Naoroji others were still alive and Gandhi was still a junior compared to them in age and experience. But an inexplorable fate removed all of them in five years and with the death of Tilak in 1920, Gandhiji was at once thrown into the front line.

64. He saw that the foreign rulers by the policy of ‘Divide and Rule' were corrupting the patriotism of the Muslim and that there was little chance of his leading a united host to the battle for Freedom unless he was able to cement fellow feeling and common devotion to the Motherland. He, therefore, made Hindu-Muslim Unity the foundation of his polities. As a counter to the British tactics he started making the most friendly approaches to the Muslim community and reinforced them by making generous and extravagant promises to the Muslims. This, of course, was not wrong in itself so long as it was done consistently with India's struggle for democratic national freedom; but Gandhiji completely forgot this, the most essential aspect of his campaign for unity, with what results we all know by now.

65. Our British masters were able to make concessions to Muslims and to keep the various communities divided. By 1919 Gandhiji had become desperate in his endeavor to get Muslims to trust him and went from one absurd promise to another. He backed the Khilafat Movement in this country and was able to enlist the full support of the National Congress in that policy. For a time Gandhi appeared to succeed and prominent Muslim leaders became his followers. Jinnah was nowhere in 1920-21 and the Ali Brothers became defacto Muslim leaders. He made the most of the Ali Brothers, raised them to the skies by flattery and unending concessions. The Muslims ran the Khilafat Committee as a distinct political religious organization and throughout maintained it as a separate identity from the Congress, very soon the Moplah Rebellion showed that the Muslims had not the slightest idea of national unity on which Gandhiji had set his heart and had staked so much. There followed as usual in such cases, a huge slaughter of Hindus, forcible conversion and rape.

By the Act of 1919 separate electorates were enlarged and communal representation was continued not merely in the legislature and the local bodies but even extended within the Cabinet. The services began to be distributed on the communal basis and the Muslims obtained high jobs from our British Masters not on merit but by remaining aloof from the struggle for freedom and because of their being the followers of Islam.

Government patronage to Muslims in the name of Minority protection penetrated throughout the body politic of the Indian State and the Mahatma's meaningless slogans were no match against this wholesale corruption of the Muslim mind. By 1925 it had become clear that the Government won all the time but like the proverbial gambler Gandhiji increased his stake.

He agreed to the separation of Sind and to the creation of a separate province in the N.W.Frontier. He also went on conceding one demand after to another to the Muslim League in the vain hope of enlisting its support in the national struggle. By this time the stock of the Ali Brothers had gone down and Mr Jinnah who had staged a comeback was having the best of both the worlds. Whatever concessions the Government and the Congress made, Mr Jinnah accepted and asked for more.

Separation of Sind from Bombay and the creation of the N. W. Frontier were followed by the Round Table Conference in which the minority question loomed large. Mr. Jinnah stood out against the federation until Gandhiji himself requested Mr. Mc Donald, the Labour Premier, to give the Communal Award. Further seeds were thereby sown for the disintegration of this country. The communal principle became deeply imbeded in the Reforms of 1935. Mr Jinnah took the fullest advantage of every situation. The Federation of India, which was to consolidate Indian Nationhood, was in fact, defeated; Mr. Jinnah had never taken kindly to it.

The Congress continued to support the Communal Award neither supporting nor rejecting it, which really meant its tactical acceptance. During the War 1939-44, Mr. Jinnah took up openly one attitude - a sort of benevolent neutrality - and promised to support the war as soon as the Muslims rights were conceded, in April 1940, within six months of the War; Jinnah came out with the demand for Pakistan on the basis of the two-nation theory.

66. The Mahasabha realized that the War was an opportunity for our young men to have military training. The result was that nearly ½ million Hindus learnt the art of war and mastered the mechanized aspect of modern warfare. The troops being used today in Kashmir and Hyderabad would have not have been there ready made but for the effort of men with such outlook.

67. The 'Quit India' campaign of 1942 had completely failed. Britishers had triumphed and the Congress leaders decided to come to terms with them. Indeed in the subsequent years the Congress policy can be quite correctly described as 'Peace at any Price' and 'Congress in Office at all costs.' The Congress compromised with the British who placed it in office and in return the Congress surrendered to the violence of Mr. Jinnah, carved out one-third of India to him an explicitly racial and theological State and destroyed two million human beings in the process,

68. This section summarizes the background of the agony of India's partition and the tragedy of Gandhiji assassination. Neither the one nor the other gives me any pleasure to record or to remember, but the Indian people and the world at large need to know the history of the last thirty years during which Indian has been torn into pieces by the Imperialist Policy of the British and under a mistaken policy of communal amity. One hundred and ten millions of people have become homeless of which 4 million are Muslims and when I found that even after such terrible results Gandhiji continued to pursue the same policy of appeasement, my blood boiled, and I could not tolerate him any longer. Gandhiji in fact successed in doing what the British always wanted to do in pursuance of their policy of Divide and Rule. He helped them in dividing India and it is not yet certain whether their rule has ceased.

2.3 Gandhiji's Politics X-Rayed

69. The accumulating provocation of 32 years culminating in his latest pro-Muslim fast at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhiji should be brought to an end. On coming back to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership it had to accept his infallibility, if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on in his own way. He alone was the judge of everyone and everything, he was the master brain behind guiding the civil disobedience movement, nobody else knew the technique of that movement, he alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement may successed or fail, bring untold disasters and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. Many people thought his politics were irrational but had to either withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do what he liked with it. In such a position of such irresponsibility Gandhiji was guilty of blunder after blunder. Not one single political victory can be claimed to his credit during 33 years of his political predominance. Herein below I mention in some details the series of blunders, which he committed during 32 years of his undisputed leadership.

70. In the moment of opportunism the Mahatma misconceived the idea that by helping the Khilafat Movement he would become the leader of the Muslims in India as the already was of the Hindus and that with the Hindu-Muslim Unity thus achieved the British would soon have to concede Swaraj. But again, Gandhiji miscalculated and by leading the Indian National Congress to identify itself with the Khilafat Movement, he quite gratuitously introduced theological element. Which has proved a tragic and expensive calamity. For the moment the movement for the revival of the Khilafat appeared to be succeeding. The Muslims who were not with the Khilafat Movement soon became out of date and the Ali Brothers who were its foremen leaders swam on the crest of a wave of popularity and carried everything before them. Mr. Jinnha found himself a lonely figure and was of no consideration for a few years. The movement however failed.

Our British Masters were not unduly shaken and as a combined result of repression and the Montague Chelmsford Reforms they were able to tide over the Khilafat Movement in a few years time. The Muslims had kept the Khilafat Movement distinct from the Congress all along; they welcomed the Congress support but they did not merge with it. When failure came the Muslims became desperate with disappointment and their anger was sited on the Hindus. Innumerable riots in the various parts of India followed. The chief victims being the Hindus everywhere. The Hindu-Muslim Unity of the Mahatma became a mirage.

The Moplah rebellion as it was called was the most prolonged and concentrated attack on the Hindu religion, Hindu honor, Hindu life and Hindu property; hundreds of Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam, women were outraged. The Mahatma who had brought about all this calamity on India by his communal policy kept mum. He never uttered a single word of reproach against the aggressors nor did he allow the Congress to take any active steps whereby repetition of such outrages could be prevented. On the other hand he went to the length of denying the numerous cases of forcible conversions in Malabar and actually published in his paper 'Young India' that there was only one case of forcible conversion.

Afghan Amir Intrigue - "I cannot understand why the Ali Brothers are going to be arrested as the rumors go, and why I am to remain free. They have done nothing, which I would not do. If they had sent a message to Amir, I also would send one to inform the Amir that if he came, no Indian so long as I can help it would help the Government to drive him back."

Attack on Arya Samaj - Gandhiji ostentatiously displayed his love for Muslims by a most unworthy and unprovoked attack on the Arya Samaj in 1924. He publicly denounced the Samaj for its supposed sins of omission and commission; it was an utterly unwarranted reckless and discreditable attack, but whatever would please the Mohammedans was the heart's desire of Gandhiji

The late Lala Lajpat Rai, and Swami Shradhanand to mention only two names were staunch Arya Samajists but they were foremost amongst the leaders of the Congress till the end of their life. They did not stand for blind support to Gandhi, but were definitely opposed to his pro-Muslim policy, and openly fought him on that issue.

Gandhiji's attack did not improve his popularity with the Muslims but it provoked a Muslim youth to murder Swami Shraddhanandji within a few months.

Separation of Sind - By 1928 Mr. Jinnah's stock had risen very high and the Mahatma had already conceded many unfair and improper demands of Mr. Jinnah at the expense of Indian democracy and the Indian nation and the Hindus. The Mahatma even supported the separation of Sind from the Bombay Presidency and threw the Hindus of Sind to the communal wolves. Numerous riots took place in Sind- Karachi, Sukkur, Shikapur and other places in which the Hindus were the only sufferers and the Hindu-Muslim Unity receded further from the horizon.

League's Good Bye to Congress - With each defeat Gandhiji became even more keen on his method of achieving Hindu-Muslim Unity. Like the gambler who had lost heavily he became more desperate increasing his stakes each time and indulged in the most irrational concessions if only they could placate Mr. Jinnah and enlist his support under the Mahatma's leadership in the fight for freedom. But the aloofness of the Muslim from the Congress increased with the advance of years and the Muslim League refused to have anything to do with the Congress after 1928. The resolution of Independence passed by the Congress at its Lahore Session in 1929 found the Muslims conspicuous by their absence and strongly aloof from the Congress organization. The hope of Hindu Muslim Unity was hardly entertained by anybody thereafter; but Gandhiji continued to be resolutely optimistic and surrendered more and more to Muslim communalism.

Round -Table Conference and Communal Award - The British authorities both in India and in England, had realized that the demand for a bigger and truer installment of constitutional reforms was most insistent and clamant in India and that in spite of their unscrupulous policy of 'Divide and Rule' and the communal discord which it had generated, the resulting situation had brought them no permanence and security so far as British Rule in India was concerned.

The Congress however soon regretted its boycott of the First Round Table Conference and at the Karachi Congress of 1931 it was decided to send Gandhiji alone as the Congress Representative to Second Session of Round Table Conference. Anybody who reads the proceedings of that Session will realize that Gandhiji was the biggest factor in bringing about the total failure of the Conference. Not one of the decisions of the Round Table Conference was in support of democracy or nationalism and the Mahatma went to the length of inviting Mr. Ramsay McDonald to give what was called the communal Award, there by strengthening the disintegrating forces of communalism which had already corroded the body politic for 24 years past The Mahatma was thus responsible for a direct and substantial intrusion of communal electorate and communal franchise in the future Parliament of India.

No wonder under the garb of minority protection we got in the Government of India Act of 1935 a permanent statutory recognition of communal franchise, communal electorate and even weightage for the minorities especially the Muslim, both in the provinces and in the Centre. Those elected on the communal franchise would be naturally communal minded and would have no interest in bridging the gulf between communalism and nationalism.

Acceptance of Office and Resigning in Huff - Provincial Autonomy was introduced from the 1st of April, 1937 under the Government of India Act 1935. The act was bristling with safeguards, special powers, and protection to British personnel in the various services intact. The Congress therefore would not accept office at first but soon found out that in every Province a Ministry was constituted and that at least in five Provinces they were functioning in the normal manner.

In the other six Provinces the Ministers were in a minority but they were forging ahead with their nation building program and the Congress felt that it would be left out in the cold if it persisted in its policy of barren negation. It therefore decided to accept office in July, 1937; in doing so it committed a serious blunder in excluding the members of the Muslim League from effective participation in the Cabinet They only admitted into the Cabinet such Muslims as were congress-men.

Rejection of Muslim League Members as Ministers gave Mr. Jinnah a tactical advantage, which he utilized to the full and in 1939 when the Congress resigned Office in a huff; it completely played in the hand of the Muslim League and British Imperialism. Under Section 93 of the Government of India Act 1935 the Governments of the Congress Provinces were taken over by the Governors and the Muslim League Ministries remained in power and authority in the remaining Provinces. The Governors carried on the administration with a definite leaning towards the Muslims as an imperial policy of Britain and communalism reigned throughout the country through the Muslim Ministries on one hand and pro-Muslim Governors on the other.

The Hindu-Muslim Unity of Gandhiji became a dream, if it were ever anything else; but Gandhiji never cared. His ambition was to become the leader of Hindu and Muslims alike and in resigning the ministries the congress again sacrificed democracy and nationalism.

League taking Advantage of War - The congress opposed the war in one way or another. Mr. Jinnah and the League had a very clear policy. They remained neutral and created no trouble for the Government; but in the year following, the Lahore Session of the Muslim League passed a resolution for the partition of India as a condition for their co-operation in the war. Lord Linlithgow within a few months of the Lahore Resolution gave full support to the Muslims in their policy of separation by a declaration of Government Policy, which assured the Muslims that no change in the political constitution of India will be made without the consent of all the elements in India's national life. The Muslim League and Mr. Jinnah were thus vested with a veto over the political progress of this country by the pledge given by the Viceroy of India.

Quit-India' by Congress and Divide and Quit by League - Out of sheer desperation Gandhiji evolved the 'Quit India' policy which was endorsed by the Congress. It was supposed to be the greatest national rebellion against foreign rule. Gandhiji had ordered the people to 'do or die' But except that the leaders were quickly arrested and detained behind the prison bars some furtive acts of violence were practiced by Congressmen for some weeks. But in less than three months the whole movement was throttled by Government with firmness and discretion. The movement soon collapsed.

Hindi Versus Hindustani - Absurdly pro Muslim policy of Gandhiji is nowhere more blatantly illustrated than in his perverse attitude on the question of the National Language of India. By all the tests of a scientific language, Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the National Language of this country.

In the beginning of his career in India, Gandhiji gave a great impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslim did not like it, he became a turncoat and blossomed forth as the champion of what is called Hindustani. Every body in India knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary; it is a mere dialect; it is spoken but not written. It is a b@st@rd tongue and a crossbreed between Hindi and Urdu and not even the Mahatma's sophistry could make it popular; but in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India. His blind supporters of course blindly supported him and the so-called hybrid tongue began to be used. Words like 'Badshah Ram' and 'Begum Sita' were spoken and written but the Mahatma never dared to speak at Mr. Jinnah as Sita Jinnah and Maulana Azad Pandit Azad. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.

The bulk of the Hindus however proved to be stronger and more loyal to their culture and to their mother tongue and refused to bow down to the Mahatmic fiat. The result was that Gandhiji did not prevail in the Hindi Parishad and had to resign from that body; his pernicious influence however remains and the Congress Governments in India still hesitate whether to select Hindi or Hindustani as the National Language of India.

Vande Mataram not to be sung - It is notorious that some Muslim disliked the celebrated song of 'Vande Mataram' and the Mahatma forthwith stopped its singing or recital wherever he could. This song has been honored for a century as the most inspiring exhortation to the Bengalees to stand up like one man for their nation. In the anti-partition agitation of 1905 in Bengal the song came to a special prominence and popularity. The Bengalees swore by it and dedicated themselves to the Motherland at countless meetings where this song was sung. The British Administrator did not understand the true meaning of the song 'which simply meant 'Hail Motherland' Government therefore banned its singing forty years ago for some time, that only led to its increased popularity all over the country It continued to be sung at all Congress and other national gatherings but as soon as one Muslim objected to it Gandhiji utterly disregarded the national sentiment behind it and persuaded the Congress also not to insist upon the singing as the national song.

Quote from book The Tragic Story of Partition "It was at the Kakinada session of the Congress in 1923, that its President Mohammed Ali objected to the singing of the song on the premise that music was taboo in Islam. The singer V P Paluskar said - You have no authority from singing the Vande Mataram. Moreover, if singing in this place is against your religion, how is it that you tolerate music in your presidential procession? In 1922 it had adopted Iqbal's Sare jahanse see accha Hindustan hamara as the associate national anthem to satisfy the Muslims. In 1937 the League condemned the Congress for foisting Vande Mataram as the national song. Accordingly the Congress decided to cut those portions of the song that were likely to offend Muslim susceptibilities".

Shiva Bavani Banned - Gandhiji banned the public recital or perusal of Shiva Bavani a beautiful collection of 52 verses by a Hindu poet in which he had extolled the great power of Shivaji and the protection which he brought to the Hindu community and the Hindu religion. The refrain of that collection says if there were no Shivaji, the entire country would have been converted to Islam.

Quote from the book The Tragic Story of Partition " Bhajans were also not spared. The soul elevating chanting of ‘Raghupati Raja Rama patita pavana Sita Rama was intoned on the lips of millions of our countrymen for the last several centuries. A new line 'Ishwar Allah tere nam, sab so sanmati de Bhagavan' was added to the original".

Suhrawardy Patronized - When the Muslim League refused to join the provisional Government, which Lord Wavell invited Pandit Nehru to form; the League started a Council of Direct Action against any Government farmed by Pandit Nehru, On the 15th of August 1946. A little more than two weeks before Pandit Nehru was to take office, there broke out in Calcutta an open massacre of the Hindus which continued for three days unchecked

Gandhiji however went to Calcutta and contracted a strange friendship with the author of these massacres; in fact he intervened on behalf of Suhrawardy and the Muslim League. During the three days that the massacre of Hindus took place, the police in Calcutta did not interfere for the protection of life or property, innumerable outrages were practiced under the very eyes and nose of the guardians of law, but nothing mattered to Gandhiji. To him Suhrawardy was an object of admiration from which he could not be diverted and publicly described Suhrawardy as a Martyr. No wonder two months later there was the most virulent outbreak of Muslim fanaticism in Noakhali and Tipperah 30,000 Hindu women were forcibly converted according to a report of Arya Samaj, the total number of Hindus killed or wounded was three lacs not to say the crores of rupees worth of property looted and destroyed Gandhiji then undertook, ostensibly alone, a tour of Noakhali District

Attitude towards Hindu and Muslim Princes - Gandhiji's followers successfully humiliated the Jaipur, Bhavnagar and Rajkot States. They enthusiastically supported even a rebellion in Kashmir State against the Hindu Prince. This attitude strangely enough contrasts with what Gandhiji did about the affairs in Muslim States. There was a Muslim League intrigue in Gwalior States as a result of which the Maharaja was compelled to abandon the celebrations of the second millennium of the Vikram Calendar four years ago: the Muslim agitation was based on pure communalism The Maharaja is the liberal and impartial Ruler with a far sighted outlook. In a recent casual Hindu Muslim clash in Gwalior because the Musalmans suffered some casualties Gandhiji came down upon the Maharaja with a vitriolic attack wholly undeserved.

Gandhiji On Fast to Capacity - In 1943 while Gandhiji was on fast to capacity and nobody was allowed to interview him on political affairs, only the nearest and the dearest had the permission to go and enquire of his health.

Mr. C. Rajagopalachari smuggled himself into Gandhiji's room and hatched a plot of conceding Pakistan which Gandhiji allowed him to negotiate with Jinnah. Gandhiji later on discussed this matter for three weeks with Mr. Jinnah in the later part of 1944 and offered Mr. Jinnah virtually what is now called Pakistan. Gandhiji went every day to Mr. Jinnah's house, flattered him. Praised him, embraced him, but Mr Jinnah could not be cajoled out of his demand for the Pakistan pound of flesh. Hindu Muslim Unity was making progress in the negative direction,

In 1945 came the notorious Desai - Liaquat Agreement - It put one more, almost the last, nail on the coffin of the Congress as a National democratic body. Under that agreement, the late Mr. Bhulabhai Desai the then leader of the Congress party in the Central Legislative Assembly at Delhi entered into an agreement with Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, the League Leader in the Assembly, jointly to demand a Conference from the British Government for the solution of the stalemate in Indian politics which was growing since the beginning of the War. Mr. Desai was understood to have taken that step without consulting anybody of any importance in the Congress circle, as almost all the Congress leaders had been detained since the. Quit India' Resolution in 1942. Mr. Desai offered equal representation to the Muslims with Congress at the said Conference and this was the basis on which the Viceroy was approached to convene the Conference. The then Viceroy Lord Wavell flew to London on receipt of this joint request and brought back the consent of the Labor Government for the holding of the Conference.

The Viceroy also laid down other conditions for the holding of the Conference. The important ones were:

1. An unqualified undertaking on the part of the Congress and all political parties to support the war against Japan until victory was won.
2. A coalition Government would be formed in which the Congress and the Muslims would each have five representatives. There will besides be a representative of the depressed classes, of the Sikhs and other Minorities.

Cabinet Mission Plan - Early in the year 1946 the so-called Cabinet Mission arrived in India. It consisted of the then Secretary of State for India now Lord Lawrence, Mr. Alexander, the minister for War and Sir Stafford Cripps. Its arrival was heralded by a speech in Parliament by Mr. Atlee, the prime Minister. Mr. Atlee announced in most eloquent terms the determination of the British Government to transfer power to India if only the latter agreed upon common plan.

In paragrah 15 of the proposals the mission introduced six conditions under which the British Government would be prepared to convene a Constituent Assembly invested with the right of framing a Constitution of Free India. Each of these six proposals was calculated to prevent the unity of India being maintained or full freedom being attained even if the Constituent Assembly was an elected body.

The Congress party was so utterly exhausted by the failure of 'Quit India' that after some smoke screen about its unflinching nationalism it virtually submitted to Pakistan by accepting the mission's proposals, which made certain the dismemberment of India although in a roundabout manner. The Congress accepted the scheme but did not agree to form a Government. The long and short of it was that the Congress was called upon to form a Government and accept the whole scheme unconditionally. Mr. Jinnah denounced the British Government for treachery and started a direct action council of the Muslim League. The Bengal, the Punjab, the Bihar, the Bombay, and other places in various parts of India became scenes of bloodshed, arson, loot and rape on a scale unprecedented in history. The overwhelming members of victims were Hindus.

Ambiguous Statement about Pakistan - In one of his articles, Gandhiji while nominally ostensibly opposed to Pakistan, openly declared that if the Muslims wanted Pakistan at any cost, there was nothing to prevent them from achieving it. Only the Mahatma could understand what that declaration meant. Was it a prophecy or a declaration or disapproval of the demand for Pakistan?

Advice to Kashmir Maharaja - About Kashmir, Gandhiji again and again declared that Sheikh Abdullah should be entrusted the charge of the state and that the Maharaja of Kashmir should retire to Benares for no particular reason than that the Muslims formed the bulk of the Kashmir population. This also stands out in contrast with his attitude on Hyderbad where although the bulk of the population is Hindu, Gandhiji never called upon the Nizam to retire to Mecca.

Mountbatten vivisects India - Lord Wavell had to resign, as he could not bring about a settlement. He had some conscience, which prevented him from supporting the partition of India. He had openly declared it to be unnecessary and undesirable. But his retirement was followed by the appointment of Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork This Supreme Commander of the South East Asia was a purely Military man and he had a great reputation for daring, and tenacity. He came to India with a determination to do or die and he ''did'' namely he vivisected India. He was more indifferent to human slaughter. Rivers of blood flowed under his very eyes and nose. He apparently was thinking that by the slaughter of Hindus so many opponents of his mission were killed. The greater the slaughter of the enemies greater the victory, and he pursued his aim relentlessly to its logical conclusion. Long before June 1948 the official date for handing over power, the wholesale murders of the Hindus had their full effect. The Congress, which had boasted of its nationalism and democracy, secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Mr. Jinnah. India was vivisected. One third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us from the 15th of august 1947.

Hindu Muslim Unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic and communal State dissociated from everything that smacked of United India was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called it 'Freedom won by them at sacrifice' Whose sacrifice?

Gandhiji on Cow-slaughter - ‘Today Rajendra Babu informed me that he had received some fifty thousand postcards, 20-30 thousand telegrams urging prohibition of cow slaughter by law. In this connection I have spoken to you before also. After all why are so many letters and telegrams sent to me. They have not served any purpose. No law prohibiting cow slaughter in India can be enacted. How can I impose my will upon a person who does not wish voluntarily to abandon cow-slaughter? India does not belong exclusively to the Hindus. Muslims, Parsees, Christians also live here. The claim of the Hindus that India has become the land of the Hindus is totally incorrect. This land belongs to all who live here. I know an orthodox Vaishnava Hindu. He used to give beef soup to his child.

Quote from the book The Tragic Story of Partition " In the Muslim All Parties Congress held in January 1929, Aga Khan pointed out that in the home of islam-Arabia there was no custom of cow sacrifice. It was also pointed out that in other Muslim countries no one took religious objection to the playing of music before mosques. Said Dr Ambedkar: Islamic Law does not insist upon the slaughter of the cow for sacrificial purposes and no Muslim, when he goes to Haj, sacrifices the cow in Mecca or Medina. In a letter to Jinnah 6-4-1938 Nehru assured him that the Congress does not wish to undertake any legislative action in this matter to restrict the established rights of the Muslims".

Removal of Tri-Color Flag - The tricolour flag with Charkha on it was adopted by the Congress as the National Flag out of deference to Gandhiji. There were flag salutations on innumerable occasions. The flag was unfurled at every Congress meeting. It fluttered in hundreds at every session of National Congress, The Prabhat Pheries were never complete unless the flag was carried while the march was on. On the occasion of every imaginary or real success of the Congress Party, public buildings, shops and private residences were decorated with that flag. If any Hindu attached any importance to Shivaji's Hindu flag, "Bhagva Zenda" the flag which freed India from the Muslim - domination it was considered communal. Gandhiji's tri-colored flag never protected any Hindu woman from outrage or a Hindu temple from desecration, yet the late Bhai Parmanand was once mobbed by enthusiastic Congressmen for not paying homage to that flag.

When the Mahatma was touring Noakhali and Tipperah in 1946 after the beastly outrages on the Hindus, the flag was flying on his temporary hut. But when a Muslim came there and objected to the presence of the flag on his head, Gandhiji quickly directed its removal. All the reverential sentiments of millions of Congressmen towards that flag were affronted in a minute, because that would please an isolated muslim fanatic yet the so-called Hindu-Muslim unity never took shape.

Quote from the book The Tragic Story of Partition "The Flag Committee in 1931 consisted of Patel, Nehru, Maulana Azad, Master Tara Singh, D B Kalelkar, N S Hardikar and Pattabhi Sitaramayya recommended that the National Flag should be of kesari or saffron color having on it at the left top quarter the Charkha in blue. However, the A.I.C.C. dare not differ from Gandhi's choice of the tricolor scheme, simply okayed his decision.

2.4 Gandhiji and Independence

71. Some good number of people are laboring under the delusion that the freedom movement in India started with the advent of Gandhiji in 1914-15. There has always been alive in India a freedom movement that was never suppressed. When the Maratha Empire was finally subdued in 1818 as the British thought the forces of freedom were lying low in some part but elsewhere the supremacy of the British was being challenged through the rise of Sikh power. And when by 1848 the Sikhs were defeated the rebellion of 1857 was being actively organized. By the time the British had established full control the Congress was established in 1885 to challenge British domination. This developed into armed resistance which openly asserted itself through the bomb of Khudi Ram Bose in 1906.

72. Gandhiji arrived in India in 1914-15. After his arrival, initial fads of Ahimsa the movement began to suffer eclipse. Thanks however to Subhash Bose and the revolutionaries in Maharashtra, Punjab and Bengal the movement continued to flourish parallel to Gandhiji's rise to leadership after the death of Tilak.

75. I have already mentioned the revolutionary party, which existed independent of the Congress. Amongst its sympathizers were many active Congressmen. This latter section was never reconciled to the yoke of Britain. During the First World War between 1914-19 the Congress began to turn left and the terrorist movement outside was running parallel to the leftist party within. The Gadar Party was operating simultaneously in Europe and America in an effort to overthrow British Rule in India with the help of the Axis Powers. The 'Comagata Maru' incident is well known, and it is by no means clear that the "Emden" incident on the Madras beach was not due to the knowledge of the German Commander that India was seething with discontent. But from 1920 upwards Gandhiji discouraged, put his foot down on the use of force although he himself had carried on an active campaign for recruitment for soldiers of Britain only a few years earlier.

The Rowlatt Repert described at length the strength of the revolutionaries in India, From 1906 till 1918 one Britisher after another and his Indian stooges were shot dead by the revolutionary nationalists and the British authorities were trembling about their very existence. It was then that Mr. Montague came to his country as Secretary of State for India and promised the introduction of responsibility; even he was only partially successful to stern the tide of revolutionary fervor.

The Government of India Act 1919 was over-shadowed by the Jallianwalla Bagh Tragedy in which hundreds of Indians were shot dead by General Dyer at a public meeting for the crime of holding a protest against the Rowlatt Act. Sir Michael O'Dwyer became notorious for callous and unscrupulous reprisals against those who had denounced the Rowlatt Act. Twenty years later he had to pay for it, when Udham Singh shot him dead in London Chafekar brothers of Maharashtra, Pt. Shamji Krishna Verma the back bone of the Revolutionaries, Lala Hardayal, Virendranath Chatopadhyaya, Rash Behari Bose, Babu Arvind Ghosh Khudiram Bose, Ulhaskar Datta, Madanlal Dhingra, Kanhere, Bhagatsingh, Rajguru, Sukhdeo, Chandrashekhar Azad were the living protest by Indian youth against the alien yoke. They had unfurled and held aloft the flag of Independence, some of them long before Gandhiji's name was heard of an even when he was the accepted leader of the constitutional movement of the Indian National Congress.

77. And the more the Mahatma condemned the use of force in the country's battle for freedom the more popular it became. This fact was amply demonstrated at the Karachi Session of the Congress in March 1931; in the teeth of Gandhiji's opposition a resolution was passed in the open Session admiring the courage and the spirit of sacrifice of Bhagat Singh when he threw the bomb in the Legislative Assembly in 1929. Gandhiji never forgot this defeat and when a few months later Mr. Hotson, the Acting Governor of Bombay was shot at by Gogate, Gandhiji returned to the charge at an All-India Congress Committee meeting and asserted that the admiration expressed by the Karachi Congress for Bhagat Singh was at the bottom of Gogate's action in shooting at Hotson. This astounding statement was challenged by Subash Chandra Bose. He immediately came into disfavor with Gandhiji. To sum up, the share of revolutionary youth in the fight for Indian Freedom, is by no means negligible and those who talk of India's freedom having been secured by Gandhiji are not only ungrateful but trying to write false history

78. An outrageous example of his dislike of people with whom he did not agree is furnished by the case of Subash Chandra Bose. So far as I am aware no protest was ever made by Gandhiji against the deportation of Subash for six years and Bose's election to the Presidential Chair of the Congress was rendered possible only after he had personally disavowed any sympathy for violence. In actual practice however Subash never toed the line that Gandhiji wanted during his term of office. And yet Subash was so popular in the country that against the declared wishes of Gandhiji in favor of Dr. Pattabhai he was elected president of the Congress for a second time with a substantial majority even from the Andhra Desha, the province of Dr. Pattabhi himself. This upset Gandhiji beyond endurance and the expressed his anger in the Mahatmic manner full of concentrated venom by stating that the success of Subash was his defeat and not that of Dr. Pattabhi. Even after this declaration, his anger against Subash Bose was not gratified. Out of sheer cussedness he absented him-self from the Tripuri Congress Session, staged a rival show at Rajkot by a wholly mischievous fast and not until Subhas was overthrown from the Congress Gadi that the venom of Gandhiji became completely gutted.

80. In the Quit India Movement launched by the Congress, on 8/8/1942 the statement of Gandhi exhorting people to do or die was interpreted by that section as giving them full scope for all kinds of sabotage and obstruction. In fact they did everything to paralyze the war effort of the Government to the fullest extent. In North Bihar and other places, nearly 900 railway stations were wither burnt or destroyed.

81. These activities were directly opposed to the Congress creed of non-violence and to the Satyagrah technique.

Meanwhile Subhash escaped from the country in January 1941. He went to Germany and then to Japan who agreed to assist him against the British in the invasion of the country.

83. Subhash Chandra Bose was thereby enabled to start a provisional Indian Republican Government on Indian territory. By 1944 he was equipped to start on an invasion of India with the help of the Japanese. Pandit Nehru had declared that if Subhash Chandra Bose came into India with the support of the Japanese he would fight Subhash. Early in 1944, Japanese and the Indian National Army organized by Subash were thundering at the gates of India and they had already entered Manipur State and some part of the Assam Frontier. The I. N. A. consisted of volunteers from the Indian population of the Far East and of those Indians who had deserted to the I. N. A. from the Japanese prisons. That the campaign eventually failed was no fault of Subhash; his men fought like the Trojans. But his difficulties were far too great and his army was not sufficiently equipped with modern armaments. The I. N. A. had no aeroplanes and their supply-line was weak. Many died of starvation and illness, as there was no adequate medical treatment available to them. But the spirit which Subhash engendered in them was wonderful

84. But Gandhiji was again more lucky. Lokmanya Tilak died in 1920 and Gandhiji became the unchallenged leader. Success of Subhash Chandra would have a crushing defeat for Gandhiji, but luck was again on his side and Subhash Chandra died outside India. It then became easy for the Congress party to profess love and admiration for Subhash Chandra Bose and the I. N. A. and even to defend some of its officers and men in the Great State Trial in 1946. They even adopted 'Jai Hind' as the slogan which Subhash had introduced in the East. They traded on the name of Subhash and the I. N. A. and the two issues, which led them to victory during the election in 1945-46, were their hypocritical homage to Subhash's memory. More over the Congress party had promised they were opposed to Pakistan and would resist it all costs.

85. All this time the Muslim League was carrying on treasonable activities, disturbing the peace and tranquility of India carrying on a murderous campaign against the Hindus. The Congress would not venture to condemn or to stop these wholesale massacres in pursuit of its policy of appeasement at all costs. Gandhiji suppressed everything which did not fit in with his pattern of public activities. I am therefore surprised when claims are made over and again the winning of the freedom was due to Gandhiji. My own view is that constant pandering of the Muslim League was not the way to winning freedom. It only created a Frankenstein, which ultimately devoured its own creator-swallowing one third of hostile, unfriendly and aggressive Indian territory, and permanently stationing a neighbor on what was once Indian territory. About the winning of Swaraj and freedom, I maintain the Mahatma's contribution was negligible. But I am prepared to give him a place as a sincere patriot. His teachings however have produced opposite result and his leadership has stultified the nation. In my opinion S. C. Bose is the supreme hero and martyr of modern India. He kept alive and fostered the revolutionary mentality of the masses, advocating all honorable means, Including the use of force when necessary for the liberation of India. Gandhiji and his crowed of self seekers tried to destroy him. It is thus entirely incorrect to represent the Mahatma as the architect of Indian Independence.

86. The real cause of the British leaving India was three fold and it does not include the Gandhian method. One - the movements of the Indian Revolutionaries from 1857 to 1932 i.e. up to the death of Chandra Shekhar Azad at Allahabad, then next, the movement of revolutionary character not that of Gandhian type in the countrywide rebellion of 1942, and an armed revolt put by Subhash Bose the result of which was a spread of the revolutionary mentality in the armed forces of India are the real factors that shattered the very foundation of the British rule in India. And all these effective efforts to freedom were opposed by Gandhi.

Two - a good deal of credit must be given to those, who imbibed with a spirit of patriotisms, fought with the Britishers strictly on constitutional lines on the Assembly floors and made a notable progress in Indian politics. Names are Tilak, N C Kelkar, C R Das, Vithalbhai Patel, Pandit Malaviya, Bhai Parmanand and during the last ten years by promin
<!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Lsrini , there is a similar article on sulekha expressions by moornam .one thanks for starting a very thoughtful thread , second i beleive the event has an collossal impact.

if we had allowed the grand old man to commit all his grandiose mistakes , in no time maybe 4-5 years down from 1950 the general public unable to bear the atrocities of the pakistani brotherhood(nehru , gandhi etc) would have risen in revolt and dealt them the jungle justice.

by killing him godse effectively turned him into a martyr and all his faults were forgotten.

<!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> the impact is greatest when the people understand the reality , not when a few people understand it , i understand godse's anger at the killings of hundred's of thousands of hindus but alas if he could have waited a few years , the crowds would have done the needful , already anger was building in the streets , among the partition displaced , people were abusing gandhi at his birla maidan speeches.

time will reveal the impact .

this is the fictional ending , but do read it the author has a rare insight into things.

if he is not already a part of this forum ,he would add more merriment to the party <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--emo&:argue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /><!--endemo--> <span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Optima'>If there is 1 icon of Indians' identity i.e. Mahatma Gandhi. i x 1 won't like to lose that identity.
Vande Matram.</span></span>
<!--QuoteBegin-Capt Manmohan Kumar+Sep 6 2006, 12:26 AM-->QUOTE(Capt Manmohan Kumar @ Sep 6 2006, 12:26 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--emo&:argue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /><!--endemo--> <span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Optima'>If there is 1 icon of Indians' identity i.e. Mahatma Gandhi. i x 1 won't like to lose that identity.
Vande Matram.</span></span>
er... Captain Kumar, for the love of god, dont type "gandhi" and "vande matram" in the same sentence again.

the vande matram slogan was given by one of the most nationalist of writers not just in india, but in the world. meanwhile gandhi had not anything called guts. Vande matram comes from a book ("ananda-math") based on the true story of how a group of hindu monks took up arms against the muslims. gandhi meanwhile was the doyen of all muslims appeasers.

next you will swear by "jai hind" and gandhi in the same breath !!
<!--QuoteBegin-sarangadhara+Dec 17 2005, 01:39 AM-->QUOTE(sarangadhara @ Dec 17 2005, 01:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
by killing him godse effectively turned him into a martyr and all his faults were forgotten.


and that my friends, is called "hitting the nail on the head".

spot on.

but on seconds thoughts, godse just killed him. it was gandhi's chamcha-in-chief nehru who turned him into a "martyr" (all the roads, schools, colleges and schemes named after gandhi etc etc) and titled him the "father of the nation" too, and thus ensured that the joker family would forever rule india.
<!--emo&:blow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blow.gif' /><!--endemo--> Who am I?
The whole of India is singing:
Bande mein tha dum = Man had guts
Vande Matram
Who am I?
Even Subhash C. Bose was Prez of Cong under the shadow of Gandhi?
All the collection of changes and blending them together is known as culturisation. There is time in life when u have to keep the differences to urself and make an attempt to sink differences. Gandhi has been accepted as World Leader. u don't accept it, u r isolated from the world. For myself, it does not make difference whether u accept it or not; all it goes to show that Indians will for ever remain divided and they will never rise as 1 man.
'United we stand; divided u fall'.
i know why you have the soft corner for the gandhi - cos you are/were in the indian army - the one indian entity after the civil servants that has always been "nehru-ised". i have noted this in all army types and/or their kids.

btw, bose was the youngest president of the indian national congress, not gandhi. and bose then again defeated the candidate, whom gandhi pitted against bose. thats when gandhi went on a hunger strike, since the fair-and-square result in Nataji's favour didnt please him. So netaji gave up the president-ship and let the crybaby have his way.

gandhi has been accepted as world leader for the same reason gandhi wasa a name to reckon with in the first place - since the enlish preferred him over the person they really were scared of. it suited them to have gandhi and not bose as a popular figure and both the national and international popularity of gandhi is due their social engineering. btw, mussaraf was also accepted as world leader in the global fight against terror !!

(meanwhile Aurobindo, or Tilak or Sardar patel or Sarvarkar or Bose havent been accepted as world leaders - so they must be lesser men than gandhi and that internationalist nehru, right?? Nehru is to Gandhi what Lenin is to Marx.)

india simply cant unite under the legacies of people who
1) divided india into 2 (3 actually)
2) went soft on both the muslims and english - our two oppressors
3) started a dynasty instead of a democracy.

the only thing i give gandhi credit for is the social reforms he suggested, the gram panchayat he advocated and for what he did for the backward castes.

finally for the ahimsha crap he preached, i have to conclude that "bande main tha RUM"

<!--emo&:clapping--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/clap.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='clap.gif' /><!--endemo--> the only thing i give gandhi credit for is the social reforms he suggested, the gram panchayat he advocated and for what he did for the backward castes.
That's what is known as win win situation i.e. u increase ur strength by putting ++ together rather than decrease ur strngth by including --.
1 of the gr8est strength of Gandhi was that as to how he brought the masses together to fight for National Freedom Movement. Otherwise, city fols had become too cozy w/ Brits.
Well, if Netaji won against the protege of Gandhi; that speaks volumes for democratic set up. And don't forget Nehru was the won who championed Netaji's defense in courts.
RE: Army
India is 1 'coz of Army. Army has got job to do. Praising Gandhi does not take out anything out of the job.
<!--QuoteBegin-Capt Manmohan Kumar+Oct 11 2006, 09:27 PM-->QUOTE(Capt Manmohan Kumar @ Oct 11 2006, 09:27 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Well, if Netaji won against the protege of Gandhi; that speaks volumes for democratic set up.

Netaji convincingly defeated Pattabhi Seetaramaiya (founder of Andhra Bank) who was Gandhi's candidate. (was it in Tripura 1939?)

Now, instead of respecting the norms of democratic process, Gandhiji sat down for hunger strike, until the winning candidate Netaji had to resign. Does that not speak volumes too - for how much respect Gandhiji had for the spirit of democracy?

Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad stepped down from the Congress presidency in 1946, and everyone was convinced that Sardar Patel should replace him during the crucial transition period.

9 out of 10 provincial congress bodies supported Sardar Patel, 1 (UP) supported Acharya Narendra Kriplani, none supported Nehru. Kriplani stepped down supporting Nehru which meant only 1 vote.

But Gandhiji vetoed Sardar Patel getting elected, and Sardar Patel gave way to Nehru for the respect of Gandhiji.

Does that not speak something too for Gandhiji's respect for democracy?
<!--QuoteBegin-Capt Manmohan Kumar+Oct 12 2006, 06:57 AM-->QUOTE(Capt Manmohan Kumar @ Oct 12 2006, 06:57 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--emo&:clapping--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/clap.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='clap.gif' /><!--endemo--> the only thing i give gandhi credit for is the social reforms he suggested, the gram panchayat he advocated and for what he did for the backward castes.
That's what is known as win win situation i.e. u increase ur strength by putting ++ together rather than decrease ur strngth by including --.
1 of the gr8est strength of Gandhi was that as to how he brought the masses together to fight for National Freedom Movement. Otherwise, city fols had become too cozy w/ Brits.
Well, if Netaji won against the protege of Gandhi; that speaks volumes for democratic set up. And don't forget Nehru was the won who championed Netaji's defense in courts.
RE: Army
India is 1 'coz of Army. Army has got job to do. Praising Gandhi does not take out anything out of the job.

sorry but you are a confused hogwashed ex-army man.

nehru's greatest piece of spinelessness was when he donned the lawyer's clothes to defend the same Netaji he helped to get out of the equation. He did that just to appear a hero to the people who were opposing the trial of INA veterans, not for any special love he had for Netaji.

And if Netaji won against Gndhi's protege, it shows just how popular and powerful Netaji was. And that Gandhi went on a hunger strike, shows how much of a spineless spoiltsport he was.

Indian army and the indian civil servant brigade are the 2 weapons that the Gandhi-nehru dynasty uses in holding india together and and keeping the terrible secret of the way Nehru usurped the throne in delhi, a big secret from the people.

Nehru and Netaji are the worst and best sons of India respectively.

Of yeah, gandhi achieved nothing in the freedom movement, except delay our independence by a good 5-10 years and get millions of indians to die fighting for england. No indian was more cozy with the brits as well as the muslims than gandhi.
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Oct 12 2006, 07:12 AM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Oct 12 2006, 07:12 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> and Sardar Patel gave way to Nehru for the respect of Gandhiji. 


why a person of steel like sardar patel should have any respect for a gutless person like gandhi ji is quite beyond me.

also why did netaji step down just cos gandhi went on a hunger strike, is also baffling.
<!--QuoteBegin-ben_ami+Oct 12 2006, 06:06 AM-->QUOTE(ben_ami @ Oct 12 2006, 06:06 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Capt Manmohan Kumar+Oct 12 2006, 06:57 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Capt Manmohan Kumar @ Oct 12 2006, 06:57 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
India is 1 'coz of Army. Army has got job to do. Praising Gandhi does not take out anything out of the job.

sorry but you are a confused hogwashed ex-army man.

nehru's greatest piece of spinelessness was when he donned the lawyer's clothes to defend the same Netaji he helped to get out of the equation. He did that just to appear a hero to the people who were opposing the trial of INA veterans, not for any special love he had for Netaji.

Army and ex-army men would also do well by reading about congress's stand and contribution towards the famous revolt of Indian Navy officers in Bombay in 1946. All the revolting officers were easily executed by British as late as in 1947, and congress just watched on. Least they could have done was to delay the execution order since the freedom was in sight, and then get them off the hook after independence. (If I remember right, Mr. Nehru was their lawyer too! and even Jinna had lamented about it)
I have the the feeling that ordinary Hindus believed Gandhi to be an avatar. One wonders how Netaji after being insulted in 1938 named a brigade in the INA after Gandhi just a few years later.
<!--QuoteBegin-kalyansarkar+Oct 12 2006, 06:39 AM-->QUOTE(kalyansarkar @ Oct 12 2006, 06:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->I have the the feeling that ordinary Hindus believed Gandhi to be an avatar. One wonders how Netaji after being insulted in 1938 named a brigade in the INA after Gandhi just a few years later.

Spot on. Yes, ordinary Hindus feel Gandhi to be an avatar. I had even read some book by a Yogi, telling about his experience on Gandhiji, that Gandhiji was born with some kalas of Vishnu. and so on. Even Paramhansa Yogananda, and Beseant wrote very highly about him, spiritually.

For masses of rural India, he was no less than a demigod.

That exactly is why the assassination of Gandhi has hurt Hindutva forces inside and outside congress party a great deal, and the loss is irrepairable.

And also let us not get carried away in his criticism. For all his shortcomings of political insight, let us give Gandhiji his due credit. The scale of movement, and mass appeal, did not exist before Gandhi came on the scene. Tilak, Bipin Chandra, Lala Lajpat Rai etc. had evoked masses, but it was limited to citites of some states only. Gandhi transformed it into really large and rural movement. He also stopped missionaries in their heels. Credit is indeed due to him.

Just before Gandhiji was killed, Congress was already being transformed into Hindutva party. While Sardar was leading that group, Dr. Shayamaprasad Mukherjee, Acharya Kriplani, GB Pant etc were clearcut second line. But after Gandhiji's assassination, all tables were turned, and noone within Congress was able to even take the name of Hindutva. Nehru used the event to also malign Savarkar totally and completely. Although legally acquitted, from public support standpoint, Savarkar never came out of that episode.

Now why Netaji would name a brigade for Gandhi. Netaji was a great opportunitist and strategist, and very well knew how to use all propoganda to generate mass support. He even appeased muslims to bring them into INA! He had no objections to allying with either the Hitler, or Stalin! So he know what he wanted, and did not let the means limit him in acheiving the goals.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->For all his shortcomings of political insight, let us give Gandhiji his due credit.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yeah, absolutely. He was vocal against missionary activities

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->While Sardar was leading that group, Dr. Shayamaprasad Mukherjee, Acharya Kriplani, GB Pant etc were clearcut second line. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As far as my knowledge goes SP Mukherjee was never in the Congress. From 1937 to 1947 in was in the Hindu Mahasabha, after Partition he suggested that there was need of the Sabha anymore and in 1952 he founded Jana Sangh and got elected as MP.

Many Hindus today regard Nathuram as Mahatma and Mohandas as Duratma (The Evil Soul). Some even call him a asura in disguise. And his assassination in the hands of Nathuram as Gandhi-vadh.

Not necessarily each and every military men follow Nehru and Gandhi. I met an ex-Naval Commander, a 1965 war veteran, who has named his house as Mahatma Nathuram Godse House.
<!--QuoteBegin-kalyansarkar+Oct 12 2006, 07:17 AM-->QUOTE(kalyansarkar @ Oct 12 2006, 07:17 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->While Sardar was leading that group, Dr. Shayamaprasad Mukherjee, Acharya Kriplani, GB Pant etc were clearcut second line. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

As far as my knowledge goes SP Mukherjee was never in the Congress. From 1937 to 1947 in was in the Hindu Mahasabha, after Partition he suggested that there was need of the Sabha anymore and in 1952 he founded Jana Sangh and got elected as MP.

You need to check your facts.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee was the <span style='color:red'>Fisrt Minister for Industry and Supply of India,</span> in the Interim Central Government of Pandit Nehru. Mookerjee was widely respected by many Indians and also by members of the Indian National Congress, the main Indian political organization, and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, one of its chief leaders.

But on issue of the 1949 Delhi Pact with Pakistani Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan, Mookherjee resigned from the Cabinet on April 6, 1950. Mookherjee was firmly against Nehru's invitation to the Pakistani PM, and their joint pact to establish minority commissions and guarantee minority rights in both countries. He wanted to hold Pakistan directly responsible for the terrible influx of millions of Hindu refugees from East Pakistan, who had left the state fearing religious suppression and violence aided by the state. Mookerjee considered Nehru's actions as appeasement, and was hailed as a hero by the people of West Bengal.

After consultation with Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Mookerjee founded the Bharatiya Jana Sangh (Indian People's Union) on October 21, 1951 at Delhi and became its first President.

In the 1952 General Elections to the Parliament of India, Mookerjee and the BJS won 3 seats.

Mookerjee went to visit Kashmir in 1953, and went on hunger strike to protest the law prohibiting Indian citizens from settling in a state in their own country and the need to carry ID cards, and was arrested on 11th May while crossing border. Although the ID card rule was revoked owing to his efforts, he died as detenu on <span style='color:red'>May 23, 1953 under mysterious circumstances. His death in custody raised wide suspicion across the country and demands for independent enquiry, including earnest requests from his mother to the then Prime Minister of India. Unfortunatley no enquiry commission was set up and his death remains a mystery.</span>


<!--QuoteBegin-kalyansarkar+Oct 12 2006, 07:17 AM-->QUOTE(kalyansarkar @ Oct 12 2006, 07:17 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Many Hindus today regard Nathuram as Mahatma and Mohandas as Duratma (The Evil Soul). Some even call him a asura in disguise.

Not necessarily each and every military men follow Nehru and Gandhi. I met an ex-Naval Commander, a 1965 war veteran, who has named his house as Mahatma Nathuram Godse House.
Proofs needed. Please substanciate. I have NEVER come across anyone calling Nathuram a mahatma. Not have I come across anyone calling Gandhi an "Asura", although he has been criticised severely and widely.
<!--emo&Tongue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo--> bei-man'why a person of steel like sardar patel should have any respect for a gutless person like gandhi ji is quite beyond me.

also why did netaji step down just cos gandhi went on a hunger strike, is also baffling'.
u pl clear ur cobwebs before calling others confused. ur confusion is bursting at seams.
'Now why Netaji would name a brigade for Gandhi. Netaji was a great opportunitist and strategist, and very well knew how to use all propoganda to generate mass support. He even appeased muslims to bring them into INA! He had no objections to allying with either the Hitler, or Stalin! So he know what he wanted, and did not let the means limit him in acheiving the goals.'
The main thing is Gandhi is acknowledged as gr8man from India and I don't lose anything standing behind Gandhi; rather my stature is increased. Here is how:
Houston city council led by Mayor celebrated Mahatma Gandhi's B'day publically this year. I think it gives Indians recognition.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)