Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi
Subject: History
Unit: Gandhian Nationalism after 1919: Ideas and
Movements
Lesson: The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi
Lesson Developer : Dr. Dilip Simeon
College/Department : Independent researcher and
writer
Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

Table of contents
Chapter
9: Gandhian nationalism after 1919: ideas and movements

9.1: The legacy of Mahatma Gandhi
Summary
Exercises
Glossary
Further readings

9.1: The legacy of Mahatma Gandhi
Introduction
On January 13, 1948, Mahatma Gandhi went on a fast. It was to be his thirty-first fast in
public life, and as it so happened, his last. (Desai 2009, 472). He called it his yagna, and
his greatest fast. Throughout the fast, he spoke (although with diminishing energy) to
the crowds at his daily prayer meetings, dictated letters and talked to political
colleagues, friends and community leaders who came to see him. Seventeen days later
he was dead, gunned down by an assassin at a prayer meeting. Gandhis utterances and
deeds in the last weeks of his life, especially during this fast are of great significance.
They are a message about the tragic events surrounding the partition of India, mixed
with foresight and advice about their consequences and how to cope with them. He
sensed that his life was about to come to a close, so this was also his farewell. Reading
these utterances today, we get the feeling that he was speaking across the boundaries of
time and space, and not only to Indians. He refused to consider Pakistanis as aliens and
enemies. Both India and Pakistan are my country, he said in June 1947, I am not
going to take out a passport for going to Pakistan.
Gandhi was also speaking to people the world over affected by war, displacement and
massacres. In the years immediately following the second world war, there were millions
of such people. In addition to the issues raised by Gandhi in his last fast, his views on
two major events in the global arena deserve more attention than they have received.
These are the atomic bombardment of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by
the USA in August 1945; and the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine in 1948.
(The second issue is covered in the lesson on Communalism).
War and nuclear weapons

Gandhi first spoke about the atom bomb in February 1946. One historian has suggested
that he delayed speaking out because he was concerned that Indias independence might
be affected by an atomic threat from the USA (Rothermund 1991, 112). It should be
remembered that Britains wartime leader was the staunch colonialist Winston Churchill.
Even after Gandhis fear of an atomic threat to Indias freedom receded, he warned of
the dangers of colonialism. Britain was one of the Big Three powers of which one was
armed with atomic weapons; and the atom bomb was the last word in violence today
(CWMG 89:402). Thus, commenting on the communal killings in Bihar in November
1946, Gandhi said that they had set back the clock of independence. Before long India
will pass under the yoke of the Big Three with one of them probably as the mandatory
power (CWMG 93:4). These statements remind us that Gandhi remained a steadfast
opponent of imperialism till the end of his life. He reminded all oppressed races of the
earth that unless we can have a new way of fighting imperialism of all brands in the
place of the outworn one of a violent uprising, there would be no hope left for them
(CWMG 89:103). In May, responding to people who believed that the bomb would put an
end to war, he said, The atom bomb has not stopped violence. Peoples hearts are full
of it and preparations for a third world war may even be said to be going on (CWMG
90:374).

In July 1946, Gandhi answered some American friends who were arguing along similar
lines. He insisted that the bomb had deadened the finest feelings of humanity. There
used to be so-called laws of war which made it tolerable. Now we know the naked truth.
War knows no law except that of might. The atom bomb brought an empty victory to
Allied arms but it resulted for the time being in destroying the soul of Japan. What has
happened to the soul of the destroying nation is yet too early to see (CWMG 91:221).
In September, he said, I regard the employment of the atom bomb for the wholesale
destruction of men, women and children as the most diabolical use of science. When
asked whether the bomb had made non-violence useless, he said, No. It is the only
thing the atom bomb cannot destroy. I did not move a muscle when I first heard that the
atom bomb had wiped out Hiroshima. On the contrary, I said to myself, unless now the
world adopts non-violence it will spell certain suicide for mankind (CWMG 92:234). In
June 1947, he commented on science, There are two kinds of shastras in the world, one
satvik and the other rajasik, one conforming to dharma and the other not conforming to
dharma. The shastra of the atom bomb does not conform to dharma. It does not show
faith in God. It usurps the place of God (CWMG 95:221).
Gandhi during partition

In early September 1947, just after Independence, Gandhi had fasted in Calcutta to
change the hearts of the people and politicians of Bengal. The background to this was as
follows. 1946 had seen the worst communal massacre in the decade before partition. It
took place in Calcutta as a result of Jinnahs call for Direct Action on August 16. (The
Muslim League controlled the provincial government under Chief Minister Husain
Suhrawardy). There were reports of five to ten thousand people being killed and fifteen
thousand injured between August 16 and 19. Suhrawardys extremist speeches in the
run-up to August 16 led many to suspect deliberate political instigation of the massacre.
This event came to be known as the great Calcutta killing (Markovits 2007). It severely
embittered communal relations and the political atmosphere. The months that followed
were extremely tense. The province was engulfed in fear. In October there was violence
in Noakhali, north Bengal, a Muslim majority area soon to become part of East Pakistan.
Here Hindu villagers were the main victims. Soon afterwards, riots erupted in Bihar that
resulted in over 7000 Muslims being killed. Gandhi severely criticised Bihars Congress
government and demanded that senior Congressmen do their utmost to stop the
violence. From November 1946 till February 1947, he walked through the villages of
Noakhali. This pilgrimage for harmony became legendary, as his prayer meetings healed
the public psyche, encouraged Hindus to return to their villages and Muslims to discard
their animus. The area has a GandhiMuseum, and legends of his visit are still repeated
among the elderly. (Gandhi 2006, 591-593)
Five months later, when India and Pakistan emerged as newly independent nations,
Gandhi was back in Bengal. Contemporary observers thought it a miracle that thousands
of Hindus and Muslims celebrated Eid together on August 18, 1947. For once, British
officialdom was happy with Gandhis presence. On August 26, Viceroy Mountbatten sent
him a telegram stating: My dear Gandhiji, in the Punjab we have 55 thousand soldiers
and large-scale rioting on our hands. In Bengal our forces consist of one man, and there
is no rioting As a serving officer may I be allowed to pay my tribute to the One Man
Boundary Force. And the Muslim League fraction in the Constituent Assembly in Delhi
passed a resolution expressing its "deep sense of appreciation of the services rendered

by Mr Gandhi to the cause of restoration of peace and goodwill between the communities
in Calcutta. (Dalton1970, 234). Gandhi now decided to visit the Punjab.
But the peace did not last. On August 31, renewed violence in Calcutta prompted Gandhi
to change his travel plans. On September 1, he announced his decision to fast against
violence. He stayed in the abandoned HydariMansion in a Muslim part of the city. Within
a day, students began to take out peace processions, and even the European and AngloIndian officers of the north Calcutta police force wore arm-bands and fasted on duty in
sympathy with Gandhi. The following day bands of hooligans came to him to surrender
their weapons and pleaded with him to end his fast. Gandhi said it was the first time he
had seen a sten gun. (Gandhi 2006, 636-637; and Dalton 1970, 235-238). On
September 4, 1947, he received a delegation including businessmen, the Muslim
League-led Seamans Union, the Hindu Mahasabha, and Chief Minister Suhrawardy. He
made them swear they would risk their own lives before allowing another outbreak of
communal violence. This unprecedented oath was then written and signed by the entire
delegation. Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari, independent Indias second Governor General,
remarked that not even the struggle for Independence was as truly wonderful as his
victory over evil in Calcutta. (The Statesman, 06/09/1947). In his editorial of
September 1, the English editor of The Statesman announced that henceforth Mr
Gandhi would be referred to in his columns as the Mahatma.
Earlier, at a prayer meeting in Bombay in March 1946, Gandhi had said, It has become
the fashion these days to ascribe all such ugly manifestations to the activities of
hooligans. It hardly becomes us to take refuge in that moral alibi. Who are the hooligans
after all? They are our own countrymen, and so long as any countryman of ours indulges
in such acts, we cannot disown responsibility for them consistently with our claim that
we are one people. Mankind is at the crossroads. It has to make its choice between the
law of the jungle and the law of humanity. (CWMG 90: 64). And at the height of the
violence of 1947 he said, it is time for peace-loving citizens to assert themselves and
isolate goondaism. Non-violent non-cooperation is the universal remedy. Good is selfexistent, evil is not. It is like a parasite living in and around good. It will die of itself
when the support that good gives it is withdrawn. (CWMG 96: 335). In Gandhi's way of
thinking, the struggle between good and evil took place in every soul, and was not
merely demarcated by the social distance between goondas and polite society.
Politics and ethics

Gandhi's ideas are sometimes misunderstood because of his refusal to separate religion
from politics. One reason for the confusion is the fact that religion nowadays is treated
more as a flag to identify ourselves as members of a community, rather than as a source
of philosophical and moral standards, which is what it was for Gandhi. It is easier to
understand this matter if we substitute ethics for religion, and power for politics.
Does anyone believe that power should be free of moral guidance? Gandhi saw himself
as a karmayogi. He regarded selfless action towards self-knowledge and human
salvation as his spiritual duty. He saw political activity as the highest sphere of social
action, and insisted on informing this action with moral guidelines such as ahimsa and
the abolition of untouchability. Since he was searching not for personal power but swaraj
for Indians, he exercised tremendous moral influence arising out of his avoidance of

selfish goals. Truth for him included spiritual goals such as moksha and self-knowledge;
and earthly ideals such as justice and social integrity. His motives were at once spiritual
and political because he saw political activity as a form of spiritually inspired social
service. Very often even the high-priests of religion could use the separation of religion
and politics as a convenient excuse to overlook crimes committed by their co-religionists.
Gandhi challenged them to translate their fine-sounding doctrines into reality. This is
why he refused to separate means and ends evil means, he said, would end up
corrupting even the best of ends. Religion and spirituality were not instruments for the
pursuit of political power, rather, political activity had to be informed by the best
spiritual ideals.
Gandhi was not a hopeless idealist. He recognised that complete non-violence would lead
to the total cessation of all human activity. Violence in his definition, meant causing
suffering to others out of, or just for the sake of doing so (Parekh 1989, 117). He
distinguished between self-interest and selfishness. Self-interest meant securing the
conditions necessary for leading a dignified life; selfishness meant putting oneself above
others and pursuing one's interests at their expense. Violent ideas were dangerous, since
they created conditions for real violence. Humiliating others was also a form of violence.
Gandhi recognised that the machinery of the state was a concentrated form of violence,
an instrument for the maintenance of an unjust social system. He also made a distinction
between the violence of the oppressors and that of the oppressed - defensive violence,
in his view, was morally superior to the offensive variety (Parekh 1989, 133-35). In
extreme situations, he argued, violence was preferable to cowardice. He was against
using ahimsa as an excuse for passive acceptance of injustice. He favoured physical
resistance by victims of rape if there was no possibility of resisting non-violently.
Gandhi was convinced that the reign of violence could not be overthrown by adding to
it (Parekh 1989, 134). Great danger lay in using common-place justifications for
violence, such as the violation of nature for human self-interest; the need to maintain
the coercive apparatus of the state; and revolutionary violence in the name of resistance
to oppression. He was deeply worried about the way in which the limited legitimacy of
violence in human life was so easily turned into its general justification, making it the
rule rather than the exception. Once this happened, men kept taking advantage of the
exceptions and made no effort to find alternatives (Parekh 1989, 128). This was why
activists needed to train themselves as non-violent warriors for justice. Ahimsa in his
definition was not merely the absence of violence but included the positive value of
karuna or compassion. By elevating ahimsa to the level of a moral ideal, he hoped to
minimise the violence which was inevitable in the process of social and political
transformation. Even if it could never be fully realised, ahimsa functioned as an ideal,
without which human society would have no standards of perfection with which to judge
our actions. A critical discussion of Gandhis views on violence and ahimsa may be read
in Parekh, 1989, chapters 4 & 5.
Unexpected converts to ahimsa

Among those powerfully influenced by Gandhi's message were two communities
traditionally considered the most militant in India, the Sikhs and the Pathans. Today, few
remember that the Akali party originated in a satyagraha to liberate gurudwaras from
pro-British mahants. The Guru-ka-Bagh agitation in 1922 involved the peaceful violation

of a ban on woodcutting for religious purposes by Akali jathas, whose members
(including ex-soldiers who had fought for the British Empire in the First World War) were
beaten with metal-capped lathis by English police officers and Indian policemen. About
1500 Sikhs were injured and 5000 imprisoned in a campaign which shook the country.
Gandhi's associate Reverend C. F. Andrews witnessed this "ultimate moral contest". The
sight of the brutalities, he reported, was incredible to an Englishmaneach blow (was)
turned into a triumph by the spirit with which it was endured.
Value addition: from the sources

Eye-witness account of the Guru ka Bagh satyagrahaby the
Christian missionary, Gandhis confidante Reverend C. F.
Andrews dated September 12, 1922
When I ... stood face to face with the ultimate moral contest I could understand
the strained look and the lips which silently prayed. It was a sight I never wish to
see again, a sight incredible to an Englishman. There were four Akali Sikhs with
their black turbans facing a band of about a dozen police, including two English
officers. They had walked slowly up to the line of the Police.. and were standing
silently in front of them.. Their hands were placed together in prayer. Then
without the slightest provocation on their part, an Englishman lunged forward the
head of his lathi which was bound with brass.. The blow which I saw was
sufficient to fell the Akali Sikh and send him to the ground. He rolled over, and
slowly got up once more and faced the same punishment over again. Time after
time one of the four..was laid prostrate by repeated blows, now from the English
officer and now from the police... the police committed certain acts which were
brutal in the extreme - I saw with my own eyes one of these police kick in the
stomach a Sikh who stood helplessly before him... when one of the Sikhs..was
lying prostrate, a police sepoy stamped with his foot upon him, using his full
weight.. The brutality and inhumanity of the whole scene was indescribably
increased by the fact that the men who were hit were praying to God and had
already taken a vow that they would remain silent and peaceful in word and
deed. The Akali Sikhs who had taken this vow, both at the Golden Temple and
also at the shrine of Guru Ka Bagh, were...largely from the Army. They had
served in many campaigns in Flanders, in France, in Mesopotamia and in East
Africa... Now they were felled to the ground at the hands of English officials
serving in the same government which they themselves had served... But each
blow was turned into a triumph by the spirit with which it was endured... The vow
they had made to God was kept to the letter. The onlookers too..were praying
with them...and for them.. It was very rarely that I witnessed any Akali Sikh who
went forward to suffer, flinch from a blow when it was struck. The blows were
received one by one without resistance and without a sign of fear..
There has been something far greater in this event than a mere dispute about
land and property. It has gone far beyond the technical questions of legal
possession or distraint. A new heroism, learnt through suffering, has arisen in the
land. A new lesson in moral warfare has been taught to the world..
Source: Ralhan, O. P. and Suresh K. Sharma. 1994. Documents on
Punjab, vol 7, Sikh Politics (Guru-ka-Bagh Morcha). New Delhi: Anmol

Publications.
The Khudai Khidmatgar, or Servants of God movement in the North
WestFrontierProvince (also known as Pakhtunistan) is another example of a Gandhian
campaign for independence and social uplift in colonial India. Their leader Abdul Ghaffar
(Badshah) Khan came to be known as the Frontier Gandhi. He preached a version of
Islam that emphasised forgiveness and self-restraint. (For a short biography see Gandhi
2004). The red-shirted Khidmatgars led the civil disobedience campaign in 1931. They
seized control of Peshawar and ran a parallel administration for a few days. This
happened after a regiment of the Garhwal Rifles (all Hindus) refused to open fire on
Pathan satyagrahis. The slogans heard in Peshawars Kissa Khani Bazaar included Allah
ho Akbar and Mahatma Gandhi ki jai. The platoon commander, Chander Singh
Garhwali, reportedly told his English officer that a soldier of the Indian Army could not
ask his men to shoot unarmed civilians. Chander Singh was sent to jail and became a
hero of the national movement. A Turkish scholar who visited the Frontier in the 1930's
suggested that the Pathans had developed a new interpretation of force. In her words,
non-violence is the only form of force which can have a lasting effect on the life of
society... And this, coming from strong and fearless men, is worthy of study (Bondurant
1965, 138).
Value addition: did you know?

Gandhi, Badshah Khan and the Pathans
The Turkish scholar Halide Edib, who visited the Frontier in the 1930's wrote of
Badshah Khans achievements: Although he based his simple ideology on
religion, his interpretation of it was so universal, that instead of separating the
Muslims from the rest of the world, he tried to make them so that they could cooperate with their fellow-men for the good of all...his supreme importance lies in
his having brought the simplest and truest conception of Islam into the lives of a
most elemental people.. (Bondurant 1965, 143)
Gandhis exhortations to the Pathans spoke the language of courage, but in a
strange new way: At every meeting I repeated the warning that unless they felt
that in non-violence they had come into possession of a force infinitely superior to
the one they had and in the use of which they were adept, they should have
nothing to do with non-violence and resume the arms they possessed before. It
must never be said of the Khudai Khidmatgars that once so brave, they have
become or been made cowards under Badshah Khans influence. Their bravery
consisted not in being good marksmen but in defying death and being ever ready
to bare their chests to the bullet. (Tendulkar 1961, 303-304).
The commitment of the Khudai Khidmatgars to non-violence was based on the
culture of Pukhtunwali and Islam. The Congress leadership believed the
stereotypes about Pathan ferocity and were anxious about the Red Shirts
commitment to ahimsa. Yet in 1942 the Khidmatgars non-violent struggle forced
the government to station 30,000 troops in NWFP (a three-fold increase over
1941) - this served to lessen the burden upon the rest of India. When it came to
the Pathans, the British excelled themselves in cruelty and psychologically
designed torture including forcing activists to make counter-oaths upon the

Koran, violating the sanctity of the womens quarter in Pathan homes; public
exposures of private parts and even sexual mutilation. The Peshawar massacre in
April 1930 (over 200 killed) and the Bannu shooting in August (70 dead) shocked
the country, whilst arousing admiration for the Pathans patriotism and nonviolent spirit. After touring the Frontier, British journalist Robert Bernays wrote
that some of the stories of the wholesale shootings and hangings made me hang
my head in shame (Bondurant 1965, 138). All the while Badshah Khan insisted
on restraint as the greatest Koranic virtue, asking the Pathans to abstain from
violence, not to defame their nation, because the world would marvel to see
such a barbarous nation observing patience (Bannerjee 2001, 156). The
Khidmatgar movement grew from a thousand members in 1930 to 25,000 in
1931, with women entering public life for the first time. It was not lost on the
nationalist public that the Englishmen on a civilising mission were behaving like
mad dogs, and the volatile Pathans were teaching their rulers a lesson in civility.
Sources: Banerjee, Mukulika. 2001. The Pathan Unarmed: Opposition and
Memory in the North West Frontier. New Delhi: Oxford University Press;
Bondurant, Joan. 1958, 1965. Conquest of Violence: the Gandhian
Philosophy of Conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press;
Tendulkar, D. G. 1961. Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi;
v. 4. New Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, Publications Division.
The question of truth

Gandhi called himself a sanatani Hindu. However, it is clear that he placed both tradition
and the opinions of spiritual authorities to the test of his own conscience. He believed
that the individual had to apply his or her reason and intuition to religious tradition. He
was not a slave of religious doctrines. Rather, he used his knowledge of them to
strengthen his convictions. When reading the shastras, he said, one should not stick to
its letter, but try to understand its spirit, its meaning in the total context. Tulsidass
Ramayana is one of the greatest works because its spirit is that of purity, compassion
and devotion to God. An evil fate awaits one who beats his wife because Tulsidas has
said in his work that a Sudra, a dull-witted person, a beast and a woman merit
chastisement. Rama not only never raised his hand against Sita, he did not even
displease her at any time. Tulsidas merely stated a common belief in any case, his
Ramayana was not composed in order to justify men beating their wives. (Gandhi 1993,
11-12). And despite the scenes of carnage described in the Mahabharata, Gandhi insists
that Vyasa wrote his epic "to depict the futility of war", and that it symbolised the inner
struggle between good and evil encountered by all human beings. If the purest form of
action was devoid of desire for reward, then violence and untruthfulness were taboo, for
selfishness was implied in them. Language and meaning changed and expanded over the
centuries, and it is the very beauty of a good poem that it is greater than its author.
Despite the warlike metaphors of the Gita, he insisted that after forty years unremitting
endeavour to enforce the teaching of the Gita in my own life, I have in all humility felt
that perfect renunciation is impossible without perfect observance of ahimsa in every
shape and form.

Gandhi's conscience impelled him towards human equality and the resolution of political
and social conflict. He rejected the violence of caste-oppression and the justifications for
violence contained in religious traditions. He managed to speak in a conservative voice
while advocating a break from traditional practices. In that sense he was a law-giver, not
a mere follower of religious commandments. He used tradition to make people think
about their situation in an idiom they were familiar with. And he did this without deceit.
He acknowledged the ambivalent character of these traditions while respectfully
challenging them from within. Instead of using religious identity to demarcate himself
from others, he used it to build bridges with them, by studying their traditions and
drawing out a common message of truth, love and non-violence. His method was to
treat myths and legends symbolically rather than literally. As he once said, The
immortal but unknown author of the Mahabharata weaves into his story sufficient of the
supernatural to warn you against taking him literally. Again, I do not believe that the
Gita advocates violence for self-defence. I understand the Gita differently. If the Gita or
some other Sanskrit work advocates this I am not prepared to accept it as Shastra. An
utterance does not become scriptural merely because it is couched in Sanskrit. These
remarks show that that he used religion as a moral guide, and did not surrender his own
powers of individual judgement. His approach indicates that he was both a deeply
religious person and one who was prepared to challenge religious scriptures when he
thought they went against his conscience. He believed all human beings possessed such
an inner voice and appealed to them to consult it. Different religious traditions were but
differently evolved paths to the same goal.
It is useful to contrast Gandhis approach to this issue with that of his assassin Nathuram
Godse, a self-proclaimed Hindu nationalist, for whom sin or moral correctness had to be
sought not in a mans act but in his motives. Godses statement at his trial made it clear
that for him, right intention coupled with infallible knowledge were sufficient grounds for
him to murder Gandhi (Payne 2003, 637-41). To this day, a similar line of reasoning is
adopted by political groups who adopt murder as a means to achieve their ends. Their
politics may be different from Godses but their moral reasoning is the same: they are
sure that their view of things is absolutely correct, and that their intentions are pure. In
their view, these two grounds give them a right to kill. We are speaking here not of
random acts of violence or crimes of passion, but of political assassination, whether of
single persons or entire groups. Extremist political programmes have the colour of
unquestioned faith that gives their followers the strength to perform violent unilateral
actions in the name of the people. Gandhis position is radically different, and modest.
He argued that we do not have irrefutable knowledge, and hence we cannot assume the
right to commit irrevocable acts such as killing other human beings.
Gandhis last fast

From September 1947, the communal situation in north India became grievous.
Massacres were taking place in Punjab, Sindh and what is now Haryana, sparking off the
migration of over ten million Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims moving in opposite directions. In
September, hundreds of Muslims of Delhi had been killed in localities such as Karol Bagh,
Subzi Mandi and Paharganj. Tens of thousands of Hindu and Sikh refugees from Punjab
were crammed into Diwan Hall, Chandni Chowk and Kingsway Camp; while thousands of
Muslims, including Meos from Alwar and Bharatpur, were living in fear in Jamia Millia,
10

Purana Qila and Humayuns Tomb. The Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia and president of
the Hindustani Talimi Sangh, Dr Zakir Husain, who later became President of India,
barely escaped with his life. He had been saved by a Sikh army captain and a Hindu
railway official. The senior Congressman Saifuddin Kitchlew was obliged to flee to
Kashmir. Upon arrival in Delhi on September 9, Gandhi was asked to detrain in Shahdara
for reasons of safety. The same reasons motivated Sardar Patel to arrange for his stay
not in the sweepers colony which was his preferred residence in the city, but in Birla
House. Once in Delhi, Gandhi plunged into the ongoing turmoil around him, travelling to
nearby places such as Gurgaon and Panipat, talking to refugees, community leaders and
cadres of social organisations. On December 22, he made this announcement at his
prayer meeting:
Some eight or ten miles from here, at Mehrauli, there is a shrine of Qutubuddin
Bakhtiyar Chisti. Esteemed as second only to the shrine at Ajmer, it is visited every year
not only by Muslims but by thousands of non-Muslims too. Last September this shrine
was subjected to the wrath of Hindu mobs. The Muslims living in the vicinity of the
shrine for the last 800 years had to leave their homes. I mention this sad episode to tell
you that, though Muslims love the shrine, today no Muslim can be found anywhere near
it. It is the duty of the Hindus, Sikhs, the officials and the Government to open the
shrine again and wash off this stain on us. The same applies to other shrines and
religious places of Muslims in and around Delhi. The time has come when both India and
Pakistan must unequivocally declare to the majorities in each country that they will not
tolerate desecration of religious places, be they small or big. They should also undertake
to repair the places damaged during riots. (CWMG, vol 98, p 98-99).
This was the background to his last protest. There was also the matter of the
Governments decision to withhold payment of Pakistans share of undivided Indias
sterling balance, which amounted to Rs 55 crores. We may take it that the fast was
undertaken both to restore the shrine and to convey to the public his feelings about
ongoing events. It began on January 13, 1948 and was announced by Gandhi at his
prayer meeting that evening. He said: Now that I have started my fast many people
cannot understand what I am doing, who are the offenders Hindus or Sikhs or
Muslims. How long will the fast last? I say I do not blame anyone. Who am I to accuse
others? I have said that we have all sinned.
He continued: I shall terminate the fast only when peace has returned to Delhi. If peace
is restored to Delhi it will have effect not only on the whole of India but also on Pakistan
and when that happens, a Muslim can walk around in the city all by himself. I shall then
terminate the fast. Delhi is the capital of India. It has always been the capital of India.
So long as things do not return to normal in Delhi, they will not be normal either in India
or in Pakistan. Today I cannot bring Suhrawardy here because I fear someone may insult
him. Today he cannot walk about in the streets of Delhi. If he did he would be assaulted.
What I want is that he should be able to move about here even in the dark. It is true
that he made efforts in Calcutta only when Muslims became involved. Still, he could have
made the situation worse, if he had wanted, but he did not want to make things worse.
He made the Muslims evacuate the places they had forcibly occupied and said that he
being the Premier could do so. Although the places occupied by the Muslims belonged to
Hindus and Sikhs he did his duty. Even if it takes a whole month to have real peace
established in Delhi it does not matter. People should not do anything merely to have me
11

terminate the fast. So my wish is that Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians and Muslims who
are in India should continue to live in India and India should become a country where
everyones life and property are safe. Only then will India progress.
The peoples reaction

On the second day of Gandhis fast the government took the formal decision to release
the money due to Pakistan. Meanwhile Delhi was visibly affected. Addressing a gathering
of three hundred thousand people on January 17, Maulana Azad announced seven tests
given him by Gandhi to be fulfilled and guaranteed by responsible people. They included
freedom of worship to Muslims at the tomb of Khwaja Bakhtiar Chishti, non-interference
with the Urs festival due to be held there within a week; the voluntary evacuation by
non-Muslims of all mosques in Delhi that were being used for residential purposes or
which had been converted into temples; free movement of Muslims in areas where they
used to stay; complete safety to Muslims while travelling by train; no economic boycott
of Muslims; and freedom to Muslim evacuees to return to Delhi. That evening a
procession of citizens shouting peace slogans walked to Birla House where Jawaharlal
Nehru addressed them. Gandhis speech was read out at the prayer meeting, attended
by some four thousand people. He said:
The number of telegrams coming from Rajas, Maharajas and common people continues
to increase. There are telegrams from Pakistan too. They are good as far as they go. But
as a friend and well-wisher I must say to all those who reside in Pakistan and mould its
fortunes that they will fail to make Pakistan permanent if their conscience is not
quickened and if they do not admit the wrongs for which Pakistan is responsible. This
does not mean that I do not wish a voluntary reunion, but I wish to remove and resist
the idea that Pakistan should be reunited by force of arms. I hope that this will not be
misunderstood as a note of discord, whilst I am lying on what is truly a death-bed. I
hope all Pakistanis will realize that I would be untrue to them and to myself if out of
weakness and for fear of hurting their feelings, I failed to convey to them what I
truthfully feel. If I am wrong in my estimate, I should be so told and if I am convinced, I
promise that I shall retract what I have said here. So far as I know, the point is not open
to question. My fast should not be considered a political move in any sense of the term.
It is in obedience to the peremptory call of conscience and duty. It comes out of felt
agony. I call to witness all my numerous Muslim friends in Delhi. Their representatives
meet me almost every day to report the days events. Neither Rajas and Maharajas nor
Hindus and Sikhs or any others would serve themselves or India as a whole, if at this,
what is to me a sacred juncture, they mislead me with a view to terminating my fast
(CWMG 98:248).
On January 18, Gandhi ended his fast. Over a hundred representatives of various groups
and organizations including the Hindu Mahasabha, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and
Jamiat-ul-Ulema who had assembled at Rajendra Prasads residence, called on Gandhiji
at 11.30 a.m. Those present included Jawaharlal Nehru, Abul Kalam Azad, Rajendra
Prasad, INA General Shah Nawaz Khan, Hifzur Rahman and Zaheed Hussain, Pakistans
High Commissioner. Dr. Rajendra Prasad reported that even those who had some doubts
on the previous night were confident that they could ask Gandhiji with a full sense of
responsibility to break the fast. As the President of the Congress, Rajendra Prasad said
that he had signed the document in view of the guarantee which they had all jointly and
12

severally given. Khurshid, the Chief Commissioner and Randhawa, Deputy Commissioner
of Delhi, had signed the document on behalf of the administration. It had been decided
to set up a number of committees to implement the pledge. Rajendra Prasad hoped that
Gandhiji would now terminate his fast. Deshbandhu Gupta described scenes of
fraternization between Hindus and Muslims which he had witnessed when a procession of
Muslims was taken out that morning in Subzi mandi and was received with ovation and
offered fruit and refreshments by the Hindu inhabitants. A seven-point declaration in
Hindi was read out solemnly affirming the peoples desire for communal harmony and
civic peace. This read as follows:
SEVEN-POINT DECLARATION OF JANUARY 18, 1948

We wish to announce that it is our heart-felt desire that the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs
and members of the other communities should once again live in Delhi like brothers and
in perfect amity and we take the pledge that we shall protect the life, property and faith
of Muslims and that the incidents which have taken place in Delhi will not happen again.
We want to assure Gandhiji that the annual fair at Khwaja Qutub-ud-Din Mazar will be
held this year as in the previous years.
Muslims will be able to move about in Subzimandi, Karol Bagh, Paharganj and other
localities just as they could in the past.
The mosques which have been left by Muslims and which now are in the possession of
Hindus and Sikhs will be returned. The areas which have been set apart for Muslims will
not be forcibly occupied.
We shall not object to the return to Delhi of the Muslims who have migrated from here
if they choose to come back and Muslims shall be able to carry on their business as
before.
We assure that all these things will be done by our personal effort and not with the help
of the police or military.
We request Mahatmaji to believe us and to give up his fast and continue to lead us as
he has done hitherto. . (CWMG, vol 98, p 249, 253).
Value addition: from the sources

Gandhis speech on the Delhi Declaration; January 18, 1948
In his reply, Gandhi said: I am happy to hear what you have told me, but if you
have overlooked one point all this will be worth nothing. If this declaration means
that you will safeguard Delhi and whatever happens outside Delhi will be no
concern of yours, you will be committing a grave error and it will be sheer
foolishness on my part to break my fast. You must have seen the Press reports of
the happenings in Allahabad, if not, look them up. I understand that the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Hindu Mahasabha are among the
signatories to this declaration. It will amount to breach of faith on their part if
they hold themselves responsible for peace in Delhi, but not in other places. I
have been observing that this sort of deception is being practiced in the country
13

these days on a large scale. Delhi is the heart - the capital of India. The leaders
from the whole of India have assembled here. Men had become beasts. But if
those who have assembled here, who constitute the cream among men cannot
make the whole of India understand that Hindus, Muslims and followers of other
religions are like brothers, it bodes ill for both the Dominions. What will be the
fate of India if we continue to quarrel with one another?... Let us take no step
that may become a cause for repentance later on. The situation demands courage
of the highest order from us. We have to consider whether or not we can
accomplish what we are going to promise. If you are not confident of fulfilling
your pledge, do not ask me to give up my fast. It is for you and the whole of
India to translate it into reality. It may not be possible to realize it in a day. I do
not possess the requisite strength for it. But I can assure you that till today our
face was turned towards Satan, we have now resolved to turn towards God. If
what I have told you fails to find an echo in your hearts or if you are convinced
that it is beyond you, tell me so frankly.
What greater folly can there be than to claim that Hindustan is only for Hindus
and Pakistan is for Muslims alone? The refugees here should realize that things in
Pakistan will be set right by the example set in Delhi. I am not one to be afraid of
fasting. Time and again I have gone on fasts and if occasion arises I may again
do so. Whatever therefore you do, do after careful thought and consideration. The
Muslim friends frequently meet me and assure me that peaceful atmosphere has
been restored in Delhi and Hindus and Muslims can live in amity here. If these
friends have any misgivings in their hearts and feel that today they have perforce
to stay here - as they have nowhere else to go to - but ultimately they will have
to part company, let them admit it to me frankly. To set things right in the whole
of India and Pakistan is no doubt a Herculean task. But I am an optimist. Once I
resolve to do something I refuse to accept defeat. Today you assure me that
Hindus and Muslims have become one but if Hindus continue to regard Muslims
as Yavans and asuras, incapable of realizing God, and Muslims regard Hindus
likewise, it will be the worst kind of blasphemy. A Muslim friend presented me
with a book in Patna. Its author is an eminent Muslim. The book says: God
ordains that a kafir - and a Hindu is a kafir - is worse than a poisonous creature.
He should be exterminated. It is ones duty to be treacherous to him. Why should
one treat him with any courtesy? If Muslims still harbouring such thoughts
assure Hindus about their good behaviour, they will only be deceiving Hindus. If
you betray one you betray all. If I truly worship a stone image I deceive no one.
For me God resides in that stone image. I feel that if the hearts of both Hindus
and Muslims are full of deceipt and treachery, why need I continue to live?
The telegrams I have received today include some from prominent Muslims. They
have made me happy. It seems they have realized that the method adopted by
them so far was not proper to run a government. After listening to all that I have
said, if you still ask me to end my fast I shall end it. Afterwards you have to
release me. I had taken the vow to do or die in Delhi and now if I am able to
achieve success here I shall go to Pakistan and try to make Muslims understand
their folly. Whatever happens in other places, people in Delhi should maintain
peace. The refugees here should realize that they have to welcome as brothers
the Muslims returning from Pakistan to Delhi. The Muslim refugees in Pakistan are
14

suffering acute hardships and so are the Hindu refugees here. Hindus have not
learnt all the crafts of Muslim craftsmen. Therefore they had better return to
India. There are good men as well as bad men in all the communities. Taking into
consideration all these implications, if you ask me to break my fast I shall abide
by your wish. India will virtually become a prison if the present conditions
continue. It may be better that you allow me to continue my fast and if God wills
it He will call me. (CWMG Vol 98, p 254-257)
Maulana Azad said that the remarks about non-Muslims to which Gandhiji had
referred were abhorrent to Islam. They were symptoms of the insanity that had
seized some sections of the people. Maulana Hifzur Rahman insisted that Muslims
wanted to remain in India as citizens with self-respect and honour. He welcomed
the changed atmosphere in the city as a result of Gandhis fast and appealed to
Gandhi to break the fast. On behalf of the R.S.S. and Hindu Mahasabha, Ganesh
Datt reiterated the appeal. Pakistans High Commisioner Zaheed Hussain
addressed a few words to Gandhiji. He said he was there to convey the deep
concern of the Pakistani people about him and the anxious inquiries they made
every day about his health. It was their hearts desire that circumstances might
soon enable him to break the fast. If there was anything that he could do towards
that end he was ready and so were the people of Pakistan. Zaheed Hussain was
followed by Khurshid and Randhawa who on behalf of the administration
reiterated the assurance that all the conditions mentioned in the citizens pledge
would be implemented, and no effort would be spared to restore the Indian
capital to its traditional harmony and peace. Sardar Harbans Singh endorsed the
appeal on behalf of the Sikhs. When Rajendra Prasad said: I have signed on
behalf of the people, please break your fast, Gandhi replied: I shall break my
fast. Let Gods will prevail. You all be witness today.
Source: Gandhi, M. K. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi Online.
(CWMG) http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/cwmg.html.
His last testament?

In the last weeks of his life Gandhi spoke his mind to Indians and Pakistanis. As was his
habit, he spoke freely, not sparing anyone, but always with respect and an appeal to
their better side. He asked Pakistans rulers to ensure the safety of minorities and
predicted that Pakistan would be an impermanent entity unless it evolved a secular
polity. He warned those who were pained by partition that Akhand Bharat, or a united
India could only be established by love and mutual respect, never by force. He spoke to
community leaders whose utterances pained him, including Muslim leaders who had
called him a kafir; and the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha who hated him for the respect he
showed towards Islam and Muslims. He discussed the matter of the SomnathTemple in
Kathiawad, insisting that its restoration could not be paid for by the Union of India,
which was a secular state, but only by private donations from devout Hindus. After all,
we have formed the Government for all. It is a secular government, that is it does not
belong to any particular religion. Hence it cannot spend money on the basis of
communities (CWMG 97: 413-14). He addressed Sikh refugees in the company of
Sheikh Abdullah, and hailed the example of Kashmiri Muslims in maintaining communal
harmony. He spoke to Sikhs, warning them never to misuse the kirpan. The day he
ended his fast was Guru Gobind Singhs birthday. Gandhi sent Sikhs a message
15

congratulating them for their victory over anger, and ending with the slogan Wahe Guruji
ki Fateh. He sent a special message to fellow Gujaratis. He discussed the issue of a
national language and his preference for Hindustani. He spoke to caste Hindus about the
evil of untouchability. After recounting the painful experiences of the oppressed castes of
Rohtak, he admonished Jats and Ahirs for tormenting them and treating them as slaves.
He talked about the Meos, named criminal tribes by the colonial administration, who
had been forcibly evicted from vast areas in Delhis hinterland, and called for their
rehabilitation. He severely criticised those Congressmen who had begun using power for
personal benefit. He spoke to social organisations such as the Hindustani Talimi Sangh,
the Kasturba Gandhi National Memorial Trust and the Harijan Sevak Sangh about their
role in building independent India. He raised philosophical issues about the crucial role of
individual conscience and about ahimsa.
Most of all, he spoke words of comfort to refugees crazed by grief, calmly listening to
their abuses, even hatred. Let Gandhi die were the slogans raised by some people
during his fast. After the fast, he continued with his daily prayer meetings and his
custom of reading from all religious texts. The significance of this custom was brought
out in April 1947, when, during his stay at the sweepers colony in Delhi, he was
prevented from reading the Koran by a small group of protestors. Gandhi had refrained
from praying, asking the objectors to either withdraw their objection or leave the
meeting. On the fourth attempt, he succeeded in reading the Sura al-Fatheha without
protest. This was his way of showing Indians that all religions contained something of
universal value, recognisable by every decent person, and that Islam was no different.
At these meetings he asked everyone to see reason, to give up the ways of Satan, to
remember the best part of their traditions, to be brave in the face of tragedy and
adversity, not to seek revenge but to forgive. There was not a single issue of social,
political and moral concern to which he did not refer. His utterances were scattered over
some weeks, but they were undoubtedly his last will and testament. The assurance given
to Gandhi on January 18 by various individuals and organisations was a solemn
(although not legal) commitment to maintain communal harmony in independent India.
It was also a re-iteration of the AICC resolution on Minority Rights in independent India,
adopted in November 1947 at Gandhis insistence. (CWMG 97: 476)
The end
But Gandhi was also a man in pain. In his prayer meeting of November 25, 1947, he had
spoken about those who had been deprived of their homes: If we come to our senses
here today, everything will be well tomorrow; I too will be free. Today I am very much
disturbed. My life has become a burden to me. I wonder why I am still here. I could
become strong if Delhi were restored to sanity, and then I would rush to West Punjab
and tell the Muslims who have gone away from here that I have prepared the ground for
them and they could come back any time they wanted and live wherever they chose
Today I have become a sort of burden. There was a time when my word was law. But it
is no longer so (CWMG 97: 393). One scholar has written about the climate of hatred in
those days, a climate in which many people wished for Gandhi to die (Nandy 1993).
Perhaps he sensed this wish.
On January 20, a bomb exploded 75 feet away from the dais at Gandhis prayer meeting.
One Madanlal Pahwa was arrested. Six other men escaped in a taxi. This was the fifth
16

attempt on his life since 1934, and all of them were made by extreme Hindu nationalists.
Gandhi was unruffled. Upon being asked by the DIG to agree to additional policemen for
his prayer meetings, he refused, saying that his life was in the hands of God, that if he
had to die, no precautions could save him. He would not agree to restricted entry to his
prayer meetings or to anybody coming between his audience and himself. At the next
days meeting he said that the man who exploded the bomb obviously thinks that he
has been sent by God to destroy me He had taken it for granted that I am an enemy of
Hinduism. When he says he was doing the bidding of God he is only making God an
accomplice in a wicked deed. But it cannot be so those who are behind him or whose
tool he is, should know that this sort of thing will not save Hinduism. If Hinduism has to
be saved it will be saved through such work as I am doing. I have been imbibing Hindu
dharma right from my childhood (CWMG 98: 279-81). On January 30, soon after he
arrived at his prayer meeting, Nathuram Godse, editor of a Poona-based Marathi journal
called Hindu Rashtra, fired three bullets at him at point-blank range and killed him.
The story of this crime is complex (Payne 2003, 609-35). On February 4, the
Government of India declared the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh to be unlawful, noting
that its members had indulged in acts of violence involving arson, robbery, dacoity and
murder.. carried on under a cloak of secrecy. It accused the Sangh of exhorting people
to resort to terrorist methods. The communique went on to state that the cult of
violence sponsored and inspired by the activities of the Sangh has claimed many victims.
The latest and the most precious to fall was Gandhiji himself (Goyal 1979, 202). The
trial of eight conspirators including V. D. Savarkar took place through 1948. Godse made
a speech stating his belief in in Savarkars ideal of Hindu nationalism, and his conviction
that Gandhi was a political and ethical imposter a traitor to his faith and his country, a
curse to India, a force for evil.., and the greatest enemy not only of Hindus, but of the
whole nation (Payne 2003, 637-41). Parts of the speech suggest that Godse saw
himself as an agency of Lord Krishna. The speech remains popular with a certain section
of political opinion. Godse and Narayan Apte were sentenced to death in February 1949
and hanged in November. They went to the gallows shouting akhand bharat amar rahe,
not realising that a united India was also Gandhis dearest ideal. Unlike them, however,
he did not believe that united India could be a Hindu Rashtra. Five conspirators were
sentenced to life imprisonment, which in India those days meant fourteen years.
Savarkars links with the murderers was clear, but he was acquitted for lack of
corroborative evidence.
However, doubts remained about the extent of the conspiracy; the behaviour of the
Bombay and Delhi police between January 20 and 30; and the evidence of V. D.
Savarkars involvement. In 1965, the Government of India set up a commission of
inquiry into the conspiracy to murder Mahatma Gandhi, headed by Justice Jivanlal Kapur
of the Supreme Court. It examined evidence not produced during the trial, including the
testimony of Savarkar's bodyguard Appa Ramachandra Kasar, and his secretary Gajanan
Vishnu Damle. Had they testified in 1948, Savarkar might have been convicted. The
evidence confirmed Godse and Apte's visits to Savarkar on January 14 and 17, 1948.
Kasar told the Commission that they visited Savarkar again on or about January 23,
upon their return from Delhi after the bomb incident. Damle stated that Godse and Apte
saw Savarkar in the middle of January and sat with him in his garden. Justice Kapur's
findings were clear. He noted the deadly negligence of the police. And he concluded that
17

the facts taken together undermined any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by
Savarkar and his group. (Noorani, March 2003).
Gandhi died standing up, with Gods name on his lips, just as he had wanted to. He had
always said that he was prepared to die for his beliefs. His death could have been
prevented. Who can say what would have happened if he had been allowed to perform
his padyatra to Pakistan? But it was not to be. In the eyes of too many officials, he was
an old man who had outlived his usefulness: he had become expendable. By negligence,
by indifference, by deliberate desire on the part of many faceless people, the
assassination had been accomplished. It was a new kind of murder the permissive
assassination, and there may be many more in the future (Payne 2003, 647).
Gandhis charisma
Gandhi appears far removed from us. He seems to be from another era, someone who
dislikes modern science and technology, who upholds sanatan dharma and the caste
system, who insists that religion cannot be separated from politics. It is better to avoid
placing Gandhi within political camps or to see him as a Rightist or Leftist. Gandhi
encourages us to question these concepts, to overcome the confusion into which they
often throw us. Nowadays he is portrayed as a man of peace. Actually he was a fighter.
He democratised the national movement and infused it with popular energy. His
message to Indian peasants was that they were part of the nation and that it could not
be built to their exclusion. He gave them a dignity which no other politician had done.
This recognition of their humanity and their citizenship earned him their immense
gratitude. (Markovits 2003, 141).
That is why the British rulers considered him a dangerous anarchist and repeatedly put
him in jail. Despite this he always proclaimed his friendship for the British people. When
he was in London for the Round Table Conference in 1931, he decided to visit the mill
areas of Lancashire. He was warned by the police not to go there, for he would be
mobbed by thousands of angry workers who had lost jobs due to the swadeshi boycott of
English cloth. But he insisted on going because he wanted to explain Indias case to
them. The American journalist William Shirer reported the workers reactions to Gandhis
arrival in the mill town of Darwen. They instinctively recognised in him a man who had
devoted his life to helping the poor. They gave him a tumultuous welcome. Gandhi was
mobbed, but by people filled with admiration, not anger (Shirer 1979, 180). An unknown
person took a photograph showing a smiling Gandhi in his dhoti surrounded by joyous
women workers whose faces shine with love. Other photographs from this trip show
similar images of the common peoples love for the man whom their government
portrayed as the Empires chief trouble-maker. There are few, if any examples of the
leader of an anti-colonial struggle whom the citizens of the colonial power held in such
affection.
18
Figure 9.1.1.1: Gandhi in Darwen, Lancashire, 1931

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gandhi_at_Darwen.jpg
Gandhi did not build a systematic political ideology or ism. Isms deserve to be
destroyed, he said, they were useless things. He often made pragmatic adjustments to
his political strategies and ideas, some of them in response to public criticism. It could
be said that he was in a continuous debate, not only with his compatriots, but with
friends and critics all over the world his writings were not shastras, but a prolonged
conversation. He declared that he since he was always growing intellectually, he was not
concerned with consistency. At most, we could say that his attitude and approach were
consistent. If his actions and ideas carry different meanings for people across space and
time, this is not surprising. It explains the immense range and magnetism of his appeal.
As the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess reminds us: There can be no rule-books of
Gandhian policy. There are no easy Gandhian formulae. This, however, does not
necessarily reduce the value of Gandhis teaching in the contemporary political situation.
After all, the indication of direction that a compass-needle gives is of some value in
itself, even if it takes no consideration of the terrain through which we must pass.
(Naess, 130.)
Once, in the face of hostile sloganeering in Bengal in 1940, Gandhi remarked, I love to
hear the words Down with Gandhism. An ism deserves to be destroyed. It is a useless
thing. The real thing is non-violence. It is immortal. It is enough for me if it remains
alive. I am eager to see Gandhism wiped out at an earlier date. You should not give
yourselves over to sectarianism. I do not belong to any sect. I have never dreamt of
establishing any sect. If any sect is established in my name after my death my soul
19

would cry out in anguish (Hardiman 2003, 8). Gandhis reference to immortality makes
us think about our experience of time. Time is another name for life. All of us live within
a certain time-frame. This does not make us prisoners of time. We are free to go beyond
our immediate circumstances to greater or lesser extent - the most deprived persons
may be seen exercising this freedom. Chander Singh Garhwali was a humble soldier. But
he left a positive mark upon history. The mark of greatness is the extent to which our
actions express truths recognisable after our time; truths that in Gandhis words, are
immortal.
Figure 9.1.1.2: Gandhi with the Khan brothers at Utmanzai, 1938

Source: http://www.nuvs.com/ashram/gallery/large/06.1.jpg
Epilogue
Until the mid 1940s, the cycle of partition-related communal massacres had not begun.
Yet in the twilight of British power in India, certain political groups and leaders threw
away the chance of mutual accomodation despite the opportunities available. But Gandhi
spoke of love and mutual respect in the midst of hatred and carnage. Some were
pessimists even when there was hope. Gandhi gave people hope in the midst of despair;
he appealed to their better instincts at the worst of times. This is the message of his fast
in January 1948. It is a message from a man of extraordinary strength and courage.
After he died, politicians argued about whether he was the father or the son of the
nation. It would be more accurate to say that the Mahatmas last sacrifice became the
foundation of Indias secular constitution.
The history of the sub-continent since the death of Gandhi is beyond the scope of this
lesson. It is enough to recall that Jinnahs Pakistan lasted for twenty-four years after
partition, at which point (1971) it disintegrated. India played a role in this, but it is
20

noteworthy that the bulk of the people of Pakistan (East Pakistanis were 55% of
Pakistans population) preferred to lead a separate existence. The logic of partition did
not end in 1947, nor did the logic of communal strife. As for Gandhis prediction that
without communal harmony India and Pakistan would once again become slaves of
foreign powers, only time will tell.
Two symbolic events tell us something about how India has treated the legacy of the
Mahatma. In 1998, nuclear devices were exploded in the Rajasthan desert at a place
called Pokharan. With this, India announced its wish to emerge as a nuclear weapons
state. And in February 2003, the Indian Unions highest officials unveiled a portrait of V.
D. Savarkar in the Central Hall of Parliament.
For a link to the debate regarding the NDA governments attempt to alter the contents of
Mahatma
Gandhis
Collected
works,
visit
the
link
http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/cwmg_controversy.html. For more photos of
Mahatma Gandhi visit the link http://www.nuvs.com/ashram/gallery/index.html.
Albert Einstein had famously said of Gandhi, that generations to come would scarce
believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth. Perhaps
less well-known is the fact that a millennium poll conducted in 2000 by global readers of
the BBC News website voted Mahatma Gandhi the greatest man of the past thousand
years (BBC, 2005).
9.1 Summary
The last phase of Mahatma Gandhi's life was spent in Delhi. He had arrived from
Bengal, and wanted to go to the Punjab to try and reduce the communal hatred
that was raging there. However, upon arrival in Delhi in September 1947, Gandhi
was pained to see the communal tension in what was to be the capital of the new
republic. There were thousands of Hindu and Sikh refugees from the Punjab,
living in camps in north Delhi, as well as thousands of Muslims from Delhi and
neighbouring areas who were forced to take refuge in Puran Quila and Jamia
Millia. Gandhi decided to stay in Delhi to work for civic calm.
From January 13 to 18, 1948, Gandhi went on a fast. This fast has been
interpreted as his pressure on the newly independent Government of India to pay
certain financial dues to the Government of Pakistan. Actually his prime motive
was the re-etablishment of communal harmony and the return of the shrine of
Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Chisti at Mehrauli to Muslims, from whom it had been
seized. This shrine was visited every year by Muslims as well as Hindus and
members of other communities.
The fast caused ripples of public emotions, negative as well as positive. Gandhi
continued his practice of evening prayer meetings. During these days he spoke on
the most important issues confronting the people of both India and Pakistan.
Gandhi could not see the people of Pakistan as alien to him. He asked them to
ensure the safety of Hindus and Sikhs living there, as he asked Indians to ensure
the security of minorities in India. In a few days senior leaders from all parties
21

publicly declared their acceptance of his urgent pleas and asked him to give up
his fast
The lesson presents the contents of the Delhi Declaration of January 18, 1948.
The lesson outlines Gandhi's ideas about truth and ahimsa in the light of his
impact upon the Sikhs and the Pathans. Gandhis moral impact upon these
communities was seen in the Akali agitation of the early 1920s and the Khudai
Khidmatgar movement of the Pathans, led by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, also
known as the Frontier Gandhi.
The lesson describes the circumstances of Gandhis assassination. It takes

examples of his activities and utterances in his last months, and analyses them as
his testament to the people of India and Pakistan.
9.1: Exercises
Essay questions
1) Whydid Gandhi postpone his planned visit to Pakistan in late 1947
and stay in Delhi?
2) What were Gandhi's ideas on the atomic bomb?
3) Why did Gandhi decide to go on fast in January 1948?
4) What were the contents of the Delhi Declaration on January 18, 1948?
5) What lessons do Gandhi's last utterances and his fast have for Indians today?
9.1 Glossary
Alibi: an excuse of any kind
Charisma: a capacity to inspire devotion and enthusiasm
Coercive: having the power of compulsion by physical pressure or force
Infallible: always correct, incapable of being proven false
Irrevocable: irreversible, unable to be undone
Legitimacy: genuineness, legal right to govern
22

9.1 Further readings
Banerjee, Mukulika. 2001. The Pathan Unarmed: Opposition and Memory in the North
West Frontier. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
BBC. 14 Nov 2005 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4435032.stm>
Bhattacharya, Sabyasachi ed. 1997, 2008 (fourth reprint). The Mahatma and the Poet:
Letters and debates between Gandhi and Tagore 1915-1941. New Delhi: National Book
Trust India.
Bondurant, Joan. 1958, 1965. Conquest of Violence: the Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dalton, Dennis. 1970. Gandhi During Partition: A Case Study in the Nature of
Satyagraha. In C. H. Philips and M. D. Wainwright eds.1970. The Partition of India:
Policies and Perspectives 1935-1947. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
Desai, Mahadev. (1946), 1991. The Gospel of Selfless Action or The Gita According to
Gandhi. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.
Desai, Narayan. 2009. My Life is My Message, vol 4, Svarpan (1940-1948). New Delhi:
Orient Blackswan.
Gandhi, M. K. 1993. The Bhagvadgita. Delhi: Orient Paperbacks.
Gandhi, M. K. 1938, 2003. Hind Swaraj, or Indian Home Rule (1909). Ahmedabad:
Navjivan Publishing House.
Gandhi, M. K. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi Online.
http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/cwmg.html
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi Online- Controversy regarding alterations:
http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/cwmg_controversy.html
Gandhi, Rajmohan. 2004. Ghaffar Khan: Nonviolent Badshah of the Pathans. New Delhi:
Penguin-Viking.
Gandhi, Rajmohan. 2006. Mohandas: A True Story of a Man, his People, and an Empire.
New Delhi: Penguin-Viking.
Goyal, D. R. 1979. Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh. New Delhi: Radha Krishna
Prakashan.
Hardiman, David. 2003. Gandhi in his Time and Ours.Delhi: Permanent Black.
Markovits, Claude. 2003. The Un-Gandhian Gandhi: the Life and Afterlife of the
Mahatma. Delhi: Permanent Black.
Markovits, Claude. 2007. The Calcutta Riots of 1946. In:
http://www.massviolence.org/The-Calcutta-Riots-of-1946
23

Naess, Arne. 1965. Gandhi and the Nuclear Age. Totowa, NJ: The Bedminster Press.
Nandy, Ashis. 1994. Final Encounter: The Politics of the Assassination of Gandhi. In At
the Edge of Psychology: Essays in Politics and Culture. New Delhi: Oxford University
Press.
Noorani, A. G. 2003. Savarkar and Gandhi. In Frontline; vol 20, March 15-28.
http://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2006/stories/20030328003603400.htm
Parekh, Bhikhu. 1989. Colonialism, Tradition and Reform: An Analysis of Gandhis
Political Discourse. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Payne, Robert. 1969, 2003. The Life and Death of Mahatma Gandhi. New Delhi: Rupa &
Co.
Ralhan, O. P. and Suresh K. Sharma. 1994. Documents on Punjab, vol 7, Sikh Politics
(Guru-ka-Bagh Morcha). New Delhi: Anmol Publications.
Rothermund, Dietmar. 1991. Mahatma Gandhi:An Essay in Political Biography.Delhi:
Manohar Publications.
Shirer, William. 1979. Gandhi: A Memoir. Abacus: London.
Tendulkar, D. G. 1961. Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, v. 4. New
Delhi: Government of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Publications
Division.
24

Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

9: Gandhian nationalism after 1919: ideas and movements

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

War and nuclear weapons

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhi during partition

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Politics and ethics

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Unexpected converts to ahimsa

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Value addition: from the sources

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Value addition: did you know?

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

The question of truth

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhis last fast

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

The peoples reaction

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

SEVEN-POINT DECLARATION OF JANUARY 18, 1948

Value addition: from the sources

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

His last testament?

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Figure 9.1.1.1: Gandhi in Darwen, Lancashire, 1931

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Figure 9.1.1.2: Gandhi with the Khan brothers at Utmanzai, 1938

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi

The Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi

The lesson describes the circumstances of Gandhis assassination. It takes