Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Lessons unlearnt....

Today marks the 59th anniversary of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi by Nathuram Godse, and perhaps we haven't really learnt our lessons yet. It is sad that even after so many years, we have failed to grasp the basic cause of this act, and what we must be fighting against.

Mahatma Gandhi was a great man, there is no doubting that. I have the highest regard for him and his principles, not in the least because of "Lage Raho Munnabhai" (but, yes, maybe more accentuated by it). But even the greatest of saints, the most venerable of men, are wont to be ignored some time.
He never approved of the Partition in the first place. I quote him, "My whole soul rebels against the idea that Hinduism and Islam represent two antagonistic cultures and doctrines. To assent to such a doctrine is for me a denial of God.”

But, this Mahatma, this deliverer of freedom, was condemned when his followers acquiesced to partitioning, to drawing lines in the sand, lines based on creed, boundaries based on the differences in faith, in beliefs. He was condemned when those who would have accepted his leadership under the occupying British now would no longer acknowledge the primacy of his authority. He continued to be condemned each and every time when communal riots broke out, when the State incompetently stood by and watch the carcass of Indian civil society slowly burn away. And he continues to be condemned whenever a civil servant or a legislator indulged in corruption or in immoral activities, violating his creed of honesty and simplicity.

Nathuram Godse would assassinate him because he was against any breach of faith, even when the one to whom he wished our faith was unfaithful, even when such fidelity would only cause us grievous harm and pain. He would be assassinated because he rejected the doctrine that one is born into a religion, and is by default antagonistic to all others. But that was but death once.

What we have done, and what we continue to do to his legacy, to his beliefs and to his value systems, may kill him many times over. Simply placing floral offerings and singing at his memorial would not suffice to heal his wounds. If Nathuram Godse and his colleagues are to be charged with having killed the physical Mahatma, we, the Indians of his nation, are equally guilty of having destroyed the spirit of the Mahatma, if not completely, then at least in part.

But is all lost? I dare think not; rather, I hope not. India and Indians can perhaps better acknowledge that now it is imperative that we all live together, and that narrow sectarian divisions should not be cause for us to yell blue murder. It is imperative that we come to understand that violence must always be reserved for the end, as the most extreme of alternatives, to be used only if all other peaceful means of resolving the problem concerned have failed beyond reproach. Then the flame at Raj Ghat may burn a little brighter, then perhaps the half-naked fakir of Porbandar will rest in peace, amidst his children, in the land of his dreams.

Is The Nation Turning Its Back on The Father?


2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are showing only one side of the picture Reddy. If he was condemnded , there's a reason behind it. Same with his assasination.
There are many (and hideous) accpects of his life not generally known. Not for nothing is disliked by so many.
Write about that too someday.

Vivek said...

That he had flaws as a person or as an ideologue is not something I am ever going to deny. No man acclaimed as a great man is unblemished, except perhaps for those who are termed as divinities, and that too because they are thereby made unassailable.
I am not referring to his assassination, nor am in any way commenting on its validity or otherwise. I am not sufficiently aware of the conditions prevalent then, and therefore choose to abstain to comment in any manner deemed definitive.
However, the basic point of this blog is not to glorify the Mahatma; rather it is to show how his creed has been condemned, despite he being called the "Father" of the Nation. And his creed wasn't bad to an extent, just he may have overdone it at times. But then Lord Acton did say that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I fail to see why one negates his public work with his personal life. He never compelled one to follow all his principles; rather you were free to take what you wanted. Hideous or not, you had the freedom to take what you wanted from his life.

I could never bring myself to injure the dead, no matter what may have been the secrets they hid in their closets. That I would leave to others, more attuned to the task. Your wish may go unanswered.

I Quote...

Quote of the Day