Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi: Relevance Today

Ram Puniyani

Introduction: Gandhi Today; Life and Work

World over the importance of the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi isbeing realized more and more. In the dismal scenario whereviolence in the name of religion, violence for selfish goals isbecoming more frightening, the need for the beacon light whichgives the message of peace is being felt very acutely. It is inthe context that United Nations declared Gandhi’s birth day, 2nd

October as the International Day of Non Violence. Recently in thesurvey on the most prominent global icons of all the times,Gandhi ranked number one in the survey conducted by Time magazineof United States.

One recalls that the major leaders of the World have paid tributeto him by following his path, in their struggles for their justrights. Many a leaders have paid tribute to the teaching ofMahatma, time and over again. Some of the major of these havebeen Martin Luther King Jr., the leader of African Americans inUnited States. In the strife ridden racist atmosphere, where theAfrican Americans were struggling for a life of dignity, King Jr.resorted to the Gandhian ideals of Peace and Non Violence and wassuccessful in uniting the African Americans to lead them to thepath of getting their just rights. He openly acknowledged hisdebt to the path shown by Gandhi, and as to how he practicedGandhian path to lead his people on the road of justice andhonor.

Similarly the other notable example has been of that of NelsonMandela. Mandela emerged as the leader of Africans in SouthAfrica. South Africa was practicing apartheid. Mandela alsorealized the truth of non violent path, the path of amity of allpeople. Mandela took the principled path of Satyagrah and non-

violence to rid South Africa from the apartheid regime withoutany bloodshed. He acknowledged the debt to Gandhi for the pathshown to him. While these are just two major examples, theinterest in Gandhi has been growing by leaps and bound around theWorld. There are Gandhian Study Centers in many Universitiesaround the Globe and Gandhi’s teachings are being studied byscholars all over. They are studying the depth and reach of thevalues of Mahatma in words and deeds. The latest in the series offollowing the values of Mahatma has been the path followed by themasses participating in social political revolution in Arabcountries, especially Tunisia, Egypt etc.

Gandhi was given the title of Mahatma by Guru Rabindranth Tagoreand it became the most popular prefix to his name. It alsodescribed the depth of the personality of Gandhi. There are otherinteresting descriptions of his, like the British Prime Ministerof Britain, Winston Churchill called him ‘half Naked fakir’,Nelson Mandel called him ‘sacred warrior’, and the Indian peoplecalled him and refer to him as ‘father of the nation’ and fondlyaddress him as Bapu (father). He not only united all the peopleof the country across, region, language and religious boundaries,but was also a social reformer, who developed his own visionabout the moral values in the field of religion, social andpolitical life.

It is ironical that while the interest in Gandhi has beenincreasing all over, here in India, there has been massiveviolence in the name of religion. This violence of the communalvariety and terrorist variety both takes the cover of religion.This is something which is based on the wrong projection ofreligion by vested interests. The values propounded by Gandhi canbe the path which can lead us to a more peaceful and progressivesociety with respect, dignity, honor and human rights to all.Let’s hope that the values of Mahatma will show us the path toovercome the period of present darkness and will lead us tolight.

Life and Work

Gandhi, after his law degree from Britain retuned to India andlater was hired by a rich South African businessman to go toSouth Africa to fight his case. In South Africa, while travellingin a first class train compartment, he was pushed out from thetrain as dark skinned people were not allowed to travel in Firstclass. It was a shock to him. After his humiliation, he decidedto fight on this issue of apartheid by organizing the local nonwhites and those of Indian origin in particular. His methodattracted the people from Indian origin in large number and hecampaigned for the rights of dark skinned people in the brutalapartheid regime. He went on perfecting his methods of struggleover a period of time.

After his return to India he spoke about the conditions ofIndians in South Africa and the policies of colonial power there.He was very well received in India. From here he joined many anagitations, Champaran, Kheda and understood the nature ofeconomic and political plight of the people of different regionsin India. The major impact on his life came when he decided tounderstand India, by travelling the whole country. He mostlytravelled in the third class railways compartment. He adopted asimple life style, set up Ashrams where ‘Cleanliness is Next toGodliness’ was the dictum.’ He kept on emphasizing the need forcleanliness all through his life. In India he saw the realconditions of Indians under colonial regime and gradually took upthe political issues at the national level.

His initial battles were for the equality of all citizens in theBritish ruled India. During the course of this struggle heevolved the concept of Satyagrah as a method for struggle for therights of people. Satyagrah means faith in Truth. It has beendescribed as ‘soul force’ or ‘truth force’. He pointed out thatwe have a right to fight all forms of oppression but it must bedone in a peaceful way- though Ahimsa, non-violence, a peacefulprotest march against the Government. This Satyagrah acts as anappeal to conscience when the armed police force attacks thepeaceful protesters, and it will act as a moral force on therulers to rethink their policies.

He adopted the dress of the poor farmer, peasant and identifiedwith them through his approach of simple living. His majorcontribution to freedom movement was to involve average people inthe freedom movement. The non- cooperation movement was the firstmajor movement, which not only was in the form of a movement butwas also an attempt to make all the Indians feel one. It wasthrough his efforts that over a period of time more and morepeople started getting involved in the struggle against colonialpowers. Later the major landmarks of freedom movement, DandiMarch, Quit India movement all had the same imprint of Gandhi’sstyle. It was this effort by him which really built the IndianNation. And the word, ‘India is a Nation in the making’ wascoined for the whole process.

It was during this period that he also emphasized on the socialreforms aimed at eradicating untouchability and also to see thatthe women are encouraged to participate in the social sphere, inall walks of life. He struggled to see that untouchables also arepart of his Ashram. This had to be done against lot ofopposition. He also used to stay in their colony, Bhangi colony(Scavengers colony) along with them. He took great personal painto see that untouchables are accepted in his own Ashram. This hada great message for the whole nation.

His efforts succeeded in gradually involving all the people toassociate with the national movement, and it is because of thisphenomenon that India’s, mass movement became the greatest evermass movement in the World. After 1937, when the communal partieslost in the elections, they stepped up their Hate against‘other’, leading to increasing intensity of communal violence. Hewas determined to see that the communal violence is stopped atall the costs and undertook fast unto death to stop the violence.During last period of his life he was focusing more on opposingthe communal violence for which he staked his life. Unity ofpeople of different religions was his central message, and thiswas disliked by those who wanted to spread hate in society fortheir political goals.

His efforts in the direction of opposing British rule throughmass movement succeeded and the British realized that it is

impossible for them to rule this country. They decided to giveIndependence to the country but played a mischief while decidingto give freedom to the Country. They had been promoting thecommunal forces, those doing politics in the name of religion,those who kept aloof from freedom movement, and those due towhose ‘hate propaganda’ the violence was increasing in thesociety. These communal forces were talking in the language ofMuslim Nation or Hindu nation. Whole Nation under the leadershipof Gandhi stood for Secular democratic India. British wanted topartition India as a United India would have been a strongcountry and Colonialist would not have succeeded in their designsto do economic exploitation of the region. Also they wanted tooppose the emerging Socialist block (Russia, China, laterVietnam, and Nehru’s commitment to socialism), so they needed afoothold in South Asia. Pursuing these long term designs, takingadvantage of divisive policies of communalists, Britishpartitioned the country in to Pakistan in the name of Islam andIndia based on secular and democratic nation.

Gandhi was most disturbed by the communal violence and thepartition of the country. Somehow he felt that ending communalviolence is a top priority and he hoped that the country’spartition will be undone in the future. But here the policies ofcolonial powers ensured that there is unrest in the South Asialeading to the sour relations between Pakistan and India. Thecommunalists did not blame the British for partition and put allthe blame on Gandhi’s uniting polices as the cause of partition.It is due to this distorted perception of the process ofpartition that one Communalist murdered him on 30th January 1948,one of the saddest days in human and Indian history.

Gandhi lives through his contribution to making of Indian nation,freedom of India and the deep spiritual values which hecontributes to Indian and global political life.

Gandhi: Religion and Politics

Even before coming to India, the Mahatma had sharpened hisphilosophy and political methods. When he returned from SouthAfrica, India was in the grip of religiosity and broad masseswere part of the churning process due to the ongoing socialchanges. Broadly they were not yet major part of freedommovement. Gandhi on one hand had the exposure to liberal Britishpolitical system and on the other had experienced the repressiveSouth African regime, which was practicing apartheid. In Indiathe social changes were slow to come by. The elite throughdifferent political formations dominated political process atthat point of time. We had Indian National Congress, mainlyespousing Indian nationalism, where the elite were the mainparticipants; later Gandhi transformed it in to a massorganization.

He faced the tough task of taking all the sections of societyalong to the path of Independence of the nation. In this, thoseon the side of secularism and democracy had some differences withhim, but their common point of acceptance was the values ofdemocracy and secularism.

Secular India

Gandhi talked of secular India, articulating the aspirations ofmajority of the country. He wanted religion to be a privatematter for the individual, "In India, for whose fashioning I haveworked all my life, every man enjoys equality of status, whateverhis religion is. The state is bound to be wholly secular", and,"religion is not the test of nationality but is a personal matterbetween man and God, and," religion is a personal affair of eachindividual, it must not be mixed up with politics or nationalaffairs" (Harijan August 31, 1947)

It is clear that while communalists saw religion as the dividinginstitution, Gandhi in his unique way, more in continuation withBhakti and Sufi traditions saw religion as the ground whichunited people, "I consider myself as good a Muslim as I am aHindu and for that matter, I regard myself as equally good aChristian or a Parsi" This quote of his has to be seen along withhis two other more often cited quotes," For me, politics bereft

of religion is absolute dirt, ever to be shunned", and "politicsdivorced from religion is like a corpse, fit only to be burnt."(Harijan, May 25 197, page 164). This again is so exceptional inits innovation in understanding. Here by religion he meant itsinner morality aspects and not just the ones related to ritualsetc., the external identity.

Gandhis understanding of religion is very unique. Religion can beseen as a combination of various facets which can be clubbed into 1. Identity constituted by rituals, poly places, places ofpilgrimage, holy books and clergy, 2. Morality, which is thevalue system, meant for guiding people as to how to relate toothers in society. While morality is the most important part ofreligion, in society all through identity has been given moreprojection. Saints have harped on morality of religions.Similarly Gandhi also harped on morality of religions to unitehumanity, in contrast to communalists who used religions identityto divide religious communities.

Hindus and Muslims

India’s history was also seen by him in a unique intertwiningway. While British were promoting the divisive view of Historythat Hindus and Muslim have been fighting in history, Gandhipointed out, “The Two races (Hindus and Muslims) lived at peaceamongst themselves during Muslim rule. Let it be remembered thatmany Hindus embraced Islam before the advent of Muslim rule inIndia. It is my belief that had there been no Muslim rule, therewould still have been Musalmans in India, even as there wouldhave been Christians had there been no British rule. There isnothing to prove that the Hindus and Musalmans lived at war withone another before British rule. (Young India, February 26, 1925,p 75, in commenting to a letter from Bengali Zamindar)

Definitely the intercommunity relations amongst Hindus andMuslims have gone on worsening over the years due to manyfactors. Even during his time Gandhi pointes out, “And the Hindusand Musalmans in villages are not even today quarreling. In thosedays, they were not known to quarrel at all. The late MaulanaMahomed Ali often used to tell me, and he was himself a bit of a

Historian, “…I will show, through documents that British peoplehave preserved, Aurangzeb was not so vile as he has been paintedby the British Historian; that Moghul rule was not so bad as ithas been shown to us in British History, and so have the Hinduhistorians written. This quarrel is not old; this quarrel camewith the British advent.” (Young India December 24, 1931, p 413,Speech at the plenary session of Round Table Conference inLondon)

About Hindu Muslim unity, he was emphatic that this has to be thebedrock of India. “The union that we want is not a patched upthing but a union of hearts based upon and a definite recognitionof the indubitable proposition that Swaraj for India must be animpossible dream without an indissoluble union between Hindus andMuslims of India. It must not be a mere truce. It cannot bebased on mutual fear. It must be a partnership between equals,each respecting the religion of other. (Young India, October 6,1920, p 4)

Gandhi’s understanding of History

Contrary to the prevalence communal versions of Historypropagated by British to pursue their policy of ‘divide andrule’, Gandhi has a very rational understanding of nationalhistory. British were deliberately promoting a communal versionof History, to bring a divide between Hindus and Muslims. Forthis they focused on the religion of the king and there by thefeeling of Hate for the other community started percolating inthe society. This also became the base understanding of thecommunal politics in India.

Indian History: Through Hind Swaraj

As reflected in this book his interpretation of History is very refreshing and all inclusive while the communalists were harping on the exclusivist history. Muslim communalists were asserting that the Muslim Nation here has been since the time of Mohammad bin Kasim, who first won over Sindh in 8th Century, they assertedthat Muslims were rulers and so British have to hand over the power to them as they had as they snatched the power from Muslims. The Hindu communalists were asserting that this is a Hindu nation from times immemorial, this is Hindu nation and Muslims are foreigners. They also talked of atrocities of Muslims, their alien-ness, the fight between Hindu Muslim kings as the battles between Hindus and Muslims. Gandhi on contrary disseminates an understanding which is more rational, non sectarian and all inclusive.

In Hind Swaraj he points out “The Hindus flourished under Moslem sovereigns and Moslems under the Hindu. Each party recognized that mutual fighting was suicidal, and that neither party would abandon its religion by force of arms. Both parties, therefore, decided to live in peace. With the English advent quarrels recommenced… Should we not remember that many Hindus and Mohammedans own the same ancestors and the same blood runs through their veins? Do people become enemies because they changetheir religion? Is the God of the Mohammedan different from the God of the Hindu? Religions are different roads converging to thesame point. What does it matter that we take different roads so long as we reach the same goal? Wherein is the cause of quarreling?

Moreover, there are deadly proverbs as between the followers of Siva and those of Vishnu, yet nobody suggests that these two do not belong to the same nation. It is said that the Vedic religionis different from Jainism, but the followers of the respective

faiths are not different nations. The fact is that we have becomeenslaved and, therefore, quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided by a third party. There are Hindu iconoclasts as there isMohammedan. The more we advance in true knowledge, the better we shall understand that we need not be at war with those whose religion we may not follow.” (The Condition of India (Continued) Hindus and Mohammedans,

http://www.mkgandhi.org/swarajya/coverpage.htm)

This is precisely what the truth of History is. Battles between kings were for power and wealth while the average people interacted with each other and created the syncretic traditions and culture. There also developed the religious streams which drew from each other and enriched the society as a whole. What isIndian culture? Is it Hindu? Is it Muslim or what? As such India is one of the places where all religions have flourished without any discrimination. Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and Sikhism are the major religions, which people have beenfollowing. Some of these were born here and some of these came inand spread through different mechanisms, like the teachings of saints, Sufis, missionaries etc. Islam mainly spread through the teachings of Sufi saints, Christianity through missionaries working for charity in the arena of education and health. All aspects of culture had a rich sprinkling from people of differentreligions. Our food habits, many of the practices coming from West Asia and other parts of the World, our clothing our architecture has a strong imprint of different people from different religions and different parts of World coming and contributing to the evolving culture. While Bhakti and Sufi are the high point of this interaction, today one can discern the contribution of different religionists in the various rituals andpractices of people.

Strength of Gandhi’s non-Violence

The popular perception of identifying communal violence withreligion was criticized by Mahatma. He was clear that religionshould not be used for political goals or for violence, “TheHindu thinks that in quarreling the Musalman he is benefitingHinduism, and the Musalman thinks that in fighting a Hindu he isbenefiting Islam. But each is ruining his faith.” (Young IndiaJanuary 27, 1927, p. 31; in the course of a speech in Hindi inSewan in Bihar when asked to speak on Hindu Muslim unity)

For him the essence of true religion was the moral values of thereligion, not the external issues related to rituals and symbolsetc., He points out, the essence of true religious teaching isthat one should serve and befriend all. I learnt this in mymothers lap. You may refuse to call me Hindu. I know no defenseexcept to quote a line from a famous song; Majhab nahin sikhata aapasmein bair rakhna meaning, religion does not teach us to bear ill-will towards one another. It is easy enough to be friendly toone’s friends. But to befriend the one who regards himself asyour enemy is quintessence of true religion. The other is merebusiness. (Harijan May 11, 1947 p. 146, speech at a prayermeeting, Patna, April 28. The reference to Iqbal’s song is SaareJahan se Achccha Hindustan Hamara)

Gandhi’s Approach to Hindus and Muslims: No Appeasement

His commitment to religious tolerance was infinite. He was forhaving respect for all the human being irrespective of theircaste color creed and religion. To overcome the mutual suspicionand hate he was for the interaction of communities at all thelevels, something which is very much needed even today. This isthe only way to overcome the mutual suspicion, “As with Hindus sowith Musalmans, The leaders among the latter should meet togetherand consider their duty towards Hindus. When both are inspired bya spirit of sacrifice, when both try to do their duty towards oneanother instead of pressing their rights, then and then onlywould the long standing differences between two communitiescease. Each must respect the other’s religion, must refrain fromeven secretly thinking ill of the other. We must politelydissuade members of both communities from indulging in badlanguage against one another. Only a serious endeavor in thisdirection can remove the estrangement between us.” (Young India,May 7 1919) This seems to be as true today as it was nearly acentury or probably it is needed much more today even at thattime.

“India cannot cease to be one nation because people belonging to different religions live in it. The introduction of foreigners does not necessarily destroy the nation, they merge in it. A country is one nation only when such a condition obtains in it. That country must have a faculty for assimilation; India has everbeen such a country. In reality there are as many religions as there are individuals; but those who are conscious of the spirit of nationality do not interfere with one another's religion. If they do, they are not fit to be considered a nation. If the Hindus believe that India should be peopled only by Hindus, they are living in dreamland. The Hindus, the Mohammedans, the Parsis and the Christians who have made India their country are fellow countrymen, and they will have to live in unity, if only for their own interest. In no part of the world are one nationality and one religion synonymous terms; nor has it ever been so in

India.” (The Condition of India (Continued) Hindus and Mohammedans,

http://www.mkgandhi.org/swarajya/coverpage.htm)

As Gandhi was working in a plural atmosphere with a respect fordiversity he could see the need for mutual tolerance in apractical way. Each other’s way of eating, worship and otherthings which are different have to be respected by the other,“Mutual toleration is necessary for all time and for all races.We cannot live in peace if the Hindus will not tolerate theMohammadan form of worship of God and his manners and customs, orif Mohammad will be impatient of Hindu idolatry or cow-worship.It is necessary for toleration that I must approve of what Itolerate. I heartily dislike drinking, meat-eating and smoking,but I tolerate all this amongst Hindus,) Mohammadan andChristians… All the quarrels between the Hindus and Mohammadanshave arisen from each wanting to force the other for his view.(Young India, February 25, 1920, p 3)

He could reconcile the faith in one’s religion with the Indiannationalism. He gave due to respect to one’s religion whileensuring the Indian nationalism is the first identity we have,“Nationalism is greater than sectarianism, and in that sense, weare Indians first, and Hindus; Musalmans, Parsis and Christiansafter.” (Young India, January 26 1922, p 22)

At the same time Gandhi was clear that religion is a personalmatter, not to be brought into the political space. “If religionis allowed to be as it is, a personal concern and a matterbetween God and man, there are many dominating common factorsbetween the two which will compel common life and common action.Religions are not for separating men from one another, they aremeant to bind them. It is misfortunate that, today, they are so

distorted that they have become a potent cause of sterile andmutual slaughter.” (Harijan, June 8, 1940, p 157)

Gandhi and Conversions

As far as conversions are concerned, it is true that the somemotivated political streams have misused what he wrote and said,but a reference to his own writings in full will give us thecorrect idea that how far removed he was from the currentpractitioners of politics of hate. He upheld the right ofexistence of all the religions and freedom of conscience, that’show the clauses giving us the right to practice and preach ourreligion got incorporated in our Constitution, Constitution whichis the direct outcome of the values of freedom movement, which heled. Unfortunately Gandhi is quoted extensively by Right wingforces to oppose conversions; but this quote is ‘part’ of thequote, half truth, something which is bigger than a lie.

The said quote, which is a fragment of the whole, is fromGandhi’s collected works, Volume XLVI p. 27-28. In an interviewdated 22nd March 1931, given to The Hindu, Gandhi apparentlystated that if in self governing India, missionaries kept‘proselytizing by means of medical aid, education etc., I wouldcertainly ask them to withdraw. Every nation’s religion is asgood as any other. Certainly India’s religions are adequate forher people. We need no converting spirituality.” This is thefirst part of the quote and the lines that follow give thetotally opposite idea, the ideas, which Gandhi held. Gandhi goeson to write, “This is what the reporter has put in my mouth… Allthat I can say is that it is a travesty of what I have alwayssaid and held.” He goes on to explain, “I am, then, not against

conversion. But I am against the modern methods of it.Conversions nowadays have become a matter of business, like anyother… Every nation considers its own faith to be as good as thatof any other. Certainly the great faiths held by the people ofIndia are adequate for her people. India stands in no need ofconversions from one faith to another.” And then he goes on tolist the faiths of India, “Apart from Christianity and Judaism,Hinduism and its offshoots, Islam and Zoroastrianism are livingfaiths.”

Gandhi: India’s Partition of India

At the trial, Godse said that Gandhiji had to be eliminated since“he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consentingto the partitioning of it….” The partition of India was a complexset of processes with visible and invisible forces working atdifferent levels, which finally partitioned our country. Morethan half a million people died and twelve million becamehomeless. It was one of the largest population movements inrecorded history. To blame Gandhi for partition is historicallyincorrect and is a fictitious myth being propagated by vestedinterests, by those who are against democratic nationalism. If welook at the whole events we will realize that Gandhi was againstthe partition of the country. The partition of India was outcomeof British policy of ‘divide and rule’ and the role played byCommunalists, Muslims and Hindu both. The events and statementsby the leaders of that period disprove this point.

All through the struggle for independence Gandhiji’s cry was thatof a lone voice in the wilderness saying that India should not bebroken up. He stood steadfast in his belief until the very end.

“The demand for Pakistan, “as put forth by the Moslem League isun-Islamic and I have not hesitated to call it sinful. Islamstands for unity and the brotherhood of mankind, not fordisrupting the oneness of the human family. Therefore, those whowant to divide India into possibly warring groups are enemiesalike of India and Islam. They may cut me into pieces but theycannot make me subscribe to something which I consider to bewrong.”

Although Sarvakar kept demanding for Akhand Bharat or undividedIndia ironically he was the one who propounded the two-nationtheory in 1923, in his book Hindutva, 16 years before Jinnah did.In 1945, Savarkar went on to say, "I have no quarrel with Mr.Jinnah's two nation theory. We, the Hindus are a nation byourselves, and it is a historical fact that the Hindus and theMuslims are two nations."

“The only alternative to Pakistan is undivided India,” saidGandhi. “There is no via media. Once you accept the principle ofpartition in respect of any Province, you get into a sea ofdifficulties. By holding fast to the ideal of undivided India,you steer clear of all difficulties.”

While Gandhi said, “Religion is not a part of nationality, but apersonal matter, between Man and his God. It must not be mixed upwith politics and national affairs,” Savarkar went on to say,"India cannot be assumed today to be unitarian and homogenousnation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main -the Hindus and the Muslims."

During the freedom movement there were other political trendsstriving for a secular, democratic, socialist India.Personalities like Bhagat Singh, Ambedkar belong to this streamwhile others like Jinnah, Savarkar-RSS harped on a nation in thename of religion. The anti-British movement led by Gandhi hasbeen the biggest ever mass movement in the history of the world.

Both the Muslim League and RSS kept aloof from the freedommovement and did not participate in the anti-British struggle.

Golwalkar felt that the freedom movement should not be an anti-British struggle fighting for territorial gains, instead be amovement towards establishing a Hindu Nation. In his book Bunchof Thoughts “The theories of territorial nationalism and ofcommon danger, which formed the basis for our concept of nation,had deprived us of the positive and inspiring content of our realHindu Nationhood…. Being anti British was equated with patriotismand nationalism. This reactionary view has disastrous effectsupon the entire course of independence struggle…”

During the freedom movement a majority perceived India as anation in the making; ready to start its journey of nationbuilding with introduction of modern industrialization, educationand other related infrastructure.

But the Muslim League and RSS felt otherwise. They continued todefine the Nation as Muslim and Hindu entities respectively.

Gandhi and issue of giving 55 crores to Pakistan

This is what Godse said at his trial. "On January 13, 1948, Ilearnt that Gandhiji had decided that he will go on fast untodeath. The reason given was that he wanted an assurance of Hindu-MuslimUnity... But I and many others could easily see that the realmotive...[was] to compel the Dominion Government to pay the sum of Rs 55crores toPakistan, the payment of which was emphatically refused by theGovernment… (http://indiansaga.com/whoswho/godse_letter.html )

The accumulating provocation of 32 years, culminating in his lastpro-Muslimfast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence ofGandhijishould be brought to an end immediately....” But the historicalfacts state otherwise. Out of a reserve of Rs.375 crores with theReserve Bank of India at the time of partition Pakistan's sharewas Rs. 75 crore, of which Rs. 20 crore had been given toPakistan. The balance amount of Rs.55 crore or Rs.550 millionwas to be handed over later by the Indian Government to Pakistanas per the agreement of December 2, 1947. On January 6, 1948 theGovernment of Pakistan sent a memorandum to the Deputy Governorof the Reserve Bank in Karachi asking for this sum of Rs. 55crore from India. Gandhiji began his fast on Monday, January13th, 1948. The fast was undertaken with a view to restoringcommunal amity in Delhi.

It was his day for observing silence. So after he began his fast,his written statement was read out in the evening's prayermeeting. In this statement he does not mention the issue ofgiving Rs. 55 crore to Pakistan. On January 15th the Governmentof India announced its decision to give 55 crore to Pakistan. Onhearing this Gandhiji should have ended his fast if 55 crore wasthe main issue for his fast. He continued his fast till 18thJanuary.

The press release of the government of India nor the list ofassurances given by the committee headed by Dr. Rajendra Prasadto persuade Gandhiji to give up his fast did not include theissue of 55 crores. The truth is that the 55 crores anyway belonged to Pakistanso Godse’s argument is flawed.

Mahatma Gandhi’s murder and appeasement of Muslims!

As we will see Gandhi was murdered as he was continuouslyfighting against the communal forces within both the religions.Godse who had got his initial training in RSS and was editing apaper called Hindu Rashtra murdered Gandhi to further the causeof Hindu Rashtra which is the goal of RSS. The followers of RSSand Hindu Mahasabha remained aloof from freedom struggle and inall, crucial times collaborated with British. The votaries ofHindu Rashtra, were divided into Hindu Mahasabha, which was moreinterested in the immediate participation in politics, as theflag bearers of Hindu communal politics, and the RSS which wasconcentrating on making a net work of ‘cadres’ who couldintervene at crucial level by spreading its view in the society.It was bringing in its fold the workers who could later on beuseful executioners of Hindutva politics to be ready for the timewhen the ‘real struggle’ will begin when the British left andalso were spreading the communal venom. Both these denominationsof Hindutva Politics had the common goal of Hindu Rashtra whiletheir goals were common, their social base was common, their keytexts were common, but their methods differed. Nathuram Godse,killer of Mahatma ‘uniquely’ symbolized the fusion of both thesetrends.

After the murder of Mahatma, the official RSS line had been thatwe have nothing to do with Godse neither is he a member of RSS.They could get away with this as there was no official record ofmembers of RSS, and they could disown Godse at legal level. In1930 Godse joined RSS and very soon rose to be the bauddhikpracharak (intellectual propagator), Like both HM & RSS he wasardent supporter of Akhand Bharat, undivided India comprising oftoday’s Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar. “Having worked for theuplift of the Hindus I felt it necessary to take part inpolitical activities of the country for the protection of justrights of Hindus. I therefore left the Sangh and joined HinduMahasabha (Godse, ‘Why I Assassinated Mahatma Gandhi’ 1993, and Pg.102).

As an ardent Hindutvawadi he was extremely critical of Gandhi’sahimsa (non-violence), the movements led by him and thought verylowly of him and scales used to assess him are also very peculiar“His followers cannot see what is clear even to the blind viz.that Gandhi was a mere pigmy before Shivaji, Rana Pratap and GuruGovind (ibid Pg. 40) and finally about the winning of swaraj andfreedom I maintain the Mahatma’s contribution was negligible.”(ibid pg. 87)

He held Mahatma responsible for appeasing Muslims, and therebythe formation of Pakistan. He joined HM, at that time the onlypolitical party of Hindus, and became general secretary of PuneBranch. In due course he founded the newspaper, as foundereditor, called Agrani or Hindu Rashtra. Jagan Phadnis in His book‘Mahatmyachi Akher’ (Lokvangymay Griha, 1994) argues that Gandhimurder was not on the charges propagated by them (Partition andinsistence on paying Pakistan's dues (55 crore) from thetreasury), but due to the basic deep differences with the socialpolitics of Gandhi and that of the followers of the HinduRashtra. These two reasons are proffered merely as a pretext forthe same.

--

Box

Assassination attempts on Gandhi

Since the year 1934 over a period of 14 years there were as manyas six attempts to assassinate Gandhiji.

Out of these attempts five involve the Pune branch of the HinduMahasabha while three point to the involvement of Narayan Apteand Nathuram Godse. Godse joined the Pune branch of Hindu

Mahasabha in 1936 as its secretary. These cases are welldocumented.

In 1944 Godse was arrested when trying to assault Gandhijiwith a sharp weapon at Panchgani near Pune. Strangely theissue of 55 crores did not exist then.(http://www.gandhitopia.org/profiles/blogs/could-gandhi-be-saved-rss )

After this event Gandhiji had invited Godse for discussions butthe latter did not respond to this request.

Pyarelal Gandhiji’s secretary said "These people kept photographsof Gandhi, Nehru and other Congress leaders in their shoes. Theywere trained to shoot by using Gandhiji's photograph as theirtarget. These were the same people who later murdered the Mahatmawhile he was striving to bring peace to a riot ravaged Delhi, in1948."(http://www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2004/aug04/cover7.html )

What were the reasons for the earlier attempts made on Gandhiji’slife by the Hindutva forces?

Thus there were serious flaws in their argument since some of theissues mentioned by Godse did not exist then.

Epilogue

Gandhi: Relevance Today

The violence and hatred, the increasing intolerance, thedeprivation of the poor masses, the refusal to treat the lowerstrata with dignity are the things which are dominating the sceneWorld over and particularly in India. The horrific violence inthe name of religion has been a matter of shame for all of us.

The conditions of dalits has slightly improved but still asection of them remains in the chains of untouchability and subhuman existence. The intolerance for the minorities is verysevere matter. The wrong projection of the past to humiliate theminorities is on the rise, the spirit of the nation has beendeeply shattered by the trends of selfish politics dominating thescene. The condition of women is also calling for a big concern,while Adivasis are being marginalized and deprived from theirdignified living.

Gandhi had tried to unite all on the grounds of Liberty, Equalityand Fraternity through the path of peaceful agitation, Satyagrah.His efforts united the nation, the Indian nation was formed andcame out from the womb of History on 15th August 1947. After fewinitial years the things have started taking adverse directionand division across regions and religion are worsening. The needto revive the spirit of the times of freedom struggle is the needof the hour. In this again it was Gandhi who led the wholestruggle to ensure that the nation comes on the path of peace,non-violence and tolerance. We need to remember his values andset the path of the values ingrained in Indian Constitution.