Ladies and
Gentlemen,
I thank you most cordially for the trust you have placed in me in
calling upon me to preside on this 19th Session of the Hindu Mahasabha; I don't
take it so much as an honour bestowed upon me by my nation for service rendered
in the past as a command to dedicate whatever strength us still left in me to
the Sacred Cause of defending Hindudom and Hindustan our common Motherland and
our common Holyland, and pressing on the fight for our National Freedom. So far
as the Hindus are concerned, there can be no distinction nor conflict in the
least between our Communal and National duties, as the best interests of the
Hindudom are simply identified with the best interests of Hindustan as a whole.
Hindudom cannot advance or fulfil its life mission unless and until our
Motherland is set free and consolidated into an Indian State in which all our
countrymen to whatever religion or sect or race they belong are treated with
perfect equality and none allowed to dominate others or is deprived of his just
and equal rights of free citizenship as long as everyone discharges the common
obligations and duties which one owes to the Indian Nation as a whole. The
truer a Hindu is to himself as a Hindu, he must inevitably grow a truer
National as well. I shall substantiate this point later on as I proceed.
With this conviction and from this point of view, I shall deal in this
my presidential address with some fundamental aspects of the Hindu Sanghatan
Movement as expounded by this Mahasabha or as I understand them and leave
detailed and passing questions, to be deliberated upon and decided, to the
representatives assembled in this Session.
But before proceeding further I feel it my bounden duty to send forth on
behalf of all Hindus our loyal and loving greetings to His Majesty the King of
Nepal, His Highness Shree Yuddhsamasher Ranajee-the Prime Minister of Nepal and
all of our co-religionists and countrymen there who have even in the darkest
hour of our history, been successful in holding out as Hindu Power and in
keeping a flag of Hindu Independence flying unsullied on the summits of the
Himalayas. The Kingdom of Nepal stands out today as the only Hindu Kingdom in
the world whose independence is recognised by England, France, Italy and other
great powers. Amongst some twenty five crores of our Hindus in this generation,
His Majesty the King of Nepal is the first and foremost and the only Hindu
today who can enter in the assemblage of King, Emperors and Presidents of all
the independent nations in the world, with head erect and unbent, as an equal
amongst equals. In spite of the passing political aspect of the question, Nepal
is bound to Hindudom as a whole by the dearest ties of a common race and
religion and language and culture, inheriting with us this our common
motherland and our common Holyland. Our life is one. Whatever contributes to
the strength of Hindudom as a whole, must strengthen Nepal and whatever
progress the latter records is bound to elevate the first. Hence all Sangha
tanist Hindus long to see that the only Independent Hindu Kingdom is
rapidly brought to an up-to-date efficiency, political, social, and above all
military and aerial so as to enable Her to hold out Her own in the National
struggle for existence that is going on all around us and march on and fulfil
the great and glorious destiny that awaits Her ahead.
Nor can this session of the Hindu Mahasabha forget to send forth its
message of sympathy and loving remembrances to those of our co-religionists and
countrymen abroad who have been building a greater Hindusthan without the noise
of drums and trumpets in Africa, America, Mauritius and such other parts of the
world and also to those who as in the island of Bali are still holding out as
remnants of the ancient world Empire of our Hindu Race. Their fortune too are
inextricably bound up with the freedom and strength and greatness of
Bharatavarsha, which is the 'Pitrubhoo' and 'Punyabhoo'-the Fatherland and the
Holyland of Hinduism as a whole.
As a whole superstructure of the mission and the function of the Hindu
Mahasabha rests on the correct definition of the word 'Hindu,' we must first of
all make it clear what 'Hindutva' really means. Once the scope and the meaning
of the world is defined and understood, a number of misgivings in our own camp
are easily removed, a number of misunderstandings and objections raised against
us from the camp of our opponents are met and silenced. Fortunately for us,
after a lot of wandering in wilderness, a definition of the word Hindu which is
not only historically and logically as sound as is possible in the cases of
such comprehensive terms, but is also eminently workable is already hit upon
when 'Hindutva' was defined as :-
।। आिसंधूिसंधूपयता [ यःय भारतभूिमका ।।......
'Everyone
who regards and claims this Bharatbhoomi from, the Indus to the Seas as his
Fatherland and Holyland is a Hindu. Here I must point out that it is rather
loose to say that any person professing any religion of Indian origin is a
Hindu. Because that is only one aspect of Hindutva. The second and equally
essential constituent of the concept of Hindutva cannot be ignored if we want
to save the definition from getting overlapping and unreal. It is not enough
that a person should profess any religion of Indian origin, i.e., Hindusthan as
his पुÖयभूhis Holyland, but he must also recognise it as
his ǒपतृ भू too, his Fatherland as well. As this is no
place for going into the whole discussion of the pros and cons of the question,
all I can do here is to refer to my book 'Hindutva' in which I have set forth
all arguments and expounded the proposition at great length. I shall content
myself at present by stating that Hinduism is bound and marked out as a people
and a nation by themselves not by the only tie of a common Holyland in which
their religion took birth but by the ties of a common culture, a common
language, a common history and essence of a common fatherland as well. It is
these two constituents taken together that constitute our Hindutva and
distinguish us from any other people in the world. That is why the Japanese and
the Chinese, for example, do not and cannot regard themselves as fully
identified with the Hindus. Both of them regard our Hindusthan as their
Holyland, the land which was the cradle of their religion, but they do not and
cannot look upon Hindusthan as their fatherland too. They are our
co-religionists but are not and cannot be our countrymen too. We Hindus are not
only co-religionists, but even countrymen of each other. The Japanese and the
Chinese have different ancestry, language, culture, history and country of
their own, which are not so integrally bound up with us as to constitute a
common national life. In a religious assembly of the Hindus, in any Hindu
Dharma-Mahasabha, they can join with us as our brothers-in-faith having a
common Holyland. But they will not and cannot take a common part or have a
common interest in a Hindu Mahasabha, which unites Hindus together and
represents their national life. A definition must in the main response to
reality. Just as by the first constituent of Hindutva, the possession if a
common Holyland-the Indian Mahommedans, Jews, Christians, Parsees, etc. are
excluded from claiming themselves as Hindus which in reality also they do
not,-in spite of their recognising Hindusthan as their fatherland, so also, on
the other hand, the second constituent of the definition that of possessing a
common fatherland exclude the Japanese, the Chinese and others from the Hindu
fold in spite of the fact of their having a Holyland in common with us. The above
definition had already been adopted by number of prominent Hindu-sabhas such as
the Nagpur, Poona, Ratnagiri Hindu-sabhas, and others. The Hindu Mahasabha also
had in view this very definition when the word Hindu was rather loosely
explained in its present constitution as ' one who profess any religion of
Indian origin.' I submit that the time has come when we should be more accurate
and replace that partial description by regular definition and incorporate in
the constitution the full verse itself translating it in the precise terms as
rendered above.
From this correct definition of Hindutva, it necessarily follows that we
should take all possible care to restrict the use of the word 'Hindu' to its
defined and definite general meaning only and avoid misusing it in any
sectarian sense. In common parlance even our esteemed leaders and writers who
on the one hand are very particular in emphasizing that our non-Vedic religious
schools are also included in the common Hindu brotherhood, commit, on the other
hand, the serious mistake if using such expressions as 'Hindus and Sikhs',
'Hindus and Jains' denoting thereby unconsciously that the Vaidiks or the
Sanatanists only are Hindus and thus quite unawares inculcate the deadly virus
of separation in the minds of the different constituents of our religious
brotherhood, defeating our own eager desire to consolidate them all into a
harmonious and organic whole. Confusion in words leads to confusion in
thoughts. If we take good care not to identify the term ' Hindu ' with the
major Vedic section of our people alone, our non-Vedic brethren such as the
Sikhs, the Jains and others will find no just reason to resent the application
of the word ' Hindu ' in their case as well. Those who hold to the opinion that
Sikhism, Jainism and such other religions that go to form our Hindu brotherhood
are neither the branches of nor originated from the Vedas but are independent
religions by themselves need not cherish any fear or suspicion of losing their
independence as a religious school by being called Hindus if that
application is rightly used only to denote all those who won India, this
Bharatbhoomi, as their Holyland and fatherland. Whenever we want to
discriminate against the constituents of Hinduism as a whole, we should designate
them as 'Vaidiks and Sikhs', 'Vaidiks and Jains' etc. But to say 'Hindus and
Sikhs', 'Hindus and Jains' is as self-contradictory and misleading as to say
'Hindus and Brahmins' or 'Jains and Digambers' or 'Sikhs and Akalees.' Such a
harmful misuse of the word Hindu should be carefully avoided especially in the
speeches, resolutions and records of our Hindu Mahasabha.
We may mention here in passing that the word 'Hindu' is not a
denomination which the foreigners applied to us in contempt otherwise but is
derived from our Vedic appellation of सƯिसंधू (Saptasindhus) a fact which is fully dealt
with in my book on Hindutva and is borne out by the name of one of our
provinces and peoples bordering on the Indus who are being called down to this
day as िसंध and िसंधी.
From this above discussion it necessarily follows that the concept of
the term 'Hindutva'-Hinduness-is more comprehensive than the word 'Hinduism'.
It was to draw a pointed attention to this distinction that I had coined the
words 'Hindutva', 'Pan Hindu' and 'Hindudom' when I framed the definition of
the word 'Hindu'. Hinduism concerns with the religious systems of the Hinds,
their theology and dogma. But this is precisely a matter which this Hindu
Mahasabha leaves entirely to individual or group conscience and faith. The
Mahasabha takes its stand on no dogma, no book or school of philosophy whether
pantheist, monotheist or atheist. All that it is concerned with, so far as
'ism' is concerned, is the common characteristic, which a Hindu, by the very
fact of professing allegiance to a religion or faith of Indian origin
necessarily possesses in regarding India as his Holyland, as his पुÖयभूिम-the cradle and the
temple of his faith.
Thus while only indirectly concerned with Hinduism which is only one of
the many aspects of Hindutva resulting from the second constituent of
possessing a common Fatherland. The Mahasabha is not in the main a
Hindu-Dharma-Sabha but it is pre-eminently a HinduRashtra-Sabha and is a
Pan-Hindu organization shaping the destiny of the Hindu Nation in all its
social, political and cultural aspects. Those who commit the serious mistake of
taking the Hindu Mahasabha for only a religious body would do well to keep
thise distinction in mind.
Some cavil at the position I have taken that the Hindu Mahasabha
as I understand its mission, is pre-eminently a national body and challenge
me-'How the Hindus who differ somuch amongst themselves in every detail of life
could at all be called a nation as such ?' To them my reply is that no people
on the earth are so homogenous as to present perfect uniformity in language,
culture, race and religion. A people is marked out a nation by themselves not
so much by the absence of any heterogeneous differences amongst themselves as
by the fact of their differing from other peoples more markedly than they
differ amongst themselves. Even those who deny the fact that the Hindus could
be called a nation by themselves, do recognise Great Britain, the United
States, Russia, Germany and other peoples as nations. What is the test by which
those peoples are called nations by themselves ? Take Great Britain as an
example. There are at any rate three different languages there; they have
fought amongst themselves dreadfully in the past, there are to be found
the traces of different seeds and bloods and race. If you say that in spite of
it all they are a nation because they possess a common country, a common
language, a common culture and common Holyland then the Hindus too possess a
common country so well marked out as Hindusthan, a common language the Sanskrit
from which all their current languages are derived or are nourished and which
forms even today the common language of their Scriptures and literature and
which is held in esteem as the sacred reservoir of ancient scriptures and the
tongue of their forefathers. By 'Anuloma' and 'Pratiloma' marriages their seed
and blood continued to get commingled even since the days of Manu. Their social
festivals and cultural forms are not less common than those we find in England.
They possess a common Holyland. The Vedic Rishis are their common pride, their
Grammarians Panini and Patanjali, their Poets Bhavabhooti and Kalidas, their
heroes Shri Ram and Shri Krishna, Shivaji and Pratap, Guru Govind and Banda are
a source of common inspiration. Their Prophets Buddha and Mahaveer, Kanad and
Shankar, are held in common esteem. Like their ancient and sacred language-the
Sanskrit-their scripts also are fashioned on the same basis and the Nagari
script has been the common vehicle of their sacred writings since centuries in
the past. Their ancient and modern history is common. They have friends and
enemies in common. They have faced common dangers and won victories in common.
One in national glory and one in national disasters, one in national despairs
and one in national hope and Hindus are welded together during aeons of a
common life and a common habitat. Above all the Hindus are bound together by
the dearest, most sacred and most enduring bonds of a common Fatherland and a
common Holyland, and these two being identified with one and the same country
our Bharatbhumi, our India, the National Oneness and homogenity of the Hindus
have been doubly sure. If the United States with the warring crowds of Negroes,
Germans and Anglo-saxons, with a common past not exceeding four or five
centuries put together can be called a nation-then the Hindus must be entitled
to be recognized as a nation par excellence. Verily the Hindus as a people
differ most markedly from any other people in the world than they differ
amongst themselves. All tests whatsover of a common country, race, religion,
and language that go to entitle a people to form a nation, entitle the Hindus
with greater emphasis to that claim. And whatever differences divide the Hindus
amongst themselves are rapidly disappearing owing to their awakening of the
national consciousness and the Sanghatan and the social reform movements of
today. Therefore the Hindu Mahasabha that has, as formulated in its current
constitution, set before itself the task of 'the maintenance, protection and
promotion of the Hindu race, culture and civilization for the advancement and
glory of "Hindu Rashtra' is pre-eminently a national body represent the
Hindu Nation as a whole.
Some of our well meaning but unthinking section of Indian patriots who
look down upon the Mahasabha as a communal, narrow and anti-Indian body only
because it represents Hindudom and tries to protect its just rights, forget the
fact that communal and parochial are only relative terms and do not by
themselves imply a condemnation or curse. Are not they themselves who swear by
the name of Indian Nationalism in season and out of season liable to the same
charge of parochialness ? If the Mahasabha represents the Hindu nation only,
they claim to represent the Indian nation alone. But is not the concept of an
Indian Nation itself a parochial conception in elation to Human State ? In fact
the Earth is our motherland and Humanity our Nation. Nay, the Vedantist goes
further and claims this Universe for his country and all manifestation from the
stars to the stone his own self. 'आमचा ःवदेश । भुवनऽयामÚये वास ।।' says Tukaram ! Why then take the Himalayas to
cut us off from the rest of mankind, deem ourselves as separate Nation as
Indians and fight with every other country and the English in particular who
after all are our brothers-inHumanity ! Why not sacrifice Indian interests to
those of the British Empire which is a larger political synthesis? The
fact is that all Patriotism is more or less parochial and communal and is
responsible for dreadful wars throughout human history. Thus the Indian
Patriots who instead of starting and joining some movement of a universal
state, stop short of it, join an Indian Movement and yet continue to mock at
the Hindu Sanghatan as narrow and communal and parochial succeed only in
mocking at themselves.
But if it is said justification of Indian Patriotism that the people who
populate India are more akin to each other bound by ties of a common ancestry,
language, culture, history, etc. than they are to any other people outside
India and therefore we Indians feel it our first duty to protect our Nation
from our political domination and aggression of other non-Indian nations then,
the same reason could be adduced to justify the Hindu Sanghatan Movement as
well.
No movement is condemnable simply because it is sectional. So long as it
tries to defend the just and fundamental rights of a particular nation or
people or community against the unjust and overbearing aggression of other
human aggregates and does not infringe on an equal just right and liberties of
others, it cannot be condemned or looked down simply because the nation or
community is a smaller aggregate in itself. But when a nation or community
treads upon the rights of sister nations or communities and aggressively stands
in the way of forming larger associations and aggregates of mankind, its nationalism
or communalism becomes condemnable from a human point of view. This is the acid
test of distinguishing a justifiable nationalism or communalism from an unjust
and harmful one. The Hindu Sanghatan movement, call it national, communal or
parochial as you like stands as much justified by this real test as our Indian
Patriotism can be. The Hindu Mahasabha is perfectly National in its Outlook For
what does the Hindu Mahasabha aim at ? As the national representative body of
Hindudom it aims at the allround regeneration of the Hindu people. But the
absolute political independence of Hindusthan is a sine qua non for that
allround regeneration of Hindudom. The fortunes of the Hindus are more
inextricably and more closely bound up with India than that of any other
non-Hindu sections of our countrymen. After all the Hindus are the bedrock on
which an Indian independent state could be built.
Whatever may happen some centuries hence, the solid fact of today cannot
be ignored that religion wields mighty influence on the minds of men in
Hindusthan and in the case of Mohammedans especially their religious zeal, more
often than not, borders on fanatism ! Their love towards India as their
motherland is but an handmaid to their love for their Holyland outside India.
Their faces are ever turned towards Mecca and Madina. But to the Hindus
Hindusthan being their Fatherland as well as their Holyland, the love they bear
to Hindusthan is undivided and absolute. They not only form the overwhelming
majority of Indian population but have on the whole been the trusted champions
of Her cause. A Mohammedan is often found to cherish an extraterritorial
allegiance, is moved more by events in Palestine than what concerns India as a
Nation, worries himself more about the well-being of the Arabs than the
well-being of his Hindu neighbours and countrymen in India. Thousands of
Mohammedans could be found conspiring with the Turkish Khilaphatists and
Afghans with an object to bring about a foreign invasion of India if but a
Mohammedan rule could thus be established in this land. But to a Hindu, India
is all in all of his National being. That is the reason why the Hindus
predominate in the struggle that is going on for the overthrow of the political
domination of England over this country. It is the Hindus who went to the
gallows, faced transporation to the Andamans by hundreds and got imprisoned by
thousands in the fight for the liberation of Hindusthan. Even the Indian
National Congress owes its inception to Hindu brain, its growth to Hindu sacrifice,
its present position to Hindu labours in the main. A Hindu Patriot worth the
name cannot but be an Indian patriot as well. In this sense the consolidation
and the independence of Hindu Nation is but another name for the independence
of the Indian Nation as a whole. For, the Hindu Sanghatanists know full well
that no regeneration of Hindudom could be brought about and no honour and equal
place could be secured for the Hindu Nation amongst the Nations of the world
unless swarajya and swatantrya are won for Hindusthan, their Fatherland and
Holyland.
In common parlance ःवराÏय is understood as the political Freedom of our
country, of our land, the independence of the geographical unit called India.
But the time has come when these expressions must be fully analysed and
understood. A country or a geographical unit does not in itself constitute a
nation. Our country is endeared to us because it has been the abode of our
race, our people, our dearest and nearest relations and as such is only
metaphorically referred to, to express our national being. The independence of
India means, therefore, the independence of our people, our race, our nation.
Therefore Indian swarajya or Indian swatantrya means, as far as the Hindu
Nation is concerned, the political independence of the Hindus, the freedom
which would enable them to grow to their full height.
Only geographically speaking India as a land and a state was absolutely
independent of any other non-Indian powers when an Allauddin Khilajee or an
Aurangzeb ruled over her. But that kind of independence of India proved a
veritable death-warrant to the Hindu Nation. That is why Sanga and Pratap, Guru
Govind Singh and Bir Banda, Shivaji and Bajirao fought and fell and won in the
end and established a Hindu Empire under the Marathas, the Rajputs, the Sikhs,
The Gurkhas throughout our Motherland and saved our Hindudom from the clutches
of the non-Hindu aggression. Does it not prove to a hilt that merely the
geographical independence or swarajya of India does not mean the independence
of Hindu Nation-nay, may at times prove a positive curse to their Race?
India is dear to us because it has been and is the home of our Hindu
Race, the land which has been the cradle of our prophets and heroes and gods
and godmen. Otherwise land for land there may be many a country as rich in gold
and silver on the face of the earth. River for river the Mississipi us nearly
as good as the Ganges and its waters are not altogether bitter. The stones and
trees and greens in Hindusthan are just as good or bad stones and trees and
greens of the respective species elsewhere. Hindusthan is a Fatherland and
Holyland to us not because it is a land entirely unlike any other land in the
world but because it is associated with our history, has been the home of our
forefathers, wherein our mothers gave us the first suckle at their breast and
our fathers cradled us on their knees from generation to generation.
The cottage wherein our beloved dwell, grows dearer to our eyes than a
palace elsewhere. But let the dear faces disappear from it and go to dwell
elsewhere and the cottage shrinks suddenly to the wretched hut that it was. We
discard it and follow our beloved to their new abode. So with the nations also.
Look at the Jews or the Parsees ! When the Arabians invaded them and only a
choice was left to them between their land and their racial and cultural
identity and with their book and cultural went away in search of a more
congenial abode.
They refused to barter away their racial soul for a mere mess of
pottage, a mere bit of lifeless earth !
The real meaning of swarajya then, is not merely the geographical
independence of the bit of earth called India. To the Hindus independence of
Hindusthan can only be worth having if that ensures their Hindutva-their
religious, racial and cultural identity. We are not out to fight and die for a
'swarajya' which could only be had at the cost of our 'swatva' our Hindutva
itself !
So far as ःवराÏय in this right sense is concerned, the Hindus
have ever been in the forefront in the movement and struggle for Indian
independence and for founding a united Indian State. It is they who first
dreamt of a united Indian State. It is the Hindus again who have by their
sacrifices and struggle brought it within the scope of practical politics of
today. Taking into account their present strength and weakness the Hindus have
ever been willing to secure the co-operation of all non-Hindu sections of their
countrymen in this common struggle with a view to establish a common and united
Indian State. In spite of their overwhelming majority in India, in spite of the
consciousness that it is they who have borne the brunt of the fight, struggled
single-handed down to this day while the other non-Hindu sections and
especially the Mohammedans who are nowhere to be found while the national
struggle goes on and are everywhere to be found in the forefront at the time of
reaping the fruits of that struggle-in spite of all this the Hindus are willing
to form a common united Indian Nation and do not advance any special claims,
privileges or rights reserved only for themselves over and above the non-Hindu
section in Hindusthan.
Let the Indian State be purely Indian. Let it not recognise any
invidious distinctions whatsoever as regards the franchise, public services,
offices, taxation on the grounds of religion and race. Let no cognizance be
taken whatsoever of man's being Hindu or Mohammedan, Christian or Jew. Let all
citizens of that Indian State be treated according to their individual worth
irrespective of their religious or racial percentage in the general population.
Let that language and script be the national language and script of that Indian
state which are understood by the overwhelming majorty of the people as happens
in every other state in the world, i.e., in England or the United States of
America and let no raligious bias be allowed to tamper with that language and
script with an enforced and perverse hybridism whatsoever. Let 'one man one
vote' be the general rule irrespective of caste or creed, race or religion. If
such an Indian State is kept in view the Hindu Sanghatanists will, in the
interest of the Hindu Sanghatan itself, be the first to offer their
wholehearted loyalty to it. I for one and thousands of the Mahasabhaites like
me have set this ideal of an Indian State as our political goal ever since the beginning
of our political career and shall continue to work for its consummation to the
end of our life. Can any attitude towards an Indian State be more national than
that? Justice demands that I must plainly proclaim that the mission and policy
of the Hindu Mahasabha with ragard to an Indian state have been more national
than the present-day policy of Indian National Congress itself. The Hindus ask
nothing more than what is their due as Indian citizens on the special plea that
they are Hindus or that they from the majority of the Indian population, over
and above the other non-Hindu sections of their countrymen. Are the Mohammedans
ready to join such a truly national Indian State without asking any special
privilege, protection or weightage on the fanatical ground that a special merit
attaches to them of being Mohammedans and not Hindus?
The anti-national designs of the Mohammedans Fortunately for the Hindus
Mr. Jinnah and the Moslem Leaguers have deliberately disclosed their real
intentions this year at the Lucknow session of the Moslem League more
authoritatively, more frankly and even more blatantly than they used to do
before. I thank them for it. An open enemy is safer than a suspicious friend in
dealing with him. Their resolutions at Lucknow are in fact no news to us. But
upto this time the onus of proving the existence of the Moslem anti-national
attitude and their Pan-Islamic ambitions more or less lay on the Hindus. But
now we need do no more than point out to the authoritative speeches and resolutions
of the League delivered and passed at that Lucknow Session to explain the
anti-Hindu, anti-Indian and extra-territorial designs of the Moslems. They want
the unalloyed Urdu to be raised to the position of the national tongue of the
Indian state, although it is not spoken as a mother-tongue by more than a
couple of crores of Moslems themselves and is not understood by some twenty
crores of people in India, Moslems included; in spite of the fact that it can
claim no more literary merit than Hindi which is the mother tongue of some
seven crores of people and is easily understoood by some ten crores more !
While the Arabian language itself, on which Urdu is fed is deemed outlandish by
Kemal and the Turks in the land of the Khaliphas itself, the Moslems expect
some twenty-five crores of Hindus to learn it and to adopt it as their national
tongue ! As to the national script, the Moslems insist on adopting the Urdu
script and would have nothing to do, at any rate so far as they are concerned,
with the Nagari ! Why ? Kemal may have discarded the Arabian script itself as
unsutied to the present day needs, the Nagari may be more scientific, more
amenable to printing, more easy to learn, may already be current amongst or
known to twenty crores of people in Hindusthan, yet the Urdu script must be the
state script and the Urdu the state language for the only merit that attaches
to them of being recognised by the Mohammedans as their cultural asset and
therefore, to make room for it, the cultures of the Hindus and other non-Moslem
sections in Hindusthan must go to dogs ! The Moslems will not tolerate the
'Vande Mataram' song. The poor unity-hankers amongst the Hindus hastened to cut
it short. But the Moslem would not tolerate even the piece of it cut to order.
Drop the whole song and you will find that the Moslems would demand that the
very words 'Vande Mataram' are a standing insult to them ! Get a new song
composed even by an overgenerous Ravindra, Moslems would have nothing to do
with it because Ravindra being a Hindu could not but commit the heinous offence
of using some Sanskrit words as 'Jati' instead of 'Kaum,' 'Bharat' or
"Hindusthan' instead of 'Pakistan' !! They cannot be satisfied unless a
national song is composed by an Iqbal or Jinnah himself in unalloyed Urdu,
hailing Hindusthan as a Pakistan-the land dedicated to Moslem domination
!
When will our unity-hankers understand that the real question at the
root of this Moslem displeasure is not a word here or a song there ! We would
have sacrificed a dozen songs or a hundred words of our own free will if
thereby we could really contribute to the unity and solidarity of Hindusthan.
But we know the question is not so simple as that. It is the strife of
different cultures and races and nations and these trifles are but the passing
and outward symptoms of this malady deep seated in the Moslem mind. They want
to brand the forehead of Hindudom and other non-Moslem sections in Hindusthan
with the stamp of selfhumiliatiom and Moslem domination and we Hindus are not
going to tolerate it any longer not only in the interests of Hindudom alone but
even in the interest of Indian Nation as well.
But if we do not tolerate this the Hon. Mr. Fuzlul Huq told there and
then at Lucknow what would happen to us ! From the high altitude of a Prime
Minister's gaddi he promised to 'satana' the Hindus in Bengal (मɇ Ǒहंदओु ंको सताउंगा) if other Hindus
proved recalcitrant elsewhere to the orders of the Moslem League. Now the gaddi
of the Prime Minister in Bengal was the outcome of the reforms which were
wrested out from the English hands by the martyrdom and sacrifice of the Hindu
Patriots in Bengal. The Moslems there as everywhere did not claim a
special representation or weightage in those sufferings and sacrifices. But as
soon as the reforms came, who could occupy and deserve the gaddi of a Prime
Minister but the Hon. Mr. Fuzlul Huq ! And now he threatens the very Hindus in
Bengal who struggled most and suffered most to whose sufferings alone Mr. Huq
owes his gaddi that he will 'satana' (सतायेगा) them, in all shades of the meaning of that
word from teasing to oppressing ! I should like to assure the Nonourable Mr.
Fuzlul Huq that the Bengal Hindus are a hard nut to crack. They have at times
forced some of the prancing roconsuls of even the powerful British Empire like
Lord Curzon to climb down ! But if he ever does persecute our Bengal Hindus
then let him not forget that we Hindus also can in Maharahstra and elsewhere
deal out to his comrades the same treatment, measure for measure, full to the
brim and well shaken !
I need not refer to the attitude of the Moslem as regards the Communal
Award and the Federation in which case also they want to humiliate the Hindus
and Shylock-like insist on having their pound of flesh ! I don't want to tire
you out with a plethora of figures which you all know by heart. It is only
enough to remind you of the audacious proposal openly debated in the League
regarding the Moslem demand to cut up the body politic of our Motherland right
in two parts-the Mohammedan India and the Hindu India,-aiming to form a
separate Moslem country-Pakistan-comprising of the provinces of Kashmir,
Punjab, Peshawar and Sind !
Hands off, sir, hands off ! If you aim thus to reduce the Hindus to the
position of helots in their own land, you should do well to remember that a
seccession of Aurangazebs when they wielded an Imperial power here had failed
to perform that feat and in their attempt to carry out that design only
succeeded in digging their own graves ! Surely, Jinnahs and Huqs cannot
accomplish what Aurangazebs failed to achieve !
Let the Hindus remember that the real cause of this mischief is nothing
else but the hankering of the Hindus after the Willow-the-Wisp of a
Hindu-Moslem, unity. The day we gave the Mohammedans to understand that Swaraj
could not be won unless and until the Mohammedans obliged the Hindus by making
a common cause with them, that day we rendered an honourable unity impossible.
When an overwhelming majority in a country goes on its knees before a minority
so antagonistic as the Mohammedans, imploring them to lend a helping hand and
assures it that otherwise the major community is doomed to death, it would be a
wonder if that minor community does not sell their assistance at the higher
bidder possible, does not hasten the doom of the major community and aim to
establish their own political suzeraignty in the land. The only threat that the
Mohammedans always hold before the Hindus is to the effect that they would not
join the Hindus in the struggle for Indian freedom unless their anti-national
and fanatical demands are granted on the spot. Let the Hindus silence the
threat once for all telling point blank : 'Friends ! We wanted and do want only
that kind of unity which will go to create an Indian state in which all
citizens irrespective of caste and creed, race and religion are treated all
alike on the principle of one man one vote. We, though we form the overwhelming
majority in the land, do not want any special privileges for our Hindudom; nay
more, we are even willing to guarantee special protection for the language,
culture and religion of the Mohammedans as a minority if they also promise not
to infringe on the equal liberty of other communities in India to follow their
own ways within their own respective houses and not to try to dominate and
humiliate the Hindus. But knowing full well the anti-Indian designs of the
pan-Islamic movement, with a link of Moslem nations from Arabia to Afganisthan
bound by their recent offensive and defensive alliances and the ferocious
tendencies of the frontier tribes to oppress the Hindus out of religious and
racial hatred, we Hindus are not going to trust you any longer with
any more blank cheques. We are out to win Swarajya in which our ःव×व along with the ःव×व of all other
constituents will be safe. We are not out to fight with England only to find a
change of masters but we Hindus aim to be masters in our own house. A Swarajya
that could only be had at the humiliation and cost of Hindutva itself is for us
Hindus as good as suicide. If India is not freed from foreign domination the
Indian Moslems cannot but be slaves thsmselves. If they feel it to be true, if
and when they feel they cannot do without the assistance and the good will of the
Hindus let them come then to ask for unity and that also not to oblige the
Hindus but to oblige themselves.' A Hindu Moslem unity which is effected thus
is worth having. The Hindus have realised to their cost that in this case
seeking unity is losing it. Henceforth the Hindu formula for Hindu-Moslem unity
is only this-'if you come, with you; if you don't without you; and if you
oppose, in spite of you-the Hindus will continue to fight for their National
Freedom as best as they can' !
So far as other minorities in India are concerned, there cannot be much
difficulty in arriving at an Indian National consolidtion. The Parsees have
ever been working shoulder to shoulder with the Hindus against the English
domination. They are no fanatics. From the great Dadabhai Nowroji to the
renowned revolutionary lady Madam Kama the Parsees have contributed their quota
of true Indian patriots, nor have they ever displayed any but goodwill towards
the Hindu Nation which to them had proved a veritable saviour of their race.
Culturally too they are most closely akin to us. In a lesser degree the same
thing could be said about the Indian Christians.
Although they have yet done but little to contribute any help to the
national struggle yet they have not acted like a millstone round our neck. They
are less fanatical and are more amenable to political reason than the Moslems.
The Jews are few in number and not antagonistic to our national aspirations.
All these minorities of our countrymen are sure to behave as honest and patriotic
citizens in an Indian State.
Those who accuse the Hindus and the Mahasabha of being communal should
ponder well on the fact that Hindus have never been found wanting in
reciprocating feelings of amicability towards these non-Moslem minorities, nor
ever have they grudged to let them have what is justly due to them-their
countrymen.
So far as the Anglo-Indians are concerned their present arrogance and
the lion's share they got in the Franchise under the present Reforms Act would
vanish in a minute as soon as England goes out. Their sound political instinct
will soon bring them in a line with other Indian citizens; otherwise they could
easily be brought to their senses.
But with the Mohammedans the case is quite different. I warn the Hindus
that the Mohammedans are likely to prove dangerous to our Hindu nation and the
existence of a common Indian State even if and when England goes out. Let us
not be stone blind to the fact that they as a community still continue to
cherish fanatical designs to establish a Moslem rule in India. Let us work for
harmony, let us hope for the best, but let us be on our guard !
As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in
India several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that
India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded
thus for the mere wish to do so. These our well-meaning but unthinking friends
take their dreams for realities. That is why they are impatient of communal
tangles and attribute them to communal organizations. But the solid fact is
that the so-called communal questions are but a legacy handed down to us by
centuries of a cultural, religious and national antagonism between the Hindus
and the Moslems. When time is ripe you can solve them; but you cannot suppress
them by merely refusing recognition of them. It is safer to diagnose and treat
deep-seated disease than to ignore it. Let us bravely face unpleasant facts as
they are. India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogeneous
nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main; the Hindus and
the Moslems, in India. And as it has happened in many countries under similar
situation in the world the utmost that we can do under the circumstances is to
form an Indian State in which none is allowed any special weightage of
representation and none is paid an extra-price to buy his loyalty to the State.
Mercenaries are paid and bought off, not sons of the Motherland to fight in her
defence. The Hindus as a nation are willing to discharge their duty to a common
Indian State on equal footing. But if our Moslem countrymen thrust on a
communal strife on the Hindus and cherish anti-Indian and extra territorial
designs of establishing a Mohammedan Rule or supremacy in India then let the
Hindus look to themselves and stand on their own legs and fight singlehanded as
best as they can for the liberation of India from any non-Hindu yoke, be it
English or Moslem or otherwise.
With this end in view I exhort you all to asset yourselves as the Hindus
! Down with the apologetic attitude that makes some of us feel shy to proclaim
themselves as Hindus, as if it was something unnational, something like a
disgrace to be born of the line of Shri Ram and Shri Krishna – Shivaji and
Pratap and Govind Singh ! We Hindus must have a country of our own in the Solar
System and must coutinue to flourish there as Hindus-descendants of a mighty
people. Then up with the Shuddi which has not a religious menaing alone but a
political side as well ! Up with Sanghatan for the consummation of which it is
simply imperative for non Hindus to capture whatever political power has been
wrung out by our efforts in the past under the present Reforms Act. The
Mohammedans only vote for those who openly and boldly pledge to guard and
aggressively secure rights for the Mohammedan people. But we Hindus commit the
suicidal blunder of voting for those who openly declare that they are neither
Hindus nor Mohammedans and yet are never tired of recognising Mohammedan
organizations and dealing with them and of adjusting compromises in the name of
the Hindus, ever against Hindu interests and to unbearable humiliation of the
Hindus. You must henceforth vote for those who are not ashamed themselves of
being Hindus, openly stand for the Hindus and pledge themselves not to keep
burning incense, always at the cost of the Hindus before the fetish of a
dishonourable unity-cult. Let the Varnashram Swarajya Sang, the Hindu
Mahasabha, Shiromani Sikh Sabhas, the Arya Samajists, the political
organizations like the Democratic Swarajya Party in Maharashtra that stand for
an honourable unity and a truly national Indians State and the great Ashrams,
Sanghas and Jateeya Sabhas, that take their stand on Hindutva from a united
Hindu party in the legislatures and let no Hindu vote for a man who is not a
Sanghatanists and you will find then that your own ministries will be
championing the just cause of our but even the Indian State to come. For truly
Hindus are and cannot but be the main stay of our Indian State !
We shall ever guarantee protection to the religion, culture and language
of the minorities for themselves, but we shall no longer tolerate any
aggression on their part on the equal liberty of theHindus to guard their
religion, culture and language as well. If the nonHindu minorities are to be
protected then surely the Hindu majority also must be protected against any
aggressive minority in India !
Now in the end I assure you, Oh Hindus, that if but you do not lose
self-confidence in yourselves and are up and doing in time, all that is lost
may yet be regained. There is some such virility and staying power inherent in
your race as find a few parallels in the annals of the world. Let alone
the Daityas and Asuras you vanquished in your mythological and the pre-historical
period of your annals-but your very history dates from some two thousand years
B.C. ! Amidst the terrible struggle for existence which is incessantly going on
in creation, survival of the fittest is the rule. The nations of the mighty
Inkas and Pharaohs and Nebuchadnezars were swept away and no trace left behind.
But you survived those national cataclysms because you were found the fittest
to survive. There are ups and downs in the life of every nation. This very
England which rules today over an Empire had often fallen an easy prey to the
Romans and the Danes, the Dutch and the Normans as well. We too had to face
great national disasters. But each time we rose and tided them over. The Greeks
under Alexander the Great came conquering the world but they could not conquer
Hindusthan. Chandra Gupta rose and we drove the Greeks back inflicting crushing
defeats on them military and cultural. Three centuries after the Huns came on
us like an avalanche. All Europe and half Asia lay at their feet, they smashed
the Roman Empire to pieces. But after some two centuries of a life-to-death
struggle against them we vanquished them in the end under our Vikramaditya the
great ! The Shakas also fared no better. The mighty hands of Shalivahan and
Yashodharman beat them to a chip. Where are those of our enemies-the Huns and
the Parthians and the Shakas today ? The very names are forgotten ! Gone,
effaced from the face of India and the world as well. The virility and the
staying out power of our race triumphed over them all. Then centuries after,
the Mohammedans invaded India and carried everything before them. Their
Kingdoms and Empires seemed to reign supreme. But we rallied again and ever
since the day that Shivaji was born the God of War sided with us. Battle after
battle we beat the Moslems in a hundred fields; their Kingdoms and Empires,
their Nababs and Shahas and Badashahas were brought to their knees by our
warriors till at last Bhausaheb the Commander-in-Chief of the Hindus, as if
smybolically raised his hammer and literally smashed the very Imperial throne
of the Moghals at Delhi to pieces, Mahadji Shinde held the imbecile Moghal
Emperors as prisoners and pensioners in his custody and Hindu supremacy was
once more re-eastablished all over the land.
In the meanwhile before we could recover from the struggle of centuries
with Moslems, the English faced us and won on all points. We do not grudge
their victory. Because though we have been vanquished in the field yesterday,
yet enough fight is still left in us today, we have not given up the struggle
for lost nay, have already returned to the charge.
Who knows that some future and more fortunate President of this our
Hindu Mahasabha may not be able to rise here, if not in this generation yet in
the generation of our sons and proclaim the triumphant news to that session to
come that as happened in the case of the Huns and the Greeks and the Shakas in
the past there is not a trace left behind to the British domination in our land
! The banner of Hindudom flies supreme on the summits of the Himalayas,
Hindusthan is free again and Hindudom triumphant !!
For details related to Veer Savarkar, kindly visit: From Prison to Politics: The Story of Veer Savarkar
No comments:
Post a Comment