It is time for me to go. Me to my death, you to your lives. Which of us goes to the better fate, only God knows. ~ Socrates.
A Socrates is to drink hemlock, a Christ is to be crucified and a Gandhi is to be assassinated. They uphold the truth and die for their courage of conviction, an ideology that throws a challenge to the established order.
Socrates spent his life "seeking and asking for living truth". He was "one of the finest philosphers of the world, perhaps the greatest of great men produced by Athens. His name commands admiration, honour and reverence. For his genius, he became conspicuous, for his virtues he was condemned to death - the world cannot stand the completely honest man". He was charged that he neglected the gods of the republic, neglected their worship and corrupted the youth of the day.
Christ was a liberating force. "In the white blaze of his Kingdom is to be no property, no privilege, no pride, no precedence, no motive indeed and no reward but love."
He was crucified that the mighty Roman Empire, with no parallel in ancient times, be saved. It was mighty Roman Empire, which produced the most famous and powerful generals, like Julius Caesar and the most nymphomaiac queen, Messalina, with no rival in the world history.
Gandhi, like Christ, was also a liberating force. He was the very breath of India's freedom struggle against the mighty British Empire in which the sun never set. He walked on this earth like an angel, a messiah and a true messenger of love, truth and non-violence.
Great men like Socrates, Christ and Gandhiji are killed for their ideology and not for sake of money or over money. They are killed when they become a threat to the established order. Gandhiji had become a threat to the pernicious and perverted social system prevalent in our country.
Gandhiji's courage of conviction, clear vision, tenacious faith and above all his admission of mistake endowed him with leadership qualities. Before he launched his non-cooperative movement, he wrote a letter to the Viceroy and surrendered his honours, decorations and titles conferred on him for his services during Bulu War and Boer War in South Africa.
Orthodox Hindus were against Gandhiji. Quoting The Times of India (5th Janurary 1925), Prof. G.S. Ghurye writes, "In the beginning of 1925, a number of merchants of Bombay, among whom were included the leading public men, convened a meeting of orthodox Hindus. Almost every speaker denouced what they called the heresies of Gandhi in respect of untouchability, and declared that the Hindu religion was in danger at his hands." Success of this conference was a shot in the arm of Dr. Hedgewar and he embarked upon founding R.S.S.
Gandhiji started a campaign against untouchability. "He was attaehed by orthodox and social reactionaries. They met him with black flags demonstrations and disrupted his meetings. They brought out scurrilous and inflammatory leaflets against him, putting fantastic utterances in his mouth. They accused him of attacking Hinduism. They publically burnt his portraits. On 25th June 1934, at Poona, a bomb was thrown on a car believed to be carrying Gandhiji, injuring its seven occupants. The protestors offered the government full support against the Congress and Civil Disobedience Movement, if it did not support the anti-untouchability campaign. The government obliged by defeating the Temple Entry Bill in the legislative Assemby in August 1934, " writes Bipin Chandra in India's Struggle for Independence.
Gandhiji's courage of conviction did not deter him from his path. He said, "I would like to assure my Harijan friends, ... that they may hold my life as a hostage for its (removal of untouchability) due fulfillment."
Gandhiji does not recognise Manu. He strikes at the bottom of the pyramid by saying, "We do not know that a Rishi named Manu ever lived."
Gandhiji does not give any credit to superior intelligence of the Brahmins."Superior intelligence is for superior service. The moment superior intelligence arrogates to itself superior status, it is worth trampling under foot." This must raise the eyebrows of stiff-necked social Darwins, who consider themselves "visible gods on earth" and repository of Indian wisdom.
Gandhiji goes step by step in attacking the punic Brahmanical social system by demolishing its spurious foundation. His third attack is on the Brahmanical false definition of two-level Truth. He defines Truth as Absolute, God. Arun Shouries's exposition of two levels of truth, "the thesis of two level of truth becomes a handy instrument in the hands of ideologists, it ended up introducing double think into the vexy heart of corpus. In practice it, like the other part of doctrine, reached the masses in a vulgarised version. It had rationalised differing levels of development in their spiritual quest, it ended up rationalising the hierarchy itself, it became a justification for dual morality... it became a justification for different codes. One code for the Aryans and another for non-Aryans, one code for those who wore sacred thread and another for those whit did not, once code for caste Hindus and another for out-castes, one code for individual in one age-group and another for individuals in another age-group, one set of punishment for a crime committed by individuals from one caste, another set of punishment for the same crime committed by individual form another caste and so on.
"This these about differing capacities of individuals ...mirrored a division of labour that had divided society into compartment so that clergy, rulers, merchants and labours were now leading entirely separate lives. What was right for one group was no longer right for another group...some individuals were capable of grasping the higher truth and other had to seek solace in lower truth, so also some were there to be served and others had to seek solace in serving them."
Gandhiji does not accept the irrationality of two levels of truth. He reads between the lines and fully grasps its implications. He defines Truth as God and affirms like Buddha, "The right as well as the competence of each individual to ascertain the truth for himself," without the aid of "dharmagurus" mushrooming as vendors of faith, each hawking his own particular brand or without the intervention and apparition of computer simulated supernatural agents, each advocating his or her own sectarian ideology.
Gandhiji proceeds further. According to him our so-called religious scriptures should be taken as the works of poets, the works of great poets, but nonetheless just words of poets. In one stroke, he demolishes the myth that ancient texts, erroneously called Dharmagranths, are "divinely ordained." He says, "I would reject all scriptures authority if it in the conflict with solar reason or the dictates of the heart. Authority sustains and enables the weak, then it is the handiwork of reason, but degrades them when it supplants reason sanctioned by the still, small voice within."
"Blind worship of authority is an sign of weakness of mind," he says.
Gandhiji does not accept the authority or infallibility of any ancient text. Even Dr. S. Radhakrishanan agrees with him when he says, "The Vedas are neither infallible nor all inclusive."
Gandhiji says, "I accept no authority or no Shastra as infallible guide.. Hinduism is not a codified religion. We have in Hinduism hundreds and thousands of books whose name we do not even know which go under the short name of Shastras. Whatever falls from the truth should be rejected, no matter where it comes from and therefore, the burden lies with the person, who upholds a practice which is inconsistent with truth, so that if a man wants to defend for instance untouchability, he has to show that it is consistent with truth."
The "embarrassing glorification of everything Brahmanical" is the basis of "half-truth." Contradictions get reconciled by the dictum of dicey Manu who declares all contradictions true as they were uttered by "wise" Brahmins. Tautology is a Gobbelien art to make lie appear true if told a hundred times.
Gandhiji moves ahead. His next attack is on the so-called "sacred texts." According to him, the ancient texts we possessed today have been passed on from generations to generations by rot. (In those ancient times of India's glory, age of high spiritualism and zenith of civilization, there was neither a pen, nor paper and nor ink!) These ancient texts through centuries have undergone many interpolations, distortions etc. and it is difficult to sift the grain from the chaff.
Truth speaking Yudhisthira says, "A Shudra is not a Shudra by birth alone, nor is a Brahmin by birth alone... Caste is such a confused affair that no one can be sure of his own caste's purity. Man of all four caste bred children form women of all four cases; how can we make our caste distinctions now? In any case, speech, sex, relations, birth and death do not follow caste rules. Character is the only thing that is certain. Does'nt Manu himself say in one place that the person of mixed caste is better than the "pure" if the "pure" does not have character?" The caste is a confused affair, "Confusion of caste" has been interpolated differently in the Gita.
Lastly, Gandhiji suggests that since all the ancient texts are not in their pristine purity, "we bring out a revised edition of scriptures." What Gandhiji desires here is that we must purge from these texts portions, which are interpolations and very abhorent to human dignity. In the post-Mauryan period, priestly class had played havoc and committed a fraud on Indian Society by polluting all those texts and every abominable speech was put in Krishna's mouth whom it hated and despised when he was alive!
Gandhiji says, "the certainty that the whole mass of Hindus and persons accepted as religous leaders will accept the validity of such authority need not interfere with sacred enterprise. Work done in long run and will assuredly help those who are badly in need of such assistance."
Could priestly class tolerate it? It tolerated Gandhiji for too long.
Fundamentalist Hindutva elements waited when Gandhiji declared that Partition would take place over his dead body. When Partition came, Lord Mountbattaen requested Gandhiji to be his 'one man army' against communalism in Noakhali where he was walking barefoot to stop blood bath. Communal frenzy in Delhi stopped him to die. Patience of Godse and his ilks was being exhausted. They were waiting for an opportunity.
Gandhiji went on fast on 12th January 1948, when communal violence in the wake of partition did not stopped and ended after six days in terms of the assurance given by the Hindu leaders to end violence according with six-point formula. This was the opportunity for Godse to Kill Gandhiji. Godse appeared on the scene attired in a Muslim Pathan's dress to camouflage his identity and motive - to create Hindu-Muslims riots and motive to assassinate Gandhiji for his social ideology.
Godse killed him for the partition of the country, and his faith in Hindu-Muslim unity and for pressuring the government of India to pay Pakistan Rupees 55 crores towards the final settlement of partition based on division of assets and liabilities.
Under the international law and by moral obligation India was bound to pay Pakistan the amount due to her.
Godse's testimony is a clear proof that Gandhiji has become a threat to the established Brahmanical social order.
Nehru wrote a letter to home minister, Sardar Patel o 26 February 1948 suggesting that Gandhiji's murder was "a part of a much wider campaign organised chiefly by R.S.S." Sardar Patel sent a reply to Nehru the very next day informing that it was a fanatical wing of Hindu Mahasabha directly under Savarkar that hatched the conspiracy and saw it through. Savarkar was not found guilty by the Court. Golwalkar, somehow went scott-free!
Now, photographs of Sardar Patel occupies a prominent place on the wall of R.S.S offices!
R.S.S considered Patel a practical Hindu and Nehru a westernised impractical visionary. As Nehru did not interfere in the Home ministry affairs, Patel's good conduct certificate given to Golwalker smacks of partiality.
The glorification of Sardar Patel by the R.S.S outfits is not for his achievements of consolidation and undisputed unification of India. It is also not for reconstruction of Somnath temple. Somnath temple was not destroyed by inveder. He simply plundered its wealth. It is that Sardar Patel loosened the noose around the Golwalker's neck.
Sardar Patel was a great freedom fighter, good administrator, a great statesman and a visionary. The credit of national integration goes to this wise man. But, this "Iron Man" perhaps could not visualise that one day R.S.S would be a threat to the integrity of this nation.
Pretender to Sardar Patel's legacy, L.K. Advani, denied Godse's link with R.S.S. Godse's brother, Gopal Godse, rebuked Advani. Gopal countered Advani, saying, "it is cowardice to say that.. You can say that R.S.S did not pass a resolution, saying, go and assassinate Gandhi." But R.S.S. hatched a conspiracy to kill Gandhiji.
It is worth mentioning here that Golwalkar was instigating the Hindus of UP to kill the Muslims when Gandhiji was administering healing balm on the wounds of the Hindus and Muslims in Noakhali. Pt. Govind Vallabh Pant saved Golwalkar from going to jail.
A bomb was thrown on Gandhiji a few days before his assassination. Home ministry should have provided a secret security cover for his safety.
Murder of Swami Dayananda was attributed to the dancing girl who poisoned him for his rebuke. Here Hindu-Muslims unity and payment of settlement amount to Pakistan provided the opportunity to apply the 'threat'. There is evidence of D.R. Goel, once staunch R.S.S activist, to suggest that Godse was in touch with R.S.S before he assassinated Gandhiji. His motive is to smoke screen his identity at the time of assassination. Neither R.S.S nor its communal outfits can expiate their sin by constructing Ram Temple, not the whole of Ganges water wash their bloodstained hands!
|<< Exploiting Rama and Krishna||Contents||Misappropriation of National Symbols >>|