Mahatma Vol8

MAHATMA – Volume Eight [1947-1948]
MAHATMA
Volume 8 [1947-1948]
By: D. G. Tendulkar
First Edition : January 1954
Printed & Published by:
The Publications Division

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
Government of India, Patiala House
New Delhi 110 001
www.mkgandhi.org Page 1
01. India Divided ( 1947 )
IN THE midst of heavy work, on June 2, 1947, Gandhi wrote the first of the series
of editorials in Harijan on "things of eternal value”:
"Readers must have noticed that last week I started writing for the Harijan.
How long I shall be able to continue it I do not know. God's will be done in this,
as in other things.
"What I think of it, the circumstances under which I stopped writing for the
Harijan have not altered. Pyarelalji is far away from me and in my opinion is
doing very important work in Noakhali. He is taking part in what I have called
mahayagna. Most of the other helpers are also unable to help under the stress
of circumstances or other causes. To resume writing for the Harijan under
these adverse conditions would be ordinarily considered madness. But what
appears unpractical from the ordinary standpoint is feasible under divine
guidance. I believe I dance to the divine tune. If this is delusion, I treasure it.
"Who is this Divinity? I would love to discuss the question; only not today.
"The question that is foremost with us all, I discuss every evening after the
prayer. This writing will come before the readers after seven days. This interval
would be considered too long in connection with the pressing problem.
Therefore, in these columns for the moment I must confine myself to things of
eternal value. One such is brahmacharya. The world seems to be running after
things of transitory value. It has no time for the other. And yet, when one
thinks a little deeper, it becomes clear that it is the things eternal that count
in the end.
"What is brahmacharya? It is the way of life which leads us to Brahma (God). It

includes full control over the process of reproduction. The control must be in
thought, word and deed. If the thought is not under control, the other two have
no value. There is a saying in Hindustani: 'He whose heart is pure has all the
purifying waters of the Ganges in his house.' For one whose thought is under
control, the other is mere child's play. The brahmachari of my conception will
be healthy and will easily live long. He will not even suffer from so much as a
headache. Mental and physical work will not cause fatigue. He is ever bright,
never slothful. The outward neatness will be an exact reflection of the inner.
He will exhibit all the attributes of the steadfast one described in the Gita. It
need cause no worry if not one person is met with answering the description.
"Is it strange that one who is able completely to conserve and sublimate the
vital fluid which has the potentiality of creating the human beings, should
exhibit all the attributes described above? Who can measure the creative
strength of such sublimation, oYie drop of which has the potentiality of bringing
into being a human life? Patanjali has described five disciplines. It is not
possible to isolate any one of these and practise it. It may be posited in the
case of Truth, because it really includes the other four. And for this age the
five have been expanded into eleven. Vinoba Bhave has put them in the form of
a Marathi verse : they are non-violence, truth, non-stealing, brahmacharya,
non-possession, bread labour, control of the palate, fearlessness, equal regard
for all religions, swadeshi and removal of untouchability.
"All these can be derived from Truth. But life is complex. It is not possible to
enunciate one grand principle and leave the rest to follow of itself. Even when
we know a proposition, its corollaries have to be worked out.
"It is well to bear in mind that all the disciplines are of equal importance. If one
is broken, all are. There seems to be a popular belief amongst us that breach of
truth or non-violence is pardonable. Non-stealing and non-possession are rarely
mentioned. We hardly recognize the necessity of observing them. But a fancied
breach of brahmacharya excites wrath and worse. There must be something
seriously wrong with a society in which the values are exaggerated and
underestimated. Moreover, to use the word brahmacharya in a narrow sense is
to detract from its value. Such .detraction increases the difficulty of proper
observance. When brahmacharya is isolated, even the elementary observance
becomes difficult, if not impossible. Therefore, it is essential that all the
disciplines should be taken as one. This enables one to realize the full meaning
and significance of brahmacharya."
With the return of the Viceroy to Delhi on June i, the atmosphere became tense
with expectation. The vivisection proposals embodied in the H. M. G.'s
announcement were discussed with the Congress and League leaders. But it was
decided that nothing should go out until the announcement was made on June
3. Gandhi requested the prayer audience to check their curiosity. To them he
could not tell what had happened or what was happening. He and the audience
were men in the street. They should not concern themselves with, what the
Viceroy had brought; they should concern themselves with what they were to
do under given circumstances.
Gandhi called upon the doctors to turn their attention to the villages of India
and study indigenous drugs and treatments. Above all, he wanted them to
teach the people the right way of living.
"What shall I say of the scientists?" he continued. "Are they giving their
attention to growing more food, not again through the aid of artificial manures,
but through the real scientific treatment of the soil and through a wise use of
organic manure? In Noakhali I saw the people even making wise use of the
terribly destructive water hyacinth, which grows wild and blocks the very
necessary water-ways. This they will remove, when they live for the country
rather than for themselves."
He asked the people to turn the searchlight inwards. They were perfectly
entitled to'praise or to blame the Congress or Muslim League according to the
dictates of their intelligence and conscience. That was the right of the people.
They must from then onwards think in terms of panchayat raj. He had called
Jawaharlal the uncrowned king of India, but the real rulers were the toiling
millions.
"Jawaharlal cannot be replaced today whilst the charge is being taken from the
Englishmen. Jawaharlal, a Harrow boy, a Cambridge graduate and a barrister, is
wanted to carry on the negotiations with Englishmen. But a time is fast coming,
when India will have to elect its first President of the Republic that is coming. I
would gladly have presented the late Chakrayya as such, had he lived. I would
rejoice to think that we had a mehtar girl of stout heart, incorruptible and of
crystal-like purity to be our first president. It is no vain dream. And there are
such Harijan girls, if we would but set our hearts on having rustic presidents.
Did I not choose, he exclaimed, little Gulnar, the daughter of the late Maulana
Mahomed Ali, as my successor? The stupid girl married Shwaib Qureshi, once a
fakir, and introduced to me as the first satyagrahi when the Ali brothers were
prisoners. Stupid Gulnar is now a proud mother of bright children, but she has
forfeited the right to be my successor. Our presidents of the future would not
be required to know English. They would have as their counsellors wise
patriots, knowing the necessary foreign languages and the art of true
statesmanship. Such dreams can only be realized if we cease sanguinary
fratricide and we turn our attention towards our villages."
Referring to the| black market, he stated that a business man had said to him
that it was perhaps only a few traders who indulged in it, whereas the real
black market was to be seen in the corruption that existed in the Government
offices. Gandhi observed that the Government itself was a trading concern.
Nevertheless, it made him indeed sad to think that the members of the services
were implicated. It made no difference whether they were Europeans or
Indians, Hindus or Muslims. It would be a sad outlook for the future of the
country if the services and the people encouraged bribery and corruption. What
could Rajaji or Rajendra Babu do, if they were not honestly helped ? No elected
representative of the people could rule by the sword. That was not possible in
any democratic state. He, therefore, pleaded earnestly with the members of
the services, whether British or Indian, to be true to the salt of India and
eschew all dishonesty, wherever it existed. He appealed also to the public to
realize the great responsibility that freedom was now throwing on them and to
rise to their full stature by clinging to truth and non-violence. Such action
would redound not only to their own credit, but would be for the good of all
and also help the British to withdraw from India, leaving India enjoying an
orderly government. In conclusion he asked the public not to believe that the
British were dishonest unless they proved themselves unworthy of their trust.
He himself belirved that the Viceroy was honest. And only by being strictly
honest themselves, however, would they be able to steer their ship of state
safely to harbour.
On the evening of June 3rd, Lord Mountbatten followed by Nehru, Jinnah and
Baldev Singh spoke to the people on the radio. The reactions to H. M. G.'s
announcement were mixed. Most of the Hindus were sad. Nehru's broadcast was
most touching. They all disliked the vivisection of India, he said, but they could
not let India bleed continuously. A surgical operation was to be preferred under
the circumstances.
The H.M.G.'s proposals envisaged the creation of Pakistan, if demanded by the

Muslim representatives in the Muslim majority provinces and it provided for the
partition of provinces, notably Bengal and the Punjab, if demanded by a
majority of either party in the Legislative Assemblies of these provinces. It
proposed that a referendum should be held in the district of Sylhet to decide
whether it should remain part of Assam or join up with East Bengal. It proposed
that the transference of power should be antedated, and that pending the
completion of the new constitution or constitutions the basis should be
dominion status, without prejudice to the future free choice of the Indian
people. "Nor is there anything in this plan," the text mentioned, "to preclude
negotiations between communities for a united India."
Speaking on the plan embodied in H. M. G.'s announcement Gandhi said on June

4 that he had already told them over and over again that to yield even an inch
to force was wholly wrong. The Working Committee held that they had nojt
yielded to the force of arms but they had to yield to the force of
circumstances. The vast majority of Congressmen did not want unwilling
partners. Their motto was non-violence and, therefore, no coercion. Hence,
after careful weighing of the pros and cons of the vital issues at stake, they had
reluctantly agreed to the secession from the Indian Union that was being
framed of those parts which had boycotted the Constituent Assembly. He then
expressed sorrow at what he considered was a mistaken policy of the Muslim
League. They feared Hindu domination, they said, and desired to rule in what
they were mistaken in calling their own homelands. As a matter of fact,
however, India was the homeland of all who were born and bred in India. Would
Muslims live in isolation? Was not the Punjab as much the homeland of the
Hindus, the Sikhs, the Christians, the Jews and the Parsis, who were of the
Punjab?
He could not blame Lord Mountbatten for what had happened. It was the act of
the Congress and the Muslim League. The Viceroy had openly declared that he
wanted a united India but he was powerless in face of the Congress acceptance,
however reluctantly, of the Muslim position.
There were the brave Sikhs whose leaders had been to see him. He had
explained to them what he meant by one Sikh being equal to one lakh and one-
fourth of persons. It was the courage of one Sikh to stand firm, in spite of the
opposition«of one lakh and one-fourth of men. And this could only mean
bravery of the highest and of the purest kind. If they had that faith and courage
born of non-violence, they would be worthy of the proud name Khalsa. That
was the lesson that he had learnt from the Granth Saheb and the Khalsa
history.
He had done his best to get the people to stand by the Cabinet Mission
statement of the May 16th, but he had failed. But what was his duty and theirs
in the face of the accepted fact? He was a servant of the Congress because he
was a servant of the country, and he could never be disloyal to them.
Jawaharlal and the Viceroy had said that nothing had been imposed on anyone.
The agreement that was embodied in the announcement being a voluntary act
of the parties could be varied by thfem at any stage by mutual consent. He
pleaded with the Muslim League, now that they had their wish fulfilled, to
relieve the Viceroy of the heavy task of being middleman between the parties.
He hoped that it was a final agreement between the parties. Therefore, all
violence should now stop. And Qaid-e- Azam Jinnah should invite the Congress
leaders for a discussion as to the best way of dealing with the further stages.
Thus, for instance, there was no reason why they should not by mutual
agreement define the boundaries of partitioned Punjab and Bengal.
Gandhi's prayer speeches had revived the hopes that the evil might be averted.
Some people asked him whether he would undertake a fast unto death in view
of the decision of the Congress Working Committee accepting division of India.

Had not he called Pakistan a sin in which he could never participate? Replying
to this Gandhi said on June 5 that he could not fast at the dictation of anyone.
Such fasts could not be lightly undertaken. They could conceivably be wholly
undesirable. The fasts could not be undertaken out of anger. Anger was a short
madness. He must, therefore, undertake the fast only when the still small voice
within him called for it. He was a servant of the country and, therefore, of the
Congress. Was he to fast because the Congress differed from his views? He had
to be patient. There were occasions enough for being impatient. The Congress
seemed to stand for the projects of industrialism in which he saw no de-
liverance for the masses from their grinding poverty. He did not believe in mill-
made civilization as he did not in mill-made cloth. He did not believe in an
army for the removal of the menace to the real freedom of the country. If he
was to impatiently fast, in the symptoms he had described and others he could
add, then there were reasons enough to justify a fast unto death. He felt that
he must be steadfast in the midst of the fire raging round him and prove his
faith in the ultimate triumph of truth. He even referred to the document he
had signed together with Jinnah and to which the Viceroy was really a party. He
must now watch what his two partners did before he acted. He could only say
that he would gladly walk or drive with them to the affected parts. The people
might well ask what they were doing while Gurgaon was burning ? He requested
the prayer audience and the authors of the rebuking messages to bear with the
Congress and Muslim League and with him, and watch, even critically, and see
how things were moving. He hoped that they would not fail the people. The
Government belonged to the latter as he did. There was ample time for the
people to judge them and leave them, if any of them were found wanting.
There was a large section of the Hindus who heaved a sigh of relief that at last
they were rid of the Muslims and would be able to work out and to develop the
country without any bickerings. But then there were others who saw clearly
that the partition was no solution to the problem. Nearly four crores of the
Muslims would still remain in the Union of India and about two crores of the
Hindus will remain in the so-called Pakistan areas. They felt helpless and angry
at the Congress decision and, as such, blamed the Congress and Gandhi. A
woman correspondent wrote to Gandhi that he should retire to the jungle. It
was he who had spoilt Jinnah and turned his head. He was responsible for the
evil that the country was facing. His reply was that she was quite wrong. Love
or ahimsa was the most powerful magnet in the world. It never did any harm to
anyone.
Addressing the prayer gathering on June 6, just after his return from the
Viceroy's House, Gandhi remarked that they might ask him what had he brought
from the Viceroy. He had brought nothing, for the Viceroy had nothing to give
except his services, if they were required. The Viceroy had frankly told him
that his one object was to withdraw from India in the quickest manner possible,
leaving behind peace and order throughout India. They had decided to go in
June 1948 but now they would probably withdraw by August 15, this year. Why
had they decided to go ? They were impressed by our non-violent struggle. India
believed that the British rule was an evil. Yet she did not try to kill the British.
India simply tried to non-co-operate with the evil, not with the evil-doer. Such
interval, as was necessary, was due to the fact that it was a voluntary
withdrawal. Some arrangement was a necessity of the case.
There were several who still suspected the British bona fides. It was not they
who were dividing India. Unity of rule, they have claimed, as their greatest
achievement. The division of India was the result of an agreement, however
reluctant, between the Congress and the Muslim League.
Brave people were never perturbed by mere suspicions. He himself believed

that the Viceroy was sincere. If he proved to be a duper, he would be the
sufferer, never the duped.
Now that the Qaid-e-Azam had got what he wanted, it was up to him to give
the world the shape of Pakistan and to make it attractive in word and in action.
Was it not up to him to invite all the non-Muslims of Pakistan? What about the
Frontier Province? It was a Congress province. If it was to be of Pakistan, Qaid-
e-Azam Jinnah had to convince the Pathans that they would be just as well off
in Pakistan as in the union of the provinces of India. Referendum was a
dangerous method at this time. He, therefore, suggested the method of

attracting the Pathans through reason and love.
What should happen was that the Union of India and Pakistan should now vie
with each other in well doing. If Pakistan did better, the whole of India would
be Pakistan, in which there would be neither majority nor minority, and all
would be equal. If he were the president of the Muslim League, he would put
Pakistan on the screen and make it attractive by its matchless beauty. In that
case he would be the first one to admit his mistake and commend Pakistan to
everybody. Will the Qaid-e-Azam do this?
The N.-W. Frontier question brought to a head Gandhi's differences with the
Congress Working Committee. He had a talk with Sardar Patel on the night of
June 6. The next day he wrote to Nehru: "The oftener we meet the more
convinced I am that the gulf between us is deeper than I had feared... If Jinnah
does not go to the Frontier and does not woo the Badshah Khan, his brother and
his other colleagues, the Frontier ministry should resign and so also the
parliamentary majority on the sole ground that a referendum at this moment
must lead to bloodshed, which they should avoid in so far as it is humanly
possible. . You think that referendum should take place now ... I had told the
Badshah that if I do not carry you with me, I shall retire at least from the
Frontier consultation and let you guide him. I will not and cannot interpose
myself between you and him. After all, was it not you who brought him to me?"
Referring to the newspaper report that he had differed from the decision of the
Working Committee and that the A.I.C.C. would raise its voice against it,
Gandhi observed on June 7 that the A.I.C.C. had appointed the Working
Committee and they could not lightly discard its decisions. Supposing the
Working Committee signed a promissory note on behalf of the A.I.C.C., the
A.I.C.C. had to honour it. The Working Committee might make a mistake. The
A.I.C.C. could punish it by removing it. But they could not go back upon the
decision already taken by it.
As for the people, he would ask them to oppose the Congress only when it tried
to mislead the public deliberately. They all knew his method of resistance.
After all, he had preached rebellion against the mighty sanatanist Hindu
stronghold on the subject of untouchability and the result was quite good.
He might differ from the Working Committee. But then having stated the fact,
he would recommend their decision for acceptance. And he was of firm opinion
that they could still mend the situation to a large extent.
He had said at the Round Table Conference that the Congress was the
representative not merely of the few lakhs of the members on the Congress
rolls, but it represented all the millions of India in that it had their real welfare
at heart. Thus who but the Congress could represent the princes and the people
under them ? When the paramountcy was at an end, then surely the will of
their people should be paramount.
That day a group of socialists came to see Gandhi. The socialists were full of
vituperation against the Congress High Command for accepting the partition
plan. Gandhi tried bard to impress upon them that now that the foreigner was
quitting and power was to be transferred to Indian hands, they would ill serve
the country and would jeopardize the newly won independence if instead of
showing a co-operative spirit they persisted in their obstructionist tactics. If
they did not approve of what was being done by the Congress High Command,
they all should meet and reason with them and resolve the difference in a
friendly way. "But our worst shortcoming is that if someone differs'from us on
any issue, we are quick to misunderstand and instead of trying to get under his
skin and regarding the issue from his angle, we begin to denounce him and run
him down. In the result fissures deepen, rivalries grow up, and principles are
forgotten in the clash of personalities; instead of national unity there is a chaos
of factions and isms." Pakistan was the bitter fruit of this factionalism. He was
afraid, the socialist friends had not understood the A B C of socialism. Why
could not the socialists see that there could be no socialism in India so long as
they were in the octopus grip of communalism? "Note down these words of an
old man past the age of three score and ten: in the times to come the people
will not judge us by the creed we profess or the label we wear or the slogans
we shout, but by our work, industry, sacrifice, honesty and purity of character.
They will want to know what we have actually done for them. But if you do not
listen, if taking advantage of the prevailing misery and discontent of the

people, you set about to accentuate and exploit it for party ends, it will recoil
upon your head and even God will not forgive you for your betrayal of the
people."
The next day, a group of communists visited him. Gandhi gave them a bit of his
mind:
"You waste your lime and your energy in hair-splitting, fault-finding and picking
holes. If you discover a trifling flaw anywhere, real or fancied, you exploit it to
make propaganda and to spread disaffection against the government in power
without even caring to make a proper inquiry. It seems to have become your
stock-in-trade. Is there no activity of the present Government whatever which
is worthy of your co-operation or which you can approve of? Think for a
moment w7hat you would do if you were in Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's position.
Either you should be prepared to shoulder the responsibility which Jawaharlal
Nehru and Sardar Patel are shouldering or you should co-operate with them. I
undertake that they will vacate office and make room for you the moment you
are prepared to take charge of the administration and run it. It will do you
good. But if you will do neither, then you should at least refrain from indulging
in untruthful propaganda. You profess lofty principles but your conduct belies
them because you seem to make no distinction between truth and falsehood,
justice and injustice. What to me is even more pathetic is that you regard
Russia as your spiritual home. Despising Indian culture, you dream of planting
the Russian system here. Food, however rich, that another person eats, cannot
sustain me. I can be sustained only by what I eat. In the same way, what an
outside power does gives me no satisfaction as it seems to give you.
"Then you talk about practising satyagraha! Anybody who talks about
satyagraha must primarily realize the elementary condition attaching to it. The
basis of satyagraha is truth. There is no room in it for the ambiguous middle. A
satyagrahi may not ride two horses, truth and untruth, at the same time nor, to
change the metaphor, trim his sail to catch every breeze as you do in the name
of communism. In other words, there must be no temporising w ith principles
for the sake of expediency. A satyagrahi must ceaselessly strive to realize and
live truth. And he must never contemplate hurting anyone by thought, word or
deed. Transparent sincerity and flawless purity must characterize every action
of his.
"You all claim to be servants of the country. As such, it is up to you to shed

narrow party-feeling and show a spirit of co-operation with all those who have
the good of the country at heart, so that India might once more attain the
pinnacle of greatness which she once held in the world."
Turning to the situation in Gurgaon, Gandhi said on June 8 that the Jats, the
Ahirs and the Meos were still fighting. It was reported that they did not descend
to inhuman levels and spared women, children and old people. There was arson
on a large scale. They were burning huts, which to the dwellers were as
precious as palaces to the princes. He appealed to the parties to cease the
hostilities when the Congress and Muslim League had come to an agreement.
The people must respect it and cease fighting amongst themselves. Someone
had suggested that he should become the arbitrator between the fighters. He
could not do so. He did not know the combatants. Nor had he ever been a self-
Styled arbitrator. He would have no sanction behind his award. He had not in
mind the sanction of the sword but he meant the sanction of public opinion. In
any event, let all the parties regard his appeal in the shape of an award which
they should carry out.
The talk of a united sovereign Bengal had been mentioned in the press for
sometime. The sponsors of the scheme told the speaker that Bengal had a
common culture and a common language. They did not want to split their
province into two. They were one people and would live and die as such. The
valiant fight that the Bengalis put forth against Lord Curzon's scheme of
partitioning Bengal was not so very long ago. He had nothing to say against the
argument. Indeed, it applied equally to the whole of India. And if any single
province wanted to do the right thing, he would surely not oppose it.
Some people had told him that the move for a united sovereign Bengal was a
sinister one. The Hindus were fed up and wanted to separate West Bengal from
East Bengal. The Bengal Muslim League had also rejected the unity plan but
some people were still persisting with it and it was said to be due to the fact
that the speaker was behind the move. He wanted to make it absolutely clear
that he could never support any questionable practice. He was even told that
money was being spent like water to buy the votes in favour of a united Bengal.
He appreciated unity, but not at the cost of honour and justice. He was taken
to task for supporting Sarat Bose. He was undoubtedly his friend. He was in
correspondence with him. But he would never be guilty of supporting anything
that could not be publicly and honestly defended. That was his universal
practice. He did not believe in questionable means even to secure a worthy
end.
In a message read out on June g, Gandhi explained the reason for his not
actively opposing the Congress acceptance of the new British plan.
One correspondent wrote to him that he who had once proclaimed that the
vivisection of India would mean a vivisection of himself, had weakened. The
writer had also invited him to lead the opposition to the proposed division. The
speaker could not plead guilty to the taunt. When he made the statement, he
was voicing the public opinion. But when the public opinion was against him,
was he to coerce it ? The writer had also argued that he had often held that
there was to be no compromise with untruth or evil. The assertion was correct.
But the application must also be correct. He made bold to say that if only non-
Muslim India was with him, he could show the way to undo the proposed
partition. But then he admitted that he had become or was rather considered a
back number. We had forgotten the lesson we had learnt for the past thirty
years. We had forgotten that untruth was to be conquered by truth and
violence by nonviolence, impatience by patience and heat by cold. We had
begun to fear our own shadows. Many had invited him to lead the opposition.
But there was nothing in common between them and him, except the
opposition. The basis of his opposition seemed to be different from that of the
inviters. Could love and hate combine ?
Some people criticized the acceptance of dominion status during the interim
period. And they went so far as to say that the drama of independence was
finished once for all. The present Viceroy was more dangerous than his
predecessors, who dangled before them the naked sword. He had tricked the
Congress into submission by his persuasive powers. Gandhi said that the
correspondent had paid a high, though unintended, compliment to the Viceroy
and had at the same time belittled the intellectual capacity of the Congress
ministers. Why could not the writer see the obvious ? The country, the vocal
part of it, was with them. They were no fools. They disliked dismemberment of
India as much as any other. But they were the people's representatives in
power. If the writer was in power, things might not have been different. In any
ease, it was not dignified to swear at the Viceroy if the leaders were ill-chosen
or if the people were not true to the country. "As the king, so the people" was
less true than "As the people, so the king."
If the British were to quit by August 15 next instead of by June 1948, they had
to hand over power in some way. That was the way of dominion status. Indians
could discard dominion status as soon as they were ready with their own
constitution. And if they themselves weakened and wanted to continue the
dominion status, there was no point in blaming the British. That would be
cowardliness, remarked Gandhi at the prayer congregation on June 10.
Gandhi had been receiving many angry protests against what he had said about
the movement for a united sovereign Bengal. He had been asked to disclose the
names of his informants and to hold a public inquiry. If informants were wrong,
then they should be punished. If they were right, those who had accepted the
bribes should be punished. Gandhi's answer was that the protests were uncalled
for. If the cap did not fit any head, there was nothing to worry about. And who
was he, a private individual, to punish anybody ? That was the function of the
law. The only effective sanction was an enlightened public opinion, as Tolstoy
used to say. The distinguished soldier and, later on, a pacifist held that public
opinion was a much more potent instrument than war or strife. The speaker
called this non-violence. The great Mr. Churchill had won the last war for
England. He was a scholar and a fine orator. But public opinion had dethroned
him. In India, too, if the public opinion was awake and strong, no one could do
anything in opposition to it. Creation of effective public opinion depended on
the cultivation of true courage, born of truthfulness and non-violence.
In the same connection, another correspondent harshly rubuked Gandhi for

giving credit to any statement however false and malicious, stupid and
unfounded it might be, if it came from those in whom he had confidence.
Gandhi replied on June 11 that he had done a good turn to his friends and even
to those who might consider themselves his enemies by scotching the rumour if
it was false, especially when he was himself accused of lending assistance to
corrupt practices. He willingly pleaded guilty to the charge of wanting a united
Bengal. He would not mind standing alone in defence of such unity, if it could
be preserved with dignity, honesty and willingness on both sides. For him it was
no political game or bargain. What he wanted was a heart unity. And although
the provincial Muslim League had turned down the proposition, he made bold to
say that it was possible for the Muslims of Bengal to give an assurance,
accompanied by tangible action, that the Hindus had nothing to fear from the
Muslim majority and there would be no partition. Unfortunately the omens
appeared to be the contrary.
The division of India, said Gandhi, was now a certainty, so far as man could
see. He asked the people not to grieve over it. He had never believed in Qaid-
e-Azam Jinnah's two-nation theory and never would. Change of religion could
never change nationality. He was as much of Pakistan as of Hindustan. If they
acted in like manner, Jinnah Saheb would not be able to prove his theory in
spite of the geographical division of India.
Jinnah Saheb had rebuked his followers for calling him Shahanshah-e- Pakistan
and had said that in Pakistan the minorities would get a square deal. And if he
lived up to what he had said, things then would go right. Having got what they
wanted, Muslims were expected now to live in peace with their non-Muslim
fellow countrymen. In Pakistan they had to assure religious freedom and equal
rights for all. Why should the Hindus in Sind, for instance, be unable to live
there in peace and in security? If a single Hindu left Sind, Muslims should plead
with him and welcome him back. To the Hindus he would say that they should
shed all fear. No one could force them to change their religion or status.
To Hindus in the Hindu majority areas he would say that they should do the
right thing irrespective of what Muslims did. Thus only the Hindus would be
able to disprove Jinnah Saheb's two-nation theory.
Gandhi had a visit from some non-Muslims from stricken Rawalpindi. He

inquired of them whether, now that the Pakistan was almost a settled fact,
there was any difference for the better in the behaviour of the Muslims round
them. He was startled to be informed that the difference was undoubtedly
there, but for the worse. How happy indefcd he would be if he could be told
truly that the information was coloured, or that it was wholly wrong and that
the fact was that the Muslims were going out of their way to fraternize with the
Hindus, the Sikhs and the other non-Muslims.
Some friends from Campbellpore had come and they wanted to know whether
they could live with safety in Campbellpore. Gandhi told them that he had no
fear of any man, much less of Pakistan, for he feared only God. Therefore, he
had no hesitation in saying to them that they should have no fear about their
own safety because the area which they occupied was now to be part of
Pakistan. His assurance, however, could not produce much or any effect on
them. They were frightened like most of the other non-Muslims who had to
reside in Pakistan. In reality, therefore, it was not he but Jinnah Saheb and the
other Muslim leaders of the Muslim League who had to give convincing
assurances to all the frightened non-Muslims and dispel their fears. He
suggested that the Qaid-e-Azam should lay all his cards on the table, so that
the world could see what he meant by the Muslim majority rule, otherwise
called Pakistan.
There was the talk of a referendum in the Frontier Province. He would suggest
to Jinnah Saheb that he should meet the Frontier ministers and Badshah Khan,
as also the Khudai Khidmatgars, and tell them why they should be in Pakistan.
If the terms were attractive, then he would have no hesitation in advising his
Frontier friends to be part of Pakistan and thus avoid conflict between Pathan
and Pathan and keep their Pathanistan intact in a federation of the majority
Muslim states. Surely, it was not proper to divide the Pathans by a referendum
into two parties.
It was open to the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs and all the other communities
even now to come together and to treat the Viceregal document of June 3 as a
scrap of paper in so far as further steps were concerned. It did nothing but
register an agreement between the Congress and the League. It was an
agreement which neither party liked. The Congress spokesmen had made it
clear that they could not be willing partners in any division of India. Jinnah
Sahab did not show any enthusiasm about the agreement, inasmuch as Bengal
and the Punjab were to be partitioned. In whatever direction he looked, the
only way he could see through the surrounding darkness was that all parties
should come together and evolve a concerted plan so as to prevent further
friction and further bloodshed.
On June 12, Gandhi spoke at the prayer congregation as to how should the
Indian Union act:
"Does the readjustment of the geography of India mean two nations? I admit
that the division having been agreed upon, unity becomes somewhat difficult.
But assuming that the Muslims of India look upon themselves as a nation
distinct from the rest, they cannot become so, if the non- Muslims do not
respond. The Muslim majority areas may call themselves Pakistan, but the rest
and the largest part of India need not call itself Hindustan. In contradistinction
to Pakistan, it will mean the abode of the Hindus. Do the Hindus feel so? Have
the Parsis, the Christians and Jews born in India and the Anglo-Indians who do
not happen to have the white skin, any other home than India ? I will omit the
Muslims for the time being. I suppose such is the reason why Jawaharlalji
refuses to call the non- Pakistan areas as Hindustan and loves to call them by
the proud name of the Union of Indian Republics, from which some Muslim
majority areas have seceded. History has shown that the possession of proud
names does not make the possessors great. Men and groups are known not by
what they call themselves but by their deeds. How is this Union to behave ?
Already the taunt is being levelled against the Union of India that the much
maligned Caste Hindus who, as I have shown in an earlier speech, are in a
hopeless minority, will ostracize the millions of the Scheduled Classes and, I
will add, an equal number of Shudras and the so-called aboriginal tribes. And
then what of the other insignificant minorities ? The so-called Caste Hindus are
on their trial. Will they recognize and do their obvious duty and give place to
the least in the Union by affording them all the facilities to rise to the highest
status ? And what will they do to the Muslim minorities ? Will they be regarded
as aliens or will they be made to feel that they cannot be treated as aliens in
their own land and that the Muslims will have all the opportunity that the
tallest in the Union enjoy? Heaven forbid that the Caste Hindus so behave as to
prove Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah's thesis that the Muslims and the Hindus are separate
nations. Will they rise to the occasion and by their character and bravery,
incorruptibility and toleration prove to the Muslims of Pakistan that in the
Union there is no discrimination whatsoever on the ground of religion or caste
or colour and that the only test is merit which every industrious citizen of the
Union will have ample opportunity to acquire.
"I am told that there are people in the Union who have wrongly come to the
conclusion that now there is no occasion for Hindustani, a compatible mixture
of Hindi and Urdu. There are many holy shrines of Islam. Will they be honoured
equally with the others ? Will it be the same with the Muslim seats of learning ?
On the proper treatment of these and such other questions, depends the real
unity of India and I say this irrespective of what is said or done in Pakistan. 'Tit
for tat' is the law of the brute or unregenerate man. Such men have had their
day. The world is sick of the application of the law of the jungle. It is thirsting
for the brave law of love for hate, truth for untruth, toleration for intoleration.
If this law of regenerate men is not to rule the world, it is thrice doomed."
On the 13th, Gandhi referred to the sad news which he had heard that day that
Sir G. P. Ramaswami Aiyar, the Dewan of Travancore, an able administrator and
a writer, had banned the State People's Congress from holding any public
meetings and, if the newspapers were to be believed, had said that on August
15th, when the British transferred power to the Indian hands, Travancore would
declare itself an independent state. If any Travancoreans objected, then they
were at liberty to leave the state. The speaker would like to know how the
Travancoreans were expected to leave the land of their birth. Evidently, Sir C.
P. was quite content for Travancore to remain in India, so long as the British
King was Emperor of India, but the moment the power passed into Indian
hands, he wanted Travancore not to join the Union of India. It was an amazing
position and wholly unworthy of any state. If the British were going to be party
to such conduct, it would be to their lasting shame and he fervently hoped that
the British would act on the square. And what now applied to Travancore
applied equally to Hyderabad also. The Nizam's firman, if the newspaper
reports again were to be believed, was wholly wrong. Ninety per cent of the
population in Hyderabad was non-Muslim. This state, as indeed all the states,
belonged to their people. The rulers had the right to exist only if they became
the trustees and servants of the people. Times had changed, and if the princes
did not take time by the forelock, they would cease to be. The Congress had
been a true friend of the states from the very beginning. He cited the instance
of Mysore in Dadabhai's time. The Congress had also served Kashmir, Baroda
and the other states. It had no desire to annihilate them, but the princes could
not afford to disregard this great organization which represented the people in
the states, as it sought to represent the princes. As for himself, he had always
been a friend of the princes and of all who possessed this world's goods. He
wanted through his friendship to bring them close to the poor and needy, near
to the bhangis, of whom he was one. And lie fervently appealed to them with
all the emphasis at his command to come into the constituent assembly. He did
not mind which it was. India was, alas! being partitioned because of the Hindu-
Muslim quarrels. Let not the princes attempt to create any further separatism.
He hoped that God would give the necessary wisdom not only to the princes but
also to Lord Mountbatten. As Britain's last Viceroy, he must not leave this
country in needless strife.
On the following day Gandhi received a telegram from Sir C. P. saying that
Travancore was willing to come into the Constituent Assembly of a United
India, but if there were to be two independent Indias, Travancore which had
never been conquered would maintain an independent status, while working in
the closest co-operation with the rest of India and entering into necessary
agreements and treaties on matters of common concern. The dewan further
stated that the majority of the people of Travancore were in favour of an
independent Travancore. Referring to the telegram, Gandhi said that he was

sorry that he was no wiser on the main issue. He could not help noticing a grave
omission in the wire. Was there a ban on the State People's Congress? If so,
why?
If Travancore would have come in, provided there was no division or, in more
precise language, no secession from the Union, then surely this state should not
treat secession as a signal for the Balkanization of India. Travancore was
independent when there was no politically unified India. Now, that there was
secession on purely religious grounds, he would have expected a man like Sir C.
P. . to advise the Maharaja of Travancore in no way to emphasize the secession
by using, wholly wrongly, the vicious example set by the All-India Muslim
League.
He made bold to declare that if a referendum were taken, the Christians of

Travancore as also the Hindus, not excluding the untouchables, would then vote
against Sir C. P.'s strange idea of an independent Travancore, in which he
hugged the suzerainty of the British, but he rejected the suzerainty of the
Union of the people of India. If Sir C. P. was unfortunately unable to appreciate
his appeal and argument, he hoped the other princes would recognize the
obvious wisdom of making common cause with the people of India in which,
without fear of contradiction, he included the people of the states.
Speaking at the A.I.C.C. meeting which was being held in Delhi on the 14th and
15 th of June, Gandhi said :
"There was a time when I told everyone to leave the Indian states alone. At
that time we were engaged in a very grim fight against the third power. The
times have changed. India is now on the threshold of independence. Hyderabad
and Travancore are talking of becoming independent states. Such talk is vain. I
congratulate the majority of the princely states who have decidcd to join the
Constituent Assembly. If they have come wholeheartedly, they are quite safe as
servants and trustees. They must march with the times.
"It is amazing that the princes, who were virtual slaves of the British, should
spurn an honourable position in the Union of India and should want to be
independent. The Indian Union are not inimical to the princes. But today when
the reins of the Government have come into'the peoples' hands, they have
jealously to guard the welfare of the whole of India. The people of the states
arc with us. If the princes becomc independent, it can only be at the cost of
the freedom of the people of the states. And so far as I know India, such a thing
will never be tolerated. The princes must read the writing on the wall."
The Congress resolution on the states declared: "The A.I.C.C. cannot admit the
right of any state in India to declare its independence and to live in isolation
from the rest of India. That would be a denial of the course of the Indian
history and of the objectives of the Indian people today. The A.I.C.C. trusts
that the rulers of the states will appreciate fully the situation as it exists today
and will in full co-operation with their people enter as democratic units in the
Union, thereby serving the cause of their own people, as well as of India as a
whole."
The main resolution on the statement of June 3 was moved by Pandit Pant and
was seconded by Maulana Azad. President Kripalani received notice of thirteen
amendments to the resolution. He ruled out of order eight amendments. The
rest of the amendments were allowed to be moved. Over thirty members gave
notice of their intention to speak on the resolution. The debate on the
resolution lasted for two days.
Many were the arguments put forth for and against the main resolution. Pandit
Pant recommended acceptance of the plan because, he said, it was better than
the Cabinet Mission plan. On the other hand, Maulana Azad held the view that
the Cabinet Mission scheme was better than the partition proposal, but
supported the resolution because a settlement must be reached at all cost to
make the British quit India at the earliest. Aad compared the partition with an
attempt to divide a river by drawing a line on its waters. But a concession had
to be made to the League's obstinacy. He was sure that there would be a
reunion before long.
Mr. Purshottamdas Tandon considered the June 3 plan so harmful that he was
even prepared to suffer the British rule a little longer than pay this price for
achieving the freedom. Dr. Choithram Gidwani characterized the resolution as a

surrender to the Muslim League's violence. Jagat Narain Lai contended that the
A.I.C.C. had in May 1942 unequivocally declared its opposition to any plan of
partition and could not go back on it. Sardar Patel admitted that nobody liked
the division of India but there were stark realities of which they should take
notice. He was afraid of one thing and that was that all their toils should not go
to waste or prove unfruitful. They all worked for independence and they should
see as large a part of this country as possible become free and strong. Here was
a chance for India to attain her independence. Was she going to throw it away ?
They had now a great opportunity to develop over three-fourths of India.
Addressing the A.I.C.C. for forty minutes, Gandhi commended the Working
Committee resolution accepting the June 3 plan. The A.I.C.C., he stated, had
absolute freedom to accept or to reject the resolution. The rejection or
amendment of the resolution would mean lack of confidence in the president
and Working Committee and they must naturally resign. The Working
Committee as their representative had accepted the plan and it was the duty of
the A.I.C.C. to stand by them.
Those who talked in terms of an immediate revolution or of an upheaval in the

country would achieve it by throwing out this resolution, but then he asked if
they had the strength to take over the reins of the Congress and the
Government. "Well, I have not that strength today or else I would declare
rebellion today, " he added.
Gandhi emphasized that he was not pleading on behalf of the Working

Committee, but the A.I.C.C. must weigh the pros and cons of the rejection of
the resolution. His views on the plan were well known. The acceptance of the
plan did not involve only the Working Committee. There were two other parties
to it, namely, the British Government and the Muslim League. If at this stage
the A.I.C.C. rejected the Working Committee's decision, what would the world
think of it? All parties had accepted it and surely it would not be proper for the
Congress to go back on its word. If the A.I.C.C. felt so strongly on this point
that this plan would do a lot of injury to the country, then it could reject the
plan. The consequence of such a rejection would be the finding of a new set of
leaders who could constitute not only the Congress Working Committee but also
take charge of the Government. If the opponents of the resolution could find
such a set of leaders, the A.I.C.C. could then reject the resolution, if it so felt.
They should not forget, at the same time, that peace in the country was very
essential at this juncture.
The Congress was opposed to Pakistan and he also steadfastly opposed the
division of India. Yet, he had come before the A.I.C.C. to urge the acceptance
of the resolution on India's division. Sometimes certain decisions, however
unpalatable they might be, had to be taken.
The A.I.C.C., he stressed, should not accept the resolution out of any false
sense of moral compulsion but they should do so from conviction and a sense of
duty. The A.I.C.C. could reject the resolution, if they could be certain that
such a rejection would not lead to turmoil and strike in the country. The
members of the Congress Working Committee were old and tried leaders who
were responsible for all the achievements of the Congress hitherto and, in fact,
they formed the backbone of the Congress and it would be most unwise, if not
impossible, to replace them at the present juncture. All Congressmen should
understand what their duty was at this time and to do it silently. Out of
mistakes sometimes good emerged. Rama was exiled because of his father's
mistake, but ultimately his exile resulted in the defeat of Ravana, the evil.
"I admit that whatever has been accepted is not good," he then added. "But I
am confident good will certainly emerge out of it." The A.I.C.C., he hoped, was
capable of extracting good out of this defective plan, even as gold was
extracted from dirt.
Appealing for communal unity, he said that the plan put both Hinduism and
Islam on trial. Would Hindus, he asked, prove by their conduct that Jinnah
Saheb was wrong? The plan had afforded them an opportunity to disprove
Jinnah Saheb's theory that the Muslims were a separate nation and were
something apart from the Hindus. Even the smallest minority should now feel
secure and happy in India. A Harijan would not consider India to be truly
democratic and free until untouchability was completely eradicated. He would
urge that by accepting an imperfect plan they could all the same extract good
out of it and make India a land where there was no discrimination and where
there were no inequalities.
At the conclusion of the debate on June 15, the resolution was passed, 157
voting for it and 15 against it, with some abstentions.
The following resolution was adopted by the A.I.C.C., welcoming the decision
of the British Government to transfer power to Indian people:
"The Congress accepted the British Cabinet Mission's statement of the 16th May
1946, as well as the subsequent interpretation thereof dated December 6,
1946, and-has been acting in accordance with it in the Constituent Assembly,
which was constituted in terms of the Cabinet Mission's plan. That assembly has
been functioning for over six months and has nQt only declared its objectives to
be the establishment of an Independent Sovereign Republic of India and a just
social q,nd economic order, but has also made considerable progress in framing
the constitution for the free Indian Union on the basis of fundamental rights
guaranteeing freedom and equality of opportunity to all Indians.
"In view, however, of the refusal of the Muslim League to accept the plan of
the 16th May and to participate in the Constituent Assembly, and further in
view of the policy of the Congress that 'it cannot think in terms of compelling
the people in any territorial unit to remain in an Indian Union against their
declared and established will,' the A.I.C.C. accepts the proposals embodied in
the announcement of June 3, which have laid down a procedure for
ascertaining the will of the people concerned.
"The Congress has consistently upheld that the unity of India must be
maintained. And ever since its inception, more than sixty years ago, the
National Congress has laboured for the realization of a free and united India,
and millions of our people have suffered in this great cause. Not only the
labours and sacrifices of the past two generations but the long course of India's
history and tradition bear witness to this essential unity. Geography and the
mountains and the seas fashioned India as she is and no human agency can
change that shape or come in the way of her final destiny. Economic
circumstances and the insistent demands of the international affairs make the
unity of India still more necessary. The picture of India we have learnt to
cherish will remain in our minds and hearts. The A.I.C.C. earnestly trusts that
when present passions have subsided, India's problems will be viewed in their
proper perspective and the false doctrine of two nations in India will be
discredited and discarded by all.
"The proposals of June 3, 1947 are likely to lead to the secession of some parts
of the country from India. However much this may be regretted, the A.I.C.C.
accepts this possibility, in the circumstances now prevailing.
"Although freedom is now at hand, the times are difficult, and the situation in
India demands vigilance and a united front of all those who care for the
independence of India. At this time of crisis and change, when unpatriotic and
anti-social forces are trying to injure the cause of India and her people, the A.-
I.C.C. appeals to and demands of every Congressman and the people generally
to forget petty differences and disputes and to stand by vigilant, disciplined
and prepared to serve the cause of India's freedom and defend it with all their
strength from all who may seek to do it injury."
Kripalani, in his concluding speech at the A.I.C.C., said :
"I have been with Gandhiji for the last thirty years. I joined him in Champaran.
I have never swayed in my loyalty to him. It is not a personal but a political
loyalty. Even when I have differed from him I have considered his political
instinct to be more correct than my elaborately reasoned attitudes. Today also
I feel that he with his supreme fearlessness is correct and my stand is
defective. Why then am I not with him now? It is because I feel that he has as
yet found no way of tackling the problem on a mass basis. When he taught us
non-violent non-co-operation, he showed us a definite method which we had at
least mechanically followed. Today he himself is groping in the dark. He was in
Noakhali. His efforts eased the situation. Now he is in Bihar. And the situation
is again eased. But this does not solve in any way the flare-up in the Punjab. He
says he is solving the problem of Hindu-Muslim unity for the whole of India in
Bihar. May be. But it is difficult to see how that is being done. There are no
definite steps, as in non-violent non-co-operation, that leads to the desired

goal.
"And then unfortunately for us today though he can enunciate policies, they
have in the main to be carried out by others and these others are not converted
to his way of thinking. It is under these painful circumstances that I have
accepted the division of India."
On June 15, Gandhi's written message for the prayer gathering was an answer
to his critics and an emphatic reaffirmation in non-violerce under all
circumstances:
"I would love to attempt an answer to a question which recently has been
addressed to me from more than one quarter of the globe. It is : How can you
account for the growing violence among your own people on the part of
political parties for the furtherance of political ends ? Is this the result of the
thirty years of non-violent practice for ending the British rule? Does your
message of non-violence still hold good for the world? I have condensed the
sentiments of my correspondents in my own language.
"In reply I must confess my bankruptcy, but not that of non-violence. I have
already said that the non-violence that was offered during the past thirty years
was that of the weak. Whether it is a good enough answer or not is for the
others to judge. It must be further admitted that such nonviolence can have no
play in the altered circumstances. India has no experience of the non-violence
of the strong. It serves no purpose for me to continue to repeat that" the non-
violence of the strong is the strongest force in the world. The truth requires
constant and extensive demonstration. This I am now endeavouring to do to the
best of my ability. What if the best of my ability is very little? May I not be
living in a fool's paradise? Why should I ask the people to follow me in the
fruitless search? These are pertinent questions. My answer is quite simple. I ask
nobody to follow me. Everyone should follow his or her own inner voice. And if
he or she has no ears to listen to it, he or she should do the best he or she can.
In no case should he or she imitate others sheep-like.
"One more question has been and is being asked. If you are sure that India is
going the wrong way, why do you associate with the wrongdoers ? Why do you
not plough your own lonely furrow and have faith that if you are right, your
erstwhile friends and your followers will seek you out ? I regard this as a very
fair question. I must not attempt to argue against it. All I can say is that my
faith is as strong as ever. It is quite possible that my technique is faulty. There
are old and tried precedents to guide one in such a complexity. Only, no one
should act mechanically. Hence, I can say to all my counsellors that they should
have patience with me and even share my belief that there is no hope for the
aching world except through the narrow and the straight path of non-violence.
Millions like me may fail to prove the truth in their own lives — that would be
their failure, never of the eternal law."
02. Rights And Duties ( 1947 )
GANDHI observed silence on Sunday, June 15, one day earlier, so as to be able to
participate in the Working Committee meeting of June 16, 1947.
Travancore delegates to the A.I.C.C. saw Gandhi on his silence day. They told
him that there was no exaggeration in what he had said about the suppression
of the State Congress in Travancore. Meetings were held, lathi charges made
and thirty-five persons were arrested on the previous day. Free expression of
opinion was being gagged. Gandhi observed that he was convinced that
declaration of independence by the state was of no consequence in an
independent India. Such a declaration was tantamount to a declaration of war
against the free millions of India. Such a thing was inconceivable especially
when the particular prince had no backing of the people of his state. Indeed,
the audacity of such a declaration was amazing. It was possible when the
actions of the princes had the backing of the British power. "If I am not
mistaken things have changed," he said. Who was to become independent? The
princes or the people? His advice to Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar and all other
dewans was that if they were loyal to their princes, they should advise them to
join the Constituent Assembly.
In his prayer speech on June 16 Gandhi said that the A.I.C.C. passed its
resolution only yesterday, but he had received two newspaper cuttings, one
from a Nagpur newspaper purporting to report the speech of Pandit Shukla, the
Chief Minister of C. P., and the other criticizing the speech. The speech made
Pandit Shukla say, "It was Mr. Jinnah's claim that the Musalmans had a separate
culture and had a different religion and that in Pakistan only the Islamic law
would prevail. It would be very difficult for the non-Muslims to live in Pakistan
in such conditions. Pandit Shukla had pointed out that while there were
1,85,00,000 Hindus in the Muslim areas of British India, there were 3,00,00,000
Muslims in Hindu areas of British India. And these have lived in these parts for
generations. What would be the conditions of these, Pandit Shukla asked, and
said in reply that they would be treated as aliens. They will have no citizenship
rights. The grants that are being given today for their education will be
withdrawn and they will have to depend on their own resources."
Pointing to Minister Dr. Hasan who was sitting next to him, the Chief Minister
jocularly commented, "Dr. Hasan will not only have to quit the C. P. cabinet,
but that he would not be allowed to live in Wardha. He will have to seek
shelter elsewhere in Pakistan. Even though the religious and cultural freedom
may be conceded to the Musalmans living in Hindustan, they will have no
representation in the legislatures or in the services. They will have to maintain
their own institutions and they will be entitled to no Government grants."
If this, report was fairly accurate, the speech was unfortunate, although it
might have been made in lighter vein. Certainly, the Union provinces were not
going to be caught in the trap prepared for them, Gandhi emphasized. They
had to show by their action that the Muslim members in the provincial cabinet
were just as welcome as they were before and that no matter what was done in
the so-called Pakistan provinces, the Union provinces would be absolutely just
in their treatment of their Muslim brethren. Pakr'an too should make no
difference in their regard for the Muslims as was the other minorities. This,
however, had no reference to the apples of discord which the foreign power
had thrown in their midst such as separate electorates.
A young Maharashtrian couple wrote to Gandhi saying that their inner voice had
directed them to fight against the division of India and, therefore, they wanted
to go on a fast which they would break only if Pakistan was undone. The couple
wanted to fast in Gandhi's camp and asked for some place to stay. Gandhi told
them that he was not staying in his own house and he could not offer them
hospitality in a place where he himself was a guest. So the couple went on a
fast in front of the Bhangi Colony. Addressing them in the prayer gathering on
June 17, Gandhi said that the couple did not know the science of the public
fasts. So far as he knew it, the fast would be wholly unjustified and wrong. It
could produce no effect on him much less on the others. He could only dissuade
the couple from the false step. He advised them to follow the course that he
had suggested, namely, not to divide themselves from their Muslim brethren
and sisters, but to regard themselves as one, and, if their example was
followed by all the inhabitants of the Union, Pakistan would then be wholly
inoperative. If the hearts of the non-Muslims were sound, the physical partition
could produce no ill effect. He, therefore, invited the couple to devote their
energy in the constructive channel he had indicated. He admitted that time
seemed to be running against them, but that only meant that their faith was on
its trial.
The couple wrote back to say that they could not go against the dictates of
their conscience and break their fast. Addressing them on the second day,
Gandhi said that all possessed a conscience but it was not fully awakened in all.
Could a thief claim to be following his conscience when he committed theft, or
could the maddened Hindu and Muslim mob claim to be acting according to the
dictates of their conscience when they killed each other and butchered
innocent children?
He claimed to know more about the science of fasting in India than any one
else, and practically all those who went on a fast did follow his advice. In his
opinion, the couple were wrong in persisting with the fast and he requested
them to give it up. They were young and inexperienced. Gandhi appealed to
them to listen to the advice of one grown old in the knowledge and the
technique of fasting. He suggested that their conscience was asleep. It was no
use learning scriptures by heart parrot-like. Man could only live according to
them, if he had digested what he had read. Only then would his conscience be
really awakened.
Gandhi's advice had the desired effect and the couple took some milk and fruits
in Gandhi's camp at night. They wrote to him that henceforth they would
devote themselves to the constructive effort prescribed by him.
A note appeared in papers that the Muslim League and the Congress members
of the Partition Committee had agreed before the Viceroy that the partition
would be effected in a brotherly spirit. It was a good thing that the Viceroy had
been able to achieve. But then he knew that sweet words buttered no parsnips.
He would dance with joy, when he found a series of acts following the words.
The world was tired of eloquent speeches and writings. Both the things were
overdone. Hunger was appeased by even a dry crust of bread without butter
but never by honied promises.
On June 18, Gandhi and Ghaffar Khan met Jinnah at the Viceroy's House and in
accordance with arrangement at the meeting Ghaffar Khan later met Jinnah at
the latter's house. Ghaffar Khan was straining every lerve to find some means of
avoiding bloodshed in his province. Gandhi 'equested the prayer audience to
pray with him for the success of Ghaffar EChan's mission. But then he warned
them against disappointment, if their prayers were not answered in the way
they might have expected. If they were inclined to judge God that way, then
they were much mistaken. God answered prayer in His own way, not theirs. His
ways were different from the ways of mortals. And hence, they were
inscrutable. Prayer presupposed faith. No prayer went in vain. Prayer was like
any other action. It bore fruit whether we saw it or not, and the fruit of heart
prayer was far more potent than action so called.
Referring to the movement for an independent N.W. Frontier state called

Pathanistan, Gandhi said that the movement had come to stay for it was a solid
movement. If it was an anti-Indian movement, it was a bad and mischievous
thing. If it was meant to conserve, as he thought it was, Pathan life and
culture, it deserved every encouragement. Geographically it was only a bit of
India; numerically too the Pathans were indeed very few compared to the
millions of India. But their warlike qualities and their position on the map of
India gave them an importance all their own. The Frontier has been a Congress
province. It was so when the Congress was in the wilderness. And it was now
too, when it was in power. It was also represented on the Constituent
Assembly. But now it was face to face with a very delicate position. There was
the referendum immediately to be held. Both the Congress and the Muslim
League were committed to it. It was not open to any one party to vary the
terms. The issue was to be Pakistan or Hindustan. And this had a sinister
meaning in the context of what had happened in front of them. Were they to
be with the Hindus or with the Muslims? The Congress was not a Hindu
organization. It never was and he hoped that it never would be. But how could
the Pathan mind grasp the difference in the midst of this confusion becoming
worse confounded from day to day. He would advise the Congress to make its
position clear and would ask the Muslim League likewise. Let both honour the
Pathan sentiment and let the Pathans have their own constitution for the
internal affairs and administration. It would promote the Pathan solidarity,
avoid internal conflict, and retain the Pushtu culture and the Pushtu language.
If they could do thaty they would be better able unitedly to federate with
Pakistan or the Union of India. And this he would advise, whether there was or
was not a referendum. Any premature referendum would be a leap in the dark.
Several refugees from the Frontier Province and some from the Punjab had
seen Gandhi and told him their tale of woe. Consequently he motored with
Nehru to Hardwar on June 21. Speaking to a deputation of sixteen
representatives of the refugees, Gandhi said that it was useless and depressing
to recount the story of the horrors they had gone through. "But every affliction
has its own rich lesson to teach, if we would learn it. I hear that many of those
who were well-to-do in the past are idling away their time in playing cards and
even gambling. Some are reported to be buying property or resorting to the
other methods of making money. I call it criminal behaviour. If I were given the
rare opportunity of making common cause with poor refugees, I would share
with them my talents and such riches as I had brought with me. All of you
should now make a co-operative effort, so that where you go ultimately you
lead a better and corporate life as a result of the life lived in Hardwar."
On his return from Hardwar, Gandhi read in the newspapers a colourful

description of the grand ceremonial that wras scheduled to mark the in-
troduction in Parliament of the Independence Bill, announcing the birth of two
nations. On June 23, Gandhi wrote to Sardar Patei: "Look at the Reuter's wire in
today's papers. The bill will create two nations! What is the value then of these
rompous talks that are going on here? If you have not given your consent to it,
you can prevent this crime. After the bill is passed, nobody is going to listen to
you."
It was not possible for Gandhi to speak to the 32,000 refugees at Hardwar owing
to the lack of loud speaker arrangements. He, therefore, took the opportunity
of the Delhi meeting the following day and reiterated his advice given to the
deputation at Hardwar.
June 23 being Gandhi's day of silence, the following message was read out after
the prayer:
"This division of India, with a subdivision of the provinces, puts us on our

mettle. The papers today talk of a grand ceremonial to take place in London
over the division of India into 'two nations' which were only the other day one
nation. What is there to gloss over in the tragedy? We have hugged the belief
that though we part, we do so as friends and as brothers, belonging to one
family. Now if the newspaper report is correct, the British will make of us two
nations and that with a flourish of trumpets. Is that to be the parting shot? I
hope not.
"If the major partner is true to his salt, the foreshadowed wisdom can be
confounded, not in the shape of avoiding partition, however distasteful it might
be, but by right behaviour on the part of the major partner by always acting as
one nation, by refusing to treat Muslim minorities as aliens in their own home.
"This means a revolutionary reform in the religion of the major partner. Let us
not shut our eyes to the plain fact. The untouchables or the Scheduled Classes,
are the target, because they are the weakest point of Hinduism. One reads
reports of the Muslim League speakers holding forth that the Scheduled Classes
in Pakistan can have separate electorate. Is that to be a call for joining Islam of
the Pakistan type ? I do not wish to recall the tales of forcible conversions. But
having heard so much from their own mouths, I shudder to contemplate the
worst. What is the answer to this fear or threat? It is undoubtedly that there
should be no untouchability whatsoever in Hinduism, no Scheduled Classes,
therefore, in India, and no caste divisions whatsoever in the eye of the law.
Hindus are all one, no high or low. All the neglected classes such as the
Scheduled Classes and the so- called aboriginal classes should receive special
treatment in the matter of education, housing, etc. On the electoral roll they
will be one. This must never mean a worse state than the present one, but
better in every way. Will Hinduism come up to the high level, or will it court
extinction by hugging the infamous superstitions and aping bad manners?"
Addressing the prayer meeting on June 24, he referred to the several

interviewers and correspondents who wrote harsh letters. They accused him of
partiality towards the Muslims. He could not plead guilty to the charge. The
latest charge was that he was partial to the Muslims when he said that,
irrespective of what they did in Pakistan, the majority community had to be
honourable and just towards the Muslims in Hindu-majority provinces and was
never to regard them as aliens.
Gandhi saw no partiality in the statement by which he still stood. His advice
must be rejected, if it did not appeal to their hearts or to their sense of right
and wrong. Every person, as every institution, and above all, every religion,
was to be judged not by the amount of atrocities or the wrong committed but
by the right conduct. And who could dare say that what he had suggested was
less than right?
That the Hindus of larger Hindustan could not or would not do the right was
another question. So much the worse for those who did not do the right, no
matter whether they were Hindus or Muslims or any other. The law was no
respecter of persons. Only for the occasion his remarks were addressed to the
Hindus. For, it was they, who by their action, were to prove or to disprove the
two-nation theory
What was now happening in Lahore, in Amritsar and in Gurgaon was a matter of
shame and sorrow. He was informed, with what truth he did not know, that the
parties were fairly matched and were bent on fighting it out. What the "if" was,
he did not know. Was the suicidal strife to continue, Pakistan or no Pakistan?
Why could not the combatants honestly come together and decide to stop arson
and murder? Must they look to the members of the ruling race to suppress the
riots? The end of the alien rule was imminent. Would to God that the people
stopped the savagery and showed mankind the better and the brave way.
In conclusion he exposed the fallacious argument put forth by Sir C. P.

Ramaswami Aiyar. Sir C. P. had observed that he could not understand why, if
Gandhi arid the Congress were willing to agree to an independent Pathan state,
they had any objection to an independent Travancore.
The analogy did not hold water, said Gandhi. Pathanistan was asked for by
Badshah Khan simply because he did not want to divide Pathan from Pathan on
the communal issue. The Pathans wanted to frame their own constitution and
then when the full face of Pakistan and the Indian Union was exposed to view,
the Pathans would decide which state to join. They did not want to be a third
state, nor did they want to be the slaves of one or the other. They wanted to
have the fullest autonomy in their province, just as any of the other provinces
had, owing their allegiance to the Centre but allowing no interference in their
internal affairs. And if Badshah Khan meant anything different, then he would
have no hesitation in breaking with him, a friend though he was.
What Sir C. P. wanted, was a state independent of any of the two. If he was
allowed and if his example was followed by the others, India would be split up
into several states, a disaster too dreadful to contemplate. All these petty
states would need an emperor and the emperor who was now leaving might
even return with redoubled force.
The analogy between Travancore and the Frontier Province was again
misleading, in that, whereas Sir C. P. spoke for the maharaja, the Frontier
Pathans spoke as a jirga. The one was indeed unadulterated autocracy and the
other was full democracy.
In his conception of India the prince and the peasant were equal. The former
could exist only as a bona fide trustee of his people. He, therefore, advised Sir
C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar to retrace himself from the grave error into which he
was betrayed.
A correspondent had asked him as to how, having depended on British troops

for over a century, India could all of a sudden do without them. He observed at
the prayer meeting on June 25: "Another way of putting the same question
would be, 'Are you not unfit for swaraj?' "
He answered the question many years ago, Gandhi said. He would give the
same answer today. He had not a shadow of doubt that India would, when the
British troops were really withdrawn, feel that a great load had been lifted off
her back. No doubt, they would feel a little awkward for a day in this time of
internal strife and mutual distrust, not always ill-based. But they would feel
even as a man feels when he is removed from a stuffy room. This he said not
merely from the standpoint of non-violence, but even from that of violence.
They had to get out of helpless dependence and learn even to fight to the finish
among themselves. And it was a terrible lesson to go through. But it was any
day better than the present helplessness. He was quite certain that the present
Hindu-Muslim enmity was a base manufacture which was destined to die of
inanition. The pity undoubtedly was that the disease had invaded the
intelligentsia. But it did not become respectable on that account. It made the
intelligentsia disrespectable. Some of them would live to see the dawn of sanity
when they would laugh at their own folly. He hoped that the British would, up
to the last moment, resist the temptation to stay in India for the sake of giving
her peace. He wished he could convince them that they never gave India the
blessings of peace. It was, as Lord Halifax, when he was Viceroy as Lord Irwin,
had said on a memorable occasion, "the peace of the grave".
In reply to another question, namely, "Does not your non-violence now stink in
your nostrils?" Gandhi made bold to declare that the fragrance of non-violence
to him was never sweeter than when it was today amidst the stink of violence
of the most cowardly type that was being displayed in the cities of India, such
as, Lahore, Amritsar and other places. He was sorry to say that he wras
ashamed of his own countrymen, be they Hindu or Muslim. Neither became his
enemy because either chose to call himself so. He was aware that Qaid-e-Azam
Jinnah had rendered a disservice to Islam by calling Hindus, or better still the
Caste Hindus, "our enemies". He would plead with the so-called Caste Hindus
not to wear the cap but unselfishly and bravely prove themselves friends of
every Indian, because they loved India. There was grave danger of insanity
proving effective. Pakistan was there. Why would Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah not be
happy now that he had got Pakistan? Or had the poison gone too deep to be
brought under control? Was it a variety of and that worse than the atom bomb?
Let those who had eyes see the thing and avoid it well before India was caught
in the poisonous coil.
A correspondent asked whether he contemplated any kind of friendship or

relation with England when India ceased to be a dominion after it had its own
constitution.
Gandhi said in reply on June 27 that he contemplated the closest friendship

with England. And he was, therefore, indeed anxious that during this pregnant
period the Viceroy and his English advisers and the Englishmen in India did
nothing that was not strictly right. Most correct dealings with India as a whole
would leave no bitter memory behind.
The developments in the Frontier Province had left Gandhi extremely unhappy.
The way the partition was being effected, like the way the decision about
partition itself had come, did not spell peace. In the desperation to obtain
immediate relief, there was an unwillingness to grapple with the realities and
recourse was often being had to make-believe and false compromises. Gandhi's
prediction concerning the departing British power was coming true. In the past
that power had not hesitated to take the strongest measures when its interests
were at stake. But now it was not prepared to face up to the full logic of its
solemn declaration and put down violence by a firm hand.
Gandhi saw no good coming out of this. By accepting partition at the British
hands, the Congress had averted an open civil war but only at the cost of a
smouldering undeclared war. He would have preferred the naked reality. An
open fight, however ugly, ends in the natural course in a spell of peace. But an
undeclared war, which only the armed might of a third party prevents from
breaking out into an open fight, only intensifies the dangerous passions.
That was why he had been opposed to partition under the British aegis. He saw
in the consequences of partition, as they were now unfolding themselves, a
confirmation of his worst fears. The Congress High Command had agreed to the
vivisection of India to obtain a respite for themselves and the country from the
Muslim League's subversive activities. In Nehru's grim phrase, they had cut off
their head to get rid of their headache.
Hitherto Lord Mountbatten had managed one way or the other to prevent the
issue of the continuation of the Muslim League members in the Interim
Government from coming to a head. This became difficult after the acceptance
of the partition plan by the parties, particularly when the Congress again
pressed its demand in that regard. But Jinnah threatened to withdraw the
League's acceptance of the 3rd June plan if the Muslim League nominees were
removed from the Interim Government, and Lord Mountbatten fought shy of
taking any step which might jeopardize the chance of the Indian Independence
Bill being passed by Parliament. The Viceroy's advisers felt that the Viceroy
must not, in the circumstances, take any action that would jeopardize his
"objective and almost judicial status". As a way out, Lord Mountbatten
suggested that the controversial matters in the Interim Government should, so
far as possible, be put into cold storage for the time being while the
contentious issues arising in the course of day-to-day administration should be
referred to him for decision instead of being settled by a majority vote in the
Cabinet. This provided him with a temporary relief but the tension remained.
Conditions in the Punjab, Bengal and the Frontier Province grew from bad to
worse; the Sikhs became restive; the number of refugees from the north-west
Punjab increased; the minorities in Sind and in the Frontier Province felt more
and more insecure as to their future in Pakistan; round about the capital itself
pitched battles were being fought between the Muslim Meos of Gurgaon district
on the one side and the Hindu Ahirs and Jats on the other, and Sardar Patel
found that with the League's bastion firmly established in the Interim
Government and in the administration he could do nothing to cope with the
deteriorating situation. The outlook was grave.
On the day after the Council of the All-India Muslim League adopted its
resolution accepting the partition plan, Gandhi wrote to Lord Mountbatten to
bring home to him the danger of allowing matters to drift:
"The sooner you have a homogeneous ministry the better. In no case can the
League nominees work independently of the whole Cabinet. It is a vicious thing
that there is no joint responsibility for every act of individual members. . .
"The problem of the civil and military services . . . demands the same firm
handling . . . Gurgaon strife is an instance in point. So far as I know, one single
officer is responsible for the continuance of the mischief.
"Lastly, may I suggest that the attempt to please all parties is a fruitless and
thankless task. In the course of our conversation I suggested that equal praise
bestowed on both the parties was not meant. No praise would have been the
right thing. 'Duty will be merit when debt becomes a donation.' It is not too late
to mend. Your undoubted skill as a warrior was never more in demand than
today. Fancy a sailor without his fleet, save his mother wit!"
Lord Mountbatten had his own difficulties. This did not fit in with his plans. And
so the crisis continued. Gandhi decided once more to strive with him. A
meeting that he had with him on June 26 in that behalf, resulted in an
incident. The following day he wrote to Lord Mountbatten:
"I sent you a note in the afternoon. The time after the evening prayer and walk
I wish to devote to talking to you on certain matters I was able to touch but
could not develop when we met.
"I told the Parliamentary delegation that heralded the Cabinet Mission and the
Cabinet Mission itself that they had to choose between the two parties or even
three. They were doomed to fail if they tried to please all, holding them all to
be in the right. I had hoped that you were bravely and honestly trying to
extricate yourself from the impossible position. But my eyes were opened
when, if I understood you correctly, you said that Qaid- e-Azam Jinnah and the
League members were equally in the right with the Congress members and that
possibly Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah was more so. I suggested that this is not humanly
possible. One must be wholly right in the comparative sense. You have to make
your choice at this very critical stage in the history of this country. If you think
that Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah is on the whole more correct and more reasonable
than the Congress, you should choose the League as your advisers and in all
matters be frankly and openly guided by them.
"You threw out a hint that Qaid-e-Azam might not be able even to let you quit
even by 15th August especially if the Congress members did not adopt a helpful
attitude. This was for me a startling statement. I pointed the initial mistake of
the British being party to splitting India into two. It is not possible to undo the
mistake. But I hold that it is quite possible and necessary not to put a premium
upon the mistake. This does not in any way impinge upon the very admirable
doctrine of fair play. Fair play demands that I do not help the mistaken party to
fancy that the mistake was no mistake but a belated and only partial discharge
of an obligation.
"You startled me again by telling me that if the partition had not been made
during British occupation, the Hindus being the major party would have never
allowed partition and held the Muslims by force under subjection. I told you
that this was a grave mistake. The question of numbers was wholly untenable in
this connection. I cited the classic example of less than one hundred thousand
British soldiers holding India under utter subjection. You saw no analogy
between the two instances. I suggested the difference was only one of degree.
"I place the following for your consideration:
"(a) The Congress has solemnly declared that it would not hold by force any
province within the Union.
"(b) It is physically impossible for millions of caste-ridden Hindus to hold well-

knit though fewer millions of Muslims under subjection by force.
"(c) It must not be forgotten *hat Muslim dynasties have progressively subjected
India by exactly the same means as the English conquerors later did.
"(d) Already there has been a movement to win over to the Muslim side the so-
called Scheduled Classes and the so-called aboriginal races.
"(e) The Caste Hindus who are the bugbear are, it can be shown conclusively, a
hopeless minority. Of these the armed Rajputs are not yet nationalists as a
class. The Brahmins and theBanias are still untrained in the use of arms. Their
supremacy, where it exists, is purely moral. The Shudras count, I am sorry,
more as Scheduled Class than anything else. That such Hindu society by reason
of its mere superiority in numbers can crush millions of Muslims is an astounding
myth.
"This should show you why, even if I am alone, I swear by non-violence and
truth together standing for the highest order of courage before which the atom
bomb pales into insignificance, not to say of a fleet of dreadnoughts.
"I have not shown this to any of my friends."
Lord Mountbatten replied on the same day: "I am glad you wrote because afte^
reading your letter, I feel that almost from first to last I must have failed to
make clear to you my meaning. I am glad that you have not shown your letter
to others, since I should be very sorry that views should be attributed to me
which I did not, in fact, express. I hope you will agree to discuss these matters
again at our next meeting."
"I want to deal with one great evil that is afflicting the society today," observed
Gandhi on June 28 :
"The capitalist and the zamindar taik of their rights, the labourer on the other
hand of his, the prince of his divine right to rule, the ryot of his to resist it. If
all simply insist on rights and no duties, there will be utter confusion and
chaos.
"If instead of insisting on the rights, everyone does his duty, there wil1
immediately be the rule of order established among mankind. There is no such
thing as the divine right of the kings to rule and the humble duty of the ryots to
pay respectful obedience to their masters. Whilst it is true that these
hereditary inequalities must go, as being injurious to the well-being of the
society, the unabashed assertion of the rights of the hitherto downtrodden
millions is equally injurious, if not more so to the same well-being. The latter
be! aviour probably is calculated to injure the millions rather than the few
claimants of ore divine right or other rights. They could but die a brave or
cowardly death, but those few dead would not bring in the orderly life of
blissful contentment. It is, therefore, necessary to understand the correlation
of rights and duties. I venture to suggest that the rights that do not flow
directly from duty well performed, are not worth having. They will be
usurpations, sooner discarded the better. A wretched parent who claims
obedience from his children, without first doing his duty by them, excites
nothing but contempt. It is distortion of the religious precept for a dissolute

husband to expect compliance in every respect from his dutiful wife. But the
children who flout their parent, who is ever ready to do his duty towards them,
would be considered ungrateful and would harm themselves more than their
parent. The same can be said about husband and wife. If you apply this simple
and universal rule to the employers and labourers, the landlords and tenants,
the princes and their subjects, or the Hindus and the Muslims, you will find that
the happiest relations can be established in all walks of life, without creating
any disturbance in and dislocation of life and business, which you see in India as
in the other parts of the world. What I call the law of satyagraha is to be
deduced from an appreciation of duties and rights flowing therefrom."
Taking the relations between Hindus °nd Muslims for his illustration, Gandhi
resuming his remarks on the rights and duties, said on June 29 at the prayer
meeting:
"What is the duty of the Hindu towards his Muslim neighbour? His duty is to
befriend him as man, to share his joys and sorrows and to help him in distress.
The Hindu will then have the right to expect similar treatment from his Muslim
neighbour and he will probably get the expected response. Supposing the
Hindus are in a majority in a village with a sprinkling of Muslims in their midst,
the duty of the majority towards their Muslim neighbours is increased manifold,
so much so that the Muslims will not feel that their religion makes any
difference in the behavior of the Hindus towards them. The Hindus will then
earn the right, not before, that the Muslims will be natural friends with them
and, in times of danger, both the communities will act as one man. But suppose
that the few Muslims do not reciprocate the correct behaviour of the many
Hindus and show fight in every action, it will be a sign of unmanliness. What is
then the duty of the many Hindus? Surely not to overpower the Muslims by the
brute strength of the many. That will be usurpation of an unearned right. Their
duty will be to check their unmanly behaviour as they would that of their blood
brothers. It is unnecessary for me to dilate further upon the illustration. I will
close it by saying that the application will be exactly the same if the position is
reversed.
From what I have said, it is easy enough to extend the application with profit to
the whole of the present state which has become baffling, because people do
not apply in practice the doctrine of deriving every right from a prior duty well
performed.
"The same rule applies to the princes and the ryots. The former's duty is to act
as true servants of the people. They will rule not by right granted by some
outside authority, never by the right of the sword. They will rule by right of
service, of greater wisdom. They will then have the right to collect taxes
voluntarily paid and expect certain services equally voluntarily rendered, not
for themselves, but for the sake of the people under their care. If the princes
fail to perform this simple and primary duty, then the ryots not only owe no
return duty, but the duty devolves on them of resisting the princely usurpation.
It may be otherwise said that the ryots earn the right of resisting the usurpation
or misrule. But the resistance will become a crime against man in terms of
duty, if it takes the form of murder, rapine and plunder. Force that the
performance of duty naturally generates is the non-violent and invincible force
that satyagraha brings into being."
The question of the referendum in the Frontier Province now loomed large in
the public eye. Badshah Khan and his co-workers did not like being asked to
choose between Hindustan or Pakistan, bearing respectively the unjust
meaning: "Hindus or Muslims." How is Badshah Khan to get over the difficulty?
asked Gandhi at the prayer meeting on June 30. The Congress pledged its word
that there should be a referendum in consultation with Dr. Khan Sahib but
under the Viceroy's direct supervision. So it was going to take place at the
appointed time. The Khudai Khidmatgars would not exercise their votes, thus
providing a walk-over for the Muslim League, and at the same time doing no
violence to their conscience. Was there in this procedure any breach of the
terms of the referendum? The Khudai Khidmatgars who bravely fought the
British were not the men to shirk the defeat at the polls, he said. It was an
everyday occurrence for the parties to go to the polls in spite, sometimes, of
the chance of certain defeat. Defeat was no less certain for a boycotting party.
"The charge of the new cry of Pathanistan is being flung in Badshah Khan's
face," observed Gandhi. "Even before the Congress ministry came into being, so
far as I know, Badshah Khan had on the brain Pathan independence in internal
affairs. He does not want to create an additional state. If he can frame his own
local constitution, he will gladly make his choice of the one state or the other.
It is difficult for me to understand the objection to this yearning after the
Pathan autonomy, unless the object is to humiliate the Pathans and to tame
them into subjection.
"The more serious charge is that the Badshah is playing into the hands of
Afghanistan. I consider him to be incapable of any underhand dealing. He would
not allow the Frontier Province to be absorbed by Afghanistan.
"As his friend, and because I am his friend, I must admit one failing of his. He is
highly suspicious, especially of British professions and intentions. I would urge
on all to overlook this failing which is by no means peculiar to him. Only it does
not sit well on a leader of his eminence. I contend that though I have called it a
failing, and which it is in one way, in another it is to be regarded as a virtue in
that he cannot, even if he tries, conceal his thoughts. He is too honest to hide
them."
Gandhi's speeches were interpreted to mean that he was hankering after a

geographical reunion. This was supposed to be a vain hope calculated to irritate
Muslims. He was, therefore, advised to plead for co-operation and collaboration
between the two parts of India. He was not guilty of entertaining the vain
hope, he stated, though he would ever welcome a reunion based on an
appreciation of mutual interest. He had never any intention of unnecessarily
hurting the feeling of anyone, much less of his Musalman brethren. What,
however, he had pleaded for was more than co-operation. He was pleading for
the correct behaviour in every case on the part of the major community and he
warned them against the danger, in a spirit of vengeance, of falling into the
trap of the two-nation theory. To become or not to become a separate nation
was for the major party to determine.
They would never succeed in coming to a right decision, if they falsely prided
themselves on their superior numbers. To say that there was danger in numbers
was as true, as to say that there was safety in numbers. It was time to discard
pride and folly in exchange for humility and wisdom. Thus, he had received a
telegram from one Muslim League secretary complaining of ill-treatment by the
Hindus in large numbers of a few Muslim passengers. He did not know what
truth there was in the complaint. He was sorry that he received many such
messages which on investigation, were found to be devoid of truth or highly
exaggerated, but by way of illustration, the telegram was enough for him. He
would be glad to find that there was no truth in the message, but if there was,
it was proof of the arrogance and the ignorance of the Hindus, which would
discredit anybody.
He then referred to the visit he had from Sikh friends and a letter from one
Sikh youth who complained that he was neglecting those whom he claimed as
his friends. He was proud to claim friendship with the Sikhs. It was when the
tragedy of the Nankana Saheb took place that the Sikhs had undertaken to
follow his teaching of non-violence and truth, whereby they had lost nothing.
He personally did not see any difference between Sikhism and Hinduism. They
were varieties of the same faith. When he read the Granth Saheb written in the
Devanagari characters, he had not much difficulty in following the language.
The thought in the various bhajans of Nanak Saheb and other Sikh gurus was
derived from the Vedas and the Puranas. But, at the same time, he did not
mind the Sikhs regarding themselves as distinct from the Hindus. Thus
regarded, he admitted that theirs was a desolate condition. The remedy, no
doubt, was in their own hands.
The Sikhs had to come up to the infinitely higher bravery that nonviolence
would give them, as compared to the bravery of the sword. The Sikhs were very
industrious. They were to be found in Canada. They were responsible largely
for building the railway to Nairobi and several other things he could mention.
He adjured them to shed the drink habit and the enervation brought about by
the luxurious habits in which Sikh women, he had heard, were indulging. It
would not do to remind him that others were no better. The Sikhs, if they were
to keep up their renown, the fewness of number could only be made up for by
their being unequalled in courage and correct thinking born of simple life. The
sword was a rusty weapon. Its very effective substitute was the force of the
spirit which cost nothing and which was indestructible.
The prayer audience were naturally anxious to know what took him to the
Viceroy's House that day. He had not gone to see His Excellency. He had gone
to be with Jawaharlal and other friends. He could not satisfy their curiosity
beyond the fact that they had met. In this connection, he would ask the
newspapers not to anticipate events. In times of stress or delicacy, anticipation
of events was positively harmful to the country.
He was being rebuked for championing forlorn causes and thus wasting his life,
stated Gandhi on July 2. He should, especially, in the winter of his life, retire
or use his popularity for handling the popular causes. He gladly admitted the
charge of championing the forlorn causes, but he could not subscribe to the
charge that he was thereby wasting his life. He was also told by way of
illustration that he was trying to twist a rope of sand in trying to popularize
Hindustani with the two scripts, Devanagari and Urdu, especially when Pakistan
had now become an established fact. He strongly dissented from the view. He
believed that he had the wisdom not to subscribe to the doctrine that Pakistan
was supposed to enunciate. The present for him was the moment when he
should diligently study both scripts and speak in a language which was a proper
mixture of the two. It should also be remembered that there were a very large
number of Hindus in the north who knew only Urdu, written in the Urdu script.
Were these Hindus now to forget-the Urdu script and the Urdu language and
take up the learning of Hindi written in the Devanagari script? He submitted
that there was method in his madness so called. The real test for measuring the
quality of a particular step was whether, if nobody else followed it, it would be
useless for the pioneer, as would be an endeavour to make a rope out of sand.
Applying the test to his Hindustani idea, if he were the only one in India to
know the two scripts and equally at ease with both Hindi and Urdu, he would
pass as a distinguished scholar, much wanted both in Pakistan and the Indian
Union. Unfortunately for him, he was no scholar, and his Hindustani was not
musical enough to capture the imagination. Incidentally, he should also

mention that it was a vicious suggestion that in the evening of life, one should
lend weight only to the popular causes. Popular causes needed no further
weight and often popular causes, like popular superstitions, had to be resisted
with all one's might however feeble that might was. And he, therefore, invited
his audience to resist the mad wave that was sweeping across the land. No
cause that was intrinsically just, could ever be described as forlorn.
The following day he referred to the bhajan of the evening whose first line
meant that the people would laugh at the fish, which being in water, so
behaved as to feel thirsty. The condition of men living on God's earth, and yet
not knowing Him, was very like the condition of the imaginary fish. How it was
to be wished that men knew their state, in which case they would not live in
the state of degradation which was their lot today. Happily for India the
savagery was confined to the cities and the villages round the cities. These
villages could not be counted by thousands in a country, 1,900 miles long and
1,500 miles broad. It was as yet a matter of luck that thousands of other
villages remained unaffected by the madness raging round cities and the
neighbouring villages.
Gandhi then referred to a letter he had received, complaining that the

hopelessly insignificant minority of the Brahmins was faring badly in that the
admission of the Brahmin boys and the Brahmin girls to colleges and services
was becoming increasingly difficult, because of the anti-Brahmin movement. He
could sympathize with the complainant because, hitherto being more
receptive, more industrious and more eager to gain knowledge, the Brahmins
seemed to have a monopoly, not because of any brute force they exercised but
because of their superior qualities. But though he sympathized with the
Brahmins in their lot, he did not share their grief or their disappointment. In
the first instance, he could not appreciate their considering themselves as a
minority. If we were one nation, then there could be no question of minority
and majority. He might as well complain of being a minority and then imagine
himself to be hurt, that he could not enjoy all the privileges he might wish for.
He would,' therefore, advise his Brahmin friends to forget that they were a
class or group apart from the ocean of India's humanity. Considering them even
as Hindus, rather than Indians, the sons of the same soil, there was to be no
high and low in the ocean of Hinduism. If the Brahmins ceased to consider
themselves as a minority they would be proud to share the majesty of the
ocean of Indian or Hindu humanity, and they could feel with a drop in the
ocean, if it was not isolated from the latter, the greatness of the ocean which
carried on its broad bosom thousands of mighty steamships. After all, what
were the colleges and the services in terms of the millions of villagers, living in
the seven lakhs of India's villages? He suggested that the Brahmin friends should
feel happy that they were no longer exposed to the temptation of having to go
to the colleges or to services under the Government. Such persons could only
be few and far between. Those who refused to take part in the unseemly
struggle for entrance to the colleges or to services, were the real servants of
India. Knowledge was not confined within the four walls of a school or a
college. It was open for every industrious boy or girl to gather real knowledge
outside schools and colleges. And in this connection, he would commend to
them the Nayee Talim and all it meant.
He then reminded them of what he had said about the validity only of those
rights which were directly derived from duty well performed. They would then
immediately realize that there was no such inherent right for anyone to be
admitted to the Government colleges. But if there was such a right belonging to
any boy or girl, it was his or hers who had hitherto been criminally neglected.
A Brahmin's duty was to know God and to enable others to do likewise. And the
right that was derived from the duty would be to be fed and to be clothed
decently and honourably by the community which he served.
03. I Too Am A Socialist ( 1947 )
GANDHI addressed the Delhi Provincial Political Conference on July 2,1947 and
pointing towards Jayaprakash Narayan, said: "He holds the reins of the Socialist
Party. But I, too, am a socialist."
"Nearly fifty years ago," Gandhi went on, "when I was practising law in South
Africa, many people used to call themselves socialists. But they were less of
socialists than I was. I used to work among the labourers. I have made this part
of my life's work. This is true socialism. I have always considered myself a true
servant of the peasants and of the workers. There is a difference in my and
Jayaprakash Narayan's method of approach towards socialism. I am of the
opinion that even a king can be a socialist by becoming a servant of the
people."
If we wished to make both the ruler and the ruled socialists, how would we do
it, Gandhi asked. We could convert people to socialism by our personal
example. It was said that there were only two ways of converting a ruler—
either by beheading him or by making him abdicate. But his way was to make
the ruler a socialist through love. To kill anybody was absurd. If you taught
thousands of people to kill each other, you would not have the rule of socialists
but of killers.
The Viceroy might call himself a Congressman, as the speaker did, but would
the Viceroy abdicate his throne if he asked him to do so? Likewise, there were
many who called themselves Congressmen, but were they true Congressmen, as
he was a true socialist? There were many who were lost in wealth and the
pleasures it brought.
He then added:
"I firmly believe in truth and love. By love I do not mean the love of the
husband for the wife. Nor do I mean the love between father and the son, for
that too is based on self-interest. Love for me means the relationship between
a devotee and his god.
"In South Africa, though the whites considered me their enemy, many of them
came to me as friends. If socialism means befriending one's enemies I should be
treated as a true socialist. This conception of socialism is my own. The
socialists should learn socialism from me. Only then we can establish a true
workers' and peasants' raj. I do not, however, believe in the type of socialism
preached by the Socialist Party. You may treat what I say as a cry in the
wilderness and not listen to me. There are people who abuse me today and call
me a madman.
"I cannot teach you violence, as I do not myself believe in it. I can only teach
you not to bow your head before any one even at the cost of your life. Therein
lies true courage. No one can deprive me of this courage. Even when I die, you
will have to admit that Gandhi was a true socialist."
In an editorial entitled, "Who Is a Socialist?" he wrote:
"Socialism is a beautiful word and, so far as I am aware, in socialism, all the

members of society are equal—none low, none high. In the individual body, the
head is not high because it is the top of the body, nor are the soles of the feet
low because they touch the earth. Even as members of the individual body are
equal, so are the members of society. This is socialism.
"In it, the prince and the peasant, the wealthy and the poor, the employer and
the employee are all on the same level. In terms of religion, there is no duality
in socialism. It is all unity. Looking at society, all the world over, there is
nothing but duality or plurality. Unity is conspicuous by its absence. This man is
high, and that one is low, that is a Hindu, that a Muslim, third a Christian,
fourth a Parsi, fifth a Sikh, sixth a Jew. Even among these there are
subdivisions. In the unity of my conception, there is perfect unity in the
plurality of designs.
"But, in order to reach this state, we may not look on the things philosophically
and say that we need not make a move until all are converted to socialism.
Without changing our life, we may go on giving addresses and forming parties
and, hawk-like, seize the game when it comes our way. This is no socialism.
The more we treat it as game to be seized, the farther it must recede from us.
"Socialism begins with the first convert. If there is one such, you can add zeros
to the one, and the first zero will account for ten and every addition will
account for ten times the previous number. If, however, the beginner is a zero,
in other words, no one makes the beginning, multiplicity of zeros will also
produce zero value. Time and paper occupied in writing zeros will be so much
waste.
"This socialism is as pure as crystal. It, therefore, requires crystal-like means to

achieve it. Impure means result in an impure end. Hence, the prince and the
peasant will not be equalized by cutting off the prince's head, nor can the
process of cutting off the head equalize the employer and the employed. One
cannot reach truth by untruthfulness. Truthful conduct alone can reach truth.
Are not non-violence and truth twins? The answer is an emphatic 'no\ Non-
violence is embedded in truth and vice versa. Hence, has it been said that they
are faces of the same coin. Either is inseparable from the other. Read the coin
either way. The spelling of words will be different. The value is the same. This
blessed state is unattainable without perfect purity. Harbour impurity of mind
or body and you have untruth and violence in you.
"And, therefore, only truthful, non-violent and pure-hearted socialists will be

able to establish a socialistic society in India and the world. To my knowledge,
there is no country in the world which is purely socialistic; without the means
described above, the existence of such a society is impossible."
In the second article on socialism Gandhi wrote:
"Truth and non-violence must incarnate in socialism. In order that they can, the
votary must have a living faith in God. Mere mechanical adherence to truth and
non-violence is likely to break down at the critical moment. Hence I have said
that Truth is God. This God is a living Force. Our life is of that Force. That
Force resides in, but is not the body. He who denies the existence of that great
Force, denies to himself the use of that inexhaustible Power and thus remains
impotent. He is like a rudderless ship which tossed about here and there,
perishes without making any headway. The socialism of such takes them
nowhere, what to say of the society in which they live.
"If such be the case, does it mean that no socialist believes in God? If there be
any, why have they not made any visible progress? Then again, many godly
persons have lived before now; why have they not succeeded in founding a
socialistic state?
"It is very difficult completely to silence these two doubts. Nevertheless, it is

possible to say that it has perhaps never occurred to a believing socialist that
there is any connection between his socialism and belief in God. It is equally
safe to say that godly men as a rule never commended socialism to the masses.
"Superstitions have flourished in the world in spite of godly men and women. In
Hinduism itself, untouchability has, till of late, held undoubted sway.
"The fact is that it has always been a matter of strenuous research to know this
great Force and its hidden possibilities.
"My claim is that in the pursuit of that search lies the discovery of satyagraha.
It is not, however, ever claimed that all the laws of satyagraha have been laid
down or found. This I do say fearlessly and firmly that every worthy object can
be achieved by the use of satyagraha. It is the highest and infallible means, the
greatest force. Socialism will not be reached by any other means. Satyagraha
can rid society of all evils, political, economic and moral."
On July 4, in the course of his prayer discourse, Gandhi said that the question
that was being put to him was: Did he ever think that the swaraj of his dreams
was going to be born out of the present regime which was to culminate in full
dominion status on August 15 at the latest? Was he not ashamed of the non-
violence of the past thirty years, which had resulted in the violence that had
been stalking the country? He was indeed sorry to have to confess that he saw
no sign of the Kingdom of God being born out of the coming dominion status.
He hoped that the dominion status was offered in order to anticipate the final
date of the withdrawal of the British rule. Without it, they felt unable to devise
a scheme whereby the "Quit India" date of June 30 next could be put earlier. Be
that as it may, it was open to both the new states, as soon as they framed their
own constitutions, to declare complete independence of the exclusive family of
the British dominions and aim at a family of independent world states, which
necessarily ruled out all the internal armies. He could not visualize a dog- in-
the-manger poncy for India, whereby India would become a menace to the
world peace, another Japan or Germany, calling itself falsely a democracy.
Democracy and the military spirit, he held to be a contradiction in terms. A
democrat relied upon the force not of the arms his state could flaunt in the
face of the world, but on the moral force his state could put at the disposal of
the world. If by India's effort such a world federation of free and independent
states was brought into being, the hope of the Kingdom of God, otherwise
called Ram Raj, might legitimately then be entertained. Before that happy
event, however, took place, these two new states which today were enemies of
each other would have to become friends and associates. He was sorry to
confess that the signs pointed the contrary way.
And the second taunt really was the corollary of the first one and vice versa. He
had every reason to be ashamed of the result of over thirty years of non-
violence so called. He had already admitted that our non-violence was of the
weak. But the weak of heart could not claim to represent any non-violcnce at
all. The proper term was passive resistance. Passive resistance was a
preparation for the active resistance of arms. Had it been the non-violcnce of
the strong, the practice of a generation would have made the recent orgies of
the destruction of life and property impossible. Then, there would have been
no need for the rationing of cloth and of food. If the people knew the working
of the law of truth and non-violencc, then they would themselves regulate the
matter of shortage. He had never subscribed to the belief that the shortage
could not be locally made good. Such a big country like India should disdain to
share the world's production of food and cloth, when the world wr as suffering
from shortage due to the insensate destruction wrought by the terrible war. All
that was needed in India was solid, steady and hard work put in by the millions
of India wisely and intelligently directed. There was indeed no dearth of
wisdom and skill in the country. And lastly, if thcjre was the true grasp of non-
violence and truth, the people would not look to the civil service which was
described by the late Mr. Montagu as a wooden machine. These gentlemen
were experts of a kind. They were never employed for the benefit of the
nation. They had to keep the foreign rule going somehow or other. And they
were too few to handle successfully the present work of reviving the drooping
spirits of a nation of starving and naked millions. The business men, the
producers and the scientists should be impressed into willing service for the
nation in dire need. Will the servicemen rise to the occasion, and will the
members of the Government go out of the red-tape rut now and woo the public
to help themselves? How or why could all this happen if there was no non-
violence, no truth in us?
"The two independent dominions, known as India and Pakistan, will come into
existence on August 15, 1947," stated the Indian Independence Bill presented in
the British Parliament on July 4. The British Government decided to give up by
August 15, all responsibility for the government of any of the territories then
included in British India and the parliamentary control over the two dominions.
The British paramountcy over the Indian states and the tribal areas was to lapse
also simultaneously.
On July 5, Gandhi devoted his prayer discourse to the Indian Independence Bill.
It compelled postponement* of every other topic to another occasion. He did
not; propose to examine in detail the twenty sections of the elaborate bill. He
was ill disposed with many critics to read a sinister meaning in the bill. The
fact that there were two Indias instead of one, was bad enough in itself. Both
had the same status. Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah and the Muslim League were entitled
to claim the full credit for bringing about a state of things which seemed to be
impossible, only as it were yesterday. They had undone the solemn declaration
of the Cabinet Mission. And they had succeeded in compelling the consent from
the Congress and the Sikhs to the division. The thing that was in itself bad did
not become good because the parties concerned had accepted it, no matter
that the causes dictating the acceptance, were different in each case. It was
hardly any comfort that Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah did not get all that he wanted.
The difference was not at all in kind. He wanted a sovereign state. That he had
in the fullest measure. Pakistan had the same status as India.
As he read and re-read the bill, he realized that the three parties had
subjected themselves, consciously or unconsciously, to public judgement in
terms of the bill. It was true that the British were divesting themselves of all
power. But they had become party to the division and they had two new
members in the family of the Commonwealth possessing conflicting ideals and
interests. So long as they two had any connection with Great Britain, Great
Britain would be judged by the action following the Indian Independence Bill
rather than by its language, however generous and just it might read. He
admitted that it would be a superhuman task to reconcile the conflicting
interests and treat them equally. What would happen if one declared complete
independence when the constitution act was passed by its Constituent
Assembly?
The relation of the princes remained in a most unsatisfactory condition. He had

no hesitation in saying that the British Government had lacked the courage,
since the inception of the Cabinet Mission effort, to do the right thing, no
matter what the cost was. Here again British honour was at stake. The British
would certainly be blamed if any mishap occurred. The dangerous situation had
not been cleared by the bill. Both the new dominions had an unenviable legacy,
if they had the interests of the people of the states at heart, if the people were
the real masters and the princes their trustees, not merely euphemistically but
in law and in fact.
Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah and the Muslim League had, by their act of secession and
severance, invited the world to judge them by their behaviour towards the
Muslims, as also towards the non-Muslims. Surely, there were many sects, chief
among whom were the Sunnis and the Shias, politically the Nationalists and the
Muslim Leaguers, the Baluchis, the Sindhis, the Pathans, the Punjabis, the
Bengalis, and the Muslims of the Indian Union. The speaker was daily besieged
by the large Hindu and Sikh minorities and not as often by the Christians and
the Parsis. He was asked whether there was ground for the fear that there
would be an attempt to estrange the Scheduled Classes from their Hindu
brethren. Was Pakistan a means of converting the non-Muslims to a special
brand of Islam? True religion was a universal belief in the one and only God.
The world was fast growing out of dogmas and creeds which had so sickened it
that it had become confused and had beguri to deny the very existence of the
Maker. But happily, that stage of negation was quickly passing and enlightened
faith in the Supreme Maker of the universe was taking its place. Was the Islam
of Pakistan going to be in the vanguard of that movement for restoration of
universal faith? Or was it to pass through darkness and denial of God in the
name of God? He hoped that the doubts he had mentioned would be quickly
dissolved,
Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah had unwittingly placed Hinduism also on its trial. The
Hindus had the rare opportunity of refining Hinduism of all dross and showing
by strict justness that the brand of Hinduism of the Indian Union was the same
as universal religion. He had mentioned only the day before that those who
believed in India as a nation could have no minority and majority question. All
were entitled to equal privileges and to equal treatment. Thus viewed, the
Indian Independence Bill could be taken as the final examination of all the
parties involved in the bill. It was possible to turn Pakistan, which he had
declared an evil, into unadulterated good, if all the forebodings were dispelled,
enmities were turned into friendship and mutual distrust gave place to trust.
Addressing the prayer meeting the next day, Gandhi said that he hoped that
the referendum in the Frontier Province was to be without violence. Badshah
Khan and Khudai Khidmatgars were pledged to non-violence, They were to show
that they lived up to their beliefs. And why should he not expect the same from
the Leaguers when it was at least a question of Muslim against Muslim?
There was something wrong in the fact that they missed the enthusiasm that
should accompany such a great event as the imminent advent of full freedom.
The reason for the lack of enthusiasm was no doubt to be found in the division
of the country into two states which were to be now turned into two armed
camps. For there was to be no common defence force. The army was to be
divided and the preparations were being made apace to that end. They used to
talk glibly during the glorious and strenuous days of opposition to the British
rule of having no army for the suppression of internecine quarrels which would
be non-existent and they wanted no defence force against a foreign enemy.
Now, alas! their military expenditure was maintained at a very high level
without any near prospect of substantial reduction. Indeed, he visualized a
definite increase in the military expenditure, all for fighting among themselves.
They were to be engaged in a ludicrous race for the increase of armaments; no
nation-building expenditure, not for education and the like. It was to be all for
mutual slaughter. He could discover in this no reason for gratification or
glorification. The outlook was dismal. Was India's freedom a preparation for the
abandonment of all they had learnt to prize as dear to them? Instead of self-
glorification, it was a time for deep self-introspection, self-examination, self-
castigation. As the chief actor in the fight for freedom during the past thirty
years, he was certainly now full of searching questions within himself. Was the
fight, acclaimed as noble to result in this the approaching inglorious end?
Gandhi cried with the Vedic seer: "O Lord! Lead us from darkness unto light."
On July 7 his message was read out at the prayer gathering:
"Last evening, I showed you why the coming freedom seemed to create no
enthusiasm. This evening I propose to show you how we can, if we will, turn the
calamity into a blessing. It will profit us nothing to brood over the past or to
blame this party or that. Technically, freedom is yet to come a few days hence.
In fact the parties having jointly accepted the situation, there is no turning
back. Only the inscrutable Providence can undo what men have agreed to do.
"One easy and ready way out is for the Congress and Muslim League to come
together and arrive at a mutual understanding without the intervention of the
Viceroy. The Muslim League has to make the first move. I do not at all suggest
the undoing of Pakistan. Let that be treated as an established fact, beyond
dispute or discussion. But they can sit together in a mud hut, large enough to
accommodate not more than ten representatives, and undertake not to part
until they have reached an agreement. I dare swear that if such an event
occurs, it will be infinitely better than the bill recognizing the independence of
India cut up into two states enjoying equal status.
"Neither the Hindus nor the Musalmans are happy over what is now happening
before their helpless selves. This is first-hand evidence, unless the Hindus and
Musalmans who daily see me or correspond with me are deceiving me. But—it is
a big but—I seem to be aiming at the impossible. Now that British intervention
has done the trick, how can the League be expected to come down to their
adversaries and produce an agreed settlement as between brothers and friends?
"There is an alternative which is also almost, if not quite, as difficult.
This creation of two opposing armies out of one, hitherto with one and a
common goal, whatever it was, must frighten every lover of India. Will the two
armies be created, not in order to face and fight a common danger but to
destroy one another and to demonstrate to a gaping world that they were unfit
for any other purpose but to figh< one another unto death?
"I have put the prospect in its awful nakedness, so that everyone may see and
shun it. The alternative escape is undoubtedly attractive. Will the vast mass of
Hindus and those who had joined them in the struggle for independence realize
the danger in its proper perspective and rise to the occasion and swear even
now that they do not wish to have any army at all, or at least refuse ever to use
it against their Muslim brethren, whether in the Indian Union or outside it in
Pakistan? This proposal is tantamount to asking the Hindus and their associates
to turn thirty years' weakness into strength of great beauty. Perhaps to state
the problem thus is to demonstrate its absurdity—may be God has been known
before now to turn man's folly into wisdom. The effort is worth making for the
sake of all the parties who have subscribed to the dangerous division of the
army into two self- destroying warring camps."
On July 8, Gandhi referred to a countryman from the south who had asked a
question, which the latter invited him to answer, as had become his custom of
late, in his prayer discourses. The question was: "George Bernard Shaw has
remarked that 'an Englishman is never in the wrong. He does everything on
principle. He fights you on patriotic principles; he robs you on business
principles; he enslaves you on imperial principles; he supports his king on loyal
principles and cuts off his king's head on republican principles.' I am eager to
know from you, under which of these principles the Englishman is now quitting
India. Is the Englishman glad over the present economic and political condition
of our beloved country? Does he feel satisfied in the secession of Travancore
and Hyderabad states from the Indian Union? Has he any axe to grind in
scrapping the May '46 paper and bringing forward in its place the recent
partition plan? Does he jfeel for the horrible happenings in Noakhali and Bihar
and the Punjab, which happenings have forced the Congress to accept that
plan? What can be the reason or the idea behind Mr. Churchill and his company
endorsing the plan? You have often stated that you know the mind of an
Englishman better than any other Indian and have repeatedly been advising us
in your post-prayer speeches to trust the faith, sincerity and good intentions of
the Englishmen in transferring power to our hands. I, therefore, believe that
you should be in a position to make matters clear and you alone can dispel our
doubts in a convincing manner."
Gandhi observed that he could only paraphrase tlw idea in his speech. George
Bernard Shaw's banter was by no means exhaustive, nor were the Englishman's
resources. He had no doubt that the Englishman was quitting India on principle.
Man had the supreme knack of deceiving himself; the Englishman was
supremest among men. He was quitting because he had discovered that it was
wrong on economic and political grounds to hold India in bondage. Herein the
Englishman was quite sincere. It would not be denied, however, that sincerity
was quite consistent with self-deception. He was self-deceived in that he
believed that he could not leave India to possible anarchy, if such was to be her
lot. He was quite content to leave India as a cockpit between the two
organized armies. Before quitting, he was setting the seal of approval on the
policy of playing off one community against another. And he lacked the courage
to do the right, so far as the states were concerned. The speaker hoped that
before he finally left on the 15th of August, he would bring the two parties
together, now that one had got all it wanted. He could do so, if he willed it.
Travancore and Hyderabad had not yet become independent states. He. the
speaker, admitted freely that if the Englishman left India in an uncertain
condition and left the possibility of several warring states, all independent of
England and, therefore, of one another, he could not conceive a greater
reflection on the British name than this would be. Dominion status would then
stink in the nostrils. But he had not given up the hope that the British
statesmanship would not have declared utter bankruptcy before August 15. Till
then, he preferred to defer judgement in spite of the correspondent's profound

distrust of British declarations, however high-minded they might be to read. Let
their acts be the real judge of their words. He would believe a man's word
unless he had good reason to doubt it. That Mr. Churchill & Co. were disposed
to bless the bill for Indian independence proved that they had realized the
economic and the political necessity of the step. He, however, had no
hesitation in admitting that recent signs were portentous enough to rouse
suspicion. He did not, however, believe in dying before his' death.
Seeing that India was cut into two, people had to consider their conduct
accordingly, observed Gandhi on July 10. Unfortunately, it had become the
fashion nowadays to act as if they were enemies one of the other. He could not
subscribe to any such belief, nor did he approve of the method of
appeasement—a word that had come to have a bad odour. If he did no^believe
in appeasement, why, he was asked, did he dance attendance on Jinnah Saheb
for eighteen days in 1944? A friendly approach was not one of appeasement. An
appeasement was possible between enemies. This was supposed to have
happened about Hitler. England and Germany were opposing powers. The late
Mr. Chamberlain was supposed to have been guilty of the policy of
appeasement. The speaker owned no enemies. He, undoubtedly, made an offer
to the Qaid-e-Azam of which he was proud. If Quid-e-Azam Jinnah had accepted
the offer, he could have been master in what might have been called the
Pakistan area, but there would have been common subjects as between friends.
They would then have had one India before the whole world and free of all
domination by a third power. All the bloodshed and loot and arson would have
been avoided. Now they were snarling at one another. He refused to scent
independence in this barbarous state. He could not be enthusiastic over the
independence that was coming till the look of things was changed during the
next thirty-five days. He wanted the people to develop bravery of the highest
type that would surrender nothing to violence and much to genuine
friendliness, not friendliness that was euphemism for hypocrisy.
What then were they to do, the Hindus, the Sikhs and the other non- Muslims in
Pakistan? They would not anticipate evil and would leave their homes for the
fear of evil overtaking them. He would give the Muslim fellow-countrymen the
credit for common honesty and human behaviour. There were mandirs and
gurudwaras in Pakistan areas. Were they to be demolished? Was admission to
them to be forbidden to the Hindus, the Sikhs and the others? The speaker
could not bring himself to entertain any such fear. Taking the contrary
example, one of the finest Jumma Masjids in the world was in the Indian Union,
the Taj Mahal was there, and the Aligarh university was there. Did the partition
make the slightest difference in the Muslims approaching these great places
and many others he could name? He thought not.
Then there was the question of the Hindus, who could not stay in their own
homes in Pakistan through fear, vague or real. They could not, if their trade or
movements were restricted, and if they were treated as aliens in their own
province. It was, undoubtedly, the duty of the provinces in the Union to receive
such refugees with open arms and to give them all reasonable facilities. They
should be able to feel that they had not come to a strange land. The whole of
India was the home of every Indian who considered himself and behaved as
such, no matter to what faith he belonged. The condition for the new comer
was, as he had said in Hardwar, that he must be as sugar was to milk. He must
aim at adding sweetness and richness to the life around him.
The next day, Gandhi referred to the criticism that had reached his ears in
regard to the fact that while Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah had been appointed the
Governor-General of Pakistan, the Congress leaders had decided to keep Lord
Mountbatten on as the Governor-General of India. It had been hinted that the
Congress leaders had weakened and, by requesting Lord Mountbatten to stay
on, they had shown that they were still dependent on England. He, the
speaker, wished to ask such critics to rid their minds of such suspicion. Could
they imagine men like Jawaharlal and the Sardar, a born fighter, ever bowing
the knee or bootlicking anyone? He wanted them to know that after August
15th it was within their power to ask anyone to become their Governor-
General. If it had been his own choice, he might even have chosen a Harijan
girl. But he had no wish to deceive the people in refusing to suspect Lord
Mountbatten's appointment. After all they could always fight him if he proved
false to them. It was known now through the newspapers that, in the first
instance, both India and Pakistan had agreed to have Lord Mountbatten as their
common Governor-General. But at the last moment, Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah had
changed his mind and had nominated himself. The Congress leaders could have
then done likewise, but they did not like to go back on their plighted word. He
sensed nothing wrong in this. Lord Mountbatten would be on trial in his new
job, in spite of the fact that he would be the constitutional head of the
government. The speaker hoped that he would come through the test with
flying colours by being their servant which is what the appointment stood for.
They would be foolish to imagine that no Englishman could ever be a friend of
India and loyal to her, or that Lord Mountbatten would not be a servant of the
Indian Union because he was of royal blood and because now his nephew was
going to marry the future Queen of England. They should never mistrust anyone
until and unless he proved himself unworthy.
He felt that the Governor-Generalship of Pakistan was going to be an acid test

for Jinnah Saheb. Doubtless, he was taking up the office to show to the world
that he had acquired an Islamic state. But the acquisition would be nothing
worth unless Jinnah Saheb followed in the footsteps of the great Caliphs. He
referred to the Khalifa Omar, in particular, of whom it was said that he never
wanted anything for himself and his sole concern was meeting out even-handed
justice to the people under him. If Jinnah Saheb becomes the Governor-General
with the intent to wear a crown of thorns, to be the first servant of Pakistan
and not as a ruler, then he would make Pakistan a land worth living in. His
Governor-Generalship would be a test not only for him but for Islam. He hoped
that Jinnah Saheb would come through it with flying colours.
Some time back he had mentioned that he was torn between several conflicts
and he felt that Bihar was calling him, so was Noakhali where he had
commenced work among the riot-affected refugees and tried to specialize in
the work. When a month ago he left Patna, he was under the impression that
he would return to Bihar inside of a week. But events had taken place during
the month in such quick succession that, perhaps, a generation had been
packed into a month. So the speaker was now vegetating in New Delhi, hoping
that thereby he was serving both Bihar and Noakhali. Then he fancied that the
Punjab was also calling him. He saw at present no guiding-star unmistakably
telling him which way to take. He, therefore, went by the saying that had
gripped him years ago, "When in doubt, stay where you are."
At one stage he had thought of going to Uttar-Kashi before going anywhere

else. The late Pandit Malaviya had given him a glowing account of the holy
place and of the holy men one came across in that place. Birla, on hearing of
his wish, undertook to make all arrangements to enable him to perform the
pilgrimage, practically on foot. This was an added inducement for him.
Mirabehn who had gone to Uttar-Kashi in quest of peace and inspiration from
the Himalayas wrote to say that the climate at Uttar-Kashi will not be suitable
till September. So the trip was dropped for the present.
The public on hearing of his proposed pilgrimage to Uttar-Kashi began to

speculate that he was now thinking of retiring to the Himalayas because of his
differences with the leaders. He had his differences with the leaders. The
dream of his Ram Raj did not seem to be materializing. But he had developed
the quality of detachment to a large extent. He was doing what he had done all
along, show the right path, and proclaim the truth from house-tops,
irrespective of whether anyone listened or not.
Speaking at the prayer meeting on July 12. Gandhi referred to his promise to do
or die in Noakhali. He had said that he would not leave Noakhali until the
Hindus and the Musalmans assured him that he could go without feeling the
slightest anxiety about the honour, life and property of the Hindus in Noakhali.
But who was he to achieve such a result? He was but a servant of God. If God
wished it, He would make him the instrument of such service. And if He did
not, then he would be quite content to do or die in Noakhali. He would just live
in the midst of the people of Noakhali, rendering such service as he could. His
friends had told him that he was crazy to attach so much importance to
Noakhali. What was Noakhali as compared to the whole of India, they all
argued. Why should he not use his talents for the service of India as a whole,
instead of confining himself to Noakhali? If things were all right in India, they
would be all right in Noakhali. But, he was made differently. His mother, an
illiterate village woman had taught him, "The atom reflected the universe." His
mother had explained to him that he should take care that he did the right
thing. His universe was his own immediate surroundings. If he served them, the
universe would take care of itself.
A friend had written to him that if he did not return to Noakhali by August 15,
he might have to repent. It was the dead-line for the division of India and
transfer of power from British to Indian hands. In fact, the division of India was
a settled plan already. But God could upset the plans of men. An earthquake
could destroy the v/hole of India before the appointed day. A foreign invasion
might upset man's pretty and petty plans.
But humanly speaking, Pakistan would be a legally established fact on August

15. He had left Noakhali to go to Bihar. He had done a lot for the Muslim
brethren in Noakhali. The number of deaths in Bihar far exceeded that in
Noakhali. It was nearly 10,000, whereas in Noakhali it was under 500. When the
call came from Bihar, he went there. He was, therefore, bound to take Bihar on
his way to Noakhali and he was anxious to reach there as early as possible. He
felt out of place in Delhi but it was not so in Bihar and Noakhali. He wanted
them to pray that God might enable him to return to Noakhali early and fulfil
his promise.
Jinnah, at a press conference on July 13, assured the minorities in the Pakistan
dominion that they would have protection with regard to their religion, faith,
life, property and culture. They would, in all respect, be treated as citizens of
Pakistan without any discrimination, but they would also have the obligations of
citizenship. The minorities would have to be loyal to the state and owe true
allegiance to it. The same principle, Jinnah emphasized, would apply to the
minorities in the Indian Union. One could not have the minorities disloyal to the
state and sabotaging its activities. Every citizen must be loyal to his state.
On July 13, Gandhi stated that he had read a brief report of Jinnah Saheb's
press conference, in the course of which it had gladdened his heart to learn
that Jinnah Saheb had assured complete freedom of faith and religious worship
and full security of life and property to all the minor- ides living in Pakistan.
But while any leader might say a thing and say it sincerely, it did not follow
that the advice was straightway acted upon. It was sad that, in spite of the
achievement of division, the news of stabbings and murders, loot and arson,
came from everywhere. He had many Hindu friends in Sind who were leaving
their home, because they felt they could not live there any longer. Now,
Karachi was going to be the capital of Pakistan. He would like to ask Jinnah
Saheb whether he was going to wait till August 15th to offer protection to the
Hindus in Sind. If he were in Jinnah Saheb's place, he would be sad beyond
measure if a single Hindu deserted his own home in Pakistan through fear of
injustice. While Qaid- e-Azam Jinnah was going to be the Governor-General of
Pakistan, it was true that he could do nothing without the advice of his
ministers; yet that did not mean that he was going to lose his hold over the
Muslim League. On the other hand, his political power would be even greater.
Therefore, it was Jinnah Saheb's duty to forbid such happenings as were
reported from Sind and elsewhere in the dominion of which he was now to be
the Governor-General. A man or the government of a country could only be
judged by its actions and this applied equally to India. Some Muslims of the U.
P. had fears whether they could live there any more. It was the duty of the
government there to give them every assurance that the U. P. would always be
their home, where they could as hitherto live without fear. The British had
carried on their rule through the policy of "divide and rule", but their power
was over and so should be the favouritism. What mattered it, if a minority got a
little more than its share of the spoils of service or office anywhere? The
minorities were entitled to the fullest justice. Efficiency and merit alone
should count, and the spoils of office given to the minorities over a very long
period by the British to serve their own ends should no longer lure them. The
minorities must now realize that all these were in the nature of bribes. After
all, the British could not remove untouchability. It was the Hindus themselves
who had opened all ancient temples in South India, a fact that gladdened his
heart, for it was by removing the stain of untouchability that Hinduism could
live. No privileges should be given to anyone in the new India. It was the poor
and the neglected, the downtrodden and the weak that should be their special
care and attention. A Brahmin should not grudge it, if more money was spent
on the uplift of the Harijans. At the same time, a Brahmin may not be done
down simply because he was a Brahmin. In fact, the Brahmins were a very small
minority. There must be pure and undefiled justice for everyone in both
Pakistan and Hindustan.
"It is said that my speeches nowadays are depressing," Gandhi observed in his
written message on July 14:
"Some even suggest that I should not speak at all. This multitude of advisers
reminds me of a painter who had exposed his painting in a shop window without
glass, inviting the critics to mark the parts they did not like. The result was a
daub. The painter had simply tried to show that it was impossible to please all
the parties. He was, therefore, satisfied that he had painted a good picture. His
business was to produce a work which satisfied his artistic taste. Mine is a
similar case. I hope that I never speak for the sake of speaking. I speak because
I feel that I have something to say to the people. It is true that I do not agree
with what many of my closest friends have done or are doing. Whilst I am in
Delhi and I have an opinion about some current events, I cannot help giving that
opinion. And what are the differences that matter? If you analyse them, you
would then find only one fundamental difference to which all the others could
be traced. Non-violence is my creed. It never was of the Congress. With the
Congress, non-violence has always been a policy. A policy takes the shape of a
creed whilst it lasts, no longer. The Congress had every right to change the
creed, when it found it necessary. A creed can never admit of any change. Now
though, according to the Congress constitution, the policy abides, the practice
has undoubtedly altered the policy. The technicians may quarrel with the fact.
You and I cannot, must not. Why should not the makers of the present Congress
change their policy in fact? The law will take care of itself. It should also be
noted that in the constitution the word peaceful is used, not non-violent.
"In Bombay, when the Congress met in 1934, I tried hard to have the word
peaceful replaced by non-violent and I failed. Therefore, it is open to give the
word 'peaceful5 a meaning probably less than that of nonviolent. I see none. But
my opinion is irrelevant. It is for the savants to determine the difference, if
any. All that you and I need to realize is that the Congress practice is not non-
violent today in the accepted sense of the term. If the Congress was pledged to
the policy of non-violence, then there would be no army supported by it. But
she sports an army, which may eat up the civilians and establish military rule in
India, unless the people listen to me. Am I to give up all hope of their ever
listening to me? I cannot do that whilst there is breath left in me. And if the
people do not wish to listen to my non-violent dirge, there is no reason for the
critics to dissuade me from speaking to the public.
"Let me make one thing clear. I have frankly and fully admitted that what we
had practised during the past thirty years was not non-violennt resistance but
passive resistance, which only the weak offer because they are unable, not
unwilling, to offer an armed resistance. If we knew the use of non-violent
resistance, which only those with the hearts of oak can offer, we would present
to the world a totally different picture of free India instead of an India cut in
twain, one part highly suspicious of the other and the two too much engaged in
mutual strife to be able to think cogently of the food and clothing of the hungry
and naked millions, who know no religion but that of the one and only God who
appears to them in the guise of necessaries of life. Not for them the sanguinary
strife or cinema pictures showing them how efficiently to cut one another's
throats!"
The next day, Gandhi referred to some questions that had been put to him by
Bengali friends. He was told that the Hindus in East Bengal feared that now that
the province of Bengal was divided into two, the Hindus of West Bengal would
forget them and that the Hindus of East Bengal would be weakened. Gandhi
replied that he could never understand such fears. All were Indians, first and
last, wherever they lived and to whatever creed or class or province they
belonged. Religion was entirely a personal matter. Each one could approach his
Creator as he liked. But the poison of separatism had gone deep into the soil.
When he was in Noakhali, he was just as much at home there as elsewhere. And
were the Musalmans of East Bengal and the Hindus of Bihar, for example,
always going to behave as madmen? He was never going to subscribe to such a
fear. He wanted to reiterate that while he did not like the division, it was at
the moment a fait accompli and they had to face up to it. But it was always
possible by correct conduct to lessen an evil and eventually even to bring good
out of evil. In spite of the division, the people of the Eastern and Western
Bengal were going to be Bengalis and speak the same language. The Hindus of
West Bengal must live as friends with the Muslims there. If they did, the
Muslims of East Bengal would certainly reciprocate the friendship with their
Hindu brothers. None must look upon the other as his enemy. Only such an
action could drive out fear. He added too that West Bengal was better able to
help the Hindus in East Bengal because the government of West Bengal was in
their hands.
He had been asked whether the Bengal Provincial Congress Committee should
now be split up into two parts. His answer was a firm negative. The Congress
committee there must never look upon Bengal as divided. It would act as
before though there would be sub-committees in the two halves working under
the parent body. The Congress was national and its doors were open to every
Indian who chose to enter its portals.
He was also asked why Prafullachandra Ghosh and Suresh Banerjee who were of
East Bengal were serving as ministers in West Bengal, thus deserting their
brothers of East Bengal. He saw no reason whatsoever, why they should not
serve in the west. It did not mean that they were deserting their homes. In
fact, they would serve as links, and strengthen the bonds between the two
provinces.
On July 16, he referred to the movement for Dravidistan, South India

comprising the population speaking four Dravidian languages—Telugu, Tamil,
Malayalam and Kanarese. Why, he asked, should this portion of India speaking
these four languages be separated from the rest? Had not these languages, rich
as they were, drawn largely upon Sanskrit for their richness? He had travelled
through the four provinces and he indeed found no difference between them
and the rest of the provinces. It was a myth to consider that those living in the
south of the Vindhya range were the non- Aryans and those in the north were
the Aryans. Whatever they might have been at one time, they were so
intermixed, that they were one people from Kashmir to Cape Comorin,
notwithstanding that India was cut into two. It would be folly to make further
divisons. If they did not stop at that division, there would be no end to
independent sovereign states which would be useless for India and the world.
Let it not be said of them that they were fit for one political system only under
bondage and as free men, savage-like they would split up into as many groups
as they liked, each group going its own way. Or would they be held in bondage
by one despotic state possessing an army large enough to bring them under
subjection?
In the next prayer discourse, referring to the newspaper report that the latest
campaign against the Indians in South Africa had taken the form of boycott of
the Indian traders by the European community, accompanied by threats of
violence, Gandhi said that he was deeply interested in the problem of the
Indians in South Africa, having spent twenty years of his life in that country. He
would be much pained and surprised if the Boers, with whom the Indians did
not compete, were in any way associated with violence to the Indians. He
recalled with pride how when he was marching through the Transvaal, probably
with two thousand humble Indians, the Boers were uniformly kind to them who
were completely non-violent. He strongly suspected that there were some
mischief-makers at the back of this proposed violence. He hoped that the news
was highly exaggerated. Field-Marshal Smuts and the South African whites knew
that now India was as independent as they and they were for the time being
members of the same Commonwealth as they. Were their partners to be singled
out for an invidious treatment? Was Mrs. Pandit to be baulked of the victory her
deputation to the U. N. O. had attained? If Field-Marshal Smuts could not
control the unruly element in the community, it was his duty to resign. He
called upon Pandit Nehru and Jinnah Saheb to send a joint telegram to General
Smuts that now that India had come into her own, it was the duty of the Union
Government to accord equal rights and protection to the Indians in South
Africa.
The speeches in the House of Commons reported in the newspapers emphasized

that the dominion status meant independence plus something more. The proof
of the pudding lay in the eating. Did dominion status really mean that all those
who became members of the Commonwealth would become equals? The spoken
word to be true had to be supported by corresponding action throughout the

Commonwealth.
Lord Mountbatten was still the Viceroy. He was a great admiral and he belonged
to the Royal House. He should use his great personal influence to secure justice
for the Indians of South Africa. The speaker warned the Indian compatriots to
cohere together. Let there be no divisions among them. The rich should not
neglect the poor.
Referring next to the question of untouchability, he stated that South India,

except Cochin, had made big strides in that matter. He paid compliments to Sir
C. P. Ramaswami Aiyer for the good work he had done in advising the maharaja
to throw open to the Harijans all the temples in Travancore. Now, Andhra,
British Kerala and Tamil Nad had followed suit. This was a cheering news. But
what about Kashi Vishwanath, the temple in Hardwar and the other temples
throughout India? He knew that many Harijans wanted economic betterment
and educational facilities... This they were entitled to. But for their own sake,
the Hindus could not be satisfied unless temple-entry was complete. In his
opinion, the Hindu temples were not pure till every Hindu, without any
distinction whatsoever, was freely entitled to offer worship precisely in the
same way as the tallest among them. Pure Hinduism had no inequality. All were
equal in the eye of God. All religions in the world were on their trial today. He
wanted Hinduism to come out of the test with full marks.
On July 18, Gandhi said that the Independence of India Bill would be
proclaimed the day after. According to it, the Governor-General would be
appointed by them, the people of India, and not imposed on India as hitherto.
Therefore, Lord Mountbatten would be the Governor-General of India by their
appointment, precisely as a chaprasi could be. This was not said in
disparagement. It was a compliment paid to Lord Mountbatten that he was
elected to be the Indian Union's servant, deriving his appointment from them. It
was necessary to say this, in order to dispel the suspicion that still lingered in
many minds.
Gandhi next referred to an open letter written by the editor of Dawn to him in
the day's issue. It was the Qaid-e-Azam's mouthpiece. The editor had taken the
speaker to task for saying that Jinnah Saheb's assurances about the protection
of minorities in Pakistan would be valued according to the corresponding deeds
of the Muslims in Pakistan. He adhered to his statement and held that it carried
no reflection. He had said the same of the Viceroy and the Congress ministers.
The fear that had now seized the Hindus of Sind was an ominous beginning. The
Dawn editor had further talked about the sufferings and fears of the Muslim
minority in the U. P. and had given a number of instances in support. The
speaker would state in reply that even if the allegations were proved true,
there would be no justification for similar treatment in Sind, as Sind's misdeeds
would be none in the U. P. He must confess that he had known nothing about
the many allegations against the U. P. The editor, perhaps, did not know that
he had alluded publicly to the allegations about which the speaker knew
nothing. As soon as he read the remarks referred to, he promptly wrote to Rafi
Saheb and as he was not in Delhi, he wrote to the chief minister of U.P. who
wrote in reply and later saw him and told him that there was great
exaggeration in what the Dawn editor had written. What was true in it was
attempted to be remedied at once. The guilty parties were punished, whenever
traced. No pains were spared in order to trace the offenders. But he added that
the aggression in the first instance had come from the Muslim Leaguers. He did
not seek to justify the Hindu offenders. He and his fellow ministers were doing
their best to keep turbulent element under check. The speaker had a
suggestion to make to Dawn and all the newspapers, whatever their hue, that
they should avoid all exaggeration. In order to give effect to the suggestion,
they should appoint a joint board to which all reports about communal trouble
would be submitted and even passed on to the responsible ministers and, when
necessary, given publicity. His suggestion could find favour only if the editors
realized their duty to the public and were truly anxious that a peremptory stop
should be put to all communalism. Division having become a settled fact, it was
surely time that the country was allowed to settle down to the constructive
work of feeding and clothing the ill-fed and ill-clad millions. The editors had a
weighty part to play in the noble task. To foment trouble was ignoble.
Gandhi was sick at heart. In July he wrote to Sardar Patel: "I do not like what is
going on here. That does not mean that you should alter your course, but I do
not want it Lo be said that I was associated with it. Moreover, I ought to reach
Bihar and from there Noakhali before August 15. That, too, is important work.
All that I ask you, therefore, is that you should not detain me here. I also feel
that Harijan should now be closed. It does not seem to me to be right to give
contrary guidance to the country."
But the Congress leaders needed Gandhi's presence in Delhi. And so he

continued to be in the capital, trying to lighten their burden.
04. Paramountcy ( 1947 )
ON JULY 18, 1947, the two new dominions of India and Pakistan were born and
400,000,000 people came into their inheritance of political freedom, when a
Royal Commission of Peers, with the ceremony and ritual, dating back to
William the Conqueror's time, solemnly announced in the House of Lords the
royal assent to the Indian Independence Bill.
On July 19, Gandhi commenced his prayer speech with the remark that there
was nothing of special import that he could pass on to the audience in
connection with the day's Congress Working Committee meeting. One thing,
however, he thought, he should share with them. The members of the Working
Committee were deploring the mad desire for holding office that had today
seized the Congress ranks. It was a sad commentary on the members of an
organization that had identified itself with the masses. How many jobs could
any government provide in any'case? Government service was only for those
who would serve as a matter of duty, as was the case with the top-ranking
leaders. It was no use reminding him that such was not the case under the
British rule. They must not do as free men, what they were not ashamed to do
as slaves. Any hankering after the government jobs by Congressmen, simply
because the Congress was now in power was inconsistent with the Congress
ideals.
Gandhi then referred to a letter he had received from a person who had written
angrily about the rumour that from August 15th the Union Jack would occupy a
corner of the national flag. If this happened, the writer said, he would tear the
flag into pieces and would rather die than tolerate it. This, the speaker said,
was a thoughtless outlook. The Union Jack in itself had committed no crime.
The hurt caused to India during long years of subjection had been caused by the
British officers. But they were now going. Lord Mountbatten was staying on, but
not as the Viceroy. He would henceforth be their first servant to carry out the
will of the Union cabinet who were the people's representatives. The speaker
saw no harm whatsoever in the Union Jack occupying a corner in their national
flag so long as India remained a dominion. It would be an act of courtesy

towards their erstwhile enemy. It was a gesture worthy of the tradition that
they had patiently built up. The Indian independence measure had now become
law with an amazing speed. It sometimes took one year to get an important bill
through the British Parliament, but this had been passed inside of a week.
Whether the British were giving up their hold on India with good intent or
otherwise, time alone would show. In the meantime, they must realize that the
retention of the Union Jack, for such period as India was a dominion, was in his
opinion a point of honour. Even if, in the past, they looked upon the British as
enemies, he himself never looked upon anyone as an enemy—that was no
reason for visiting the sins of the fathers on the children. He had been a born
fighter and a rebel all his life and he would be the last person in the world to
submit to any indignity. And as a matter of fact, however, he had heard with
sorrow at the Working Committee that the Union Jack was not going to occupy
a place on the national flag. He beseeched the people not to rejoice over the
omission. The British Government having recognized their independence, it was
open to them to do as they liked. He was solicitous about their traditions.
On July 20, Gandhi said that some friends were insistently telling him that his
prayer discourses were having a depressant effect on the people in general.
After all, the freedom for which he had fought all his life was now at their
door. He knew that there could be no economic freedom or moral betterment
without political freedom. Therefore, why did he not rejoice? He admitted that
there was some force in this argument. But as a satyagrahi wedded to truth,
he could never say what did not come from the depths of his heart. The
partition of India was there, and he could not but be unhappy about it. If,
however, what he said depressed them, the fault was not his. He had told them
that it was no use crying over the spilt milk. He had been a rebel and a fighter
all his life and had found great happiness therein. But he had never been
defeated in spirit. He could not weep, nor could he make the others do so. He
had gone to Noakhali to wipe their tears and beseech them not to mourn over
the loss of life and property. A satyagrahi knew no defeat. Even if their leaders
had made a mistake, there was no consciousness about it. For, they believed
that what they had done was for the good of the country. If they were happy,
the audience too felt likewise. It was no part of his duty to seek to deprive
them of their happiness. If the Congress decided on celebrations on August
15th, those who felt like joining must join in the celebrations. The Congress, as
a democratic organization, was never going to force anyone to do anything
against his or her wishes. It was true that the British were soon going. And
those few who remained, would remain now as their servants to do their
bidding. He brought home to the audience the difference between gaining a
victory as the Congress had done through passive resistance and that gained by
the armed force. Now power was going to be in their hands. But the real day of
rejoicing would be when the Hindus and the Muslims would live as brothers,
even though in the two dominions. He was distressed to hear that the Punjab
Muslim League were holding out threats of violence if the decision of the
Boundary Commission went against their wishes. Some Sikhs had also declared
likewise. The speaker deplored this attitude. It was inconsistent with the
honour of the parties who had agreed to arbitration. Having agreed, they must
conform to the decision.
He then referred to the terrible tragedy of Burma, the murder of General Aung
San and his four other colleagues of the Burma Interim Government. It was
incredible that the very people who had fought for Burma's freedom and had
brought her to its threshold should have been murdered thus in cold blood by
the assassins. He knewr Burma and her people fairly well. The Burmese had
taken Buddhism from this country. They had been made part of India by the
British, but they had now elected to remain separate. Nevertheless, they were
our neighbours with close cultural ties. It was sad that the followers of Lord
Buddha should resort to such mad violence. He hoped that India would learn a
lesson from the sad happening which was a tragedy not only for Burma but for
Asia too and for the whole world. He was afraid that it was not an ordinary
murder, but there was political ambition behind the act. Such doings had
become the part and parcel of political strife all the world over, and it did not
augur well for the future of humanity. He referred to the barbarities in India
and pointed a warning finger and he hoped that the people would desist from
following the path of mutual destruction. He sympathized with the relatives of

the murdered leaders and with the Burma Government and asked the audience
to pray with him that God would change the hearts of those who had com-
mitted those murders for the attainment of their ends. What was needed was
not the dagger and the pistol, but the play of reason for change of heart that
would rid men's minds of the lust for blood.
On July 22, Nehru moved the following resolution on the national flag in the
Constituent Assembly:
“
Resolved that the national flag of India shall be a horizontal tricolour of deep
saffron, white and dark green, in equal proportion. In the centre of the white
band, there shall be a wheel in navy blue to represent the charkha. The design
of the wheel shall be that of the wheel, chakra, which appears on the abacus of
the Sarnath pillar of Asoka. The diameter of the wheel shall be approximate to
the width of the white band. The ratio of the width to the length of the flag
shall ordinarily be 2 :3."
Presenting to the Constituent Assembly the flag of free India, Jawaharlal Nehru
observed: "There is a slight variation in this flag from the one many of us have
used during these past years. The colours are the same. In the white previously
there was a symbol of charkha, which symbolized the common man in India,
which symbolized the masses, which symbolized their industry, which came to
us from the message which Mahatma Gandhi had delivered to the country."
On the national flag, Gandhi wrote in the Harijan: "The national flag by the
very name was accepted by the nation functioning through the Congress in
1921. Those, therefore, who say that the flag that was at one time the
Congress flag has now become the national flag of India are wrong. By making
an unnecessary fuss over what they only now call the national flag, albeit
unknowingly, they insult the Congress.
The Congress has been national from its very birth in 1885. It has never
represented a party, but by it have been represented all the parties and all
Indians. Of course, it is open to this great national organization any day to
commit suicide by becoming a party machine. The calamity may overtake it if
God's wrath descends upon it. Nevertheless, many will be praying that such a
misfortune may never befall it. Is it possible that Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah's taunt
that the Congress is national only in name but essentially Hindu in action, will
ever prove true?
"Here, however, let us confine ourselves to the flag. What has happened is
that, having been party to the two divisions of India, the Congress has
nevertheless delivered it from the British domination and has taken over the
largest part from them. Therefore, a swadeshi Government will henceforth
function under a flag under which the Congress has fought without violence
many a battle against the British power. I see nothing to gloat over in this
display of the flag. The joy and the excitement that accompany the stages in
the ascent of the Himalayas, giving one a variegated and picturesque view, are
not to be enjoyed on reaching the top. That no one has yet succeeded in
making that goal merely illustrates the truth that the goal is ever in sight but
never reached and the joy consists in the attempt.
"On the 13th of April, 1921, I wrote an article for Young India which I re-read
today before writing this article. I advise every reader to glance through that
article. The improved condition of the flag has value only if it answers the
significance attached to the original. If it does not, it is valueless in my
estimation. There is reason for this caution.
"Some say that the original flag has vanished for ever. A new generation has
begun and with it have come new and befitting conceptions. I have not yet
known a worthy son for whom age has disfigured his mother. It is conceivably
possible to gild pure gold, but the son is yet to be born who would embellish his
parent. Hence, in my opinion, nothing would have been lost, if our councillors
had never thought of interfering with the design of the original flag. But in
defence of the improvement, some say that 'the spinning wheel was an old
woman's solace and Gandhi's toy; but swaraj does not belong to the old women.
It belongs to the warriors and, therefore, we want the Asoka's disc, mounted
with lions, and, if the lions do not adorn the disc of the flag, the omission is
merely for the sake of art; they cannot be accommodated on it, but we will not
be satisfied until the lions found a place on the disc somewhere. We have had
enough of cowardliness. Nobody has yet had the experience of the non-viojence
of the brave. We shall talk about it, when we see it. This we know that only the
Hon is the undisputed king of forest life. The sheep and goats are his food. We
are tired of wearing khaddar in this age of advance. We have beautiful cloth
made of glass. Our forefathers used cloth as a protection against wind and rain.
Now we use cloth as ornamentation; therefore, it should be so transparent as
to show to advantage every limb of the body.
Then the improved flag has no need of khadi. We do not want to disfigure with
khadi the shop windows of our towns. Surely, it should be counted as creditable
for us when we do not regard it criminal for the villagers to wear khaddar and
for the old women to ply the spinning wheel in their humble cottage.'
"I would refuse to salute the flag that bears the foregoing interpretation,
however artistic it may appear.
"Another group of interpreters says that the new flag is merely an improvement
upon the original one. The spinning wheel has its undoubted honoured place on
it. The wheel on the improved pattern bereft of the spindle and the mal, may
not be counted as a defect, if it is purely due to the exigencies of art. After all,
every picture had to leave something for the imagination. The spinning wheel
in a picture has no slivers with the spinners at work on it. These are left for the
imagination to fill in. And this rule applies as well to the improved edition of
the original flag. Thus conceived, the improvement must appear purely
innocent to an unbiased mind. This tricolour flag with the wheel will certainly
consist of the hand- spun and hand-woven khadi. Our country has called it
khadi, whether it is woven from hand-spun cotton or silk. When the original
conception is kept intact, no one has the right to cavil at a touch of art. We
must not be deliberately inartistic. When the country was at war with a foreign
power, the fact of being so engaged was in itself a work of art. Now that it has
ended in success, there must be place for art, though, perhaps, of a lower
type, yet quite useful, in order to perpetuate the memory of valour, such as is
open to a weak nation. If any further, but not inconsistent, interpretations are
added to this indispensable interpretation, then the additions will certainly be
harmless. It is undoubtedly open to a rich mind to see in the same colours a
subtle meaning. Unity of design lies in the diversity of colours in the whole
universe. Some will recall through the wheel the name of that Prince of Peace,
Asoka, the founder of an empire, who ultimately gave up the pomp and the
circumstance of power to become the undisputed emperor of the hearts of
men, and became the representative of all the then known faiths. We would
call it a legitimate interpretation of the wheel to seek in it the Wheel of Law
ascribed to that living store of mercy and love.
"The spinning wheel, thus interpreted, adds to its importance in the life of
billions of mankind. To liken it to and to derive it from the Asoka disc is to
recognize in the insignificant-looking charkha the necessity of obeying the ever-
moving wheel of the Divine Law of Love."
On July 24, Gandhi observed at the prayer meeting that the A.I.S.A. had
stocked national flags worth about two lakhs of rupees. They wanted to know
what was to happen to those old flags, in view of the new national flag. He
asserted that the A.I.S.A. was an organization for the service of the poor. It
could ill afford to lose property worth about two lakhs. The Congress and the
Constituent Assembly could never do anything which could involve a poor man's
organization in such needless loss. The new national flag was in implication the
same as the existing tricolour flag with the charkha. So far as he knew, for the
sake of the exigencies of design, the wheel-was kept without the mal and the
spindle. He had made inquiries and was told that the new flag would fly on the
Government buildings and on our shops and our embassies abroad. But the
people could fly the old tricolour flag without any hesitation or hindrance.
When the King died, it was said, "The King is dead, long live the King." The
kingship continued. The coins had the impression of the successor king. The old
coins, however, bore the same value and were as current as the new ones. The
same held true about the existing tricolour flag. Only the A.-I.S.A. branches
should now no more manufacture flags with the old design.
A friend had written and asked him if the Congress would continue to exist
after August 15 and, if so, what would be its function and objective. The
speaker said in reply that the objective of the Congress had so far been the
attainment of India's independence through legitimate and peaceful means, or
in his language, through truth and non-violence. As he had said already, there
had been neither truth nor non-violence in their hearts. He had, however, no
doubt that the Congress had to remain even after the 15th of August, though
the objective must be altered. It was now a question of mutual strife or mutual
friendship. Today, they were cutting one another's throats and they were
preparing for further slaughter. If such a fight came, it would be worse than
during the Mutiny of 1857. In 1857 masses of India were not awake. That was
why he could not participate in the celebrations of August 15 whilst they were
getting ready for a blood war among themselves. God forbid that such calamity
befell India. And if it did, their freedom would be shortlived. Russia, America,
Great Britain and, perhaps, others also would soon step in and put an end to
the newly acquired political freedom.
Dr. Sjahriar had come to India to seek the help of Pandit Nehru and Jinnah
Saheb. He could only secure moral help, which was far superior to that of a
legion of soldiers. But he could not secure it, if we were at war with one
another. India's real contribution would be her moral weight on the side of
justice.
India was the home of the Hindus, the Muslims, the Sikhs, the Parsis, the
Christians and the others. The Parsis were driven out of Persia and found
shelter in India. Here they were treated as equals. That was the tradition of
India. She did not scorn or look down upon the new comers. She just absorbed
them.
But, now, there seemed to be a quarrel about the national language. What was
it to be? The speaker was told it was to be Hindi written in the Devanagari
script. He could never agree to that. He had been twice the president of the
Hindi Sahitya Sammelan. He could not be an enemy of Hindi and Urdu. But he
had realized that the language of the common people, the lingua franca of
India, could only be an amalgamation of simple Hindi and simple Urdu, written
in the Devanagari script or in the Urdu script, Hindustani. He knew many
Hindus, leave alone the Muslims, who did not understand Sanskritized Hindi,
nor could they write in the Devanagari script. Therefore, he would stick to
Hindustani, even if he had to stand alone. Muslims might regard themselves as
the enemies of Hindus today. India had to win Muslims over, not by servility or
appeasement, nor yet by enmity. They could do so only through friendship,
non-violence of the brave. He could never teach cowardice. He was a staunch
Hindu, but his Hinduism taught him equal regard for all religions.
A friend had written him to say that now that India had been divided, she could
not enjoy the status of a great nation in the world. The speaker did not agree
with this opinion, if the two parts behaved as brothers and friends.
In his prayer speech of July 25, Gandhi said that Rajendra Babu had told him
that he had received about 50,000 postcards, 30,000 letters and thousands of
telegrams, asking for the prohibition of cow slaughter in the Union of India. A
telegram was received today saying that a pundit had already undertaken a fast
in Cawnpore on that issue. The Hindu religion prohibited cow slaughter for the
Hindus, not for the world. The religious prohibition came from within. Any
imposition from without meant compulsion. Such compulsion was repugnant to
religion. India was the land not only of the Hindus, but also of the Musalmans,
the Sikhs, the Parsis, the Christians and the Jews and all who claimed to be of
India and were loyal to the Indian Union. If they could prohibit the cow
slaughter in India on the religious grounds, why could not the Pakistan
Government prohibit, say, idol worship in Pakistan on similar grounds? He was
not a temple- goer, but if he was prohibited from going to a temple in Pakistan,
he would make it a point to go there even at the risk of losing his head. Just as
Shariat could not be imposed on the non-Muslims, the Hindu law could not be
imposed on the non-Hindus. He then told the audience that many Hindus were
guilty of cow slaughter by slow torture. It was the Hindus who exported the
cows outside India, well knowing that they were to be slaughtered for beef
extract, which came to India and which the children of the orthodox Hindus ate
without compunction under medical advice. Were they not the co-partners in
cow slaughter?
Gandhi next referred to the Tree Plantation Week in Delhi. Many big people had
taken part in it including Lady Mountbatten. He was told that tione but she had
thought of watering the trees after planting. The official who originated the
idea of tree-planting did not do it for fancy, nor was it meant only for the
monied men. It began with them, so that the others would copy them and thus
add to the wealth and the rainfall of India. Deforestation had led to diminished
rainfall. Moreover, trees required little care except in the early stages. An acre
of land used for growing fruit trees would give greater yield than a crop of
wheat over the same area. They should also take to growing salad vegetables in
pots on their open terraces. Love of growing edibles on the open patches of
ground or in pots, provided healthy employment combined with innocent
amusement.
The question he had no time to answer on the previous day, he answered on

July 25. How were they to behave towards Muslims in the Union, in view of the
atrocities committed by them in many places? It had become very difficult to
trust the Muslims they had met and how were they to ensure the protection of
the non-Muslims in Pakistan? He had dealt with the question more than once.
Yet evidently the answer bore repetition. India was equally the home of the
Hindus and non-Hindus. All religions were on their trial. He had already
confessed his mistake. He had imagined that the weak could be non-violent. It
was not so. If they only could shed their cowardice, the Muslims would indeed
recognize their bravery and would cease to worry them, in the Indian Union,
they were bound to treat all with equal regard. In the absence of that bravery,
which non-violence alone gave, they had the law of revenge—division of the
army might well mean a graphic lesson in that law. The division rendered army
weak, if not useless, as an effective defence against foreign aggression. He had
shown how, if they did not take care, India might even have to pass through
military dictatorship. Was it to be the fate of India to win freedom with one
hand and lose it with the other? The Dutch seemed to be now trying to deprive
Indonesia of her freedom. Whatever their previous faults, the British were
leaving India of their own accord. A fratricidal war was bound to result in the
loss of that freedom. If they acted correctly in the Indian Union, no one would
dare touch the non-Muslims in Pakistan, however small their number might be.
It was, therefore, a good sign that the leaders of both the communities had
made a statement that they would accept the decision of the Boundary
Commission, whatever it was. They had also said that the minorities and even
erstwhile political Opponents would be quite safe in either part of India.

Correct conduct required that they should believe what they had said, till
proved otherwise.
Speaking after prayers on July 26, Gandhi said that from what he had heard and
read in newspapers it seemed that the strikes were becoming a nuisance in
India. At Calcutta, there was a "Pens Down" strike in the Accountant-General's
Office. Services like this were public utility services. The dislocation of these
would dislocate public life. He was not the one to tell the clerks and the others
in these departments to slave away under any conditions. But there were other
and unobjectionable ways of getting redress. The Pay Commission had
recommended quite a large increase in the salaries of the lower staff. But they
wanted still more. That seemed to be the cause of the strike. Why should the
director get Rs. 2,000 a month, and the chaprasi Rs. 20 a month? It certainly
sounded odd. He for one believed that, under the ideal conditions, the barrister
and the bhangi should both get the same payment. But he knew, as everybody
else did, that the society all the world over was far from the ideal. It was not
possible to pay everyone Rs. 100 per day. He knew too that the barrister did
not deserve what he got. But the clients gladly paid four rupees a day to a
tailor, but not more than eight annas a day to a sweeper. Society needed
patient and sustained education to bring it to the same level in earning. It
required much advanced training to reach that state of equality. In the
meanwhile, every effort must be made to bridge the gulf between the
payments of the higher and the lower ranks. The commission had done that. If
it was not a satisfactory rise, the causes must be examined. Among these must
be the capacity of the country to-bear the additional burden. There was no
such thing as an abrupt ascent in life. Let them not kill the goose that laid the
golden egg. That process would spell insolvency of the land.
In Bombay, he had learnt that the Government had already put into practice
the recommendations of the Pay Commission. But there was an agitation for a
still higher increase and there was now a threat of a token strike of a day. He
hoped that there was no truth in the statement. If there was, he hoped that
the matter would not be allowed to go beyond a threat. If it was meant
seriously, he would request the leaders of the movement to think twice before
embarking on what appeared to him to be a meaningless adventure, unless it
was an attempt to test the strength or the influence of the leaders behind the
movement. If such was the case, he could only regard it as a dangerous move,
harmful to the country. Let all who had influence in life remember that any
manoeuvring for party gains might endanger the freedom they were about to
gain from foreign domination.
The next day Gandhi referred to the conference of the princes called on July 25
by the Viceroy. It was right that the Viceroy should now explain to the rulers
what their position was going to be. He expressed the opinion that what the
Viceroy had said in the main appeared to be correct. It was well known that up
till now the princes had lived secure under the shelter of the British guns.
Britain was the paramount power and had concluded the treaties with some of
the princes. The latter had to do the bidding of the paramount power and could
not even appoint their own dewans. But paramountcy was now going and while
the Viceroy said that, legally and technically, the states were independent,
because that paramountcy was not devolving on either of the dominions, he
advised the rulers to join one or the other dominion, rather than be in
isolation. It was ridiculous for them to remain aloof and to maintain their
independent existence. The British could not compel the princes to join one or
the other dominion. The days of British compulsion were gone for ever. But, as
the Viceroy said, it would be wisdom for the princes to make their own choice
and enter one or the other dominion, having due regard to their geographical
situation and the compulsion of that position.
There was one lacuna in the Viceroy's speech which, perhaps, was inevitable,
but which the speaker stressed, he had a right to refer to. He was from a small
Kathiawad state himself. He knew what that position meant. There was no
mention of the people of the states. The British had occasionally hauled a
prince over the coals for misgovernance. But, by and large, the princes had
lived the lives of ease and luxury and had exploited their subjects. Now that
the imperial power was going, the princes would naturally welcome its
departure in the sense that the weight of the paramountcy was to be
withdrawn. In another sense, they might foolishly resent the paramountcy of

the ryots. He suggested to them that they should regard the people's
paramountcy as a privilege to be prized. That would add to their moral weight
and redound to their credit. But this meant that the princes should become
truly the first servants of the people. They had to show the spirit of service in
action, they should act on the advice of the Praja Mandals or the real leaders of
the people. That would be wisdom and in that way alone could the states'
people feel with the rest of India the glow of freedom.
The Praja Mandals had no experience of running the government. But the same
was true of the leaders, who were running the Government. The leaders were
Hons outside but, in office, they had become lambs. They were slaving away
night and day, in order to serve the people. Therefore, the Praja Mandals were
to be approached with trust.
The princes were on their trial. The taxes they received should be spent for the
welfare of the ryots, so that they received tenfold return for what they paid.
The states' people comprised probably one-fourth of the whole of India. Would
the ten crores of the states' subjects be able to rejoice on the 15th of August?
A simple Muslim girl had written to the speaker: "Freedom has come. But shall I
call it freedom or ruination?" There was force in what she had said. The British
could have said that the paramountcy would devolve on the dominions and they
could have adjudicated as to which dominion each stare was to join.
Unfortunately, they did not choose to do so. Nevertheless, the princes' road
was quite clear. He hoped that they would choose the right course forthwith
and' assist in making the whole of India, though in two parts, a true democracy.
There should be no mental reservations. All parties must lay all their cards on
the table. It was now easy to understand why they could have no demonstrative
celebration. He, therefore, recommended the celebration of the event with
fasting and prayer and deep heart-searching.
On July 28, he said that that evening he proposed to answer some of the
questions that were found in his correspondence file.
Question: "After the 15 th of August will there be two National Congresses or

only one for both the parts of India, if there is to be any need for the National
Congress at all?"
Answer: "In my opinion, the need for such an organization will be greater than
it has been upto now. No doubt, the function will be different. Unless
Congressmen foolishly subscribe to the theory of two nations based on two
religions, there can be only one Congress for one India. Division of India does
not, ought not to, divide the all-India body; India does not become two nations,
because she has been cut up into two sovereign states. Supposing one or more
states remain outside the two dominions, will the Congress exclude them and
their people from the National Congress? Will they not rather demand special
care and attention from the Congress? Problems more intricate than before will
certainly arise. Some of them may defy solution. That will be no reason for
cutting the Congress in twain. It will evoke greater statesmanship, deeper
thinking and cooler judgement than hitherto. Let us not anticipate paralysing
difficulties. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
Question: "Will the Congress become a communal body? There is an insistent

demand for it. Now that the Muslims regard themselves as aliens, why should
we not call the Union, Hindu India?"
Answer: "This question betrays gross ignorance. The National Congress can
never become a Hindu body. Those who will make it so, are enemies of India
and Hinduism. We are a nation of millions. Their voice, no one has heard.
Insistence, if there is any, is confined to the busybodies of our cities. Let us not
mistake their voice for the voice of the millions of India's villages. Thirdly, the
Muslims of the Union have not declared themselves as aliens. Lastly, in spite of
the many shortcomings of the Hindus, it can be safely claimed that Hinduism
has never been known to be exclusive. Many persons claiming different faiths
make us one and an indivisible nation. All these have an equal claim to be the
nationals of India. The so-called majority community has no right to impose
itself on the others. Might of numbers or of the sword shall not be right. Right
is the only true might, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding."
Question: "What should be the attitude of the non-Muslims towards the Pakistan
flag?"
Answer: "Pakistan flag has not yet come into being. Probably, it will be the
same as the Muslim League flag. If it is identified with Islam, it must have a flag
which is common to all the Musalmans of the world and it should command the
universal respect of all, who are not inimical to Islam. I know of no such flag
either for Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, or any other faith. Not being a student
of history, I am subject to correction. If the Pakistan flag, whatever its design,
represents all its inhabitants equally, irrespective of religion, it will command
my salute, as it should yours. In other words, the dominions must not be
enemies, one of the other. Dominions of the Commonwealth cannot be enemies
of one another. I am watching with painful interest how the South Africa
Dominion behaves towards the Dominions oflndia. Can they afford to be anti-
Indian? May the Europeans of that dominion refuse even to travel in the same
compartment with the Indians because they are Indians?"
On July 29, Gandhi told the player audience that he was leaving for Kashmir the
next day. Talk of his going to Kashmir had been going on for a long time. He
was not very keen to go there, although everyone should wish to visit that
beautiful place. He was going as a matter of duty to fulfil a promise made to
Jawaharlal Nehru.
After his return to India from South Africa in 1915, he met the late Maharaja of
Kashmir at the Kumbha Mela at Hardwar. The maharaja invited him to visit
Kashmir. But he had no time then. In 1938 he was the guest of Khan Saheb
Abdul Ghaffar Khan at Abbottabad. Sir N. Gopala- swamy Ayyangar was then
the Prime Minister of Kashmir. He had invited the speaker to go to Kashmir. It
was almost decided that he would go. But he could not. In 1945 there was the
Simla Conference. Important negotiations were going on at New Delhi, in which
Jawaharlal was the chief participant. He went on what was to be a day's visit to
Kashmir. But being a born fighter Jawaharlal got caught in a fight with the
state authorities and could not return. The Maulana Saheb was the President of
the Congress. He was upset and so was Lord Wavell that Jawaharlal was held
up. The speaker told the Maulana Saheb to send a telegram to Jawaharlal to
return immediately. His commitment would be taken up by the Congress and

that, if need be, the speaker would go instead. As a disciplined soldier that he
was, Jawaharlal returned. When, therefore, over a month ago, when
Jawaharlal felt that he should pay a flying visit to Kashmir, the speaker offered
to go in his place, provided the Viceroy had no objection to it. The Viceroy
advised the speaker to postpone his visit. After the protracted delay, it became
a question as to who should go now. It was felt that Jawaharlal's visit would be
more open to misinterpretation than his. As a matter of fact, neither had any
intention of influencing the decision as to joining one dominion or the other. So
far as he was concerned, he knew what Jawaharlal wanted to go there for. He
did not want to let the workers in Kashmir feel that they were neglected.
Jawaharlal belonged to Kashmir. The speaker was connected with Kashmir as
President of the A.I.S.A. He was not going to Kashmir to secure Sheikh
Abdullah's release. He was certainly going to see Begum Abdullah. But he had
no wish to see the Kashmir functionaries, although he was courteous enough
not to object to any such proposal. He would certainly like to meet common
men and women of Kashmir whether Muslim or non-Muslim. So far as the
accession to the dominions was concerned, he was firmly of opinion, that it was
the ryots who should decide, not the rulers. The British Government were a
paramountcy imposed. The real paramountcy was inherently vested in the
ryots. His visit to Kashmir was thus in fulfilment of the promise referred to by
him. He had no wish to address public meetings.
The speaker was taken to task for advising the people to fast and pray and spin
on August 15. Was it not a sign of mourning? It was not so. There was cause for
sorrow, inasmuch as the country had been cut in twain. But there was cause
too for rejoicing, in that the British power was now quitting India. There was
more than enough to chasten them. Even when there was cause for unmixed
joy as on the 6th of April, 1919, when there was countrywide awakening and
the Hindus, the Musalmans and the others freely mixed with one another, he
had advised the celebration by prayer, fasting and spinning. The reason for
humbling themselves before God was now infinitely greater when brother was
fighting brother, when there was shortage of food and clothing, and when the
country's leaders were called upon to shoulder a burden under which, without
God's grace, the strongest back might well break.
Some were even thinking of having black-flag demonstrations. He could not

approve of such. There was no cause for mourning.
Gandhi reached Srinagar on August 1, and left it on the morning of the 4th.
During his short stay, every minute was booked up. All kinds of people who
came to see him were unanimous in asking for the release of Sheikh Abdullah
and other leaders, and for the removal of the Prime Minister of Kashmir. He
told them that he had not come on a political mission. He had no intention to
ask for the release of Sheikh Abdullah. A satyagrahi's mere stay in jail was a
most potent force to achieve the objective.
At Jammu, on August 4, deputations of workers and students waited on him.

"India will be free on August 15," they said. "What of Kashmir?" "That will
depend on the people of Kashmir," he replied. What could the people do when
Sheikh Abdullah was behind the bars? they asked. He discouraged the tendency
to rely on one man and feel helpless in his absence. They must learn to stand
on their own legs. The leader's function was to help them in that. Spoon-
feeding could not go on for ever.
They wanted to know whether Kashmir would join the Indian Union or Pakistan.
He had not gone to Kashmir to discuss this question, he said. It should be
decided by the will of the Kashmiris.
Gandhi had promised himself that he would make no public speeches in Kashmir
so as to make his visit devoid of all political colour, as far as was possible. On
the first day even the public prayer was not held. But the authorities wrote
saying that they had no objection to the prayers being held in the compound of
the house where he was staying. So the prayer was held and was attended by
thousands on August 2. Men and women flocked from the neighbouring villages
to have his glimpse.
Gandhi's heart was with the sufferers of the Punjab. Therefore, he cut short his
stay in Kashmir and returned to Jammu on the 4th, from where he motored
down all the way back to Pindi, so as to spend som e time with the refugees at
the Wah camp. The number of refugees in this camp had reached 24,000 at one
stage. But the fear of the coming 15th of August was fast driving them out of
the West Punjab. They numbered about 9,000 on the day ot Gandhi's visit. They
were all insistent that their camp should be removed to East Punjab before
August 15th. They were terror-stricken. The things that they had seen and
passed through were too terrible to face again. They could not trust the
Musalmans. If left in West Punjab, they would have no alternative except to
embrace Islam or to die, they said.
Addressing the prayer gathering at Wah on August 5, Gandhi said that he was
glad to be able to visit the refugee camp. He was glad too that he was able to
pay what was his second visit to the Panja Saheb, the famous gurudwara. He
had a talk with refugees.
Before, however, he dealt with matters arising out of these talks with the
representatives of the refugees, he stated that he would like to say a word
about his Kashmir visit. He had made up his mind not to hold any public
meeting or address them, but he was able to see the workers. The Begum
Saheba, wife of Sheikh Abdullah, was with him throughout the three days he
was in Srinagar. He was able to see also the Maharaja Saheb and the Maharani
Saheba and Prime Minister Kak Saheb. He was sorry that he was not able to
meet Sheikh Abdullah who was undoubtedly the leader of the Kashmiris. He had
not gone there to see the Sheikh Saheb. He was able, however, to hold the
public prayers for two days in Kashmir and one day in Jammu. These were
attended by thousands. He could say that on August 15, all being well, legally
the State of Kashmir and Jammu would be independent. But he was sure that
the state would not remain in that condition for long after August 15. It had to
join either the Indian Union or Pakistan. It had a predominantly Muslim
population. But he saw that Sheikh Saheb had fired the Kashmiris with local
patriotism. The British paramountcy would terminate on the 15th. Real
paramountcy would then commence. He referred to the paramountcy of the
Kashmiris. They had one language and one culture and, so far as he could see,
they were one people. He could not distinguish readily between a Kashmiri
Hindu and a Kashmiri Muslim. In the large deputation that he saw, it was very
difficult for hijn to know whether it was predominantly Muslim or Hindu.

Whatever it was, he had no hesitation in saying that the will of the Kashmiris
was the supreme law in Kashmir and Jammu state. He was glad to say that the
maharaja and maharani readily acknowledged the fact. He had the good
fortune to read what was euphemistically called the Treaty of Amritsar, but
which was in reality a deed of sale. He supposed that it would be dead on the
15th August. The seller was the then British Governor-General, and Maharaja
Gulab Singh was the buyer. The treaty going, would the state revert to the
British and, therefore,, to England? If to India, to which part? The speaker held
that without going into the intricacies of law, which he had no right to dilate
upon, the common sense dictated that the will of the Kashmiris should decide
the fate of Kashmir and Jammu. The sooner it was done, the better. How the
will of the people would be determined was a fair question. He hoped that the
question would be decided between the two dominions, the maharaja and the
Kashmiris. If the four could come to a joint decision, then much trouble would
be avoided. After all Kashmir was a big state, it had the greatest strategic
value, perhaps, in all India. So much for Kashmir.
He then dealt with the question of refugees at Wah camp. Among them they
were nearly 9,000. The Hindus and the Sikhs who discussed the question with
him said that they were afraid of the approach of August 15th. He confessed
that he did not in any way whatsoever share the fear. Nor could he appreciate
it. The Muslims had got their Pakistan. They could now have no quarrel with the
Hindus and the Sikhs of the Punjab. Jinnah Saheb and the other Muslim
Leaguers had given assurances that the non- Muslims were as safe in Pakistan as
the Muslims. He invited them all to accept these assurances. Supposing that the
assurance proved untrue and the worst fears of the refugees proved true, it
would be the beginning of the ruin of Islam. He refused to believe that Muslim
leaders would be guilty of such a suicidal act. He asked the refugees, men and
women, to dispel all fear. If he could put off his departure for Noakhali, he
would gladly pass August 15th in the midst of the refugees at Wah. He
proposed, however, to do the next best thing. They saw Dr. Sushiia Nayyar
taking notes of what he was saying. She herself belonged to Gujrat a district in
West Pakistan. He had conferred with her before coming to the meeting and,
though she was otherwise to accompany him to Noakhali, she had accepted his
advice to stay with refugees on his behalf, in order to help them to dispel all
fear about August 15. He knew that she had no such fear. She was with him in
Noakhali, as was also her brother Pyarelal. She was posted in one of the worst
affected areas of Noakhali and, through medical assitance; she had become
popular among the Muslims, as she was undoubtedly among the Hindus. He had
heard from the district commissioner, who was a Muslim, that the refugees in
and about Rawalpindi had nothing to fear. They should feel as safe, as the
Muslim inhabitants.
At the Panja Saheb, an address was presented to him in Gurumukhi. It stressed

the sufferings of the Sikh community and the dangers that faced them and their
shrines in Pakistan. Twice the gurudwara was attacked by the Muslim mobs
during the recent disturbances. The attack was warded off. But they wanted
definite and concrete measures to ensure the safety of the gurudwara. They
also wanted East Punjab to be made into a Sikh state where Sikh religion and
culture would prosper.
Replying to the address, he said that he did not consider it possible that East
Punjab should be handed over entirely to the Sikhs to govern. He felt that the
Sikhs should never entertain such an unworthy ambition. They were reputed to
be a warlike race. With them of all the persons in the world, merit and merit
alone should be the sole test for holding any office. As to the protection of
Panja Saheb, Nankana Saheb and other gurudwaras that may be found in
Pakistan or elsewhere, Gandhi said:
"Do not look to any other power outside yourselves for the protection of these
shrines. I would like every Sikh to be a defender of his faith and, therefore, of
all the gurudwaras and not merely of Panja Saheb, which is one of the greatest.
At the same time, I want you to shed all fear about the future. I would ask you
to rely upon the plighted word of Muslim leaders. The Muslims had got their
Pakistan. They have no quarrel now with any one in India, at least they should
have none. If your fears materialize and any attempt at desecration of the
gurudwaras is made by the Muslims, it will be contrary to the tradition of Islam,
as I know it. And those Muslims who take part in such desecration would be
partakers in the destruction of Islam. Every faith is on its trial in India. God is
the infallible judge and the world which is His creation will judge Muslim
leaders not according to their pledges and promises, but according to the deeds
of these leaders and their followers. What I have said of the Muslim leaders is
also true of the leaders and followers of other faiths.
"The real test is soon coming," Gandhi remarked to Congress workers who saw
him off at Lahore. For himself, he declared, the rest of his life was going to be
spent in Pakistan. "May be in East Bengal or West Punjab or perhaps the
Frontier Province."
"My present place is in Noakhali," he said, "and I would go there even if I have
to die. But as soon as I am free from Noakhali, I will come to the Punjab. I hope
to be free from Noakhali very soon."
05. Under A Muslim Roof ( 1947 )
ON THE train, August 7, 1947, Gandhi wrote an article on the task before the
students:
"There should be only one national organization including the Hindus, the
Muslims and the others. Students are the makers of the future. They cannot be
partitioned. I am sorry to observe that neither the students have thought for
themselves, nor have the leaders left them to their studies, so that they can
become good citizens. The rot began with the alien government. We, the
inheritors, have not taken the trouble to rectify the errors of the past. Then
the different political groups have sought to catch the students as if they were
the shoals offish. And stupidly the students have run into the net spread for
them.
"It is, therefore, a Herculean task for any students' organization to undertake.
But there must be a heroic spirit amongthem, who would not shrink from the
task. The scope will be to knit them together into one. This the students cannot
do, unless they will learn to steer clear of active politics. A student's duty is to
study the various problems that require solution. His time for action comes
after he finishes his studies.
"They must eschew active politics. It is a sign of one-sided growth that all
parties have made use of the student world for their own purpose. This was
probably inevitable when the purpose of education was to create a race of
slaves who would hug their slavery. That part of the business is over, I hope.
The students' first business is to think out the education that the children of a
free nation should receive. The education of today is obviously not such. I must
not go into the question as to what it should be. Only they must not allow
themselves to be deceived into the belief that it is the function only of the
elders in the university senates. They must stimulate the faculty of thinking. I
do not even remotely suggest that the students can force the situation by
strikes and the like. They have to create the public opinion by offering
constructive and enlightened criticism. The senators having been brought up in
the old school are slow to move. They can truly be acted upon by
enlightenment.
"A student's life has been rightly likened to the life of a sanyasi. He must be the
embodiment of simple living and high thinking. He must be discipline incarnate.
His pleasure is derived from his studies. They do provide the real pleasure when
study ceases to be a tax the student has to pay. What can be a greater pleasure
than that a student marches from knowledge to more knowledge?"
After arriving in Calcutta Gandhi underwent medical examination. In a bulletin,

Dr. Sunil Bose stated that, in view of the rainy season and fear of malaria in
Noakhali district, it was essential to cut down his stay there to eight or ten days
at the most. He added: "I have examined Mahatma Gandhiji after an interval of
eight years. His physical condition is unchanged since 1939. In fact, the facial
appearance and colour seem to have improved marvellously. His body weighs
today 113 pounds against 112 to 114 pounds in 1939. His heart and lungs are
sound. The pulse rate is 68 per minute and regular, volume good. A general
outlook in health is on the whole very favourable."
At Sodepur, on August 9th, Gandhi devoted his prayer address to the

situation.in Calcutta. His destination, he said, was Noakhali, but he had been
listening the whole day long to the woes of Calcutta. Some Muslim friends and
also some Hindus complained that the Hindus seemed to have gone mad, not
that the Musalmans had become wiser. But now that the Muslim police and
Muslim officials were almost withdrawn and replaced by the Hindus, the Hindus
had begun to believe that they were now free to do what they liked, as the
Musalmans were reported to have done under the Muslim League ministry. He
was not going to examine what was done under the Muslim League ministry. His
purpose was undoubtedly to know what his co-worker Dr. Ghosh's ministry was
now doing. Was it true that the Muslims were living in terror? If it was at all
true, it was a severe reflection on the Congress ministry. He wras rightly asked,
before he went up to Noakhali, to tarry in Calcutta to "pour a pot of water over
the raging fire" that was burning Calcutta. He would love to give his life if,
thereby, he could contribute to the quenching of mob fury. He would never be
able to subscribe to the theory that the doings in Calcutta were the result of
goondaism. He held that the crude open goondaism was a reflection of the
subtle goondaism they were harbouring within. Hence, it was the duty of the
Governments to hold themselves responsible for the acts of goondas, so called.
He hoped that Calcutta would not present the disgraceful spectacle of the hot
goondaism when they were entering upon full responsibility.
On August 10 there was a big crowd at the prayer congregation. Their

acclamation was piercing. Gandhi had to speak to them for a few minutes to
establish quiet.
Gandhi said that he had thought that he was to go to Noakhali the next day.
Owing to the pressure from many Muslim friends who had seen him, he had
decided to stay to see if he could contribute his share in the return of sanity in
the premier city of India. The argument of the Muslim friends went home. He
had, at the same time, observed that if he did not go to Noakhali and any
mishap took place, his life would become forfeit, as he had said already about
Bihar; He had seen the ministers and the others too during the day. He would
like to see the places, where the destruction wass
said to have been wrought by the Hindus. He had also learnt that there were
some parts of Calcutta which were inaccessible to the Hindus, though many
premises therein used to be occupied by them. Similar was the case with the
Hindu localities. His head hung in shame to listen to this recital of man's
barbarism. He would love to go to these localities and see for himself how
much truth there was in these recitals. He was told that there were not more
than twenty-three per cent Muslims in Calcutta. It was unthinkable that such a
minority could coerce the majority without countenance from or incompetence
of authority. Similarly, it was unthinkable that in the midst of a government
which knew the art of government, the majority could for one moment be
permitted to coerce the minority. He was also told that what the Muslim police
and the Muslim officers were alleged to be doing before, now that the Congress
ministry was in power, the Hindu police and Hindu officers were doing. They
had become partial in the administration of justice. If this wretched spirit of
communalism had entered the police force, the prospect was black, indeed. He
hoped that the police would realize the dignity of their profession.
Addressing the prayer gathering on August 11, Gandhi said :
"This evening I must devote to answering some questions addressed to me. One
of them complains that the prominent men were admitted but the
comparatively unknown persons were insulted. There was an inordinate rush
throughout the day, it being Sunday. I agree that when there is such a rush,
there should be no distinction made between the known and unknown persons.
But I had given previous appointments to some who had to be admitted. Then
there were many who were specially working for the day. I would, therefore,
plead with those who may feel disappointed on such occasions, to have
forbearance and patience, as I would plead with the volunteers to be uniformly
courteous and gentle with the public.
"I had read something about the Chittagong flood, the day before yesterday,
when I came to Calcutta. This is the third day and I see that the angry waters
have not yet subsided, and the extent of loss to life and property no one can
yet assess with any degree of accuracy. It is hardly necessary to remind
ourselves, in the face of such catastrophe, that we may not think of east or
west, or of Pakistan and of Hindustan. Adversity makes strange bedfellows.
Surely, then, those who were bedfellows till yesterday, must not cease to be at
least on such occasions, whatever their political or religious differences might
be or might have done. It is a calamity to cope with not merely for East Bengal
but for the whole of Bengal, and not for Bengal only but for the whole of India.
There 'must be a strong reliable committee to collect and to distribute funds.
Local men come first. Round them can arise an All-Bengal Relief Committee,
and if need be even an All-India one. No trouble need be given to all India if
Bengal alone can cope with the situation. My whole heart goes out to
Chittagong in its dire calamity. May the survivors bear it with fortitude.
"Correspondents continue to ask all sorts of questions about the appointments

of the governors, ministers and the like, as if I were a member of the Congress
Working Committee, or could affect its decisions. I know and I admit that I have
and shall always retain, by right of service, a place in the hearts of the
Congressmen. I know too that I shall forfeit that place immediately I begin to
overstep my limits. Legal status I have none, moral status can be retained only
so long as the moral platform is firmly heid.
" 'Do you agree that the leaders of both the communities should proceed to East
and West Bengal and show that they have no differences now to quarrel over ?'
"My answer is emphatically 'Yes', if the leaders are one at heart. If the word
belies the thought, then the going about will be worse than useless. The
newspaper war still continues. I would always prefer an open war to the war of
hearts. Are we sure that the leaders trust one another? My fear is that neither
at the top, nor at the bottom, are we cleansed of hypocrisy. I can, therefore,
but repeat my old argument that we must unlearn the habit of retaliation in
every shape and form. Blow for blow is a crude form and, probably, more
excusable than the subtle one of evil thought for its kind. Thought is the root of
speech and deed. I am sorry that I am unable to return a more comfortable
answer. There is none that I know. This is said to hearten ourselves, not to
dishearten us. For I have said the naked truth. Within my experience, it ever
heartens. Is it not heartening to know the true remedy for a disease? Any other
is a palliative and in the end aggravates the disease."
On August 12, Gandhi said that the 15th August was to be a landmark in India's
history. It was a day when India would be declared free of the foreign yoke.
India was to be an independent nation. He had told how the day was to be
observed, but he was probably alone in the view. Already, there was an
announcement that the Muslims of Calcutta were to observe it as a day of
mourning. He hoped that it was not true. No man could be compelled to
observe the/day in a particular manner. It was to be a perfectly voluntary act.
He Would ask Muslim countrymen not to mourn over the freedom. The present
distemper was.to go.
What were then the Hindus in Pakistan to do? They should salute the Pakistan
flag if it meant freedom and equality of all in every respect, irrespective of
caste, colour or creed.

He had heard further that on August 15th the Indians in the French and the
Portuguese possessions were to declare their freedom of France and Portugal,
respectively. That, he pointed out, would be a thoughtless act. It would be a
sign, perhaps, of arrogance. The British were retiring, not the French and the
Portuguese. He, undoubtedly, held the view that the Indians in these
possessions were bound to merge in independent India in good time. Only, the
Indians in those territories should not take the law in their own hands. They
had the constitutional means open to them, and then there was the Prime
Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, who had vindicated the freedom of Indonesia.
Surely, he was not going to neglect his own kith and kin in the two possessions.
If they had any doubt about the validity of his advice, they should act on
Jawaharlal's advice.
Gandhi then referred to another important subject. They knew that he

prolonged his stay in Calcutta by two days at the instance of his Muslim friends.
Last night Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy came to see him. He suggested that it
would be contrary to the speaker's practice to leave Calcutta while it was going
through the horrors of the communal strife. Shaheed Saheb suggested that the
speaker should prolong his stay in the city and work until real peace was
restored. The speaker replied that Suhrawardy Saheb and he should live under
the same roof in the disturbed parts of Calcutta. It would be best to live
unprotected by the police or the military. In brotherly fashion they would
approach the people and argue with them and tell them that now that the
partition had taken place by agreement, there was no longer any reason why
the two parties should quarrel. The decision of the Boundary Commission was
going to be announced in a day or two, and it was in the fitness of things that
all the parties should abide by the decision in a becoming manner. After all,
the two parties had appointed an arbitration tribunal. They were in honour
bound to abide by the award, whatever it was.
His proposal to Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy was of such an important nature

that he could not afford to give a hasty reply. The speaker, therefore, had
asked him to consult his aged father as well as his daughter before coming to a
decision.

During the afternoon, Mr. Osman, ex-Mayor of Calcutta, had arrived with Mr.
Suhrawardy's message, stating that the latter had accepted the speaker's
proposal without reservation. It was now time, therefore, for them to choose
quarters in the midst of the worst affected areas and see what could be done
by joint effort.
Gandhi observed that he was warned that Shaheed Saheb was not to be relied
upon. The same thing was said about himself also. He was described as the
worst enemy of Islam. And he was supposed to be a consummate hypocrite.
God alone knew men's hearts. He asserted that he spoke and acted as he
believed. He had known Suhrawardy Saheb since the days of the Faridpore
Conference, to which the late Deshbandhu had taken him. Nobody had any right
to prejudge anybody. He would trust, as he expected to be trusted. Both would
live under the same roof and would have no secrets from each other. They
would together see all the visitors. People should have the courage to speak
out the truth under all circumstances and in the presence of those against
whom it had to be said.
In the afternoon of August 13, Gandhi arrived at a Muslim residence in

Beliaghata. It was a ramshackle building open on all sides to the crowds. He
was accompanied by Mr. S. M. Osman, the ex-Mayor and secretary of the
Calcutta District Muslim League, and Mr. A. P. Choudhury, the Political
Secretary to the Premier of West Bengal. Manu and Ava Gandhi, who were to
stay with him, also accompanied Gandhi.
The Premier of the newly formed cabinet for West Bengal, Dr. P. C. Ghosh, told
the press that although Gandhi wanted to stay in the disturbed area without
the military or the police protection, the Government could not sit idle without
arranging such protection. "If not for Gandhiji, we will have to do it for Mr.
Suhrawardy," said Dr. Ghosh.
Beliaghata, a filthy locality full of hooligans, had been one of the most
disturbed areas of the city. There had been many cases of bomb-throwing, use
of fire-arms by private individuals, arson, looting and clashes between rival
groups. It had a mixed population of Hindus and Muslims.

A short while after Gandhi had arrived at his new residence, persistent shouts
of "Suhrawardy, go back!" were heard at the entrance. The crowd had stopped
the car by which Mr. Suhrawardy came. With the help of the police, the car
entered the compound and he quietly came near the room where Gandhi had
already settled down and was attending to his heavy correspondence. Unlacing
the shoes which he left outside, Mr. Suhrawardy entered the room. Gandhi
greeted him with a smile.
The demonstrators swelled in numbers. Professor Nirmal Kumar Bose, Gandhi's

secretary, approached the angry crowd and requested them to. maintain peace
and place before Gandhi their grievances. The angry demonstrators refused to
hear his pleadings.
Angry young men who were excited volleyed Gandhi with questions: "Why did
you not come to us when fire was raging in Hindu homes after August 16th last
year? Why don't you go and settle down at Kolootola and Park Circus areas
where a large number of Hindu houses are lying vacant and ruined?"
Gandhi explained that they should remember that from the August 16th last
year up to that day, the whole political structure of India had changed. He was
in Calcutta, only on his way to Noakhali, to be there, lest anything happened in
that district. He had postponed his departure for Noakhali as Suhrawardy Saheb
had flown from Delhi only to say that Calcutta was a raging fire and he should
pour a pot of water on it. He thought that by staying on in Calcutta, he could
do a lot for the Hindus of Noakhali. He never was an enemy of the Hindus, but
to him the Hindus and Muslims were same, brothers, and he wanted as much
the Muslims to start living in their homes again, as the Hindus.
There was no ugly incident in Calcutta on August 14. Calm prevailed around
Gandhi's Beliaghata residence in marked contrast to the angry demonstrations
on the previous day. Arrangements had been made to hold a public prayer in
the evening in a near-by park. Mr. Suhrawardy, who was unable to stay with
Gandhi the previous night for want of sleeping accommodation, returned there
in the morning.

During his morning walk, Gandhi inspected some houses destroyed during the
disturbances in the immediate neighbourhood of his residence.
Some parties of Hindus and Muslims went round the city, raising slogans of
Hindu-Muslim unity and welcoming the new Dominions of India and Pakistan.
There were scenes of Hindu-Muslim fraternization in some of the areas that
were recently disturbed. Gandhi drove round an area of Beliaghata in the
evening to see for himself this picture of fraternization which was reported to
him by a number of visitors.
On that day, Gandhi addressed a prayer congregation at Beliaghata. It was

attended by over ten thousand people. He said that the next day was the fixed
day of deliverance from the foreign yoke. It was, therefore, a great day. They
were bound to celebrate it. In his opinion, it was a day when both the
dominions were to shoulder a heavy burden. He invited everyone to have fast
and prayer during the day for the well-being of India and pass it in spinning as
much as possible. For, it was hand-spinning that had knit the poor and the rich
together, and that had given occupation to the countless men and women who
were without occupation.
He explained once more the reason for postponing his visit to Noakhali and
coming to stay in the present place. He had many warnings against Shaheed
Saheb. He was unaffected by the warnings. He was bound to believe his word,
as he expected him to accept his word. Let them not think that they were to
neglect the parts of Calcutta which were deserted by their Hindu inhabitants
and were occupied by the Muslims. They were working for the peace of the
whole of Calcutta and he invited his audience to believe with them that if
Calcutta returned to sanity and real friendship, then Noakhali and the rest of
India would be safe. He mentioned that Shaheed Saheb was in the building but
he had with his consent kept himself away from the meeting as he wanted to
avoid being the slightest; cause of irritation to the meeting. But he was glad
that they had exhibited becoming tolerance and gave him the courage to bring
Shaheed Saheb to the meeting. After all, they should live and work together in
perfect cooperation, if their difficult mission was to succeed.

"From tomorrow we shall be delivered from the bondage of the British rule,"
Gandhi said. "But from midnight today India will be partitioned too. While,
therefore, tomorrow will be a day of rejoicing, it will be a day of sorrow as
well. It will throw a heavy burden of responsibility upon us. Let us pray to God
that He may give us strength to bear it worthily."

06. Birth Of Free India ( 1947 )
ON AUGUST 14, 1947, the Dominion of Pakistan was heralded at Karachi. Jinnah
said that "the two Indias are parting as friends and will continue to be friends
for ever".
At the other end, entire Delhi kept awake to witness the historic event of
ushering in the freedom of India at midnight. Unprecedented scenes of
enthusiasm were witnessed, inside and outside the Constituent Assembly
chamber, where seething and swaying humanity wildly cheered the momentous
event, heralded with the blowing of conches and cries of "Mahatma Gandhi-ki-
jai".
Rajendra Prasad, the President of the Constituent Assembly, opening the

proceedings, recalled in grateful remembrance the services and sacrifices of
those countless men and women, known and unknown, who with smiles on their
faces walked to the gallows and faced the bullets. He paid tribute and
reverence to "Mahatma Gandhi, who has been our beacon light, our guide and
philosopher during the last thirty years."
"Long years ago, we had made a trust with destiny, and now the time comes,
when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very
substantially," observed Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India,
moving a resolution prescribing an oath for the members in the Constituent
Assembly. At the hour of midnight Jawaharlal said: "When the world sleeps,
India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely
in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends and
when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. It is fitting that at
this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India
and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity . . ."
Prior to the pledge-taking ceremony, which took place after midnight,

Jawaharlal moved the adoption of the text of the pledge in the shape of a
motion : "At this solemn moment, when people of India, through suffering and
sacrifice, have secured freedom, I, a member of the Constituent Assembly of

India, do dedicate myself in all humility to the service of India and her people
to the end that this ancient land attain her rightful place in the world and
make her full and willing contribution to the promotion of world peace and the
welfare of mankind."
The clock struck twelve and one member of the Constituent Assembly blew a
conch, an ancient Hindu custom, to herald an auspicious event. Some one
shouted it was August 15th and more cheering followed.
The President then solemnly read the pledge, which was repeated by all the
members, standing. He then proposed that "it should be intimated to the
Viceroy that the Constituent Assembly of India has assumed power for the
governance of India."
In a stirring message to the nation, Jawaharlal Nehru said:
"The appointed day has come—the day appointed by destiny—and India stands
forth again after long slumber and struggle, awake, vital, free and
independent. The past clings on to us still in some measure and we have to do
much before we redeem the pledges we have so often taken. Yet the turning
point is past, history begins anew for us, the history which we shall live and
act, and the others will write about.
"It is a fateful moment for us in India, for all Asia and for the world. A new star
rises, the star of freedom in the East, a new hope comes into being, a vision
long cherished materializes. May the star never set and that hope never be
betrayed.
"We rejoice in that freedom, even though clouds surround us and many of our
people are sorrow-stricken and difficult problems encompass us. But freedom
brings responsibilities and burdens and we have to face them in the spirit of a
free and disciplined people.
"On this day, our first thoughts go to the architect of this freedom, the Father
of our Nation who, embodying the old spirit of India, held aloft the torch of
freedom and lighted up the darkness that surround us. We have often been
unworthy followers of his, and we have strayed from his message, but not only
we, but the succeeding generations, will remember this message and bear the

imprint in their hearts of this great son of India, magnificent in his faith and
strength and courage and humility. We shall never allow that torch of freedom
to be blown out however high the wind or stormy the tempest.
"Our next thoughts must be of the unknown volunteers and the soldiers of
freedom who without praise or reward, have served India even unto death.
"We think also of our brothers and. sisters, who have been cut off from us by
political boundaries and who unhappily cannot share at present in the freedom
that has come. They are of us and will remain of us, whatever may happen, and
we shall be sharers in their good and ill fortune alike.
"The future beckons to us. Whither do we go and what shall be our endeavour?
To bring freedom and opportunity to the common man, to the peasants and the
workers of India. To fight and end poverty and ignorance and disease. To build
up a prosperous, democratic and progressive nation, and to create social,
economic and political institutions, which will ensure justice and fullness of life
to every man and woman.
"We have hard work ahead. There is no resting for anyone of us, till we redeem
our pledge in full, till we make all the people of India, what the destiny
intended them to be. We are citizens of a great country, on the verge of bold
advance, and we have to live up to that high standard. All of us, to whatever
religion we may belong, are equally the children of India, with equal rights,
privileges and obligations. We cannot encourage the communalism or narrow-
mindedness, for no nation can be great whose people are narrow in thought or
in action.
"To the nations and the peoples of the world, we send greetings and pledge
ourselves to co-operate with them in furthering peace, freedom and
democracy.
"And to India, our much loved motherland, ancient, eternal and ever new, we
pay our reverent homage and we bind ourselves afresh to her service. Jai Hind."
On the morning of August 15th, Lord Mountbatten announced in the Constituent

Assembly: "I have the honour to be the Governor-General of independent India.
I am your servant."

"At this historic hour," he added, "let us not forget all that India owes to
Mahatma Gandhi, the architect of her freedom through non-violence. We must
miss his presence here today and would have him know how much he is in our
thoughts."
Soul-stirring scenes of national rejoicings marked by unique demonstration of

Hindu-Muslim unity were witnessed in Calcutta on August 15th. Vast crowds of
Hindus and Muslims freely intermingled with each other, dancing, singing,
merry-making together in the streets, from an early hour of the morning till at
late hour of the night, reverberated with deafening shouts of "Hindus and
Muslims Unite" and "Jai Hind".
Gandhi's residence in Beliaghata became a place of pilgrimage for the citizens

of Calcutta. All day long, unending stream of people wended their way to his
residence and offered their respects to him. There were moving scenes of
Hindu-Muslim fraternization in front of his residence.
There were festivities all over the country. But the man who more than anyone
else had been responsible for freeing India from the alien rule did not share in
these rejoicings. When an official of the Information and Broadcasting
Department of the Government oflndia came for a message, Gandhi stated that
"he had run dry." When told again that if he did not give any message, it would
not be good, he replied : "There is no message at all. If it is bad, let it be so."
When a representative of the B. B. C. came for a message, which would be
broadcast all over the world, retorted Gandhi tersely: "I must not yield to the
temptation. You must forget that I know English."
Gandhi observed the Independence Day by fasting and spinning and there was
no special ceremony on the occasion in his camp. He observed "Mahadev Desai
Day" early in the morning, by holding prayers which included the recitation of
the whole of the Gita.
He insisted on walking to the prayer meeting which was held at Rash Bagan
Maidan in Beliaghata. The crowd of over thirty thousand people through which
he was to pass was so dense that what was five minutes' walk took nearly
twenty minutes to cover. In his prayer speech he congratulated Calcutta on the

Hindus and the Muslims meeting together in perfect friendliness. The Muslims
shouted the same slogans of joy as the Hindus. They flew the tricolour flag
without the slightest hesitation. And what was more, the Hindus were admitted
to mosques and the Muslims were admitted to temples. This news reminded the
speaker of the Khilafat days when the Hindus and the Muslims fraternized with
one another. If this exhibition was from the heart and was not a momentary
impulse, it was better than the Khilafat days. The simple reason for it was that
they had both drunk the poison cup of disturbances. The nectar of friendliness
should, therefore, taste sweeter than before. He was, however, worried to
hear that, in a certain locality, the Muslims experienced molestation. He hoped
that Calcutta, including Howrah, would be entirely free from the communal
virus forever. And then, indeed, they need have no fear about East Bengal and
the rest of India. He was very sorry to hear that madness still raged in Lahore.
He could hope and feel sure that the noble example of Calcutta, if it was
sincere, would affect the Punjab and other parts of India. He then referred to
Chittagong. Rain was no respecter of persons. It engulfed both the Muslims and
Hindus. It was the duty of the whole of Bengal to feel one with the sufferers of
Chittagong.
Gandhi then referred to the fact that the people realizing that India was free,
took possession of the Government House and in affection besieged their new
Governor Rajaji. He would be glad, if it meant only a token of the people's
power. But he would be sick and sorry if the people thought that they could do
what they liked with the Government and other property. That would be
criminal lawlessness. He hoped, therefore, that they had of their own accord
vacated the Governor's palace as readily as they had occupied it. He would
warn the people that now that they were free, they would use.the freedom
with wise restraint. The people should know that they were to treat the
Europeans who stayed in India with the same regard as they would expect for
themselves. They all must know that they were masters of no one but of
themselves. They must not compel anyone to do anything against his will.
After evening prayers he broke his twenty-four-hour fast which he had started
on Thursday evening in observance of the Independence Day. His face beamed

with joy when Dr. P. C. Ghosh told him about the unique demonstrations of
Hindu-Muslim fraternization in the city. During the night, he made a tour of the
city to witness the scenes of fraternization with his own eyes.
On August 16 he wrote an editorial on "Miracle or Accident":
"Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy and I are living together in a Muslim manz.il in

Beliaghata where the Muslims have been reported to be sufferers. We occupied
the house on Wednesday, the 13th instant, and on the 14th it seemed as if there
never had been bad blood between the Hindus ahd the Muslims. In their
thousands, they began to embrace one another and they began to pass freely
through places which were considered to be points of danger by one party or
the other. Indeed, the Hindus were taken to masjids by their Muslim brethren
and the Muslims were taken by their Hindu brethren to mandirs. And both with
one voice shouted 'Jai Hind* and 'Hindu-Muslims! Be One.' As I have said above,
we are living in a Muslim's house and the Muslim volunteers are attending to our
comforts with the greatest attention. The Muslim volunteers do the cooking.
Many were eager to come from the Khadi Pratisthan for attendance, but I
prevented them. I was determined that we should be fully satisfied with
whatever the Muslim brothers and sisters were able to give for our creature
comforts* and I must say that the determination has resulted in unmixed good.
Here in the compound, numberless Hindus and Muslims continue to stream in
shouting favourite slogans. One might almost say that the joy of fraternization
is leaping up from hour to hour.
"Is this to be called a miracle or an accident. By whatever name it may be

described, it is quite clear that all the credit that is given to me from all sides
is quite undeserved ; nor can it be said to be deserved by Shaheed Saheb. This
sudden upheaval is not the work of one or two men. We are toys in the hands of
God. He makes us dance to His tune. The utmost, therefore, that a man can do
is to refrain from interfering with the dance and that he should tender full
obedience to his Maker's will. Thus considered, it can be said that, in this
miracle, He has used us two as His instruments and as for myself I only ask
whether the dream of my youth is to be realized in the evening of my life.

"For those who have full faith in God, this is neither a miracle nor an accident.
A chain of events can be clearly seen to show that the two were being
prepared, unconsciously to themselves, for fraternization. In this process, our
advent on the sccne enabled the onlooker to give us credit for the
consummation of the happy event.
"Be that as it may, the delirious happenings remind me of the early days of the
Khilafat movement. The fraternization then burst on the public as a new7
experience. Moreover, we had then Khilafat and swaraj as our twin goals.
Today, we have nothing of the kind. We have drunk the poison of mutual hatred
and so this nectar of fraternization tastes all the sweeter, and the sweetness
should never, wear out.
"In the present exuberance one hears also the cry of'Long Live Hindustan and
Pakistan' from the joint throats of the Hindus and the Muslims. I think, it is
quite proper. Whatever was the cause for the agreement, the three parties
accepted Pakistan. If then the two arc not enemies, one of the other, and here
evidently they are not, surely there is nothing wrong in the above cry. Indeed,
if the two have become friends, not to wish long life to both the states would
probably be an act of disloyalty."
At the prayer meeting on August 16, there were nearly fifty thousand people.
And consequently, there was noise, where the pressure was felt. Gandhi,
therefore, stopped the usual bhajan and refused to speak, if the noise did not
subside. He requested Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy to speak with his powerful
voice. He spoke and the vast audience listened to him in silence and
punctuated his remarks with applause when he lustily shouted "Jai Hind" and
said he was proud to be a loyal inhabitant of West Bengal. He was then
followed by Gandhi. Gandhi expressed his pleasure that, at the Chittaranjan
Seva Sadan, the national flag was hoisted by an elderly Harijan mehtarani, who
was faithfully serving the institution. Similarly, for a district Congress
Committee, of which he had forgotten the name for the moment, a Harijan girl
performed the flag-hoisting ceremony. This was along the right lines and was in
keeping with the present fraternal spirit of Calcutta. He hoped that the spirit
was permanent and that there would be no trace of untouchability or inequality

in Hinduism and that Hindus and Muslims being from the same God would never
quarrel among one another. If this spirit persisted, it would spread throughout
the length and breadth of India. Then there would be no fear of disturbance in
Noakhali, or the Punjab.
On August 17 he wrote an article on "An Indian Governor" : "In construing the

word India here, it includes both Hindustan and Pakistan. Hindustan may mean
the country of Hindus, strictly so called, Pakistan may mean the country of
Muslims. Both the uses are, in my opinion, irregular. Hence, I have purposely
used the word Hindustan.
"Khilafat-Swaraj-Non-co-operation Resolution of 1920 passed in Calcutta at the

Special Session of the Congress, which has brought freedom from the British
yoke, was for both the Hindus and the Muslims, designed to induce self-
purification, so as to bring about non-co-operation between forces of evil and
those of good. Hence—
"1. An Indian Governor should, in his own person and in his surroundings, be a
teetotaller. Without this, the prohibition of the fiery liquid is well-nigh
inconceivable.
"2. He and his surroundings should represent hand-spinning as a visible token of

identification with the dumb millions of India, a token of the necessity of bread
labour and organized non-violence, as against organized violence, on which the
society of today seems to be based.
"3. He must dwell in a cottage, accessible to all, though easily shielded from
gaze, if he is to "do efficient work. The British Governor naturally represented
the British might. For him and his, was erected a fortified residence—a large
palace to be occupied by him and his numerous vassals who sustained his
empire. The Indian prototype may keep somewhat pretentious buildings for
receiving the princes and ambassadors of the world. For these, being guests of
the Governor, should constitute an education in what even 'Unto This Last',
equality of all, should mean in concrete terms. For him, no expensive furniture,
foreign or indigenous. Plain living and high thinking mustjbe his motto, not to
adorn his entrance, but to be exemplified in daily life.

"4. For him there can be no untouchability in any form whatsoever, no caste or
creed or colour distinction. He must represent the best of all religions and all
things, eastern or western. Being a citizen of India, he must be a citizen of the
world. Thus simply, one reads, did the Caliph Omar, with millions of treasure at
his feet, live; thus lived Janaka of ancient times ; thus lived, as I saw him, the
Master of Eton, in his residence, in the midst of and surrounded by the sons of
the Lords and Nabobs of the British Isles. Will the Governors of India of the
famished millions do less!
"5 He will speak the language of the province of which he is the Governor, and
Hindustani, tRe lingua franca of India written in the Nagari or the Urdu script.
This is neither Sanskritized Hindi nor Persianized Urdu. Hindustani is
emphatically the language which is spoken by the millions, north of the Vindhya
range.
"This does not pretend to be an exhaustive list of the virtues that an Indian
Governor should represent. It is merely illustrative.
"One would expect that the Britishers who have been chosen by Indian
representatives as Governors and who have taken the oath of fealty to India
and her millions would endeavour, as far as possible, to live the life an Indian
Governor is expected to live. They will represent the best that their country
has to give to India and the world."
"Have not the Congress leaders virtually buried Gandhi alive?" asked a
correspondent. Gandhi said in reply: "I cling to the hope that I am not yet
buried alive. The hope rests on the belief that the masses have not lost faith in
his idols. When it is proved that they have, they will be lost and then I can be
said to have been buried alive. But so long as my faith burns bright, as I hope it
will, even if I stand alone, I shall be alive in the grave and, what is more,
speaking from it."
Addressing the prayer meeting on August 17, attended by over a lakh of people,
Gandhi stated that it was well for Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy to say sweet
things. They were justified. There was no exaggeration in his speech. But he
felt bound to draw attention to certain disturbing things. They should not be

drowned in the pardonable exuberance they were witnessing. There were

isolated spots in Calcutta, where it was not all well. He had heard that in one
spot the Hindu residents were not prepared to welcome back Muslim residents,
who were obliged to leave their place. All this was bad. It was like a bad boil in
an otherwise wholesome body. If the boils were not looked after in time, they
might poison the body.
Then Gandhi mentioned a letter he had received from Mr. Bahar, the secretary
of the Muslim League. Mr. Bahar had made a suggestion about a joint influential
committee going to the East and West Bengal and consolidate the good work
being done in Calcutta. The speaker hoped that the suggestion would be quickly
acted upon. And another suggestion was that the havoc caused by the flood in
the East Bengal should be a joint concern of the Hindus and Muslims. He agreed
and he hoped that there would be a body of Hindu and Muslim workers, who
would tackle the subject efficiently. Both grain and workers were wanted more
than money. The Mayor of Calcutta had sent him a cheque for Rs. 15,000, in aid
of relief. He was thankful for the cheque. He would see to it that it was well
employed.
He then referred to Chandernagore from which the news was received that the
Administrator's house was surrounded by those who called themselves
satyagrahis but were, in fact, duragrahis, if the statement received by him was
true. It was suggested that he had approved of the step. He must assert that it
was wholly untrue. Some persons had come to him and he had said that this
was no time for satyagraha. There never could be any for duragraha. Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru was there to look after such affairs. After all, the French
were a great people, lovers of liberty. They must not be subjected to any strain
by India, which had now come in possession of liberty. India was bound to
protect the French possessions in India against any untoward action by the
Indians. He was glad that the chief minister had proceeded to Chandernagore
to find out the truth and do what he could.
He dealt with the way in which the people were treating the police who were
posted to protect Shaheed Saheb and him. It was most improper to disregard
the police instructions. He had seen the police undertaking their very difficult

task writh exemplary patience and courtesy. It was wrong for the crowds to
take the law in their own hands. That way lay slavery, not freedom. He warned
the public that he was thinking of approaching the authorities to withdraw their
forces, for he did not like them to be subjected to insult for doing a public
duty. He, however, expected that the crowd would become orderly, so that the
contemplated withdrawal might not be necessary. The police and the military
today were, after all, the servants of the public and not their masters.
In conclusion, Gandhi referred to the forthcoming Id celebration. For twenty

years, in South Africa, he had participated in the celebration with Muslim
friends in the masjids. Now that a flood of goodwill was sweeping over the city
of Calcutta, he expected everyone to take such steps, as would render the
friendly feeling permanent. It was easy to share in a rising tide of emotion; but
then it was quite another matter to produce constructive workers, who would
toil from day to day, in order to consolidate the feeling. He would love to see
such work in the city, for he was sure that its effect would then be felt by the
rest of the country. If they failed to do this, he warned them, today's freedom
would prove only a nine days' wonder.
The Id fell on Monday, August 18. It gave the Hindus and Muslims another
opportunity to be nearer each other and establish happy relationship between
the two communities. From all the areas of the city, gaily attired Muslims, in
their thousands, attended the morning congregational prayer on the maidan.
Simultaneously, prayers were held in Nakhoda and other mosques in the city
and in many places they had gifts of sweets and fruits from Hindus, who in
many other ways associated themselves with the Id celebration. The Hindus and
Muslims exchanged fraternal greetings and several organizations arranged inter-
communal dinners.
The Muslims carrying the tricolour flags went to Gandhi's Beliaghata residence
in the morning and greeted him with "Id Mubarak". He also received a number
of Id presents from Muslims and in his turn distributed fruits to those who came
to greet him. As he was then observing his weekly silence, Gandhi wrote on a
piece of paper: "I send my Id greetings to all my Muslim brethren."

Throughout the day, there was free mixing of Hindus and Muslims in every
thoroughfare, in trams, buses and cinema houses. The biggest mixed gathering
of the day, however, was witnessed in the evening, when Gandhi addressed
about three lakhs of Hindus and Muslims on the maidan.
Under a canopy, Gandhi sat surrounded by the leaders of both the com-
munities. Dr. P. C. Ghosh, the chief minister, greeted the gathering with "Id
Mubarak". Mr. Suhrawardy extended on behalf of his community his hands of co-
operation to the Hindus.
Gandhi broke his weekly silence at 7.10 p.m. at the prayer meeting. In a short
speech, he wished the vast gathering "Id Mubarak". He also made a reference to
his visit in Barrackpore, where the Hindus and Muslims had assured him that
they would settle their quarrel and that they did not like to give him trouble
about this.
There was a small gathering of the local students at Gandhi's residence in

Beliaghata. Gandhi first asked them if any of them had taken a part in the
riots, to which they replied in the negative. Whatever they had done was in
self-defence ; hence it was no part of the riot. This gave Gandhi an opportunity
of speaking on some of the vital problems connected with nonviolence. He
observed that mankind had all along tried to justify violence and war in terms
of unavoidable self-defence. It was a simple rule that the violence of the
aggressor could only be defeated by superior violence of the defender. All over
the world, men had thus been caught in mad race for armaments, and no one
yet knew, at what point of time, the world would be really safe enough for
turning the sword into the plough. Mankind, he said, had not yet mastered the
true art of self-defence.
But the great teachers, who had practised what they had preached, had
successfully shown that true defence lay along the path of non-retaliation. It
might sound paradoxical. But this is what he meant. Violence always thrived on
counter violence. The aggressor always had a purpose behind his attack ; he
wanted something to be done, some object to be surrendered by the defender.
Now, if the defender steeled his heart and was determined not to surrender

even an inch, and, at the same time, to resist the temptation of matching the
violence of the aggressor by violence, the latter could be made to realize in a
short while, that it would not be paying to punish the other party and his will
could not be imposed in that way. This would involve suffering. It was this
unalloyed self-suffering which was the truest form of self-defence which knew
no surrender.
But then someone might well ask that if through such non-resistance, the
defender was likely to lose his life, how could it be called self-defence? Jesus
lost his life on the Cross, and the Roman Pilate won. He did not agree. Jesus
had won, as the vvorld's history had abundantly shown. What did it matter if
the body was dissolved in the process, so long as by Jesus' act of non-
resistance, the forces of good were released in society?
This art of true self-defence by means of which man gained his life by losing it,
had been mastered and exemplified in the history of individuals. The method
had not been perfected for application by large masses of mankind. India's
satyagraha was a very imperfect experiment in that direction. Hence, during
the Hindu-Muslim quarrel it proved a failure on the whole.
The Kasturba trainees of Bengal came to meet Gandhi from their camp at
Sahcbnagar. T he question which he took up for discussion was asked by one of
the trainees: In view of the resistance encountered from the rural people and
the numerous disappointments which they all had to face, how would he advise
them to proceed, so that success could be ensured? Gandhi began by saying
that he was glad that a very fundamental question had been raised. He had,
however, only one answer for it.
The education through which India had passed for more than a century was
essentially designed for a particular purpose. In order to feed the interests of
capitalism, the entire economic life of India had been changed, the city had
become the centre of gravity an.d not the village ; the village had been
dethroned from its position of supremacy and virtually been converted into a
slum and kept as far away from the city as practicable. The educational system
had been planned to supply the needs of this lop-sided economy. If, now, we

wanted to create a new India, then our outlook must be changed altogether.
Democracy had to be built up inch by inch in economic, social and political life.
And considering the magnitude of the task, it would naturally require a very
stout heart to grapple with the problem.
To the trainees, his advice was one. They must be brave, intelligent and
persevering. The villagers might not readily respond and they might even prove
hostile. Many interests would have to be disturbed before the necessary change
could be effected. But the non-violent workers should choose the line oflcast
resistance. They should suffer in their own person, before they could aspire to
gain co-operation of the inert or hostile villagers. Day in and day out, they must
persevere at their chosen task, whether it was village.sanitation or the
imparting of education to a few children, whom nobody else would care to
touch. They might not have the resources to supply their own bread. But even
then, through hunger, the trainees must persist without resentment, without
bitterness. Then only will their conduct strike the imagination of the villagers
and this element of surprise will open the way into their hearts. Once the inert
mass has begun to yield, work will make rapid progress.
Another trainee then observed that there were no signs of response from the
villagers, even after a year of patient work. Gandhi comforted her by saying
that one year's work was not enough. We have to sweep aside the accumulated
debris of centuries of subjugation. Even a lifetime might not prove enough. If
our education had been otherwise, we might not have perhaps yielded so
readily to despondence. We have to steel our hearts and look forward to the
bright future to enable us to get out of the slough of despond. So long as we
persevere, the struggle itself is victory. It was only courage of this kind which
could lead India to the new age.
Addressing the readers of Harijan, Gandhi wrote:
"It occurs to me that now that freedom from the British rule has come, the
Harijan papers are no longer wanted. My views remain as they are. In the
scheme of reconstruction for free India, its villages should no longer depend, as
they are now doing, on its cities, but the cities should exist only for and in the

interest of the villages. Therefore, the charkha should occupy the proud
position of the centre, round which all the life-giving village industries would
revolve.. But this seems to be receding into the background. The same thing
can be said of many other things of which I used to draw a tempting picture. I
can no longer dare to do so. My life has become, if possible, more tempestuous
than before. Nor can I at present claim any place as a permanent habitation.
The columns are predominantly filled by my after-prayer speeches. In the
original, I contribute on an average only one and half columns per week. This is
hardly satisfactory. I would like, therefore, the readers o{ Harijan weeklies to
give me their frank opinion as to whether they really need their Harijan weekly
to satisfy their political or spiritual hunger."
Professor Stuart Nelson, who had come to meet Gandhi before he left for
America, asked Gandhi why it was that the Indians, who had more or less
successfully gained independence through the peaceful means, were now
unable to check the tide of civil war through the same means?
Gandhi replied that it was indeed a searching question which he must answer.
He confessed that it had become clear to him that what he had mistaken for
satyagraha was not satyagraha but passive resistance, a weapon of the weak.
The Indians harboured ill will and anger against their erstwhile rulers, while
they pretended to resist them non-violently. Their resistance was, therefore,
inspired by violence, not by regard for the man in the British, whom they
should convert through satyagraha.
Now that the British, were quitting India, apparent non-violence had gone to
pieces in a moment. The attitude of violence which we had secretly harboured,
in spite of the restraint imposed by the Congress, now recoiled upon us and
made us fly at each other's throats, when the question of the distribution of
power came up. If India could now discover a way of sublimating the force of
violence which had taken a communal turn, and turning it into constructive
peaceful ways, whereby differences of interests could be liquidated, it would
be a great day indeed.

Gandhi then proceeded to say that many English friends had warned him that
the so-called non-violent non-co-operation of India was not really non-violent.
It was the passivity of the weak and not the non-violence of the stout in heart,
who would never surrender their sense of human unity and brotherhood even in
the midst of conflict of interests, who would ever try to convert and not cocrcc
their adversary.
He admitted that this was indeed true. He had all along laboured under an
illusion. But he was never sorry for it. He realized that if his vision was not
covered by that illusion, then India would never have reached the point which
it had today.
India was now free and the reality was now clearly revealed to him. Now that
the burden of subjection had been lifted, all the forces of good had to be
marshalled in one great effort to build a country which forsook the accustomed
method of violence, in order to settle human conflicts, whether they were
between two states or between two sections of the same people. He had yet
the faith that India would rise to the occasion and prove to the world that the
birth of two new states would be not a menace, but a blessing to the rest of
mankind. It was the duty of free India to perfect the instrument of non-violence
for dissolving collective conflicts, if its freedom was going to be really
worthwhile.

07. Victory Over Evil ( 1947 )
EVERY DAY, in one quarter of Calcutta or another, the same question had been
cropping up, how can we trust Muslims, how can we trust Shaheed Suhrawardy,
after the bitter things we have experienced for one whole year? Gandhi,
unfailingly, tried to lift the people from this way of looking at things to political
sanity.
Speaking to a group of students, Gandhi remarked that they should remember

that the Muslim League was fighting for a political objective, the establishment
of Pakistan. The rest of India was against the vivisection; its aim was to
preserve India undivided. Whatever the cause actuating the parties, they, the
British Government, the Congress, the Muslim League and the Sikhs ultimately
accepted the partition of India. Having got Pakistan, the Qaid-e-Azam said that
in Pakistan, there was equality of treatment for all—Muslims and all minorities—
the Congress claiming likewise.
Gandhi had been drawing pointed reference at every public meeting, or among
every group, where opportunity presented itself, that now that the struggle for
Pakistan and the Akhand Hindustan was over, we must settle down to the
reality that in each state the Hindus and the Muslims had to live together as
common citizens. If any of them still swore by the past, it would not help but
hinder us in our forward march. We must accept facts and try to convert every
citizen into a worthy member of either state. If we treated the Muslims in the
Indian Union as aliens, who had fought for Pakistan, and tried to keep them in
subjection, we would only succeed in proving our political bankruptcy. Today,
they were no less citizens of the Union than anyone else. Musalmans had
accepted the fact of their Indian citizenship, and as proof of that, everyone of
them, from Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy downwards, had been lustily shouting
"Jai Hind".
Addressing the prayer congregation at Beliaghata on August 19, Gandhi

apologized for being over an hour late. His party was not at fault. Because of
the misdeeds of the majority, who were Hindus, Dr. Prafulla Ghosh and

Shaheed Saheb, he and the others had to go to Kanchrapara. Then, on return,

they were stopped by some parties, who wanted to acclaim their joy. This sort
of acclamation, if it was not tempered with restraint, would kill their leaders
and they would deplore the embarrassing affection. He then warned the people
against being unduly elated by the fraternization that they were now witnessing
in Calcutta. Behind it, there were pointers like Barrackpore and Kanchrapara
and the other places he could mention. He would not let them plead excuse or
extenuation. There was neither excuse, nor extenuation, for the majority in
Pakistan or Hindustan. If the Hindu majority treasured their religion and their
duty, they would be just at all cost. They would overlook the limitations or the
mistakes of the minority, who had no one but the majority to look to for
justice. He had to listen not without shame and sorrow to the statement that a
Muslim friend made to him. He said with a sigh that there was nothing left but
a kind of subjection to the Hindu majority and the Muslims might have to suffer
in silence the playing of music before the mosques, whilst they were offering
prayers. He would have no such despair on the part of the Muslims. The friend,
who made the remark, did not realize that he unconsciously implied that the
Muslim majority would inflict revenge in Pakistan. The speaker hoped, it would
never be so, either in Hindustan or in Pakistan. The proper thing was for each
majority to do "their duty in all humility, irrespective of what the other
majority did in the other state. He suggested, therefore, that until the Prime
Ministers of Pakistan and the Indian Union agreed upon another course in both
the states, the practice that was followed during the British regime, often
under compulsion, should be fully and voluntarily followed in both the states.
Those who thought that they could haughtily impose their will on the minority
were foolish and were vastly mistaken. If, therefore, they wanted to
consolidate the prevailing goodwill, they would see to it that they acted on the
square .under all circumstances.
On August 20 the prayer meeting was held at Khengrapati, which was indeed a
unique scene in fraternization. More than four lakhs of people of all classes and
communities attended the meeting. People failing to go near the venue of the

prayer meeting, thronged round on the roofs of the adjoining buildings.

Hundreds of people were seen climbing on all the available trees in the area.
Gandhi stated that he had received several letters to the effect that, now that
there was peace in Calcutta, he should go to the Punjab. He replied that when
God called him, he would most certainly go there. But the Prime Ministers of
both the dominions had announced that their major preoccupation would be to
restore complete peace in the Punjab. They would use every resource at their
disposal to establish peace.and they would mobilize the public opinion of the
Punjab. And this should be enough for them to hope that things in the Punjab
would be as good as in Calcutta.
Referring to the Central Peace Committee, Gandhi said that it should

consolidate the results so far achieved. They all had to see that the poor
Muslims were rehabilitated, just as the Hindus had to be rehabilitated in the
areas from which they had been evacuated. The local peace committees should
be set up in each mahalla, and they must find at least one Hindu and one
Muslim of clean heart to work together. The local peace committees must tour
the areas under their jurisdiction. They should work to create the feeling of
friendliness, wherever it was lacking. For the purpose of rehabilitation, local
peace committees would have to go into details. Food, shelter and clothings
had to be found for the evacuees returning to their homes. It would be a great
day indeed for Calcutta, if its men and women cooperated in this manner to
consolidate their good feelings, which had been so much, in evidence during
the last few days. In this task, all the parties were to co-operate. For now that
all the parties concerned had come to an agreement with regard to the division
of India into two dominions, there was no longer any reason to quarrel and they
could join hands in the task of restoring peaceful conditions.
The following day he drew attention to the joint flags of Pakistan and the
Indian Union that were being prominently flown in the prayer meeting attended
by seven lakhs of people and he hoped that that pleasing sight would be
universal in India. He was glad that Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb had suggested
the revival of the slogan "Hindu-Muslim-ki jai' for it was st arted during the
palmy Khilafat days. He then recalled the memory of the old days when a

Muslim fellow prisoner used to sing Iqbal's "Hindostan Hamara". The words of
Iqbal's poem were indeed as sweet as the tune. And among therri, what could
be sweeter than that religion never taught mutual hatred? He hoped and prayed
that the beginning thus auspiciously made would last forever and that they
would never appeal to the sword for the solution of their difficulties. If that
was to be so, they would see that no untoward incidents were allowed to
happen and flimsy things were not exaggerated so as to make them look like a
communal disturbance, as had come to his notice even that very day.
Lastly, he referred to the award of the umpire in the Boundary Commission.

The umpire was chosen by all the parties to the dispute. It would be unjust and
unworthy to impute motives to the umpire. He was specially invited by the
parties to the thankless task. The parties and the public they represented,
were loyally to abide by the award. No award that he knew— and he had to do
with many arbitrations—completely satisfied the parties. But once haying made
the choice, they were bound to carry out the terms of the award. No doubt, the
best way was for them to adjust the differences themselves. And this royal road
was open to them any time as Nazimuddin Saheb and Dr. Ghosh, the two
Premiers, had wisely pointed out.
He knew that the Muslims of Murshidabad and of Malda were severely

disappointed as the Hindus in Khulna or Gopalganj, and the Buddhists in the
Chittagong Hill tracts. The latter had gone to East Bengal. He would say to all
these parties that now it was not only foolish but unbecoming to quarrel over
the award. It should not matter that on the 15th, the day was celebrated
according to the national divison. If he had been consulted, he would have
advised non-celebration," because of the state of uncertainty.
On August 23, Gandhi referred to the cry of Allah-O-Akbar to which some

Hindus objected. He held that it was probably a cry than which a greater one
had not been produced by the world. It was a soul-stirring religious cry which
meant God only was great. There was nobility in the meaning. Did the cry
become objectionable, because it was Arabic? He admitted that it had in India
a questionable association. It often terrified the Hindus, because sometimes
the Musalmans in anger come out of the mosques with that cry on their lips to

belabour the Hindus. He confessed that the original had no such association. So
far as he was aware, the cry had no such association in the other parts of the
world. If therefore, there was to be a lasting friendship between the two, the
Hindus should have no hesitation in uttering the cry together with their Muslim
friends. God was known by many names and He had many attributes. Rama and
Rahim, Krishna and Karim, were all names of the one God. "Sat Shri Akal" was
an equally potent cry. Should a single Muslim or Hindu hesitate to utter it? It
meant that God was and nothing else was. The Ramdhun had the same virtue.
He then came to "Bande Mataram". That was no religious cry. It was a purely
political cry. The Congress had to examine it. A reference was made to Gurudev
about it. And both the Hindu and the Muslim members of the Congress Working
Committee had to come to the conclusion that its opening lines were free from
any possible objection, and he beseeched that it should be sung together by all
on due occasion. It should never be a chant to insult or to offend the Muslims.
It was to be remembered that it was the cry that had fired political Bengal.
Many Bengalis had sacrificed their lives for the political freedom with that cry
on their lips. Though, therefore, he felt strongly about "Bande Mataram" as an
ode to Mother India, he advised his League friends to refer the matter to the
League High Command. He would be surprised, if in view of the growing
friendliness between the Hindus and the Muslims, the Muslim League High
Command objected to the prescribed lines of "Bande Mataram", the national
song and national cry of Bengal, which sustained her when the rest of India was
almost asleep and which was, so far as he was aware, acclaimed bv both the
Hindus and the Muslims of Bengal. No doubt, every act must be purely voluntary
on the part of either partner. Nothing could be imposed in true friendship.
He then referred to a deputation he had from the Punjabi friends, who had
drawn a terrible picture of what was said to be going on in the Punjab and who
on the strength of the information requested him immediately to proceed to
the Punjab. They had informed him that before the killing and arson in the
Punjab, what had happened in Bengal was nothing. Lahore was almost denuded
of the Hindus and the Sikhs, as was Amritsar of the Musalmans. He only hoped
that the information was highly coloured. The Punjabis of Calcutta could not

know the true situation in the Punjab. Be that as it may, he was sure that if the
Hindus, the Sikhs and the Muslims of Calcutta were sincere in their professions
of friendship, they would all write to their fellowmen in the Punjab and implore
them to desist from mutual slaughter. The declarations of the Dominion
Premiers could not go in vain. He could not believe that the Punjab leaders
would not like any non-Muslims in the Pakistan part and non-Hindus and
nonTSikhs in the other part. The logical consequence would then be that there
would be no gurudwaras and mandirs in the West Punjab and no mosques in the
East Punjab. The picture was too gruesome to be ever true.
Lastly he referred to the Nationalist Muslims who had gone to see him. They
twitted him for giving importance and life to the Muslim League and neglecting
the Nationalist Muslims. But lie could not plead guilty to either charge. The
Muslim League had gained importance without his or the Congress aid. The
Muslim League became great because, rightly or wrongly, it caught Muslim
fancy. The Congress and he had to deal with and recognize the fact that faced
them. He was not sorry for having visited Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah eighteen times in
Bombay. His friends should also know that he alone could have done nothing
without Shaheed Saheb Suhrawardy and Osman Saheb and the other League
members. There was no question of neglect of the Nationalist Muslims.
Nationalism of a man was its own merit. It demanded no recognition. He would
advise them to remain what they were and exhibit courage, self-sacrifice and
true knowledge, born of study, and he was certain that, whether they were few
or many, they would make their mark on India's future. He would even ask
them to join the Muslim League and stoutly oppose it from within, whenever
they found it to be reactionary. Whilst he said all this, he would advise the
Muslim Leaguers to approach the Nationalist Muslims in a friendly spirit,
whether they remained out or came in. True friendship did not admit of
exclusion, without the soundest reason.
Gandhi was given a civic reception by the Calcutta Corporation on the Maidan
on August 24. Paying tribute to him, the mayor said: "You are the symbol of
truth and non-violence. You have freed Mother India from her bondage, you

have conquered hatred and established peace." Gandhi held his evening prayer
after the reception and delivered his message.
Gandhi observed that he could not help recalling the late Dr. P. C. Roy under
whose roof he had lived for one month in 1901. When he was with the late
Deshbandhu Das, he used to see him with a few scientists engaged in very lively
but strictly scientific conversation under the shadow of the Octerlony
Monument, near which they had met. That was their recreation. He asked him
whether they had any drinks or eatables. Dr. Roy most emphatically said "No".
Their food and drink consisted of their instructive as distinguished from idle
conversation.
Referring to the address, Gandhi replied that this was the third time he was
receiving an address from Calcutta Corporation. The first was given to him by
the late Deshbandhu Das when he was the mayor. Then at the hands of Nalini
Babu, when he was the mayor. He recalled the fact that the caskets were then
auctioned in the interest of the Harijans. He hoped that this casket too would
be sold in the same interest by the mayor.
He would repeat what he had said in answer to the first civic address: he could
not be satisfied till Calcutta had become the premier city in the world for
sanitation. He included in this the sanitation of the streets in Calcutta, which
was absent today. The citizens should have healthy minds in healthy bodies.
Then they would have no goondas, no vagabonds, no drunkards. If the mortality
in Calcutta was to be reduced, it should be flowing with clean milk. Today, it
was a most difficult commodity to procure. Then he would expect the
corporators, by honest application, to put the friendship between the Hindus
and the Muslims on a permanent footing.
Gandhi stated that he had a message from Khwaja Saheb Nazimuddin that he
should help'in procuring at least 500 tons of rice out of the shipment that was
coming from Burma. The need was so urgent that the ship with the rice should
be diverted to Ghittagong to deliver the 500 tons. He gladly associated himself
with the request and he hoped that Dr.-Rajendra Prasad would, if it was at all

possible, allow 500 tons of the precious cargo to be delivered at the Chittagong
port.
In this connection, he could not help mentioning the complaint that the petty
officials in charge of flood relief confined the distribution to Muslim sufferers
only. He-hoped the news was not true. If unfortunately it was, he had 110
doubt that the ministers and high officials would redress the wrong. If the two
dominions were to live creditably and as friends, the communal spirit would be
wholly purged. It was up to the Hindu and Muslim leaders to see that the seeds
of poison that were sown, while they were fighting, would be removed
forthwith-. Then he deplored the fact that the Muslims in government services,
when the choice was offered to them, preferred Pakistan, and the Hindus the
Indian Union. The choice was made, he did not doubt, in haste. He indeed
would be sorry to find that the communal virus had entered the services. He
advised that the two Prime Ministers should confer with each other and if it was
at all honestly possible, the services shpuld be given the opportunity to
reconsider their choice. It would indeed be a sorry thing for India if the Hindu
officials could not be trusted by the Muslims and vice versa. Much would
depend upon the leaders who influenced the services and the public.
He had heard that Khulna was to celebrate its entry into Pakistan. The speaker
deplored such celebration after the award. But he was consoled by Shaheed
Suhrawardy Saheb that the celebration would be joint and that the Hindus were
associating with it. Nevertheless, he could not regard the example with
happiness. The jubilant parties ought to restrain themselves, as the aggrieved
ones should accept the award with perfect resignation. The award must be
regarded as final, except to the extent that the ministers of the two dominions
agreed to vary it for the mutual satisfaction of the parties concerned. There
was no other worthy or gentlemanly way.
On August 25, Gandhi referred to the disturbances in Sylhet:
"I am sorry that today being my silence day, I cannot speak to you. I have,
therefore, to write out what I wish to say to you. I have been speaking every
day about the vital duty of the Hindus in West Bengal, who are the majority

community, towards their Muslim brethren. This duty they will perform truly, if
the Hindus are able to forget the past. We know how all over the world, the
enemies have become fast friends. The example of the Britons and the Boers
who fought one another strenuously, becoming friends, we all know. There is
much greater reason, why the Hindus and the Muslims should become friends.
We cannot do that, if we are not great enough to shed all malice.
"This evening I wish to devote to Sylhet. I have received frantic telegrams from
Sylhet about the serious riots that have broken out there. The cause of the riots
is not known. I am indeed sorry that I am unable to go just now to Sylhet, nor
am I vain enough to think that my presence there would immediately abate the
mob fury. I know, too, that one should not without peremptory cause abandon
his present duty, however humble it may be, in favour of one which may appear
to be higher. To adopt the Salvation Army language, we are all soldiers of God
to fight the battle of right against wrong, by means which are strictly non-
violent and truthful. As His soldiers, ours is 'not to reason why', ours is 'but to
do and die.'
"Though, therefore, I am unable to respond to the urgent call of the sufferers

of Sylhet, I can appeal, not in vain, to the authorities in East Bengal in general
and Sylhet in particular, to put forth their best effort on behalf of the sufferers
and deal sternly with the recalcitrants. Now that there is peace between the
Hindus and the Musalmans, I am sure, the authorities do not relish these ugly
outbreaks. It would be wrong and misleading to underestimate the trouble by
calling it the work of the goondas. The minorities must be made to realize that
they are as much valued citizens of the state they live in, as the majority. Let
the Chief Ministers of the two divisions of Bengal meet often enough and jointly
devise means to preserve peace in the two states and to find enough healthy
food and clothing for the inhabitants and enough work for the masses in East
Bengal and in West Bengal. When the masses, Hindu and Muslim, see their
chiefs acting together and working together honestly, courageously and without
intermission, the masses living in the two states will take the cue from the
leaders and act accordingly. To the sufferers, I would advise bravely to face the
future and never to give way to panic. Such disturbances do happen in the

lifetime of a people. Manliness demands that there should be ho weakness

shown in facing them. Weakness aggravates the mischief, courage abates it."
Gandhi's message was written out in English in order to enable Nirmal Bose
easily to render it in Bengali. But, as, owing to heavy rains, Gandhi reached the
prayer meeting at six instead of five, and as there were only a few minutes left
to break the silence, he was able to speak at the meeting.
Gandhi referred to the visit of the Punjabi friends who pressed him to proceed
to the Punjab, as early as possible. He assured them that he was in constant
correspondence with Jawaharlal. After all, the Punjab was as much his, as any
other part of India; for he claimed to be the servant of the whole of India.
Moreover, he had passed six months in that province during the martial law
days. He would hasten to the Punjab, as early as necessary. Indeed, he was
wanted in Sylhet, in Malda and Murshidabad and in other places. It was not
given to any one man to cover all calls upon his time, nor was it healthy to
depend upon man's assistance in times of trouble. It was manly and dignified to
rely upon God for the dissolution of all troubles. He was the only infallible help,
guide and friend.
On August 27, Gandhi said at the prayer meeting that the present was his
second visit to Matiaburz. The first was when Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and he
visited them years ago, because there was a fight between Hindu and Muslim
workmen. Fortunately, when they reached the scene of trouble, it was almost
over, but they got undeserved credit. The present visit was indeed a happy
occasion. The Hindus and the Musalmans had adjusted their differences and had
become friends. He hoped that this was a lasting friendship. He wanted to say a
few words to the workmen in the working men's locality. He strongly hoped that
there was no distinction between the Hindus and the Muslims in labour. They
were all labourers. If the communal canker entered their ranks, both would
weaken labour and, therefore, themselves and the country. Labour was a great
leveller of all distinctions. And if they realized that truth, the speaker would
like them to go a step further. Labour, because it chose to remain
unintelligent, either became subservient, or insolently believed in damaging
the capitalists' goods and machinery or even in killing the capitalists. He was a

labourer by conviction and a bhangi. As such his interests were bound with
those of labour. As such he wished to tell them that violence would never save
them. They would be killing the goose, that laid the golden eggs. What he had
been repeating for years was that labour was far superior to capital. Without
labour gold, silver and copper were a useless burden. It was labour which
extracted the precious ore from the bowels of the earth. He could quite
conceive labour existing without metal. Labour was priceless, not gold. He
wanted the marriage between capital and labour. They could indeed work
wonders in co-operation. But that could happen only when labour wras
intelligent enough to co-operate with itself and then offer co-operation with
capital on terms of honourable equality. Capital controlled labour, because
capital knew the art of combination. Drops in separation could only fade away,
drops in co-operation made the ocean, which carried on its broad bosom the
ocean greyhounds. Similarly, if all the labourers in any part of the world
combined together, then they could not be tempted by the higher wages or
helplessly allow themselves to be attracted for, say, a pittance. A true and
non-violent combination of labour would act like a magnet attracting to it all
the needed capital. The capitalists would then exist only as trustees. When that
happy day dawned, there would be no difference between capital and labour.
The labour will have ample food, good and sanitary dwellings, all the necessary
education for their children and ample leisure for self-education and proper
medical assistance.
Then he talked of the Nationalist Muslims who had sent him a note: "You have
expressed the opinion that the Nationalist Muslims should join the Muslim
League. Then, does it imply that the Congress has now become a communal
organization?"
Gandhi said in reply that he was not guilty of asking them to discard
nationalism or of expecting the Congress to be another Hindu Sabha. He hoped
that the Congress would never commit suicide by being a communal
organization. When the Congress ceased to represent all who were proud to call
themselves Indians, whether the prince or the pauper, the Hindus, Muslims, or
any other, it will have destroyed itself. Therefore, he could not advise a Muslim

Congressman to join the Muslim League if the condition of joining the League
was to discard or to suppress his Congress membership. He would vote for those
resolutions of the Muslim League which were in the nation's interest and against
those which were contrary to the nation's interest. He had several Muslims of
staunch faith in mind, who were neither in the Congress nor in the Muslim
League. He advised the Nationalist Muslims to join the Muslim League if they
wanted to affect the Muslim masses. The real nationalists needed no
encouragement from him or anyone else. Nationalism, like virtue, was its own
reward. His one warning was, that they should never think of power or of
bettering their worldly prospects by joining the one or the other organization. A
nationalist would ever think of service, never of power or riches. There could
be only one President of the Congress or the League. Presidentship came by
merit and strength of service. The Muslim League had become what it was, not
by his or Congress cajoling. The Qaid-e-Azam was an able president, whom
neither riches nor titles could buy. He was a* front-rank barrister and a rich
man. Being the son of a merchant, he knew how to multiply his earnings as a
lawyer by wise investments. This acknowledgement did not mean that the
speaker liked all his ways, or that the latter had led the Muslims in the right
way. He had his differences with the Qaid-e-Azam and the League. But he could
not withhold merit, where it was due. It was, he hoped, clear to the Nationalist
Muslims under what conditions he advised them to join the League.
On August 28, after prayer, he addressed the students of Calcutta at the

University Science College. He said that he had done teaching in his own way
from his early youth and probably the very first meeting he addressed after his
return to India in 1915 was that of the students. Since then, he had addressed
numerous students' meetings throughout his many wanderings in India. He was
not new to them nor were they new to him. But of late years, he had ceased to
address meetings, as he used to do before. He was, therefore, very glad that he
was able to address the students. Their vice- chancellor was good enough to
see him about the evening's proceedings. He was nervous about the students'
behaviour towards Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb. He remarked that he would
have only the prayer and his usual after-prayer speech. It should not have been

so. Everywhere, there appeared to be anarchy in the student world. The

students did not tender obedience to their teachers and their vice-chancellor.
On the contrary, they expected obedience from their teachers. It was a painful
exhibition on the part of those who were to be the future leaders of the nation.
They gave an exhibition of unruliness that evening. He was faced with placards
in the foreign tongue, depicting his comrade Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb in
unbecoming language. He suggested to them that inasmuch as they had insulted
Shaheed Saheb, they had insulted the speaker. Shaheed Saheb could not be
insulted by the language used against him. But he could not take up that
attitude. The students should be humble and correct.
At the prayer meeting of August 29, "Bande Mataram" was sung and the whole
audience, including Shaheed Suhrawardy and other Muslims on the platform,
stood up, Gandhi alone keeping seated. Gandhi commenced his prayer speech
by congratulating Shaheed Saheb and the other Muslims on standing. He himself
purposely kept seated, because he had learnt that the Indian culture did not
require standing as a mark of respect when any national song or bhajan was
sung. It was an unnecessary importation from the West. A respectable posture
on such occasions was the correct attitude. After all, it was the mental attitude
that really mattered, not the superficial appearance. He then suggested that
there should be one universal notation for "Bande Mataram" if it was to stir
millions; it must be sung by millions in one tune and one mode. After all,
national songs couid only be two or three. But they should all have their
common notation. It was up to the Shantiniketan authorities or some such
authoritative society to produce an acceptable notation.
Gandhi then referred to the Christians. He had the pleasure of receiving them
the day before. They said that the major communities had taken care of
themselves but what was to happen to the Christian Indians? Were they to have
no seats in the Governments or the legislatures? He told them that the
poisonous favouritism of foreign rule was. dead and gone. Merit should now be
the sole test. In a well-ordered society, there should be no minority. Why
should they not feel that they were of the forty crores, but not a mere handful
born in India, and proud of their birth, were equal in the eye of the law. On the

strength of merit and intellectual capacity, self-sacrifice, courage and

incorruptibility, a Christian also could be the chief minister without exhibiting
greater merit than a Hindu or a Muslim. Religion was a purely personal matter.
He expected that what was true of the Indian Union was equally true of
Pakistan. He asked his Christian brethren also not to take their Christianity as it
was interpreted in the West. There, they knew that they fought with one
another, as never before. After all, Jesus was an Asiatic, depicted as wearing
the Arabian flowing robe. He was the essence of meekness. He hoped that the
Christians of India would express in their lives Jesus, the crucified of the Bible,
and not as interpreted in the West with her blood-stained fingers. The speaker
had no desire to criticize the West. He knew and valued the many virtues of the
West. But he was bound to point out that Jesus of Asia was misrepresented in
the West except in individuals.
Then he answered the question whether the minorities would have recognition
as religious minorities had. Thus, whether the Bengalis of Bihar, though a
minority, would have recognition? This was a ticklish question. In his opinion,
an Indian was a citizen of India, enjoying equal rights in every part of India.
And, therefore, a Bengali had every right in Bihar, as at Bihari. But, he wished
to emphasize that a Bengali must merge in the Bihari. A Bengali must never be
guilty of exploiting the Biharis, or feel- jng a stranger, or behaving as a stranger
in Bihar. If the speaker brought hh Gtyarat manners in Bengal and imposed
himself on the province, he would expect the Bengalis to expel him. And he
could not then claim the rights of an Indian as against the Bengalis. All rights
flowed from duties, previously and duly performed. One thing he must stress,
that in both the dominions the use of force for the assertion of rights must be
eschewed altogether, if they were to make any progress. Thus, neither the
Bengalis nor the Biharis could assert themselves at the point of the sword, nor
could the Boundary Commission award similarly be changed; it was the first les-
son to be learnt in a democratic independent India. Their independence was
only a fortnight old. Liberty never meant the licence to do anything at will.
Independence meant voluntary restraint and discipline, voluntary acceptance
of the rule of law in the making of which the whole of India had its hand

through its elected representatives. The only force at the disposal of

democracy was that of the public opinion. Satyagraha and civil disobedience
and fasts had nothing in common with the use of force, veiled or open. But
even these had restricted use in democracy. They could not even think of
them, whilst the Governments were settling down and the communal distemper
was still stalking from one province to another.
In his prayer discourse at Barasat on August 30, Gandhi observed that this was
Shaheed Saheb's constituency. He was, therefore, glad that he was invited to
visit Barasat. He had noticed the absence of the Pakistan flag or the Muslim
League flag. Why did not the Hindus of Barasat go out of their way to invite
their Muslim brethren to fly the Pakistan flag side by side with the tricolour
flag? That, however, never meant that the Muslims were to impose the Pakistan
fl^tg or the Muslim League flag on the Hindus. He would apply the same rule,
where the Muslims were in a majority. If a Hindu girl was in their midst, they
would encourage the solitary girl to unfurl the tricoldur flag and recite
Ramdhun. That was the sure sign of Hindu-Muslim friendship, which then would
be capable severest strain upon it. No doubt, they learnt the daily tale of
family strife in the Punjab. It had become difficult for the Muslims to live in the
East and the Hindus and Sikhs in the West. Was there to be a transfer of crores
of population? The way to stem the tide of this savagery and this inhuman
conduct was for the Hindus and the Muslims of the two divisions of Bengal to
preserve their equanimity intact and to demonstrate by their unbreakable
friendship the way for all the communities to live. The way of mutual strife and
exclusiveness was the way to perdition and slavery. If there was true heart
friendship, he could not understand the objection of Muslims, wherever they
were in a majority, to be included in the Western Bengal as in Murshidabad and
Malda, or for the Hindu majority to be included in Pakistan. This was indeed a
sign not of friendship but of unworthy and mutual distrust.
Although Calcutta was apparently quiet, Gandhi's mind was far from peaceful.
After some hesitation, Gandhi decided to proceed to Noakhali by the beginning
of September. On the evening of August 31, there was a demonstration against
his peace mission. "My resolve to go to Noakhali has collapsed after this

evening's happenings," Gandhi said to Pyarelal when he saw him that night. "I
cannot go to Noakhali or, for that matter, anywhere, when Calcutta is in
flames. Today's incident to me is a sign and a warning from God. You have for
the time being to return to Noakhali without me. You can tell the people of
Noakhali that if my colleagues for any reason cannot be there, they will find
me, surely, in their midst."
The next day, Monday, September 1, was his day of silence. Disturbing news
continued to pour in. He wrote to Sardar Patel: "Preparations for a fight are
today in evidence everywhere. I have just returned after seeing the corpses of
two Muslims who have died of wounds. I hear that conflagration has burst out in
many places. What was regarded as the ' Calcutta miracle' has proved to be a
nine days' wonder. I am wondering what my cjuty is in the circumstances. I am
writing this almost at 6 p.m. This letter will leave with tomorrow's post. I shall,
therefore, be able to add a postscript to it. There is a wire from Jawahar that I
should proceed to the Punjab. How can I go now? I am searching deep within
myself. In that silence helps."
Several deputations waited on him during the day to consult him as to what
they should do to quench the fire. "Go in the midst of the rioters and prevent
them from indulging in madness or get killed in the attempt. But don't come
back alive to report failure. The situation calls for sacrifice on the part of top
rankers. So far, the unknown, nameless, rank and file, alone have been the
victims of the holocaust with the one exception of the late Ganesh Shankar
Vidyarthi. That rs not enough," he said.
Even as he uttered these words, he was cogitating within himself as to where

he came into the picture which he was presenting to them. For, he added : "Of
course, I cannot do today, what I have told them to do. I will not be permitted
to. I saw that yesterday. Everybody will try to protect me from harm, if I went
in the midst of the maddened crowd. I may drop down from sheer physical
exhaustion—that is nothing. It will not do for a soldier to be exhausted in the
midst of battle." When C. Rajagopalachari, the Bengal Governor, saw him that
night, his mind was already made up. "You don't expect me to approve of your
proposed step," remarked Rajagopalachari, as he perused Gandhi's statement

setting forth his reasons for going on a fast. Together, they took stock of the
situation thrashing out the question in the minutest detail.
"Can you fast against the goondas?" argued Rajaji.
"The conflagration has been caused not by the goondas, but by those who have
become goondas. It is we who make the goondas. Without our sympathy and
passive support, goondas would have no legs to stand upon. I want to touch the
hearts of those who are behind the goondas," Gandhi remarked.
"But must you launch your fast at this stage? Why not wait and watch a little?"
asked Rajaji.
Gandhi said: "It would be too late afterwards. The minority Muslims cannot be
left in a perilous state. My fast has to be preventive, if it is to be any good. I
know that I shall be able to tackle the Punjab too, if I can control Calcutta. But
if I falter, the conflagration may spread and soon, I can see clearly, two or
three powers will be upon us and thus will end our shortlived dream of
independence."
"But supposing you die, then the conflagration would be worse," remarked
Rajaji.
"At least I won't be there to witness it," replied Gandhi. "I shall have done my
bit. More is not given a man to do."
"But why add sour lemon juice to water, if you are to put yourself entirely in
God's hands?" asked Rajaji, as he read that part of the statement where Gandhi
had allowed himself that latitude.
"You are right," quickly replied Gandhi. "I have allowed it out of my weakness.
It jarred on me even as I wrote it. A satyagrahi must hope to survive his
conditional fast by a timely fulfilment of the condition."
And so the portion, referring to the addition of sour lime juice to water to be
taken during the fast, was scored out and the fast commenced. This was on
Monday night, September 1st. Gandhi's press statement said:
"I regret to have to report to you that, last night, some young men brought to
the compound a bandaged man. He was reported to have been attacked by

some Muslims. The Chief Minister had him examined and the report was that he
had no marks of stabbing, which he was said to have received. The seriousness
of the injury, however, is not the chief point. What I want to emphasize is that
these young men tried to become judges and executioners.
"This was about 10 p. m., Calcutta time. The young men began to shout at the
top of their voices. My sleep was disturbed, but I tried to he quiet, not knowing
what was happening. I heard the window-panes being smashed. I had lying, on
either side of me, two very brave girls. They would not sleep, but without my
knowledge, for my eyes were closed, they went among the small crowd and
tried to pacify them. Thank God, the crowd did not do any harm to them. The
old Muslim lady in the house endearingly called Bi Amma and a young Muslim
stood near my matting, I suppose, to protect me from harm.
"The noise continued to swell. Some had entered the central hall and began to
knock open the many doors. I felt that I must get up and face the angry crowd.
I stood at the threshold of one of the doors. Friendly faces surrounded me and
would not let me move forward. My vow of silence admitted of my breaking it
on such occasions, and I broke it and began to appeal to the angry young men
to be quiet. I asked the Bengali grand- daughter-in-law to translate my few
words into Bengali. But all to no purpose. Their ears were closed against
reason.
"I clasped my hands in the Hindu fashion. Nothing doing. More window-panes
began to crack. The friendly ones in the crowd tried to pacify the crowd. There
were police officers. Be it said to their credit that they did not try to exercise
authority. They too clasped their hands in appeal. A lathi blow missed me and
everybody round me. A brick aimed at me hurt a Muslim friend standing by. The
two girls would not leave me and held on to me to the last. Meanwhile, the
police superintendent and his officers came in. They did not use force. They
appealed to me to retire. Then there was a chance of their stilling the young
men. .After a time the crowd melted.
"What happened outside the compound gate I do not know, except that the
police had to use tear-gas to disperse the crowd. Meanwhile, Dr. P. C. Ghosh,

Annada Babu and Dr. Nripen walked in and after some discussion left. Happily,
Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb had gone home to prepare for tomorrow's proposed
departure for Noakhali. In view of the above ugly incident, which no one could
tell where it would lead to, I could not think of leaving Calcutta for Noakhali.
"What is the lesson of the incident? It is clear to me that if India is to retain her
dearly won independence, all men and women must completely forget the
lynch law. What was attempted was an indifferent imitation of it. If the
Muslims misbehaved, the complainants could, if they would not go to the
ministers, certainly go to me or my friend, Shaheed Saheb. The same thing
applies to the Muslim complainants. There is no way of keeping peace in
Calcutta or elsewhere, if the elementary rule of the civilized society is not
observed. Let them not think of the savagery of the Punjab or outside India.
The recognition of the golden rule of never taking the law into one's own hands
has no exceptions.
"My secretary, Dev Prakash, wires from Patna: 'Public agitated Punjab
happenings. Feel statement necessary, impressing duty of public and the press.'
Shri Dev Prakash is never unduly agitated. There must be some unguarded word
by the press. If that is so, at this time, when we are sitting on a powder
magazine, the Fourth Estate has to be extra wise and reticent.
Unscrupulousness will act as a lighted match. I hope every editor and reporter
will realize his duty to the full.
"One thing I must mention. I have an urgent message calling me to the Punjab. I
hear all kinds of rumours about recrudescence of trouble in Calcutta. I hope
they are exaggerated, if not quite baseless. The citizens of Calcutta have to
reassure me that there would be nothing wrong in Calcutta and that peace,
once restored, will not be broken.
"From the very first day of peace, that is, from August 14th last, I have been
saying that the peace might only be a temporary lull. There was no miracle.
Will the foreboding prove true and Calcutta again lapse into the law of the
jungle? Let us hope not, let us pray to the Almighty that He will touch our
hearts and ward off the recurrence of insanity.

"Since the foregoing was written, about four o'clock during my silence, I have
come to know fairly well the details of what has happened in the various parts
of the city. Some of the places, which were safe till yesterday, have suddenly
become unsafe. Several deaths have taken place. I saw two bodies of very poor
Muslims, I saw also some wretched-looking Muslims being carted away to a
place of safety; I quite see that the last night's incidents, so fully described
above, pale into insignificance before this flare-up. Nothing that I may do in
the way of going about in the open conflagration could possibly arrest it.
"I have told the friends, who saw me in the evening, what their duty is. What
part am I to play, in order to stop it? The Sikhs and Hindus must not forget what
the East Punjab has done during these few days. Now the Muslims in the West
Punjab have begun the mad career. It is said that the Sikhs and the Hindus are
enraged over the Punjab happenings.
"I have adverted above to a very urgent call for me to go to the Punjab. But
now that the Calcutta bubble seems to have burst, with what face can I
proceed to the Punjab? The weapon which has hitherto proved infallible for me
is fasting. To put an appearance before an yelling crowd does not always work.
It certainly did not last night. What my word in person cannot do, my fast may.
It may touch the hearts of all the warring elements in the Punjab, if it does in
Calcutta. I, therefore, begin fasting from 8.15 tonight, to end only if and when
sanity returns to Calcutta. I shall as usual, permit myself to add salt and soda
bicarb to the water I may wish to drink during the fast.
"If the people of Calcutta wish me to proceed to the Punjab and help the
people there, they have to enable me to break the fast as early as may be."
Gandhi went to bed just after midnight and rose at half past three as usual.
The prayers were held at four in the morning. Then he attended to
correspondence and later in the morning lie read the papers, lying in bed.
During the day he received several reports of incidents in the city and he sent
out members of his party to see things on the spot.
"As soon as the condition returns to normal, as it was two days back, I shall
break my fast—and not before that," said Gandhi to Dr. Shyama Prosad

Mookerjee who along with other Mahasabha leaders called on him on Tuesday
afternoon.
In the course of discussion with his close associates, Gandhi said: "With
fratricidal strife going on in various parts of India, I was thinking seriously of my
duties. I was groping in the dark. At last I have seen light. If Providence so
desires, I would rather dedicate my life, than live to see this fair land
besmeared with the blood of Hindus and Muslims."
Gandhi completed twenty-four hours of his fast on Tuesday night. He had been
resting most of the time, being unable to carry on with his usual activities. He
looked a bit tired and he spoke rather slowly. Otherwise, the general condition
was good. He went to bed at eight in the night and soon fell asleep.
On Wednesday a leading member of the Muslim League pleaded with him to

give up the fast: "Your very presence in our midst is an asset to us. It is the
guarantee of our safety. Do not deprive us of it."
"My presence did not check the rowdies the other day," Gandhi remonstrated.
"My word seemed to have lost all efficacy so far as they were concerned. My
fast will now be broken only when the conflagration ends and the pristine
peace of the last fifteen days returns. If the Muslims love me and regard me as
an asset, they can demonstrate their faith by refusing to give way to the
instinct of revenge and retaliation, even if the whole of Calcutta goes mad. In
the meantime, my ordeal must continue."
Gandhi's fast stirred the people. Sachin Mitra and Smritish Banerji got killed on
September, while leading the peace squadrons in the city.
The riots rapidly subsided. On September 4 the Government and the individuals
reported to Gandhi that not a single incident had taken place during the last
twenty-four hours. People came to him, either with reports or with promise,
and in spite of his very weak state, he insisted on speaking in his feeble voice
to every interviewer. Dr. Sunil Bose came to Gandhi with a request that he
should take rest and not talk at all. But Gandhi told him that he could not
exclude relevant talk. Such necessary loss of energy was inevitable. He was
certainly desirous of living, but not at the cost of work that duty demanded. "I

cannot interrupt the work which has made me fast and which makes me live. If
my life ebbs away in the process, I would feel happy."
Residents of Beliaghata, who had a few weeks earlier looked upon his peace
mission with suspicion, had been electrified by the fast. They with all their
energy set about the task of rehabilitating the deserted Muslim basti.
The pressmen who had met the evacuees who had returned home, testified to
the sincerity and the solicitude with which those who had driven them away a
few weeks back now treated them. This was good news for Gandhi, but yet he
did not reach the point when the fast could be broken.
As the hours crept by and, drop by drop, strength ebbed out of him, the Hindus
and the Muslims combined in an all-out effort to save the precious life. Mixed
processions, consisting of all the communities, issued forth and paraded
through the riot-affected areas to restore communal harmony. A group of about
fifty people, credited with power to control the turbulent elements in the city,
met Gandhi on September 4, and gave an undertaking that they would
immediately bring the trouble-makers under check. They told him that they
had already traced and put under restraint the ring leaders, who had organized
the rowdyism in his camp on Sunday last, including the person" who had hurled
the stick that had narrowly missed hitting him. They would all surrender
themselves to him and would take whatever punishment might be meted out to
them. Would not he, on the strength of that assurance, now break his fast? If
not, what was his condition for breaking the fast?
In reply, Gandhi promptly told them that he would break his fast only when
they could assure him that there would never again be recrudescence of
communal madness in the city, even though the whole of West Bengal and, for
that matter, India might go forth into a blaze and the Muslims themselves
would come and tell him that they now felt safe and secure and, therefore, he
need not further prolong his fast. He did not expect to be able to control all
the goondas in the city, though he would love to, as he had not the requisite
degree of purity, detachment and the steadfastness of mind. But, if he could
not even make them purge themselves of the communal virus, he would feel

that life was not worth living and he would not care to prolong it. They had
referred to the oppression of his fast. He could not understand that. Why
should they have a feeling of oppression if what they had told him came right
from their hearts ? If a single step was taken under pressure of the fast, not
from conviction, then it would cause oppression; but there should be no
oppression if there was complete co-operation between the head and the
heart.
He concluded: "The function of my fast is to purify, to release our energies by

overcoming our inertia and mental sluggishness, not to paralyse us or to render
us inactive. My fast isolates the forces of evil. The moment they are isolated
they die, for evil by itself has no legs to stand upon. And I expect you,
therefore, to work with even greater vigour under the instigation of my fast,
not to feel its oppression."
The deputation went back realizing that it was not fair to request him to give
up his fast, unless they could deliver the goods. Later, in the afternoon, a
number of those who had led the disturbances in his camp on the Sunday night,
came to Gandhi and made their surrender.
Towards evening, Mr. N. C. Chatterjee, the President of the Hindu Mahasabha,

Mr. D. N. Mookerjee, its secretary, Sirdar Niranjan Singh Talib, the editor of
Desk Darpan, Dr. G. Jilani of the Muslim League, Dr. Abdur Rashid Chowdhury
and Mr. Mohibur Rahman of the Pakistan Seamen's Union came to report on the
quiet and with their request to Gandhi to break his fast. Rajagopalachari,
Acharya Kripalani, Dr. P. C. Ghosh and Mr. Suhrawardy were also there. They
had a long discussion with Gandhi which left him rather worn out.
Gandhi observed that ever since August 14th, although he had relished the
fraternization between the Hindus and the Muslims, he looked on the ebullition
of emotion with caution and reserve. If the feeling was due entirely to
friendship new found, to sense of brotherhood through common citizenship
newly attained, there would be more signs of it, in intensified efforts for
rehabilitation. The sign was lacking. The recrudescence had then come.
Therefore, he felt that he must fast. God had at least given him the capacity to

work and to die for communal peace. If there were anti-social elements in
society, where a rowdy or a goonda plundered or killed a man, whether Hindu
or Muslim, his fast might not affect him. He surely knew his own limitations. He
fasted for the restoration of communal harmony. The sanity that had been in
evidence for the last twenty-four hours was not enough for him. If the present
company was going to assure him that it was a sincere affair and was going to
be permanent, he would then expect them to give him something in writing. It
must state that supposing the Hindu-Muslim riots broke out once more in
Calcutta, they should assure him that they would give their lives in the attempt
to quell the riots. If they agreed, that would be enough. They must so work
from tomorrow, that real peace and common citizenship was created as a
feature of Calcutta life, no matter what happened elsewhere. Communal peace
should be their prime occupation, and their other occupations or avocations
must henceforth occupy a second place.
There was another matter, but that was a condition which automatically
attached itself to the situation. As in Bihar, as in Noakhali, so also in Calcutta,
he wanted to tell them who were making themselves responsible for the break
of his fast, that if the communal frenzy broke out in Calcutta again, he might
have to go on an irrevocable fast. The present fast was meant to activate the
better, peace-loving and wise, elements in society, to rescue them from the
mental sluggishness and make goodness active.
Gandhi asked them two questions. Could they in all sincerity assure him that
there would never be any more recrudescence of communal madness in
Calcutta? Could they say, there was a genuine change of heart among the
citizens of Calcutta so that they would no longer foster or tolerate any
communal frenzy? They should let him continue his fast if they could not give
him that guarantee, for in the event of the present communal outbreak being
followed by another, he would have to undertake an irrevocable fast unto
death. "But supposing, there is another communal outbreak, in spite of your
assurances, since you are not omniscient," Gandhi resumed, "would you give
your word of honour that you would in that event suffer to the uttermost
before a hair of the minority community is injured, that you would die in the

attempt to put out the conflagration but not return alive to report failure? I
want this from you in writing. But mind you, my blood will be upon your head,
if you say one thing and mean another; rather than thoughtlessly hurry, let me
prolong my fast a little longer. It would not hurt me. When a man fasts, it is not
the gallons of water he drinks that sustains him, but God."
Gandhi spoke with deep passion. A pin-drop silence followed. Shaheed

Suhrawardy broke the ice. Gandhi had said that he would break the fast when
Calcutta would return to sanity. That condition had been fulfilled. Was he not
imposing fresh conditions now by asking them to sign that declaration? To this
legal argument, Gandhi retorted that there was no fresh condition imposed
now. All that was there implied in the original terms of the fast. "What I have
spoken now is only a home truth, to make you know what is what. If there is a
complete accord between your conviction and feeling, there should be no
difficulty in signing that declaration. It is the acid test of your sincerity and
courage of conviction. If, however, you sign it merely to keep me alive, you will
be encompassing my death."
Everybody realized the, solemnity of Gandhi's warning. Kripalani and

Rajagopalachari, who had arrived during the latter part of the discussion,
proposed that Gandhi should be left alone for a while and they all should retire
to the adjoining room to confer together. Suhrawardy endorsed the suggestion.
They were about to retire when an appeal signed by forty representatives of
the Hind us and the Muslims was brought in. In the appeal, the signatorierswore
that they would not allow any untoward event or incident in the locality which
was affected during the previous riots and they earnestly prayed to Gandhi to
break his fast. "So our effort has not been in vain," remarked Mr. Suhrawardy,
as he read out the appeal.
"Yes, the leaven is at work," Gandhi added.
Mr. Suhrawardy then said: "Now that even the Muslims have joined in the
appeal, will you not break your fast? This shows that the Muslims have fully
accepted your peace mission although they are the aggrieved party in the
present riots. It is all the more strange, because, -at one time, Muslims looked

upon you as their arch enemy. But now their hearts have been so touched by
the services you have rendered them that today they acclaim you as their
friend and helper."
Rajagopalachari quickly added: "If I may vary the language, I would say that he
is safer today in the hands of Muslims than those of Hindus,"
Gandhi now picked out for his comments only that portion of Shaheed
Suhrawardy's remarks in which he had referred to the Musalmans as the
aggrieved party. "Do not think of the Musalmans as the aggrieved party."
Gandhi remarked. "The essence of our present peace mission is that we are to
forget the past. I do not want the Musalmans to feel that in West Bengal they
are the underdog. Unless we can forget the distinction, we will not have done
solid work."
They then all retired to the next room and Gandhi who had an attack of nausea
during the latter part of the talk was left alone to rest.
The discussion was brief but unhurried. C. Rajagopalachari drafted the pledge
which was| signed by N. C. Chatterjee, Devendra Nath Mookerjee, Suhrawardy,
R. Jaidka and Niranjan Singh Talib, to be followed later by the others. A car-
load of handgrenades and arms had in the meantime arrived to be surrendered
to Gandhi as a token of repentance on the part of those who had taken part in
the reprisals and counter reprisals. Without any loss of time, all the signatories
then returned to Gandhi with the document.
"But is it any good my signing this document?" Mr. Suhrawardy remarked. "I may
any time be called to Pakistan and fhen what happens to my pledge?"
"You must in that event have confidence that those whom you leave behind will
deliver the goods," remonstrated Gandhi. "Moreover, you can come back."
"I have no desire to hoodwink you and will never deliberately do so," said Mr.
Suhrawardy.
"I will break this fast now," said Gandhi, "and leave for the Punjab tomorrow. I
shall now go there with far greater strength and confidence than I could have
three days back."

Mr. Suhrawardy interposed: "You cannot leave tomorrow. For your presence is
necessary here at least for a couple of days yet to consolidate peace." The
others supported him. So, Saturday was provisionally fixed for Gandhi's
departure.
At quarter past nine on Thursday, September 4, Gandhi broke his fast. The fast
lasted seventy-three hours.
On September 5, he was too weak to address the prayer meeting but on the
following day he attended a farewell function arranged on behalf of the
citizens of Calcutta to express their gratitude.
Gandhi, referring to the deputy mayor's speech, stated that the word "farewell"
was misapplied. He had made his home in Calcutta among the Muslim friends in
Beliaghata and not in Sodepur Khadi Pratisthan, which was his permanent
home. He did not even allow Hemaprobha Devi and her co-workers to come to
his new abode for looking after him. He said that he would be satisfied with
what the Muslim friends gave him in the shape of service. He had made no
mistake. He was in the habit of living comfortably in the Muslim homes in South
Africa.
He then spoke on the martyrdom of Sachin Mitra and Smritish Baneiji. He was
not sorry. Such innocent deaths were necessary to keep the two communities
together. Let them not make the mistake that such martyrs were to be found
among the Hindus only. He could cite several instances of Musalmans, who had
lost their lives in the act of protecting Hindus. He had similar personal
experiences in life. There was evil and good among all the communities and
climes. That brought him to Shaheed Saheb, about whom he had many Hindus
coming to him, and also many letters from them, to the effect that he was a
fool to have accepted Shaheed Saheb as his associate in the task. He must say
that he was no fool. He knew what he was doing. He had nothing to do with
what Shaheed Saheb had done in the past. But he was there to testify that
Shaheed Suhrawardy had given his full co-operation all the precious days they
were together. And he was free to confess that without Shaheed Saheb's
valuable help, they would not have found him working in their midst. It was an

insult to his intelligence to think that there could be any base motive behind
the work into which he had thrown himself with his whole heart. Shaheed
Saheb had a palatial house and a brother whom he regarded as superior to him
in talent. He had another brother whom the speaker had the pleasure of
knowing in London at the Round Table Conference and who was the Vice-
Chancellor of the Dacca University. His uncle Sir Abdulla was the author of The
Sayings of the Prophet. If they distrusted the motives, they would be vastly
mistaken. Neither they, nor anybody else, had any right to question a man's
motives. The speaker would not like his motives to be judged against his action
to the contrary. That was the only right way to get on with the people. They all
should know that the speaker had been condemned to their knowledge as the
enemy number one of Islam and that in spite of his protestations to the
contrary. Would the audience, therefore, like the Muslims never to accept his
actions at their worth?
Let them consider the awful consequence of such distrust. It might ruin the
present unity and thus jeopardize what probably was the only chance of saving
the Punjab from fratricidal' strife.
He then referred to the Shanti Sena and the other organizations which were
doing strenuous work to preserve peace. The women had come forward to do
their bit. The students had excelled themselves in their devotion to the cause
of communal amity. Some young men had brought their unlicensed arms,
including the Sten guns, handgrenades and other less destructive weapons. He
thanked them for their courage in bringing them to him. He hoped that the
good example would be copied by all possessors, Hindus and Muslims, of
unlicensed arms. It would be a proof of mutual trust and trust in God. He was
assured by the Premier that those who delivered up such arms within a given
date—the shorter the better—would be thanked for their open help in the work
of peace and that no punishment would be inflicted on them, now or hereafter,
for what was undoubtedly a serious offence. He earnestly asked, therefore, all
such possessors to deliver these to the authorities or to their friends, to be
delivered to the authorities.

And lastly, Gandhi told them that by breaking the fast, only after day's absence
of strife, on the strength of the pressure of friends drawn from all the
communities in Calcutta and outside, he threw the burden on them of
preservation of peace at the cost of their lives. Let them not be guilty of
having, though unwittingly, brought about his death by the abrupt end of the
fast. He could have, as they might have, waited for some days more to enable
him to gauge the situation for himself; but he could not properly do so in the
face of the earnestness of friends, say, like Mr. N. C. Chatterjee, the President
of the Hindu Mahasabha, Shaheed Saheb and many others, but then he threw all
the greater weight on the shoulders of all Calcutta citizens and sojourners.
What they wanted was not the peace imposed by the Government forces but by
themselves. If unfortunately it was broken, there would be no alternative but a
fast unto death. He could not, like a child, play with them, and each time say,
he was going to break his fast if they resumed sanity. He made that solemn
declaration for Bihar, then for Noakhali, and now for Calcutta. As his life was
made, he had no other alternative. If God willed that he should still do some
service, He would bless all with wisdom to do the right thing in the matter.
Consider the consequence of the Calcutta city remaining sane. It must mean
the automatic sanity of all Bengal, East and West. It meant also Bihar and
consequently the Punjab, where God was sending him. If the Punjab came to its
senses, the rest of India was bound to follow. So may God help them all.
A Muslim League paper, the Morning News, paying tribute to Gandhi on behalf
of the Calcutta Muslims, wrote: "He was ready to die so they might live
peacefully." And the correspondent of The Times summed up the situation by
the remark that Gandhi had achieved more than would have been effected by
several divisions of troops.
"Gandhiji has achieved many things," said Rajagopalachari, "but there has been
nothing, not even independence which is so truly wonderful, as his victory over
evil in Calcutta."
Lord Mountbatten gratefully wrote to Gandhi: "In the Punjab we have 55,000
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, as well as an administrator,

may I be allowed to pay my tribute to the one-man boundary force!"
Gandhi left for Delhi on September 7 after spending in Calcutta thirty days—in
his Beliaghata residence twenty-four days. When approached for a message he
wrote down in Bengali: "My life is my message."

08. Man Proposes, God Disposes ( 1947 )
WHEN Gandhi reached Delhi on the morning of September 9th, 1947, he was
shocked to hear of the riots in the capital of India and issued the following
statement:
“‘Man proposes, God disposes' has come true often enough in my lifetime, as it
must have done in many others. I knew nothing about the sad state of things in
Delhi when I left Calcutta on Sunday last. On reaching Delhi, I have been
listening the whole day long to the tale of woe that is Delhi today. I saw several
Muslim friends who recited their pathetic story. I heard enough to warn me that
I must not leave Delhi for the Punjab until it had regained its former self.
"I must do my little bit to calm the heated atmosphere. I must apply the old
formula 'Do or Die' to the capital of India. I am glad to be able to say that the
residents of Delhi do not want the senseless destruction that is going on. I am
prepared to understand the anger of refugees whom fate has driven from West
Punjab. But anger is short madness. It can only make the matters worse in
every way. Retaliation is no remedy. It makes the original disease much worse.
I, therefore, ask all those who are engaged in the senseless murders, arson and
loot to stay their hands.
"The Central Government, the ablest, the most courageous and the most self-
sacrificing team that the Union could produce, have not been in the saddle for
even a month after the declaration of Indian independence. It is criminal and
suicidal not to give them a chance to set the house in order. I am fully aware of
the shortage of food. Mob rule is dislocating everything, making distribution of
foodstuffs all but impossible. May God restore peace to distracted Delhi.
"I would close with the hope that Calcutta will fulfil the promise made on my
departure and which sustains me in the midst of the surrounding madness."
On the situation in Delhi, Nehru in a broadcast speech said:
"I have little doubt that, in a military or a police sense, we shall overcome it
soon. Indeed, the military are still masters of the situation and they will be still

more masters very soon. Of that, I have little doubt. But, surely, we are not
going to live in India just with the help of the military without any self-restraint
and to desist from the evil deeds just because of what the police or the military
might do to us.
"During the last three weeks, I have wandered about West Punjab and East
Punjab and my mind is full with the horror of the things that I saw and that I
heard. During these last few days in the Punjab and in Delhi, I have supped my
fill of horror. That, indeed, is the only feast that we can have now . . .
"This morning our leader, our master, Mahatma Gandhi, came to Delhi and I
went to see him and I sat by his side, for a while, and wondered how low we
had fallen from the great ideals that he had placed before us.
"I go to the country-side and the people with spikes and all sort of destructive
weapons, when they see me, shout 'Mahatma Gandhi-ki-jai' and 'Jawaharlal-ki-
jai'. I feel ashamed to hear these cries from these people who might have
committed murder and loot and arson, in the name of Mahatma Gandhi. It is
not by shouting slogans that they will wash off the evil deeds that they have
done. And even we will not get over these evil deeds by just honouring the
Mahatma in name and not following what he had told us all these long years.
"What is happening now is something directly inimical and so directly opposed

to these ideals. The very thought of it shames me and makes me sometimes
doubt, if all the good work that we have done in these many years is not going
to bear fruit at all. And yet that doubt cannot remain for long. For I do believe
that good work must bear good results, just as I do believe that evil must bear
evil consequences.
"There has been enough of evil work in this country. Let us put an end to it and
start good work and try to follow the great lessons that the Mahatma has taught
us."
On September 10, Gandhi made a forty-mile tour and visited refugee centres in
Delhi and at Okhla. At the prayer meeting he delivered a soul- stirring speech
which was broadcast to the nation.

Gandhi stated that when he reached Shahadra station he found Sardar Patel,
Rajkumari Kaur and others to receive him. But he missed the usual smile on
Sardar Patel's lips and his apt jokes. The police and the public, whom he met on
alighting from the train, reflected the gloom he noticed around him. Had jovial
Delhi suddenly become a city of the dead? Yet another surprise was in store for
him. He was taken not to Bhangi Colony where he delighted to stay, but to the
palatial Birla House. Though the cause of it hurt him, he was glad to find
himself in the house, where he had often stayed before. Whether he stayed
among the Valmiki brethren or in Birla House, he was the guest of the Birla
brothers. Their men looked after him in the Bhangi Colony with single-minded
devotion. The cause of the change was not the Sardar. He could never be guilty
of weakness, so as to fear for the speaker's safety in Valmiki Colony. It was his
delight to live in the midst of the bhangis, though, through the New Delhi
committee's fault, he could not live actually in the houses in which the bhangis
were packed like sardines.
The cause of the change this time was the fact that the premises which he
occupied were being used for the refugees, whose need was infinitely greater
than his. Was it not to their shame as a nation that there should be any refugee
problem at all? Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah, Liaquat Saheb and the other Pakistan
leaders had proclaimed in common with Pandit Nehru and Sardar Patel that the
minorities would be treated in the respective dominions with the same
consideration as the majorities. Was it said by each to tickle the world with
sweet words, or was it meant to show the world that we meant what we had
said and that we would die in the attempt to redeem the word. If so, he asked,
why were the Hindus and the Sikhs and the proud Amils and the Bhaibunds
driven to leave Pakistan which was their home? What had happened in Quetta,
in Nawabshah and Karachi? The tales that one heard and read from the Western
Pakistan were heartbreaking. It would not do for either party to plead
helplessness and say that it was all the work of goondas. Each dominion was
bound to take full responsibility for the acts of those who were living in either
dominion. No longer did they work willynilly under the crushing weight of
imperialism. But it could never mean that there was now to be no rule of law,

if they were to face the world squarely in the face. Were the Union ministers to
declare their bankruptcy and shamelessly own to the world that the people of
Delhi or the refugees would not cheerfully and voluntarily obey the rule of law?
He would like the ministers to break in the attempt to wean the people from
their madness rather than bend.
Gandhi's voice was very low throughout but he went on to give an exhaustive
account of his tour through Delhi, which looked like a city of the dead. He
incidentally mentioned that even in the house where he lived in, there was
neither fruit nor vegetables to be had. Was it not a shame that no vegetables
were to be had in Subzi Mandi because some Muslims had opened fire with a
machine-gun and otherwise? In his wandering, he had heard complaints that the
refugees were without rations. What was issued was not worth eating. If the
fault was of the administration, it was equally of the refugees, who had
paralysed even necessary activities. Why did they not realize that they harmed
themselves? If they trusted the Government to secure redress for all their
legitimate grievances and acted as law-abiding citizens, he knew, as they all
should know, that most of their difficulties would be over.
He had paid a visit to the Meo Refugee Gamp near Humayun Tomb. The
refugees said that they were driven out from the Alwar and Bharatpur states.
He was told that they had no food, save what was sent to them by the Muslim
friends. He knew that the Meos were easily excitable and could cause trouble.
The remedy was certainly not to pack them off to Pakistan, unless they wanted
to go there, but to treat them as fellow human beings, demanding treatment
for their weaknesses, like any other disease.
He had gone to Jamia Millia, in whose shaping he had played a vital part. Dr.
Zakir Husain was his dear friend. Dr. Zakir Ilusain described his experiences
certainly in sorrow, but without bitterness. Just a short time ago he had to go
to Jullundur. He would have been done to death by the angry Sikhs for the
crime of being a Musalman but for the timely aid of a Sikh captain and a Hindu
railway employee. He gratefully related this experience. Imagine the fact that
this national institution, where several Hindus had studied, was in fear of
receiving attention from angered refugees and their abettors. The speaker saw

over hundred refugees accommodated somehow in the Jamia Millia premises.

The speaker hung his head in shame as he heard the sorry recital of the
refugees' difficulties. He had then gone to the Dewan Hall refugee camp, the
Wavell Canteen Camp and Kingsway Camp. He met there the Sikh and the
Hindu refugees. They could not quite forget his past services to the Punjab. But
some pardonably angry faces were in all these refugee camps. He was accused
of hardness of heart towards the Hindus. He had not suffered as they had. He
had not lost his dear ones as they had, nor had he, like them, been rendered
homeless and penniless. How could he then console them by saying that he had
stayed in Delhi to do what he could in assisting to make the capital of India
return to normality? He could not bring back the dead ones. But death was a
blessing bestowed by the Creator on all life, human and subhuman. The
difference lay in the time and the manner. Right conduct was the only right
way of life, which made it bearable and even lovely.
A Sikh friend had seen him during the day. He said that though he was born a
Sikh, he could not claim to be one in the light of the Granth Saheb. The speaker
asked him whether he knew any such claimant, '"Hie friend could not think of
any. The speaker quietly put in his claim. He claimed to be attempting to live
as a Sikh in terms of the Granth Saheb. Time was, when in the Nankana Saheb,
he was accepted as a true friend of the Sikhs. Guru Nanak made no distinction
between a Musalman and a Hindu. And for him, the whole humanity was one.
Such was his own Sanatan Hindu Dharma. As such, he claimed to be a Muslim.
He recited the great Muslim prayer on the oneness of God and His all-protecting
power.
He beseeched the refugees to live truly, fearlessly and at the same time
without malice or hatred towards anybody. Let them not throw away the
golden apple of dearly won freedom by hasty and thoughtless action in the
moment of anger.
Gandhi went round hospitals and refugee camps giving consolation to distressed
people. On September 12 he visited the camp at Jumma Masjid, where 30,000
Muslim refugees—men, women and children—were lodged. They all greeted
Gandhi with folded hands and unburdened their hearts. In the Purana Quila

some 50,000 Muslim refugees were sheltered. On the Ridge and Idgah,
thousands of Muslims were accommodated in tents. In the other parts of Delhi
were lodged thousands of Hindus who had to leave their homes in West Punjab.
The world's biggest convoy consisting of eight lakhs of non-Muslim refugees
from West Punjab had left on foot for East Punjab. Intense anxiety and
suspicion was in the air.
On September 12, Gandhi began his prayer address by expressing his sorrow at
the disturbing news that was coming through from the N.-W. Frontier Province.
He knew that province well. For weeks, he had toured there and had lived
under the roof of the Khan brothers in perfect safety. It pained him beyond
measure, therefore, to have been shown a telegram during the day from
Girdhari Lai Puri, an ex-minister, saying that he and his wife, both good
workers, should be rescued at once. Such news made him hang his head in
shame and it was up to the Government today in power and the Qaid-e-Azam to
see to it that all the Hindus and the Sikhs were as safe there, as the Muslims.
While deploring the sad happenings in the N.W. Frontier Province, he, however,
impressed on the prayer audience that anger was not going to lead them
anywhere. Anger bred revenge and the spirit of revenge was today responsible
for all the horrible happenings there and elsewhere. What good would it do the
Muslims to avenge the happenings in Delhi or for the Sikhs and the Hindus to
avenge the cruelties on their co-religionists in the Frontier and West Punjab? If
a man or a group of men went mad, should everyone follow suit? He warned the
Hindus and the Sikhs that by killing and looting and arson, they were indeed
destroying their own religions. He claimed to be a student of religion and he
knew that no religion ever taught madness. And Islam was no exception. He
implored them all to stop their insane actions at once. "Let not the future
generations say that you lost the sweet bread of freedom because you could
not digest it. Remember that unless you stop this madness, the name of India
will be mud in the eyes of the world," he warned.
He then spoke of his visit to the beautiful Jumma Masjid, second to no mosque
in the world. It pained him to see Muslim men and women there in deep
distress. He tried to comfort those sufferers by saying that death had to come

to all. It was no good weeping for the dead. It would not bring back the dead. It
was up to everyone to save the future of this great land. Many Muslim friends
came to meet him daily. He advised them to state their position frankly and
fully. He was sorry that the lives of the Muslims should be in danger in Delhi or
in any part of India. It was a big tragedy. He implored the refugees to listen to
an old man who had been through many experiences during his long life. He
was absolutely convinccd that to return evil for evil led nowhere. To return
good for good was no virtue. The true way was to return good for evil. Many
Muslim friends would indeed like to help. But it was impossible to requisition
their active services in Delhi today.
He appealed to the Sikhs, the Hindus and the Muslims to forget the past and not
to dwell on their sufferings but to extend the right hand of fellowship to each
other, and to determine to live at peace with each other. The Muslims must be
proud to belong to the Indian Union, they must salute the Tricolour. If they
were loyal to their religion, no Hindu could be their enemy. Similarly, the
Hindus and the Sikhs must welcome peace-loving Muslims in their midst. He had
been told that the Muslims here were in possession of arms. They should
surrender these at once and the Government here should take no action against
them. The Hindus and the Sikhs must do likewise. He had also been told that
the West Punjab Government was arming the Muslims. If this was true, it was
wholly wrong and would in the long run lead to their own destruction. It should
cease forthwith. No one anywhere should have unlicensed arms.
Gandhi begged of them all to bring about peace quickly in Delhi, so that he
might be able to proceed to both East and West Punjab. He had only one
mission and his message was the same for everyone. Let it be said of them that
the inhabitants of Delhi had gone mad temporarily, but that sanity had now
returned. Let them allow their Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister to
hold up their heads again. Today, they were bowed in shame and sorrow. They
had a priceless heritage. Let them remember, it was a joint one. It was their
duty to guard it and keep it unsullied.
On September 13 Gandhi referred to the days in 1915, when he lived under the
late Principal Rudra's roof. He was as staunch a Christian, as he was a son of

India. It was he who brought the speaker in contact with the late Hakim Saheb
and Dr. Ansari, both of whom looked upon Hindus, Muslims and other Indians
with even affection and regard. He knew that thousands of poor Hindus
received free treatment from the Hakim Saheb. He was without doubt the
loved sardar of all Delhi. Were these men to be classed as unworthy? It was a
matter of shame that Dr. Ansari's daughter, Zohra, and her husband, Dr.
Shaukatullah Khan, should have to abandon their home and live in a hotel for
fear of the Hindus and Sikhs. He was free to confess that he would lose all
interest in life, if the Muslims who had produced such men could not live with
perfect safety in the Union. It was suggested to him that the Muslims were all
fifth-columnists in the Union. He declined to believe in that sweeping
condemnation. There were four and a half crores of Muslims in the Indian
Union. If they were all so bad, they would dig the grave of Islam. The Qaid-e-
Azam too had asked the Muslims of the Union to be loyal to it. Let people trust
their Government to deal with traitors. They must not take the law into their
own hands.
He then reported to the prayer audience that he was able to visit only one
refugee camp and that in the Old Fort. It contained many Muslim refugees. As
his car passed through the crowd, many more refugees seemed to be coming.
Though the crowd was very large, he insisted on saying a few words of cheer to
the refugees. He urged the refugees to be calm and shed anger. He said that
God was the refuge of all, and not man, however highly placed he may be. God
would make right what man spoiled. On his part he promised not to rest till
peace again ruled Delhi as it did before many men of both the communities had
gone mad.
During the day he had seen many Muslim and Hindu friends. It was the same sad
tale of woe, whether recited by the Hindu sufferers or the Muslims. It was a
shame for both. He claimed to be the equal servant of all. He wished that they
could unitedly make up their minds that transfer of population was a fatal
snare. It meant nothing but greater misery. The solution lay in both living in
peace and friendship in their own original homes. It would be madness to make
the present estrangement into permanent enmity. It was the bounden duty of

each dominion to guarantee full protection to their minorities. Let the two
dominions thrash the question out among themselves or, if need be, fight it out
and make of themselves the laughing-stock of the world.
The speaker missed, therefore, in the Qaid-e-Azam's fervent appeal for funds
for the Muslim evacuees from the Indian Union any reference to the misdeeds
of the Muslims in Pakistan. He ernestly pleaded for a frank and bold
acknowledgement by the respective governments of the misdeeds of their
majorities.
Lastly, he wished to refer to a vague insinuation against Asaf Ali Saheb, their
ambassador in America. Asaf Ali Saheb had been a Congressman ever since the
speaker had known him. He had been a friend of the late Hakim Saheb and Dr.
Ansari as he was of the Maulana Saheb who was Congress President for many
years and had always been known as a staunch nationalist. He knew that Asaf
Ali Saheb was not recalled from America, but that he had come to consult the
Prime Minister on many important questions. It was a matter of shame that
such Muslims should not feel at ease with every Hindu and Sikh. It was wrong
that a single Muslim should feel unsafe in Delhi, India's capital.
On September 14, Gandhi told the eager prayer audience that he went to
Muslim refugee camps in Idgah and Motia Khan. No Muslim bore an angry look.
They seemed to be poor. There was a very old man who was mere skin and
bone. Every rib was to be seen. He was stabbed in several places. By his side
was a woman equally injured. Though not so old, she was in a dilapidated
condition. He hung his head in shame when he saw them. For him, all men and
women were the same, no matter what religion they professed.
Then he observed the insanitation of the refugee camps. They were indeed
filthy beyond description. In the Idgah, the tank was dry. He did not inquire
where the refugees could get their water from. The camp inmates performed
natural functions anyhow. If he was the camp commandant and the military and
the police were under him, he would take up the shovel and the pickaxe
himself, ask the help of the military and the police to do likewise and then ask
the refugees to follow suit, so that the camps would be in a perfectly sanitary

condition. As it was, the ground itself was a rubbish heap on which no human
being should be asked to live before it was thoroughly cleaned out. It required
no money, it required a little forethought and the possession of a sanitary sense
which would refuse to tolerate insanitation. The Hindu camps were no better
on this score. Insanitation was a national defect, or better still a vice, of which,
as a free nation, the sooner they got rid, the better it was for them.
From the refugee camps his thought turned to the cause of this dislocation on a
scale which arrested the progress of the entire nation. Why were so many
Hindus and Sikhs coming away from the Western Pakistan provinces? Was it a
crime to be a Hindu or Sikh? Or were they coming away out of sheer cussedness?
Or was it a punishment for what their confreres had done in the East? Then he
thought of the Indian Union. Why were the Muslims of Delhi frightened into
leaving their homes? Had both the Governments broken down? Why did the
populace ignore their Government? The Musalmans had unlicensed arms. There
was the Government to see to it that those arms were taken away from the
unlawful possessors. If they were incompetent, they were to give place to
better men. Government was what the people made it. It was wholly wrong and
undemocratic for the individuals to take the law into their own hands. This
lawlessness boded no good for India, whether it was rampant in Pakistan or
Indian Union. He was in Delhi to do or die. He had no desire to witness the mad
fratricide, this national suicide, their betrayal of their own Government. May
God help them to regain their lost sanity!
On Monday, September 15, Gandhi's prayer message was read out:
"During the night, as I heard what should have been the soothing sound of
gentle, life-giving, rain, my mind went out to the thousands of refugees, lying
about in the open camps in Delhi. I was sleeping snugly in a verandah
protecting me on all sides. But for the cruel hand of man against his brother,
these thousands of men and women and children would not be shelterless and
in many cases foodless. In some places, they could not but be in knee-deep
water. Was it all inevitable? The answer from within was an emphatic 'No'. Was
this the first fruit of freedom, just a month- old baby? These thoughts have
haunted me throughout these last twenty hours. My silence has been a blessing.

It has made me inquire within: Have the citizens of Delhi gone mad? Have they
no humanity left in them? Have love of the country and its freedom no appeal
for them? I must be pardoned for putting the first blame on the Hindus and
Sikhs. Could they not be men enough to stem the tide of hatred? I would urge
the Muslims of Delhi to shed all fear, trust God and discover all the arms in
their possession, which the Hindus and the Sikhs fear they have. Not that the
former too do not have any. The question here is one of degree only. Either the
minority rely upon God and His creature man to do the right thing, or rely upon
their fire-arms to defend themselves against those whom they must not trust.
"My advice is precise and firm. Its soundness is manifest. Trust your
Government to defend every citizen against the wrongdoers, however well-
armed they may be. Further, trust them to demand and get the damages for
every member of the minority wrongfully dispossessed. All that neither
Government can do is to resurrect the dead. The people of Delhi will make it
difficult to demand justice from the Pakistan Government. Those who seek
justice must do justice, must have clean hands. Let the Hindus and the Sikhs
take the right step and invite the Muslims, who have been driven out of their
homes, to return. If they can take this courageous step, worthy from every
point of view, they immediately reduce the refugee problem to its simplest
terms. They will command recognition from Pakistan, nay, from the whole
world! They will save Delhi and India from disgrace and ruin. For me, transfer
of the millions of Hindus and Sikhs and Muslims is unthinkable. It is wrong. The
wrong of Pakistan will be undone by the right of a resolute non-transfer of
population. I hope that I shall have the courage to stand by it, even though
mine may be the solitary voice in its favour."
Addressing 500 members of the Rashtriva Sevak Sangh or R.S.S. at the Bhangi
Colony on the morning of September 16, Gandhi said that he had visited their
camp years ago at Wardha, when the founder Shri Hedgewar wras alive. He had
been very well impressed by their discipline^ complete absence of
untouchability, and rigorous simplicity. Since then, the sangh had grown. He
was convinced that any organization which was inspired by the ideal of service
and self-sacrifice was bound to grow in strength. But, in order to be truly

useful, self-sacrifice had to be combined with purity of motive and true

knowledge. Sacrifice without these two had been known to prove ruinous to
society.
Prayer that was recited by the R.S.S., was in praise of Mother India, Hindu
culture and Hindu religion. The speaker claimed to be a sanatani Hindu. He
took the root meaning of the word "sanatana". No one knew accurately the
origin of the word "Hindu". The name was given to us and we had
characteristically adopted it. Hinduism had absorbed the best of all the faiths
of the world and in that sense Hinduism was not an exclusive religion. Hence, it
could have no quarrel with Islam or its followers, as unfortunately was the case
today. When the poison of untouchability entered Hinduism, the decline began.
One thing was certain and he had been proclaiming it from house-tops, that if
untouchability lived, Hinduism must die. Similarly, if the Hindus felt that in
India there was no place for any one else exccpt the Hindus, and if non-Hindus,
especially Muslims, wished to li\e here, they had to live as the slaves of the
Hindus, they would kill Hinduism. And, similarly, if Pakistan believed that in
Pakistan only the Muslims had a rightful place and non-Muslims had to live there
on sufferance and as their slaves, it would be the death-knell of Islam in India.
It was undoubtedly an unfortunate fact that India had been divided into two
parts. I (one part went mad and did ugly deeds, was the other to follow suit?
There was no gain in returning evil for evil. Religion taught us-to return good
for evil.
He had seen their Guruji a few clays ago. He had mentioned to him the various
complaints about the Rashtriya Sevak Sangh that he had received in Calcutta
and Delhi. The Guruji had assured him that though he could not vouchsafe for
the correct behaviour of every member of the sangh, the policy of the sangh
was purely the service of the Hindus and Hinduism and that too not at the cost
of any one else. The sangh did not believe in aggression. It did not believe in
non-violence. It taught the art of self-defence. It never taught retaliation.
Today, the ship of India was passing through troubled waters. The leaders in
charge of the Government were the best that India possessed. Some people

were dissatisfied with them. He would ask them to produce better men, if they
could, and he would advise the old guard to hand over the reins to their
betters. After all the Sardar was an old man and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru,
though not old in years, looked old and haggard under the burden he was
carrying. And they were doing their utmost to serve the people, but they could
only act according to their light. If the vast bulk of Hindus wanted to go in a
particular direction, even though it might be wrong, no one could prevent them
from doing so. But even a single individual had the right to raise his voice
against it and give them a warning. And that is what he was doing. He was told
that he was the friend of the Musalmans and the enemy of the Hindus and the
Sikhs. It was true that he was a friend of Musalmans, as he was of the Parsis
and others. In this respect, he was the same today, as he had been since the
age of twelve. But those who called him the enemy of the Hindus and the Sikhs
did not know him. He could be enemy of none, much less of the Hindus and
Sikhs.
If Pakistan persisted in wrongdoing, there was bound to be war between India

and Pakistan. If he had his way, he would have no military, and no police even.
But all this was tall talk. He was not the Government. Why did not Pakistan
plead with the Hindus and the Sikhs and ask them not to leave their homes and
ensure their safety in every way? Why could not they in the Indian Union ensure
the safety of every Muslim?
Today, both the parties appeared to have gone crazy. The result could be
nothing but destruction and misery.
The Rashtriya Sevak Sangh was a well-organized and well-disciplined body. Its
strength could be used in the interests of India or against it. He did not know
whether there was any truth in the allegations made against the sangh. It was
for the sangh to show by their uniform behaviour that the allegations were
baseless.
On September 16 Gandhi had to abandon his evening prayer meeting which was
held at a refugee camp, as a number of Sikh refugees started a demonstration
against the recitation from the Koran. He said that he was glad of the

experience. He for one could not be deflected from the course he had adopted.
He must remain the friend of all communities of India. And he commended it to
all the lovers of freedom.
On September 17, there was a mammoth gathering of the workmen of the Delhi
Cloth Mills and others from outside in the spacious courtyard of the Lines.
Gandhi had gone there at the instance of the workmen who used to supply
volunteers, whenever he stayed at the Valmiki Colony.
Gandhi stated that after his experience of last evening, he had decided not to
offer public prayer, unless the whole audience, without exception, wished to
have the prayer. He had never imposed anything on anyone, much less could he
impose such a highly spiritual thing as prayer. The response must be from the
heart. There could be no question of pleasing him. His prayer meetings had
certainly become popular and lakhs of people seemed to have gained
therefrom. But in these times of tension, he could understand the resentment
of the sufferers. Only no one should expect him to omit that part of th£ prayer
which to him seemed objectionable. It had to be accepted heartily, as it was,
or rejected. For him, the recitation from the Koran was an integral part of the
prayer.
Turning to the burning question of the day, Gandhi remarked that he was quite
prepared to understand their resentment and the consequent impatience. But if
they deserved their independence, they would learn to subdue their
resentment and trust their Government to do the best. He was presenting to
the people not his own way of non-violence, much as he would like to. But he
knew that he was out of court today. He suggested to them the adoption of the
path that all democratic nations had adopted. In democracy, the individual will
was governed and limited by the social will, which was the state, which was
governed by and for democracy. If every individual took the law into his own
hands, there was no state, it became anarchy, absence of social law or state.
That way lay destruction of liberty. And, therefore, they should subdue their
anger and let the state secure justice. In his opinion, if they permitted the
state to do its duty, he had no doubt that every Hindu and every Sikh refugee
would return to his home with honour and dignity. He was free to admit that

the refugees had suffered much in Pakistan, many homes had become desolate,
many lives had been lost, girls had been abducted, and there had been forcible
conversions. If they had self-control and did not allow their anger to get the
better of their reason, the girls would be returned, forcible conversions would
be null and void, and their properties returned to them. But this could not be
done, if they interfered with the even course of justice and thus spoiled their
own case. The refugees could not expect these things, if they expected that
their Muslim brothers and sisters should be driven out of India. He regarded any
such thing as a monstrous proposition. They could not have the cake and eat it.
Moreover, whilst it was true that the minorities, the Hindus and the Sikhs, were
badly treated in Pakistan, it was equally true that the East Punjab had also
treated its minority, namely the Muslims, likewise. Guilt could not be weighed
in the golden scales. He had no data to measure the guilt on either side. It was
certainly sufficient to know that both the sides were guilty. The universal way
to have proper adjustment was for both the states to make a frank and full
confession of guilt on either side and come to terms, and failing agreement, to
resort to arbitration in the usual manner. The other and rude way was that of
war. The thought repelled him. But then there was no escape from it, if there
was neither agreement nor arbitration. Meanwhile, he hoped that the wiser
counsels would prevail and the Muslims, who had not of their own free will
chosen to migrate to Pakistan, should be asked by the neighbours to return to
their homes with a perfect feeling of safety. This could not come about with
the aid of the military. It could be done by return to sanity by the people
concerned. He had made his final choice. He had no desire to live to see the
ruin of India through fratricide. His incessant prayer was that God would
remove him before any such calamity descended upon their fair land. And he
asked the audience to join in the prayer.
In the end, he congratulated the working class on the Hindus and the Muslims
working together. If they were working in perfect union, they had set a noble
example. The workmen should have no communalism among them. Had he not
said that if they knew their power and used it wisely and constructively, they
would become the real rulers and the employers would be their trustees and

their friends in need and deed? But this happy state of things would come only
when they knew that labour was more real capital than the capital in the shape
of gold and silver, which labour extracted from the bowels of the earth.
Some Muslim friends had requested Gandhi to visit the Muslim localities in the
city, so that the Muslim inhabitants who were still there might not leave their
homes out of sheer panic. He readily agreed and began by visiting the
Daryaganj area on the 18th evening. The deserted appearance of the houses
and the shops, a few of which had been looted, oppressed him. About a
hundred Muslims had gathered in the house of Mr. Asaf Ali. They told Gandhi
that they wanted to live in India as loyal citizens of the Union, but they wanted
an assurance of their safety, particularly from the partisan behaviour of the
police. Some of them were in tears when they narrated their experiences. They
did not approve of what the Muslims in Pakistan had done. But the innocent
people should not be made to pay for the guilt of others.
Addressing the Muslims, Gandhi said that they had to be brave and declare
firmly that they would not leave their homes, whatever might happen. They
should look to none but God for their safety and their protection. He was there
to do whatever he could. He had pledged himself to do or die in Noakhali,
Bihar, Calcutta, and now in Delhi. He would not ask those who had left their
homes to come back until there was real peace and the Hindus, the Sikhs and
the Muslims agreed to live as brothers, without the help of the police and the
military.
He was indeed the friend and servant of the Muslims, as of the Hindus and
others. He would not rest till every Muslim in the Indian Union, who wished to
live as a loyal citizen of the Union, was back in his home living in peace and
security and the Hindus and the Sikhs returned likewise to their homes. He had
served the Muslims for a lifetime in South Africa and in India. He could never
forget the unity of the Khilafat days. It did not last, but it demonstrated the
possibilities of lasting friendship between the Hindus and the Muslims. That was
what he lived for and worked for. He was on his way to the Punjab to see that
all the Hindus and the Sikhs who had been turned out of Pakistan should be
able to return to their homes and live there in safety and honour. But, on his

way, he was held up at Delhi, and he would not leave it till real peace returned
to the capital. Even if he was the only one to say it, he would never advise the
Muslims to leave their homes. If the Musalmans lived as law-abiding, honest and
loyal citizens of India, no one could touch them. He was not the Government,
but he had influence with those in the Government. He had had long talks with
them. They did not believe that in India the Muslims had no place or that if the
Muslims wished to stay there they had to do so as slaves of the Hindus. Some
people had said that Sardar Patel encouraged the idea of the Muslims going
away toâkistan. The Sardar was indignant at the suggestion. But the Sardar
told him that he had reasons to suspect that the vast majority of the Muslims in
India were not loyal to India. For such people, it was better to go to Pakistan.
But the Sardar did not let his suspicion colour his actions.
He was convinced that for those Muslims who wished to be the citizens of the
Indian Union, loyalty to the Union should come before everything else and they
should be prepared to fight against the whole world for their country. Those
who wished to go to Pakistan were free to do so. Only, he did not wish a single
Muslim to leave the Union out of fear of the Hindus or the Sikhs. The Muslims in
Delhi had assured him by their written declaration that they were loyal citizens
of the Union. He would believe their word, as he wished the others to believe
his. As such, it was the duty of the Government to protect the Muslims. He for
one would not like to live, if he could not achieve that. The wrong had to be
undone, wherever it was. The abducted women had to be returned, forcible
conversions considered null and void. The Hindus and the Sikhs of Pakistan and
the Muslims of East Punjab had to be reinstalled in their own homes. In
Pakistan and the Indian Union, they should produce conditions that not even a
little girl, whatever her religion, should feel insecure. He was glad to have read
the statement of Khaliquzzaman Saheb and of the Muslims of Muzaffarnagar.
But, before he proceeded to Pakistan he had to help to quench the fire in
Delhi. If Pakistan and the Union were to be perpetual enemies and gp to war
against each other, it would ruin both the dominions and their hard-won
freedom would be soon lost. He did not wish to live to see that day.

He was taken to some purdah women, before leaving the place. They said that
their hopes were fixed on him. He replied that they should rely on none but
God. He was trying to do his best.
At the prayer gathering, Gandhi told of his meeting with the Muslims at
Daryaganj. He could not rest in peace till every Muslim, Hindu and Sikh in India
and Pakistan was not rehabilitated in his own home. What was to become
ofjumma Masjid, the biggest mosque in India, or of the Nankana Saheb or Punja
Saheb, if no Muslim could live in Delhi or in India and no Sikh lived in Pakistan ?
Were these sacred places to be turned to other purposes? Never.
Gandhi stated that he was proceeding to the Punjab in order to make the
Musalmans undo the wrong that they were said to have perpetrated there. But
he could not hope for success, unless he could secure justice for the Musalmans
in Delhi. They had lived in Delhi for generations. If the Hindus and the
Musalmans of Delhi would begin to live as brothers once again, he would
proceed to the Punjab and do or die in Pakistan. The condition for success was
that those in the Union should keep their hands clean. Hinduism was like an
ocean. The ocean never became unclean. The same should be true of the Indian
Union. It was natural for the Hindus and the Sikhs to feel resentment at what
they had suffered but they should leave it to their Government to secure
justice for them.
The partisan behaviour was attributed to the military and the police. It was
sad, if it was true. If the custodians of law and order were to become partial
and participants in crime, how could law and order be maintained? He appealed
to the military and the police to be above prejudice and corruption. They were
to be faithful servants of the people, irrespective of caste and creed.
On September 19, Gandhi went out at five in the evening and visited the Hindu
pocket in Kucha Tarachand, surrounded on all sides by the Muslims, as the
spokesman £aid before a crowded meeting of the Hindus. He recited in
exaggerated language the woes of the Hindus and ended by saying that the
whole of the locality should be denuded of all the Muslims who were mostly the
Leaguers and who had carried 011 a wild agitation against the Hindus. He

maintained that the Hindus should do exactly as the Muslims in Pakistan were
reported to be doing.
Gandhi emphatically stated that he could never associate himself with the
contention that the Union should drive out all its Muslim population to Pakistan
as the Muslims of Pakistan were driving out all the non-Muslims. He asserted
that two wrongs could never make one right. He, therefore, invited the prayer
audience to listen to his advice and to act bravely and fearlessly and be proud
to live in the midst of a large Muslim population. He then went to the
Anathalaya in the Pataudi House and advised the responsible parties to bring
back the orphans who had been removed out of fright. He was told that about
the 7th of September there was a shower of bullets from the adjoining Muslim
houses, killing one child and wounding another. Maulana Ahmad Saeed and the
other Muslim friends who were accompanying him said that the neighbouring
Muslims would see to it that no harm befell the inmates. The next place was
near the residence of Shri Bhargava, who was the sole Hindu living in the midst
of Muslims. It was packed with Muslims. The speaker hoped that the Muslims
would fulfil his dream as a lad of twelve, that the Hindus, the Muslims and the
other Indians would live together as brothers and friends.
To a small prayer audience in Birla House, Gandhi said that God would fulfil his
dream or take him away and save him from witnessing the awful tragedy of one
part of India being inhabited by the Muslims only and the other part by the
Hindus.
On September 20 Gandhi referred to the hymn that had been sung at the prayer
meeting. In it the composer said that God removed all fear from the hearts of
those who had faith in Him.
Today the Hindus and the Sikhs were frightening the Muslims in Delhi. Those
who wished to be free from fear themselves, should not instil fear into the
hearts of others.
Bannu was a city where he had lived in the house of a Muslim friend. Some
persons from Bannu had come to him and complained that unless they were
evacuated soon from there, they might all be murdered and ruined. The Muslim

friend was as staunch as ever but was unable to protect them single-handed,
try as he might. Other Muslims even from the border were coming daily and
filling them with dread and they asked to be rescued in time. He said that he
had not the power. He would pass on their story to Panditji and the Sardar. The
friends asked that their own military should come to their aid. The speaker,
however, said to them, as he had so often pointed out before : "No one can
protect you other than God. No man can protect another." None of them could
say whether he was going' to be alive the next day or even a minute after. God
alone was, is and ever shall be. Therefore, it was their duty to call upon God
and rely on Him. In no case, however, was anyone at any time to return evil for
evil.
He further added that the fear of the Hindus and the Sikhs in Pakistan was a
very sad reflection on the Pakistan Government and contrary to the assurance
of protection given to the minorities by Jinnah Saheb himself. It was the
bounden duty of the majority in Pakistan, as of the majority in the Union of
India, to protect the small minority, whose honour and life and property were
in their hands.
It baffled him as to why those who had lived as brothers and those whose blood
had mingled in the massacre of the Jallianwala Bagh, should today be enemies.
As long as he had breath in his body, he would say that this should not be. In
the agony of his heart, he cried daily to God to bring peace. If peace did not
come, he would pray to God to take hirn away.
He thought of the poor refugees in Delhi, in both East and West Punjab, today,
while it was raining. They were roofless and homeless, suffering for whose sins?
He had heard that convoys of Hindus and Sikhs were pouring in from West
Punjab into the East, fifty-seven miles in length. It made his brain reel to think
how this could be. Such a happening was unparalleled in the history of the
world and it made him, as it should make all of them hang their heads in
shame. This was no time to ask who had done more wrong and who less. It was
time to put a stop to this madness.
Some remarked to the speaker that every Muslim in the Indian Union was loyal
to Pakistan and not to India. He would deny the charge. Muslim after Muslim

had come and said the contrary to him. In any event, the majority here need
not be frightened of the minority. After all, four and a half crorcs of Muslims in
India were spread over the length and breadth of the land. Muslims in the
villages were harmless and poor, as in Sevagram. They had no concern with
Pakistan. Why turn them out? As for the traitors, if there were any, they could
always be dealt with by the law. The traitors were always shot, as happened in
the case even of Mr. Amery's son, though the speaker admitted that that was
not his law. Others said that some Muslim officials were being kept here in
order to keep all the Muslims in India loyal to Pakistan. Some stated that the
Muslims looked upon all the Hindus as kafirs. Learned Muslims had told the
speaker that this was wholly incorrect. The Hindus were as much followers of
inspired scriptures, as the Muslims, the Christians and the Jews. In any event,
he appealed to the Hindus and the Sikhs to shed all fear of the Muslims from
their hearts, to be kind to them, to invite them to return and settle in their old
homes and to guarantee them protection from hurt. He was confident that in
this way they would get the desired response from the Muslims of Pakistan, and
even from the border tribes across the Frontier. This was the way to peace and
life for India. To drive every Muslim from the Indian Union and to drive every
Hindu and Sikh from Pakistan would mean war and eternal ruin for the whole
country. If such a suicidal policy was followed in both the states, it would spell
the ruin of Islam and Hinduism in Pakistan and the Indian Union. Good alone
could beget good. Love bred love. As for revenge, it behoved man to leave the
evil-doer in God's hands. He knew no other way.
In the midst of riots and strenuous work in Delhi, Gandhi attended to his heavy
correspondence and wrote regularly for Harijan on the vital questions of the
day. His advice was solicited from all sides.
The Regional Study Conference on Fundamental Education was held in China

early in September. The following message was sent by Gandhi to the
conference and the entire audience that had gathered there stood up, while it
was being read:
"I am deeply interested in the efforts of the United Nations Economic, Social
and Cultural Organization to secure peace through educational and cultural

activities. I fully appreciate that real security and lasting peace cannot be
secured so long as extreme inequalities in education and culture exist, as they
do among the nations of the world. Light must be carried even to the remotest
homes in the less fortunate countries which are in comparative darkness, and I
think that, in this cause, the nations which are economically and educationally
advanced have special responsibility.
"I wish your conference every success, and I hope that you will be able to
produce a workable plan for providing the right type of education particularly
in countries in which opportunities for education are restricted owing to
economic and other circumstances.""
In an editorial entitled "Take Care", in Harijan dated September 21, he wrote

on the language question:
"Unless the Governments and their secretariats take care, the English language
is likely to usurp the place of Hindustani. This must do infinite harm to the
millions of India, who would never be able to understand English. Surely, it
must be quite easy for the provincial governments to have a staff which would
carry on all transactions in the provincial and the inter-provincial language
which, in my opinion, can only be Hindustani written in Nagari or Urdu script.
"Every day lost in making this necessary change is so much cultural loss to the
nation. The first and foremost thing is to revive the rich provincial languages,
with which India is blessed. It is nothing short of mental sluggishness to plead
that in our courts and in our schools and even in the secretariats, some time,
probably a few years, must lapse before the change is made. No doubt, a little
difficulty will be felt in multi-lingual provinces, as in Bombay and Madras, until
redistribution of provinces takes place on the linguistic basis. Provincial
governments can devise a method in order to enable the people in those
provinces to feel that they have come into their own. Nor need the provinces
wait for the Union for solving the question, whether for inter-provincial speech
it shall be Hindustani, written in either Devanagari or Urdu script, or mere
Hindi, written in Devanagari. This should not detain them in making the desired
reform. It is a wholly unnecessary controversy likely to be the door through
which English may enter to the eternal disgrace of India. If the first step, that

is, revival of provincial speech in all the public departments takes place
immediately, that of inter-provincial speech will follow in quick succession.
Provinces will have to deal with the Centre. The provinces dare not do so
through English, if the Centre is wise enough quickly to realize that they must
not tax the nation culturally for the sake of a handful of Indians, who, are too
lazy to pick up the speech which can be easily common to the whole of India
without offending any party or section. My plea is for banishing the English
language as a cultural usurper, as we successfully banished the political rule of
the English usurper. The rich English language will ever retain its natural place
as the international speech of commerce and 6f diplomacy."
Kaka Kalelkar posed a question, "If the Muslims of the Indian Union affirm their
loyalty to the Indian Union, will they accept Hindustani as the national
language and learn the Urdu and Devanagari scripts? Unless you give your clear
opinion on this, the work of the Hindustani Prachar Sabha will become difficult.
Cannot Maulana Azad give his clear opinion on the subject?" Gandhi replied:
"Kaka Saheb says nothing new in his letter. But the subject has acquired added
importance at the present juncture. If the Muslims in India ov/n loyalty to India
and have chosen to make India their home of their own free will, it is their duty
to learn the two scripts. It is said that the Hindus have no place in Pakistan. So
they migrate to the Indian Union. In the event of a war between the Indian
Union and Pakistan, the Muslims of the Indian Union should be prepared to fight
against Pakistan. It is true that there should be no war between the two
dominions. They have to live as friends or die as such. The two states will have
to work in close co-operation. In spite of being independent of each other, they
will have many things in common. If they are enemies, they can have nothing in
common. If there is genuine friendship, the people of both the states can be
loyal to both. They are both members of the same commonwealth of nations.
How can they become enemies of each other? But that discussion is unnecessary
here.
"The Union must have a common inter-provincial speech. I will go a step further
and say that if the two states are friends, Hindustani should be the common
speech between the two. This does not mean that Urdu and Hindi will cease to

exist as distinct forms of speech. They must continue to live and progress. But,
if the Hindus and Muslims, or rather the people of all religions in India are
friends, they must accept a common language, evolved from Hindi and Urdu.
They should learn the two scripts. This will be a test for the Muslims and the
Hindus in the Indian Union.
"It would be wrong to say that if the Muslims of the Union refuse to learn the
Nagari script, Hindustani cannot become the national language. Whether the
Muslims learn the Nagari script or pot, the Hindus and the people of all other
religions ought to learn the two scripts. It is possible that in view of the
poisoned atmosphere of the day, the people may not appreciate this simple
proposition. If the Hindus wish to, they can boycott the Urdu script and Urdu
words, but all will be the losers thereby. Therefore, those engaged in
Hindustani Prachar should not weaken in their faith or efforts. I agree that
people like Maulana Azad and other prominent Muslims of the Indian Union
should be the first ones to adopt Hindustani and the two scripts. Who will take
the lead, if not they? Difficult times lie ahead of us. May God guide us aright."
A friend wrote: "The Congress has the reins of government in India. Is it not
well that you should devote your energy to the prosecution of the constructive
programme?"
Gandhi replied: "Communal unity is a vital part of my being. It was so when

khaddar and all the village industries were not even conceived by me. At the
time the communal unity possessed me, I was a lad twelve years old, just a
beginner in English. It was then that I had realized that all Hindus and Muslims
and Parsis were sons of the same soil and, as such, were pledged to complete
brotherhood. This was before 1885, when the Congress was born. Moreover, it
should never be forgotten that communal unity is itself an integral part of the
constructive programme. For it, I have run many a risk. It is my conviction that
if that unity is not achieved, the constructive programme cannot make
substantial progress, at least not at my hands. For, I should not know how to
prosecute it in the midst of communal disturbances."

Harijan was playing an important role in the nation's life and Gandhi declared
to continue to write for it, though a month earlier he was inclined to suspend
Harijan and the allied weeklies. On "My Duty", he wrote:
"This heading has reference only to my duty about the conducting of Harijan
papers. A fair number of replies have been received in answer to my query. The
majority of Harijan readers with a few exceptions want the papers to be
continued. The purport of these letters is that the readers desire my views on
the present-day topics. This means that, probably, after my death these will no
longer be required.
"My death can take place in three ways: (1) The usual dissolution of the body.
(2) Only the eyes move but the mind no longer works. (3) The body and mind
may work but I may withdraw from all public activity.
"The first kind overtakes everybody—some die today, others tomorrow. It

demands no consideration.
"The second variety is to be wished by or for nobody. I for one do not wish for
any such imbecile state. It is a burden on earth.
"The third variety does demand serious consideration. Some of the readers
suggest that the period of my active life should be over now. A new age for
India began on August 15th last. There is no place for me in that age. I detect
anger in this advice, as it is worded. It, therefore, carries little weight with me.
Such .counsellors are few. I have to come to an independent conclusion. The
Harijan papers are being conducted and published under Navajivan Trust. The
trustees can stop publication, whenever they choose. They have full powers.
The trustees do not desire any such stoppage. My life line is cast in active
public service. I have not attained the state which is known as 'action in
inaction'. My activity, therefore, seems at present to be destined to continue,
till the last breath. Nor is it capable of being divided into watertight
compartments. The root of all lies in truth otherwise known to me as non-
violence. Hence the papers must continue as they are. 'One step enough for
me.' "

09. Resignation To Divine Will ( 1947 )
STARTING from his residence at five p.m. on September 21, Gandhi drove through
the curfew-ridden roads of Delhi, which bore traces of the recent disturbances.
At Phul Bargesh, Gandhi was received by a large gathering of Muslims and was
taken to a balcony of a building from where he addressed the assembled people
who were standing on the road. The house-tops in the vicinity were packed
with Muslim women in burqa.
That evening, Gandhi did not hold his prayers, as some one from the audience
took objection to the recitation from the Koran. "One must not seek to impose
one's views on others," he said.
Gandhi went on to relate how he had been to a locality where there were a
large number of Hindus living next door to a large number of Muslims. The
Hindus greeted him with "Mahatma Gandhi-ki-jai", but they little knew that
today, there could be no victory for him, nor did he wish to live, if the Hindus,
Muslims, and Sikhs could not live at peace with one another. He was doing his
level best to drive home the truth that there was strength in unity and
weakness in disunion. Just as a tree that did not bear fruit withered, so also
would his body be useless if his service could not bear the expected fruit.
Whilst this was true, it was equally true that one was bound to work without
attachment to fruit. Detachment was more fruitful than attachment. He was
merely explaining the logic of facts. A body that had outlived its usefulness
would perish, giving place to a new one. The soul was imperishable and
continued to take on new forms for working out its salvation through acts of
service.
Addressing a meeting of the Muslims in that locality, Gandhi said that he

advised them to stick to their homes, although they might be molested by their
Hindu neighbours, even unto death. If they had not that wisdom, they were
free to shift, in order to avoid death. It they could follow his advice, they
would serve both Islam and India. Those Hindus and Sikhs who molested them
would discredit their religion and do irreparable harm to India. It was sheer

madness to think that four crores and a half could be wiped out or banished to
Pakistan. Some persons had suggested that the speaker wished to do so. He
never had any wish that the Muslim refugees should be reinstated through the
police and the military. What, however, he did hold was that when the Hindu
and Sikh anger had subsided, they themselves would bring back the refugees
with honour. He, however, did expect the Government to hold the vacated
houses in good order and in trust for the evacuees.
If the Government had not that power, if the people would not let their
Government do the right thing, he would advise them to resign in favour of
those who would^carry out the mad design to kill or to banish all the Muslims
from India. He had seen such a suggestion seriously made by one newspaper.
This was an advice to commit national suicide and to uproot Hinduism. He
wondered if such a newspaper should exist in independent India. Was liberty of
the press to amount to license to poison the public mind? People who wanted
such a policy to be pursued, should ask for the resignation of their Government.
The world which up till now had looked up to India, would certainly cease to do
so. In any event, so long as he had breath in his body, he would continue to
advise against such madness.
On September 22, his message was read out at the prayer meeting:
"Though I believe-that I was wise in having yielded to a solitary objector and

refrained from holding the public prayer, it is not improper to examine the
incident a little more fully. The prayer was public only in the sense that no
member of the public was debarred from attending it. It was held on the
private premises. Propriety required that those only should attend who
believed whole-heartedly in the prayer, including verses from the Koran.
Indeed, the rule should be applicable to prayer held even on public grounds. A
prayer meeting is not a debating assembly. It is possible to conceive the prayer
meetings of many communities on the same plot of land. Decency requires that
those who are opposed to particular prayers would abstain from attending the
prayer meetings they object to. The reverse would make any meeting
impossible without disturbance. Freedom of worship, even of public speech,
would become a farce, if interference became the order of the day. In decent

society, the exercise of this elementary right should not need the protection of
the bayonet. It should command universal acceptance.
"I have noticed with great joy at the annual sessions of the Congress, on its
exhibition grounds, several meetings held by the religious sects or the political
parties holding their gatherings, expressing divergent and often diametrically
opposite views without molestation and without any assistance from the police.
There have been departures from this fundamental rule and they have excited
the public condemnation. Where is that spirit of healthy toleration gone now? Is
it because, having gained our political freedom, we are testing it by abusing it?
Let us hope that this is only a passing phase in the nation's life.
"Let me not be told, as I have often been, that it is all due to the misdeeds of
the League. Assuming the truth of the remark, is our toleration made of such
poor stuff that it must yield under some uncommon strain? Decency and
toleration to be of any value, must be capable of standing the severest strain.
If they cannot, it will be a sad day for India. Let us not make it easy for our
critics—we have many—to say that we did not deserve our liberty. Many
arguments come to my mind in answer to such critics. But they give poor
comfort. It hurts my pride, as a lover of India, of the teeming millions, that our
toleration and our combined culture should not be self-evident.
"If India fails, Asia dies. It has been aptly called the nursery of many blended
cultures and civilizations. Let India be and remain the hope of all the exploited
races of the earth, whether in Asia, in Africa, or in any part of the world.
"This brings me to the bugbear of the unlicensed and hidden arms. Some have
undoubtedly been found. The driblets have been coming to me voluntarily. Let
them be unearthed by all means. So far as I know, the haul made up to date, is
not much to speak of for Delhi. Hidden arms used to be possessed even during
the British regime. No one worried then. By all means, explode all the hidden
magazines, when you have made sure, beyond doubt, that they are hidden in a
particular place. Let there be no repetition of much cry and little wool. Nor let
us apply one code to the British and set up another code for ourselves, when
we profess to be politically free. Let us not call a dog a bad name in order to

beat him. After all is said and done, to be worthy of the liberty we have won
after sixty years of toil, let us bravely face the difficulties that confront us,
however hard they may be. Facing them squarely will make us fitter and
nobler.
"Surely, it is cowardly on the part of the majority to kill or to banish the

minority for fear that they will all be traitors. Scrupulous regard for the rights
of the minorities well becomes a majority. Disregard of them makes of a
majority a laughing-stock. Robust faith in oneself and brave trust of the
opponent, so called or real, is the best safeguard. Therefore, I plead with all
the earnestness at my command that all the Hindus, the Sikhs and the Muslims
in Delhi should meet together in friendly embrace and set a noble example to
the rest of India, shall I say, to the world! Delhi should forget what the other
parts of India have done or are doing. Then only will it claim the proud
privilege of having broken the vicious circle of private revenge and retaliation.
They belong, if they ever do, to the state, never to the citizens as individuals."
Speaking on September 23, Gandhi said that he had received a deputation of

the Hindus and the Sikhs from Rawalpindi as also from Dera Gazi Khan. The
Hindus and the Sikhs had made Rawalpindi what it was. They were all well off
there. Today, they were refugees, without shelter. It hurt him deeply. Who had
made modern Lahore as it v/as, if not the Hindus and the Sikhs? They were
exiles from their own lands. Similarly, the Muslims had not a little to do with
the making of Delhi. Thus all the communities had worked together to make
India what it was on the 15th of August last. He had no doubt that the Pakistan
authorities should assure full protection to the remaining Hindus and Sikhs in
every part of Pakistan. It was equally the duty of both the governments to
demand such protection for the minorities. He was informed that there were
still left more than 18,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Rawalpindi and 30,000 in the
Wah Camp. He would repeat his advice that they should all be prepared to die
to a man, rather than leave their homes. The art of dying bravely and with
honour did not need any special training, save a living faith in God. Then there
would be no abductions and no forcible conversions. He knew that they were
anxious that he should go to the Punjab at the earliest moment. He wanted to

do so. But if he failed in Delhi, it was impossible for him to succeed in Pakistan.
For he wanted to go to all the parts and provinces of Pakistan under the
protection of no escort, save God. He would go as a friend of the Muslims as of
others. His life would be at their disposal. He hoped that he would cheerfully
die at the hands of anyone who chose to take his life. Then he would have done
as he advised all to do.
The refugees had also asked him for houses. He told them that there was the
land and the canopy of the sky above their heads. They all should be content
with such accommodation rather than inhabit the houses forcibly vacated by
the Muslims. If they would work, they could within the day put up the
necessary shelters. And what was more, they could then assuage the anger of
the refugees and bring about an atmosphere that would enable him to go to the
Punjab at once.
"The spirit of revenge and retaliation fills the atmosphere," observed Gandhi on
September 24. The Hindus and Sikhs in Delhi did not want the Muslims there. If
they had been driven away from Pakistan, why should the Muslims have a place
in the Indian Union, or in Delhi at least, they argued. It was the Muslim League
that had thrown out the gauntlet. The speaker agreed that the Muslim League
had been wrong to have raised the cry of "larkar lenge Pakistan"—"we will take
Pakistan by fighting." He had never believed that such a thing could happen.
And in fact, they could not have succeeded in partitioning the country through
force. If the Congress and the British had not agreed, there would be no
Pakistar today. Nobody could now go back upon it. The Muslims of Pakistan
were entitled to it. Let them for a moment see how they had got
independence. The principal fighter was the Congress. The weapon was passive
resistance. The British had yielded to India's passive resistance and retired. To
undo Pakistan by force, would be to undo swaraj. India had' two governments.
It was the duty of the citizens to allow the two governments to fight out among
themselves. The daily toll of lives was a criminal waste, which did nobody any
good and did infinite harm.
If the people became lawless and fought among themselves, they would prove
that they were unable to digest; freedom. If one dominion behaved correctly

all along the line, then it would force the other too to do likewise. It would
have the whole world behind it. Surely, they would not like to rewrite the
Congress history and make the Indian Union a Hindu state in which the people
of other faiths had no place. He earnestly hoped that they would not stultify
themselves.
Let them contemplate what was now going on in Junagadh. Was there to be a
war between Junagadh on the one hand and almost all the other Kathiawad
states on the other? If the rest of the princes and the people truly combined,
he had no doubt whatsoever that Junagadh state would not stand aloof from
the other states of Kathiawad. For this the rule of law was absolutely essential.
On September 5, someone handed over a note to him before the prayers

started, stating that the Pakistan Government was driving away Hindus and
Sikhs from Pakistan. He had advised the Indian Union Government to let
Muslims stay in India as equal citizens. How could the Indian Union Government
bear this double burden?
Answering this question after the prayers, Gandhi observed that he did not
propose that the Indian Union Government should ignore the ill treatment of
the Hindus and the Sikhs in Pakistan. They were bound to do their utmost to
save them. But the answer was undoubtedly not that they were to drive away
the Musalmans and copy the reputed methods of Pakistan, Those who wished to
go to Pakistan of their own free will, should be safely conducted to the border.
To ensure the safety of the Hindus and the Sikhs in Pakistan, was the duty of
the Indian Union Government. But, for that the Government should be given a
free hand and should receive the full and sincere co-operation of every Indian.
It was no co-operation for the citizen to take the law into his own hands. Our
independence was a baby of one month and ten days. If they continued the
mad career of retaliation, they would kill the baby even in its babyhood.
He narrated the story of the Ramayana. The uneven battle between the mighty
Ravana and the exile Rama was won by Rama by strict adherence to dharma. If
both sides indulged in lawlessness, who'could then point the finger against the

other? The question of degree or who started it, could not justify their
behaviour.
They were brave men. They stood up against the mighty British Empire. Why
had they become weak today? The brave feared none but God. If the Muslims
proved traitors, their treachery would kill them. It was the biggest offence in
any state. No state could harbour traitors. But it was unbecoming to turn out
men on suspicion.
He had heard that the military and the police were taking sides with the Hindus
in the Indian Union and with the Muslims in Pakistan. It hurt him deeply to be
told so. They could not usefully think of what they were capable of doing, when
they were under the foreign masters. Today, the military and the police,
including the British officers, were servants of the nation. They were expected
to be above corruption or partiality. To the people, he appealed not to fear the
police and the military. After all, they were too few compared to the millions
inhabiting their vast country. If the millions were correct in their conduct, the
police and the military could not but act likewise.
Gandhi then told them of his meeting the Governor-General during the day.
Later on he had met some prominent workers and citizens of all the
communities from Delhi, and after that he attended the Congress Working
Committee meeting. Everywhere the same problem was discussed: how to
quench the flames of hatred and revenge. It was for man to put forth his best
effort; the result could then be confidently placed in the hands of God, who
only helped those who helped themselves.
On September 26 he told the audience that during the day he had a visit from
Sikh friends. They said that the present butchery was contrary to the Sikh
religion and, in fact, was inconsistent with any religion. One of them gave an
apt verse from the Granth Saheb wherein Guru Nanak said that God may be
called by the name of Allah, Rahim and so on. The name did not matter, if He
was enshrined in their hearts. Guru Nanak's efforts like those of Kabir had been
directed towards synthesizing the various religions. He had forgotten to bring

the verse which he had got written down, in order to share it with them. He
would bring it the next day.
Pandit Thakur Datt of Lahore had come to him and had narrated his tale of
woe. He wept as he was giving the narrative. He had felt forced to leave
Lahore. He said that he believed in what the speaker had said about dying at
one's place in Pakistan, rather than be bullied out, but he had lacked the
strength to follow that sound advice. He was willing to go back and face death.
The speaker did not want him to do that. But he said that he wanted him and
all the other Hindu and Sikh friends to help him in restoring real peace in Delhi.
Then he would proceed to Western Pakistan with fresh strength. He would go to
Lahore and Rawalpindi, Sheikhpura and the other places in the West Punjab, he
would go to N.-W. Frontier Province and to Sind. He was the servant and well-
wisher of all. He was sure, no one would prevent him from going anywhere. And
he would not go with a military escort. He would put his life in the hands of the
people. He would not rest till every Hindu and Sikh, who had been driven away
from Pakistan, returned to his home with honour and dignity.
He had always been an opponent of all warfare. But then if there was no other
way of securing justice from Pakistan, if Pakistan persistently refused to see its
proved error and continued to minimize it, then the Indian Union Government
would have to go to war against it. War was not a joke. No one wanted war.
That way lay destruction. But, he could never advise anyone to put up with
injustice. If all the Hindus were annihilated for a just cause, he would not mind
it. If there was a war, the Hindus in Pakistan could not be fifth-columnists
there. No one would tolerate that. If their loyalty lay not with Pakistan, they
should leave it. Similarly, the Muslims whose loyalty was with Pakistan should
not stay in the Indian Union. To secure justice for the Hindus and the Sikhs was
the function of the Government. The people could make the Government do
their will. As for himself, his way was differnt. He worshipped God, which was
Truth and Ahimsa.
There was a time when India listened to him. But, today, he was a back
number. He was toid that he had no place in the new order, where they wanted
machines, navy and air force and what not. He could never be a party to that.

If they could have the courage to say that they would retain independence with
the help of the same force with which they had won it, then he was their man.
His physical incapacity and his depression would vanish in a moment.
The Muslims were reported to have said, "Hans ke liya Pakistan, lar ke lenge
Hindustan." If the speaker had his own way, he would never let them have it by
force of arms. Some dreamt of converting the whole of India to Islam. That
never would happen through war. Pakistan could never destroy Hinduism. The
Hindus alone could destroy themselves and their faith. Similarly, if Islam was
destroyed, it would be destroyed by the Muslims in Pakistan, and not.by the
Hindus in Hindustan.
Referring to the question raised by a member of the audience, Gandhi said that
he was asked to work a miracle and save India and the Hindus and Sikhs, if he
was really a Mahatma. But he had never claimed to be a Mahatma. He was an
ordinary human being like any one of them, except that he was much frailer.
The only difference in his favour might be that his faith in God was perhaps
stronger than their. If all Indians—Hindus, Sikhs, Parsis, Musalmans and
Christians, were prepared to lay down their lives for the sake of India, India
could never come to harm. He wanted them to remember what the r is his had
said: "Truth alone is victorious, never falsehood."
On September 27, Gandhi read out the verse from the Granth Saheb to which
he had referred the previous evening. He then explained: "The verse affirms
that man calls God by many names—Rama, Khuda, etc. Some go on a pilgrimage
and bathe in the sacred river, others go to Mecca; some worship Him in
temples, the others in mosques, and some just bow their heads in reverence;
some read the Vedas, the others the Koran; some dress in blue, others in white;
some call themselves the Hindus, others the Muslims. Guru Nanak says that he
who truly follows God's law, knows His secret. This teaching is universal in
Hinduism. It is very difficult, therefore, to understand the madness that wants
to turn four and a half crores of Muslims out of India.
With regret, he referred to what he had heard from Rajkumari Amrit Kaur. She
was now in charge of the health portfolio. She was a Christian and on that

account claimed to be a Sikh and a Hindu as well. She tried to look after the
welfare of all refugee camps whether they were Muslim or Hindu. She had
collected a band of Christian girls and men to serve the Muslim refugee camps.
Now, some angry and senseless persons were threatening the Christians, and
many of them had left their homes. This was monstrous. He was glad to learn
from Rajkumari Amrit Kaur that in one place the Hindus had guaranteed
protection to the poor Christians, and he hoped that they would all soon be
able to return to their homes in peace and be allowed to carry on their service
to sick and suffering humanity without any molestation.
Some newspapers had displayed his remarks about war in such a way that there
was an inquiry from Calcutta, whether he had now really begun to advocate
war. He was wedded to non-violence for all time and he could never advocate
war. In a state run by him, there would be no police and no military. But he
was not running the Government of the Indian Union. He had merely pointed
out the various possibilities. The Indian Union and Pakistan should settle their
differences by mutual consultations, and failing that, fall back upon
arbitration. But if one party persisted in wrong-doing and would accept neither
of the two ways, the only way left open was that of war. They should know the
circumstances that prompted his remark. In almost all his prayer speeches in
Delhi, he had to tell the pecple not to take the law into their own hands, but
let their Government secure justice for them. He put before them the logical
steps which excluded lynch law. The latter would make decent government
impossible. But, that did not mean that his faith in non-violence had weakened
in the least degree.
On September 28 there was a larger prayer congregation than usual and Gandhi
inquired if there was any one who objected to the prayer with the special
verses from the Koran. Two members of the audience raised their hands in
protest, and Gandhi said he would respect the objection although he well knew
that it would be a disappointment to the rest of the audience. However, he
told the objectors that although, as a firm believer in nonviolence, he could not
do otherwise, he could not help remarking that it was highly improper for them
to flout the wishes of the very large majority against them. They all should

realize from the remarks that were to follow that the intolerance that the
objectors were betrayed into, was a symptom of the distemper which was now
visible in the country and which had prompted the very bitter remarks from Mr.
Churchill.
Gandhi then paraphrased in his Hindustani speech the following extract which
had appeared in the papers: "Mr. Churchill declared in a speech here tonight:
'The fearful massacres,.which are occurring in India, are no surprise to me. We
are, of course, only at the beginning of these horrors and butcheries,
perpetrated upon one another with the ferocity of cannibals by the races gifted
with the capacities for the highest culture and who had for generations dwelt
side by side in general peace under the broad, tolerant and impartial rule of
the British Crown and Parliament. L cannot but doubt that the future will
witness a vast abridgment of the population throughout, what has for sixty or
seventy years been the most peaceful part of the world and that, at the same
time, will come a retrogression of civilization throughout these enormous
regions, constituting one of the most melancholy tragedies which Asia has ever
known.'"
Gandhi stated that they all knew that Mr. Churchill was himself a great man. He
belonged to the blue blood of England. The Marlboroughs were famous in
English history. Mr. Winston Churchill took the helm when Great Britain was in
peril on the outbreak of the second World War. He undoubtedly saved what was
then the empire from that peril. It would be wrong to argue that without
America and the other allies, Great Britain would not have won the war. Who
brought the powers together, if it was not his energetic statesmanship? After
the war was won, the great nation whom he so brilliantly represented, whilst
recognizing Mr. Churchill's services, did not hesitate to prefer a purely Labour
Government for the purpose of reconstructing the British Isles which had had to
pay a heavy toll of life and money. The British rose to the occasion, decided
voluntarily to break the empire and erect in its place, an unseen and more
glorious empire of hearts. The speaker then referred to the voluntary
declaration of India, though broken into two parts, as willing members of the
Commonwealth. And this noble step was taken by the whole of British nation,

consisting of all the parties. In this act, Mr. Churchill and his party were the
partners. Whether the future would justify the step or not, was quite a
different matter and irrelevant to the speaker's thesis, which was, that Mr.
Churchill, being associated with the act of the transformation, would be
expected to say or do nothing that would diminish its virtue. Surely, there was
nothing in modern history to be compared with the British withdrawal of
power. The speaker then referred to the renunciation of Asoka the Good, to see
whom was to be the proud possessor of good fortune. But Asoka was
incomparable and he did not belong to modern history. The speaker, therefore,
was sorry to read Reuter's summary of Mr. Churchill's speech, which he
presumed was not misinterpreted by the renowned news agency. Mr. Churchill
had rendered a disservice to the nation of which he was a great servant. If he
knew the fate that would befall India after she became free from the British
yoke, did he for a moment stop to think that the blame belonged to the
builders of the British empire rather than to the "races", in his opinion "gifted
with the capacities for the highest culture"? The speaker suggested that Mr.
Churchill was overhasty in his sweeping generalization. India was composed of
teeming millions in which a few lakhs turned savages counted for little. The
speaker made bold to invite Churchill to come to India and study things for1
himself, not as a partisan with preconceived notions, but as an impartial honest
Englishman who put honour before his party and who was intent on making the
British transaction a glorious success. Great Britain's unique action would be
judged by results. The dismemberment of India constituted an unconscious invi-
tation to the two parts to fight among themselves. The free grant of inde-
pendence to the two parts as sister dominions, seemed to taint the gift. It was
useless to say that either dominion was free to secede from the British family
of nations. It was easier said than done. He must not carry the argument
further. He had said sufficient to show why Mr. Churchill had to be more
circumspect than he had been. Mr. Churchill had condemned his partners
before he had studied the situation first hand: To the audience, which listened
to him, he would say, that many of the listeners had provided a handle to Mr.
Churchill. It was not too late to mend their manners and falsify Mr. Churchill's
forebodings. He knew that his was a voice in the wilderness. If it was not and if

it had the potency which it had before the talks of independence began, he
knew that nothing of the savagery described with so much relish and magnified
by Mr. Churchill would ever have happened and they would have been on a fair
way to solving their economic and other domestic difficulties.
On September 29, Gandhi's prayer message was read out:
"My reference to the possibility of a war between the two sister dominions
seems, I am told, to have produced a scare in the West. I do not know what
reports were sent outside by the newspaper correspondents. Summaries are
always a dangerous enterprise, except wrhen they truly reflect the speaker's
opinion. An unwarranted summary of a pamphlet, I had written about South
Africa in 1896, nearly cost me my life. It was so hopelessly unwarranted that
within twemty-four hours of my being lynched, the European opinion in South
Africa was turned from anger into contrition, that an innocent man was made*
to suffer for no fault that he had committed. The moral that I wish to diraw
from the foregoing version is that no one should be held responsible for what he
has not said or done.
"I hold that not a single mention of war in my speeches can be interpreted to
mean that there wras any incitement to or approval of a war between Pakistan
and the Union, unless mere mention of it is to be taboo. We have among us the
superstition that the mere mention of a snake ensures its appearance in the
house in which the mention is made even by a child. I hope that no one in India
entertains such superstition about war.
"I claim that I rendered a service to both the sister states by examining the
present situation, and definitely stating when the cause of war could arise
between the two state is. And this was done not to promote war but to avoid it,
as far as possible. I endeavoured, too, to show that if the insensate murders,
loot and arson by the people continued, they would force the hands of their
governmenLts. Was it wrong to draw public attention to the logical steps that
inevitably followed one after another?
"India knows, the worl d should know, that every ounce of my energy has been
and is being devote d to the definite avoidance of fratricide culminating in war.

When a man vowed to non-violence as the law governing the human beings
dares to refer to war, he can only do it so as to strain every nerve to avoid it.
Such :is my fundamental position, from which, I hope, never to swerve, even
tc> my dying day."
On September 30, ref erring to the wanton attacks on Muslims, Gandhi asked,
who were the Muslims of India? The vast majority had not come from Arabia, he
remarked. A few had come from outside. But the crores were converts from
Hinduism. He would not mind intelligent conversion. The so-called
untouchables and Shudras were converted not by an appeal to reason. The
responsibility was their own. By giving place to untouchability in Hindu
religion and by oppressing the so-called untouchables, the Hindus had forced
them into the arms of Islam. It was unbecoming on their part to kill or oppress
these brothers and sisters*
Speaking after prayers on October i, Gandhi mentioned that a sister had handed
a note to him the previous evening, in which she had said that both she and her
husband were anxious to serve, but no one told them what to do. The speaker
observed that there were several such complaints. He had one and the same
reply for all of them. The field of service, unlike that of authority, was
unlimited. It was as vast as the earth itself. It could take in an unlimited
number of workers. For instance, the city of Delhi had never been ideally
clean. With the influx of the refugees, the sanitation had become poorer still.
The sanitation of the various refugee camps was far from satisfactory. Anyone
was free to take up that work. And even if they could not get to the refugee
camps, they could clean their own surroundings and that was bound to affect
the whole city. No one should look to anyone else to give direc tions. To
physical cleanliness he added cleanliness of mind and spirit. This was a big job
and pregnant with great possibilities.
He had been to a meeting of some prominent citizens of Delhi and had invited
brief questions. A friend got up and practically delivered a speech. The
substance of it was that the citizens of Delhi were ready to live in peace with
the Muslims, provided they were loyal to the Union and surrendered all the
arms and ammunition, which they possessed without licence. There could be no

two opinions that those who wished to live in the Union must be loyal to the
Union, whatever may be their faith, and they should surrender unlicensed arms
unsolicited. But he asked the friend to add a third condition to the two
mentioned, and that was to leave the execution of the conditions to the
Government.
There were about 50,000 Muslim refugees in the Purana Quila and some more
on the Humayun's tomb grounds. The conditions of life were none too pleasant
there. To justify their suffering by stating the sufferings of the Hindu and the
Sikh refugees in Pakistan and even in the Indian Union was wrong. The Hindus
and the Sikhs had suffered, no doubt, and suffered heavily. It was for the
Government of the Union of India to secure justice for them. Lahore was
famous for its various educational institutions. They had all been founded by
private enterprise. The Punjabis were industrious. They knew how to earn
money and how to spend in charity. There were first-class hospitals raised by
the Hindus and the Sikhs in Lahore. All those institutions and private property
had to be restored to the rightful owners. It could, however, not be done by
seeking private revenge. It was the duty of the Indian Union Government to see
that the Pakistan Government did its duty, as it was that of Pakistan to ensure
justice by the Indian Union.
They could never secure justice by copying the evil ways of one another. If two
men go out riding and one falls down, was the other to follow suit? That would
merely result in breaking the bones of both. Supposing, the Muslims would not
be loyal to the Indian Union, nor would they surrender arms, were they to
continue murder of innocent men, women and children on that account? It was
for the Government to see that the traitors were dealt with properly. By taking
to savagery, the people in both the states had tarnished the fair name that
India had earned in the world. They were thereby bargaining for slavery and for
destruction of their great religions. They were free to do so. But he who had
staked his life to gain independence of India did not wish to be a living witness
to its destruction. With every breath he prayed to God, either to give him the
strength to quench the flames, or to remove him from this earth.

Gandhi then dealt with the reported attack on a hospital in Delhi by a frenzied
mob from a neighbouring village, resulting in the death of four patients and
injury to a few more. It was, indeed, a most cowardly and inhuman act, which
could never be justified under any circumstances.
There was another report that some of the Muslim passengers had been thrown
out of a moving train coming from Naini Tal to Allahabad. He was at his wit's
end to understand the rationale behind such acts. These acts should make
every Indian hang down his head in shame.
On October 2, Gandhi referred to the stream of visitors he had had all day,
including representatives of the foreign embassies and Lady Mountbatten. They
had come to congratulate him on his seventy-eighth birthday. He had received
scores of telegrams also both from home and abroad. It was indeed impossible
to send individual replies. But, he asked himself: "Where did the
congratulations come in? Would it not be more appropriate to say condolences?"
Flowers even had come to him from the refugees and many tributes, both in
money and good wishes. He, however, said that there was nothing but agony in
his heart. Time was when whatever he said the masses followed. But, today, his
was a lone voice. All he heard from them was that they would not allow the
Muslims to stay in the Indian Union. And if the cry was against the Muslims
today, what might be the fate of the Parsis and the Christians and even the
Europeans tomorrow? Many friends had hoped he would live to be 125, but he
had lost all desire to live long, let alone 125 years. He was utterly unable to
appropriate any of the congratulations showered on him. He could not live
while hatred and killing marred the atmosphere. He, therefore, pleaded with
them all to give up the present madness. It did not matter what was being done
to non-Muslims in Pakistan. If one party had sunk low, the other could not
afford to do likewise. He asked them to pause and consider the evil con-
sequences of such misdeeds. They should purge their hearts of hatred.
A fervent appeal to the people of India to follow the great lead given by
Gandhi, was made by Nehru and others addressing a mass meeting in Delhi.

Nehru called upon the citizens to make up their minds as to which path they
were going to follow, the one pointed out by that "apostle of truth and non-
violence" or the other one on which they had, for the past many days, been led
by the anti-social elements in the country. They could not shout "Mahatma
Gandhi-ki-jai" and pursue a policy of hatred towards their own brethren.
In a memorable broadcast speech, Mrs. Naidu said:
"It was on the eve of the last Great World War that we heard the rumour that a
strange man was coming to England from South Africa. There was great interest
in his coming. It was said that he had enunciated a strange gospel alien to the
modern world and alien to the ancient world. His name was Gandhi. I climbed
the steps of a house in a very unfashionable quarter in London, and I stood on
the threshold of an open door, and I found a man seated on a black blanket on
the floor with funny little boxes around him, eating dreadful-looking bits out of
a wooden bowl with a wooden spoon. He looked up and said, 'Oh, is it you?' I
said: 'Certainly not, it looks dreadful to me.' And so laughing, we began a
friendship that has lasted, grown, and developed through all these years. He
was Gandhi, as yet a curiosity to the world. They knew he was someone
distinguished, that he had won a great 4moral victory over a small issue, great
to him, in South Africa, in a contest with great General Smuts. The issues today
against General Smuts are of a vast magnitude, but Gandhi had won on a great
moral principle.
"Who is this Gandhi and why is it today that he represents the supreme moral
force in the world? Throughout history, age after age, in every country, there
have been very distinguished men and great men—kings, warriors, lawgivers,
poets—men whose fame had rang through the corridors of their own periods.
Their names have survived and they are fresh today in their radiance, as they
were in their own times—Buddha, Jesus Christ and Mahomed, and a few others
whose gospel was an exaltation to the spirit of man. Today, there is Gandhi, a
tiny man, a fragile man, a man of no worldly importance, of no earthly
possessions, and yet a man greater than emperors. The emperors have passed
in processions through the streets of their own cities and provinces and crowds
have applauded them out of duty, sometimes tinged with affection and

sometimes tinged with fear, but because it was a convention. But this man,
with his crooked bones, his toothless mouth, his square yard of clothing or of
cloth rather, that just covers his nakedness, where nakedness must be covered,
he passes meekly through the years, he faces embattled forces, he overthrows
empires, he conquers death, but what is it in him that has given him this
power, this magic, this authority, this prestige, this almost godlike quality of
swaying the hearts and minds of men?
"It is a quality he shares with that small band of great teachers of the world,
who inaugurated great religions. He shares with them the quality of bringing
hope to the hopeless, of bringing courage to those who are afraid, of uplifting
those who have fallen, of soothing down the beastly passions of those who have
lost all the sense of sanity and humanity. With Christ he shares the great gospel
that love is the fulfilling of the law. With the great Mahomed he shares the
gospel of brotherhood of man, equality of man and oneness of man. With Lord
Buddha he shares the great evangel that the duty of life is not self-seeking but
to seek the truth, no matter at what sacrifice. With the great poets of the
world, he shares the ecstacy of the vision that the future of man is great, that
the future of man can never be destroyed, that all sin will destroy itself,, but
that love and humanity must endure, grow and reach the stars. Therefore,
today, a broken world ruined by wars and hatred, a broken world seeking for a
new civilization honours the name of Mahatma Gandhi. In himself, he is
nothing. There are men of learning, greater than his, and there are men of
wealth and power, and men of fame, but who is there that combines in one
frail body the supreme qualities of virtue enshrined in him : courage
indomitable, faith invincible, and compassion that embraces the entire world?
This transcendental love of humanity that recognizes no limitations of race, no
barriers of country but gives to all, like a shining sun, the same abundance of
love, understanding and service. Every day—today and yesterday and
tomorrow— every day is the same story of the miracle of Gandhi in our own
age. Who said that the age of miracles is past? How should the age of miracles
be past while there is such a superb example of embodied miracle in our midst?
Let the whole world honour this man, whose birthday we celebrate. He was

born like other men, he will die like other men, but unlike them he will live
through the beautiful gospel he has enunciated, that hatred cannot be
conquered by hatred, the sword cannot be conquered by the sword, that power
cannot be exploited over the weak and the fallen, that the gospel of non-
violence which is the most dynamic and the most creative gospel of power in
the world, is the only true foundation of a new civilization, yet to be built. It is
to this man, who is my leader, my friend and my father, I pay this tribute of
homage."
One of the numerous birthday messages said: "May I suggest that the present
situation should not depress you? In my opinion, this is the final attempt of the
forces of evil to foil the divine plan of India's contribution to the solution of
world's distress by way of non-violence. You are today the only instrument in
the world to further the divine purpose." In reply, Gandhi said:
"It is perhaps wrong to describe my present state of mind as depression. I have

but stated a fact. I am not vain enough to think that the divine purpose can
only be fulfilled through me. It is as likely as not that a fitter instrument will be
used to carry it out and that I was good enough to represent a weak nation, not
a strong one. May it not be that a man purer, more courageous, more far-
seeing, is wanted for the final purpose? This is all speculation. No one has the
capacity to judge God. We are drops in that limitless ocean of mercy.
"Without doubt, the ideal thing would be neither to wish to live 125 years nor
to wish to die now. Mine must be a state of complete resignation to the Divine
Will. The ideal ceases to be that, w-hen it becomes real. All we can do is to
make as near an approach to it as possible. This I am doing with as much energy
as I can summon to my assistance.
"And if I had the impertinence openly to declare my wish to live 125 years, I
must have the humility, under changed circumstances, openly to shed that
wish. I have done no more, no less. This has not been done in a spirit of
depression. The more apt term, perhaps, is helplessness. In that state, I invoke
the aid of the all-embracing Power to take me away from this Vale of tears'
rather than make me a helpless witness of the butchery by man become

savage, whether he dares to call himself a Musalman or Hindu or what not. Yet
I cry, 'Not my will but Thine alone shall prevail.' If He wants me, He will keep
me here on this earth yet awhile."

10. Let Me Magnify My Cross ( 1947 )
CONGRATULATORY birthday greetings kept pouring in. In his post-prayer speech

dated October 3, 1947, Gandhi referred to many birthday messages from the
Muslim friends too. But he did not consider that the present time was
opportune to publish them, as it was not likely to benefit the general public,
who today did not believe in ahimsa and truth. Evil-doers, he held, were
equally guilty, whoever they were.
He then referred to a kind Frenchman who had, while congratulating him, tried
to persuade him to wish to live for 125 years in order to finish his work. The
Frenchman said that the speaker had achieved so much and, after all, if-God
was responsible for every happening, He would bring good out of evil: He
should not be sad or depressed. The speaker stated that he could not deceive
himself by kind words. Today, he felt that what he might have achieved in the
past, had to be forgotten. No one could live on his pa.st. He could wish to live
only if he felt that he could render service to the people. That meant that the
people saw the error of their ways and listened to his words. He was in God's
hands. If God wished to take further work from him, He would do so. But he
certainly felt that today his words had ceased to carry weight, and if he was
not able to render more service, it would be best that God took him away.
Under "Apt Lines", Gandhi published in Harijan the following:
It is by my fetters that I can fly;
It is by my sorrows that I can soar;
It is by my reverses that I can run;
It is by my tears that I can travel;
It is by my Cross that I can climb into the heart of humanity;
Let me magnify my Cross, O God!
In his prayer speech on the 4th he said that at the Kurukshetra Camp the
refugees were Hindus and Sikhs. Their number was at least 25,000, and it was

daily increasing. Tents had been erected to house the refugees, but then they
were not enough to give shelter to all of them. Their diet was just enough to
prevent death from starvation, but it was not a balanced diet and it was
already resulting in malnutrition and lowered the resistance to disease. He was
constrained to state that the suffering of humanity could have been greatly
minimized, if one side at least had retained sanity. The spirit of revenge and
retaliation had started a vicious circle and it brought hardships on increasing
numbers. The Hindus and the Musalmans today seemed to vie with each other
in cruelty. Even women, children and the aged were not spared. He had worked
hard for the independence of India and he had prayed to God to let him live up
to 125 years so that he could see the establishment of Ram Raj, or the Kingdom
of Heaven on earth, in India. But, today, there was no such prospect before
them. The people had taken the law into their own hands. Was he to be a
helpless witness of the tragedy? He prayed to God to give him the strength to
make them see their error and mend it, or else remove him. Time was when
their love for him made them follow him implicitly. Their affection had not,
perhaps, died down, but his appeal to their reason and hearts seemed to have
lost its force. Was it that they had use for him only while they were slaves and
had none in an independent India? Did independence mean good-bye to
civilization and humanity? He could not give them any other message now than
the one he had proclaimed from the house-tops all these years.
His purpose for the evening was to draw attention of his hearers to the
approaching cold weather, which was very severe in Delhi and the Punjab. He
appealed to all who could afford to donate the warm blankets or quilts they
could spare. Even thick cotton sheets could be sent. But they should be washed
and mended, if necessary, before sending. The Hindus and the Muslims should
all co-operate in this humanitarian task. He would like them not to earmark
anything for any particular community. They should rest assured that all their
gifts would be distributed to the deserving people only. He hoped that the gifts
would begin to pour in from the next day. It was not possible for the
Government to provide blankets to lakhs of homeless human beings. The crores
of India had now to come to the rescue of their unfortunate brethren. In

response to his appeal for blankets, two friends had sent two good blankets and
another had sent ten more. He assured the donors that they would be given to
deserving people.
He had received a telegram saying that if the Hindus and Sikhs had not
retaliated, probably, even he would not be alive today. He considered this
suggestion preposterous. His life was in God's good hands, as theirs was. No one
could put an end to it, till He permitted it. It was not for human beings to save
his life or that of anyone else. The telegram further said that ninety-eight per
cent of the Muslims were traitors and would betray India in favour of Pakistan
at a given moment. He did not believe it. The Muslim masses in the villages
could not be treacherous. Supposing that they were they would destroy Islam.
If the charge could be proved, the Government would deal with them. The
speaker was convinced that if the Hindus and the Muslims continued to be
enemies of one another, it was bound to lead to war, which would mean the
ruin of both the dominions. It was the duty of the Government to offer
protection to all who looked up to it, wherever they were and to whatever
religion they belonged. Ultimately, protection of one's faith lay with oneself.
He then referred to Mr. Churchill's speech in which he had attacked the Labour
Government for bringing ruin upon India. He said that they had liquidated the
empire arid brought misery upon India's masses. And he was afraid that the
same fate would befall Burma. Was the wish father to the thought? asked
Gandhi. Mr. Churchill was a great man. It hurt him that he should have spoken
in that manner again. He put the party before the nation. India consisted of
seven lakhs of villages and these seven lakhs of villages had not run amuck. But
supposing that they did, would that be a justification for reducing India to
slavery? Was it only the good who had the right to freedom? It was the British
who had taught us that freedom with drunkenness was any day preferable to
slavery with sobriety. We were rightly taught that self-government included the
right to misgovernment and that the good government was no substitute for the
self-government. Socialism was Mr. Churchill's bete noire. Labour could not be
other than socialist. Socialism was a great doctrine. It did not admit of
condemnation but wise application. The socialists may be bad, but not

socialism. The victory of the Labour Party in Great Britain was the victory of
socialism. The Labour Government was a government by labour. He had long
held the view that when labour realized its dignity, it would eclipse all other
parties. Labour had withdrawn the British power from India by the consent of
all parties. It ill became Mr. Churchill to quarrel with the great act. Supposing
that he succeeded at the next election, surely he did not dream that he would
undo the act and compel India to a second dose of slavery. He would have to
face a living wall of opposition. Did he for a moment think how shameful was
the act of the annexation of Burma? Did he remember the way in which India
was brought under subjection? He did not wish to open the dark chapter. The
less said about it the better. And while he said all this, he did not want his
hearers to forget that their dearly won liberty might be lost to the world
powers if they continued to act like beasts rather than men. He did not wish to
be a living witness of the tragedy if it was to overtake them. Who was he to
save India singlehanded? But he did want his hearers to falsify Mr. Churchill's
forebodings.
On October 6 his written address was read out at the meeting:
"Those who ought to know all about our food have gathered together on the
invitation of Dr. Rajendra Pradad to give him the benefit of their advice in the
grave food crisis. Any mistake made on this important matter may mean
starvation and death of millions therefrom. India is not unfamiliar with the
starvation and death of tens of thousands, if not millions, due to famine,
natural or man-made. I claim that in a well-ordered society, there should
always be pre-arranged methods of successful treatment of scarcity of water
and of food crops. This is, however, not the occasion for describing a well-
ordered society and for showing how it would deal with the matter. Our
concern, for the present, is to see whether we can with fair hope of success
deal with the present food crisis.
"I think that we can. The first lesson that we must learn is of self-help afid self-
reliance. If we assimilate this lesson, we shall at once free ourselves from the
disastrous dependence upon the foreign countries and ultimate bankruptcy.
This is not said in arrogance, but as a matter of fact. We are not a small place,

dependent for its food supply upon the outside help. We are a subcontinent, a
nation of nearly 400 millions. We are a country of the mighty rivers and a rich
variety of agricultural land, with inexhaustible cattle wealth. That our cattle
give us much less milk than we need, is entirely our own fault. Our cattle
wealth is any day capable of giving us all the milk we need. Our country, if she
had not been neglected during the past few centuries, should, today, not only
be providing herself with sufficient food, she would also be playing a useful role
in supplying the outside world with much-needed foodstuffs, of which the late
war has unfortunately left practically the whole world in want. This does not
exclude India. The distress is growing instead of showing signs of decreasing. My
suggestion does not include ungrateful rejection of free supply that any foreign
country may wish to offer u§. All I say is that we must not go a begging. It
demoralizes. Add to this the difficulty of internal transport of foodstuffs from
one place to another. We have not the requisite facility for rapid movement of
grains and other foodstuffs. Further add not the remote possibility of delivery
of uneatable stuff. We dare not lose sight of the fact that we have to deal with
human nature. In no part of the world, it is to be found perfect or even very
nearly so.
"And next, let us see what possible foreign aid we can get. I am told not more
than three per cent of our present wants. If this information is correct, and I
have had it checked by several experts who confirm the figure, I am sure the
case for reliance on the outside help falls to the ground. The slightest
dependence on outside help is likely to deflect us from trying to the fullest
extent our immense internal possibilities in the shape of utilizing every inch of
arable land for growing crops for our daily food in the place of growing money
crops. We must reclaim the waste land which is capable of being placed under
immediate cultivation.
"Centralization of the foodstuffs is ruinous. Decentralization easily deals a blow

to black-marketing, saves time and money in transport, to and fro. Moreover,
the villager, who grows India's cereals and pulses, knows how to save his crops
against the rodents. The movement of grain from station to station, makes it
liable to be eaten by the rodents. This costs the country many millions and

deprives it of tons of grain, every ounce of which we need badly. If every Indian
were to realize the necessity of growing food, wherever food can be grown, we
should most probably forget that there was scarcity of the foodstuffs in the
land. I have by no means dealt fully with the fascinating and absorbing subject
of growing more food but, I hope, I have said enough to stimulate interest and
turn the wise towards the thought of how every individual can help in the
laudable enterprise.
"Let me now show how to deal with the three per cent of the grains we might
possibly get from outside. The Hindus observe a fast or a semi-fast every
eleventh day per fortnight. The Muslims and the others are not prohibited from
denying themselves, especially, when it is for the sake of the starving millions.
If the whole nation realized the beauty of this partial self-denial, India would
more than cover the deficit, caused by the voluntary deprivation of foreign aid.
"Personally, I hold that the rationing has very limited use, if any. If the
producers were left to themselves, they would bring their produce to the
market and everyone would get good and eatable grain, which today is not
easily obtainable.
"I shall close this hurried review of the food crisis by drawing attention to
President Truman's reported advice to the American people that they should
eat less bread and thus save the much-needed grain for the starving European.
He added that the Americans would not lose in health by the recommended act
of self-denial. I tender my congratulations to President Truman on this
philanthropic gesture. I must decline to endorse the suggestion that, at the
back of this philanthropy, there is the sordid motive of deriving a pecuniary
advantage for America. A man must be judged by his action, not the motive
prompting it. God alone knows man's heart. If America would deny herjself for
the sake of hungry Europe, should we fail to do this little act of self-denial for
ourselves? If many must die of starvation, let us at least earn the credit of
having done our best in the way of self-help which ennobles a nation.

"Let us hope that the committee that Dr. Rajendra Prasad has called together,
will not disperse without presenting a workable solution of the food crisis that
faces the country."
On October 7, referring to his remarks about the food control, he said that he
was convinced that his suggestion would remove the major part of the problem
of the food shortage within twenty-four hours. Whether the experts would
accept it or not, was a different question. Many persons came and talked to
him and also left literature with him to the effect that the popular ministers
were acting in an autocratic fashion like their British predecessors. He had not
talked to the ministers in this connection. But he was quite certain that nothing
for which they had criticized the British Government should happen in the
regime of responsible ministries. Under British rule the Viceroy could issue
ordinances for making laws and executing them. There was a hue and cry
against the combination of judicial and executive functions. Nothing had
happened since to warrant a change in the opinion. There should be no
ordinance, rule now. Their legislative assemblies should be their only law-
makers. The ministers were liable to be changed at will. Their acts should be
subject to review by their courts. They should do all in their power to make
justice cheap, expeditious and incorruptible. For that purpose, the panchayat
raj had been suggested. It was not possible for a High Court to reach lakhs and
lakhs of people. Only extraordinary situations required emergency legislation.
The legislative assemblies, even though the procedure might entail some delay,
must not be superseded by the executive. He had no concrete example in mind.
He based his remarks upon the correspondence he had received from various
provinces. Therefore, while he appealed to the people not to take the law into
their own hands, he appealed to ministers to beware of lapsing into the old
ways, which they had condemned.
To the people, he appealed once again to be loyal and faithful to their own
Governments, and to strengthen them or dismiss them, which they had every
right to do. Jawaharlalji was a real jawakar, jewel. He could never be party to
Hindu Raj, nor could Sardar Patel, who had championed the Muslim friends. If
Jawaharlal, the Sardar, and the people with their ideas had forfeited their

respect and confidence, they could replace them by another team that had
their confidence. But they could not and should not expect them to act against
their conscience, and regard that India belonged only to Hindus. That way lay
destruction.
He watched with deep sorrow the plight of the refugees and gave advice to the
people from Delhi, where his stay had to be prolonged, in order to help the
Nehru Government. One of the greatest migrations was nearing its completion,
as the 400,000-foct convoy of the uprooted non-Muslim population of the fertile
areas in West Punjab was pouring over the Pakistan border into India. Already,
three lakhs of Muslim refugees had migrated into Pakistan and over a lakh
Hindu refugees into India.
Addressing the prayer gathering on October 9, Gandhi said that he was grateful
to the people for giving him a patient hearing, but that was not enough. His
advice, if it was worth listening to, should be acted upon. The Hindus and the
Sikhs in Pakistan were in a terrible plight. Evacuation was a difficult process.
Many must die on the way. After coming across to the Indian Union, their
condition in the refugee camps was none too enviable. There was the camp at
Kurukshetra, where thousands lay under the sky. Medical facilities were
inadequate, nutrition poor. It would be wrong to blame the Government. What
advice was he to give to the people? Some friends from the Western Pakistan
had seen him during the day. They had narrated to him their tale of woe and
had pleaded for speedy evacuation of those left behind. He was not the
Government. But, with all the will in the world, no government would be able
to do all that it wanted to do in such extraordinary circumstances. The news
came from East Bengal that the people had started fleeing from there too. He
did not know the reason. His co-workers were still there. He himself had toured
through Noakhali and tried to impress upon the people to shed all fear. It made
him think of the duty of the people and that of the Government. Those who
were now fleeing from one dominion might imagine that the conditions on the
other side would be much better. But they were mistaken. With all the will in
the world, the authorities would not be able to cope with so many refugees.
They could not reproduce the original condition. The only advice that he could

give to the people, was to stick to their places and to look to none but God for
their protection. They would die courageously, if they must, in their own
homes. Naturally, it would be the duty of the other Government to ask for the
safety of the minorities. It was the duty of both the Governments to act
correctly and in co-operation. If that desirable thing did not happen, the logical
result would be war. He was the last person to advocate it. But he knew that
governments which possessed arms and armies, could not act in any other way.
Any such procedure would mean annihilation. Death in the process of exchange
of population did no good to anyone. The exchange raised tremendous problems
of relief and rehabilitation.
Gandhi announced on October 10 that more blankets had been received. There
was also donation of some money and a gold ring for that purpose. He had
received a wire from Baroda informing him that 800 blankets were now ready
for dispatch and many more could be sent, if railway permit could be secured.
He hoped at this rate, there would be enough blankets to save the refugees
from the ravages of the cold weather.
Gandhi then referred to the problem of food and cloth shortage in the country.
With the advent of independence, the problems appeared to have become
more acute than before. He was unable to understand the reason thereof.
These were not the signs of independence. Indian independence was all the
more precious for the reason that their means of achieving it had commanded
universal appreciation. The fight they gave, was bloodless. Such independence
should help them to solve their problems more speedily than before.
As for food, the system of control and rationing was unnatural and un-
businesslike. They had plenty of fertile land; there was enough water and no
dearth of man-power. Why should there be food shortage under these
circumstances? People should be educated to become self-reliant. Once they
knew that they had to stand on their own legs, it would electrify the atmo-
sphere. It was well known that fright took a larger toll of life than actual
disease. He wanted them to shed all fear of calamity by taking the natural step
of self-help. He was convinced that removal of food control would not result in
a famine and deaths from starvation.

Similarly, there was no reason why there should be shortage of cloth in India.
India produced more cotton than she required for her wants. People should spin
and weave themselves. He was, therefore, for the removal of cloth control too.
That might result in increase of prices. He was told and he believed that if the
people abstained from buying cloth for at the most six months, the abstention
was bound to result in a natural fall in prices. And he had suggested that, in
case of need, in the meantime, the people should produce their own khadi. He
did not at the present stage bring in his belief in the use of khadi to the
exclusion of any other cloth. Once the people began to produce their own food
and cloth, it would change their entire outlook. Today, the people had gained
political independence only. By following his advice, they would gain economic
independence also, and that would be felt by every villager. Then there would
be no time or inclination left for fighting amongst themselves. It would result in
elimination of other vices like drinking, gambling, etc. The people would gain
in every sense of the term. And God would also help them, for He helped those
who helped themselves.
During the day, the Food Committee met in Gandhi's room, when the members
of the committee and officials of the Food Department attended and sought his
advice on the solution of the food crisis. "We have plenty of fertile lands and
large man-power," Gandhi observed. "If the Government utilize these two, then
in six months' time, there would be no necessity for continuing the controls."
On October 11 Gandhi referred to the statement that Mr. Mandal and other
members of the Pakistan Government had decided that the Harijans would be
expected to wear a badge, showing that they were untouchables. The badge
had to have a sign of the crescent and the star. This was intended to distinguish
the Harijans from the other Hindus. The logical consequence of this, in his
opinion, would be that those Harijans who did stay there, would ultimately
have to embrace Islam. He had nothing to say against a change of faith out of
conviction and spiritual urge. Having become a Harijan by choice, he knew the
mind of the Harijans. There was not a single Harijan today, who could fall in
that category. W^hat did they understand of Islam? Nor did they understand
why they were Hindus. And this was true of the followers of all faiths. They

were what they were, because they were born in a particular faith. If they
changed their religion, it would be merely from compulsion or some
temptations held out to them in return. In the present atmosphere, no
voluntary change of faith should have any validity. Religion should be dearer
than life itself. Those who acted up to the truth were better Hindus than one
well versed in the Hindu scriptures, but whose faith did not hold out at the
time of a crisis.
In the end he spoke on the proposed launching of satyagraha in South Africa.

Satyagraha had been going on for some time. It had been suspended for some
time. India's case was before the U.N.O. and the Indians, Hindus and Muslims,
in South Africa, had decided to restart their satyagraha the following day. His
advice to them was to seek the assistance of both the Indian Union and the
Pakistan Governments, and it was the duty of both the Governments to give all
possible assistance and encouragement to the Indians in South Africa.
Conditions for successful satyagraha were, that the cause must be just and the
means fully non-violent. If the Indians in South Africa observed these, success
was bound to be theirs.
On October 12, Gandhi reported that he had received more blankets and
promises of quilts during the day. Some mills were also getting quilts ready for
the refugees. Unlike blankets, quilts would get wet with dew. But an easy way
out of it was to cover them with the old newspapers at night. The advantage of
quilts was that they could be stripped, cloth washed and the cotton refilled.
Those who invoked God's assistance could turn even misfortune to good
account, he said. There were some among the refugees who were embittered
by their sufferings. They were angry. But anger did not help. They were well-
to-do people. They had lost their all. So long as they did not return to their
homes with honour and dignity and assurance of safety, they had to do the best
they could in the camp life. The contemplated return was, therefore, a long-
range programme. What were they to do in the meantime? He was told that
seventy-five per cent of those who had come from Pakistan were traders. They
could not all expect to start business in the Indian Union. That would upset the
whole economy of the Indian Union. They had to learn to work with their

hands. As for people with professions, as for instance, doctors, nurses, etc.,
there should be no difficulty in finding work for them. Those who had felt
driven from Pakistan should know that they were the citizens of the whole of
India, and not merely of the Punjab, N. W. F. Province or Sind. The condition
was that wherever they went, they should so mix with the inhabitants there, as
sugar with milk. In their dealings, they should be industrious and honest. They
must realize that they were born to serve India and add to her glory, never to
degrade her. They should refuse to waste time in gambling or drinking or
quarrelling among themselves. It was human to err, but it was also given to
human beings to learn from their mistakes and not to repeat them. If they all
followed his advice, they would be an asset wherever they went and the people
in every province would welcome them with open arms.
He went on pleading for toleration. During his prayer speeches which were
broadcast, he dealt with the pressing problems of the day. He had seen a
paragraph in the press that henceforth the official language of the United
Province would be Hindi with the Devanagari script. It hurt him. Of all the
Muslims in the Indian Union, nearly one-fourth resided in U.P. There, were
many Hindus like Sapru who were Urdu scholars. Were they to forget the Urdu
script? The right thing would be to keep both the scripts and make the use of
either acceptable in all the official dealings. And this would result in the
compulsory learning of both the scripts. The language then would take care of
itself and Hindustani would become the language of the province. This
knowledge of the two scripts would not be a waste, but it would enrich them
and enrich their language. No one should cavil at such a step.
They should treat the Muslims as equal citizens. And equality of treatment
demanded respect for the Urdu script. They must not produce a state in which
respectable life was impossible and still claim that they did not want the
Muslims to go. In spite of really equal treatment, if the Muslims chose to go to
Pakistan, it was their own look-out. There should be nothing in their behaviour
to scare away the Muslims. They should be correct in their conduct. Then only
they could serve India and save Hinduism. They could not do so by killing the

Muslims, or driving them away, or suppressing them in any way. They had to do
the right thing irrespective of what happened in Pakistan.
In his prayer discourse on October 17, he referred to several letters and

messages from friends, expressing their concern over his persistent cough. His
speech was broadcast, and so was the cough, which was often troublesome in
the evening and in the open. For the last four days, however, the cough had
been on the whole less troublesome and he hoped it would soon disappear
completely. The reason for the persistence of the cough had been that he had
refused all me'dical treatment. Dr. Sushila Nayyar had stated that if at the
outset he had taken penicillin, he would have been all right in three days.
Otherwise, it would take him three weeks to get over it. He did not doubt the
efficacy of penicillin, but he believed too that Ramanam was the sovereign
remedy for all ills and, therefore, superseded all other remedies. In the midst
of the flames that surrounded him on all sides, there was all the greater need
for a burning faith in God. God alone could enable the people to put down the
fire. If He had to take work from him, He would keep him alive, otherwise He
would carry him away.
They had just heard the bhajo.n in which the poet had exhorted man to stick to
Ramanam. He alone was the refuge of man. And, therefore, in the present
crisis, he wished to throw himself entirely on God and not accept medical aid
for a physical ailment.
The committee appointed by Dr. Rajendra Prasad had just ended its
deliberations. It was to consider the question of food only. But Gandhi had
expressed his opinion sometime ago that the control over food and cloth should
be removed without further delay. The war was over. Yet the prices were going
up. There was food in the country and cloth too. Yet it did not reach the
people. It was, indeed, a sad state of affairs. The Government was trying to
spoon-feed the people. Instead of that the people should be thrown on their
own resources. The Civil Service was used to carrying on work from their
offices. The red tape and the files controlled their activity. They had never
come in contact with the peasants. They did not know them. He wished the
Civil Service would be humble enough to recognize the change that had come

over the people. Their initiative should not be strangled by the controls. The
people should be allowed to be self-reliant. Democracy should not result in
making them helpless. Supposing that the worst fears were realized and
removal of controls made the situation worse, there was nothing to prevent
them from reverting to them. Personally he firmly believed that it would
greatly ease the situation. The people would begin to exert themselves to solve
their problems and have little time to quarrel among themselves.
A correspondent wrote: "It would be well not to discuss, even by way of joke,
the possibility of a war between our two states. But you have gone so far as to
express the opinion that in the event of a war between the two, the Muslims of
the Union should fight against those of Pakistan. Does it not then follow that
the Hindus and other non-Muslims should do likewise ? Now, if such a war arises
out of the communal question, no argument is likely to make the Muslims of the
Union fight those of Pakistan and, likewise, the Hindus and the Sikhs of
Pakistan. If, however, a war takes place between the two states, for other than
the communal cause, you will not contend that the Hindus of Pakistan and the
Muslims of the Union should fight Pakistan." To this, Gandhi editorially replied:
"It is undoubtedly true that the possibility of a war between the two states
should not be discussed by way of a joke. The adverb even does not fit in. For,
if the possibility be a reality, it would be a duty to discuss it. It might be folly
not to do so.
"It is my firm opinion that the rule that applies to the Muslims of the Union
must, in the same circumstance, apply to the Hindus and other non-Muslims of
Pakistan. I have expressed this view in my after-prayer speeches, as also in my
talks with friends here.
"Of course, behind the opinion lies a train of reasoning. Loyalty cannot be
evoked to order. If circumstances do not warrant it, it may be said to be
impossible to achieve. There is a large number of people who do not believe in
the possibility of such genuine loyalty and hence laugh out my opinion. Surely,
there is nothing to laugh at in conceiving such a possibility. The Muslims of the
Indian Union will fight those of Pakistan, when they regard it as a duty, in other

words, when it is clear to them that they are being fairly treated in the Union
and that the non-Muslims arc not so treated in Pakistan. Such a state is not
beyond the range of possibility.
"Similarly, if the non-Muslims of Pakistan clearly feel that they are being fairly
treated in Pakistan and that they can reside there in safety, and yet the Hindus
of the Indian LJnion maltreat the minorities, minorities of Pakistan will
naturally fight the majority in the Union. Then the minorities will not need any
argument to induce them to do their duty.
"It was our misfortune that the country was divided into two parts. The division
was avowedly by reason of a religious cleavage. Behind it, might be economic
and other causes. They could not have brought out the cleavage. The poison
that fills the air arose also from the same communal cause. Irreligion
masquerades as religion. It sounds nice to say that it would have been better if
there had been no communal question. But how could the fact be undone?
"It has been repeatedly asked whether in the event of a war between the two
states, the Muslims of the Indian Union will fight against the Muslims of
Pakistan, and the Hindus of one against those of the other. However unlikely it
may appear at present, there is nothing inherently impossible in this
conception. There is any day more risk in distrusting the profession of loyalty
than in trusting it and courageously facing the danger of trusting. The question
can more convincingly be put in this way: will the Hindus ever fight the Hindus
and the Muslims their co-religionists for the sake of truth and justice? It can be
answered by a counter question: does not history provide such instances?
"In solving the puzzle the great stumbling block in the way is that truth is at a
discount. Let us hope that in this holocaust, some there are who will stand firm
in their faith in the victory of truth."
At the prayer congregation on October 19, Gandhi posed the question: how
were they to quench the flames? They all had to be correct in their behaviour,
irrespective of what the others did. He was not unaware of the sufferings of the
Hindus and the Sikhs in Pakistan. But knowing that, he wanted to overlook
them. Otherwise, he would go mad. He would not be able to serve India. They

were to look upon the Musalmans in the Indian Union as their blood brothers.
Delhi was said to be at peree. It brought him little solace. It was due to the
presence of the military and the police. There was no love lost between the
Hindus and the Muslims. The hearts were still estranged. He did not know
whether there were any Muslims in the meeting. If there was any, he did not
know whether he felt at home. Sheikh Saheb and some Muslim friends were at
the prayer meeting the day before. So was the widow of Kidwai Saheb's brother
who, for no fault of his, was murdered in cold blood in Mussoorie. He confessed
that he was uneasy about their presence, not because he was at all anxious
about their persons. The speaker flattered himself with the belief that no harm
could befall them in his presence. However, he was not equally sure that they
could not be insulted. He would have to hang his head in shame if they were
insulted in any way. And why should there be any such fear about the Muslim
brethren? Surely, they should feel as safe among them as they themselves. This
could not happen until they learnt the art of magnifying, their own faults and
minimizing those of their neighbours. All eyes rested on India, which had
become the hope of Asia and Africa, nay, of the whole world. If India was to
realize the hope, it had to stop the fratricide and all Indians had to live like
friends and brothers. Clean hearts were the first condition of that happy state.
On October 20, his message was read out at the prayer gathering:
"The Rajkumari informed me last night after prayers that a Muslim Health
Officer was butchered yesterday, while he was on duty. He was a good
conscientious officer. He leaves a widow and children. The widow was so
distracted that her one wish was she and her children were also similarly
butchered, now that their caretaker and bread-winner was removed from their
midst by cruel hands.
"I had told you only the last evening that all was not well with Delhi, as it
appeared on the surface. So long as tragedies, such as I have described,
continue to occur, there is little ground for rejoicing over the silence that
reigns on the surface in Delhi. Is it the silence of the grave, as was once said of
the surface silence during his Viceroyalty by the then Lord Irwin, now Lord
Halifax?

"The Rajkumari added that it was no easy task to get together a sufficient
number of Muslim friends who would perform the burial rites in strict accord
with the Koran.
"This narrative must indeed cause any sensitive mind, as it causes me, a
shudder. Should Delhi come to such a pass? It is a sure sign of cowardice for the
majority to dread a minority, however powerful it might be.
"I hope that the authorities will trace the perpetrators of the crime and bring
them to justice.
"If it was the last of such crimes, I should have little to say, deplorable though
even such a crime would always be. But I fear that it is a pointer. The
conscience of Delhi must be quickened by it.
"It is my painful duty to draw your attention to another menace, if it be one. A

Britisher writes in an open letter, 'To whom it may concern': 'Several of us are
living in a lonely spot in a disturbed area. We are pure British and for years
have devoted ourselves at great personal sacrifice to the welfare of the people
of this country. We now find that a secret word has gone out that all the British
left in India are to be murdered. I read in the newspapers Pandit Nehru's
assurance that the Government will protect the persons and property of all
loyal citizens of the state. But there is no protection for persons living in little
country places, or almost none. None at all for us. It is a physical impossibility.'
"There is much else in this open letter which can be quoted with advantage. I
have reproduced here enough to warn us of the lurking danger. Of course, it
may be only a scare, and there may be nothing beyond it, and there may be no
secret circular/There is, however, prudence in not disregarding such warnings.
I am hoping that the writer's fears are altogether groundless. I agree with him
that all promise of protection by authority in isolated places is vain. It simply
cannot be done, no matter how efficient the military and the police machine
may be, which, it must be admitted, it is not, at present. Protection must come
first from within, from the rocklike faith in God, and secondly from the
goodwill of the neighbouring population. If neither is present, the best and the
safest way is to leave India's inhospitable shore. Things have not come to such a

pass. The duty of all of us is to regard with special attention all the Britishers
who had chosen to remain in India as her faithful servants. They must be free
from every kind of insult or disregard. The press and public bodies have to be
circumspect in this, as in many other respects, if we are to render a good
account of ourselves as a free, self-respecting nation. Those who respect
themselves, can never make good the claim, if they will not respect their
neighbours however few or insignificant they may be."
The following day, Gandhi mentioned that he had heard of another sad
incident. It was not a communal murder. The victim was a Hindu government
officer. A soldier shot him dead because the officer would not act as he was
directed. This tendency to use the gun on the slightest pretext was a grave
portent. There were barbarous people in the world, with whom life had no
value. They shot dead human beings as they would shoot down the birds or
beasts. Was free India to be in that category? Man had not the power to create
life, hence he had no right to take it. Yet, the Musalmans murdered the Hindus
and the Sikhs and vice versa. When this cruel game was finished, the blood lust
was bound to result in the Muslims slaughtering the Muslims and the Hindus and
the Sikhs slaughtering the members of their own communities themselves. He
hoped they would never reach that savage state. That was their fate, unless
both the states pulled themselves together and set things right, before it was
too late.
Gandhi then referred to another question. In some places, authority had

arrested several people who were implicated in rioting. Under the old regime,
the people appealed to the Viceroy for clemency, who had to follow the
prescribed rules however faulty they were. Now they appealed to their
ministers. Were the ministers to act according to their own sweet will? He
thought not. The ministers could not act capriciously. They were bound to let
the law take its own course. The clemency of the state had a definite place and
it had to be exercised under due safeguard. The only way, such cases could be
withdrawn was .by the complainants appealing to the courts concerned to
release the prisoners concerned. The heinous crimes did not admit of such easy
discharges. In such cases, it was not enough for the complainants to abstain

from giving evidence against the accused. The latter had to confess their
crimes and ask for mercy. And if there was sincere cooperation from the
complainants, free pardon was a possibility. What he wanted to stress here was
that no minister had the right to interfere with the course of justice even for
his dearest ones. It was the function of democracy to make justice cheap and
expeditious and to ensure all possible purity in Jthe administration. But, for the
ministers to dare to replace or influence courts of justice was the very negation
of democracy and law.
A friend had warned him that as his prayer speeches were recorded on the All-
India Radio, he should not talk for more than fifteen minutes at the outside. He
appreciated the warning. He had, therefore, cut down further remarks and
hoped thenceforth to follow the practice.
On the 22nd, Gandhi said that a friend had read out a passage from an Urdu
daily to him in the afternoon. He hardly ever read the Urdu newspapers. He
knew Urdu, but he could not read it with the required ease. Friends read out to
him passages from the Urdu newspapers from time to time. In the paragraph
that was read out to him that day, the editor had stated, among other inciting
things, that the Hindus were determined to turn out the Muslims from the
Indian Union. They must either go or have their heads cut of. He hoped that it
reflected the opinion of the editor only. If it reflected the opinion of a
substantial section of the public, it was a matter of great shame and anxiety for
the very existence of the Union. He had told them the sad consequences of this
ruinous policy, the previous evening. It was bound to lead to the Hindus and the
Sikhs killing each other ultimately. A friend had told him that a start in that
direction had already been made. The newspapers had taken the place of the
Gita, the Bible and the Koran with the people. For the people the printed sheet
was gospel truth. The fact threw a great responsibility on the editors and the
reporters. The kind of stuff that was read out to him that afternoon should
never be allowed to be published. Such newspapers should be banned.
Another friend had spoken to him about the chaos that was now to be found in
the states. The British exercised a certain amount of control over the states.
With the lapse of paramountcy, that was gone. The Sardar had taken the place,

but he had not the might of the British bayonet to help him. It was true that
most of the states had acceded to the Indian Union. Nevertheless, they did not
feel bound to the Central Government. Many fancied that they were freer than
under the British suzerainty to treat the ryots as they chose. He himself
belonged to a state and was a friend of the princes. As such, he wished to warn
the princes that the only way to save themselves was to become the real
trustees for their people. They could not live as autocratic rulers. They could
not annihilate their people. Whatever might be in store for India, if any of the
princes dreamt of becoming the absolute rulers, they were greatly mistaken.
The princes could only live on the goodwill of their people. The millions of India
had resisted the might of the British Empire and won their freedom. Today,
they seemed to have gone mad. Let not the princes follow suit. Autocracy,
profligacy, drunkenness would lead them to sure ruin.
Lastly he referred to the approaching festivals of Dussehra and Bakr Id.

Everyone was rather anxious. In the Indian Union, the trouble, if it arose, could
only be started by the Hindus. He then reminded them of the origin of the
Dussehra festival. It was to commemorate the victory of Rama over Ravana.
Durga Puja meant worship of the all-pervading Shakti. The ten days were
followed by Bharat Milap. All this connoted self-restraint, not lenience. These
nine days were the days of fasting and prayer. His mother used to fast during
these nine days. And they, her children, were taught to practise as much
abstinence, as they could. Were they to celebrate the sacred occasion by killing
and harassing their brothers? The Muslims in the Indian Union, including the
Nationalist Muslims, did not know what was in store for them on the morrow.
Were they to live in the Union on pain of being forcibly converted? The last
state was worse than the first. He had protested against forcible conversions of
the Hindus and the Sikhs to Islam. He would expect them to prefer death to
forcible conversions. The same thing applied to the Muslims. He had no use for
people who could change their religion like their clothes. They would not be an
asset to any religion. Hinduism could not be saved by following any of the three
alternatives. The only honourable way was for those in the Union to live as
brothers. Let them shed all enmity and bitterness on the occasion of these

festivals. He then would go to Pakistan with renewed self-confidence. He could

not be satisfied until every Hindu and Sikh returned to his home in safety and
honour, and the Muslims did likewise.
On October 23 Gandhi referred to another murder. A poor Muslim whc had a

spectacles shop, went to open it hoping that things had at last settled down. He
was murdered, as he was opening his shop. Why should such a thing happen?
Where were the police and the military? The shop was not in a lonely place.
Why did not the neighbours try to stop the act? He could understand the
bitterness of the Hindus and the Sikhs at the sufferings of their brethren in
Pakistan. But the desire for revenge and retaliation must be checked. They
must not degrade themselves by wreaking vengeance on the innocent Muslims
in the Indian Union. Delhi was as much the home of the Muslims as of the
Hindus and the Sikhs.
Prayers were held in the Delhi Central Jail on October 25 for the sake of the
prisoners of whom there were not less than 3,000. After the prayers, Gandhi
said that he was indeed pleased when he received the invitation to hold the
prayer amidst prisoners. He was a seasoned ex-prisoner himself. He had served
various terms in South Africa and in India. In South Africa there were Indians
described then as coolies, Negroes, and the third class were Europeans. All the
three were kept separately in jails. When there was an influx of satyagrahis,
they put Indians and Negroes in the same compound. The jail rules were strict.
There was no distinction between political and non-political prisoners. They
were all criminals. In a way it was right. All those who broke the law,
committed a crime against it.
In India, their struggle for independence was a mighty one and the topmost
people participated in it. As a result, there was not only a distinction between
the political and the non-political prisoners, but there were again A, B and C
sections amongst the politicals. He did not believe in those divisions. He also
believed that all men committed offences, big or small. Some were caught and
put in jail. The others managed to escape detention. He was told by the chief
jailor of an Indian jail that he often thought himself to be a bigger criminal

than the prisoners under him. No one, however, would be able to deceive the
biggest Jailor above.
What should their jails be like in free India? The speaker had long held the
opinion that all criminals should be treated as patients, and the jails should be
hospitals, admitting this class of patients for treatment and cure. No one
committed crime for the fun of it. It was a sign of a diseased mind. The causes
of a particular disease should be investigated and removed. They need not have
the palatial buildings when their jails became the hospitals. No country could
afford that, much less could a poor country like India. But the outlook of the
jail staff should be that of physicians and nurses in a hospital. The prisoners
should feel that the officials were their friends. They were there to help them
to regain their mental health, and not to harass them in any way. The popular
governments have to issue necessary orders, but, meanwhile, the jail staff
could do a little to humanize their administration. What was the duty of
prisoners?
As an ex-prisoner, he would advise his fellow prisoners that they should behave
as ideal prisoners. They should avoid breach of the jail discipline. They should
put their heart and soul into whatever work was entrusted to them. For
instance, the prisoners' food was cooked by themselves. They should clean the
rice, dal, or whatever cereal was issued, so that there were no stones and grit
or weevils in them. Whatever complaints the prisoners might have, should be
brought to the notice of the jail authorities in a becoming manner, and they
should so behave in their little community as to become better men, when they
left the jail, than when they entered it.
He had learnt that there were Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims among the prisoners.
Let not the poison of communalism enter their ranks. They should all live
together as friends and brothers, so that when they went out, they might be
able to check the madness outside. He wished Id Mubarak to all Muslim
prisoners and hoped that non-Muslim prisoners would do likewise to their
Muslim brethren.

Gandhi began his address on the 26th by referring to a letter in which a

member of the audience had asked whether it was any use saying that
retaliation and revenge were wrong, when his followers, year after year,
depicted Rama as burning the effigy of Ravana on the Dussehra day, and thus
encouraged the sentiment of revenge. He replied that there were two fallacies
in the question. He did not know who his followers were, unless it was he
himself. And again, the interpretation of the ceremonial was quite wrong. For,
it not only did not encourage private revenge, but discouraged it by showing
that it belonged exclusively to God, known to Hinduism as Rama. He was the
sole infallible reader of men's hearts and, therefore, He knew Who was Ravana.
If everyone arrbgatecj to himself the position of Rama, who would be Ravana?
Imperfect men h^d no right to judge other imperfect men. It was unmanly and
irreligious for the Hindus to lay their hands on the Muslims and vice versa. That
way lay ruin of Hinduism and Islam. He was, therefore, glad that as a sanatani
Hindu, he represented not only the Hindus, but the Muslims and members of
the other religions.
They might ask, whether the speaker was aware of the sad happenings in
Kashmir. He certainly was, so far as the newspapers gave the news. If the
newspaper reports were correct, the happenings in Kashmir were certainly bad.
The charge was that the Pakistan Government was coercing Kashmir to join
Pakistan. No one could coerce Kashmir or for that matter Hyderabad or little
Junagadh, or any other state, into joining one or the other dominion. What was
the solution? He humbly put it to all the rajas and the maharajas, that they
were not the real rulers of their states. The present princes were the creation
of British imperialism. The British power had quitted India. The real rulers of all
the states were their people, and their will must be supreme. The rajas and
maharajas would remain only as trustees. The people of Kashmir must decide,
without any coercion, or show of it from within or without, to which dominion
it should belong. The rule was of universal application.
His speech of October 27 was read out at the prayer meeting:
"Complaints are being repeatedly made that Muslims are being forced to leave
their ancestral home in the Indian Union and migrate to Pakistan. Thus it is said

that, in a variety of ways, they are being made to vacate their houses and live
in camps, to await despatch by train, or even on foot. I am quite sure that such
is not the policy of the Cabinet. When I tell the complainants about this, they
laugh at it, and tell me in reply that either my information is incorrect, or the
services do not carry out the policy. I know that my information is quite
correct. Are the services then disloyal? I hope not. Yet the complaint is
universal. Various reasons are given for the alleged disloyalty. The most
plausible one is that the military and the police are largely divided on a
communal basis and that their members are carried away by the prevalent
prejudice. I have given my opinion that if these members, on whom depends
the preservation of law and order, are affected by the communal taint, orderly
government must give place to disorder and, if the latter persists, to disruption
of society. It is up to the upper ranks of these services to rise superior to
communalism and then to infect the lower ranks with the same healthy spirit.
"It is suggested with much force that the popular governments established in
the country have not the prestige that the ability to overawe the Indian
members of the services gave the foreign bureaucracy. This is only partly true.
For, the popular government wields a moral force, which is infinitely superior
to the physical force that the foreign government could summon to its
assistance. This moral force presupposes the possession of the political morale
that popular support would give to an indigenous government. It may be lacking
today. There is no means of checking it save by the resignation of the ministry
at the Centre. What we are examining specially this evening is the condition of
the central authority. It must never be and, what is perhaps more important,
never feel weak. It must be conscious of its strength/ Therefore, if it is at all
true that there is the slightest insubordination among the services, the guilty
ones must resign and give place to the one who would successfully deal with
the official disorderli- ness. Whilst I voice, not without hesitation, the
complaints that persistently come to me, I must cling to the hope that they
have no bottom to them and that, if they have, the superior authority wall
satisfactorily deal with them, in so far as they have any justification.

"What is the duty of the affected citizens of the Indian Union? It is clear that
there is no law that can compel any citizen to leave his place of residence. The
authority will have to arm itself with special powers to issue orders, such as are
alleged to have been given. So far as I am aware, there are no written orders
issued to anyone. In the present case, thousands are involved in the alleged
verbal orders. There is no helping those who will be frightened into submission
to any order given by a person in uniform. My emphatic advice to all such
persons is that they should ask for written orders whose validity in case of
doubt should be tested in a court of justice if appeal to the final executive fails
to give satisfaction.
"The public, in this case, representing the majority community—that hateful

expression—should rigidly refrain from taking the law into their own hands. If
they do not, they will be cutting the very branch on which they are sitting. It
will be a fall, from which it will be difficult to rise. Let wisdom dawn on them
while there is yet time. Let them not be swayed by ugly events even when the
report thereof happens to be true. They must trust the representative ministers
to do the needful for the vindication of justice."
In the midst of heavy engagements, Gandhi wrote an editorial entitled "Of New
Universities" on October 25:
"There seem to be a mania for establishing the new universities in the

provinces. Gujarat wants one for Gujarati, Maharashtra for Marathi, Carnatic
for Kannad, Orissa for Oriya, Assam for Assami and what not. I do believe that
there should be such universities if these rich provincial languages and the
people who speak them are to attain their full height.
"At the same time, I fear, we betray ourselves into undue haste in
accomplishing the object. The first step should be linguistic political
redistribution of provinces. Their separate administration will naturally lead to
the establishment of universities, where there are none. The Bombay province
absorbs three languages: Gujarati, Marathi and Kannad, and, therefore, stunts
their growth. Madras absorbs four: Tamil, Tclugu, Malayalam and Kannad. Thus,
there is overlapping also. That Andhra Desh has an Andhra University is true. In

my opinion, it does not occupy the place it would, if Andhra was a separate
administrative unit, free from foreign control. India attained that freedom only
two months ago. The same thing can be said of the Annamalai University. Who
can say that Tamil has come to its own in that university?
"There should be a proper background for the new universities. They should
have feeders in the shape of schools and colleges which will impart instruction
through the medium of their respective provincial tanguages. Then only can
there be a proper milieu. University is at the top. A majestic top can only be
sustained if there is a sound foundation.
"Although we are politically free, we are hardly free from the subtle
domination of the West. I have nothing to say to that school of politicians, who
believe that knowledge can only come from the West. Nor do I subscribe to the
belief that nothing good can come out of the West. I do fear, however, that we
are unable, as yet, to come to a correct decision in the matter. It is to be
hoped that no one contends that because we seem to be politically free from
the foreign domination, the mere fact gives us freedom from the more subtle
influence of the foreign language and the foreign thought. Is it not wisdom,
does not duty to the country dictate that before we embark on new
universities, we should stop and'fill our own lungs first with the ozone of our
newly got freedom? A university never needs a pile of majestic buildings and
treasures of gold and silver. What it does need most of all, is the intelligent
backing of public opinion. It should have a large reservoir of teachers to draw
upon. Its founders should be far-seeing.
"In my opinion, it is not for a democratic state to find money for founding
universities. If the people want them, they will supply the funds. The
universities so founded, will adorn the country, which they represent. Where
administration is in foreign hands, whatever comes to the people comes from
top and thus they become more and more dependent. Where it is broad-based
on the popular will, everything goes from bottom upward, and hence it lasts. It
is good looking and strengthens the people. In such a democratic scheme,
money invested in the promotion of learning, gives a tenfold return to the
people, even as a seed sown in good soil returns a luxuriant crop. Universities

founded under foreign domination have run in the reverse direction. Any other
result was impossible. Therefore, there is every reason for being cautious about
founding new universities, till India has digested the newly acquired freedom.
"Then take the Hindu-Muslim question. The poison has assumed dangerous
proportions, such that it is difficult to forecast where it will land us. Assume
that the unthinkable has happened, and that not a single Muslim can remain in
the Indian Union safely and honourably and that neither the Hindu nor the Sikh
can do likewise in Pakistan. Our education will then wear a poisonous form. If,
on the other hand, the Hindus, the Muslims and all the others, who may belong
to different faiths, can live in either dominion with perfect safety and honour,
then, in the nature of things, our education will take a shape altogether
pleasing. Either people of different faiths, having lived together in friendship,
have produced the beautiful blend of cultures, which we shall strive to
perpetuate and to increasingly strengthen the shape, or we shall cast about for
the day, when there was only one religion represented in Hindustan, and
retrace our steps to that exclusive culture. It is just possible that we might not
be able to find any such historical date and, if we daand we retrace our steps,
we shall throw our culture back to that ugly period and deservedly earn the
execration of the universe. By way of example, if we make the vain attempt to
obliterate the Muslim period, we shall have to forget that there was the mighty
Jumma Masjid in Delhi, second to none in the world, or that there was a Muslim
University in Aligarh, or that there was the Taj in Agra, one of the seven
wonders of the world, or that there were the grea t forts of Delhi and Agra built
during the Mogul period. We shall then have to rewrite our history with that
end in view. Surely, today we have not the atmosphere which will enable us to
come to a right conclusion about the conflicting choices. Our two months old
freedom is struggling to get itself shaped. We do not know what shape it will
ultimately take. And until we know this definitely, it should be enough if we
make such changes as are possible in the existing universities and breathe in
our existing educational institutions the quickening spirit of freedom. The
experience we will thus gain will be helpful when the time is ripe for founding
new universities.

"Last but not least remains the Basic Education. It is an infant, not more than
eight years old. And, therefore, the actual experience does not take us beyond
what may be termed the matriculation stage. Thus, though it is limited in
scope, the mind of those who are engaged in making the experiment has grown
far beyond that stage. It would be unwise for any educationist to put aside the
recommendations of a body which has behind it the solid experience of eight
years. It should be borne in mind that this Basic Education has grown out of the
atmosphere surrounding us in the country and is in response to it. It is,
therefore, designed to cope with that atmosphere. This atmosphere pervades
India's seven hundred thousand villages and its millions of inhabitants. Forget
them, and you forget India. India is not to be found in her cities. India is in her
innumerable villages. The cities rose in answer to the requirements of the
foreign domination. They exist, as they were two months ago, for though the
foreign rule has disappeared, its influence has not and cannot quite so
suddenly, Thus, I am writing these lines in New Delhi. If I know nothing of the
villages of India, how can I draw, sitting here, a true picture of the villages?
What applies to me, applies more forcibly to the ministers."
A correspondent wrote: "I belive that such a project will present great
difficulties, if it comes into being before linguistic redistribution. I cannot
understand why the Congress should take any time in accomplishing this
linguistic.redistribution." Gandhi replied:
"I entirely endorse the suggestion underlying the foregoing letter, namely that
what is proper to be done should not be delayed without just cause, and that
what is improper should notbe conceded under any circumstances whatsoever.
There can be no compromise with evil and, since linguistic redistribution is
desirable from almost every point of view, all delay in carrying out the project
should be avoided.
"But the reluctance to enforce the linguistic redistribution is, perhaps,

justifiable in the present depressing atmosphere. The exclusive spirit is ever
uppermost. Everyone thinks of himself and of his family. No one thinks of the
whole of India. The centripetal force is undoubtedly there, but it is not vocal,

not boisterous, whereas the centrifugal is on the surface, and in its very nature
makes the loudest noise, demanding the attention of all.
It manifests itself most in matters communal. This has given rise to fear in the
other fields. The history of the quarrel between Orissa and Andhra, Orissa and
Bihar, and Orissa and Bengal is fresh in our minds. The whole of it has not died
out even now. This is but an illustration of an almost accomplished fact. The
other provinces were never redistributed in law, though they were in 1920,
when the Congress had a brand new constitution, enabling it to put up a life-
and-death struggle with, perhaps, the greatest empire that has ever existed.
How will Madras, though divided by the Congress, divide itself into four new
provinces, and Bombay do likewise in law? Many other claimants have come to
the fore. They are not recognized by the Congress, but they are not less vocal
or less insistent. The Congress does not command the prestige and the
authority it found itself in possession of in 1920. Despair has given place to
hope. Now, when we have freedom, we seem not to know what to do with it. It
is almost mistaken for suicidal anarchy. Even zealous reformers would postpone
the controversial issues to a more hopeful time, when, in the interest of the
country, the virtue of 'give and take' would be freely recognized and all the
sectional interests would be subordinate to the one interest of the good of
India, which will include the good of all. Therefore, those who like me, want
constructive suggestions to come into play at this very moment, have to work
to bring about a healthy atmosphere, promoting concord in the place of
discord, peace in the place of strife, progress in the place of retrogression, and
life in the place of death. That happy day will be most manifest, when the
communal strife has died out. In the meanwhile, will the southern linguistic
groups settle their disputes and boundaries, will Bombay produce an agreed
scheme of redistribution according to language, and will the new candidates
withdraw their claims, at least for the time being? Then the linguistic redistri-
bution can come into being today without the slightest difficulty or fuss.
"But let there be no undue strain upon the Congress whose foundations have
been shaken to their roots. It is ill-equipped today, either for arbitrating
between the rival claimants or imposing its will upon recalcitrants."

11. Hope For The Future ( 1947 )
ON OCTOBER 27, 1947, Kashmir acceded to the Indian Union and Indian troops
were despatched to Srinagar to help defend the territory and protect the lives
and property of the people from the onslaught of the raiders. The action
followed an appeal by the ruler of Kashmir, who promised to set up an interim
government headed by Sheikh Abdullah.
Referring to the situation in Kashmir, Gandhi observed that when the ruler in
his distress wished to accede to the Union, the Governor-General could not
reject the advance. The Indian Government sent troops by air to Kashmir,
telling the maharaja that the accession was provisional upon an impartial
plebiscite being taken in Kashmir, irrespective of religion. The Kashmir
maharaja had wisely appointed Sheikh Saheb Abdullah, as his prime minister. It
pleased the speaker to read in papers that the Sheikh Saheb had risen to the
occasion and made a hearty response to the invitation. What was the situation?
It was stated that a rebel army composed of the Afridis and the like, ably
officered, was advancing towards Srinagar, burning and looting the villages all
along the route, destroying even the electric power-house, thus leaving
Srinagar in darkness. It was difficult to believe that the entry could take place
without some kind of encouragement from the Pakistan Government. He had
not enough data to come to a judgment as to the merits of the case. Nor was it
necessary for his purpose. All he knew was that it was right for the Union
Government to rush the troops, even a handful, to Srinagar. That must save the
situation to the extent of giving confidence to the Kashmiris, especially to the
Sheikh Saheb, who was affectionately called Sher-e-Kashmir, the Lion of
Kashmir. The result was now in the hands of God. Men could but do or die. The
speaker would not shed a single tear if the little Union force was wiped out like
the Spartans, bravely defending Kashmir, nor would he mind the Sheikh Saheb
and his Muslim, Hindu and Sikh comrades, men and women, dying at their post
in defence of Kashmir. That would be a glorious example to the rest of lndia.
Such heroic defence would infect the whole of India and we would forget that
Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs were ever enemies. Then we would realize that not

all the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs were fiends. There were some good men and
women, in all religions and in all races. The universe existed on its good men
and good women. Indeed, he would not be surprised if even the rebel army was
itself converted to sanity. Let them remember the refrain of the bhajan: "We
were all of and from one and the same God, no matter, by what name we
worshipped Him."
On November 1, Gandhi invited the prayer audience to cast their mental eyes
on Kashmir and picture to themselves the condition of the people there. When
he listened to the sound which the aeroplanes above made in their journey to
Kashmir, his heart went out to the Prime Minister, the Sheikh Saheb, and his
people. The speaker was a friend of all and made no distinctions between man
and man. He represented the non-Muslims, as well as the Muslims. He
remonstrated that those who were fleeing from Kashmir out of fear, should not
do so. They should learn to be brave and fearless, and they should be prepared
to lay down their lives in defence of their homes. This applied equally to all,
whether old or young, or women or children. The speaker would not mind, if
the whole of the military and the people of Kashmir died at their post in
defence of fair Kashmir. How he wished that the Afridis and the other
freebooters were sensible enough to leave Kashmir alone.
On November 2, there was a much larger prayer audience -than usual, and
about ten objectors to the recitation from the Koran. There was among the
objectors the old friend too. But the objectors were perfectly restrained and
courteous. Gandhi was also told that there was a suppressed objection from a
much larger number. Before proceeding with the prayers, Gandhi remarked
that he was glad that the people were open enough to register their objection.
He did not like to think that the people came not to share the worship of God
but they came to see him or to hear him, because he was called a Mahatma, or
because of his long service of the nation. The prayer was all-inclusive. God was
known by many names And, in the last analysis, God's names were as many as
human beings. It was rightly said that even animals, birds and stones adored
God. They would find in the Bhajanawali a hymn by a Muslim saint, which said
that the chirp of the birds in the morning and evening signified that they

adored their Maker. There was no sense in objecting to any part of the prayer
simply because it was selected from the Holy Koran or from any other scripture.
Whatever might be the shortcomings of certain Muslims, the objection could
not apply to the whole community, much less to the Prophet or any other, or
his message. He had gone through the whole of the Koran. He had gained by it,
not lost by it. He felt that he was a better Hindu for the reading of the world's
scriptural books. He knew that there were many hostile critics of the Koran. A
friend from Bombay who had many Muslim friends had put before him a
conundrum. What was the teaching of the Prophet about the kafirs? Were not
the Hindus kafirs according to the Koran? He had long come to the conclusion
that they were not. He referred to his Muslim friends about the matter. They
spoke from knowledge. They assured him that kafir in the Koran, meant a non-
believer. They said that the Hindus were not kafirs, because they believed in
one God. If they went by what the hostile critics said, they would condemn the
Koran and-the Prophet, as they would condemn Krishna, who was depicted as a
dissolute being, having sixteen thousand go pis. He then silenced his critics by
saying that his Krishna was immaculate. He would not bow his head before a
rake. The God whom they worshipped with him every evening, was in everyone
and was all-powerful. And, therefore, they could have no enemy and they could
fear none, because God was in them and by them every moment. Such being
the nature of the congregational worship, he would prefer to have no such
worship, if they could not with their whole heart and without any reservation
join the prayer. If they could, they would find that they every day gathered
strength to enable them to dispel the darkness that surrounded them.
On asking the audience fearlessly to express their opinion, they lustily replied
that they wranted the prayer and that if there was an interruption they would
bear no anger or malice against the objectors. The prayer then went on in the
usual manner, Tagore's grand-daughter Nandita singing the bhajan of the
evening.
Referring to the trouble in Kashmir, Gandhi remarked that the Indian Union
continued to send more troops and the other necessary help. The Government
did not own any aeroplanes, but he was glad to hear that the private companies

had placed their planes at the disposal of the Government. Time ran in favour
of the ordered troops and ordered government and against the freebooters.
He was, however, sorry to learn that the freebooters in Kashmir were being led
by two ex-officers of the I.N.A., which had valiantly fought under the able
leadership of the late Shri Subhas Chandra Bose. It was composed of Hindus,
Muslims, Sikhs and others. They retained their own religion, but there was no
distinction of caste or creed. They were all knit together in bonds of friendship
and brotherhood. They were proud of being Indians. The speaker had met
them—if it was they—in the Delhi Fort and outside, after their release. He could
not understand why they led freebooters and took part in burning and looting
the villages and murdering innocent men and women. They were surely harming
the Afridis and the other tribesmen by encouraging them to do the forbidden
things. If he was in their place, he would wean the tribesmen from their error.
They could meet the Sheikh Saheb, if they thought he was harming Islam or
India. He hoped that his appeal would reach these officers and the tribesmen,
and that they would retrace their steps.
He could not escape the conclusion that the Pakistan Government was directly
or indirectly encouraging the raiders. The Prime Minister of the N.-W. Frontier
Province was reported to have openly encouraged the raid and had even
appealed to the Islamic world for help. The speaker had seen in the press that
Nehru's Government was accused of fraud, in that the assistance was being sent
to Kashmir and that accession was being plotted from some time. He was
amazed that such reckless charges were made by a Pakistan minister against
the Government of a sister dominion. He had brought in Kashmir in his remarks,
because he had good news from his friends, which he wanted to share with the
prayer audience. The news did not square with the Qaid-e-Azam's declaration
that there was an enemy of Pakistan meaning the Union, he supposed. A Hindu
friend from Karachi saw him and another from Lahore. Both informed him that
things were better than a few days ago, and that they were getting still better.
He was told too, that at least one Muslim family was seen by the friend to have
given shelter to a Sikh friend and set apart one room for keeping the Sikh
friend's Granth Saheb with due respect. He was also informed that such

instances of the Hindus and the Sikhs having sheltered Muslims and vice versa
could be multiplied. He had, too, some Muslim friends coming to him who
deplored with him that a vast and criminal exchange of population was going
on. These friends told him that the Muslim refugees in Pakistan suffered no less
than the Sikhs and the Hindus in the Indian Union. No government could cope
with such a large mass of human beings uprooted from their homes and thrown
on its shoulders. It was like an overwhelming onrush of waters. Could not this
mad rush be stopped the friends asked. He had no doubt that it could be, if the
suspicion and the flinging of charges—he thought baseless—was altogether and
sincerely stopped. He asked them to pray with him that God would bring sanity
to the unhappy land. He congratulated the objectors on their wise restraint in
allowing the prayer to proceed smoothly and without any interruption.
On November 3, his speech was read out at the prayer meeting:
"If two quantities of poison mix together, who will decide which was the first on
the field and, if such a decision could be arrived at, what end would it serve?
We know it, however, that the virus has spread throughout the Western
Pakistan area, and that it has not as yet been recognized as such by the powers
that be. So far as the Indian Union is concerned, it has been confined only to a
small part of it. Would to God that the virus would remain under isolation and
control! There would then be cause for every hope that it would be expelled in
due time and that soon from both the parts.
"In view of the fact that Dr. Rajendra Prasad has called a meeting of the
Premiers or their representatives and others to help and advise him in the
matter of food control, I feel that I should devote this evening to that very
important question. Nothing that I have heard during these days has moved me
from the stand that I have taken up from the beginning that the control should
be entirely removed at the earliest moment possible, certainly not later than
six months hence. Not a day passes but letters and wires come to me, some
from important persons, declaring emphatically that both the controls should
be removed. I propose to omit the other, the cloth control, for the time being.

"Control gives rise to fraud, suppression of truth, intensification of the black

market and to artificial scarcity. Above all, it unmans the people and deprives
them of initiative, it undoes the teaching of self-help they have been learning
for a generation. It makes them spoon-fed. This is a tragedy next only, if,
indeed, not equal, to the fratricide on a large scale and the insane exchange of
population, resulting in unnecessary deaths, starvation, and want of'proper
residence and clothing, more poignant for the coming inclement weather. The
second is certainly more spectacular. We dare not forget the first, because it is
not spectacular.
"This food control is one of the vicious legacies of the Second World War.
Control then was probably inevitable, because a very large quantity of cereals
and other foodstuff were exported outside. This unnatural export was bound to
create a man-made scarcity and lead to rationing in spite of its many
drawbacks. Now, there need be no export which we cannot avoid if we wish to.
We would help the starving parts of the world if we don't expect outside help
for India in the way of food.
"I have seen during my lifetime, covering two generations, many godsend
famines, but I have no recollection of an occasion when rationing was even
thought of.
"Today, thank God, the monsoons have not failed us. There is, therefore, no
real scarcity of food. There are enough cereals and pulses and the oil-seeds in
the villages of India. The artificial control of the prices, indeed the growers do
not, cannot, understand. They, therefore, refuse willingly to part with their
stock at a price much lower than they can command in the open market. This
naked fact needs no demonstration. It does not require statistics or the desk-
work civilians, buried in the red-tape files, to produce elaborate reports and
essays to prove that there is scarcity. It is to be hoped that no one will frighten
us by trotting out before us the bogy of over-population.
"Our ministers are of the people, from the people. Let the ministers not
arrogate to themselves a greater knowledge than those experienced men who
do not happen to occupy the ministerial chairs but who hold the view strongly

that the sooner the control is removed the better. A physician writes to say
that the food control has made it impossible for those who depend upon the
rationed food to procure eatable cereals and pulses and, therefore, he says,
the people needlessly suffer from ailments caused by rotten stuff.
"In the place of the controlled food, the Government can easily run the very
stores for selling good grains which they will buy in the open market. They will
thus bring about automatic regulation of prices and set free the hoarded
cereals, pulses and oil-seeds. Will they not trust the grain dealers and the
growers? Democracy will break under the strain of apron-strings. It can exist
only on trust. If the people die, because they will not labour or they will
defraud one another, it will be a welcome deliverance. The rest will then learn
not to repeat the sin of being lazy, idle or cruelly selfish."
Before he commenced his prayers on November 4th, Gandhi said that though no
one except the courteous old friend who had registered his usual objection, had
got up to object to the recitation from the Koran, he proposed to deal with a
very pathetic letter of objection received from one Punjabi Hindu refugee who
had suffered much. He did not know whether the objector was present at the
meeting or not. Whether he was present or not, the speaker would not ignore
the letter, if only because it was written with deep pain. It was fairly well
argued but was full of ignorance, which was born of anger. Anger was written in
every line of the letter. Practically, the whole of his time was devoted to
listening to the tale of woes, whether recited by the Hindu refugees or the Sikh
refugees, or the local Muslim sufferers. His spirit was equally touched and
wounded and if he allowed himself to be moody, it was no expression of
ahimsa. He would be weeping the whole day long, leaving no time either for
obeisance, food or sleep. But from early youth he had used himself in terms of
ahimsa not to weep over the sorrows that came under his notice, but .to
harden his heart, in order to enable him to combat the sorrows. Had they not
been told by the seers of old, that one who was full of ahimsa was bound to
have a heart softer than a flower and harder than flint? He had endeavoured to
live up to the advice and so, when confronted with complaints like those in the
letter in question, or the recital of their anger and sorrow by his visitors, the

speaker hardened his heart so as to battle with the problem of the day. The
letter was written in the Urdu script. He had asked Brijkrishan to note down
the points of the letter.
The first was the charge of breach of his word. Had he not said that if there
was even one objector at his prayer meetings, he would respect the objection
and not lead the public prayer for the evening in question? This was a half-
truth, more dangerous than full untruth. When he stopped the prayer meeting
for the first time, he had announced that he suspended it for fear that the
overwhelming majority of the audience might resent the objection, even to the
point of molesting the objector. And this was several months ago. Since then
the audience had learnt the art of self-restraint, and when he could get the
assurance from the audience that they would harbour neither resentment nor
anger in their hearts, he consented again to conduct public prayer. The result
was happy as he knew. The objectors were strictly courteous in their behaviour
and beyond registering their objection, they did nothing to interfere with the
public prayer. He hoped, therefore, that the writer of the letter would see that
there was not only no breach, but that the result, so far, had been quite happy.
He assured the prayer audience that so far as he knew himself, he had not been
guilty of any such breach throughout his long life of public service.
The writer of the letter then taxed him for reciting some verses from the
Koran, when he did not do so with reference to the Japji or to the Bible. Here,
too, the writer betrayed ignorance of the description he had given, as to how
the whole of the prayer verses had been adopted. He had already pointed out
that very often the bhajans were taken from the Bible as well as the Granth
Saheb.
And the third complaint of the writer of the letter was that there were known
Congress leaders who had left the West Punjab or some other part of Western
Pakistan, and did not live like the refugees, sharing their trials and difficulties,
but were occupying buildings, more palatial than those they had occupied in
Pakistan. They lived a life of utter isolation from the refugees, who were often
without shelter, without warm clothes or even a change of clothes, and without
adequate food. If the complaint was true, it betrayed a disgraceful state of

things. He had not hesitated at the prayer meetings to condemn in general

terms richer refugees for isolating themselves from the poorer ones, instead of
sharing the latter's tribulation.
The complainant then in sarcastic language twitted the speaker for not going to
Pakistan, as he had intended. Why, he was asked, he preferred to help his
Muslim friends, instead of going to Pakistan to the help of the Hindu and the
Sikh sufferers? Little did the complainant know that he could not neglect his
duty in Delhi and with any hope go to Pakistan to alleviate the sufferings of the
Hindu and the Sikh brethren. He, however, confessed that he was a friend of
the Muslims and the others, because he was an equal friend of the Hindus and
the Sikhs. He did not believe in any exclusive service. If he served one, the
spirit actuating him to render that service was that he served the one individual
as part not only of India or of one religion, but the whole of humanity. It was
for the Hindus and the Sikhs of Delhi, refugees and others, to prove by their
friendliness towards the Muslims of Delhi that it was superfluous for him to be
in Delhi. They would then find him rushing to Pakistan with full confidence that
his visit would not be fruitless.
The last complaint of the writer was why, when the slaughter of the pigs was
prohibited in Pakistan, the cow slaughter could not be prohibited in the Indian
Union. He replied that he had no knowledge of legal prohibition of the
slaughter of the pigs in Pakistan. If the information given by the complainant
was true, he was sorry. He knew that use of pork for food was prohibited in
Islamic law. But even so, he could not justify the prohibition of the use of pork
by those other than the Muslims.
Had not Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah said that Pakistan was not a theocratic state and
that it was purely a secular state? That this claim could not always be justified
in action was unfortunately too true. Was the Indian Union to be a theocratic
state and were the tenets of Hinduism to be imposed on the non-Hindus? He
hoped not. The Union would then cease to be a land of hope and promise, a
land to which all the Asiatic and African races looked, indeed, the whole world.
The world expected not littleness and fanaticism from India, whether as the

Union or Pakistan. It expected greatness and goodness from which the whole
world could derive a lesson and light in its prevailing darkness.
He yielded to none in his devoted worship of the cow, but that devotion could
not be imposed by law. It would only come by cultivation of friendship with all
non-IIindus, including the Muslims and by correct conduct. The Gujaratis and
the Marwaris were supposed to be the foremost in their wish for the protection
of the cow, but then they had so far forgotten the dictates of Hinduism, that
they would gladly impose restrictions on others, whilst they were grossly ill-
treating the cow and her progeny. Why were the cattle of India the most
neglected? Why had they, as was contended, become a burden on the land by
reason of the poorest yield of milk in the world? As beasts of burden, why were
they grossly ill-treated?
The various pinjrapoles were not ideal institutions to be proud of. Much money
was invested in them, but scientific and intelligent treatment of the cattle was
hardly to be found in them. These pinjrapoles would surely not bring about the
regeneration of the cattle of India. They could only do so by strict regard to the
humane treatment of cattle. He claimed that without the assistance of law, but
because of his being able to cultivate friendship with the Muslims of India, he
had been instrumental in saving more cows from the butcher's knife than any
other individual.
On the 5th he dealt with several questions that had come to him through the
post. A Muslim friend had complained that in his part of the Indian Union, the
vegetarian Hindus insisted upon the Muslims, living in their midst, abstaining
even from fish and mutton. The speaker had no patience with such intolerance
and narrow-mindedness. Vegetarians in India, from religious conviction, were
said to be in a minority. The vast majority of the Hindus throughout India,
whenever they got an opportunity, did not hesitate to eat fish or fowl or
mutton. What right had the vegetarians to impose their cult on the Muslims?
They would not dare to impose it on the Hindu non-vegetarians. The whole
thing appeared to be ridiculous. The correct way for the people to spread
vegetarianism was to reason out its beauties, which should be exhibited in their
lives. There was no other royal road to bringing round others to one's view.

A Hindu critic said that the speaker and the others like him were never tired of
preaching to Muslims that, in spite of hardships entailed by their obstinacy,
they should not leave their homes even though they might be able to do so in
safety. Whereas, if they stuck to their pockets, they would not be able to stir
out to earn their livelihood, or the manufactures of their honest labour might
be boycotted by a vast majority of the Hindus. It was too much to expect the
remnant of the poor Muslims, who had seen others slaughtered before their
eyes and yet others going away to Pakistan, to remain in their homes in spite of
the disabilities. The speaker admitted that there was much truth in the
criticism, but he had no other advice to offer them. He thought that leaving
their hearth and home was likely to result in greater distress. And the speaker
therefore, sincerely believed that if the remnant honestly and heroically
remained in their own homes, in spite of the sufferings, they were bound to
melt the hard hearts of the Hindu neighbours. Then, there would be certain
deliverance for the others in both the parts of India. For, unexampled bravery,
born of non-violence, coupled with strict honesty shown by a fair number of
Muslims, was sure to infect the whole of India.
Yet another letter rebuked him for having dared to advise Churchill, Hitler,
Mussolini, and the Japanese, when they were likely to lose all, that they should
adopt his technique of non-violence. The writer of the letter then proceeded to
say that if the speaker could give that advice when it was safe for him to do so,
why did he abandon his non-violence when his own friends in the Congress
Government had forsaken it and even had sent armed assistance to Kashmir?
The letter concluded by inviting the speaker to point out definitely how the
raiders were to be opposed non-violently by the Kashmiris. He rejoined that he
was sorry for the ignorance betrayed by the writer. The audience would
remember that he had repeatedly told them that he had no influence in the
matter over his comrades in the Union Cabinet. He held on to his views on non-
violence as firmly as ever, but he could not impose his views on his best friends
as they were, in the cabinet. He could not expect them to act against their
convictions and everybody should now be satisfied with his confession that he

had lost his original hold upon his friends. The question put by the writer was
quite apposite. His answer was quite simple.
His ahimsa indeed forbade him from denying credit where it was due, even
though the creditor was a believer in violence. Thus, though he did not accept
Subhas Babu's belief in violence and his consequent action, he had not refrained
from giving unstinted praise to his patriotism, resourcefulness and bravery.
Similarly, though he did not approve of the use of arms by the Union
Government for aiding the Kashmiris, and though he could not approve of
Sheikh Abdullah Saheb's resort to arms, he could not possibly withhold
admiration for either for their resourceful and praiseworthy conduct,
especially, if both the relieving troops and the Kashmiri defenders died
heroically to a man. The speaker knew that if they could do so, then they
would perhaps change the face of India. But if the defence was purely non-
violent in intention and action, he would not use the word "perhaps", for the
speaker would be sure of change in the face of India, even to the extent of
converting to the defenders' view the Union Cabinet, if not even the Pakistan
Cabinet.
The non-violent technique he would suggest, would be no armed assistance to

the defenders. The non-violent assistance could be sent from the Indian Union
without stint. But the defenders, whether they got such assistance or not,
would defy the might of the raiders or even a disciplined army in overwhelming
numbers. And the defenders dying at their post of duty without malice and
without anger in their hearts against the assailants and without the use of any
arms, including even their fists, would mean an exhibition of heroism, as yet,
unknown to history. Kashmir would then become a holy land shedding its
fragrance not only throughout India, but throughout the world. Having
described non-violent action, he had to confess his own impotence, in that his
word lacked the strength which the perfect mastery over self, as described in
the concluding lines of the second chapter of the Gita, gave. He lacked the
tapascharya requisite for the purpose. He could only pray and invite the prayer
audience to pray with him to God that if it pleased Him, He might arm him with
the qualifications he had just described.

On November 6, Gandhi observed that he had the pleasure of meeting the

ministers from the various provinces, or their representatives, who had come to
Delhi to assist Dr. Rajendra Prasad in coming to a decision upon the
recommendations of the committee of the non-officials, which the Food
Minister had called into being and which had presented its report to him. When,
therefore, he heard about the meeting, he requested Dr. Rajendra Prasad to
give him an opportunity of addressing them, in the hope of being able to clear
their doubts, if they had any. For, he felt quite sure of the stand he had taken
up. Dr. Rajendra Prasad readily accepted his proposal and he was glad to meet
the old friends. He had been saying that, so far as his opinion on the communal
trouble was concerned, he had become a back number, but he was glad to be
able to say that such was not the case with reference to his stand on the food
question. He had held the view that there should be no food control and no
cloth control as long ago as when Mr. Casey, the Governor of Bengal, and he
had the pleasure of having several interviews. At that time he did not know
whether he had any backing or not. But during the recent controversy, he was
agreeably'surprised to discover that he had a very extensive backing from the
members of the public, unknown and well known. Among the voluminous
correspondence he had on the subject, he could not recall a single writer who
dissented from him. He knew nothing about the view held by the magnates like
G. D. Birla and Lala Sri Ram, nor did he know that he was to have any support
from the socialist circles, except when Dr. Lohia met him and expressed his
whole-hearted approval of the ground he had adopted. The speaker had no
hesitation in suggesting that, in the circumstances that faced the country Dr.
Rajendra Prasad should be guided by one member or more from his committee,
rather tlian by the permanent staff.
Gandhi then referred to the control on cloth. Though in this matter he

personally was, if possible, on surer ground than in the matter of removal of
food control, nevertheless he was afraid that about the cloth control he had
not the backing that he had about the food control. His submission was
incredibly simple. The Congress readily had supported the opinion he had held
about khadi as an entire substitute for mill cloth, foreign or indigenous. India

had forty crores of inhabitants. If the Pakistan area was deducted from India,
then India would still have more than thirty crores.
They had as much cotton growing in the country as they needed. There were
enough spinners to turn their cotton into weavable yarn and they had more
than the required number of weavers in the country for weaving the handspun
yarn. Without any outlay of very large capital, they could manufacture in the
country all the wheels, the handlooms and the other accessories, without
difficulty. All that was needed, therefore, was robust faith in themselves and
the determination to use nothing but khadi. They all knew that it was possible
to have as fine khadi as could be desired and to produce patterns superior even
to those manufactured by the mills. And now that India was free from the
foreign yoke, there could be no hostility such as khadi had to face from the
representatives of the foreign rulers. It was, therefore, a most surprising thing
for him that now that they had come to their own, nobody talked of khaddar,
nobody seemed to have his faith in the possibility of khadi, and that they could
think of nothing but mill cloth for clothing India. He had not the slightest doubt
that khadi economics was the only sound economics for India.
On November 7, Gandhi having gone to meet the Muslim sufferers at Tehar and
having been obliged to give more time than was expected, he went directly to
the prayer meeting on his return. After the prayer, he referred to his visit and
exclaimed with sorrow that the Muslims in and near Tehar were obliged to go
through much needless suffering. Several of them were landowners, but their
land they could not till for fear of molestation. They had sold their cattle and
their ploughs and some other movables too and they were guarded by the
military. The Muslim sufferers, who had gathered round him and had swelled to
over two thousand, said through their spokesman that they were anxious to go
to Pakistan, as life had become impossible and many of their friends and
relatives had already gone there. It would be a mercy, therefore, if they were
sent away to Lahore as early as possible. But he did not intend to take up the
time that evening with a full description of the meeting at Tehar. He had told
the gathering there that he had no power but he would gladly carry their
message to the Prime Minister and his deputy, who was also the Home Minister.

On November 9 his message was read out at the prayer meeting:
"Diwali^ will be pp us in a few days. A sister who is herself a refugee writes :

'The question whether we should or should not celebrate Diwali as a festival,
agitates most of us and I wish to put before you our thoughts on the question,
no matter how lisping my Hindi words may be. I am a refugee from Gujranwala.
I have lost my all in that place. Nevertheless, our hearts are full of the joy
that, after all, we have our independence. This will be the first Diwali in
independent India. Therefore, it behoves us to forget all our sorrows and wish
to have jlluminations throughout India. I know that your heart is sore over our
sufferings and you would have all India to abstain from the Diwali rejoicings.
We are thankful for your sympathy. Notwithstanding the fact that your heart is
full of sorrow, I would like you to tell all the refugees and the rest of India that
they should rejoice during the Diwali festival and ask the monied men to help
those who are without means. May God Almighty give us the wisdom to rejoice
over all the festivities that might come to us after independence.'
"Whilst I admire this sister and the other like her, I cannot help saying that she
and those who think like her are wrong. It is well known that a family which is
overtaken by sorrow abstains from participation in festivities, according to
capacity. It is an illustration of the doctrine of oneness on a very limited scale.
Break through the crust of limitation, and India becomes one family. If all the
limitations vanish, the whole world becomes one family, which it really is. Not
to cross these bars is to become callous to all fine feelings, which make a man.
We must not be self-centered or being falsely sentimental, ignore facts. My
advice to abstain from the rejoicings is broad-based on many solid
considerations. The refugee problem is there, affecting lakhs of Hindus and
Musalmans and Sikhs. There is as well want, albeit man-made, of food and
clothing. The deeper cause is dishonesty of the many who can mould the public
opinion, obstinate refusal of the sufferers to learn from their sufferings and
extensive inhumanity of man to man. I can see in this misery no cause for joy. A
resolute and wise refusal to take part in festivities will be an incentive to
introspection and self-purification. Let us not do anything which will throw
away a blessing which has been won after hard toil and tribulation."

At the request of the Dewan ofJunagadh and with the full approval of the ruler
and the executive council and the people of the state, the Indian Government
took over the administration of the state on November 9. It was made very
clear that this step had been taken only to avoid the serious situation that was
developing in the state, and at the express desire of the ruler as well as of the
dewan, to help avoid strife and bloodshed. It was pointed out that the step was
purely provisional arrangement, pending the settlement of the issues involved
either by negotiations or by plebiscite. Pakistan Government had been kept
fully informed of the developments.
Referring to the turn of events in Junagadh state, Gandhi in his prayer

discourse on November 10 said that they had seen in the papers all about
Junagadh. From the two telegrams received by him from Rajkot, he was now
satisfied that the newspaper report was accurate. The Prime Minister, Bhutto
Saheb, was in Karachi, so was the Nawab Saheb. The Deputy Prime Minister,
Major Harvey Jones, was in Junagadh. They all were a party to Junagadh,
acceding to the Union. The audience had a right to infer that Qaid-e-Azam
Jinnah was a party to this transaction. If he was, they were justified in
inferring that the Kashmir and Hyderabad troubles would also be over. If he
could go further, he would say that things would take a happy turn and that the
two dominions would become friends and do everything in co-operation. He was
thinking of the Qaid-e-Azam not as a Governor-General. As a Governor-General,
he had no legal right to interfere with the affairs of Pakistan. As such, he
occupied the same position as Lord Mountbatten, who was merely a
constitutional Governor- General. He could go to the wedding of one who was
more than a son to him and who was to be married to the heir-presumptive to
the British Throne only with the permission of his cabinet, and he was to return
on the 24th of this month. The speaker, therefore, thought of Jinnah Saheb as
the maker of the present-day Muslim League and without whose knowledge and
permission nothing regarding Pakistan could be done. Therefore, it was that he
thought that if Jinnah Saheb was behind the Junagadh accession, it was a happy
augury.

What, however, he wanted to tell the prayer congregation was about his visit to
Panipat. Maulana Azad was with him. The Rajkumari was also to be with him,
but she was at the Government House and he could not afford to wait beyond
10.30 a.m. by his watch. He was glad that he went to Panipat. He saw the
Muslim patients in the hospital. Some of them had suffered ghastly wounds, but
they were receiving all the attention possible because the Rajkumari had sent
four doctors, nurses and medical accessories. They then met the leader of the
Muslims, the local Hindus, and the representatives of the refugees who were
reported to be over 20,000. And they were told that more were coming in daily
to the dismay of the deputy commissioner and the superintendent of police,
both of whom, he was glad to report to the audience, were highly talked of by
the Hindus as well as the Muslims, not to mention the refugees. They were also
able to meet the refugees who were assembled near the municipal house. He
was indeed glad to find that, in spite of the terrible hardships that the refugees
had to go through in Pakistan and also in Panipat, where there was no settled
life some of them had to live on the station platform and many absolutely in
the open without adequate covering—he did not see any irritation in them and
they were very glad that he had gone there. It seemed to him cruel that the
refugees were dumped on in Panipat without any previous notice to the deputy
commissioner or anybody else. They came to know how many refugees were
coming, only when the trains drew up at the Panipat station platform. This was
most unfortunate. There were among the refugees, women and children and
also old men. He was told that there were women refugees who delivered on
the station platforms.
All this happened in East Punjab, whose Chief Minister was Dr. Gopir- chand
Bhargava. Dr. Gopichand was a valued associate of his. The speaker had known
him for years as an able organizer with great influence over the Punjabis. The
speaker added that he should not have thought that the task of East Punjab
would be beyond him, but if Panipat was a sample of his workmanship, then it
was a sad reflection upon his Government. Why were the refugees dumped
anywhere without any proper notice? Why were there inadequate arrangements
for their reception? And why should the officers not know beforehand, who and

how many were coming? Added to this was the information he had received the
day before, that there were three lakhs of Muslims in the Gurgaon district who
were frightened into leaving their homes. They were living in the open,
alongside the public road with the expectation that they with their wives and
their children and their cattle were to undertake a march of three hundred
miles in the severe winter weather of the Punjab. He could not believe the
story. He thought that there was some mistake in the narrative given to him by
his friends, and still hoped that it was altogether wrong or exaggerated. But
after what he had seen in Panipat, he was shaken in his disbelief. Anyway, he
hoped that Dr. Gopichand Bhargava and his cabinet would wake up betimes and
not rest till all the refugees were well looked after. This could only be done by
foresight and extreme vigilance.
Addressing the prayer gathering on November 11, Gandhi said that the previous
day he had given them the news about the entry into the Junagadh state of the
Provisional Government, in answer to the request of the Prime Minister and the
Deputy Prime Minister of Junagadh. He did so partly in astonishment and partly
in joy, for he was not prepared for what appeared to be such a happy ending of
the struggle of and on behalf of the Junagadh people. But he expressed also the
fear that the joy would be premature, if the request made by the Junagadh
authorities had not the imprimatur of Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah. They could not,
therefore, but feel painfully surprised to know that the Pakistan authorities
resented this occupation of Junagadh by the Provisional Government on behalf
of its ryots and demanded "the withdrawal of Indian troops from the state
territory and relinquishment of the administration to the rightful government
and stoppage of violence and invasion of the state by people from the Indian
Union." They further contended that neither the ruler nor the dewan was
entitled to negotiate any settlement, temporary or permanent, with India, and
that the action of the India Government was "a clear violation of the Pakistan
territory and a breach of international law".
According to the statements in the press the day before, he could see no
breach of international law and no occupation by the Union Government. And
so far as he could see, there was no unlawfulness about the whole of the

movement of the Provisional Government on behalf of the people of Junagadh.

The Union Government had certainly lent the use of its troops at the request of
the princes of Kathiawad for the safety of Kathiawad as a whole. And
therefore, he detected no unlawfulness about the whole transaction, nor did he
see any justification for what appeared to him to be a volte face on the part of
the Prime Minister of Junagadh. The way he looked at the whole thing was this,
that the Nawab Saheb of Junagadh had truly no authority to accede to Pakistan
without the consent of his subjects, of whom eighty-five per cent, he was told,
were Hindus. The sacred hill of Girnar with all its temples was part of Junagadh
on which the Hindus had spent a great deal of money and which was visited by
thousands of pilgrims from all over India. In independent India, the whole of it
belonged to the people and nothing of it belonged to the princes as individuals.
Their claim could only be sustained by their being the trustees of the people
and, therefore, producing the authority of the people for every transaction.
That the princes had not realized their representative capacity and that the
ryots in the states, with honourable exceptions, had not yet realized their own
capacity as true owners, in the aggregate, of the states that they inhabited,
derogated nothing from the doctrine he had just enunciated. If, therefore,
anybody had the legal right to accede to one or the other of the two dominions,
it was the ryotsv belonging to a particular state, and if the Provisional
Government did not at any stage represent the ryots of Junagadh, they became
the usurpers to be driven out by both the dominions, and neither dominion
could stand before the world to justify the accession by a prince in his own
individual capacity. In that sense, he held that the accession by the Nawab
Saheb of Junagadh was ab initio void, unless the ryots of the Junagadh state
could be proved to have set the seal upon the accession by the Nawab Saheb.
To which dominion Junagadh would finally accede could only be decided, in
case of dispute, by a properly conducted referendum, without the use of
violence or show of it, accompanying the process. The attitude taken by the
Pakistan Government and now also by the Prime Minister of Junagadh created
indeed a curious situation. Who was to decide upon the right or the wrong of
the case for Pakistan and the Union Government? Any appeal to the sword was
not to be thought of. The only honourable way out was the ancient method of

arbitration in the usual manner. There were enough men and women in India,
who could shoulder the burden. If, however, the contending parties could not
agree upon arbitration by Indians, he for one had no objection to any impartial
person from any part of the world.
What he said about the Junagadh state, equally applied to Kashmir and to
Hyderabad. Neither the Maharaja of Kashmir nor the Nizam had any authority
to accede to'either dominion without the known consent of their people. This
was, so far as he knew, made clear in the case of Kashmir. If the maharaja
alone had wanted to accede, the speaker could not defend such accession. This
accession was provisionally agreed to by the Union Government, because both
the Maharaja and Sheikh Abdullah, speaking for the people of Kashmir and
Jammu, wanted it. The Sheikh Saheb came on the scene, because he claimed
to represent the people of Kashmir and Jammu, not merely the Muslims, but
the whole of the people.
He had heard whispers that Kashmir could be divided into two parts, Jammu
going to the Hindus and Kashmir to the Muslims. He could not think of such
divided loyalties and splitting up Indian states into so many parts. He hoped,
therefore, that wisdom would rule all India and an ugly situation would be
avoided without delay, if only for the sake of the lakhs of Indians who felt
compelled to become helpless refugees.
Under "A Psychological Explanation", Gandhi wrote in Harijan:
"The following is from Richard B. Gregg, an American friend who used to live in
Santiniketan as also with me in the Sabarmati ashram years ago:
" 'Though because of my ignorance I am hesitant, yet I venture to send you an

idea that seems to me not only to explain with perhaps less moral blame a part
of the recent communal violence in India, but also to offer hope for the future.
" 'It seems to me probable that much of this violence is an expression, not so
much of inter-communal suspicion and hatred, but rather, and more deeply and
originally, of the long pent-up resentments of the masses, because of their
oppression. The oppression was not only by the foreign political rule, but by the
foreign modern social and economic and financial ways, which are contrary to

the ancient habits of dharma, which were a very part of the nature of the
masses. By foreign ways, I mean such things as the English landholding system,
usurious money lending, heavy taxes, payable not in kind but in money; and
other interferences with long established village life common to all Indian
communities.
" 'Psychological studies have shown quite clearly that the severe frustrations
suffered during the childhood of an individual generate resentments which are
suppressed and remain suppressed, long after the person who caused the
original frustration has died, but later some occasion pulls a trigger, as it were,
and releases the pent-up energy of the old resentment which then pours forth
in violence upon some perfectly innocent person. This explains many crimes of
violence, and, perhaps, some of the cruelties against the Jews in Europe. In
India, the establishment of religious electorates created a channel into which it
was easy for this energy to flow, but I believe the fearful energy of the
explosion of wrath comes from the older cause I have mentioned. Such an idea
as this, would help explain why in all the countries, all through history, a major
change of political power results in more or less violence and disorder. Masses
always suffer some oppression and, therefore, have resentments, which flare
up upon a shift of control, or may be exploited by selfish leaders.
" 'If this surmise is true, it suggests that the suspicion and hatred of one
community towards another is not so deep as now appears. It also means that
as soon as the masses can be guided back into their ancient ways of life with
the chief emphasis on religion and on small organizations—the village
panchayats and the communal family systems—the energy of the people will be
turned from violence into creative channels. I would expect that the khadi work
among the refugees might help start such a diversion of energy into proper
channels. In such a development, I see hope.
" 'Forgive me, if this seems to be presumptuous. I write it only in the hope that
an humble outsider, just because he is outside, may see a gleam of
encouragement, that is not so easy to see in the dust and distraction of the
struggle. Anyhow, I love you and India.'

'Though many psychologists have recommended a study of psychology, I am

sorry, I have not been able, for want of time, to study the subject. Mr. Richard
Gregg's letter does not mend matters for me. It does not fill me with any
impelling enthusiasm for undertaking the study. Mr. Gregg gives an explanation,
which mystifies the mind, instead, of clearing it. 'Hope for the future' I have
never lost and never will, because it is embedded in my undying faith in non-
violence. What has, however, clearly happened in my case is the discovery
that, in all probability, there is a vital defect in my technique of the working of
non-violence. There was no real appreciation of non-violence in the thirty
years' struggle against the British Raj. Therefore, the peace which the masses
maintained during the struggle of a generation with exemplary patience, had
not come from within. The pent-up fury found an outlet when the British Raj
was gone. It naturally vented itself in communal violence, which was never
fully absent and which was kept under suppression by the British bayonet. This
explanation seems to me to be all-sufficing and convincing. In it, there is no
room for failure of any hope. Failure of my technique of non-violence causes no
loss of faith in ahimsa itself. On the contrary, that faith is, if possible,
strengthened by the discovery of a possible flaw in the technique."
In a letter to Madame Privat, Gandhi wrote:
"I see that you have grasped the fundamental difference between passive
resistance and non-violent resistance. Resistance, both the forms are, but you
have to pay.a heavy price when your resistance is passive, in the sense of the
weakness of the resister. Europe mistook the bold and brave resistance, full of
wisdom, by Jesus of Nazareth for passive resistance, as if it was of the weak. As
I read the New Testament for the first time, I detected no passivity and no
weakness about Jesus, as depicted in the four gospels, and the meaning
became clearer to me when I read Tolstoy's Harmony of the Gospels and his
other kindred writings. Has not the West paid heavily in regarding Jesus as a
passive resister ? Christendom has been responsible for the wars, which put to
shame even those described in the Old Testament and the other records,
historical or semi-historical. I know what I speak under correction here, for I
can but claim very superficial knowledge of history, modern or ancient.

"Coming to my personal experience, whilst we undoubtedly got through passive

resistance our political freedom, over which lovers of peace, like you and your
good husband, of the West, are so enthusiastic, we are daily paying the heavy
price for the unconscious mistake we made, or better still, I made, in mistaking
passive resistance for non-violent resistance. Had I not made the mistake, we
would have been spared the humiliating spectacle of weak brother killing his
weak brother, thoughtlessly and inhumanly.
"I am only hoping and praying and I want all the friends here and in other parts
of the world to hope and pray with me, that this blood bath will soon end and
out of that, perhaps, inevitable butchery, will rise a new and robust India—not
warlike, basely imitating the West in all its hide- ousness, but a new India,
learning the best that the West has to give, and becoming the hope, not only of
Asia and Africa, but the whole of the aching world.
"I must here confess that this is hoping against hope, for we are today swearing
by the military and all that the naked physical force implies. Our statesmen
have for more than two generations declaimed against the heavy expenditure
on armaments under the British regime, but now that freedom from political
serfdom has come, our military expenditure has increased and still threatens to
increase, and of this we are proud! There is not a voice raised against it in our
legislative chambers. In spite, however, of the madness and the vain imitation
of the tinsel of the West, the hope lingers in me and many others, that India
shall survive this death dance and occupy the moral height that should belong
to her after the training, however imperfect, in non-violence, for an unbroken
period of thirty-two years, since 1915."

12. Steep Ascent ( 1947 )
ADDRESSING the refugees at Kurukshetra in a broadcast speech from New Delhi,

on November 12, 1947, Gandhi said:
"I do not know if it is only you or whether the others too are listening in to me
today. Though I am speaking from the Broadcasting House, I am not interested
in such talks. To suffer with the afflicted and try to relieve their suffering has
been my life's work. I hope, therefore, that you will accept this talk in that
light.
"I was distressed, when I heard that over two lakhs of refugees had arrived at
Kurukshetra and more were pouring in. The moment the news caitie to me, I
longed to be with you but I could not get away at once from Delhi because the
Working Committee meetings were being held and my presence was required.
"Quite by accident, General Nathusingh, who has organized the Kurukshetra

Camp, came to see me two days ago and told me about your sufferings. The
Central Government asked the military to take over the organization of your
camp, not because they wanted to coerce you in any way, but because the
military are used to doing such organization and know how to do so efficiently.
"Those who suffer, know their sufferings best of all, yours is not an ordinary
camp, where it is possible for everyone to know each other. Your camp is really
a city, and your only bond with your co-refugees is your suffering.
"I was sorry to learn that there is not that co-operation with the authority or
with your neighbours, that there ought to be, in order to make the camp a
success, I can serve you best by drawing your attention to your shortcomings.
That has been my life's motto, for therein lies true friendship, and my service is
not only for you or of India; it extends to the world for I know no barriers of
race or creed. If you can rid yourselves of your failings, you will benefit not
only yourselves, but the whole of India".
"It hurts me to know that many of you are without shelter. This is a real
hardship, particularly in the cold weather, which is severe in the Punjab and

increasing daily. Your Government is trying to do everything they can for you.
The burden is the heaviest, of course, on your Prime Minister. The Health
Department, which is served by the Rajkumari and Dr. Jivraj Mehta, is also
working very hard to lighten your sufferings. No other government could have
done better in this crisis. The calamity is immense and the Government too
have their limitations. But it is up to you to face your sufferings with as much
fortitude and patience as you can summon to your aid and as cheerfully as you
can.
'Today is Diwali. But there can be no lighting of the chirags for you or for
anyone. Our Diwali will be best celebrated by service of you, and you will
celebrate it by living in your camp as brothers and by looking upon everyone, as
your own. If you will do that, you will come through victorious.
"General Nathusingh told me of all that still needed to be done in the

Kurukshetra Camp. He told me that no more refugees should be sent there. It
seems, as if, there is no proper screening of the refugees and it is hard to
understand why they come and why they are dumped in various places without
any proper intimation to the local authority. In my post-prayer speech last
evening, I criticized the East Punjab Government for this state of affairs. I have
just had a letter from one of their ministers to say that the fault is not theirs,
but the Central Government is responsible.
"Now that all governments, whether central or provincial, belong to the people,
it does not befit one to throw the blame on the other. All must work together
for the general good. I tell you this in order that you may realize your own
responsibility also.
"You must assist in the maintenance of discipline in the camp. You must take
the sanitation of the place in your own hands. I have known the Punjab well
since the martial law days. I know the qualities and the failings of the Punjabis.
One of them, and that is not confined to the Punjab alone, is the utter lack of
the knowledge of social hygiene and sanitation. Therefore, it is that I have
often said that we must all become the Harijans. If we do, we shall grow in

stature. I request you, therefore, to help your doctors and your camp officials—
everyone of you, men, women and even children—to keep Kurukshetra clean.
"The next thing I want to ask you to do, is to share your rations. Be content
with what you get. Do not take or demand more than your share. Community
kitchens are a thing which should be cultivated. In this way, too, you can serve
each other.
"I must also draw your attention to the danger of the refugees getting
accustomed to eat the bread of idleness. The refugees are apt to think that it is
the Government's duty to do everything for them. The Government's duty is
certainly there, but that does not mean that your own ceases. You must live for
others and not only for yourselves. Idleness is demoralizing for everyone, and it
will certainly not help us successfully to get over this crisis.
"A sister from Goa had come to meet me the other day and I was delighted to
learn from her that many women in your camp were anxious to spin. It is good
to have the desire to do creative work which helps. You must refuse to be a
burden on the state. You must be as sugar is to milk. You will become one with
your surroundings arid thus help to share with your government the burden that
has fallen on it. All the camps should really be self-supporting but, perhaps,
that may be too high an ideal to place before you today. All the same, I do ask
you not to despise any work but rejoice at doing anything that comes your way
in order to serve and thus make Kurukshetra an ideal place.
"The response to my appeal for warm clothing and blankets and quilts has been
very good. The people have responded well to the Sardar's appeal too. Your
own share of these is also there. But if you quarrel among yourselves and some
take more than their due, then it will not go well with you. Your suffering is
great even now, but wrong action will make it even greater.
"Finally, I am not one of these who believe that you who have now left your
lands and homes in Pakistan, have been uprooted from there for all time. Nor
do I believe that such will be the case with the thousands of Muslims who have
been obliged to leave India. I for one shall not rest content and will do all that
lies in my power to see that all are reinstated and are able to return with

honour and safety from where they have today been driven out. And I shall
continue, as long as I live, to work for this end. The dead cannot be brought
back to life, but we can work for those who are alive. If we do not do so, then
it will be an eternal blot on both India and Pakistan, and therein will lie ruin for
both of us."
Addressing the prayer meeting, he explained the significance of Diwali. It was a

great day in the Hindu calendar year. They should understand why it was
celebrated by illuminations. In the deadly battle between Rama and Ravana,
the former, the representative of the forces of good, overcame the latter, who
represented the forces of evil. This victory established Ram Raj.
Today, alas! there was no Ram Raj in India. Therefore, how could they
celebrate Diwali? He alone could celebrate victory who had Rama in his heart,
for it was God alone who could illumine their souls, and such illumination alone
was worth while. The crowds went to see man-made illuminations, but the light
they needed today was the light of love in their hearts. Then alone, they would
be worthy of receiving congratulations. Today, thousands were in the most dire
suffering. Could everyone in the audience lay his hand on his heart and say that
everyone of these sufferers, whether Hindu, Muslim or Sikh, was as his own
brother or sister? That was the test for them. Rama and Ravana represented
the eternal duel going on between the forces of good and evil. The real
illumination came from within.
Gandhi then proceeded on to relate how Jawaharlal had just returned from
seeing wounded Kashmir. Jawaharlal had been unable to attend the Congress
Working Committee meetings, either the day before or that day in the
afternoon. He had brought him some flowers from Baramula. These gifts of
nature were always beautiful. But the beauty of that lovely country was that
day marred by the shedding of blood and loot. He had gone to Jammu, too,
where all was not well.
The Sardar had had to go to Junagadh. Both Jinnah Saheb and Bhutto Saheb
were angry, because they felt that the Indian Government had prac tised a
deception on them and were forcing Junagadh to accede to the Indian Union.

In order to bring about peace and goodwill throughout the land, it was the duty
of everyone to banish hatred and suspicion from his or her heart. No victory in
Kashmir or in Junagadh would avail, if they did not feel the existence of God
within them and forget all their petty internal differences. Diwali could never
be properly celebrated, until they had brought back to India all those Muslims
who had fled from here out of fear. Nor could Pakistan live, unless it did
likewise for the Hindus and the Sikhs.
On November 13, Gandhi said that the Working Committee members and the
invitees were unanimously of the opinion that the Congress which had stood
from its inception for over sixty years for perfect communal harmony, was not
to go back upon that unbroken record of perfect harmony, persisted often in
the face of heavy odds. They were quite clear that even though the Congress
might for a time find itself in a minority, they should cheerfully face that
ordeal rather than succumb to the prevalent insanity.
Freedom without equality for all citizens, irrespective of race or religion, was
not worth having for the Congress. In other words the Congress and any
government representative of the Congress must remain a purely democratic
popular body, leaving every individual to follow that form of religion which best
appealed to him or her without any interference from the state. There was so
much in common between people living in the same state under the same flag,
owing undivided allegiance to it. There was so much in common between man
and man, that it was a marvel that there could be a quarrel on the ground of
religion. Any creed or dogma which coerced others into following one uniform
practice was a religion only in name, for a religion worth the name, did not
admit of any coercion. Anything that w*as done under coercion, had only a
short lease of life. It was bound to die. It must be a matter of pride to them,
whether they were the four-anna Congress members or not, that they had in
their midst an institution without a rival, which disdained to become a
theocratic state and which always believed and lived up to the belief that the
state of their conception must be a secular democratic state having perfect
harmony between the different units composing the state. When he thought of
the plight of the Muslims in the Indian Union, how in many places the ordinary

life had become very difficult for them and how there was a continuing exodus
of the Muslims from the Indian Union, he wondered, whether the people who
were responsible for creating such a state of thing could ever become a credit
to the Congress. He, therefore, earnestly hoped that the Hindus and the Sikhs
would so behave as to enable every Muslim, whether a boy or a girl, to feel that
he or she was as safe and free, as the tallest Sikh or Hindu.
Addressing the prayer meeting on November 14, Gandhi said that the Congress
Working Committee gave full three hours to a discussion of the resolutions to
be put before the A.I.C.C. It turned upon the question as to how best to bring
about an atmosphere, whereby all the refugees, the Hindus and Sikhs, could be
returned with honour and in safety to their homes in Western Pakistan. The
Working Committee contended that the wrong commenced in Pakistan, but
they realized also that the question of commencement dwindled into
insignificance when the wrong was copied on a large enough scale by the
Hindus and the Sikhs who took terrible reprisals in East Punjab and the
adjacent parts of the Indian Union. If the A.I.C.C. could with confidence say
that, so far as the Indian Union was concerned, the days of madness were over
and that sanity reigned from one end of the Indian Union to the other, the
committee could say with perfect assurance that the Pakistan Dominion would
feel obliged to invite the refugees to return to their homes with honour and in
perfect safety. This condition would be brought about if only the audience and
the other Hindus and Sikhs could install Ramanam, God, in their hearts, instead
of Ravana or Satan. For, when they had displaced Satan and had shed the
present madness, every Muslim child would roam about as freely as a Hindu or a
Sikh child. Then, he had no doubt, that the Muslim refugees who had left their
homes under pressure would all gladly return to their homes and the way would
then be cleared for the safe and honourable return of every Hindu and Sikh
refugee.
Would that his word could find an echo in the hearts of his audience and that
the A.I.C.C. would be able to come to a wise and just decision!
The following day, Gandhi felt that the prayer audience would naturally expect
him to tell them something of what he had said at the A.I.C.C. meeting in the

afternoon, but he did not feel like repeating himself. As a matter of fact, it was
what he had been saying to them all these days. If he was called in all sincerity
the Father of the Nation, it was true only in the sense that he had had a great
hand in making the Congress what it had become after his return from South
Africa in 1915. That meant that he influenced the nation greatly. But, today,
he could no longer claim such influence. This fact, however, did not, at least,
should not, worry him. All had but to do their duty and leave the result in God's
hands. Nothing happened without God's will. Theirs was only to strive. So he
had gone to the A.I.C.C. meeting as a matter of duty to tell the members what
he believed to be the truth, if he got the permission to speak to the members
before they commenced the business of the meeting.
What he wanted to tell the prayer audience, however, was about controls. He
could no more than just touch upon the subject in the A.I.C.C. meeting, as he
had taken a long time over the other matters of moment.
He felt that it was criminal to have controls. The control system might have
been good during the war time. It might be good also for a military nation. It
was harmful for India. He was sure that there was no scarcity of foodstuffs or of
cloth in the land. The rains had not failed them. They had enough cotton in the
land and enough hands to work at the spinning wheel and the loom. Moreover,
they had the mills. He felt, therefore, that the two controls were bad. There
were other controls too, as for instance, on petroleum, sugar, etc. He could see
no justification for the controls. They tended to make people lazy and
dependent. Laziness and dependence were any day bad for the nation. He had
daily complaints about these controls. He hoped that the nation's
representatives would come to a wise decision and persuade the Union
Government to remove these controls, which promoted corruption, hypocrisy
and black-marketing.
On November 17, Gandhi's address on the controls was read out at the prayer
meeting:
"Must the voice of the people be drowned by the noise of the pundits who claim
to know all about the virtue of controls? Would that our ministers, who are

drawn from the people and are of the people, listened to the voice of the
people rather than of the controllers of the red tape which, they all know, did
them infinite harm when they were in the wilderness! The pundits then ruled
with a vengeance. Must the pundits do so even now? Will not the people have
any opportunity of committing mistakes and learning by them? Do the ministers
not know, that they have the power to resume control wherever necessary, if
decontrol is found to have been harmful to the people in any instance out of .
the samples, by no means exhaustive, that I am giving below? The list before
me confounds my simple mind. There may be virtue in some of them. All I
contend is that the science, if it is one, of controls, requires a dispassionate
examination and then education of the people in the secret of controls in
general or specified controls . . ."
The first session of the A.I.C.C., after the attainment of India's freedom, which
commenced on November 15, ended on the 17th. On the very first day in the
presence of Gandhi, President Kripalani told the A.-I.C.C. that he was resigning
his position. He had neither been consulted by the Government, nor had been
taken into their full confidence. He said that the Government ignored the
Congress party. He revealed that Gandhi felt that, in these circumstances, the
resignation was justified.
Nehru and Patel were the heads of the Government. Their hold on the Congress
machine was unquestioned. They identified themselves with the party. Why
then should they accept the Congress President as a curb on their power?
Gandhi attended the Working Committee meeting, which was to elect the new
president. He was for Narendra Deva. Nehru supported Narendra Deva's
candidature. Other members opposed it.
At the request of Sardar Patel and Nehru, Dr. Rajendra Prasad agreed to accept
the presidentship of the Congress. When he approached Gandhi for advice,
Gandhi said, "I don't like it." Dr. Rajendra Prasad wanted to withdraw his
candidacy but subsequently he changed his mind. Kripalani resigned from the
presidentship; Rajendra Prasad was elected President of the Congress.

Gandhi, who addressed the A.I.C.C. members in camera, urged that the
Congress was the servant of the whole country and all communities. No Muslim
in the Indian Union should feel his life unsafe and all those Muslims who had
left India under coercion should be brought back. The Indian Union had to do
the right thing irrespective of the policy Pakistan adopted. He told them that if
they did their duty, Pakistan would find itself obliged to follow suit. He also
dealt with communal organizations and their dangerous creed and practice. The
proper answer to these organizations was the creation of a powerful public
opinion by the Congress, which wrould render them ineffective.
Under his guidance, the A.I.C.C. passed resolutions on the repatriatioh of

refugees, communal organizations, states and controls. The resolution on the
fundamental policy of the Congress said:
"At this moment of crisis, it is necessary that the Congress should declare its
faith and policy in the clearest terms, and that the people as well as the
Government should follow that policy unswervingly. Even though the Congress
agreed to a division of the country in the hope, which has thus far proved vain,
that thereby the internal conflicts might cease, it has never accepted the
theory that there are two or more nations in India. The Congress has firmly
believed in the whole of India as a nation bound together by indissoluble
cultural and historical links, which had been further strengthened in the course
of the national struggle for freedom. It was on the basis of this faith that the
Congress grew up as a national institution, open to all Indians, without
difference of creed or religion. India is a land of many religions and many
races, and must remain so. Nevertheless, India has been and is a country with a
fundamental unity and the aim of the Congress has been to develop this great
country as a whole as a democratic secular state, where all the citizens enjoy
full rights and are equally entitled to the protection of the state, irrespective
of the religion to whicî they belong. The Constituent Assembly has accepted
this as the basic principle of the constitution. This lays on every Indian the
obligation to honour it.
"The Congress wants to reassure the minorities in India that it will continue to
protect, to the best of its ability, their citizen rights against any aggression.

The Central Government as well as the provincial Governments must

accordingly make every effort to create conditions, wherein all minorities and
all citizens have security and opportunity for their progress. All citizens have
also, on their part, not only to share in the benefits of freedom, but also to
shoulder the burdens and the responsibility which accompany it, and must
above all be loyal to India.
"The All-India Congress Committee calls upon all Congressmen and the people
of India to adhere strictly to these well established principles of the National
Congress and not to allow themselves to be diverted into wrong channels by
passion or prejudice, or by the tragic events that have happened. Real good
and the progress of India have yet to be achieved, and this can only be done by
adhering to the ideals and the policy of the Congress and discarding and
opposing all false doctrines which have done so much mischief to India and her
people."
In a letter to Pyarelal, Gandhi wrote: "I see, my battle has to be fought and
won in Delhi itself. There is a lot for me to do here. Six resolutions of the
A.I.C.C. this time were practically mine. It now remains to be seen how they
are implemented."
Addressing the prayer gathering on the 18th, Gandhi referred to the resolutions
passed by the A.I.C.C. He said that they were most of them such as expected
some duty to be performed by the public, as also something to be done by the
central and the provincial Governments.
Thus, the main resolution expected every non-Muslim citizen to be fair to every
Muslim citizen, so as to enable the latter to feel perfectly secure in any part of
India as to his person and property. The resolution equally demanded from the
Governments, so far as it lay in their power, to afford such protection. And it
also expected that the Governments and the public would so act as to enable
all the Muslim evacuees who had left their homes under pressure, to return and
take up their usual avocations. The real test was that the columns who were
marching on foot towards Pakistan, would feel such a change in the atmosphere
as to make them turn towards their homes. He was very glad to be able to say

that some persons of the column that was moving from the Gurgaon district
were turning homeward. If the public acted correctly, he was quite sure that
the whole column would follow suit.
He further remarked that he was informed that the case of the Panipat Muslims
was somewhat of the style of the Gurgaon column. If the railway conveyance
was available, the Muslims might go to Pakistan under pressure. When he went
to Panipat the other day, he was informed that no Hindu inhabitant of Panipat
wanted the Muslims to leave their homes, if only because each was helpful to
the other. The Muslims were accomplished artisans, and the Hindus were
traders, for the most part, depending upon their Muslim neighbours for the
supply of wares to deal in. But the advent of a large number of refugees
disturbed the even tenor of their lives. He could not understand the change of
attitude, which the occupation of Muslim houses by the refugees, after his visit
to Panipat, signified, and the proposed exodus of the Muslims from that place.
That was all contrary to the letter and spirit of the A.I.C.C. resolution he
referred to. He almost felt like going to Panipat and living there and studying
for himself the condition, as it was reported to have developed.
Addressing the prayer gathering on November 19, Gandhi said that the previous
evening he had referred to the main resolution of the A.I.C.C. regarding Hindu-
Muslim relations. It was his misfortune to refer to an illustration of how it was
being defeated in Delhi. Little did he know, that the very evening that he was
expressing his misgivings, the truth would be illustrated in the heart of old
Delhi. He was told last night that there was a very large crowd of the Hindus
and the Sikhs collected in the Chandni Chowk in front of a shop that belonged
to a Muslim but which was given to a refugee, on condition that the shop would
have to be returned to the owner, when the latter came back. Happily, the
owner turned up, having never wished to leave his business for ever. The
officer-in-charge went to the occupant and requested him to vacate it in favour
of the owner. The occupant hesitated and then promised to vacate on the
officer returning in the evening for possession. The officer found that the
occupant, instead of delivering possession, had evidently informed his friends
who, it was reported, collected in a threatening mood, demonstrating against

the shop being vacated. The few police in the Chandni Chowk were unable to
cope with the crowd. And so they summoned more assistance. It came, and the
military or the police, as the case may be, fired in the air. The frightened
crowd then dispersed, not however without stabbing a passer-by. Happily the
wound was not fatal. The result of the rowdy demonstration was, however,
curious. The shop in question was not vacated. Whether the authority was
finally defied, or whether, at the time of speaking, the shop had been vacated,
he did not know. He hoped, however, that authority to be authority, would
never be defied with impunity under the state of the precious freedom India
had attained. All he could say was that the whole thing was disgraceful. The
crowd, he was told, must have numbered about 2,000.
Nor was this all. In another part of the city, afresh attempt was being made to
force the Muslim occupants out of their places, so as to make room for the
Hindu and the Sikh refugees. The technique was that the Sikhs brandished their
swords and frightened the Muslim residents threatening dire vengeance, if they
did not vacate their homes. He was also informed that the Sikhs were given to
drinking with the results which could easily be surmised. They danced with the
naked swords to the terror of the passersby. And he was further told that,
whereas in Chandni Chowk it was the custom for Muslims not to sell kababs or
other flesh foods in that vicinity, the Sikhs and also probably other refugees
freely sold these forbidden foods in Chandni Chowk, much to the annoyance of
the Hindus in that locality. The nuisance had become so great that men found it
very difficult to pass through crowds in the Chandni Chfftrk ftw fear of
receiving unwelcome attention. He wished to appeal to his refugee friends to
desist from the practices he had described for the sake of themselves and the
country.
As to the kirpans, Gandhi observed, whilst there was for a short time a ban on
the carrying of them beyond a certain size, during the ban he was approached
by many Sikh friends to use his influence for the removal of the ban and the
prescription of a particular size. They quoted a judgment of the Privy Council,
which was given some years ago, ruling that the kirpan could be carried by any
Sikh without any limitation as to size. The speaker had not studied the

judgment. He understood that the judges interpreted the word kirpan to mean
a "sword" of any size. The then Punjab Government met the judgment of the
Privy Council by declaring that it was open to anyone to possess a sword. And
so, in the Punjab, any citizen could carry a sword of any size he liked.
Gandhi stated that he had no sympathy either for Sikhs or the Punjab
Government. Some Sikh friends had come to him producing texts from the
Granth Saheb in favour of the speaker's view that the kirpan was never meant
to be a weapon of offence or to be used Unyhow. Only that Sikh who carried
out the injunctions of the Granth Saheb could use the kirpan on rare occasions
of having to defend innocent women and children and old people and others
against heavy odds. It was for that reason that one Sikh was supposed to be
equal to one and a quarter lakh opponents. Therefore, a Sikh who was given to
drink and indulged in other vices, forfeited the right to carry a kirpan as a
religious symbol of purity and restraint, which is meant to be used only in the
strict prescribed manner.
He was of the opinion that it was idle, even harmful, to invoke the alu of the
past judgments of the Privy Council in order to justify licence. We had just got
out of what he had described as a state of bondage. It was wholly improper in a
state of liberty to break up healthy restraints una^r which alone a society could
grow. He would request the Sikh friends, therefore, not to sully the great Sikh
religion by using the kirpan in favour of any questionable conduct or behaviour.
Let them not unmake what was made by arrays of martyrs of whose bravery the
whole humanity was proud.
On November 21, during the prayer speech, he referred to a question that was
sent to him by one of the members of the audience: What is a Hindu? What is
the origin of the word? Is there any Hinduism?
These were pertinent questions for the time, Gandhi stated. He was no
historian, he laid claim to no learning. But he had read in some authentic book
on Hinduism that the word "Hindu" did not occur in the Vedas, but when
Alexander the Great invaded India, the inhabitants of the country to the east of
the Sindhu were described as Hindus. The letter "S" had become "H" in Greek.

The religion of these inhabitants became Hinduism and, as they knew it, it was
a most tolerant religion. It gave shelter to the early Christians who had fled
from persecution, also to the Jews known as Beni-Israel, as also to the Parsis.
He was proud to belong to that Hinduism, which was all-inclusive and which
stood for tolerance. The Aryan scholars swore by what they called Vedic
religion, and Hindustan was otherwise known as Aryavarta. The speaker had no
such aspiration. Hindustan of his conception was all-sufficing for him. It
certainly included the Vedas, but it included also much more. He could detcct
no inconsistency in declaring that he could, without in any way whatsoever
imparing the dignity of Hinduism, pay equal homage to the best of Islam,
Christianity, Zoroast nanism and Judaism. And such Hinduism will live, as long
as the sun shines. Tulsidas summed it up in one doha: "The root of religion is
embedded in mercy, whereas egotism is rooted in love of the body. Tulsi says
that mercy should never be abandoned, even though the body perishes."
Gandhi said that he could not help mentioning the fact that, according to his
information, about 137 mosques in Delhi were more or less damaged during the
recent disturbances. Some of the mosques were converted into mandirs. One
such was near Connaught Place which nobody could miss. There was a tricolour
flag flying there. The mosque was converted into a mandir with the installation
of an idol. He considered all such desecration as a blot upon Hinduism and
Sikhism. It was, in his opinion, a wholly ungodly act. That the Muslims in
Pakistan had resorted to such desecration could not be pleaded in extenuation
of the blot he had mentioned. Any such act, in his opinion, constituted an act
of destroying Hinduism, Sikhism or Islam as the case may be.
At the risk of being longer than usual, Gandhi felt bound finally to refer to a
case of persecution of some Roman Catholics near Gurgaon, which was brought
to his notice. The village in question where it took place was known as Kanhai,
about twenty-five miles from Delhi. One of his visitors was an Indian Roman
Catholic chaplain and the other was a catechist belonging to a village. They
both had produced to the speaker a letter from the Roman Catholics in the
village relating the story of the persecution at the hands of the Hindus. The
informants further told the speaker that the Roman Catholics there had been

threatened if they did not remove themselves from their village. He hoped that
it was an idle threat and that these Chtfstian brothers and sisters would be left
to follow their own faith and their avocation without let or hindrance/Surely,
they were not less entitled to their freedom than they were under the British
regime, now that there was freedom from the political bondage. That freedom
could never be confined to the Hindus only in the Indian Union and the Muslims
only in Pakistan. He had in one of his prayer addresses already told the
audience that when the mad fury against the Muslims had abated, it was likely
to be vented on the others; but when he made the remark, he was not quite
prepared for such an early verification of his forebodings. The fury against the
Muslims had not yet completely abated. And so far as he knew, these Christians
were utterly inoffensive. It was suggested that their offence consisted in being
Christians, more so because they ate beef and pork. As a matter of curiosity he
had asked the chaplain whether there was any truth in the remark, and he was
told that these Roman Catholics, of their own accord, had abjured beef and
pork, not only now but long ago. If this kind of unreasoning prejudice persisted,
then the future for independent India was dismal. The chapfein himself had
recently had his bicycle taken away from him when he was at Rewari, and he
narrowly escaped death. Was this agony to end only with the extinction of all
the non-Hindus and the non-Sikhs?
Gandhi exclaimed that he had no desire to live to witness such a dissolution of

India and he would ask the audience to join him in the wish and prayer that
good sense would return to the Hindus and the Sikhs of the Indian Union.
Reverting to the ill-treatment of Christians in a village near Gurgaon, in his

prayer speech on November 22, Gandhi said that he had received information
that somewhat similar treatment was meted out to Christians at Sonipat. If the
facts were as stated, evidently the plague was extending and one would not
know where the plague was to land India.
In a discussion with some friends he was told that much improvement was not
to be expected in the Indian Union unless there was an abatement of the
corresponding nuisance in Pakistan. And what had appeared in the papers about
Lahore, was cited as an instance. He himself never swore by the newspaper

reports and would warn the readers of the newspapers not to be easily affected
by stories reported therein. Not even the best of them were free from
exaggeration and embellishment. But supposing that what they read in the
newspapers was true, even then a bad example was never a pattern to follow.
Imagine a rectangular frame without a slate, he observed. The slightest rough

handling of the frame would turn the right angles into acute and obtuse angles,
and if the frame was again properly handled at one corner, the other three
corners would be automatically turned into right angles. Similarly, if there was
right conduct on the part of the Government and people in the Indian Union, he
had not a shadow of doubt that Pakistan would respond and then the whole of
India would return to sanity. Let the reported ill-treatment of the Christians
against whom, so far as he knew, there was no charge, be an indication that
insanity must not be allowed to go any further and that it should be promptly
and radically dealt with, if India was to give a good account of herself to the
world.
Gandhi then referred to the refugee problem. There were among them doctors,
lawyers, students, teachers, nurses, etc. If they tore themselves away from the
poor fellow refugees, they would not have learnt the lesson from their common
misfortune. He felt that all the refugees, professionals and non-professionals,
rich and poor, should hold together and should establish model townships, as
the monied men of Lahore had built the model town of Lahore, which the
Hindus and the Sikhs had now felt compelled to evacuate. These townships
would remove the pressure from the crowded cities like Delhi, and they would
promote the health and the well-being of the inmates. If over two lakhs of
refugees in the big camp of Kurukshetra became a model for purity, within and
without, if the people including the professionals and the rich men lived on
equal terms with the poor refugees and led a life of contentment under the
canvas, with well laid-out streets and in perfect voluntary co-operation, doing
all the services, beginning with sanitation, themselves and occupied themselves
usefully throughout the day, they would cease to be a burden on the exchequer
and their simplicity and co-operation would not only compel admiration from
city dwellers, but would also shame them into imitating them in all their good

points. The prevailing bitterness and mutual jealousies would vanish in a

moment. And the refugees, no matter how many they were, would cease to be
a matter of worry to the Central Government as also to the local governments.
Such an exemplary life lived by tens of lakhs of refugees, would command the
admiration of the distracted world.
In his discourse on the 23rd, Gandhi apologized to the radio men for his
occasional breach of the rule that his speech should not exceed twenty
minutes, not even fifteen, if possible. He stated that he could not always
observe the rule, for his main purpose was to reach the hearts of the prayer
audience that was physically before him. The radio came next. He did not know
whether there was any arrangement whereby the radio could record longer
speeches. He was not in the habit of speaking without purpose or for the sake
of hearing his own voice.
Then he referred to the reported attack on the liberty of the Harijans in Rohtak
and elsewhere by the Jats. This was nothing new. Interference with the liberty
of the Harijans was in vogue during the British regime too. What was, however,
new was that the persecution had become more pronounced, instead of dying
out during their newly acquired freedom. Did not the freedom belong to every
one of India, no matter to what state of society he belonged? Was the Harijan
still the serf that he was upto the other day? In his opinion, one wrong led to
another. Our misbehaviour, irrespective of the doings in Pakistan, towards our
Muslim brethren led to our illtreatment of the Christians. Our conduct regarding
the Harijans pointed in the same direction. If we had realized the significance
of the change that came upon India on the 15th of August last, then the glow of
freedom would have been felt by the meanest in the country. We would then
have been spared the awful events of which we had been helpless witnesses. It
seemed, as if, everybody was working for his own advancement and nobody for
India.
His address on November 24 was read out at the prayer gathering:
"You are good enough, when I enter the prayer ground, to keep ample room for
me and my daughters to help me to pass through you. I would urge you to

observe the same orderliness when after the prayer I pass out. There is an
unseemly rush to touch me as I pass out. The crowd press in upon me. I know
and value your affection. I want it to take the shape not of effusiveness, but of
some constructive service of the country, such as I have pointed out on many
an occasion and in my numerous writings. The first and the foremost, today, is
communal harmony. Formerly, discord was of a negative character. Today, it is
of a most virulent type. The Hindus and the Sikhs on the one hand, and the
Musalmans on the other, have become enemies of each other, with the
shameful result, which we have already seen.
"The attendants at the prayer should not only be free from any rancour against
one another, but they should actively assist in re-establishing the communal
harmony which was our pride during the Khilafat days. Have I not attended the
huge friendly gatherings of those days? They gladdened my heart when I
witnessed them. Will those days never return?
"Take the latest tragedy that happened in the heart of the capital city
yesterday. Some Hindu and Sikh refugees are reported to have gone out to an
empty Muslim residence and unlawfully attempted to occupy it. A scuffle
ensued and some were injured, although none fatally. And this incident, bad as
it was, was exaggerated out of all proportion. The first report was that four
Sikhs were murdered. The sequel was to be expected. Retribution followed,
and several stabbings took place. A new technique seems to have been adopted
now. Sikhs with their, drawn swords, which seem to have taken the place of
little kirpans, with or without the Hindus, visit Muslim houses and demand
evacuation. This is a monstrous state of things in this the capital city, if the
report is true. If it is untrue, it may be dismissed. And if it is true, it demands
urgent attention not only from the authorities, but the public as well. The
former will be impotent, if the public is not behind them.
"I am not sure, what my duty is in this case. Things evidently are going from
bad to worse. The full moon day of Kartik will be soon upon us. All kinds of
rumours have been poured in upon me. I hope that the rumours are all untrue,
as they proved to be for the Dussehra and Bakr Id.

"A lesson to be learnt from these rumours is that we are living a hand- to-mouth
life, which is not good for any state or nation. Every servant of the nation has
to consider seriously the part he has to play towards the abatement of this
corroding nuisance.
"It is well to consider at this stage a long letter from Sardar Sant Singh of
Lyallpur, former M.L.A. He has put up a forcible defence for the Sikhs. He has
read into my prayer speech of last Wednesday a meaning which the words do
not bear and certainly never meant by me. Perhaps, the good sardar is aware of
my intimate connection with the Sikhs ever since my return from South Africa
in 1915. There was a time, when my word was law to the Sikhs as to the Hindus
and the Muslims. Manners have changed with the times, but I know that I have
not. The sardar, perhaps, does not view the present tendency among the Sikhs
as I, their avowed dispassionate friend, without any axe of my own to grind,
can and do. I speak freely and frankly, because I am their true friend. And I
make bold to'tay that many a time the Sikh situation was saved because they,
in general, chose to follow my advice. I need, therefore, no reminder that I
should be cautious about what I say about the Sikhs or any other community.
Let the sardar and every Sikh who wishes well by them and is not carried away
by the prevailing current, help in ridding the great and brave community from
madness, drunkenness and all the vices that flow from it. Let them sheathe the
sword which they have flourished and have used badly. Let them not be
befooled by the Privy Council judgement, if it means that the kirpan is a sword
of any length. A kirpan ceases to be sacred when it goes into the hands of an
unprincipled drunkard or when it is used anyhow. A sacred thing has to be used
on sacred and lawful occasions. A kirpan is undoubtedly a symbol of strength,
which adorns its possessor, only if he exercises amazing restraint over himself
and uses it against enormous odds against himself.
"The sardar will pardon me when I say that I have fairly studied the history of
the Sikhs and I have drunk deep of the essence of the Granth Saheb. Tested by
the tenets of that scripture, what is said to have been done by the Sikhs, is
indefensible and suicidal. Sikh bravery and integrity must not be frittered away

on any account. It can be an asset to the whole of India. In my opinion, it is a

menace which it should not be.
"Of course, it is nonsense to suggest that the Sikhs are the enemy number one
of Islam. Have I not been described as such? Is the honour to be divided
between them and me? I have never desired the honour. My whole life is a
standing testimony against the charge. Can the same be said of the Sikhs? Let
them learn the lessons from the Sikhs who stand behind the Sher-e-Kashmir. Let
them repent of the follies committed in their name.
"I also know the vicious suggestion that the Hindus will be all right if they will
sacrifice the Sikhs who would never be tolerated in Pakistan. I cannot be a
party to any such fratricidal bargains. There can be no rest for this unhappy
land, unless every Hindu and Sikh returns with honour and in safety to West
Punjab and every Muslim refugee to the Union, barring, of course, those who do
not choose to do so for reasons of their own. The sin of mass exchange of
population must be washed out, if we are to live as peaceful and helpful
neighbours.
"I must not be asked to recount the evil deeds of Pakistan. For, the recounting
will not help either the Hindu or the Sikh sufferers. Pakistan has to bear the
burden of all its sins, which, I know, are terrible enough. It should be enough
for everybody to know my opinion—in so far as it has any value—that the
beginning was made by the Muslim League long before the 15th of August. Nor
am I able to say that they turned over a new leaf on the 15th of August last.
But this statement of my opinion cannot help you. What is of moment is that
we of the Union copied the sins and thus became fellow sinners. Odds became
even. Shall we now awake from the trance, repent and change, or must we
fall?"
In his prayer speech on November 25, Gandhi said that some people had
objected to being called refugees. They said that the whole of India, according
to his own showing, was equally the home of ever) Indian. And, therefore,
every one of them had the right to settle in any part of the Indian Union. They
had suffered heavily in Pakistan and, therefore, they had come to the Indian

Union. They should be called sufferers. He had no objection to calling them

sufferers, if that was a more pleasing term. Refugee was a familiar word in the
English language, from whose spell the people were not yet disengaged. The
Hindustani papers translated the word correctly as sharanarthi. 'Sufferers' was
also an English word, which his visitors had used. He suggested dukkhi as the
equivalent, which the visitors accepted. This evening he wanted to talk to them
about these sufferers.
He had met three sets of people during the day. The first was a family from
Lahore who had lost everything, including seventeen members of the family in
Pakistan. They asked him to get them a house in Delhi. He told them that he
was not the Government and even if he was, he would not help them. There
were no vacant houses in Delhi. The sufferers like them should go and live in
the camps like the others. They said they were not beggars to live on charity.
He rejoined that he would not have a single individual live on charity. Those in
the camps should work for the food, shelter and clothing that they got there.
They retorted that they had their children. But so had the other sufferers, he
rejoined. The more capable class among them should use their talents to
organize the life in the camps and give the benefit of their experience and
their knowledge to all their fellow sufferers. These friends argued that there
were many Muslims still with houses. He felt ashamed and hurt to hear this
argument. Many thousands had been forced to leave their homes. These
sufferers had not been mellowed by their sufferings. But his appeal fell on deaf
ears. He suggested that instead of expecting the much injured Muslims to give
up their few homes, their argument would have force, if they asked him to
leave his comfortable place in their favour. This seemed to silence them.
After that, came some Sikhs from Hazara. They did not seem to wear kirpans.
They said that they were farmers and wanted facilities for farming. He asked
them why they did not go to the East Punjab. They replied that the East Punjab
would not take anyone else except those from the West Punjab. They held that
there was not enough land in the East Punjab to take in those from the N.-
W.F.P. also. There were 8,000 of these sufferers from Hazara. They had been
directed to go to the Central Government. In the speaker's opinion, the

Government should settle them all on agricultural land, as early as possible.

The Sikh friends told that they did not wish to push out the Muslims from their
homes. All they wanted was some land and ploughs, bullocks and seeds, by way
of loan. Then they would produce their own food. They showed willingness to
go to any part of the Union where they could get agricultural land. The speaker
thought that these Sikh sufferers were reasonable and that their reasonable
wish should be gratified.
A member of the audience had inquired when they could expect to go back. He
replied that they could go at once, provided they in the Union ceased to hound
out the Musalmans and were prepared to welcome back those who had felt
compelled to migrate to Pakistan. Then he would be free to go to West Punjab
and tell the Musalmans there that they should welcome the Hindus and the
Sikhs, who had felt compelled to leave their homes in Pakistan. Today,
however, he heard the foolish talk that the three and a half crores of
Musalmans should be turned out of the Indian Union. It seemed to him to be
intolerable, and he did not wish to witness that catastrophe. He felt that he
had become a futile burden on earth. But whether he was alive or dead, the
sufferers would surely one day return to their homes.
The next day, Gandhi referred to a letter received by him from Bombay. The
writer of the letter had enclosed a cutting from a Bombay newspaper and had
not disclosed his name. The cutting said that the All-India Radio was being used
to broadcast his prayer discourses which amounted to propaganda for the
Congress. It was a fascist technique, with non-violence thrown in as a mask.
The people were sick of listening to his speeches. His reply was that though
some people might be of that opinion, there were also others who wrote to him
that his speeches put heart into them. The accusation was quite baseless. A
government which used the radio for singing its own praises was worthless. The
good deeds of a government alone was the right propaganda. As for himself, he
only talked about things which had an intimate connection with prayer and
religion. If listeners were not interested in his talks, they need not listen to
him. He was not interested in speaking for the radio. His one object was the
service of humanity, and it was for that alone that he spoke to them. If the

public stopped coming for prayers, he would not be making any post-prayer
speeches.
Gandhi then referred to some of the letters that had hurt him deeply. Several
women had been abducted in Pakistan and some of them had been cruelly
molested and dishonoured. Their upbringing was such that those rescued
women felt ashamed and the society also looked down upon them. To do so was
cruel. While it was true that no one could touch a woman who possessed the
purity and the tejas of Sita, it was very hard to find a Sita in this age. At any
rate, every woman could not rise to those heights. A woman who was forcibly
molested had nothing to be ashamed of. She was in no way unchaste or
immoral. It was strange that, while the immoral men or women went
unpunished and the lapses of some society men and women never came to
light, the people went out of their way to outcast the innocent victims of
brutality. Such an outlook pained him.
He could never turn out or look down upon his daughter or wife, if she had
been subjected to such evil treatment and had escaped or been liberated. He
had met such women, both Hindus and Muslims, and had told them that they
had nothing to feel ashamed of.
He then went on to relate how the secretary of a provincial Congress

committee, who was a farmer himself, had come to him and told him that,
while formerly all men and women in the villages used to lend a helping hand
at harvesting time, today the farmers had to hire labour for that purpose. That
increased the cost of food grains and removed the spirit of willing co-operation,
which was afi asset in itself. He knew of the good custom. He advised all, with
all the emphasis at his command, to practise it.
The secretary said also that at least the Minister for Food, if not most, should
be kisans. It was unfortunate that, today, none of the ministers were kisans.
Sardar Patel was born in a farmer's family and though he knew something about
agriculture, he had become a barrister by profession. The Prime Minister was a
learned man, a great historian and a great writer, but he knew nothing about
agriculture and farming. The other ministers were well-to-do men, who had

never worked on the land. Yet, more than eighty per cent of the India's
population consisted of kisans. Only a kisan knew how to increase production
and the fertility of the land. And only he could understand the whys and
wherefores of profiteering by the kisans and overcome the evil. In democracy,
a kisan should be the ruler. The speaker would certainly like to push forward an
honest and a capable kisan. Such a kisan would not know English. The speaker
would ask Jawaharlal to be the kisan's secretary and see the foreign
ambassadors on his chief's behalf, and take pride in such service. Such a kisan
Prime Minister would not ask for a palace to live in. He would live in a mud hut,
sleep under the sky and work on the land during the day, whenever he was
free. Then the whole picture would change immediately. In panchayat raj, the
man who should count most in India, was naturally the kisan. How to advance
him was the question.
On November 27, he told the prayer audience that he had been to see the
Governor-General and had met Liaquat Ali Saheb, who was staying in the
Government House. There he learnt that the Governor-General, the Prime
Ministers of the two Dominions, Sardar Patel and the Finance Minister had
conferred together and had come to some conclusions, which might bring about
peace to the strife-torn country of theirs. Nothing was impossible for sincere
men in the way of bringing concord out of discord.
And then he had a visit from Sheikh Abdullah, who was affectionately called
Sher-e-Kashmir. Though there were just a handful of Hindus and Sikhs in
Kashmir, the Sheikh Saheb took pains to carry them with him. He had been to
Jammu also. What had happened there was most shameful for the Hindus and
the Sikhs. But that did not make the Sheikh Saheb lose his balance. His visit to
Jammu also bore good fruit. And if the harmony continued as it promised to do,
it would be a lesson in communal harmony for the whole of India.
Kashmir was a mountainous country and the life there was most trying in
winter. Many routes passed through Pakistan. There was, however, a narrow
strip which joined Kashmir to East Punjab. But in East Punjab, it was difficult
for the Muslims to safely pass through, much less to live in, as it was difficult
for the Hindus and the Sikhs in the West Punjab and the N.-W.F.P. How could

Kashmir have trade with the Indian Union under these circumstances? If the
insanity continued in the East Punjab, accession to the Indian Union might
prove nugaft>ry. He hoped wisdom would dawn upon East Punjab. It was the
duty of the Central Government to see that there was a safe land route
between Kashmir and the Indian Union, so that woollen cloth, other
manufactures and fruits from Kashmir could come to the Union as freely as
before.
He sometimes glanced at Dawn and Pakistan Times. These were influential

Pakistan dailies. One could not dismiss with indifference what they said. These
newspapers had reported that the Muslims in Kathiawad were being harassed.
There was arson and loot, murders and abductions. He had received some
telegrams also about this matter. Some Hindu friends had told him that arson
and loot had certainly taken place in some places, but they were not aware of
any murders and abductions. He had asked Liaquat Saheb if the report of the
Pakistan newspapers could be trusted. The Pakistan Premier had assured him
that it could be trusted about the facts, though he could not vouch for the
magnitude. The report hurt him deeply. He was born in Kathiawad. At the head
of the temporary government in Junagadh was his nephew, Shri Shamaldas
Gandhi. Sardar Patel as well as Shri Shamaldas Gandhi had said in their
speeches in Kathiawad that no Muslim could be hurt in Junagadh state or in
Kathiawad, provided the Muslims were faithful to the Indian Union. He had
been glad to hear that the Hindus and the Muslims of Junagadh seemed of their
own free will to have decided to stay in the Union. If what was reported of the
happenings in Kathiawad was true, then like their independence, what they had
won in Junagadh was only to lose it. He hoped fervently that those reports
were highly exaggerated, if they were not entirely untrue. He would welcome
an authoritative and a frank statement on the subject. If the poison spread
thoughout India, life would not be worth living in it.
One Bengali friend wrote a long letter on the exodus from East Pakistan. Its
purport was that though workers like him understood and appreciated the
speaker's argument and distinction between death—courageous and cowardly—
the common man detected in his statement a not too hidden advice in favour of

migration. "If death is to be the lot in any case, courage becomes of no count;
for man lives but to escape death," he said.
"This argument seems to beg the question," remarked Gandhi. "Man does not
live but to escape death. If he does so, he is advised not to do so. Man is
advised to learn to love death as well as life, if not more so. A hard saying,
harder to act up to, one may say. Every worthy act is difficult. Ascent is always
difficult. Descent is easy and often slippery. Life becomes livable only to the
extent that death is treated as a friend, never as an enemy. To conquer life's
temptations, summon death to your aid. In order to postpone death a coward
surrenders honour, wife, daughter and all. A courageous man prefers death to
the surrender of self-respect. When the time comes, as it conceivably can, I
would not leave my advice to be inferred, but it will be given in precise
language. That, today, my advice might be followed only by one or none, does
not detract from its value. A beginning is always made by a few, even one."

13. Secular State ( 1947 )
ON NOVEMBER 28, 1947, Guru Nanak's birthday, Gandhi addressing the Sikhs said:
"I fear that I might not be able to say to you all that I want to. I had also hoped
that you having gone through the military machine would observe perfect
silence. But the discipline has not reached the sisters and, therefore, they are
not able to observe the laws of the public meetings. I had the same experience
when, some years ago, I was in Amritsar. You will admit that the fault lies with
the men. As I entered the meeting place, I saw the remains of bananas and
oranges thrown about any how. These have not only made the place dirty, but
dangerous to walk. We should learn to keep the roads and footpaths as clean as
the floors in our houses. In the absence of proper receptacles, I have noticed
disciplined people putting these in a piece of paper, and then temporarily in
their pockets, until they are cast in their places. It is the duty of men, if they
have learnt the rules of social conduct, to teach them to the womenfolk.
"Today, Bawa Bachittar Singh Saheb came to me in the morning and insisted
that I should attend the Guru Nanak's birthday celebration. He told me that
probably over a lakh of men and women had assembled there, and that most of
them would be sufferers from Western Pakistan. I hesitated because I felt that
many Sikhs had been displeased with me. Bawa Bachittar Singh Saheb
nevertheless insisted and said that I would say my say before the meeting. I
yielded and felt that even as a mother often gives bitter pills to her children, I
would take the liberty of saying things which might appear to be bitter. In
reality and in effect, they are meant for your good. My mother often used to
administer bitter drugs, but I could not feel elsewhere the comfort that her lap
provided for me. Whatever I have said to you up to now, I do not regret. I have
said those things as your sincere friend and servant. I have with me Sardar
Datar Singh's daughter. You perhaps know him. He has lost his all in the West
Punjab. He was the owner of large tracts of land and of several hundred fine
cattle. He has lost many relatives and dear friends in Montgomery, but indeed I
am glad to be able to tell you that he has not shed a single tear over the

misfortune, nor has he felt any bitterness towards the Muslims. I would like you
all to follow his example. The Sikh friends have told me that one Sikh is
considered equal to 1,25,000 men. Where is that bravery today? Have things
come to such a pass that a minority of Muslims cannot live in your midst with
perfect safety?
"I am free to admit that the mischief commenced in Pakistan, but the Hindus
and the Muslims of East Punjab and the neighbouring districts have not been
behindhand in copying the mischief. The difference is that the Hindus have not
the courage of the Sikhs, who know how to use the sword.
"You see Sheikh Abdullah Saheb with me. I was disinclined to bring him with
me, for I know that there is a great gulf between the Hindus and the Sikhs on
the one side, and the Muslims on the other. But the Sheikh Saheb, known as the
Lion of Kashmir, although a pucca Muslim, has won the hearts of both, by
making them forget that there is any difference between the three. He had not
been embittered. Even though in Jammu, recently, the Muslims were killed by
the Hindus and the Sikhs, he went to Jammu and invited the evil-doers to
forget the past and repent over the evil they had done. The Hindus and the
Sikhs of Jammu listened to him. Now the Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs of Kashmir
and Jammu are fighting together to defend the beautiful valley of Kashmir. I
am glad, therefore, that you are receiving the two of us with cordiality.
"Let this auspicious day mark the beginning of a new chapter in your life. Let
the disgrace of driving out the Muslims from Delhi cease from today. I found to
my shame that, as our motor-car was passing through the Chandni Chowk,
which used to be filled with the Hindus, the Sikhs and the Muslims, I did not
notice a single Muslim passer-by. Surely, we have not come to such a pass as to
be afraid of the minority of the Muslims, scattered throughout the Union. If
there are any traitors in their midst, our Government is strong enough to deal
with them. We must be ashamed of hurting children, women or old men. Every
man must be considered innocent before he is found guilty by a properly
constituted court of law.

"I fervently hope that such misdeeds will become now a thing of the past. The
kirpan is a symbol of sanctity to be exhibited and to be used in defence of the
helpless and the innocent. The tenth and the last guru of the Sikhs,
undoubtedly, wielded the sword, but never, so far as I know, at the expense of
the weak. He had imposed many restraints upon himself. He had many reputed
Muslim disciples. So had the other gurus, beginning with Nanak Saheb. Your
bravery will be testified, when all those who belong to different faiths,
including Muslims, become your sincere friends.
"Intoxicating drinks and drugs, dancing, debauchery and the vices to which
many of us become addicted, are not for the followers of the gurus and the
Granth Saheb. With the Granth Saheb as my witness, I ask you to make the
resolution that you will keep your hearts clean and you will find that all other
communities will follow you."
In his prayer speech on the 29th, he said that many mosques had been damaged
during the riots. Some mosques had been converted into temples. The idols
should be removed without the intervention of the police or the military. These
things could take place, only if there was real contrition.
He knew that the idols could not be placed in the mosques by the Sikhs. What,
however, he did say was that reformation among the Sikhs would automatically
affect the Hindus in the right direction. In the present instance, the Hindus and
the Sikhs had worked hand in hand.
He said that a large number of Hindu and Sikh girls had been abducted in
Pakistan. God alone knew, what awful things the girls were being subjected to.
The Hindus and the Sikhs in the Indian Union had not behaved any better. He
had learnt that the Muslim girls who were abducted, were subjected to
unnamable ill-treatment by their lustful captors. He would like the East Punjab
Government and their officers to deliver every one of such girls from this
indecent captivity. Every abduction or capture should be regarded by both the
Governments as illegal and ab initio void. It was the peremptory duty of the
two Governments not to rest, till every such girl was freed from captivity and

returned to the respective Governments. There could be no question of

voluntary conversion or association on the part of the girl concerned.
The following day he referred to several telegrams that he had received about
Kathiawad. He had spoken to them of the reported happenings in Kathiawad.
He could not ignore what was written in the Pakistan newspapers. Thousands of
people read and believed those newspapers. Therefore, he had spoken to them
without waiting for the verification of those reports. If the reports were
incorrect, it was a matter of shame for the newspapers concerned. If they were
true, it was shameful for the people of Kathiawad. He had told them what the
Sardar had said. The Sardar had seen him also and he repeated his assurance
that things were all right in Kathiawad. He had also received a telegram from
Rajkot which said that some Hindus had lost their balance at one stage and
they had damaged or burnt a few Muslim houses, but the Congressmen aided by
the state had immediately controlled the situation at the risk of their own
lives. Shri Dhebarbhai who was a well-known lawyer and leader in Rajkot had
been mobbed. Some Congressmen had been injured. Thus, though the mob fury
was turned against Congressmen, the Muslims were saved. They were very sorry
to learn of his distress and wanted to reassure him that life was quite normal in
Rajkot. They were making inquiries about other places and they would let him
know the result. It was the Rashtriya Sevak Sangh and the Hindu Mahasabha,
who were supposed to have planned the attack, but they had failed. There was
another telegram from the Muslims offering thanks for the services rendered to
them by the Congressmen. A telegram from some Muslims in Bombay
complimented the speaker for having brought out the matter and added that
many Muslims in Kathiawad were looted and terrorized. Thank God, there was
no mention of murders and abductions. The telegram stated that many Muslims
had left Kathiawad. If the assurances given were to be relied upon, the
evacuees should return to their homes. He w arned the people and the
newspapers against making unverified or exaggerated statements. It would
serve no useful purpose to deceive their friends. He had received too a
reassuring telegram from the Maharaja of Bhavnagar. There was also a telegram
from five Muslims of Rajkot saying that thirteen shops were looted, resulting in

a severe damage of about a lakh of rupees and saying that the state and the
Congressmen had brought the situation under control. Against this was a
telegram from Junagadh just received, as he was coming to the prayer. The
telegram confirmed the alarming news that he had mentioned on Friday and
asked for an impartial inquiry. The inquiry was not in his power to give. As the
meeting knew, he was awaiting further telegrams from Kathiawad. He could
say, however, that he would not be satisfied except with the full assurance,
which was, perhaps, better than an official inquiry.
He then fervently appealed to the Hindu Mahasabha and the Rashtriya Sevak
Sangh, both of which were Hindu organizations and had many well- educated
men on their roles, to desist from what they were reported to be doing.
Religion could never be saved by questionable methods. They should let the
Government right the wrongs and punish the evil-doers.
Lastly, Gandhi referred to a communique published in the newspapers giving

seven days' notice for the removal of idols from the mosques which had been
converted into temples. And if there was no compliance, the police were to
remove the idols. Sardar Patel had said that the Government would repair the
damage done to the mosques. In the speaker's opinion, it was the duty of the
public to do so. An idol had no value unless it was duly installed in a
consecrated place by duly qualified devotees. Forcible possession of a mosque
disgraced Hinduism and Sikhism. It was the duty of the Hindus to remove the
idols from the mosques and repair the damage. He had not heard of any
mosque being turned into a gurudwara. The Sikhs worshipped the Guru Granth
Saheb and it would be an insult to the Granth Saheb, if it was placed in a
mosque.
A Muslim had brought to him a half-burnt Koran. He had wrapped it up in a

piece of cloth, showed it to him with tearful eyes and went away without
speaking. The man who had thus tried to insult the Koran, had insulted his own
religion. He made an appeal to the Hindus and the Sikhs to desist from bringing
ruin to their country and religion.
On December i, Gandhi's address was read out to the prayer gathering:

"Many friends upbraid me for often using 'if5 in making many statements. I have
made use of this little conjunction with much benefit to the cause that I am
espousing for the time. The controversy now rages round the Kathiawad
imbroglio. My friends feel hurt by the publicity gained by the reported
atrocities, which they hold to be groundless and which, to the small extent that
they are true, the authorities and the Congressmen have battled against
bravely and successfully. Surely, truth has gained by making conditional use of
the information given by the parties concerned. The Kathiawad authorities and
the Congress will gain to the exact extent that they have stood for the truth.
But the friends hold that by the time untruth is overtaken, mischief is done by
unscrupulous parties making unlawful use of my giving currency to a particular
untruth by omitting the conjunction and by quoting me in support of it. I am
not unaware of the danger. Each time it has been tried, it has failed miserably
and the unscrupulous party has been discredited. My friends need not be
perturbed by my speeches in which I make conditional use of compromising
statements, provided, of course, always the parties attacked are above
reproach.
"Let us now examine the converse case. Suppose, in the instance in point, I had
ignored the charges made in the influential Pakistan journals, especially when
they were on the whole backed by the Prime Minister of Pakistan. My
indifference would have resulted in the Muslim world giving credence to these
reports, as if they were gospel truth. Now the best Muslim mind is already
sceptical about the truth of the reports.
"The lesson that I would have my friends of Kathiawad and incidentally others
to draw from the incidents, such as this, is that they should have their own
house in perfect order, should always welcome criticism, even when it is bitter,
and profit by it by becoming more exact, if possible, and correcting their
errors, whenever detected. We should never make the mistake of thinking that
we can never make any mistakes. The bitterest critic is bitter because he has
some grudge, fancied or real, against us. We shall set him right if we are
patient with him, and whenever the occasion arises, show him his error or
correct our own, when we are to be found in error. So doing, we shall never go

wrong. Undoubtedly, the balance is to be preserved. Discrimination is ever

necessary. Deliberately mischievous statements have to be ignored. I believe
that by constant practice, I have somewhat learnt the art of discrimination.
"In the present disturbed atmosphere, when charges are hurled against one
another, it would be a folly to be in a fool's paradise and feel that we can do no
wrong. That blissful state, it is no longer possible for us to claim. It will be
creditable if by strenuous effort we succeed in isolating the mischief and then
eradicating it. And we shall do so, only if we keep our eyes and our ears open
for seeing and hearing our own shortcomings. Nature has so made us that we do
not see our backs, it is reserved for others to see them. Hence, it is wise to
profit by what they see.
"I have not done with the long telegram I received from Junagadh last evening,
as I was about to come to the prayer meeting. I was able only to glance at it. I
have since read it carefully. The signatories repeat all the charges made in the
reports, alluded to by me. If the charges are true, then they damage the
Kathiawadi Hindus. If they go baselessly beyond the admissions made and
published by me, they have damaged the Pakistan cause. They invite me to go
to Kathiawad and to study things for myself. I presume that the senders know
that I cannot do so. They ask for a commission. Surely, before they can do so,
they have to make out a prima facie case. I must assume that their purpose is
not to discredit the Hindus of Kathiawad or of Junagadh, as the case may be,
but to elucidate the truth and protect Muslim life, honour and property. They
know as well as anybody else, that the newspaper propaganda, especially when
it is unscrupulous, will protect neither honour nor life, nor property. All the
three can be preserved and now, by the strictest adherence to truth and by
going to the many Hindu friends that the signatories know they have. They
shotild know too that, though I am far away from Kathiawad, I am not idle.
Deliberately I opened the chapter myself and I am gathering all the information
I can. I have met Sardar Patel and he assures me that, so far as in him lies, he
will prevent all communal strife and he will see that all misconduct is severely
dealt with. The workers in Kathiawad who have no communal prejudice are

striving to reach the truth and to seek redress of every wrong done to the
Muslims who are as dear to them as themselves. Will they help in the process?"
On December 2, Gandhi returned from Panipat a little after half past five and
arrived on the prayer ground as the Ramdhun was being recited. He apologized
for being late and then gave a brief account of his visit. He had gone there in
order to see whether he could persuade the Muslims not to leave Panipat for
Pakistan. If they could have the courage to remain in their own homes, it would
not only be good for them, but also for the whole of India, including Pakistan.
He had met the Hindu and the Sikh refugees too. They all called themselves
refugees and not sufferers. They were unhappy and were bound to remain so,
till they too went back to their homes. The same was true of a great many
Muslims who had been forced by circumstances to leave the Indian Union and
go to Pakistan. The Muslims of Panipat mentioned why they felt that they could
not stay there.
Dr. Gopichand Bhargava and Sardar Swaran Singh were also in Panipat. The
maulanas of Delhi also met the speaker there. The Muslim friends of Panipat
told him that though, on his last visit, they had told him that they would not
go, the situation had since then very much deteriorated. Neither their life nor
honour nor property was safe. How then could they stay? The speaker told them
that those whose refuge was God and who had nothing but love in their hearts
for all mankind, would fear for nothing. They would suffer death or loss of
property, but they would protect their honour. He had left Delhi &t 10.30 a. m.
and reached Panipat at 11.30 a. m. He was talking to the Muslims till 3 p. m.
After that, he met the Hindu and the Sikh refugees. The audience was over
20,000. Dr. Gopichand addressed them and so did Sardar Swaran Singh. When
the latter stood up, the patience of the refugees gave way. The speaker did not
think that they meant any disrespect to Sardar Swaran Singh, but they merely
wanted to give expression to their feeling that they had had enough of talks. It
was time for them to put forward their grievances.
The refugees had a number of grievances. They complained that the food was
bad and insufficient. The East Punjab Governor was, however, looking into the
matter. Out of the clothes that were sent for the refugees, good blankets often

disappeared. They were given old and torn ones. One boy came and took off his
clothes in front of the speaker and told him to restore his father who had been
killed. How could anyone do that? But he could understand the boy's grief and
sympathized with him.
He said that he was relating all this to the audience so that they might know
how low they had sunk. They had their own Government but they were not
prepared to obey them. Jawaharlal had said that he would rather be called the
first servant of the nation than the Prime Minister. Were all the Government
officials really the servants of the people? If so, then there would be no scope
for luxuries. They would then be for ever thinking of the people and their
needs. That would mean Ram Raj or the Kingdom of God on earth and that
would be real and complete independence. The independence of today stifled
him. It was unreal and unstable.
Referring to South Africa on the 3rd, Gandhi said that India had not carried her
point at U.N.O. Shrimati Vijayalakshmi Pandit had told the Indians in South
Africa that though they had lost, it was not a defeat, for India had a majority of
votes, though not the two-third majority, which was required to get the motion
through. She had asked the Indians in South Africa not to lose heart. She as a
representative of the Union, could n6t go further. He went a step further and
said that there was no question of a defeat for those who believed in the
golden law of satyagraha. That weapon he had discovered in South Africa.
Supposing, India had won at U.N.O. and General Smuts had agreed to concede
all the demands of the Indians in South Africa but the white population of South
Africa refused to submit, what could India do? Such things were happening in
India today. The Hindus from Pakistan and the Muslims from the Indian Union
were being driven out. Each Government declared its impotence to protect the
minorities. There was a large number of Hindus in Bannu. They could not go out
of their houses, except at the risk of losing their lives. And if they remained
indoors, starvation stared them in the face. What were they to do then? He
would repeat the same advice to them as he had given to the Muslims here.
They should say clearly .and openly that they would not leave their homes.
They would live where they were born and brought up, but with honour.

South Africa was the country of the Negroes. Outsiders like the Boers had no
greater rights than the Indians who had gone there. But the Europeans
suppressed the Negroes and deprived the Indian settlers of the elementary
rights. It was quite proper to place India's case before U.N.O. But, if U.N.O.
would not or could not secure justice for the Indians of South Africa, should not
they fight for their rights? In his opinion, they should, but not with the force of
arms. The true and the only weapon was satyagraha or soul force. The soul was
immortal, the body was perishable.
On December 4, Gandhi stated that the Prime Minister of Burma had been to
see him. He was full of humility. The speaker told him that though India was a
great country geographically and her culture was ancient, today there was
nothing for Burma to learn from India, although India has given birth to Guru
Nanak, who preached love and tolerance for all. The Sikhs were asked to be
friends with the Hindus, Muslims and everybody. It was wrong to make a
difference between the Sikhs ^.nd the Hindus. Master Tara Singh had compared
the Hindus and the Sikhs to the nail and the nail-bed. No one, he said, could
separate the two. He was glad to hear it. Who was Guru Nanak, if not a Hindu?
The Guru Granth Saheb was full of the teachings of the Vedas. Hinduism was
like a mighty ocean, which received and absorbed all religious truths. It was
indeed a tragedy that India and the Hindus seemed to have forgotten their
heritage. They seemed to be engaged in fratricidal strife today. He did not
want Burma to learn strife from India. They should forget the ugly present
which, he hoped, was temporary, and remember that India had won her
freedom without bloodshed. He had admitted that it was not the non-violence
of the brave that India had practised. But, whatever it was, it had enabled a
mighty nation of forty crores to shake off the foreign yoke without bloodshed.
It was the freedom of India that had brought freedom to Burma and Ceylon. A
nation that had won freedom without the force of arms, should be able to keep
it too without the forcfe of arms. This he said, in spite of the fact that India
had an army, a navy in the making and an air force and these were being
developed still further. He was quite convinced that unless India developed her
non-violent strength, India had gained nothing, either for herself or for the

world. Militarization of India would mean her own destruction as well as of the
whole world. He reminded the Burmese friends that they had got their
Buddhism top from India. He had come in touch with the Burmese phoongyis.
Let Burma take the best of Buddhism from India. In his opinion, the quality of
the original Buddhism had suffered from migration. He wanted Burma and
Ceylon to rise to their highest heights. And this they could do only by copying
its best from India and omitting its obvious shortcomings.
In the course of his written post-pcayer discourse dated December 8, Gandhi

said:
"Sugar control had gone and control on cereals, pulses and cloth will go. The
object of the removal is not to lower the prices at a bound, it is to return to
normal life. The superimposed control is bad any day. And it is worse in this
country, in that we are a nation of millions spread over a large area. I need not
take into account the division of the country. We are not a military nation and
we grow or we can grow our foodstuffs and enough cotton for our
requirements. When this control is removed, the nation will breathe free, it
will have the right to make mistakes. This ancient method of progressing by
making mistakes and correcting them, is the proper way. Keep a child in cotton
wools and stunt it or kill it. If you will let it develop into a robust man, you will
expose its body to all weathers, teaching him how to defy them. Precisely in
the same manner, a government worth the name, has to show the nation how
to face deficits, bad weathers and other handicaps of life through its collective
effort, instead of its being effortlessly helped to live anyhow.
"And thus considered, decontrol means that the business of foresight is

transferred from the few members of the Government to the millions
composing the nation. The Government will have new tasks to perform
towards* the nation so as to enable it to discharge the duty devolved upon it.
The methods of transport have to be put in order and the methods of growing
more food have to be brought home to the people in general and to that end
the agricultural department has to learn how to serve the small grower rather
than the capitalist grower. The Government have on the one hand to trust all
arms of the nation, as well as to watch and check their movement, the regard

being had always to the interest, hitherto neglected, of the small grower, who
represents the largest majority of the millions. He is the consumer of his own
crops, reserving a small percentage for the mere consumer who, in exchange
for the foodstuffs he gets, gives cash for buying the other necessaries of life.
The control has meant less payment to the grower than he would otherwise
command from the open market. Hence, to the extent that he gets a higher
price, the prices of food must rise. These, the consumer will not grudge. The
Government have to see that in the new set-up, the whole of the percentage in
the rise of prices goes to the grower. This has to be made clear to the public
from day to day or week to week, as the case may be. The wealthy factory
owners or the middlemen have to work in co-operation with and in
subordination to the Government, I understand that the process is going on.
There should be perfect co-ordination among these few men or the
corporations, who have hitherto exploited the poor for their selfish purpose,
and have not hesitated to enter into an unhealthy rivalry among themselves.
This has to go especially in the case of food and cloth, where the profit motive
is to be wholly absent. Any successful attempt at adding to their profit, owing
to decontrol, will defeat its purpose. Let us hope that these monied interests
will rise to the occasion."
On December 10, Gandhi said that news had come from Ajmer that a very large
number of Muslims had been scared away. Out of the remaining, some had been
killed and the poison was spreading fast to the villages. There was a big dargah
at Ajmer, where the Hindus and the Muslims both offered worship. Had they
gone mad now? He wanted them all to pray for good sense to prevail. In their
efforts to kill or turn out the Muslims, they would certainly kill Hinduism. And
similarly, the Muslims would kill Islam by wiping out the Hindus and the Sikhs
from Pakistan. The only way to live, was to let live.
On December 1i, before the prayer started, a member of the audience stood up
and requested Gandhi to explain the meaning of the verse from the Koran that
was recited in the prayers. Gandhi did that in his prayer speech. In the verse,
the devotee called upon Allah, the All-Merciful, to save him from the clutches
of the accursed Satan. He was the Lord of the Day of Judgement. Allah was

one. He had no son and was not the son of anyone. In the end was the prayer
that He might lead the devotee on the path trodden by those who were blessed
with His grace.
They might ask the speaker why the Muslims did the deeds that went quite
contrary to the above teaching. He asked them in return: Did the Christians live
up to the message of the Bible, or the Hindus up to the message of the
Upanishads? All Muslims were not bad and all Hindus were not good.
A refugee had written to the speaker that, in accordance with what he had
advised about the return of the non-Muslims to Pakistan the previous evening,
he would like to go back as early as possible. In the Union no one cared for the
refugees and the refugees were being subjected to great hardships. The
speaker agreed-that the refugees were being subjected to great hardships and
that in spite of all the efforts of the Union Government to help them. It must
be remembered that the task was so colossal that the best of governments
would be hard put to it to cope with it wholly to the satisfaction of everyone.
He was, however, not prepared to advise anyone to return to Pakistan today.
He would have to verify the statement of the peace mission and then to see
what suitable arrangements could be made for the return of those who wished
to go back.
Another friend had commented on his remark saying that Sardar Patel had said
that the expenditure on the renovation of the Somnath Temple would not be
met from the state treasury. The friend saw no reason why it should not be so
met. The speaker believed that if the state spent money for such purposes for
one community, it must also do so for others. That would be wrong.
On December 15, Gandhi's written address was read out:
"Here is what pained me to read in the newspapers: 'The buildings of six

municipal schools have been occupied by the refugees and in spite of the best
efforts of the Delhi Municipal Comm ittee, the refugees have not vacated them.
The committee proposes to approach the police authorities to get the buildings
vacated.'

"This press report appears to be reliable. It is a shameful instance of

lawlessness and worse. That such defiance can take place in the capital of the
Indian Union reflects no credit on anybody. I am hoping that the trespassers
themselves will repent of their folly and vacate the school premises and, that
failing, their friends will succeed in bringing sense to them and that the
Government will not feel compelled to put their threat into execution. There is
a general charge against the refugees that the terrible affliction they have gone
through have not made them sober, sensible and industrious workers. Let us
hope that the refugees in general and these trespassers in particular will by
their repentance disprove the charge. . .
"A friend from Eastern Pakistan asks: 'How can I declare myself as an inhabitant
of undivided India, when India is cut into two and when to be of one part
excludes you from the other?' Whatever the legal pundits may say, they can
never dominate the mind of man. Who can prevent the friend from declaring
himself as a citizen of the world, even though legally he is not, and though he
may be, as he will be, prevented from entering many states under their laws?
Legal status should not worry a man who has not reduced himself to the state
of a machine, as many of us have. So long as the moral condition is sound,
there is no warrant for anxiety. What every one of us has to guard against is the
harbouring of ill will against a state or its people. Thus, one cannot do so
against the Muslims of Pakistan or its government and still claim to belong to
Pakistan as to the Union of India. Such a state, if it is general, must lead to
war. Any state will declare traitorous the conduct of every inhabitant who
entertains hostility against it and even helping the enemy state. Loyalty cannot
be divided."
In his prayer speech of December 16, Gandhi gave the audience certain figures
placed before him, indicating the results of decontrol in as far as it had gone.
As a result, the price of gur had fallen to eight annas a seer from one rupee. He
hoped that' it would fall still lower. In his youth, gur was sold at one anna. The
price of sugar had fallen from Rs. 34 to Rs. 24 per maund. One rupee today
brought one and a half seers of pulses instead of fourteen chhataks. The price
of gram had fallen from Rs. 24 to Rs. 18 per maund. The black-market price of

wheat had been Rs. 34 per maund. It had now come down to Rs. 24 per maund.
He was rightly accused of knowing nothing about the orthodox economics and
the fluctuations of prices. He talked of decontrol in his ignorance, but the
consequences would have to be borne by the poor. The results, however, so far
had falsified these fears. The poor people seemed to be better off without the
control. He had received numerous congratulations for decontrol but he could
not appropriate them, for many causes and many persons had worked towards
the same end. If the middleman and the grower thought more of the whole
country than of themselves, then he had no doubt that decontrol all round
would be an unmixed blessing. All fear about decontrol was due to the
supposition that the business community would never play the game. The
sceptics distrusted the producer and the middleman. If the majority of the
people were selfish and untrustworthy, how could democracy or panchayat raj
work? He would ask the Government to utilize the services of the non-civilians
equally with those of the civilians. The difference was that the civilians were
highly paid and the non-civilians were volunteers. Each was amenable to law
for any fraud.
He had received several complaints about, the high salaries of the civil
servants. The civil service could not be done away with all of a sudden. Their
numbers had already been reduced, with the result that those remaining had to
work harder. Sardar Patel had, therefore, congratulated them for their work.
The speaker did not grudge credit where it was deserved, but he could not help
noting that the civil servant drew salaries which, before independence, the
Congress had considered too much. The real civil services were the people.
After all, the Congressmen had been working without any salaries in the past. If
a Congressman becomes a parliamentary secretary today, why should he be
paid a high salary? He did not know that the parliamentary secretaries were
needed. The Congress party must be chary of imposing more paid secretaries on
the Government. It would be wrong to tone down the high standard the
Congress had set before the country. Greater care was necessary, in that they
have now crores at their disposal. It would be imprudent to let the expenditure
go up when the income remained stationary. Every business concern had to see

that the credit side was larger than the debit side. Could they run the business
of free India by ignoring this basic fact? They had some money today and they
could squander it in any way they liked. But it would not last long, unless they
acted like wise business men.
In his prayer address on December 19, Gandhi told the audience that he had
been to meet the Meos, who had been rendered homeless. Many of them had
been driven away from Alwar and Bharatpur. Some had gone to Pakistan, others
were undecided whether they should stay or go away. Dr. Gopichand Bhargava
had accompanied the speaker and had assured the Meos, that those who
wanted to stay, had every right to do so. Their lives and property would be
safeguarded by his Government. The speaker stressed that he could never be
reconciled to the exchange of population. To uproot lakhs and lakhs of men,
women and children from their homes, was a devilish act. In the face of the
calamity, it was idle to speculate as to who started or whose was the greater
violence. Such calculation was not the way to peace. Those who wanted to go
to Pakistan of their own accord, were free to do so. No one would obstruct
them. Nor could any one compel them to leave the Union.- The Meos were a
fighting community. Some said that they were like a criminal tribe. Even if the
charge was true, the state could not banish them. The right way would be to
reform and induce them to become worthy citizens.
On December 20 Gandhi expressed deep sorrow at the recrudescence of trouble

in Delhi, even though it was on a very minor scale. If the Hindus and the Sikhs
of Delhi, or the Pakistan sufferers in Delhi, were determined not to let the
Muslims stay here, they should say so boldly and openly, and the Government
should declare that they could offer the affected Muslims no protection. It
would be a declaration of bankruptcy on the part of the Government. That
would mean a decline and extinction of the Hindu and the Sikh religions if the
disease spread. Similarly, if Pakistan would let no Hindu or Sikh stay there with
safety and honour, it would mean extinction of Islam in India. He wanted them
to shed all cowardice. He held it to be cowardice to force out any one by
indirect means. If the Muslims were bad, goodness on the part of the Hindus
and the- Sikhs would make them good.

On December 21 his address was read out at the prayer meeting:
"Not even eight miles from here is the mausoleum of Kutubuddin Chishti Saheb
which is reputed to be second in sanctity to the one in Ajmer. Both are visited
not only by Muslims but by thousands of Hindus and other non-Muslims in equal
veneration. The Hindu wrath visited the sacred place in early September last.
The Muslims in the surroundings felt compelled to vacate their favourite home,
which had been such for close on four centuries. It would be unnecessary to
mention this tragic occurrence but for the fact that the place is still deserted
by the Muslims, however much they may be devoted to the mausoleum. It
behoves the Hindus, the" Sikhs, the officials immediately in charge and the
ministers to wipe out the disgrace and reinstate the place in all its original
glory. What I have said here, is equally applicable to all the Muslim places of
worship, in and around Delhi and elsewhere in the Indian Union. It is high time
that both the Governments by their firm action made it clear to their
respective majorities, that they could no longer tolerate desecration of the
places of worship, big or insignificant. All damage done to them, should be
repaired without delay.
"In view of the decision recently arrived at by the All-India Muslim League
meeting held in Karachi, and in view of the meeting to be held in Lucknow at
the instance of Maulana Azad, the Muslim friends have been asking me
whether, if they were the members of the Muslim League, they should also
attend the meeting of the League members to be held in Madras, and in any
event what the attitude of the members of the Muslim League in the Indian
Union should be. I have no doubt, that if they are invited specially or publicly,
they should attend the Lucknow meeting, as also the later meeting at Madras.
And at each meeting, they should express their views fearlessly and frankly.
That the Muslims in India find themselves in a minority without the protection
from the majority in Pakistan, is no disadvantage, if they at all followed the
technique of non-violence during the past thirty years. It was not necessary for
the Muslims of India to have faith in non-violence to be able to appreciate the
fact that a minority, however small it might be, never has any cause for fear as
to the preservation of their honour and all that must be near and dear to man.

He is so made that if he understood his Maker and himself as made in His

image, no power on earth could rob him of self-respect, except he himself. A
dear English friend in Johannesburg, while I was fighting the mighty
Government of the Transvaal, told me that he always made common cause with
the minorities. For, he said, the minorities were hardly ever in the wrong, and
if they were, they could be weaned from it without difficulty, whereas the
majorities could not be, owing to the intoxication that power gave them. The
English friend had uttered a great truth, if by the majority we would also
understand the power that exclusive possession of weapons of destruction gave
an aggregate of men. We know to our cost, that a handful of Englishmen were
able to be the majority, keeping under their heels millions of Indians by
possession of arms, which India did not have and could not know how to wield
them even if she had. It is a thousand pities that neither the Hindus nor the
Musalmans learnt the lesson whilst the English power was in operation in our
country. The Union Muslims are now free from the oppressiveness they were
under whilst they were falsely proud of the Muslim majority in the West and in
the East. If they would realize the virtue of being in a minority, they would
know that they could now express in their own lives the best that is in Islam.
Will they remember that Islam gave its best during the Prophet's ministry in
Mecca? Christianity waned when Constantine came to it. But I must not here
carry this argument further. My advice is based upon implicit belief in it.
Therefore, if my Muslim friends do not share the belief, they will perhaps do
well to reject the advice.
"In my opinion, while they should hold themselves in readiness to join the
National Congress, they should refrain from applying for admission until they
are welcomed with open arms and on terms of absolute equality. In theory, at
least, the Congress has no major and no minor communities. It has no religion,
but the religion of humanity. For the Congress every man and woman is equal
to any other. The Congress is a purely secular, political national organization in
which Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Jews are equal. Because
the Congress has not always been able to live up to its professions, it has
appeared to many Muslims as a predominantly caste Hindu organization. Any

way, the Muslims should have dignified aloofness so long as the tension lasts.
The Muslims would be in the Congress when their services are wanted by it. In
the meantime, they should be of the Congress even as I am. That I have an
influence without being a four-anna member, is because I have served the
Congress faithfully ever since my return from South Africa in 1915. Every
Muslim can do so from now and he will realize that his services are as much
valued as mine. Today, every Muslim is assumed to be a Leaguer and,
therefore, to be an enemy of the Congress. Such unfortunately has been the
teaching of the Muslim League. There is now not the slightest cause for enmity.
Four months are too short a period to be free from the communal poison.
Unfortunately for this unhappy land, the Hindus arid the Sikhs mistook the
poison for nectar and have, therefore, become enemies of the Muslims of India
and have to their disgrace retaliated and become so even with the Muslims of
Pakistan. I would, therefore, urge the Muslim minority to rise superior to the
poisonous atmosphere and to live down the thoughtless prejudice by proving by
their exemplary conduct that the only honourable way of living in the Indian
Union is that they should be full citizens without any mental reservations. It
follows then that the League cannot remain a political organization, even as
the Hindu Mahasabha or the Sikh Sabha or the Parsi Sabha cannot. They may
function as religious organizations for internal religious reform, for the purpose
of exploring the best and living the best that is in their religions. Then they will
purify the atmosphere of all poison and vie with one another in well-doing.
They will be friendly to one another and thus help the state. Their political
ambition can only be satisfied through the Congress, whether they are in it or
not. The Congress will be a caucus when it thinks of those only who are in it. It
has very few such, even now. It has as yet an unrivalled position, because it
strives to represent the whole of India without exception. It aims to serve even
unto this last."
Some people from Bahawalpur had brought with them placards to the prayer
ground, on which was written: "Save 70,000 Hindus and Sikhs of Bahawalpur."
Gandhi referred to the demonstration on December 23rd. Two friends saw him
during the day in the same connection, and said that they were contemplating

fasting before the Governor-General's house, till arrangements were made for
the evacuation of the Hindus and Sikhs from Bahawalpur. The speaker observed
that such a step would help none. The Governor-General had no power today,
excepting such as he derived from his Cabinet. He had no longer the might of
the British Empire at his back. Nor could he utilize his power as a fine warrior
that he was. For the time being, he had put'it in cold storage. The speaker
nevertheless agreed that proper arrangements should be made to bring the
Hindus and the Sikhs from Bahawalpur. It was the duty of the Nawab of
Bahawalpur to make arrangements to send them wherever they wanted to go
outside Pakistan. Bahawalpur was, he understood, made principally by the
Sikhs. And yet, they and the Hindus had to suffer terribly. The Nawab of
Bahawalpur could not disown responsibility in the matter. But let bygones be
bygones. He made an appeal to the nawab to make a declaration that not a hair
of the head of any Hindu and Sikh would be touched in the state till arrange-
ments were made for their evacuation. During the interval they should be well
looked after.
In his discourse on December 24, Gandhi said that some Sikh friends had been
coming to see him. And he had seen too some newspaper cuttings. There
seemed to be a general impression that he had of late become an enemy of the
Sikhs. They would not have worried much about that, but for the fact that his
word seemed to carry weight with the world outside India. The world thought
that India had won her independence through non-violence, and, if it was so, it
was a unique thing in history. Hdw he wished that it was really so! But he had
already confessed that it was not.
The cowardly or the weak and the lame of heart could never practise non-
violence. The physically disabled could practise non-violence if they had the
grace of God. He had blindly thought that the Indian fight was nonviolent. But
the events that had taken place lately had opened his eyes to the fact that
theirs was the passive resistance of the weak. If the Indians had really been
bravely non-violent, they could never have indulged in the acts of which they
were guilty. They had before them the unique instance of Prahlad, the twelve-

year-old boy, who had alone stood up against the might of the king, his father.
He would rely upon none but God.
Gandhi remarked that he could not but laugh at the anger of the Sikh friends.
They attributed to him numerous things that he had never said. He made no
distinction between the Hindus, the Sikhs, and the Muslims. He had criticized
the Sikhs for their drink habit and for the atrocities that they were reported to
have committed. But that did not mean that all the Sikhs had acted in the
wrong manner. Nor did it mean that the Hindus could be absolved. As the Sikhs
were a virile race, he certainly expected more from therr^ He had freely
acknowledged their many merits, if he had pointed out their faults. Those who
tried to minimize or to overlook cruel deeds done, were the enemies of the
Sikhs; not he, who owned no enemy. Whatever he had said, he had said as a
staunch friend of the Sikhs. He was not unaware of the lofty teachings of the
Granth Saheb. The Sikh friends should never fear that they would be misjudged
by the world because of what he had said.
On December 25, Gandhi spoke on Kashmir. He said that he had seen in the
papers some reference to an arbitration over the issue of Kashmir. Were the
Union of India and Pakistan always to depend on a third party to settle their
disputes? How long would they go on quarrelling?
There was now talk about the vivisection of Kashmir. It was fantastic. It was
more than enough that India had been divided into two. One would have
thought it impossible for man to divide a country, which God had made one.
Yet it had happened and both the Congress and the League had decided upon
it, though for different reasons. But that could not mean that the process of
dividing should be further extended. If Kashmir was to be divided, why not
other states? Where would this process end?
It was said at first that Kashmir was attacked by raiders. But as time went on,
it became very clear that Pakistan was at the back of the attack. He had a
passage from an Urdu daily entitled zamindar read out to him that day. In that
the Musalmans were openly invited for recruitment and for joining the jehad.
Abuses were showered all round. He knew Maulana Zafar Ali Khan during the

Khilafat days. In those days too he could curb his tongue with difficulty. Now
evidently, he seemed to have no check on his tongue or pen. Did the maulana
mean that the Hindus, the Muslims and the Sikhs were to be perpetual enemies?
Whatever the provocation, he advised the Hindus and the Sikhs not to retaliate.
Facts seemed to be that Pakistan was indeed at the back of the attack on
Kashmir. The Union troops had gone there at the call of the people of Kashmir
as well as the maharaja, to help them in defending the beautiful valley. He
considered the Sheikh Saheb to be the real head of Kashmir. Everyone who had
been to Kashmir had told him what an unrivalled hold the Sheikh Saheb had on
the Muslim masses and the few non-Muslims in Kashmir. In these days, an Indian
prince could remain one only as the titular head, even as the English King was.
He had heard of the murders of numberless Muslims and of the abduction of

Muslim girls in Jammu. The Maharaja of Kashmir must own the responsibility.
The Dogra troops were under his direct control. He had not yet become the
mere constitutional head and, therefore, he must be held responsible for all
the acts, good or bad, of the people under his rule. The Sheikh Saheb had been
to Jammu and tried to allay passions. The speaker would advise the maharaja
to step aside along with his minister, in view of what had taken place in Jammu
and give the fullest opportunity to Sheikh Abdullah Saheb and the people of
Kashmir to deal with the situation. Such a graceful act would become him as
the head of a very great and important state in India.
Pakistan prided itself of being the biggest Islamic State in the world. But they
could not be proud of themselves unless they ensured justice to every single
Hindu and Sikh in that state.
If Pakistan was to become a worthy state, let Pakistan and the Union
representatives sit down and thrash out the Kashmir issue, as they had already
done in the case of many other things. If they could not do so, why could they
not choose from among themselves good and true persons who would direct
their steps? The first step was an open and sincere confession of the past
lapses. Hearty repentance broke the edge of a guilt and led the way to proper
understanding. The Congress Government could never stand for the princes

against their people. They could only deal with the princes as the trustees of
their people.
Lastly, Gandhi referred to an Urdu magazine published in the Union, wherein

was a verse to the effect that everyone was talking of the Somnath temple that
day. But in order to avenge the happenings in Junagadh, a new Ghaznavi would
have to come from Ghazni. It had deeply hurt him. How could any Muslim worth
the name in the Indian Union entertain such thoughts? Why should he not be
proud to associate himself with the act of the renovation of Somnath? He hoped
that no true Muslim would be proud of the acts which were imputed to
Mahmood Ghaznavi. He had pledged his life to secure safety for the Muslims in
the Indian Union. He would not swerve from his pledge, because he believed in
returning good for evil. He requested the Hindus and the Sikhs not to be carried
away by passions. But then he asked his Muslim friends not to make the task of
reconciliation more difficult than it was. He would not have referred to the
mischievous couplet but for the fact that it was to be found in an important
publication.
On December 27, the prayer meeting was held at the Sammalka village where a
panchayat ghar had been built. Gandhi was presented with garlands at the
entrance. An address was also presented to him. Addressing the gathering,
Gandhi said that the meeting was held for prayers. At such a meeting, garlands,
addresses and shouts were out of place. He would have been pleased if they
had omitted them. They had mentioned truth and nonviolence in their address,
but if they did not practise those virtues, there was no point in talking about
jthem. On the contrary, mere mention of them was harmful. Ever since his
return from South Africa, he had visited thousands of villages. He knew how
these addresses were prepared. Someone wrote them out and someone else
read them parrot-wise, and that was the end of it. There must be consistency
between one's thoughts and words and actions. Driving away the minority
community or ill-treating them did not fit in with the profession of non-
violence. Independence did not mean that people could act in any way they
liked. Could anyone pray for and work for the freedom to commit murders and
tell lies? That would be surrender to Satan, instead of God.

Gandhi congratulated them on having built a panchayat ghar. Unless they did
the work of the panchayat, the effort would be a waste of time and labour.
Distinguished travellers from the world came to India, in the days of yore, from
China and other countries. They all came in quest of knowledge and they put
up with great hardships in travelling. They had reported that in India there was
no theft, people were honest and industrious. They needed no locks for their
doors. In those days, there was no multiplicity of the castes, as at present. It
was the function of the panchayats to revive honesty and industry. If he asked
them after one year, would they show that they had no court save their
panchayat? It was the function of the panchayats to teach the villagers to avoid
disputes, if they had to settle them. That would ensure speedy justice without
any expenditure. They would need neither the police, nor the military.
Then the panchayat should work for cattle improvement. They should show
steady increase in the milk yield. Our cattle had become a burden on the land
for want of care.
The panchayats should also see to an increase in the quantity of the foodstuff
grown in their village. That was to be accomplished by properly manuring the
soil. The Congress Conference recently held in Delhi had told them how the
excreta of the animals and human beings, mixed with rubbish, could be turned
into valuable manure. This manure increased the fertility of the soil. Then they
must see to the cleanliness of their village and its inhabitants. They must be
clean and healthy in body and mind.
He hoped that they would have no cinema house. People said that the cinema
could be a potent means of education. That might come true some day, but at
the moment he saw how much harm the cinema was actually doing. They had
their indigenous games. They should banish intoxicating drinks and drugs from
their midst. He hoped that they would eradicate untouchability, if there was
any trace of it still left in their village. The Hindus, the Muslims, the Sikhs, the
Parsis and the Christians should all live as brothers and sisters. If they achieved
ali he had just mentioned, then they would demonstrate real independence,
and people from all over India would come to see their model village and take
inspiration from it. May God crown their endeavours with success.

On the 28th, he said that he was daily receiving telegrams and letters,
congratulating him on the removal of controls. It had a miraculous effect all
round and the prices had gone down. Although the control on cloth was still
there, the prices of towels, etc., he was told, had gone down. The business
men knew that he w?as merely voicing the opinion of the millions when he
stressed that the controls should go. The goods of black market were,
therefore, now slowly coming into the open market and were selling at
reasonable prices. He was also told that the removal of the control had brought
much relief to the people. He could take no credit for what was happening in
the matter of controls. The real credit went to the masses, whose wish he was
voicing. If his personal voice had any effect, then the unseemly communal
trouble would have ceased long ago. In this matter, they dubbed him as a
visionary and a madcap. But he knew that they were wrong and he was right. If
he had been right and practical on many occasions in the past, why was he
unpractical in this matter of life and death? Tulsidas had said that the essence
of religion was mercy and forgiveness. And that was exactly what he had been
asking them to follow.
He emphasized that the controls on cloth, firewood and petrol should also be
removed forthwith. He had dealt with cloth control at the meeting of business
men. As for firewood, the people were not going to consume more firewood
than necessary if the control was removed. Removal of the control could not
adversely affect the poor people in the matter of firewood* It was the control
on petrol that was hitting them hard on all sides, because he understood that it
hampered road transport. They did not have enough railway transport. To make
new railways and wagons, was a longtime project. They did not need new
railways. The removal of the control on petrol would make it wholly
unnecessary. Swift road transport of the food grains, cloth and salt would lower
the prices of those articles. The salt tax had gone and yet salt had become
more expensive than before. It was partly due to transport difficulty and partly
due to some bungling about contracts. A few contractors were said to be
fattening at the expense of the consumers. This evil must be rectified. The

people should be taught to prepare salt, wherever they could. It was the
easiest thing to do, now that salt was free.
On December 29, Gandhi's prayer speech was read out "I have been lately taken
to task for daring to say what I have stated about Kashmir and the maharaja.
Those who have done so have evidently failed to read my statement carefully. I
have simply tendered advice which, I suppose, the lowliest can do. And to do
so5 sometimes, becomes a duty, as was the case with me. What was it for? It
was, if accepted, designed to raise the maharaja in his own and the world's
esteem. His and his state's is a most unenviable position today. He is a Hindu
prince, having under his sway a very large majority of Muslims. The invaders
have called their invasion a holy war for the defence of the Muslims reported to
be ground down under Hindu misrule! Sheikh Abdullah Saheb was called by the
ruler to his task at a most critical period. He is new to the task and deserves
every encouragement, if he is considered fit by His Highness tfie Maharaja. It
must be evident to the outsider, as it is to me, that Kashmir must be lost to the
invaders, otherwise called the raiders, if the Sheikh Abdullah Saheb's effort to
hold together the Muslims and the minority fails. And it would be a mistake to
tlunk that the Union army could do it. The army was sent in answer to the
combined importunity of the Maharaja Saheb and the Sheikh Saheb, in order to
help ward off the attack. Is it any wonder that I have advised the ruling
authority to rise to the occasion and to become like the King of England and,
therefore, use his rule and his Dogra army in strict accord with the advice of
Sheikh Abdullah Saheb and his emergency Cabinet? The instrument of accession
stands, as it is. It confers or reserves certain rights on or for the ruler. I, as a
private individual, have ventured to advise that the ruler should waive or
diminish the rights and perform the duty, pertaining to the office, of a Hindu
prince. If I am wrong as to my facts, I should be corrected. If I err in my
conception of Hinduism and of the duty of a Hindu prince, I am out of court. If
Sheikh Abdullah Saheb is erring in the discharge of his duty as the chief of the
Cabinet or as a devout Musalman, he should certainly step aside and give place
to a better man. It is on the Kashmir soil, that Islam and Hinduism are being
weighed now. If both pull their weight correetly and in the same direction, the

chief actors will cover themselves with glory and nothing can move them from
their joint credit. My sole hope and prayer is that Kashmir should become a
beacon light to this benighted subcontinent.
"So much for the Maharaja Saheb and the Sheikh Saheb. Will not the
Government of Pakistan and the Government of the Indian Union close ranks
and come to an amicable settlement with the assistance of impartial Indians?
Or, has impartiality fled from India? I am sure, it has not."
Presiding over the momentous conference of the Muslims of the Union in

Lucknow on December 27, Maulana Azad said that he had no lead to give to his
co-religionists and nothing to say which he had not said before. It was no time
to reopen the old controversies or to enter into acrimonious debate, as might
have been, if the Muslims, or a majority of them, had not allowed themselves
to be influenced by the Muslim League ideology. Partition of India was now a
fact, and he did not care even to speak of the possibility, in some distant
future, of a re-union of the separated parts. The scope of the conference being
limited to the fashioning of a new programme for the bewildered Muslims of
India, the maulana went straight to the central issue. Now that the objective of
the Muslim League had already been achieved and communalism had found a
homeland of its own, it was time to read the League's epitaph and banish from
India at least all that it stood for. Maulana Azad revealed that the decision to
hold the last month's consultative conference of the Muslim leaders in Delhi was
not taken on a sudden impulse, but at the persuasion of some of the top-rank
League leaders, who wanted a new lead. Azad was referring evidently to the
approach made to him by Mr. Khaliquzzaman before he went over to Pakistan.
The Leaguers not only did not participate in the Delhi discussions but held their
own meeting in Calcutta. Azad made it clear that he was not asking the Muslim
community to join the Congress. They were free to join any non-communal
political party.
The conference passed a resolution calling on the Muslims of the Indian Union
to be members only of the non-communal political organizations and advised
them to join the Indian National Congress which had been the main bastion of

"our freedom and unity and is pledged to absolute equality of rights and
opportunities for members of all communities."
Two prominent Muslim Leaguers related to Gandhi how the Indian Union
Muslims were eager to join the Congress. Gandhi felt much hurt. "I do not like
this stampede to join the Congress," he told them. "They should—it is their right
to join the Congress. But the time for it, in my opinion, is not yet. I would
rather that they waited until the Congress was ready to welcome them with
open arms. Today, that warmth is lacking. Under the circumstances, it would
be best for them to serve the Congress from outside, even as I am doing."

14. Voice In The Wilderness ( 1947-1948 )
DURING December 1947, Gandhi held a series of discussions—one with the

Hindustani Talimi Sangh group, the other with the members of the Constructive
Programme Committee. The gathering included seasoned soldiers of many a
non-violent struggle that he had led during the last thirty years of his life.
Hitherto, non-violence had been used in offering resistance to the alien

Government; the problem now was to run the Government. Gandhi had made
the discovery that during the struggle for independence, what he had taken to
be non-violence was not non-violence but passive resistance only, the weapon
of the weak, a temporary expedient which could be and which was actually
discarded by the people as soon as there was an opportunity to resort to
violence. The conception of non-violence as the weapon of the strong, he saw,
must remain a chimera and a dream, and non-violence had no future as world
power and harbinger of universal peace, unless it could be shown to be capable
of retaining and defending the power which it had helped to win; in other
words, unless it could successfully act upon and guide power politics. His
limited experiment with the Gandhi Seva Sangh had brought home the fact that
the moment non-violence assumed power, it contradicted itself and became
contaminated. The question was whether non-violence could at all be used to
influence power politics without succumbing to its corrupting influence and, if
so, how.
There were some workers, who were worried at the paradox which the free
India Government presented. The Congress had sworn adherence to the
constructive programme for years, while it was in the wilderness. But having
come into power, it showed signs of giving it the go-by. Was not the remedy for
those who had faith in the constructive work to enter the Government and use
it for the purpose of building up a non-violent social order? Gandhi was opposed
to it, but he held that the purpose could be achieved if the various
organizations which he had founded for carrying on constructive work came up
to the standard which he had set to them. And as a preparatory step to the

discharge of that role, he recommended the unification and co-ordination of

those organizations into one body. He placed the onus of the transformation on
the shoulders of the Hindustani Talimi Sangh. It should be easy for them to do
that if Nayee Talim was what he had envisaged it to be. What he had proposed
was only a part of adult education. "The Nayee Talim is today on its trial. It has
either to transform the prevailing atmosphere, or perish in the attempt."
He then went on to describe another challenge that confronted Nayee Talim. It

threatened all that they stood for and fought for all these years. "There is one
section in the country today in our midst which holds that the Hindus and
Muslims cannot co-exist, that either the Muslims should get out of Hindustan or
they should live here as the vassals of the Hindus. And similarly, in Pakistan,
only the Muslims should remain. It is a poisonous doctrine and in it lies the root
of Pakistan. Pakistan has come into being ; their dream has vanished but the
virus has remained. I have pledged myself to resist this doctrine and this
ideology and to do or die in the attempt. But to correct the wrong psychology
of the people is the function of Nayee Talim."
Being invited to express his opinion, Dr. Zakir Husain said that while in principle
what Gandhi had stated was unexceptionable, still there was need to hasten
slowly. Things had changed considerably after independence. Everybody felt
the urge and impatience to make new and daring experiments and the need for
absolutely a free hand. If the merger resulted in maladjustment, it might
retard, instead of helping progress.
A suggestion was then made that they might function as the separate branches
of a tree that have sprung from a common trunk and a reference was made in
that connection to the Gandhi Seva Sangh which was described as functioning
as the parent trunk, at one time. But Gandhi smelt danger in that. He did not
want the constructive workers' organization to be drawn into power politics and
become a rival to the Congress or the Government in the contest for the
political power. "Gandhi Seva Sangh is no longer there. Nor did it attempt to
rally all constructive workers under one organization. It did once make a
shortlived attempt to enter into and purify the politics of the country but had
to admit defeat."

Dr. Zakir Husain next took up the argument saying: "Various organizations were
created separately as ad hoc bodies to perform certain specific functions. If
they are united into one body, it will not be possible to keep powpr politics out
of it."
Gandhi said: "If the united constructive workers' sangh tries to go into power
politics, then it would spell its ruin. Or else why should I myself not have gone
into politics and tried to run the Government my way? Those who are holding
the reins of power today, would easily have stepped aside and made room for
me, but whilst they are in charge, they can carry on only according to their
own lights. But I do not want to take power into my hands. By abjuring power
and by devoting ourselves to pure and selfless service of the voters, we can
guide and influence them. It would give us far more real power than we shall
have by going into the Government. But a stage may come, when the people
themselves may feel and say that they want us and no one else to wield the
power. The question could then be considered. I shall most probably be not
alive then. But when that time comes, the sanghs will produce from amongst
them someone who will take over the reins of administration. By that time,
India shall have become an ideal state."
Dr. Zakir Husain questioned: "Shall not we need ideal men in order to
inaugurate and run the ideal state?"
Gandhi replied: "We can send men of our choice, without going into the
Government ourselves. Today, everybody in the Congress is running after
power. That presages grave danger. Let us not be in the same cry as the power-
seekers. Today, many Congressmen say: 'Pandit Jawaharlal is getting so much
salary, and why should not we?' They forget that a person of Jawaharlalji's
talents could any day have commanded a far greater emolument than he is
getting today. If an ordinary humble worker like myself, who neither needs nor
has the capacity to earn independently, say, Rs. 3,000 per month, draws that
much amount as salary, it is a deplorable thing. It is my firm view, that we
should keep altogether aloof from power politics and its contagion."

In the conference convened by the Constructive Works Committee of the

Congress, Kripalani, Shankarrao Deo and R. R. Diwakar posed the question to
Gandhi whether, if the Congress having captured power failed to give to the
constructive work sufficient importance or attention, would it not be better for
all the constructive workers to form themselves into a separate body for the
vigorous prosecution of the constructive work? Such a body should not abjure or
run away from power either, but go into the Government, take power and use
it for the furtherance of the constructive programme. They would thus
accomplish in five years what as a reformatory group outside the Government
they would not be able to do in fifty years. Today, they were confronted with a
paradox. For instance, they praised gur, but their Government were sanctioning
the erection of new sugar mills. They talked of expanding the khaddar
production, but the Provincial Governments were increasing the number of
cloth mills. Why was it that the Congress which had sworn adherence to the
constructive programme, year after year, when it was in the wilderness, was
pursuing a halting policy in regard to it now that it had got the power?
Gandhi said: "It is difficult to answer the question: why constructive work is
making so little headway, though the Congress has sworn adherence to it for
years and men like Jawaharlal, Rajendra Babu and Vallabh- bhai are at the
helm of affairs. All the sanghs, except the Harijan Sevak Sangh, were brought
into being by the Congress. Why is it then that the workers of those sanghs lack
the power to make the Government go the whole hog with them? No doubt, the
fault lies with us, the constructive workers. We had faith in constructive work,
but our faith was not deep or enlightened enough to illumine our intellect and
so our growth has been lop-sided. The criticism levelled against the
constructive workers is that they are generally lacking in imagination and
intellect. Our intelligentsia are not lacking in sympathy. Reason, as a rule,
follows in the footsteps of feeling. But we have not sufficiently penetrated the
hearts of intelligentsia to convince their reason."
Gandhi then proceeded to describe how the constructive work came to be

adopted by the Congress as a part of the non-co-operation programme. There
was a mass upheaval. The people thought that it was a good way to fight the

British. There was a country-wide awakening. In due course, the intelligentsia

were drawn in. As a result, we got independence. The fight being over, our
interest in the constructive programme waned. The constructive work is not a
strategy or a technique of fighting. The constructive work connotes a way of
life. It can be worked only by men who have adopted it by the heart as well as
by the intellect.
He then warmed up and said:
"The Congress lent the constructive workers' sanghs its name and also it gave
them the charter to function. But the Congressmen failed to come up to the
scratch and to shoulder the burden. Such is our bankruptcy. If the sanghs could
come together and could work under the direction of a jointly chosen
representative, it would mark a big step in advance. To set our own house in
order is the first indispensable requisite, if we want to influence political
power. If all the sanghs give a good account of themselves, work unitedly and
in co-operation, without ajar or jolt, it would be a grand thing. But they must
not do it for the sake of popularity or hanker for political power, even in their
dreams. Soon we shall have adult suffrage. It is a good thing. But to regard
adult suffrage as a means for the capture of political power, would be to put it
to a corrupt use.
"The objective of the constructive work organization is to generate political

power. But if we may say that political power having come, it must be ours as a
prize for our labours, it would degrade us and spell our ruin. Take the case of
the Charkha Sangh. It has the largest membership of all the sanghs. But we
have never endeavoured to get its members enrolled on the voters' list. It was
suggested at one time that we should get their names enrolled on the Congress
register. I opposed it. 'Do we want to capture the Congress?' I asked. That would
be tantamount to killing it. The Congress can betmrs only by right of service.
Today we have our own Government. Under the adult suffrage, if we are worth
our salt, we should indeed have that hold upon the people that whomsoever we
might choose, should be returned. In Sevagram I deprecated the proposal of our
people enrolling themselves as voters. What actually happened was that the
people from the village came and sought our advice as to whom they should

give their vote, because they knew that we were their true servants and had no
axe of our own to grind.
"Today, politics has become corrupt. Anybody who goes into politics is
contaminated. Let us keep out of it altogether. Our influence will grow
thereby. The greater our inner purity, the greater shall be our hold on the
people, without any effort on our part.
"My eyes have now been opened. I see that what we practised during the fight
with the British under the name of non-violence, was not really non-violence.
God had purposely sealed my eyes, as He wanted to accomplish His great
purpose through me. That purpose being accomplished, He has restored to me
my sight."
"Has what I am doing today penetrated your hearts?" he interrogated. "Then you
should have the strength to remove corruption, wheresoever it may be. You
have met here as the constructive wing of the Congress. For that you need not
go into any committee. Your work is among the masses. The Constituent
Assembly is today forging the constitution. Do not bother about affecting
changes in it. Shriman Narayan Agarwal has written to me that in the
constitution that is being framed now, there is no mention of gram panchayat,
whereas the Congressmen have always said that the gram panchayat must be
the foundation of our future polity. We have to resuscitate the village, make it
prosperous and give it more education and more power. What good will the
constitution be if the village does not find its due place in it? What Shriman
Narayan Agarwal says, appeals to me. But we must recognize the fact that the
social order of our dreams cannot come through the Congress of today. Nobody
knows what shape the constitution will ultimately take. I say, leave it to those
who are labouring at it. Let the constructive workers consolidate their strength,
and the way to do it is through the unification of the various constructive works
organizations. And if we cannot do that, let each sangh continue on its way and
<Welop its strength m best as it can, making intelligence more and more the
hall-mark of all its* activity. The Charkha Sangh is the biggest sangh. It has
funds. It is pursuing the policy of decentralization. I am not unaware of its
perils and its difficulties. We have to create a superior, more advanced type of

khadi worker. Not till then, shall Samaj Panchayat Raj become a reality. The
workers of the Charkha Sangh are not there merely to earn a living for
themselves or merely to distribute some wages to the spinners and weavers,
etc., by way of poor relief. The only goal worthy of their ambition is to create a
non-violent order of society. But, in this they have not made much headway. If
our khadi workers are there for wages only, then we had better bid good-bye to
the dream of realizing a nonviolent social order. The success will depend on our
uttermost purity. Impatience would be fatal."
In conclusion, Gandhi said:
"Today, most of our workers are drawn from the cities. The really poor villager
is haunted by the spectre of destitution. He cannot see beyond the satisfaction
of his primary needs. The villager does not understand nonviolence, nor do I
talk to him of it, but I try only to see that he becomes a good spinner and gets
a fair minimum subsistence wage. I do not mind if the volume of our work is
small, so long as it is truly solid. Constitution- making will be over in a few
months. What next? The responsibility of working it and making of it a success
will rest on you. And supposing you get a constitution after your heart, but it
does not work. After five years, someone will say: 'You had your innings, now
give us a chance. You will have to give in and they may try to seize power, set
up a dictatorship and strangulate the Congress. Per contra, suppose you do not
take power but gain hold on the public, you will be able to return at the polls,
whomsoever you may wish. Forget membership, so long as the voters are in
your hand. Think of the root and take care of it as much as you can, and make
self-purification the sole criterion. Even a handful imbued with this spirit will
be able to transform the atmosphere. The people will soon perceive the change
and they will not be slow to respond to it. Yours is an uphill and difficult task
but it is full of rich promise,"
Soon after Gandhi's speech, there was discussion.
Question: "The people are with us, but the Government obstruct our effort.
What are we to do?"

Gandhi: "If the people are with you, the Government are bound to respond. If
they do not, they will be set aside and another installed in their place. Even in
the days of Lord Wavell, I used to tell the people that they did not know their
own strength, or they could get Lord Wavell removed at will. When the British
saw that they could rule over us only by martial law, they removed him. It is a
tribute to the British, for they could very well have imposed martial law."
Question: "Should there not be an over-all organization, which would include

and co-ordinate all the sanghs' activities?"
Gandhi: "A separate organization is not necessary for that purpose. What is
needed is co-ordination of the work of the sanghs. The various sanghs have
worked separately and independently of one another till now. We tried to set
up a co-ordinating committee for the purpose of Samagra Gram Seva, but it did
not work. If we all unite, we shall function like the departments of the Central
Government. The members of the Charkha Sangh will do the work of the Gram
Udyog too. There is the question of the sale of tad gur. Why should not the
Charkha Sangh take it over? Our workers' children have to be educated. Shall
we build a separate school for them? Is that not the function of the Talimi
Sangh? If we will not cooperate even in such matters, it will show that we have
not understood how ahimsa works. The central body will lay down the general
lines of policy which all the sanghs would follow. If we are determined and
pledge ourselves to 'Do or Die', we are bound to succeed."
Aryanayakam: "Let presidents and secretaries of various sanghs meet first in a

preliminary informal conference and, after discussion, place before Gandhiji
the implications and difficulties of unification."
Shankarrao Deo : "This is not the right way to go about it. The workers should
meet first. A gathering of the presidents and the secretaries will not have the
requisite atmosphere. It is a narrow and subjective approach."
Gandhi: 'It is neither narrow, nor subjective. The workers' conference can
follow, not precede. The Charkha Sangh has its board. Jajuji must consult it
first. The average worker will not even understand."
Shankarrao Deo: "We have a number of intelligent workers, let them be called."

Gandhi: "We seem to be talking at cross purposes. The discussion that I have
proposed, involves the technical matters. It needs specialists. The general
workers will feel themselves at sea in such a discussion. Let the props and
pillars unite. All will then feel the glow of strength. Forget me. Dr. Zakir Husain
is a great organizer. He has suggested that just now nothing should be decided
under the spell of my presence. And, therefore, he has recommended that the
matter be taken up later at Sevagram. I like it. The atmosphere at Sevagram
would be calmer and free from the communal virus. When I came here, I did
know that I would have to speak on these things. I was told that in the
constitution committee of the Congress there were some constructive workers;
how could they make their influence felt in the Congress? I had come to tell you
that you must not expect to get the constitution you desire through the
Congress. Nor need that worry yoii. It should be enough if the constitution you
get does not actually stand in the way of constructive effort. The second thing I
had come to tell you was that the various sanghs should become the research
laboratories in their respective fields. Our constructive works institutions are
not democracies, but they are the instruments for the building up of
democracy. The Congress has lent us its name and its prestige and, in return, it
derives prestige from us for the service which, as its true servants, we render.
The connection of the constructive works organizations with the Congress is
spiritual. It can be severed at any moment. As specialists we should be able to
tender to the Congress our advice on what needs to be done."
Question: "Why cannot we get it done through the Congress?"
Gandhi: "Because the Congressmen are not sufficiently interested in

constructive work. If they were, it should not have been necessary for us to
meet here."
Question: "That being the Congressmen's psychology, what is the use of giving
place to the constructive works organizations in the Congress constitution?"
Gandhi: "Because the constitution moulds the psychology of the people. People
may not do the things they believe, but then it should be our duty to see that
through our neglect our case does not go by default."

Question: "Labour is represented in the assembly through their representatives.

There are special seats reserved for universities. Why should not constructive
workers' organizations have their functional representatives in the A.I.C.C.,
who would act in the general way too?"
Gandhi: "No, surely not the mixture. Functional is all right. But in the general
there is so much corruption today, that it frightens me. Everybody wants to
carry so many votes in his pockets, because the votes give power. Under adult
suffrage, anybody who is eligible has a vote. Let all such members of the
various sanghs form themselves into one body and let the Congress Working
Committee and the A.I.C.C. take from among them their nominees, to advise
and to guide them in matters and policies pertaining to the constructive work.
There are many labour organizations in country. There is the Ahmedabad
Labour Union, the Charkha Sangh, the Goseva Sangh, the Chamber of
Commerce and so on. The Congress claims to represent them all. The Congress,
of course, claims to represent the princes too. But I would not ask you to
include the Chamber of Princes in your scheme. Take all the living
organizations with you. Purify yourselves of all dross. Banish the very idea of
capture of power and keep it on the right path. Therein lies salvation. There is
no other way."
In his speech on New Year's Day, January i, 1948, Gandhi expressed pleasure at
the large size of the prayer gathering but regretted that seven minutes had to
be lost in making the seating arrangements for the women. Even one minute
wasted by a meeting meant so many minutes lost to the nation. Men should
learn to give place to women, and a community or a country in which the
women were not honoured, could not be considered civilized. Having attained
independence, all of us should, from now on, behave as citizens of a free and
proud country.
It was raining on the evening of January 2, when Gandhi arrived at the prayer
ground, wearing his Noakhali hat to the amusement of the prayer audience. So
he began his prayer discourse with a humorous reference to his straw hat,
which he valued both as a present from a Muslim kisan and as a cheap
substitute for an umbrella, all made of local material.

Gandhi then referred to a letter, recently received from Allahabad. According

to the writer, barring only a few honourable exceptions, no Muslim could really
be trusted to remain loyal to the Indian Union, more specially in the event of
an inter-dominion war, and the majority of Muslims, with the exception of a
few nationalists should, therefore, be turned out. The speaker observed that it
behoved man to trust the word of his fellow men in the absence of any
evidence to the contrary. Only last week, nearly a lakh of Musalmans had met
in Lucknow and they made an unequivocal declaration of their nationalism. If a
man was demonstrably disloyal or dishonest, he could even be shot, though
that was not his way. But the needless distrust was a sign of ignorance and
cowardice, and it had led to the communal hatred and bloodshed and migration
on a colossal scale. Its continuance would only result in the perpetuation of the
division of India and the eventual destruction of the two dominions. If war
broke out, which God forbid, he would not like to live, but if the people shared
his faith in non-violence, there would be no wrar and all would yet be well.
The following day he said that people were talking everywhere about the
possibility of a war between the two dominions. He was surprised to see that
the Government of Pakistan disputed the veracity of the Union's representation
to the U.N.O. and the charge that Pakistan had a hand in the invasion of
Kashmir by the raiders. Mere denials cut no ice. It was incumbent upon the
Indian Union to go to the rescue of Kashmir, when the latter sought the Union's
help in expelling the raiders, and it was the duty of Pakistan to co-operate with
the Union. But while Pakistan professed its willingness to co-operate, it took no
concrete steps in that direction. He would like to impress on the leaders of
Pakistan that the partition having been conceded, there was no justification for
animosity. Partition was demanded on the religio-communal grounds and it
was, therefore, the duty of Pakistan, as its name implied, to remain clean in all
its dealings. Both the Hindus and the Muslims had resorted to cruel acts and
had made grievous blunders, but that did not mean that this mad race should
go on, culminating in war. A war would bring both the dominions under the
sway of a third power and nothing could be worse. He, therefore, pleaded for
amity and goodwill, which could enable the Union's representation to the

U.N.O. to be withdrawn with dignity. And this the U.N.O. itself would welcome.
He invited all to join in this prayer. The understanding should, however, be
genuine. To harbour internal hatred might be even worse than war.
He next referred to an incident which had occurred in Delhi the previous night.
A party of refugees had tried to effect unauthorized entry into the vacant
Muslim houses. The police arrived on the scene and they had to disperse the
crowd with tear-gas. Today, we had our own Government. How could they
function satisfactorily, if the public behaved lawlessly? What was worse, women
and children were placed in front of the crowd to evade the remedial action by
the police. This amounted to an affront to womanhood and cowardice on the
part of men, possibly worse than a similar use of cows by the Muslims in bygone
times in their fight with the Hindus. He again appealed to the refugees to
maintain peace and order, particularly at the present time, when the relations
between the Indian Union and Pakistan were strained, and thus help in the
preservation of our new-born freedom.
The situation in India and Pakistan was tense. The refugee problem was heart-
rending. Tempers ran high. The Pakistan leaders made irresponsible
statements. Sardar Patel warned: "If Pakistan does not change her ways, there
may soon be a flare-up. The nation must be quite prepared for any emergency.
Kashmir and Junagadh are small matters, and if the rulers of Pakistan want a
trial of strength, India is ready. As far as India is concerned, she wants Pakistan
to grow into a strong and prosperous country." Some people, Sardar Patel
added, had talked of a possible re-union of the two countries. In fact, he
declared, India did not desire a re-union just now, at least not until those who
had clamoured for a separate homeland, had reaped the harvest they had
sown. There was a time, when Mahatma Gandhi was considered the greatest
enemy of Muslims. Today, things had reversed, and the Mahatma was regarded
as their sole protector and benefactor. Gandhiji gained his unpopularity by
frankly stating what he really felt and foresaw. The Muslims refused to see hard
facts. They thought that with the establi shment of Pakistan their interests
would be fully secure. The present position showed how ill-founded that'hope
was.

In his prayer discourse on January 6, Gandhi said that he had heard that several
refugees were still trying to occupy the vacant Muslim houses and the police
were using tear-gas to disperse the crowd. It was true that the refugees were
faced with great hardship. It was hard to lie in the open in the biting cold of
Delhi. When it rained, tents were not sufficient protection. The speaker would
understand the refugees clamouring for houses, if they would not make the
Muslim houses their target. For instance, they could come to the Birla House
and turn him and the owners, including a sick lady, out and occupy that house.
That would be open dealing, though not gentlemanly. But the squeezing out of
the Muslims, that was going on, was crooked and ungentlemanly. To scare away
the already frightened Muslims and then occupy their houses, would surely not
be good for anyone. He had heard that that day the authorities had offered
some housing accommodation to the refugees elsewhere, but they insisted on
occupying the Muslim houses. This was a clear indication that it was not the
necessity which was the driving force, but the wish to get Delhi cleared of all
Muslims. If such was the general wish, then it would be much better to tell the
Muslims to go, instead of driving them away indirectly. They should understand
the consequences of such a step in the capital of the Union.
In his prayer address on January 7, he referred to the visit of several

representatives of the refugees from Pakistan. They asked him why he'did not
take more interest in the removal of their grievances. Little did they realize
that he was in Delhi for that very purpose. But then he was not so effective
today, as he used to be before the advent of India's independence. In the past,
he was the leader of the non-violent rebels. Although everyone did not follow
his advice, large numbers did so. Today, his was a voice in the wilderness. The
great teachers had said that one should go on proclaiming the truth, as one saw
it, even though no one listened to it. He was not running the Government.
Those at the helm of affairs, it was true, were his friends. But he did not want
anyone to accept his advice out of regard or friendship for him. They should do
so, only if it went home. If the ministers and their secretaries and the lower
staff, including the police, would listen to him, things would be very different.

But that could not be. The ministers had inherited the old machinery from the
British rulers and they were making the best of it.
The refugees were, however, entitled to shelter and food and clothing. They
were their own kith and kin. It was utterly unjust that they should not get
what, for instance, he could. What were they to? He had told them already tnat
the only course was for all to gratefully accept whatever accommodation was
offered. The grass mattress could very well serve the purpose of the cotton
mattress. For the food, clothing and shelter supplied to them, they should do
such work, as was entrusted to them. A labourer could not sit at the table and
write, but a man who had worked at the table all his life could certainly take to
physical labour. If they developed the right mentality, India could easily absorb
the few lakhs of refugees that had come and more.
They all knew about the sad happenings in Karachi. Although, many people had
said that Sind was quiet and the people could continue to stay there, he had his
doubts. His fears had come true. Not only the Hindus and the Sikhs but the
other non-Muslims also were not safe in Sind today. The Pakistan Government
had admitted that they had been powerless to prevent the disturbances, but
they were trying to suppress them as fast as they could. His advice to the
Pakistan Government as well as to the Union Government was that if they were
powerless to prevent the outbreak of violence, they should resign. That might
make things worse for a while, but ultimately they would improve. The only
condition on which they should continue to hold the reins was that things
should begin to improve, however slowly. There should be no setback.
To the refugees and the Hindus and the Sikhs, in general, he would advise that
they must curb their desire for revenge. They should be neither frightened, nor
become upset and panicky by the happenings in Karachi. The only correct reply
to such a thing was cent per cent correct behaviour in the Union.
Before the prayers commenced on January 8, several slips were passed to

Gandhi by the members of the audience. One of them had asked him why he
did not go to Pakistan. He replied that he had already told them that he could
not do so, until the things were perfectly all right in the Indian Union. As to

another question, he said that it was in their hands to enable him to go to

Pakistan. He would want to go there when Delhi showed a clean slate. The
same friend had also contended that if satyagraha was a potent remedy for all
ills, why it should not be tried in Pakistan. The speaker agreed that if the
Hindus and the Sikhs in Pakistan could resort to satyagraha, it would prove
efficacious for all their troubles there. But where was that satyagraha today?
He saw no satyagraha anywhere in India on any appreciable scale. Everywhere,
the people wanted the police and the military for their protection. We seemed
to have displaced God and preferred the military.
The same friend had remarked further that Pakistan was determined to drive
away all the Hindus and Sikhs, unless they remained there as serfs. Therefore,
the writer asked that unless all the Muslims or at least an even number left the
Indian Union, how could the non-Muslim new-comers be accommodate? The
speaker rejoined that an even number of Muslims had probably already left the
Union. But still there were large numbers of Muslims in the Indian Union.
Seventy thousand of Muslims had collected at the conference called by the
Maulana Saheb. They were the representatives of the Union Muslims. Were
these Muslims to be driven away or to be exterminated? The speaker could
never be a party to that. There was no bravery in such a course of action.
Whatever the others might do, he did not want the Union to become communal
in its outlook. One should copy the good in others, never the evil.
In his address on the 9th, Gandhi said that a friend had written to him that
many poor people could not come to attend his prayers on the Birla House
grounds. He asked why the speaker was not staying at the Bhangi Colony, as
before. He had given the reason on his arrival at Delhi. But he would repeat it.
When he arrived in Delhi, Delhi was like a dead city. The riot had just broken
out and the Bhangi Colony was full of refugees. The Sardar, therefore, had
decided to put him at the Birla House instead. The speaker did not know if the
Bhangi Colony was vacant now. Even if it was, he did not think it would be right
for him to shift there. His main object in staying in Delhi, was to give to the
Muslims whatever comfort and aid he could. That object was served better by
his staying at the Birla House. Muslim friends felt safer in coming here than in

the poor quarters of Delhi. Moreover, it was much easier for the members of
the Cabinet to come to see him at the Birla House, as most of them were
staying close by. They were very busy men and going to the Bhangi Colony
would require much more time, than coming to the Birla House.
He fervently appealed to the people to maintain peace in the capital. He had

heard that there were many thieves and thugs, who went about Delhi, dressed
as gentlemen. Such a state of affairs should be remedied, without delay.
As Gandhi walked to the prayer ground on January 10, the refugees from
Bahawalpur had staged a demonstration and shouted angry slogans, asking for
help for the 70,000 Hindus and Sikhs left behind in Bahawalpur. The angry
demonstrators became perfectly quiet when Gandhi sat down for prayers. He
commended their example to all. He had been told that the people from
Bahawalpur would disturb the prayer meeting that day. He had not believed it
and according to his expectation, they had maintained perfect silence during
the prayers. It indeed pleased him to note how peaceful the prayer
congregations these days were. The sufferers from Bahawalpur had given
expression to their anguish in a restrained manner. He knew their sufferings
and he assured them that everything possible was being done for the Hindus
and the Sikhs of Bahawalpur. He had the word of the ruler that though he could
not bring the dead back to life, the remaining Hindus and Sikhs could live there
in peace and in safety. No one would interfere with their religion. The Union
Government was also alive to their duty and were doing all that wTas possible.
He wanted them to bear in mind that there w as a far larger number of Hindus
'ind Sikhs in Sind including a large number of Harijans. They did not feel safe
there. He had just then received a telegram from Sind stating chat what had
taken place in Karachi, was far worse than the newspaper reports led one to
believe. His advice to them all was not to lose patience and courage. They
should never accept defeat. The word "defeat" should be deleted from their
dictionary. For that it was necessary that they should curb their anger and
patiently think out their duty under the circumstances. He had been explaining
it to them every day.

He told the prayer audience that the Ambassador of Persia had been to see him
that day. The Ambassador of Persia stated that India and Persia had been very
old friends, and that they were from the same Aryan stock. India, he observed,
was the biggest pov/er in Asia and they felt great in India's greatness. The
ambassador wanted Persia and India to be bound in ties of genuine friendship
and he was very anxious that the relations between India and Persia should not
become strained in any manner. The speaker asked him what made him think of
such a possibility. Then the ambassador told him that some Iranis had been
molested and even killed in Bombay. The people had gone mad. In the frenzy of
the moment, some people might have injured some of the Iranis too as
Musalmans. But then the ambassador had assured him that the Bombay
Government had taken prompt action to put down the trouble. He was satisfied
with the attitude of the provincial as well as of the Central Government. On
behalf of his own government, he assured India that although there were some
people who wanted trouble in view of the exaggerated reports of the
happenings in India, the Persian Government was watchful and did not wish to
lose India's friendship on any account. He added that the Hindu, Muslim and
Sikh traders in Persia were living in perfect peace and amity so far.
Lastly, Gandhi referred to a friend's letter saying that although many people
had congratulated him on the removal of the controls, the measure was not an
unmixed blessing. The speaker advised him to share his thoughts with the
people. After all, his eyes, ears and hands were the people. He had to rely on
what the people told him. Therefore, he could not ignore large number of
letters and telegrams, welcoming the removal of controls. He did not believe
that they were all inspired by selfish motives. However, he wanted to know the
other side too. He advised the people not to take anything for granted because
he advocated it. If their own experience told them otherwise, they should stick
to their judgement, in defiance of twenty mahatmas. Then alone will they be
able to make good the independence, if one could call it by that name, that
had come to India.
On January 11, Gandhi referred to a letter from Andhra and gave the following
relevant extracts from it:

"I intensely hate to point out the shortcomings of an individual, but to shut
one's eyes to the terrible consequences of the rot set in the individuals of an
organization like the Indian Congress, noble in its origin and admirable in its
achievements, would be heinous. This rot in the Congress is that of the peoples'
representatives in the legislative bodies of the provinces, who are the
prototype of the rank and file. They are vociferous about stopping the
widespread corruption, but then they themselves resort to worse corruption.
The legislators accept money from the people to secure licences of every
description, indulge in black-marketing of the worst type, trade on the
ignorance of the masses, corrupt the sources of justice, and force the
administrative machinery to get transfers for the administrative personnel. The
people are crushed between these two sets of people. Some two hundred and
fifty of these legislators let loose on the people in a province without
opposition are, in my opinion, the worse plague. Is it after all for replacing the
white rapacity by the black that so many noble souls, who are no more with us,
suffered and sacrified everything worth living for in their lives? There must be
some escape out of this morass. If these legislators are not so numerous, the
evils would be less. Fifty members in the lower house and half that number in
the upper house for each province, which is going to be smaller on the linguistic
basis, would minimize the nuisance. Will the constitutionalists embody this
principle of less the number the better in the constitution of our country and
save us from the rapacious legislators and incidentally from top-heavy
expenditure?"
He had another confirmatory letter from an old and aged friend from Andhra.
He appealed to all, whether Congressmen, socialists or communists, to live and
to work for the good of India. If they all ran after power, where then would
India be ? They all should think of the interests of the country, rather than their
own or of those-of their friends.
Lastly, he mentioned the visit from some Muslim friends. They asked him how
long they were to put up with pin-pricks. If the Congress could not protect
them, they should say so in plain language, so that the Muslims might go away
and be spared the daily insults and possible physical violence. Those friends

were speaking for the Delhi Muslims in general. He strongly advised them to
hold their place. He wanted all the nationalists not to mix religion with politics.
They were Indians first and last in all secular matters. Religion was a personal
affair of the individual concerned. Times were hard. In Pakistan, the Muslims
had gone mad and had driven away most of the Hindus and the Sikhs. If the
Hindus in the Indian Union did likewise, they would certainly spell their own
ruin. To try to suppress another was always suicidal. All right-thinking men
should work against this tendency.
On receiving the letter from Andhra, Gandhi commented: "Our moral standards
are going down at such a rate that I can now see why our satyagraha fights in
the past lacked the real content and were reduced to serve passive resistance
of the weak. The only chance of saving the Congress is in having a president
one who will act with firmness and impartiality in the midst of the'growing
welter of confusion. For that the Congress organization needs to be beyond the
pulls and strains of power politics. Otherwise the Congress will disintegrate.
Rather than that fate should overtake it, it is much better to dissolve it. The
letter from Andhra today is to me a sure sign of the decay and decline of the
Congress. If all that is said therein is true, does it not show that we are fit only
to be slaves?"
On January n, Gandhi wrote on "Urdu Harijan":
"Two weeks ago, I hinted in the Gujarati columns that the Harijan9 printed in
the Urdu script, was likely to be stopped as its sale was steadily dwindling.
Apart even from financial considerations, I saw no meaning in publishing it, if
there was no demand for it. The dwindle to me was a sign of resentment
against its publication. I would be foolish if I failed to profit by it.
"My view remains unalterable, especially at this critical juncture in our history.
It is wrong to ruffle Muslim or any other person's feeling, when there is no
question of ethics. Those who take trouble of learning the Urdu script in
addition to the Nagari, will surely lose nothing. They will gain a knowledge of
the Urdu script, which many of our countrymen know. If it was not for
cussedness, this proposition will be admitted without any argument. The

limitations of this script in terms of perfection are many. But, for elegance and
grace, it will equal any script in the world. It will not die so long, at least, as"
Arabic and Persian live, though it has achieved a status all its own without
outside aid. With a little adaptation, it can serve the purpose of shorthand. As
a national script, if it is set free from the bondage of orthodoxy, it is capable of
improvement, so as to enable one to transcribe Sanskrit verses without the
slightest difficulty.
"Lastly, those who in anger boycott the Urdu script, put a wanton affront upon
the Muslims 6f the Indian Union who, in the eyes of many Hindus, have become
aliens in their own land. This is copying the bad manners of Pakistan, with a
vengeance. I invite every inhabitant of India to join me in a stern refusal to
copy bad manners. If they will enter the heart of what I have written, they will
prevent the impending collapse of the Nagari and the Urdu editions of the
Harijan. Will the Muslim friends rise to the occasion and do two things:
subscribe to the Urdu edition and diligently learn the Nagari script and enrich
their intellectual capital?"
A correspondent complained: "I could have understood your step, if the Nagari
and the Urdu editions of the Harijan had been started for the sole purpose of
propagating Hindustani. But the Nagari edition was being published from the
commencement with a different end. And if it was not self-supporting, you
would be justified in stopping it. But I see an element of coercion in its
threatened closure. Is the Nagari Harijansevak a greater evil thin even the
English Harijan? The right course would be to stop the publication of the English
edition first, and not that the English edition should get—as it does at present—
greater importance than the Indian languages editions. How painful it is that
though your post-prayer speeches are given in Hindustani, your office
summarizes them in English and the translations of English summaries are
published in the Indian languages editions of Harijan. It appears that this
practice has been put an end to recently. Some years ago, you declared that,
as far as possible, you would write your original articles in Gujarati or in
Hindustani and the English edition would give only translations. This was done
for some time, but the old habit seems to have reasserted itself. I request you

to stop the English edition and publish the Indian languages editions only."
Gandhi wrote in reply:
"If one says what is just the truth, it is a wrong use of the word 'anger' to say
that it is done in anger. Anger is followed by unbalanced action. If the Urdu
edition has to be stopped, the stopping of the Nagari edition becomes
inevitable. There can be no anger in doing a thing which is inevitable. Of
course, I cannot help, if others like the correspondent, do not agree with me
that it is compulsory for me to stop the Nagari edition if I can't publish the Urdu
one. There are always two sides to every question, and much though one might
wish, it is not possible to have unanimity of opinion in this world.
"Let me now explain why I should stop both the editions and not only one. It is
true that when the Nagari Navajivan and Nagari Harijansevak began their
publications, there was no dispute about the two scripts. If there was, I, at
least, don't know it.
"In the meantime, the Hindustani Prachar Sabha was founded at the suggestion
of the late Sheth Jamnalal Bajaj. This rendered the issue of the Urdu edition
absolutely necessary. Now, if I were to stop the Urdu edition and continue the
Nagari edition only, it would-be, in my own eyes, a highly improper act. For,
according to the Hindustani Prachar Sabha, Hindustani means a language which
may be written in both the scripts equally.
"Consequently, a paper published in both the scripts, should continue in both.

This becomes all the more necessary, when people clamour on all sides that the
national language of India should be Hindi and that it should be written in the
Nagari script only. It is my duty to show that this claim or demand is not right.
If my reasoning is correct, a further duty devolves on me that I should either
publish the Harijansevak in both the scripts, or stop both the editions.
"I accept that among all the scripts, the Nagari stands first in merit. I do not
give out anything new in this. I had come to this opinion even when I was in
South Africa, where I had actually begun to write the Gujarati letters in the
Nagari script. For want of time, I could not pursue this subject to the end. No
doubt, there is room for reform in the Nagari script, even as there is in other

scripts. But this is altogether a different matter. I refer to this merely to show
that there is not the least disaffection towards Nagari in my mind. But when
the lovers of the Nagari script oppose the Urdu script, I scent in it hatred and
intolerance. The opponents have not even the confidence that since the Nagari
is more perfect than the other scripts, it must ultimately prevail. If they looked
at it from this point of view, they would regard my decision to be correct and
also inevitable.
"I am, undoubtedly, an advocate of Hindustani. I believe that between the

Nagari and the Urdu scripts, Nagari will prevail ultimately. But if we leave aside
the script and we consider only the language, then I say that Hindustani will
win in the end, as the Sanskritized Hindi is entirely artificial, while Hindustani
is quite natural. In the same way, the Persianized Urdu is artificial and
unnatural. There are not many Persian words in my Hindustani. I find very little
argument in favour of Hindi. It is significant that, when I gave my first
definition of Hindi in the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, there was very little
opposition to it. I would not like to remember, far less relate, the sorrowful
history of how the opposition began. I had gone to the length of saying that the
name Hindi Sahitya Sammelan was not proper for propagating the national
language. I adhere to the opinion then expressed.
"But I had not accepted the presidentship of the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan as a
Hindi man of letters. The late Jamnalal Bajaj and the other friends represented
to me that whatever be the name, they did not take interest in the Hindi
Sahitya Sammelan as literary men but as promoters of the national language. It
was this which made me work energetically for the propagation of the national
language in South India.
"I am really not interested in the controversy about the name. The name may
be any, provided what we do is for the good of the country and the nation.
There should be no opposition to any name as such.
"Which Indian heart will not throb on hearing Iqbal's song 'Hindostan Hamara'? If
there is one, I should consider it to be a misfortune. Is the language of this song
of Iqbal, Hindi, Hindustani or Urdu? Who will say that this is not the national

language of India, that the language is not sweet, or that it does not express
the highest thought? To conclude, even if I were alone to say so, I am quite
clear that, ultimately, neither the Sanskritized Hindi, nor the Persianized Urdu,
will win the race; Hindustani alone can do so. Only when we have given up our
internal quarrels, shall we forget these artificial controversies and will feel
ashamed of having created them.
"And now about the Harijan in English. I consider it to be comparatively a minor

point. I cannot stop the English edition for the reason that Englishmen as well
as Indian scholars of the English language, consider me to be a good writer in
the language. My relations with the West are also increasing every day. I never
hated before and do not hate today the Englishmen or the other westerners. I
wish them good, as much as I wish good to my countrymen. And so, I cannot
cast out the English language from my small store of knowledge. I do not wish
to forget that language, nor do I wish all Indians to give up or to forget it. What
I have always insisted upon is that it should not go out of its proper place. It
can never become the national language of India or a medium of Indian
education. By doing this, we have impoverished our own languages and put a
great strain upon our students. So far as I know, this tragedy has taken place in
India only. Our slavery to the English language has kept millions of our people
deprived of useful knowledge for years. My regret is that we do not understand
this, are not ashamed of it and do not repent it. It is a tragedy. But with all this
clear to me, I cannot boycott the English language. Even as Tamil, etc., are the
languages of the different provinces, and Hindustani is the national language of
the country, so is English, the language of the world. Its international position
cannot be disputed. Imperialist rule of the Englishman will go, because it was
and is an evil. But the superior role of "the English language cannot go.
"I do believe that the English Harijan and Gujarati Harijanbandhu will stand on
their own legs for whatever I may publish in those languages."
In an article entitled "How Democracy Works", Gandhi wrote:
"A valued correspondent has written to me two letters, one issuing a timely
warning about the ill effects of hasty decontrol and the other about the

possibility of an outbreak of Hindu-Muslim riots. I have dealt with both the

letters in a letter, which has become unexpectedly argumentative and gives my
view of democracy which can only come out of non-violent mass action. I,
therefore, reproduce the letter below, without giving, at the same time, the
letters, to which it is in answer. There is enough in the answer to enable the
reader to know the purport of the two letters. I have purposely refrained from
giving the name of my correspondent and the scene of action, not because the
letters are confidential, but because nothing is to be gained from disclosing
either:
" 'You still write as if you had a slave mind, though the slavery of us all is
abolished. If decontrol has produced the effect that you attribute to it, you
should raise your voice, even though you may be alone in doing so and your
voice may be feeble. As a matter of fact you have many companions and your
voice is by no means feeble, unless intoxication of power has enfeebled it.
Personally, the bogy of the shooting up of prices by reason of decontrol, does
not frighten me. If we have many sharks and we do not know how to combat
them, we shall deserve to be eaten up by them. Then we shall know how to
carry ourselves in the teeth of adversity. The real democracy people learn not
from books, not from the government who are in name and in reality their
servants. Hard experience is the most efficient teacher in democracy. The days
of appeals to me are gone. The cloak of non-violence which we had put on
during the British regime, is no longer necessary. Therefore, violence faces us
in its terrible nakedness. Have you also succumbed, or you too never had non-
violence? This letter is not to warn you against writing to me and giving me your
view of the picture, but is intended to tell you why I would swear by decontrol,
even if mine was a solitary voice.
" 'Your second letter about the Hindu-Muslim tension is more to the point than
the first. Here too, you should raise your voice openly against any soft handling
of the situation or smug satisfaction. I shall do my part, but I am painfully
conscious of my limitations. Formerly, I could afford to be monarch of all I
surveyed. Today, I have many fellow monarchs, if I may still count myself as
such. If I can, I am the least among them. The first days of democracy are

discordant notes which jar on the ear and give many headaches. If democracy is
to live, in spite of these killing notes, sweet concord has to rise out of this
seemingly discordant necessary lesson. How I wish that you would be one of the
masters, who would contribute to the production of concord out of discord!
" 'You will not make the mistake of thinking that your duty is finished when you
have apprised me of the situation in your part of the country.' "
"When it is relevant," Gandhi wrote, "truth has to be uttered, however

unpleasant it may be. Irrelevance is always untruth and should never be
uttered. The misdeeds of the Hindus in the Union have to be proclaimed by the
Hindus from the house-top, if those of the Muslims in Pakistan are to be
arrested or stopped. Confession of one's guilt purifies and uplifts. Its
suppression is degrading and should always be avoided."

15. The Last Fast ( 1948 )
"WE ARE steadily, losing hold on Delhi," Gandhi mentioned to a friend. "If it goes,
India goes and with that goes the last hope of world peace." It was intolerable
to him that a person like Dr. Zakir Husain, for instance, or for that matter, Mr.
Shaheed Suhrawardy should not be able to move about in Delhi as freely and
with as much safety as himself. When a deputation of the Musalmans waited
upon Gandhi, setting forth to him their grievances, he immediately arranged a
meeting between them and some of the important Cabinet members in his
presence. He was equally concerned with the sufferings of the minority
community in Pakistan. He would have liked to be able to go to their succour.
But with what face could he now go there, when he could not guarantee full
redress to the Muslims in Delhi? He felt helpless and so came his decision to fast
in a flash. It left no room for argument, so much so that he gave no inkling to
Nehru and Patel, who saw him only a couple of hours before the announcement
of his fast.
In his prayer discourse on the evening of January 12 th, 1948, Gandhi

announced his decision to fast from the 13th, for an indeterminate period, to
bring about a reunion of hearts of all communities:
"One fasts for health's sake, under laws governing health, fasts as a penance for
a wrong done and felt as such. In these fasts, the fasting one need not believe
in ahimsa. There is, however, a fast which a votary of ahimsa sometimes feels
impelled to undertake by way of protest against some wrong done by society
and this he does when he as a votary of ahimsa, has no other remedy left. Such
an occasion has come my way.
"When on September 9th I returned to Delhi from Calcutta, it was to proceed

to-the West Punjab. But, that was not to be. Gay Delhi looked a city of the
dead. As I alighted from the train, I observed gloom on every face I saw. Even
the Sardar whom humour and the joy that humour gives, never desert, was no
exception, this time. The cause of it, I did not know. The Sardar was on the
platform to receive me. He lost no time in giving me the sad news of the

disturbances that had taken place in the metropolis of the Indian Union. At
once I realized that I had to be in Delhi, and 'do or die'. There is apparent calm
brought about by the prompt military and police action. But there is storm
within the breast. It may burst forth any day. This I count as no fulfilment of
the vow to 'do', which alone can keep me from death, the incomparable friend.
I yearn for heart friendship between the Hindus and the Sikhs and the
Musalmans. It subsisted between them only the other day. Today, it is non-
existent. It is a state that no Indian patriot worthy of the name, can
contemplate with equanimity. Though the voice within has been beckoning for
a long time, I have been shutting my ears to it, lest it may be the voice of
Satan, otherwise called my weakness. I never like to feel resourceless, a
satyagrahi never should. Fasting is his last resort in the place of the sword—his
or other's. I have no answer to return to the Musalman friends, who see me
from day to day, as to what they should do. My impotence has been gnawing at
me of late. It will go immediately the fast is undertaken. I have been brooding
over it for the last three days. The final conclusion has flashed upon me, and it
makes me happy. No man, if he is pure, has anything more precious to give
than his life. I hope and pray that I have that purity in me to justify the step.
"I ask you all to bless the effort and to pray for me and with me. The fast
begins from the first meal tomorrow. The period is indefinite and I may drink
water with or without salt and sour limes. It will end when and if I am satisfied
that there is a reunion of hearts of all communities brought about without any
outside pressure but from an awakened sense of duty. The reward will be the
regaining of India's dwindling prestige and her fast fading sovereignty over the
heart of Asia and .therethrough the world. I flatter myself with the belief that
the loss of her soul by India, will mean the loss of the hope of the aching,
storm-tossed and hungry world. Let no friend or foe, if there be one, be angry
with me. There are friends who do not believe in the method of the fast for the
reclamation of the human mind. They will bear with me and extend to rne the
same liberty of action, that they claim for themselves. With God as my supreme
and sole counsellor, I felt that I must take the decision without any other
adviser. If I have made a mistake and discover it, I shall have no hesitation in

proclaiming it from the house-top and retracing rriy faulty step. There is little
chance of my making such a discovery. If there is clear indication, as I claim
there is, of the inner voice, it will not be gainsaid. I plead for all absence of
argument and inevitable endorsement of the step. If w hole India responds or at
least Delhi does, the fast might be soon ended.
"But wrhether it ends soon or late or never, let there be no softness in dealing
with what may be termed as a crisis. The critics have regarded some of my
previous fasts as coercive and held that, on pure merits, the verdict would have
gone against my stand but for the pressure exercised by the fasts. What value
can an adverse verdict have, when the purpose is demonstrably sound? A pure
fast, like duty, is its own reward. I do not embark upon it for the sake of the
result that it may bring. I do so, because I must. Hence, I urge everybody
dispassionately to examine the purpose and let me die, if I must, in peace,
which, I hope, is ensured. Death for me would be a glorious deliverance rather
than that I should be a helpless witness of the destruction of India, Hinduism,
Sikhism and Islam. That destruction is certain if Paldstan ensures no equality of
status and security of life and property for all professing the various faiths of
the world and if India copies Pakistan. Only then, Islam dies in the two Indias,
not in the world. But, Hinduism and Sikhism have no world outside India. Those
who differ from me, will be honoured by me for their resistance, however
implacable. Let my fast quicken conscience, not deaden it. Just contemplate
the rot that has set in in beloved India and you will rejoice to think that there
is an humble son of hers who is strong enough and possibly pure enough to take
the happy step. If he is neither, he is a burden on earth. The sooner he
disappears and clears the Indian atmosphere of the burden, the better for him
and all concerned.
"I would beg of all friends not to rush to the Birla House, nor try to dissuade me
or be anxious for me. I am in God's hands. Rather, they should turn the
searchlight inwards, for this is essentially a testing time for us all. Those who
remain at their post of duty and perform it diligently and well, now more so
than hitherto, will help me and the cause in every way. The fast is a process of
self-purification.

"I told you yesterday of the two letters from Andhra. One was from the aged
friend, no other than Deshbhakta Konda Venkatappayya Garu. I give here
extracts from it:
" 'The one great problem, apart from the many other political and economic
issues of very complicated nature, is the moral degradation into which the men
in Congress circles have fallen. I cannot say much about the other provinces,
but in my province, the conditions are very deplorable. The taste of political
power has turned their heads. Several of the M.L.A.s and M.L.C.s are following
the policy of make hay while the sun shines. Making money by the use of
influence, even to the'extent of obstructing the administration of justice in the
criminal courts, presided over by the magistrates. Even the district collectors
and the other revenue officials do not feel free in the discharge of their duties
on account of the frequent interference by the M.L.A.s and the M.L.C.s, on
behalf of their partisans. A strict and honest officer cannot hold his position,
for false reports are carried against him to the ministers, who easily lend their
ears to these unprincipled self-seekers.
" 'Swaraj was the only all-absorbing passion, which had goaded men and women
to follow your leadership. But now that the goal has been reached, all moral
restrictions have lost their power on most of the fighters in the great struggle,
who are joining hands even with those who were the sworn opponents of the
national movement and who now for their personal ends enlist themselves as
the Congress members. The situation is growing intolerable every day with the
result that the Congress as well as the Congress Government, have come into
disrepute. The recent municipal elections in Andhra had proved how far and
how fast the Congress is losing its hold upon the people. The municipal
elections in Guntur were suddenly ordered to be stopped by an urgent message
from the Minister for Local Bodies.
Madras, after every preparation was made for carrying on elections. Only a
nominated council was in power for, I believe, the last ten years or more, and
for nearly a year now the municipal administration has been in the hands of a
commissioner. Now the talk prevails that the Government would soon nominate
councillors to take charge of the municipal affairs of this town. I, old and

decrepit with a broken leg, slowly limping on the crutches within the walls of
my house, have no axe to grind. I do, no doubt, entertain certain strong views
against some of the provincial and district Congress committees that now stand
divided. And I have made no secret of my views.
" 'The factions in the Congress circles, the money-making activities of several of
the M.L.A.S and the M.L.C.s, and the weakness of the ministers have been
creating a rebellious spirit among the people at large. The people have began
to say that the British Government was much better and they are even cursing
the Congress.5
"Let the people of Andhra and the other provinces measure the words of this
self-sacrificing servant of India. As he rightly says that the corruption described
by him, is no monopoly of Andhra. He could only give the first-hand evidence
about Andhra. Let us beware.
"My Bahawalpur friends I have asked to be patient. The Sardar Saheb saw me
only at noon. Being silent and preoccupied, I could say or write nothing. Shri V.
Shankar from his office was too busy to come, so that I could not place your
case before him and possibly save the Sardar Saheb's precious time."
Gandhi began his fast at noon of January 13th. Before entering on the fast, he
went through his usual routine, looked into some important papers and
received also few visitors. Nehru, Patel and Azad had prolonged talks with him.
The fast was preceded by a prayer on the lawns adjoining his room in the Birla
House. A few friends and admirers clustered round the cot on which he was
seated. Along with his favourite hymn Vaishnava J ana, "When I survey the
Wondrous Cross" was sung, followed by recitations from the Koran, Granth
Saheb and Hindu devotional songs.
"I have a lot to say against your undertaking the present fast," Devadas Gandhi
wrote. "My main concern and argument against your fast is that you have at last
surrendered to impatience, whereas the mission which you have undertaken is
essentially one of infinite patience. You do not seem to have realized what a
tremendous success you have achieved by your inexhaustible and patient
labour. It has already saved lakhs upon lakhs of lives and could save many more

still. But your patience seems to have suddenly snapped. By dying you will not
be able to realize what you would have realized by conserving your life. I
would, therefore, beseech you to pay heed to my entreaty and give up your
fast."
Gandhi wrote in reply to his son:
"I am not prepared to concede that my decision to undertake the fast was
hasty. It was quick, no doubt, so far as the drafting of the statement was
concerned. Behind the lightning quickness was my four days' heart- searching
and prayer. Therefore, it cannot be dubbed as 'hasty', in any sense of the term.
"I did not need to hear any arguments as to the propriety of the fast. The fact
that I did listen to any arguments, only bespeaks my patience and humility.
"Your worry, as well as your argument, are of no use. You, of course, are my
friend and a high-minded friend at that. Your concern is natural and I esteem
it, but your argument betrays impatience and superficial thinking. I regard this
step of mine as the last word on patience. Would you regard patience that kills
its very object, as patience or folly?
"I cannot take any credit for the results that have been achieved since my
coming to Delhi. It would be self-delusion on my part to do so. Mere man
cannot judge as to how many lives were really saved by my labours. Only the
Omniscient God can do that. Does it not betray sheer ignorance to attribute
sudden loss of patience to one who has been patience personified since
September last?
"It was only when, in terms of human effort, I had exhausted all resources and
realized my utter helplessness, that I put my head on God's lap. That is the
inner meaning and the significance of my fast. If you read and ponder over the
epic of Gajendra Moksha, you will be able to appraise my step.
"The last sentence of your note is a charming token of your affection. But your
affection is rooted in ignorance or attachment. Ignorance does not cease to be
ignorance because of its repetition among persons, no matter how numerous
they are.

"So long as we hug life and death, it is idle to claim that it must be preserved
for a certain cause. 'Strive while you live' is a beautiful saying, but there is a
hiatus in it. Striving has to be in the spirit of detachment.
"Now you will understand why I cannot accept your counsel. God sent me the
fast. He alone will end it, if and when He wills. In the meantime, it behoves us
all to believe that whether He preserves my life or ends it, it is equally to the
good, and we should act accordingly. Let our sole prayer be that God may
vouchsafe me strength of spirit so that the temptation to live may not lead me
into premature termination of the fast."
Equally characteristic was his reply to a Sikh friend, who saw him soon after the
commencement of the fast: "My fast is against no one party or group or
individual exclusively, and yet it excludes nobody. It is addressed to the
conscience of all, even the majority community in the other dominion. If all or
any one of the groups fully respond, I know that the miracle will surely be
achieved. For instance, if the Sikhs respond to my appeal as one man, I shall be
wholly satisfied. I shall go and live in their midst in the Punjab, for the Sikhs
are a brave people and I know that they can set an example in the non-violence
of the brave which will serve as an object lesson to all the rest."
On the 13th, he attended the evening prayers as usual. He warned the audience
against being surprised that he had walked to the prayer ground. A fast
weakened nobody during the first twenty-four hours after a meal and it did
good generally to everybody who fasted occasionally for twenty- four hours, he
said.
The day following Gandhi stated that it might be difficult for him to walk to the
prayer ground. But if they were eager to attend the prayers all the same, they
could come and the girls would recite the prayer with them even though he was
not present.
Gandhi then referred to his written message of Monday. In that he had

observed that Shri Shankar of Sardar Patel's department would not come to see
him, because Shrimati Manibehn had said that he was busy. She informed him
that there was some misunderstanding. She had only stated that Shri Shankar

could not come at 2 p.m., but he could at some other time. The speaker was
sorry that he did not correctly catch the message or he forgot it. He had not
taken it amiss that Shri Shankar was busy the whole day. He would not expect
the government servants to go to private persons. As it was, Shri Shankar was
ready to oblige him another time. He mentioned this incident only to console
the Bahawalpur refugees.
A question was asked as to whom the speaker considered blameworthy for the
fast. He blamed no individual or community. He did believe, however, that if
the Hindus and the Sikhs insisted on turning out the Muslims from Delhi, they
would be betraying India and their own faiths. And that indeed hurt him.
Some people had also taunted the speaker that he had sympathy for the
Muslims only and that he had undertaken the fast for their sake. They were
right. But all his life the speaker had stood, as everyone should stand, for the
minorities or those in need. Pakistan had resulted in depriving the Muslims of
the Union of pride and self-confidence. It hurt him to think that this was so. It
weakened a state which kept or allowed any class of people who had lost self-
confidence. His fast was against the Muslims too in the sense that it should
enable them to stand up to their Hindu and Sikh brethren. In terms of the fast
the Muslim friends had to work no less than the Hindus and the Sikhs. Thus they
were in the habit of singling but Pandit Nehru and him for praise and, by
contrast, blaming Sardar Patel. Some twitted the Sardar for his remark that the
Muslim Leaguers could surely not become friends overnight. But they should not
blame the Sardar, as he did not, for the remark. Most of the Hindus held this
view. What the speaker wanted his Muslim League friends to do was to live
down the Sardar's remark and by their conduct—not by declarations—disprove
it. Let it be remembered that Panditji, though he had not the same method and
manner as the Sardar, claimed the Sardar as his valued colleague. If the Sardar
was an enemy of the Muslims, Panditji could ask him to retire. The Sardar had
not ceased to be the speaker's esteemed friend, although he was no longer his
"yes-man", as he was once popularly and affectionately nicknamed. Friends
should know the true character of the Cabinet. It was responsible for every
official act of every member of the Cabinet. He expected a thorough cleansing

of hearts. That being assured, there would be mutual respect and trust. They
were all of the Union and by right it belonged to them. He could not break the
fast for less. They must dethrone Satan from their hearts and enthrone God.
What was the duty of the Hindus and the Sikhs? They had just heard Gurudev's
favourite song: "If no one responds to your call, walk alone, walk alone." He
liked it very much and was often sung during his walking pilgrimage in Noakhali.
He would repeat with his last breath that the Hindus and the Sikhs should be
brave enough to say that, whatever happened in Pakistan, they would not raise
their little finger against a single Muslim in the Union. They would never again
indulge in cowardly acts, however great the provocation.
If Delhi became peaceful in the real sense of the term, he would break the
fast. Delhi was the capital of the Indian Union. The ruin or downfall of Delhi he
would regard as the ruin of India and Pakistan. He wanted Delhi to be safe for
all Muslims, even for one like Shaheed Suhrawardy, who was looked upon as the
chief of the goondas. Let all proved goondas be rounded up. But, he was
witness to the fact that Shaheed Saheb had worked for peace in Calcutta in all
sincerity. He had pulled out Muslims from the Hindu houses, which they had
forcibly occupied. He was living with him and he would willingly join the prayer
but the speaker would not expose him to the risk of being insulted. He wanted
him, as he did every Muslim, to feel as safe in Delhi as the tallest of them.
He did not mind how long it took for real peace to be established in Delhi.
Whether it took one day or one month, it was immaterial. No one should say or
do anything to lure him into giving up his fast prematurely. The object should
not be to save his life but to save India and her honour. He would feel happy
and proud, when he saw that India's place was not lowered as it had become by
the recent happenings which he had no wish to recall.
Sardar Patel sent word that he would do anything that Gandhi might wish. In
reply Gandhi suggested that the first priority should be given to the question of
Pakistan's share of the cash assets withheld by the Union Government. Within
twenty-four hours of the commencement of the fast, the Cabinet of the Indian
Union met round his fasting bed to consider afresh the issue of Pakistan's share

of the cash balance. It made those who were already angry with Gandhi for
what they considered as his partiality towards the Musalmans angrier still. A
fanatical group among them began to organize a conspiracy to compass
Gandhi's death. At night some Sikhs from West Punjab had a demonstration
before the Birla Rouse, shouting "blood for blood," "we want revenge," "let
Gandhi die."
On the 14th, Gandhi dictated articles for Harijan. Addressing the people of
Gujarat, he wrote:
"I am dictating this from my bed early on Wednesday morning. It is the second
day of the fast, though twenty-four hours have not been completed since the
fast commenced. It is the last day of posting for this week's Harijan. Hence, I
have decided to address a few words in Gujarati to the people ôf Gujarat.
"I do not regard this fast as an ordinary fast. I have undertaken it after deep
thought and yet it has sprung not from reasoning but God's will that rules men's
reason. It is addressed to no particular section or no individual, and yet it is
addressed equally to all. There is no trace of anger of any kind behind it, nor
the slightest tinge of impatience. But behind it is the realization that there is a
time for everything and an opportunity once missed, never returns* Therefore,
the only thing that now remains is for every Indian to think as to what his or her
duty in the present hour is. The Gujaratis are Indians. So, whatever I write in
Gujarati is addressed equally to all the people of India.
"Delhi is the metropolis of India. If, therefore, we really in our hearts do not
subscribe to the two-nation theory, or in other words, if we do not regard the
Hindus and the Muslims as constituting two distinct nations, we shall have to
admit that the picture that the city of Delhi presents today, is not what we
have envisaged always of the capital of India. Delhi is the Eternal City, as the
ruins of its forerunners, namely, Indraprastha and Hastinapur testify. It is the
heart of India. Only a nitwit can regard it as belonging to Hindus or to Sikhs
only. It may sound very harsh but it is the literal truth. From Cape Comorin to
Kashmir and from Karachi to Dibrugarh in Assam, all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs,
Parsis, Christians and Jews, who people this vast subcontinent and who have

adopted it as their dear motherland, have an equal right to it. No one has a
right to say that it belongs to the majority community and that the minority
community can only remain there as the underdog. Whoever serves it with the
purest devotion, must have the first claim. Therefore, anyone who wants to
drive out of Delhi all Muslims as such, must be set down as its enemy number
one and, therefore, enemy number one of India. We are rushing towards that
catastrophe. It is the bounden duty of every son and daughter of India to take
his or her full share in averting it.
"What should we do then? If we would see our dream of panchayat raj, that is,
true democracy, realized, we would regard the humblest and the lowest Indian
as being equally the ruler of India with the tallest in the %land. This
presupposes that all are pure, or will become pure, if they are not. And purity
must go hand in hand with wisdom. None would then harbour any distinction
between community and community, and caste and outcaste. Everybody would
regard all as equal with oneself and would hold them together in the silken net
of love. No one would regard another as untouchable. We would hold as equal
the toiling labourer and the rich capitalist. Everybody would know how to earn
an honest living by the sweat of one's brow and make no distinction between
the intellectual and physical labour. To hasten this consummation, we would
voluntarily turn ourselves into scavengers. No one, who has wisdom, will ever
touch opium, liquor or any intoxicants. Everybody would observe swadeshi as
the rule of life and would regard every woman, not being his wife, as his
mother or sister or daughter, according to her age, never lust after her in his
heart. He would be ready to lay down his life when the occasion demands it,
and never want to take another's life. If he is a Sikh, in terms of the command-
ment of the gurus, he would have the heroic courage to stand singlehanded and
alone, without yielding an-inch of ground, against the one lakh and a quarter,
enjoined by them. Needless to say, such a son of India, will not want to be told
what his duty in the present hour is."
When the maulanas came to see him on the 14th, Gandhi greeted them with,
"Are you satisfied now?" Then, turning to the one who had said to him a few
days ago that he should get the Union Government to send them to England,

Gandhi remarked: "I had no answer to give you then. I can now face you. Shall I
ask the Government to arrange a passage for you to England? I shall say to
them: Here are the unfaithful Muslims, who want to desert India. Give them
the facility they want."
The maulana said that he felt sorry if his words had hurt him. Gandhi retorted:
"Well that would be like the Englishman who kicks you and at the same time
goes on saying, I beg your pardon. Do you not feel ashamed of asking to be sent
to England? And then you said that the slavery under the British rule was better
than independence under the Union of India. How dare you, who claim to be
patriots and nationalist utter such words? You have to cleanse your heart and
learn to be cent per cent truthful. Otherwise India will not tolerate you long
and even I shall not be able to help you."
On January 14, Gandhi had dictated a message to be read out to the prayer
audience but later on he decided to go to the meeting and address the
gathering. He said that he had come in spite of the doctor's objections but from
the following day, he would probably not be able to walk to the prayer ground.
He had the strength that day and he used it, though the doctors had advised
him to conserve it. He was in God's hands and if He wanted him to live, he
would not die. He did not want his faith in God to weaken.
Continuing his prayer speech without referring to the dictated notes, Gandhi
said:
"Cablegrams and telegrams are pouring in from far and near. Some in my
opinion weighty and congratulating me on my resolve and entrustin me to God.
And some others, in the friendliest terms appealing to me to abandon the fast
and assuring me that they would befriend their neighbours irrespective of caste
and creed and try to carry out the spirit of my message that accompanied the
fast. I am asking Shri Pyarelalji to give a few selections from the abundance,
which is hourly increasing, to the press. The messages are from the Hindus,
Muslims, Sikhs and others. If those who have given me assurances—some of the
senders represent associations and groups—carry them out faithfully, then they
will certainly have contributed largely to the hastening of the stoppage of the

fast. Mridulabehn asks the following question from Lahore, where she is in
touch with the Pakistan authorities as also the common Muslims : 'There are
friends here who are very anxious about Gandhiji's health and are very eager to
know what Gandhiji would like them to do on this side, and what he expects
from his Muslim friends in Pakistan, including those who are in political parties
and in the Government service.5 It is pleasing to think that there are Muslim
friends wrho are anxious about my health, and more so to know that they are
eager for the information that Mridulabehn seeks. To all the senders of the
messages and to the seekers in Lahore I wish to say that the fast is a process of
self-purification and is intended to invite all who are in sympathy with the
mission of the fast therliselves to take part in the process of self-purification,
whether they are in the service of the Pakistan Government or whether they
are members of political parties or others.
"You have heard of the cowardly attack on the Sikhs in Karachi. Innocent men
and women and children were butchered and looted, and others have had to
flee. Now comes the news of an attack on a refugee train at Gujrat. The train
was carrying non-Muslim refugees from the North-West Frontier Province. Large
numbers are reported to have been killed and the women abducted. It
distresses me. How long can the Union put up with such things? How long can I
bank upon the patience of the Hindus and the Sikhs, in spite of my fast?
Pakistan has to put a stop to this state of affairs. They must purify their hearts
and pledge themselves that they will not rest till the Hindus and Sikhs can
return and live in safety in Pakistan.
"Supposing that there is a wave of self-purification throughout India, Pakistan

will become pak. It will be a state in which the past wrongs will have been
forgotten, the past distinctions will have been buried, and the least and the
smallest in Pakistan will command the same respect and the same protection of
life and property that the Qaid-e-Azam enjoys. Such Pakistan can never die.
Then and not till then shall I repent that I ever called it a sin, as I am afraid, I
must hold today, it is. I want to live to see that Pakistan not on paper, not in
the orations of the Pakistani orators, but in the daily life of every Pakistani
Muslim. Then the inhabitants of the Union will forget that there ever was any

enmity beWeen them and, if I am not mistaken, the Union will proudly copy
Pakistan and, if I am alive, I shall ask her to excel Pakistan in well-doing. The
fast is a bid for nothing less. Be it said to the shame of those of us who are in
the Indian Union that we have readily copied Pakistan's bad manners.
"Before I ever knew anything about politics in my early youth, I dreamt the
dream of communal unity of the heart. I shall jump in the evening of my life
like a child, to feel that the dream has been realized in this life. The wish for
living the full span of life portrayed by the seers of old and which the seers
permit us to set down at 125 years, will then revive. Who would not risk
sacrificing his life for the realization of such a dream? Then we shall have real
swaraj. Then, though legally and geographically we may still be two states, in
daily life no one will think that we were two separate states. The vista before
me seems to me to be, as it must be to you, too glorious to be true. And yet
like a child in a famous picture, drawn by a famous painter, I shall not be
happy, till I have got it. I live and I want to live for no lesser goal. Let the
seekers from Pakistan help me to come as near the goal as it is humanly
possible. A goal ceases to be one, when it is reached. The nearest appiroach is
always possible. What I have said holds good, irrespective of whether others do
it or not. It is open to every individual to purify himself or herself, so as to
render him or her fit for that land of promise. I remember to have read, I
forget now whether in the Delhi Fort or in the Agra Fort, when I visited them in
1896, a verse on one of the gates, which when translated reads thus: Tf there is
paradise on earth, it is here, it is here, it is here.5 That fort with all its
magnificence at its best, was no paradise in my estimation. But I should love to
see that verse with justice inscribed on the gates of Pakistan at all the
entrances. In such paradise, whether it is in the Indian Union or in Pakistan,
there will be neither paupers, nor beggars, nor high, nor low, neither the
millionaire employers, nor the half-starved employees, nor intoxicating drinks
or drugs. There will be the same respect for women as vouchsafed to men, and
the chastity and the purity of men and women will be jealously guarded. Where
every woman, except one5s wife, will be treated by men of all religions, as
mother, or sister, or daughter, according to her age. Where there will be no

untouchability, and where there will be equal respect for all faiths. They will
be all proudly, joyously and voluntarily bread labourers. I hope that everyone
who listens to me or who reads these lines, will forgive me, if stretched on my
bed and basking in the sun, inhaling the life-giving sunshine, I allow myself to
indulge in this ecstasy. Let this assure the doubters and the sceptics that I have
not the slightest desire that the fast should be ended as quickly as possible. It
matters little if the ecstatic wishes of a fool like me are never realized and the
fast is never broken. I am content to wait, as long as it may be necessary, but it
will hurt me to think that the people have acted merely in order to save me. I
claim that God has inspired this fast and it will be broken only when and if He
wishes it. No human agency has ever been known to thwart, nor will it ever
thwart Divine Will.
A health bulletin issued on the 15th said that Gandhi was considerably weak.
His voice was feeble and acetone bodies had appeared in the urine. Anxiety
deepened. There were peace rallies in Delhi and elsewhere.
"The loss of Gandhiji's life would mean the loss of India's soul/' said Nehru
addressing a meeting in Delhi and he appealed to his countrymen to maintain
communal harmony and save Gandhi's life. He announced that beside other
relief measures, the Government would arrange for the accommodation of
every refugee in Delhi within the next one week.
Ghaznafar Ali Khan, Pakistan's Refugee Minister, said that Gandhi's fast should
serve as an eye-opener to all people, not only in India, but also in Pakistan, and
make them aware of the shame which they had brought upon themselves. He
suggested that the occasion indicated the need of a joint conference of the
leaders of India and Pakistan and an honest and bold attempt to remove all the
causes of friction.
Gandhi was too weak to walk to the prayer ground on the evening of the 15th.
He, however, wanted to say a few words to the people from his bed. The radio
microphone was arranged near his bed, but as there was no loud speaker his
voice could not reach the prayer audience. A Hindi translation of his dictated
message was read after the prayers.

In his spoken message at the radio microphone, Gandhi expressed regret that
his voice could not reach the prayer audience. However, he would like to say a
few words to the invisible audience, sitting in their homes, as he knew that it
would comfort them to hear his voice, although if he had known that his voice
would not reach the prayer audience, he would not have spoken. He had
dictated a message for the prayer gathering that day. He did not know whether
he would be fit enough to do so the next day.
He appealed to people not to bother as to what the others were doing. Each
one of them should turn the searchlight inwards and purify his or her heart, as
far as possible. He was convinced that if people sufficiently purified
themselves, then they would help India and help themselves and also shorten
the period of his fast. None should be anxious for him. They should think out
how best they could improve themselves and work for the good of the country.
All must die some day. No one could escape death. Then why be afraid of
death? In fact, death was a friend, which brought deliverance from sufferings.
In his dictated message, Gandhi said:
"Newspapermen sent me a message two hours after my prayer speech of last

evening, asking to see me, as they had some doubts to be cleared. After a
heavy day's work I felt disinclined, out of some exhaustion, to see them for
discussion. I, therefore, told Pyarelal to inform them to excuse me and further
tell them that they should put down their questions in writing and send them to
me next morning. They did so. This is the first question: 'Why have you
undertaken the fast when there was no disturbance of any kind in any part of
the Indian Dominion?
"What was it, if it was not a disturbing disturbance for a crowd to make an
organized and a determined effort to take forcible possession of Muslim houses?
The disturbance was such that the police had reluctantly to resort to tear-gas
and even to a little shooting, if only overhead, before the crowd dispersed. It
wouid have been foolish for me to wait, until the last Muslim had been turned
out of Delhi by subtle undemonstrative methods, which I would describe as
killing by inches.

"The second question is: 'You have said that you could not give any reply to the
Muslims who cam e to you with their tale of fear and insecurity and who have
complained that Sardar Patel, who is in charge of the Home Affairs, is anti-
Muslim. You have also stated that Sardar Patel is no longer a yes-man, as he
used to be. These factors create the impression that the fast is more intended
to bring about a change of heart in Sardar Patel and thereby amounts to a
condemnation of the policy of the Home Ministry. It would be helpful, if you
can clear the position.'
"As to this, I feel that my reply was quite precise, not admitting of more
interpretations than one. The suggested interpretation never crossed my mind.
If I had known that my statement could bear any such interpretation, I should
certainly have dispelled the doubt in anticipation. Many Musalman friends had
complained of the Sardar's so-called anti-Muslim attitude. I had, with a degree
of suppressed pain, listened to them, without giving any explanation. The fast
freed me from this self-imposed restraint and I was able to assure the critics
that they were wrong in isolating the Sardar from Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and
me, whom they gratuitously raise to the sky. This isolation did them no good.
The Sardar had a blunt- ness of speech which sometimes unintentionally hurt,
though his heart was expansive enough to accommodate all. Thus, my
statement was meant deliberately to free a lifelong and faithful comrade from
any unworthy reproach. And lest my hearers should go away with the idea that
my compliment carried the meaning that I could treat the Sardar as my yes-
man, as he was affectionately described, I balanced the compliment by adding
the proviso that the Sardar was too masterful to be anybody's yes-man. When
he was my yes-man, he permitted himself to be so named, because whatever I
said instinctively appealed to him. Great as he was in his own field and a very
able administrator, he was humble enough to begin his political education
under me, because, as he explained to me, he could not take to the politics in
vogue at the time when I began my public career in India. When power
descended on the Sardar, he saw that he could no longer successfully apply the
method of non-violence, which he used to wield with signal success. I have
made the discovery that what I and the people with me had termed non-

violence was not the genuine article, but a weak copy known as passive
resistance. Naturally, passive resistance can avail nothing to a ruler. Imagine a
weak ruler being able to represent any people. He would only degrade his
masters who, for the time being, had placed themselves under his trust. I know
the Sardar could never betray, or degrade his trust.
"I wonder if, with a knowledge of this background to my statement, anybody

would dare call my fast a condemnation of the policy of the Home Ministry. If
there is any such person, I can only tell him that he would degrade and hurt
himself, never the Sardar or me. Have I not before now declared emphatically
that no outside power can really degrade a man? He only can degrade himself.
And although I know that this sentence is irrelevant here, it is such a truth that
it bears repetition on all occasions. My fast, as I have stated in plain language,
is undoubtedly on behalf of the Muslim minority in the Indian Union and,
therefore, it is necessarily against the Hindus and the Sikhs of the Union and
the Muslims of Pakistan. It is also on behalf of the minorities in; Pakistan, as in
the case of the Muslim minority in the Union. This is a clumsy compression of
the idea I have already explained. I cannot expect the fast taken by a very
imperfect and weak mortal, as I truly confess I am, to have the potency to
make its proteges proof against all danger. The fast is a process of self-
purification for all. It would be wrong to make any insinuation against the
purity of the step.
"The third question is: 'Your fast has been undertaken on the eve of the
meeting of the United Nations Security Council at Lake Success and soon after
the Karachi riots and the Gujrat massacre. What publicity the latter incidents
received in the foreign press is not known. But, undoubtedly, your fast has
overshadowed all other incidents. And Pakistan representatives would not be
worth their reputation, if they do not seize the opportunity to declare that the
Mahatma has undertaken the fast to bring sanity among his Hindu followers,
who have been making the life of the Muslims in India impossible. Truth takes a
long time to reach the four corners of the globe. But in the meantime, your fast
may have the unfortunate effect of prejudicing our case in the eyes of the
United Nations.'

"This question does not demand or need, any elaborate answer. From all I have
known of the powers and peoples outside India, I make bold to say that the fast
has created only a healthy impression. Outsiders who are able to take an
impartial and unbiased view of what is happening in India cannot distort the
purpose of the fast, which is meant to bring sanity to all those who inhabit both
the Indian Union and Pakistan. It is impossible to save the Muslims in the Union
if the Muslim majority in Pakistan do not behave as decent men and women.
Happily for the cause, the Muslims of Pakistan, as Mridulabehn's inquiry of
yesterday made clear, have become wide awake to a sense of their duty. The
United Nations know that my fast aids them to come to a right decision and to
give the right guidance to the newly made two dominions."
The Government of India, owing to the dispute in Kashmir, had been

withholding from the Government of Pakistan fifty-five crores of rupees, which
they had previously agreed to hand over to them as part of the division of the
assets of the whole of India. On the night of January 15, India decided to
implement immediately the financial agreement with Pakistan "to remove the
one cause of suspicion and friction." The communique stated: "This decision is
the Government's contribution, to the best of their ability, to the non-violent
and noble effort made by Gandhiji in accordance with the glorious traditions of
this great country, for peace and goodwill."
The revocation of the cabinet decision hurt Sardar Patel's feelings. In certain
matters of high policy the Sardar had felt compelled to differ from his cabinet
colleagues. He knew, too, his outlook on several issues was not shared by
Gandhi and yet Gandhi had shown great affection for him. The Sardar had to
leave Delhi on January 16 for an important engagement. Gandhi had insisted on
keeping it. Before leaving the Sardar addressed the following letter to Gandhi:
"I have to leave for Kathiawad at seven this morning. It is agonizing beyond
endurance to have to go away when you are fasting. But stern duty leaves no
other course.
"The sight of your anguish had made me disconsolate. It has set me furiously
thinking.

"The burden of work has become so heavy that I feel crushed under it. I now
see that it would do no good to the country or to myself to carry on like this
more. It might even do harm. . .
"I cannot do otherwise than I am doing now. And if thereby I became

burdensome to my lifelong colleagues and a source of distress to you and still I
stick to office, it would mean that I let the lust of power blind my eyes and so
unwilling to quit. You should quickly deliver me from this intolerable position.
"I know, it is no time for argument while you are fasting. But, since I can be no
help even in ending your fast, I do not know what else there is for me to do. I,
therefore, earnestly beseech you to give up your fast and get this question
settled soon. It may help even remove the causes that have prompted your
fast."
On January 16th, the evening prayers were held as usual, but Gandhi was not
able to be present. Before his dictated message was read out to the prayer
audience, he addressed them on the microphone from his bed. He said that he
had not expected that he would be able to speak to them that day, but they
would be pleased to learn that, if anything, his voice was less feeble that day
than the day before. He could not explain it, except for the grace of God. He
never had felt so well on the fourth day of the fast in the past. If all of them
continued to participate in the process of self-purification, he would probably
have the strength to speak to them till the end. He was in no hurry to break the
fast. Hurry would spoil matters. He did not want anyone to come and tell him
that the things had been set right, while the process was incomplete. If Delhi
became peaceful, in the real sense of the term, it would have its repercussions
all over the country. He had no desire to live unless peace reigned in the two
dominions.
In his written message to the prayer gathering Gandhi said:
"It is never a light matter for any responsible Cabinet to alter a deliberate
settled policy. Yet our Cabinet, responsible in every sense of the term, have
with equal deliberation, yet promptness, unsettled their settled fact. The
Cabinet deserve the warmest thanks from the whole country, from Kashmir to

Cape Comorin and from Karachi to the Assam frontier. And I know that all the
nations of the earth will proclaim the present gesture as one which only a
large-hearted Cabinet like ours could rise to. This is no policy of appeasement
of the Muslims. This is a policy, if you like, of self-appeasement. No Cabinet,
worthy of being representative of a large mass of mankind, can afford to take
any step merely because it is likely to win the hasty applause of an unthinking
public. In the midst of insanity, should not our best representatives retain
sanity and bravely prevent a wreck of the ship of state under their
management? What then was the actuating motive? It was my fast. It changed
the whole outlook. Without it, the Union Cabinet could not go beyond what the
law permitted and required them to do. But the present gesture, on the part of
the Government of India, is one of unmixed goodwill. It has put the
Government of Pakistan on its honour. It ought to lead to an honourable
settlement, not only of the Kashmir question, but of all the differences
between the two dominions. Friendship should replace the present enmity. The
demands of equity supersede the letter of law. There is a homely maxim of
law, which has been in practice for centuries in England, that when the
common law seems to fail, equity comes to the rescue. Not long ago, there
were even separate courts for the administration of law and of equity.
Considered in this setting, there is no room for questioning the utter justice of
this act of the Union Government. If we want a precedent, there is a striking
one at our disposal in the form of what is popularly known as the MacDonald
Award. That award was really the unanimous judgement of not only the
members of the British Cabinet, but also of the majority of the members of the
Second Round Table Conference. The award was undone overnight as a result of
the fast undertaken in Yeravda prison.
"I have been asked to end the fast, because of this great act of the Union
Government. I wish that I could persuade myself to do so. I know that the
medical friends who, of their own volition and at considerable sacrifice,
meticulously examine me from day to day, are getting more and more anxious,
as the fast is being prolonged. Because of defective kidney function, medical
friends dread not so much my instantaneous collapse, as the permanent after-

effects of any further prolongation. I did not embark upon the fast after
consultation with medical men, be they however able. My sole guide, even
dictator, was God the Infallible and the Omnipotent.
If God has any further use for this frail body of mine, He will keep it, in spite of
the prognostications of the medical men and women. I am in His hands.
Therefore, I hope you will believe me when I say, that I dread neither death,
nor permanent injury, even if I survive. But I do feel that this warning of the
medical friends should, if the country has any use for me, hurry the people up
to close their ranks. And like brave men and women that we ought to be, under
the hard-earned freedom, we should trust even those whom we may suspect as
our enemies. Brave people disdain distrust. The letter of my vow will be
satisfied if the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs of Delhi bring about a union, which
not even a conflagration around them in all the other parts of India or Pakistan
will be strong enough to break. Happily, the people in both the dominions seem
to have instinctively realized that the fittest answer to the fast should be a
complete friendship between the two dominions, such that members of all the
communities should be able to go to either dominion, without the slightest fear
of molestation. Self-purification demands nothing less. It will be wrong for the
rest of the two dominions to put a heavy strain upon Delhi. After all, the
inhabitants of the Union are not superhuman. In the name of the people, our
Government have taken a liberal step without counting the cost. What will be
Pakistan's counter gesture? The ways are many, if there is the will. Is it there?"
The doctors were perturbed. Gandhi's weight, which for the fifst two days had
shown a drop of nearly two pounds per day, had become stationary at 107 lbs.
The system was getting water-logged, owing to the failing kidney function. And
this meant increasing strain on the already enfeebled heart. Persistent refusal
on Gandhi's part to terminate the fast led everybody to ask what specific test
would satisfy him. Just then a telegram from Karachi came. The Muslim
refugees who had been driven out of Delhi inquired whether they could return
to Delhi and re-occupy their houses. "That is the test," Gandhi remarked as soon
as he had read the telegram. Pyarelal set out with that telegram on a round of
all the Hindu and Sikh refugee camps in the city. By night, 1,000 refugees had

signed a declaration that they would welcome the Musalmans to return and
occupy their original homes even though with their families they might now
have themselves to face the biting winter cold of Delhi in refugee camps. There
was friendly feeling on the fifth day of the fast.
On January 17 the public prayers were held as usual. Gandhi spoke for a few
minutes from his bed:
"I repeat what I have said before: nothing is to be done under pressure of the
fast. I have already observed before that things done under pressure of a fast
have been undone after the fast is over. If any such thing happens, it would be
a tragedy of the highest degree. There is no occasion for it at any time. What a
spiritual fast does expect, is cleansing of the heart. The cleansing, if it is
honest, does not cease to be when the cause which induced it ceases. The
cleansing of a wall seen in the form of a whitewash, does not cease when the
dear one has come and gone. This material cleansing is bound to require
renovation after some time. Cleansing of the heart once achieved only dies
with one's death. Apart from this legitimate, laudable pressure, the fast has no
other function which can be described as proper.
"The number of telegrams coming from rajas, maharajas and the laity continues
to increase. There are telegrams from Pakistan too. They are good, so far as
they go. But as a friend and well-wisher, I must say to all those who reside in
Pakistan and mould its fortune 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 the 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 everyday to report the day's events. Neither
the rajas and maharajas nor the 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. Let them know that I feel never
so happy as when I am fasting for the spirit. This fast has brought me higher
happiness than hitherto. No one need disturb this happy state unless he can
honestly claim that in his journey he has turned deliberately from Satan
towards God."
Towards evening on the 17th, nausea set in and heaviness in Gandhi's head
increased. The doctors' bulletin sounded a grave note: "It is our duty to tell the
people to take immediate steps to produce the requisite conditions for ending
the fast without delay."
Addressing a big peace rally in the capital Maulana Azad informed the gathering
that he had met Gandhi in the afternoon and had requested him to suggest
concrete conditions wrhich, if fulfilled, would persuade him to break his fast.
Gandhi had thereupon mentioned to him seven conditions. The fast would be
ended when all parties gave their signatures to those conditions. The
assurances, Gandhi had further said, "must come from responsible people who
could guarantee their proper fulfilment." He should not be given false
assurance, the Maulana warned.
A Central Peace Committee, consisting of 130 members representing all

communities, was formed under Dr. Rajendra Prasad. The committee met at his
residence on the evening of January 17th and adopted a satisfactory resolution.
The feverish anxiety into which the whole country had been plunged was
terminated when Gandhi broke his fast on January 18 at 12.45 p.m. Earlier in
the day, representatives of all organizations in the city, including the

representatives of the refugees and from the three worse affected parts of the
city, namely, Karol Bagh, Sabzi Mandi and Paharganj, had assembled under the
chairmanship of Rajendra Prasad and had put their signatures to a seven-point
declaration, covering the conditions laid down by Gandhi for breaking his fast:
"We wish to announce that it is our heart-felt desire that the Hindus, Muslims
and Sikhs and members of 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 Qutab- ud-Din Mazar
will be held this year as in previous years.
"The Muslims will be able to move about in Sabzi Mandi, Karol Bagh, Paharganj
and other localities just as they could in the past.
"The mosques which have been left by the Muslims and which now are in the
possession of the Hindus and the Sikhs, will be returned. The areas which have
been set apart for the 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 the Muslims shall be able to carry
on their business as before.
"We assure that these things will be done by our personal efforts and not with
the help of the police or the military.
"We request Mahatmaji to believe us and to give up his fast, and continue to
lead us, as he has done hitherto."
The document was recorded both in the Urdu and Devanagari scripts, at
Gandhi's insistence. Maulana Azad was present at the meeting. The Muslims of
Delhi were represented by Hifzur Rahman and Ahmed Saeed of the Jamiat-ul-
Ulema and Maulana Habib-ur-Rahman. Messrs. Goswami Ganesh Datt, Basantlal
and Narain Das represented the R.S.S. and the Hindu Mahasabha. There were
also the representatives of various Sikh organizations. They then all repaired,
numbering more than a hundred, to the Birla House, where they assembled in

Gandhi's room to request him to break the fast. Nehru had arrived there
already. Mr. Zahid Hussain, the Pakistan's High Commissioner, came in a little
later.
Rajendra Prasad opened the proceedings by narrating to Gandhi how they had
all assembled on the previous night at the former's residence and after full
discussion, had decided to sign the declaration then and there. But as the
representatives of some organizations were not present in that meeting, they
felt that they should not go to him immediately with the signed document, but
wait till the remaining signatures were also obtained. They had accordingly met
again in the morning, when all those who were absent during the previous
night's meeting came and gave their signatures. It was found in the course of
the morning meeting, Dr. Rajendra Prasad reported, that even those'who had
some lingering doubts on the previous night, were now confident that they
could ask Gandhi, with a full sense of their responsibility, to break the fast. As
the President of the Congress, Dr. Rajendra Prasad said that he had signed the
document in view of the guarantee which they had all jointly and severally
given. Mr. Khurshid, the Chief Commissioner, and Mr. Randhawa, the Deputy
Commissioner of Delhi, who were also present, 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 Gandhi
would now terminate his fast.
Mr. Gupta, speaking next, described touching scenes of fraternization between

the Hindus and the Muslims which he had witnessed when a procession of about
150 Muslims was taken out that morning in Sabzi Mandi and was received with
ovation and offered fruit and refreshments by the Hindu inhabitants of that
locality.
Gandhi said in reply that what they had told him had touched him deeply.
Indeed, they had given him all that he had asked for. But if their words meant
that they held themselves responsible for the communal peace in Delhi only
and what happened in other places was no concern of theirs, then their
guarantee was nothing worth and he would feel and they too would one day
realize that it was a great blunder on his part to have given up his fast. As an

illustration, he referred to the report of the happenings in ALlahabad that had

appeared in the press. Representatives of the R.S.S. and the Hindu Mahasabha
were among the signatories to the seven-point declaration. If they were sincere
in their professions, surely, they could not be indifferent to outbreaks of
madness in places other than Delhi. It would be a fraud upon God, if they did
so. Delhi was the heart of the Indian Dominion and they, the representatives
gathered there, were the cream of Delhi. If they could not make the whole of
India realize that the Hindus, Sikhs and Musalmans were all brothers, it would
bode ill for the future of both the dominions. What would happen to Hindustan,
if they quarrelled with one another?
Here Gandhi broke down owing to overwhelming emotion, as he explained on

resumption. What he had said was repeated aloud by Pyarelal and partly by
Sushila Nayyar.
Resuming his remarks, Gandhi again appealed to them to search well their
hearts, so that they might not take any step which they would have to regret
afterwards. The occasion demanded of them bravery of the highest order. They
should clearly realize the implications of their pledge. It was nothing less than
that what they had achieved in Delhi, had to be realized in the whole of India.
That did not mean the ideal could be realized in a day. It did mean that whilst
in the past they had turned their face towards Satan, they had now resolved to
turn it godward. If in their hearts they did not accept what he had placed
before them, or they had made up their minds that it was beyond them, they
should plainly tell him so.
There could indeed be nothing more wrong on their part than to hold that
Hindustan belonged only to the Hindus and that the Muslims could have no
place in it or, on the reverse, that Pakistan belonged to Muslims only, and the
Hindus and the Sikhs could have no place in it. He wanted the refugees to
understand that if they set things right in Delhi, as he had suggested, that was
the only way to set things right in Pakistan too. He reminded them that he was
not a man to shirk another fast, should he afterwards discover that he had been
deceived, or he had deceived himself into breaking it prematurely. They
should, therefore, act with circumspection and cent per cent sincerity. He

invited the representatives of the Muslims, who had been meeting him
frequently, to tell him whether they were satisfied that the conditions in Delhi
were now such as to warrant breaking the fast on his part,
Addressing next a few words to the Muslims especially, he asked if there was
any ground for the suspicion that the Muslims did not regard India as their
country. They live in India in the midst of the Hindus because they could not
help it, but one day they had to part company. He hoped that suspicion was
baseless. Similarly, if there was a Hindu who regarded Muslims as yavanas or
asuras, incapable of realizing God, he was guilty of the worst blasphemy, which
could have no room in the covenant which they had signed.
Gandhi referred to a book which a Muslim friend had lovingly presented him at
Patna. In that book, the writer had propounded that according to the Koran,
the kafirs, the Hindus, were worse than the poisonous reptiles and fit only to be
exterminated. Not only was there no sin in using every conceivable variety of
force or fraud, to compass that end, but it was also meritorious in the eyes of
God. He was sure that no god-fearing Muslim could subscribe to or even
secretly sympathize with, that creed. Some had dubbed the Hindus as image
worshippers. But it was not the stone image which they worshipped, but the
God within, without whom not a particle of matter existed. If a devotee saw
God in an image, it was not a thing for anybody to cavil at. And granting that
his belief was a delusion, it deluded nobody but himself. It required
magnanimity and breadth of outlook to understand and appreciate the religious
convictions and practices of others. It was the same thing if they considered
the Koran or the Granth Saheb as God.
In conclusion, he said that if they fully accepted the implication of their

pledge3 then they should release him from Delhi, so that he might be free to go
to Pakistan. In his absence, they should welcome such refugees from Pakistan
as might want to return to their homes. The latter were none too happy over
there, just as the Hindus in the Indian Dominion were none too happy to lose a
large number of Muslim artisans and craftsmen. It was not easy to reproduce in
a day the traditional skill that had been acquired through generations. It was a
loss on both the sides which no sane people would like willingly to perpetuate.

He once more asked them to turn the searchlight inward and not to deceive
themselves or others by asking him to give up his fast, if what he had said did
not find a responsive echo in their hearts.
Maulana Azad, being requested to speak, remarked that so far as the guarantee
of communal peace was concerned, it could be given only by the
representatives of citizens of Delhi. The maulana however, did not want to
leave unchallenged the observation made in the book to which Gandhi had
referred, as it referred to the teachings of Islam. He had no hesitation in
characterizing it as a libel on Islam. He quoted a verse from the Koran which
was to the effect that all mankind are brethren, irrespective of their race or
their religion. The remarks to which Gandhi had just referred were abhorrent
to the teachings of Islam. They were only indicative of insanity that had of late
seized some sections of the people.
He was followed by Hifzur Rahman, who categorically repudiated the allegation

that Muslims, his co-religionists, did not regard India as their country which
claimed, their full and undivided allegiance, but only as a place where they
were forced to live by expediency and by the compulsion of circumstances.
Indeed, their thirty years' unbroken record of service of the nationalist cause,
gave the lie to that charge. They regarded it as an insult to their nationalism to
be asked to reiterate their loyalty to India. He asserted that if India were to be
attacked, they would defend it to the last man as their country. They had
plainly said on more than one occasion that those who were not prepared to do
so, should leave India and go to Pakistan. Describing next the change that had
come over the city as a result of Gandhi's fast, he said that they regarded it as
a happy augury and a presage of things to come. They were satisfied that the
tide had definitely turned and was now fast flowing in the direction of
communal harmony and peace, where previously bitterness and hatred ran riot.
Now that the administration had underwritten the assurance given by the
representatives of the people, they were satisfied that it would be
implemented, though it might take some time. He, therefore, joined Rajendra
Prasad in his appeal that Gandhi should break the fast.

After Mr. Ganesh Datt had on behalf of the Hindu Mahasabha and the R.S.S.
reiterated that appeal, Mr. Zahid Hussain, the High Commissioner for Pakistan
in Delhi, addressed a few words to Gandhi. He was there, he said, to convey to
Gandhi how deeply concerned the people in Pakistan were about him and how
they were inundating him with anxious inquiries about his health. It was their
heart's desire that circumstances might soon prevail which would enable him to
break the fast. If there was anything that he could fittingly do towards that
end, he was ready and so were the people of Pakistan.
Sardar Harban Singh endorsed on behalf of the Sikhs, what the others had
already said.
Gandhi then expressed his readiness to break the fast, which was done with the
ceremony of prayer, at which texts from the Japanese, Muslim and Parsi
scriptures were recited, followed by the mantra:
"Lead me from untruth to truth, From darkness to light, From death to

immortality."
A Christian hymn was then sung by the inmates of the ashram followed by
Ramdhun. The glass of fruit juice was handed by Maulana Azad and Gandhi
broke the fast after fruit was distributed to all present.
The gathering then dispersed, but Nehru stayed on. Only then he told Gandhi
that he had been fasting with him from the day before. Gandhi was deeply
moved. As soon as Nehru had left, he wrote a note for Nehru: "Now break your
fast. May you live for many long years and continue to beJawahar (thejewel)
oflndia. Bapu's blessings."
Speaking on the microphone from his bed, at half past five, on the 18th of
January, Gandhi stated that he had earlier dictated a message for the prayer
audience which would be read out to them.
It was a happy day for him and for all of them. And he was glad that due to
their kindness he could break his fast on the auspicious day of Guru Govind
Singh's birthday anniversary. He could never forget the kindness which was daily
being showered on him by the inhabitants of Delhi, the Pakistan sufferers, the
Government and administrative authorities since the fast commenced. He had

experienced the same love at Calcutta. He could not forget the help that he
had received from Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb in restoring peace in Calcutta.
But for him, the speaker would not have stopped in Calcutta. The people had
many suspicions about Shaheed Suhrawardy Saheb's bona fide still. They should
forget the past and learn the duty of having friendly feelings towards all and
being inimical to none. The millions of Muslims were not all angels, nor were all
the Hindus and the Sikhs. There were both good and bad specimens among all
the communities. Would they be less than friendly towards the so-called
criminal tribes amongst them?
The Muslims were a numerous community scattered all over the world. There
was no reason why they, who stood for friendship with the whole world; should
not be friends with the Muslims. He was not a fortune-teller, but God had given
him intellect and understanding enough to know that if for some reason or
other they could not be friends with the Muslims of the Indian Union, Muslims of
the whole world would be antagonized and they would lose India. Then India,
including both the dominions, would once again pass under foreign domination.
He had received the good wishes and blessings of numberless men and women.
He had been assured that Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, Jews, Christians and
others who lived in the capital, would all live together as brothers. They would
never quarrel among themselves again and in this assurance the sufferers from
Pakistan had also joined. This was no small matter. If the auspicious beginning
was continued, then it was bound to ensure peace in India and thence also in
Pakistan. This was not one man's work but all, young and old, men and women,
had to co-operate sincerely in the efforts. If this was not the meaning of the
breaking of his fast, he had not done well in breaking it. Then they would have
fulfilled the letter, and killed the spirit. What was possible in Delhi, was
possible in the rest of the Union and, if communal peace reigned in the whole
of the Union, Pakistan was bound to follow suit. The people should shed all
fear. Every Muslim child should feel safe among the Hindus and Sikhs. Up till
now, our face was turned towards Satan, now, he hoped, it would be turned
godward. If they did so, the Union would lead the way to world peace. He did
not wish to live for any other purpose. Mere lip-service was no good. They must

install God in their hearts. God was one, whatever the name given to Him. The
realization of this truth, should surely end all enmity and intolerance.
Let Hindus decide once for all that they wrould not quarrel. He would advise
the Hindus as well as the Sikhs to read the Koran as they read the Gita and the
Granth Saheb. And to the Musalmans the speaker would say that they too
should read the Gita and the Granth Saheb with the same reverence with which
they read their Koran. They should understand the meaning of what they read
and have equal regard for all the religions. This was his lifelong practice and
ideal. He claimed to be a sanatani Hindu, although he was not an idolater in
the accepted sense. But then he could not despise those who worshipped the
idols. The idol worshipper saw God in the stone image. God was Omnipresent. If
it was wrong to seek God in a stone, how was it right to seek Him in a book
called the Gita, the Granth Saheb or the Koran? Was not that idol worship? By
cultivating tolerance and respect, they would be able to learn from all. Then
they would forget the communal differences and live together in peace and
amity. The disgraceful incidents, where men and women were thrown out of
the moving trains, would then cease to occur. People would freely and
fearlessly move about in the Union. He would never be at peace with himself
till Pakistan was just as safe for the Hindus and Sikhs and the Pakistan sufferers
could return to their homes with honour and dignity, and the Muslims to theirs
in the Indian Union.
In his written prayer message, Gandhi said:
"I embarked on the fast in the name of Truth, whose familiar name is God.
Without living Truth, God is nowhere. In the name of God, we have indulged in
lies, massacres of people, without caring whether they were innocent or guilty,
men or women, children or infants. We have'indulged in abductions and forcible
conversions and we have done all this shamelessly.! am not aware if anybody
has done these things in the name of Truth. With that same name on my lips, I
have broken the fast. The agony of our people was unbearable. Rashtrapati
Rajendra Babu brought over one hundred people, representing the Hindus,
Muslims, Sikhs and representatives of the Hindu Mahasabha and the R.S.S., and
representatives of refugees from the Punjab, the North-West Frontier Province

and Sind. In this very representative company were present Zahid Hussain
Saheb, the High Commissioner for Pakistan, the Chief Commissioner of Delhi
and the Deputy Commissioner, Shah Nawaz Khan, representing the I.N.A.,
Pandit Nehru, sitting like a statue, v/as, of course, there, as also Maulana
Saheb. Rajendra Babu read a document in Hindustani signed by these rep-
resentatives, asking me not to put any further strain on them and to end the
agony by breaking the fast. Telegrams after telegrams have come from Pakistan
and the Indian Union urging me to do the same. I could not resist the counsel of
all these friends. I could not disbelieve their pledge that come what may, there
would be complete friendship between the Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians,
Parsis and Jews, a friendship not to be broken. To break that friendship, would
be to break the nation.
"As I write, comforting telegrams are deluging me. How I wish that God will
keep me fit enough and sane enough to render the service of humanity, that
lies in front of me! If the solemn pledge made today is fulfilled, I assure you all
that it will revive with redoubled force my intense wish and prayer before God
that I should be enabled to live the full span of life, doing service of humanity,
till the last moment. That span according to learned opinion is at least 125
years, and some say 133 years. The letter of my vow has been fulfilled early
beyond expectation through the great goodwill of all the citizens of Delhi,
including the Hindu Mahasabha leaders and the R.S.S. leaders. The result could
not be otherwise, when I find that thousands of refugees and others have been
fasting, since yesterday. The signed assurances of heart friendship have been
pouring in upon me from thousands. And the telegraphic blessings have come
from all over the world. Can there be a better sign of God's hand in this act of
mine? But beyond the letter of fulfilment of my solemn vow lies its spirit,
without which the letter killeth. The spirit of the vow is sincere friendship
between the Hindus, the Musalmans and the Sikhs of the Indian Union and a
similar friendship in Pakistan. If the first is assured, the second must follow, as
sure as day follows night. If there is darkness in the Union, it would be folly to
expect light in Pakistan. But if the night in the Union is dispelled beyond a
shadow of doubt, it cannot be otherwise in Pakistan nor are the signs wanting

in that direction. Numerous messages have come from Pakistan, not one of
dissent. May God, who is Truth, guide us, as He has visibly guided us during all
these six days."
On January 19, Gandhi's prayer address was read out:
"My thanks go out to the senders of numerous telegrams from all over the world
from the Indians and non-Indians, expressing their goodwill and anxiety. These
show the correctness of the step I had taken. Not that I had the slightest doubt
about it. I had none about this, as I never have had about the reality that God
is and that His most graphic name is Truth. Now has begun a stream of
telegrams of congratulations, heaving relief. These friends will forgive me for
not sending personal acknowledgements. It is physically impossible to do so. I
hope too that no such acknowledgement is expected by the senders.
"In this age of senseless imitation, rny warning is that it surely would be foolish
for anybody to embark on such a fast expecting the identical results in an
identically short space of time. If anyone does, he will face severe
disappointment and he will discredit what is a hoary and infallible institution.
Two severe qualifications are necessary—a living faith in God and a felt
peremptory call from Him. I am here tempted to add a third qualification, but
it is superfluous. A peremptory call from God within, presupposes the
Tightness, timeliness and propriety of the cause, for which the fast is taken. It
follows that a long previous preparation is required. Let no one, therefore,
lightly embark on such a fast.
"The citizens of Delhi and refugees have a heavy task in front of them. Let
thern seek occasions for meeting together as often as possible in perfect
mutual trust. It was a soul-stirring sight for me to meet the Muslim sisters in
large numbers yesterday. The girls in my party told me that the sisters were
sitting in the Birla House, uncertain whether they could come to me. They were
in purdah, most of them. I asked them to be brought in and they came. I
suggested that they would not have the purdah before their fathers or their
brothers. Why should they think me less? And off went the purdah, without
exception. This is not the first time that the purdah has disappeared before

me. I mention the incident to illustrate what genuine love, as I claim mine to
be, is able to do. The Hindu and the Sikh women should go to the Muslim sisters
and establish friendship with them. They should invite them on ceremonial
occasions and be invited. The Muslim girls and boys should be attracted to
common schools, not communal. They should mix in sports. Not only should
there be no boycott of the Muslims, but they should be induced to resume their
previous occupations. Delhi is poorer for the disappearance of the exquisite
workmanship of the Muslims. It is a miserable and miserly thing for the Hindus
and the Sikhs to wish to take away from them their means of livelihood. On the
one hand, there should be no monopoly and, on the other,, there should be no
attempt at deprivation. In this great country of ours, there is room for all. The
peace committees that have been now formed, must not go to sleep, as so
many committees unfortunately do in all countries. The condition of keeping
me in your midst is that all the communities in India live at peace with one
another, not by force of arms, but that of love, than which, there is no better
cement to be found in the world."
The successful ending of Gandhi's fast was prominently featured by the papers
all over the world. The French journal, Le Mond, wrote: "Mahatma Gandhi's
'secret weapon'—that spiritual violence which was taught so long ago by the
gospels and the men of the gospels—will, perhaps, be the best reply to the
atomic bombs. His voice carries far beyond the frontiers of India. If in our
turbulent western world, it is s.till far from dominating the voice of violence, it
is none the less among those voices to which we must listen and which will
carry far beyond our times. Is not this a voice to which men will be forced to
listen one day soon in the atomic age?"
The journal emphasized that such occasions were much too rare when its
editorial could escape from the often sordid considerations of politics and "still
rarer those of seeing that in the disorder and confusion of our times the spirit
has its victories and violence its defeat. Through Mahatma Gandhi, the East
teaches us again that there exists another sort of revolution than the
revolutions of hate. The good Gandhi, product of a country which is still wise

enough to give itself the sages for the heroes—not the warriors and the
politicians—shows himself once again to be the greatest rebel of our time."
Sir Mohamed Zafrullah Khan, the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, informed the
United Nations Security Council at Lake Success that "a new and tremendous
wave of feeling and desire for friendship between India and Pakistan is
sweeping the subcontinent in response to the fast."

16. Light Goes Out ( 1948 )
ON JANUARY 20, 1948, a couple of days after the termination of the fast, an
attempt was made to throw a bomb at Gandhi, as he was addressing a prayer
meeting in the Birla House compound. The bomb exploded some twenty-five
yards away from where he was sitting, but no one was injured. Madan Lai, a
Hindu refugee youth from the West Punjab, was arrested and an unexploded
hand-grenade was found on his person. The explosion was loud enough to be
heard at a far-off distance. Gandhi remained unruffled. "Listen! Listen! Listen
everybody," he said. "Nothing has happened."
Addressing the prayer audiencc in a feeble voice Gandhi observed that Delhi
had done a great thing and he hoped that signatories to the peace pledge had
given their signatures with God, in the form of Truth, as their witness. He had
heard that there was a repudiation of the pledge on behalf of an official of the
Hindu Mahasabha. He was sorry. If the inhabitants of Delhi and the refugees in
the capital would remain steadfast and not be swayed by the happenings
elsewhere, they would save the Union and also Pakistan. Delhi was an ancient
city. If Delhi acted truthfully and non- violently, the effects of its action would
be felt all the world over. If they would carefully read the Sardar's speech at
Bombay, they would realize that there was no difference of outlook between
the Sardar, Panditji and himself. They were all working for the same end,
although they might express it differently. None of them was the enemy of the
Muslims. Enmity towards the Muslims amounted to enmity towards India. The
least that he expected them to do, was not to take the law into their own
hands and commit inhuman acts. That would mean the end of the society. They
were bound as respectable citizens to leave justice in the hands of their chosen
Government. They and their newspapers were never tired of condemning in
unmeasured terms the acts of those Americans as barbarous who lynched the
Negroes. Did similar acts on their part become less barbarous?
He next referred to his statement that he might now proceed to Pakistan. But
that, he emphasized, could only happen, if the Pakistan Government were

convinced that he was a man of peace and friend of the Musalmans and would,
therefore, like him to go to Pakistan. He would, however, in any case, have to
wait, till the doctors declared him quite fit to undertake the journey. The
doctors had said that the convalescence would take at least a fortnight and it
would be some time before he could take solid food. The liquids that he was
taking, included fruit juice, vegetable soup and the goat's milk and this was
enough in all conscience.
Referring to the sufferings of the Hindu and Sikh refugees, he said that Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru was doing all that was possible, in order to bring them speedy
relief. Jawaharlalji's heart bled for them. He was a man who would offer his
own bedding to one in distress and pace up and down the whole night, in order
to keep himself warm. His house was full. Being the Prime Minister of India, he
had to accommodate guests, both Indians and foreigners. And still he had
expressed a wish to offer one or two rooms in his own house to lodge the
refugees. He expected other ministers, officials and men of means to do
likewise. The speaker was convinced that this act of self-sacrifice on the part
of India's foremost leader would be appreciated all the world over and put a
speedy end to the sufferings of the homeless refugees. It should gladden their
hearts to note that this beautiful land of theirs had produced such great men,
endowed with such wonderful spirit of service and self-sacrifice. Jawahar was a
real jawahar, gem, and there were others, only not so lustrous, perhaps. If
their leaders were doing all this for the people, it behoved them not to hurt
their Muslim brethren. To hurt the Muslims was to hurt their leaders.
Speaking after prayers on January 21, Gandhi referred to the previous day's
bomb explosion. He had been receiving anxious inquiries and praise for being
unruffled during the accident. He had thought that it was military practice and,
therefore, nothing to worry about. He indeed had not realized till after the
prayers that it was a bomb explosion and that the bomb was meant against
him. God only knew how he would have behaved in front of a bomb aimed at
him and exploding. Therefore, he deserved no praise. He would deserve a
certificate only if he fell as a result of such an explosion and yet retained a
smile on his face and no malice against the doer. What he wanted to convey

was that no one should look down upon the misguided youth who had thrown
the bomb. The youth probably looked upon the speaker as an enemy of
Hinduism. After all, had not the Gita said that whenever there was an evil-
minded person damaging religion, God sent some one to put an end to his life?
That celebrated verse had a special meaning. The youth should realize that
those who differed from him were not necessarily evil. The evil had no life
apart from the toleration of good people. No one should believe that he or she
was so perfect, that he or she was sent by God to punish the evil-doers, as the
accused seemed to flatter himself he was.
He had heard that the young man had without permission occupied a mosque
for lack of any other accommodation, and now that the police were getting all
mosques evacuated, he resented the act. It was a wrong thing on his part to
have occupied the mosque in the first place and it was doubly wrong to defy
the authorities who had asked him to vacate it.
To those who were at the back of the young man, he would appeal to desist
from such activity. That was not the way to save Hinduism. Hinduism could be
saved only by his method. He had practised Hinduism from his early childhood.
His nurse had taught him to invoke Rama when he feared the evil spirits. Later
on, he had come in contact with the Christians, Muslims and others and, after
making a fair study of other religions, had stuck to Hinduism. He was as firm in
his faith today as in his early childhood. He believed that God would make him
an instrument of saving the religion that he loved and cherished and practised.
In any case, one had to have constant practice and acquaintance with the
fundamentals of religion, before being qualified for becoming God's instrument.
Continuing he said that some Sikh friends came and said that he should not
think that the Sikhs had anything to do with the deed. He knew that the youth
was not a Sikh. But what did it matter whether he was a Sikh or a Hindu or a
Muslim? He wished well to all perpetrators. He had told the Inspector-General
of Police also, not to harass the youth in any way. They should try to win him
over and convert him to right thinking and doing. He hoped that the youth and
his guides would realize their error. For, it was a wrong done to Hinduism and
the country. At the same time, he warned his hearers against being angry with

the accused. The youth did not know that he was doing anything wrong. They
should pity the youth. If they harboured any resentment against his fast and
had still pledged themselves to maintain peace in order to save an old servant
of the nation, the guilt was theirs, and not that of the young man who had
thrown the bomb. If, on the other hand, they iiad signed the peace pledge
wholeheartedly, persons like the young man were ultimately bound to come to
their way of thinking.
He expected them to go on with the prayers in spite of bomb explosions or a

shower of bullets. He was very glad to learn that a poor unlettered woman was
the cause of the arrest of the miscreant. If the heart was sound, if there was
right thought, lack of letters was not of any consequence. He congratulated the
unlettered sister on her simple bravery.
He then referred to a letter addressed to him during his fast. The writer of the
letter had said that while he was in jail in 1942, the country had somewhat
taken to violence. If he died of the fast, there would be such a violent upsurge
in the coujitry that it would stagger humanity. Therefore, the writer had
argued that for the sake of humanity, he should give up his fast. The speaker
said that while it was true that the people had resorted to violence when he
was locked up in jail, he did not think that his death under a fast should have
the feared result. But he had rehearsed before embarking on the fast the
possibility of a wide fratricide. The Yadavas had destroyed each other before
Lord Krishna's death. But the speaker was too insignificant a mortal to produce
such an effect. However, if the people had become indolent and vicious like
the Yadavas, and God saw that there was no way out but extermination, then
He might make even an ordinary person like him, the instrument of such a
catastrophe. Having completely lgft himself in God's hands, he worried no more
about the consequences.
What, however, he saw during the fast nerved him to hope that India had no
such self-destruction in store for her.

In conclusion, he expressed satisfaction at the way the Musalmans were freely

moving about in Delhi. He wanted them to continue the process of self-
purification and to convert their hearts into temples of the living God of Truth.
For the first time after the fast, Gandhi was able to walk to the prayer ground
on January 22. He said in his prayer speech that he was slowly gaining strength
and, God willing, he hoped to return to his normal health before long.
He then went on to say that a friend had written to him that although Pandit
Nehru and other ministers and the officials might lodge some refugees in their
houses, that would not even touch the fringe of the refugee problem. He
agreed that the ministers and the officials together could not house more than
a few thousands at the most. The virtue of the offer consisted not in the
number so to be accommodated, but in the fact that the example of the
leaders doing the act was proving infectious. The British people appreciated the
least act of self-denial on the part of their king for the sake of the people. All
civilized people would appreciate and value such acts of leaders of men.
Jawaharlal Nehru had set an example before the whole country. That this was
so, was proved from the fact that now more refugees were being attracted to
Delhi. They felt evidently that they would be best treated in Delhi. While it was
proof of the popularity of Panditji's example, it was proof also that we had not
learnt the art of self-restraint.
The second difficulty to which his attention was drawn was that while the
Congress had been in the wilderness, it had set before the people the ideal of
service and self-denial and simplicity. In those days it was difficult to collect
even one lakh of rupees. Today, the Congress Government was in charge of
crores of rupees and they could raise as much as they liked. Were they to spend
it as if there was no change from the foreign rule to the indigenous rule? Some
people seemed to think that India's leaders and India's ambassadors must live
and spend money in a style befitting their independent status and must vie with
independent America and England in stylishness. They thought that such
expenditure was necessary in order to uphold India's prestige in the foreign
countries. He did not think so. Independence was not synonymous with
stylishness or with pomp. We had not cut our cloak according to our cloth.

There was no merit in hiding our poverty.' India's status in the world depended
upon India's moral supremacy which her passive resistance had brought her. And
in this, India had no rival as yet, for the other nations, great or small, were
proud of their armaments and their military valour. That was their capital.
India possessed only her moral capital, which increased with the spending. On
any other condition, the Congress claim to revolutionize values when they came
into power, would be forfeited. The people criticized the ministers for
accepting high salaries and not bringing the artificial British standard down to
the natural Indian standard. These critics knew nothing of the private life of
their ministers. But the fashion was for the Congressmen and the others to
expect high emoluments wholly out of keeping with what one was making out
of office. One who managed to live on Rs. 150 per month, would not hesitate to
demand and expect Rs. 500. Such persons felt that they would not be
appreciated unless they demanded high salaries and lived in the old Civil
Service style and dressed up as such. That was not the way to serve India. They
should not forget that a man's value did not depend upon the amount of money
that he earned. The process of self-purification, which they all must share,
demanded right thought and action.
January 23rd being the anniversary of Subhas Bose's birthday, Gandhi referred
to it in his prayer speech. He remarked that he generally did not remember
such dates, nor did he attach much value to dates of birth and death. He did
not know whether it was right or wrong for him to be so indifferent. But he was
just reminded of the day and he was very glad that there was special reason to
take note of Subhas Babu's birthday, in spite of the fact that the deceased
patriot had believed in violence, while he believed in non-violence. However,
he would not forget at this time that it was Subhas Babu who knew no
provincialism nor communal differences. Subhas Babu had in his brave army
men and women drawn from all over India without distinction and evoked
affection and loyalty, which very few have been able to evoke. A lawyer friend
had asked the speaker for a good definition of Hinduism. Though he was a
sanatani Hindu he was unable to define Hinduism. He had forgotten his law for
years. Nor was he learned in the science of religion. But as a layman he could

say that the Hinduism regarded all religions as worthy of all respect. Subhas
Babu was, in his opinion, such a Hindu. And in memory of that great patriot,
they should cleanse their hearts of all communal bitterness.
The gathering at the prayer meeting which had been growing bigger and bigger
for the last two days, reached unusual dimensions on Sunday, January 25.
Gandhi remarked that assurances were daily pouring in that all was well with
Delhi and that there was nothing to worry so far as the communal situation in
the capital was concerned. It gladdened his heart to be told by his Hindu and
Muslim friends that a reunion of hearts was now in the course of being
established and that the people were waking up to the truth that it would not
be possible for them to pursue their normal avocation if they continued
quarrelling among themselves. Having regard to the improved situation, he
suggested that they might go a step further and that each Hindu and Sikh
should make it a point to bring with him at least one Muslim to the prayer
gathering.
Gandhi next referred to the annual celebration of the urs at Bakhtiar Chishti's
dargah at Mehrauli which was to commence from the next day. During the riots
the dargah had been damaged by the miscreants and some of the stone lattice
work was removed. Efforts had been made during the last few days to effect
the repairs, so far as it was possible. Previously, both the Musalmans and the
Hindus used to visit it and take part in the urs. If the Hindus could still go there
in the same spirit of peace and devotion, it would be a great thing. He hoped
that such Muslims as might want to take part in it, would be assured the
completest security and safety from insult or from molestation and that too
with the minimum assistance of the police. He would rather that they should all
constitute themselves into police for the purpose. The eyes of the whole world
were on India. Telegrams were pouring in from all quarters of the globe—from
China, from Africa, from Europe and from America expressing deep
appreciation and admiration of what they had done in Delhi. He hoped that
they would all so act, as to come up to the expectations that had now been
aroused. The transfer of power on the 15th of August as a result of their passive
resistance struggle, was a unique event in the history of the world. But then

they fell from grace, and the Hindus and the Muslims and the Sikhs behaved
towards one another like barbarians. It was, however, he hoped, only a tem-
porary distemper. Their hearts were sound. The fast seemed to have served to
throw out the distemper. He hoped that the cure would be permanent, without
the possibility of a relapse.
He hoped that they would now set him free to go to Wardha. But then he could
go only with their blessings, coupled with the solemn guarantee that things
would be well during his absence. He wanted to go to Pakistan too. But since
legally Pakistan was now foreign territory, he could go there only with the
permission and consent, if not the invitation, of the Government of Pakistan.
Gandhi next referred to the Congress Working Committee, which had been
sitting for the last two days. He revealed that they had been discussing the
question of reconstitution of provinces on a linguistic basis. Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were both present in that day's Working
Committee meeting. The Congress had already adopted that principle and had
declared its intention to give effect to it constitutionally, as soon as they came
to power, as such redistribution would be conducive to the cultural
advancement of the country. But such redistribution should not militate against
the organic unity of India. Autonomy did not and should not mean disruption, or
that hereafter the provinces could go the way they chose, independent of one
another and of the Centre. If each province began to look upon itself as a
separate sovereign unit, India's independence would lose its meaning, and with
it would vanish the freedom of the various units, as well.
The charter of India's independence as conceived by the Congress was based on

the village autonomy. But all the villages were to derive vitality from the
Centre, as the Centre in its turn derived all power and authority from the
villages. It would be fatal, if it led to narrow provincialism, mutual bickerings
and rivalries between Tamil and Andhra, for instance, Bombay and Karnatak
and so on. The redistribution of the provinces on a linguistic basis was
necessary, if the provincial languages were to grow to their full height.
Hindustani was to be the lingua franca, rashtrabkasha, of India but it could not
take the place of the provincial tongues. Hindustani could not be the medium

of instruction in the provinces—much less English. Its function was to make

them realize their organic relationship with India. The world outside did not
know them as Gujaratis or Maha- rashtrians or Tamilians, etc., but only as
Indians. We must, therefore, resolutely discourage all fissiparous tendencies
and feel and behave as Indians. Subject to this paramount consideration, a
linguistic redistribution of the provinces should give an impetus to education
and trade.
He fervently hoped that they would not need a boundary commission to delimit
their frontiers on the new basis. That was the foreign way which they had
discarded. The best thing would be for themselves to determine boundaries on
the new basis by mutual agreement and consent and then to place the same
before their Prime Minister for his final sanction. That would be the true
independence. To go to a third party in the shape of a boundary commission for
a settlement would be g. negation of independence. They must evolve
interdependence and mutual help.
The following day, Gandhi's post-prayer address was read out:
"This day, 26 January, is Independence Day. This observance was quite

appropriate when we were fighting for independence we had not seen nor
handled. Now! We have handled it and we seem to be disillusioned. At least I
am, even if you are not.
"What are we celebrating today? Surely not our disillusionment. We are entitled
to celebrate the hope that the worst is over and that we are now on the road to
showing the lowliest of the villager that it means his freedom from serfdom and
that the villager is no longer a serf born to serve the cities and the towns of
India, but that he is destined to exploit the city dwellers for the advertisement
of the finished fruits of well thought-out labours, that he is the salt of the
Indian earth, that it means also equality of all classes and creeds, never the
domination and superiority of the major community over a minor, however
insignificant it may be in number or influence. Let us not defer the hope and
make the heart sick. Yet what are the strikes and a variety of lawlessness but a
deferring of the hope? These are the symptoms of our sickness and our

weakness. Let labour realize its dignity and strength. Capital has neither dignity
nor strength, compared to labour. These, the man in the street also has. In a
well-ordered democratic society, there is no room, no occasion, for lawlessness
or for strikes. In such a society, there are ample lawful means for vindicating
justice. Violence, veiled or unveiled, must be taboo. Strikes in Cawnpore, in
coal mines or elsewhere, mean the material loss to the whole society, not
excluding the strikers themselves. I need not be reminded that this declamation
does not lie well in the mouth of one like me, who has been responsible for
many successful strikes. If there be such critics, they ought not to forget that
then there was neither independence nor the kind of legislation we have now. I
indeed wonder, if we can remain free from the fever of power politics or the
bid for power, which afflicts the political world, the East and the West.
"Before leaving this topic of the day, let us permit ourselves to hope that
though geographically and politically India is divided into two, at heart we shall
ever be friends and brothers, helping and respecting one another and be one
for the outside world."
On January 27, Mr. Kingsley Martin had an interview with Gandhi. Gandhi
explained at length how the freedom movement had not been a non-violent
movement in the highest sense of the term. If it had been the non-violence of
the strong, no butchery, such as had taken place recently, could have come
about. He discovered this while he was on his pilgrimage in Noakhali, and ever
since this discovery, he had been impressing the fact on everyone. He felt that
non-violence during the struggle for independence was an expedient, and
resistance to the white man was undertaken in a non-violent manner, simply
because we had no military strength with which to offer battle.
He went on to relate how he had resisted a certain millionaire in South Africa,

who had introduced him, at a public meeting, as a mere passive resister and
weak, because as an Indian there, he was landless and without any rights. He
objected to this description and asserted that real passive resistance had been
miscalled a weapon of the weak. After all, Jesus Christ had been called the
prince of passive resisters. Could Jesus, in any sense of term, be called a weak

man ? People forget that soul force; the only weapon of the truly non-violent
man, was a weapon of the strong.
In answer to Mr. Martin's suggestion that many people looked upon non-violence
as a good opposition weapon in politics and that they could not understand how
non-violence could, for example, be used as a positive weapon in Kashmir
today, or against a man like Hitler, who just killed everybody and stamped out
opposition in that manner, Gandhi laughingly said that he was not in charge of
the Government and, therefore, he could not guide their policies; nor did he
for a moment think that the members of the present Government believed in
non-violence. He then recalled how Maulana Azad had said, "When we gain
power, we shall not be able to hold it non-violently." He said that he had
laughed to himself at that time and related the moral of Tolstoy's story of Ivan
the Fool, which had always remained w ith him. The Hindu scriptures had
scores of such stories also, but then he quoted Iran the Fool, because the
interviewer might have read the book. Ivan remained non-violent even when he
became king. He then pointed out how the truly non-violent man can never
hold power himself. He derives power from the people, whom he serves. For
such a man or such a government, a non-violent army would be a perfect
possibility. The voters then would themselves say, "We do not want any military
for our defence."
A non-violent army would fight against all injustice or attack, he said, but with
clean weapons; "Non-violence does not signify that man must not fight against
the enemy, and by enemy is meant the evil which men do, not the human
beings themselves." He went on to say that if he were the leader of Kashmir
like Sheikh Abdullah, he would have such an army, but Sheikh Abdullah quite
honestly and humbly thought otherwise.
On Mr. Kingsley Martin suggesting a solution of the Kashmir problem on the

basis of separation—the predominantly pro-Pakistan region, such as, Punch
going to Pakistan, arid the Kashmir Valley remaining in India— Gandhi had no
difficulty in giving a resolute answer in the negative. He held firmly that India,
or any part of India, could not be divided in this manner. It was the evil that
must not be allowed to continue. "Take, for example, Hyderabad; will you

separate the town of Hyderabad from the rest of the state? Such pockets exist
all over India and separation would then become an endless process spelling the
ruination of India."
Mr. Kingsley Martin then pleaded that the position of Hyderabad was not wholly
analogous. Any state on a border area was certainly different. But Gandhi
maintained that it was not possible for the states, even on the border, to be
either cut up or separated, or even for them to call themselves independent.
And when the correspondent mentioned Gilgit, Gandhi recalled that he was in
Kashmir when the city of Srinagar was illuminated. On questioning what the
illuminations were for, he was told that they were celebrating the accession of
Gilgit to Kashmir. He was sad when he heard the news, because he wondered
how long Kashmir would hold Gilgit. It had been a big bite even for Great
Britain. Britain's policy of keeping on adding to her territories in India, had not
been either a wise or a right policy. If Kashmir accedes to I-ndia, it will be
because of the will of the people as a whole, and they will do so well knowing
that Gilgit is today no part of the Indian Union. There are people who say that
they will reconquer Gilgit. All sorts of complications would then arise. He said
that Great Britain had made of India a political whole, and India must continue
as such.
In reply to a query as to what Pakistan could do with the tribal people, he said:
"I would accept a challenge of conquering the tribal areas, but as a non-violent
man. I would not bribe them, nor kill them; I would serve them. Have not
missionaries allowed themselves to be eaten by cannibals?"
The interviewer exclaimed, "Alas! there are no Gandhis in the U.S.A., Palestine
or in Russia!"
Gandhi laughingly said: "So much the worse for them!"
In answer to a query as to why Punch going over to Pakistan was not

impracticable and that a war between India and the North-West Frontier would
be unending, Gandhi replied that it would be a very bad example to others.
There were pockets everywhere, for example, Murshidabad in West Bengal. And
the vital difference between the policy of the Indian Union and that of Pakistan

was that the Indian leaders never believed in dismemberment, while the
Pakistan leaders did. He quoted the example of Kathiawad. Pakistan wanted to
vivisect Kathiawad by getting Junagadh to accede to that dominion. Vivisection
of Kathiawad which is indivisible was quite unthinkable. The whole basis of
partition was, in his opinion, wrong. He admitted that two distinguished
persons had suggested the idea of partition of Kashmir to him, but he had said a
very firm "No".
Gandhi asked the correspondent to study things deeply and not superficially. He
himself was working for a heart union between the Hindus and the Muslims, not
only in India but in Pakistan also, and he would continue his efforts in that
direction.
On January 27, Gandhi wrote on "Congress Position":
"The Indian National Congress, which is the oldest national political

organization and which has after many battles fought her non-violent way to
freedom, cannot be allowed to die. It can only die with the nation. A living
organism ever grows or it dies. The Congress has won political freedom, but it
has yet to win economic freedom, social and moral freedom. These freedoms
are harder than the political, if only because they are constructive, less
exciting and not spectacular. All-embracing constructive work evokes the
energy of all the units of the millions.
"The Congress has got the preliminary and necessary part of her freedom. The
hardest has yet to come. In its difficult ascent to democracy, it has inevitably
created rotten boroughs, leading to corruption and creation of institutions,
popular and democratic, only in name. How to get out of the weedy and
unwieldy growth?
"The Congress must do away with its special register of the members, at no
time exceeding one crore, not even then easily identifiable. It had an unknown
register of millions, who could never be wanted. Its register should now be co-
extensive with all the men and women on the voters' rolls in the country. The
Congress business should be to see that no faked name gets in and no
legitimate name is left out. On its own register, it will have a body of servants

of the nation, who would be workers doing the work allotted to them, from
time to time.
"Unfortunately for the country, they will be drawn chiefly for the time being
from the city-dwellers, most of whom would be required to work for and in the
villages of India. The ranks must be filled in increasing numbers from villagers.
"These servants will be expected to operate upon and to serve the voters,
registered according to law, in their own surroundings. Many persons and
parties will woo them. The very best will win. Thus, and in no other way, can
the Congress regain its fast ebbing unique position in the country. But
yesterday, the Congress was unwittingly the servant of the nation, it was
Khudai Khidmatgar—God's servant. Let the Congress now proclaim to itself and
the world that it is only God's servant—nothing more, nothing less. If it engages
in the ungainly skirmish for power, it will find one fine morning that it is no
more. Thank God, the Congress is now no longer in sole possession of the field.
"I have only opened to view the distant scene. If I have the time and health, I
hope to discuss in these columns what the servants of the nation can do to raise
themselves in the estimation of their masters, the whole of the adult
population, male and female."
In an interview with Gandhi, Mr. Vincent Sheean asked: "If those who believe in
the ideal of non-violence keep away from government, government will
continue to be carried on by the use of force. How is then the transformation of
the existing government to be brought about?"
Gandhi admitted that ordinarily government was impossible without the use
offeree. "I have, therefore, said that a man who wants to be good and do good
in all circumstances must not hold power."
"Is all government to come to a standstill then?" Mr. Sheean asked.
"No," Gandhi rejoined. "The man of non-violence can send those to the
government who represent his will. If he goes there himself, he exposes himself
to a corrupting influence of power. But my representative holds power of
attorney only during my pleasure. If he falls a prey to temptation, he can be
recalled. I cannot recall myself. All this requires a high degree of intelligence

on the part of the electorate. There are about half a dozen constructive work
organizations. I do not send them to the parliament. I want them to keep
parliament under check by educating and guiding the voters."
"You mean to say that power always corrupts?"
"Yes," said Gandhi emphatically.
To Mr. Sheean's question whether misuse of atomic energy might not endanger
our planet itself, Gandhi answered that everything was possible "including the
dissolution of appearances, and the survivors, if any, will then say, 'What a
wonderful spectacle!'" Gandhi very much doubted that the advent of the atomic
era would basically affect the human problems. "They claim that one atom
bomb changed the entire course of the war and brought the end of w^r so much
nearer. Has it conquered the Japanese spirit? Has it crushed Germany as a
nation? It has not and it cannot. To do that would require resorting to Hitler's
method, and to what purpose? In the end it will be Hitlerism that will have
triumphed." •
Two days later, Gandhi sketched a draft constitution for the Congress:
"Though split into two, India, having attained political independence through
means devised by the Indian National Congress, the Congress in its present
shape and form, as a propaganda vehicle and a parliamentary machine, has
outlived its use. India has still to attain social, moral and economic
independence in terms of its seven hundred thousand villages as distinguished
from its cities and towns. The struggle for the ascendency of civil over military
power is bound to take place in India's progress towards its democratic goal. It
must be kept out of unhealthy competition with political parties and communal
bodies. For these and other similar reasons, the A.I.C.C. resolves to disband the
existing Congress organization and flower into a Lok Sevak Sangh under the
following rules with the power to alter them as occasion may demand.
"Every panchayat of five adult men or women being villagers, village- minded
shall form a unit.
"Two such contiguous panchayats shall form the working party under a leader
elected from among themselves.

"When there are a hundred such panchayats, the fifty first grade leaders shall
elect from among themselves a second grade leader and so on, the first grade
leaders, meanwhile working under the second grade leader. Parallel groups of
two hundred panchayats shall continue to be formed till they cover the whole
of India, each succeeding group of panchayats electing a second grade leader
after the manner of the first. All second grade leaders shall serve jointly for the
whole of India and severally for their respective areas. The second grade
leaders may elect, whenever they deem necessary, from among themselves a
chief who will, during pleasure, regulate and command all the groups.
"(As the final formation of provinces or districts is still in a state of flux, no

attempt has been made to divide this group of servants into provincial or
district councils and jurisdiction over the whole of India has been vested in the
group or groups that may have been formed at any given time. It should be
noted that this body of servants derive their authority or power from service
ungrudgingly and wisely done to their master, the whole of India.)
"1. Every worker shall be a habitual wearer of khadi, made from self-spun yarn
or certified by the A.I.S.A., atnd he must be a teetotaller. If a Hindu, he must
have abjured untouchability in any shape or form in his own person or in his
family and must be a believer in the ideal of inter- communal unity, equal
respect and regard for all religions and equality of opportunity and status for
all, irrespective of race, creed or sex.
"2. He shall come in personal contact with every villager within his jurisdiction.
"3. He shall enrol and train workers from amongst the villagers and keep a
register of all these.
"4. He shall keep a record of his work from day to day.
"5. He shall organize the villages so as to make them self-contained and self-
supporting through their agriculture and handicrafts.
"6. He shall educate the village folk in sanitation and hygiene and take all
measures for prevention of ill heailth and disease among them.

"7. He shall organize the education of the village folk from birth to death along
the lines of Nayee Talim, in accordance with the policy laid down by the
Hindustani Talimi Sangh.
"8. He shall see that those whose names are missing on the statutory voters' roll
are duly entered therein.
"9. He shall encourage those who have not yet acquired the legal qualification,
to acquire it for getting the right of franchise.
"10. For the above purposes and others to be added from time to time, he shall
train and fit himself in accordance with the rules laid down by the sangh for the
due performance of duty.
"The sangh shall affiliate the following autonomous bodies: All-India Spinners'
Association, All-India Village Industries Association, Hindustani Talimi Sangh,
Harijan Sevak Sangh and Goseva Sangh.
"The sangh shall raise finances for the fulfilment of its mission from among the
villagers and others, special stress being laid on collection of the poor man's
pice."
On January 27, Gandhi was taken right into the sanctum sanctorum of the
dargah at Mehrauli. He was visibly moved at the sight of the wanton damage
done to the marble screens enclosing the inner shrines. He had hardly imagined
that he would be required to deliver an address on that occasion. He was
deeply touched by the spectacle before him. He had come there on pilgrimage,
not to make speeches, Gandhi remarked. Ever since he had heard that it might
not be possible to hold the urs at Mehrauli as in previous years, he had been
deeply distressed over it. It, therefore, gave him supreme satisfaction that the
citizens' of Delhi had now risen to the occasion and had given a lie to those
fears. If the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs of Delhi thoroughly cleansed their hearts
and made up their minds never again to allow the fratricidal strife to raise its
head, India and Pakistan, united in a brotherly bond, would together command
the respect and regard of the world, instead of becoming the butt of the
world's ridicule. One could understand the division of patrimony as between the
blood brothers. But did it mean that, thereafter, they must become enemies?

The speaker's answer was, "No". If they did, the world would set them down as
fools. He would go even further and call them uncivilized. When he had broken
his fast, they had pledged themselves to live together in amity and peace like
blood brothers. They should now renew and confirm that pledge. All religions
were, at bottom, one, though they differed in detail and outward form even
like the leaves on a tree. Each leaf has a separate and a distinct existence, but
they are all sprung from and are organically related to the trunk. Again, no two
leaves are alike. Yet they never quarrel among themselves. Instead, they dance
to the same breeze and emit a sweet symphony together. "I want you to take a
vow," Gandhi stressed, "that you will never again listen to the voice of Satan
and abandon the way of brotherliness and peace. Personally, I have never
known what it is to be communal. To unite all sections and all the communities
that people this vast land of ours has been my dream, ever since my early
childhood, and till that dream is realized my spirit can know no rest."
He warned them against being carried off their feet by the news of the attack
on the Parachinar Refugee Camp at Peshawar by the trans-border tribals. They
must regard it as a test of their faith. It had also shocked him. But they must
never allow even such incidents to rekindle in their hearts the sentiment of
retaliation or of revenge. They should instead proclaim to themselves and all
concerned that they were out not to demand blood for blood—that was the way
to suicide—but to confront with love even the murderer. "It might appear very
difficult," he said. "But I do not think so. That is why, when I broke my fast, I
emphasized, that if only the people of Delhi thoroughly purified their hearts
and kept the same pure, Delhi could then solve the problem of India. And if, on
the other hand, they did things which they did not mean, only to prolong the
life of an old man like myself, they would verily encompass my death, while
deluding themselves into the belief that they were saving my life."
On January 28, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur asked, "Were there any noises in your
prayer meeting today?" "No," said Gandhi. "But does that question mean that
you are worrying about me? If I am to die by the bullet of a madman, I must do
so smiling. There must be no anger within me. God must be in my heart and on

my lips. And you promise me one thing. Should such a thing happen, you are
not to shed one tear."
At the prayer meeting on January 29, Gandhi referred to a deputation of about

forty refugees from Bannu, who had called on him in the afternoon. Poor men
they were in an afflicted state and he prized their darshan. One of them said
that they owed their miseries to him and angrily asked him to leave them alone
and to retire to the Himalayas. The speaker asked him at whose bidding he
should go. Some of them were annoyed and a few went to the length of abusing
him, while many eulogized his efforts. The only course, therefore, open to him
was to follow the dictates of God, who spoke to men in the inmost chamber of
the heart. There were women too in that company. He regarded them as his
sisters. When he said that every woman was his sister or daughter, her grief
became his grief. "Why do you feel that I do not know your adversities and do
not feel my share in them?" he then asked. "I have not taken to the service of
humanity at anyone's bidding and cannot give up that service at anyone's
bidding. I am what God has willed me to be and act as He directs. Let Him do
what He wills of me. If He so chooses, He can kill me. I believe that I am acting
as He commands me. I would very much enjoy living in the Himalayas. I will not
be in want of food or drink or clothing there. It will be a peaceful place. But I
do not want peace of that sort. I want to reach peace through agony. My
Himalayas is here. If you are all going to the Himalayas, surely you can take me
with you."
The whole of January 29th was so full of activity that at the end of the day
Gandhi was utterly fagged out. His head was reeling. "And yet I must finish
this," he remarked, pointing to the draft constitution for the Congress, which
he had undertaken to prepare for the Working Committee. He rose at quarter
past nine to retire to bed. He was feeling very much disturbed and he recited
to Manu a Urdu couplet, meaning:
"The spring of the garden of the world lasts for a few days;
Have a look at its show for a few days."

On Friday morning, January 30, he woke up as usual at half past three for the
prayer. Then he sat down to work and then took a nap. At eight, he got ready
for his massage. Passing through Pyarelal's room, he handed him the draft of a
new constitution for the Congress, which he had partly prepared on the
previous night, and he asked Pyarelal to revise it. "Fill in any gaps in thought
that there might be," he added. "I wrote it under a heavy strain."
Passing out of the room at the end of the massage, Gandhi inquired if Pyarelal
had finished the revision and further asked him to prepare a note on how to
meet the threatened food crisis in Madras in the light of his experiences in
Noakhali. "The Food Ministry is feeling nervous. But I maintain that a province
like Madras, that is blessed by nature with coconut, palm, groundnut and
banana in such plenty, not to mention roots and tubers of various kinds, need
not starve, if only people know how to husband their resources in food."
Gandhi then proceeded to take his bath. When he emerged from it, he
appeared much refreshed and severe strain of the previous night had dis-
appeared. At half past nine, he took his morning meal, after going through his
daily exercise in Bengali writing—a practice he had invariably followed ever
since he embarked on the epic tour in Noakhali. He was still at his meal,
consisting of goat's milk and cooked and raw vegetables, oranges and decoction
of ginger and sour lemons, when Pyarelal took to him the draft constitution of
the Congress. He carefully went through the additions and alterations, point by
point, and removed an error of calculation that had crept in with regard to the
number of the panchayat leaders.
After his midday nap, he saw visitors. There were some Muslim priests from
Delhi, who gave their consent to his going to Wardha. He told them that he
would be absent for a short while only, unless God willed it otherwise and
something unforeseen happened.
He told to Bishan: "Bring me my important letters. I must reply to them today,

for tomorrow I may never be."
A Sindhi deputation called on Gandhi. Their sufferings greatly moved him. He

referred to the advice offered to him by one refugee to retire to the Himalayas.

Chuckling with laughter, Gandhi observed that nothing would be better in one
sense—he would develop into a double Mahatma and attract larger crowds. But
what he wanted was not vainglory or ease, but such comfort and strength as he
could extract out of the prevailing darkness and misery.
At 4 p.m. Sardar Patel went to see Gandhi and was with him for one hour.
Despite the relaxation that followed'his recent fast, Gandhi knew of the friction
between the Sardar and Nehru, and it worried him. He wanted them to hold
together. Nehru and Azad were to see him after the evening prayers. At 5 p.m.
he took out his watch and told the Sardar that it was time for his prayers. He
left his room at 5.10 p.m. to wend his way to the prayer congregation on the
adjoining lawn. His grand-daughters, Manu and Abha, were by his side. He
leaned on them as he walked. As he passed through the cordoned path through
the prayer congregation, he took his hands off the shoulders of those two girls
to acknowledge the greetings of the people. All of a sudden, someone from the
crowd, a Hindu named Nathuram Godse, roughly elbowed his way through the
crowd. Manu, thinking that he was coming forward to touch Gandhi's feet,
remonstrated and tried to stop the intruder by holding his hand. He violently
jerked her off, and bending before Gandhi with his palms folded, as if in the
act of making obeisance, fired point-blank three shots in quick succession from
a seven-chambered automatic pistol. All the bullets hit Gandhi on and below
the chest on the right side. Two bullets passed right through; the third bullet
remained embedded in the lung. At the first shot, the foot that was in motion
faltered. The hands which had been raised in namaskar slowly came down. He
still stood on his legs; then the second and third shots rang out and he
collapsed. He uttered He Rama. The face turned ashen grey. A crimson spot
appeared on the white clothes. The body was carried inside and laid on the
mattress, where he used to sit and work. Death was instantaneous.
Jawaharlal Nehru rushed to the spot. Overwhelmed with grief, he bent his head
down and began to sob like a child.
Sorrow descended everywhere. Flag were lowered all over the world.
Over the radio, Jawaharlal said :

"The light has gone out of our lives . . . Yet I am wrong, for the light that shone
in this country was no ordinary light . . . and a thousand years later that light
will still be seen in this country and the world will see it. For that light
represented the living truth."


















The following letters from Gandhi to Jawaharlal Nehru

are published with the kind permission of Nehru
APPENDIX
Satyagraha Ashram , Sabarmati
January 4, 1928
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I feel that you love me too well to resent what I am about to write. In any case,
I love you too well to restrain my pen when I feel I must write.
You are going too fast. You should have taken time to think and become
acclimatized. Most of the resolutions you framed and got carried could have
been delayed for one year. Your plunging into the "republican army" was a
hasty step. But I do not mind these acts of yours so much, as I mind your
encouraging mischief-makers and hooligans. I do not know whether you still
believe in an unadulterated non-violence. But, even if you have altered your
views, you could not think that unlicensed and unbridled violence is going to
deliver the country. If after careful observation of the country in the light of
your European experiences convinces you of the error of the current ways and
means, by all means enforce your own views, but do please form a disciplined
party. You know the Cawn- pore experiences. In every struggle, bands of men
who would submit to discipline are needed. You seem to be overlooking this
factor in being careless about your instruments.
If I can advise you, now that you are the working secretary of the Indian
National Congress, it is your duty to devote your whole energy to the central
resolution, that is, unity, and the important but the secondary resolution, that
is, boycott of the Simon Commission. The unity resolution requires the use of
all your great gifts of organization and persuasion.
I have no time to elaborate my points but verbum sapienti.
I hope Kamala is keeping as well as in Europe.
Yours,
BAPU

The Ashram,
Sabarmati January 17, 1928
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I must dictate and save time and give rest to my aching shoulder. I wrote to you
on Sunday about Fenner Brockway. I hope, you got that letter in due-time.
Do you know that it was because you were the chief partner in the transactions
referred to that I wrote the articles you have criticized, except, of course,
about the so-called "All-India Exhibition"? I felt a kind of safety that, in view of
the relations between you and me, my writings would be taken in the spirit in
which they were written. However, I see that they were a misfire all round. I
do not mind it. For, it is evident that the articles alone could deliver you from
the self-suppression, under which you have been labouring apparently for so
many years. Though I was beginning to detect some differences in viewpoint
between you and me, I had no notion whatsoever of the terrible extent of those
differences. Whilst you were heroically suppressing yourself for the sake of the
nation and in the belief that by working with and under me in spite of yourself,
you would serve the nation and come out scatheless, you were chafing under
the burden of this unnatural self-suppression. And, while you were in that
state, you overlooked the very things which appear to you now as my serious
blemishes. I could show you from the pages of Young India equally strong
articles written by me, when I was actively guiding the Congress with reference
to the doings of the All-India Congress Committee. I have spoken similarly at
the All-India Congress Committee meetings, whenever there has been
irresponsible and hasty talk or action. But whilst you were under stupefaction
these things did not jar on you, as they do now. And it seems to me, therefore,
useless to show you the discrepancies in your letter. What I am now concerned
with is future action.
If any freedom is required from me, I give you all the freedom you may need
from the humble but unquestioning allegiance that you have given to me for all
these years and which I value all the more for the knowledge I have now gained

of your state. I see quite clearly that you must carry on open warfare against
me and my views. For, if I am wrong, I am evidently doing irreparable harm to
the country and it is your duty after having known it to rise in revolt against
me. Or, if you have any doubt as to the correctness of your conclusions, I shall
gladly discuss them wTith you personally. The differences between you and me
appear to me to be so vast and so radical that there seems to be no meeting
ground between us. I cannot conceal from you my grief that I should lose a
comrade so valiant, so faithful, so able and so honest, as you have always been;
but in serving a cause, comradeships have got to be sacrificed. The cause must
be held superior to all such considerations. But'this dissolution of comradeship
—if dissolution must come—in no way affects our personal intimacy. We have
long become members of the same family, and we remain such, in spite of
grave political differences. I have the good fortune to enjoy such relations with
several people. To take Sastri for instance, he and I differ in the political
outlook as poles asunder, but the bond between him and me, that sprung up
before we knew the political differences, has persisted and survived the fiery
ordeals it had to go through.
I suggest a dignified way of unfurling your banner. Write to me a letter for

publication showing your differences. I will print it in Young India and write a
brief reply. Your first letter I destroyed after reading and replying to it, the
second I am keeping, and if you do not want to take the trouble of writing
another letter, I am prepared to publish the letter that is before me. I am not
aware of any offensive passage in it. But if I find any, you may depend upon my
removing every such passage. I consider that letter to be a frank and honest
document.
With love,
Yours sincerely,
BAPU

Satyagraha Ashram, Sabarmati
April 1, 1928
MY DEAR JAWAHAR,
I have your letter.
The enclosed copies will tell you what progress is being made in the
negotiations with the millowners. I, however, agree with you that nothing will
come out of them at the present moment. But the negotiations may fructify in
due occasion. There was a time when the millowners were absolutely opposed
about boycott and khadi propaganda. I shall write to you again after these
negotiations are finished.
Though Romain Rolland's first expected letter has arrived and he warmly looks
forward to my proposed visit, it does not enable me to come to a decision. As
the time for arriving at a fixed decision is drawing nearer, my diffidence is
growing. There may be, however, a cable from Rolland next week and it may
decide my fate. Meanwhile, there is no going to Singapore. I am fixed up here
for the time being. If I do not go to Europe, I am due to go to Burma and pass
there two months, going to a hill-side and making collections during my stay
there.
I am quite of your opinion that some day we shall have to start an intensive
movement without the rich people and without the vocal educated class. But
that time is not yet.
You do not tell me where Kamala is to pass the summer months.
Yours sincerely,
BAPU

The Ashram, Sabarmati
April 4, 1928
MY DEAR JAWAHAR,
I have your letter. I do not remember father having told me that he would be
back in Bombay to confer with the millowners during the last week of this
month. But he and I discussed the question of foreign cloth boycott at length
and we had a conference with Sheth Lalji, Shantikumar, and Sheths Ambalal,
Kasturbhai and Mangaldas. It was a good conference, but "nothing definite was
done. I have now definitely heard that the millowners are going to start their
own Swadeshi League, which means, of course, that we are not coming to any
terms.
I had a long discussion with Lalji today, for he was here for two days. He is
enthusiastic about boycott of foreign cloth. I have supplied him with literature.
He even suggested that I should invite a few leaders and confer with them
about boycott. I told him that I had not the courage to do so. He is of opinion
that, if intense boycott propaganda is to be taken up, I must not go out of the
country, wherein, of course, I agree; but I cannot take up intense propaganda
unless politically-minded India is wholeheartedly with me and unless the
agitation about "temporary boycott of the British goods, principally of the
British cloth," is given up. We have, therefore, come to this provisional
arrangement that if anything concrete takes place by spontaneous action on the
part of the known leaders, I should give up the idea of going to Europe. On the
other hand, if nothing of that kind happens and if otherwise I see my way clear,
I should proceed and that Lalji and others who are minded like him should
cultivate an atmosphere for intense propaganda about foreign cloth boycott
with or without the assistance of mills. I, therefore, suggest that you should
confer with Dr. Ansari and others—I suppose they will all go to the Punjab —and
pass the resolution about foreign cloth boycott through khadi. I would warn you
against any mention of indigenous mill cloth. You can simply say: "Whereas the
only effective means of immediately demonstrating the united strength of the

nation lies through boycott of foreign cloth, this conference urges all concerned
completely to boycott foreign cloth and adopt handspun and handwoven khadi,
even though such adoption may necessitate revision of one's taste about dress
and some pecuniary sacrifice."
You will also let me know the result of private discussions you may have with
friends and advise me as to whether I should give up the idea of going to
Europe. Dr. Ansari should really be able to decide.
Yours sincerely,
BAPU

On the train
29-7-1929
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
Your letters to Indu are excellent and should be published. I wish you could
have written them in Hindi. Even as it is, there should be a simultaneous
publication in Hindi.
Your treatment of the subject is quite orthodox. The origin of man is now a
debatable subject. The origin of religion is a still more debatable matter. But
these differences do not detract from the nature of your letters. They have a
value derived not from the truth of your conclusions but from the manner of
treatment and from the fact that you have tried to reach Indu's heart and open
the eyes of her understanding in the midst of your external activities.
I did not want to strive with Kamala over the watch I have taken away. I could
not resist the love behind the gift. But the watch will still be kept as a trust for
Indu. In the midst of so many Jittle ruffians about me, I could not keep such a
piece of furniture. I would, therefore, be glad to know that Kamala will
reconcile herself to Indu getting back her darling watch. My article on the
Congress crown is already written. It will be out in the next issue of Young
India.
Yours,
BAPU

August 7, 1929
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I do not like the title "Dawn of History". Father's letters to his daughter may be
a better title than letters to Indira, though I do not mind the latter.
I wish Kamala would be freed from these recurring pains. I should risk the
operation, if the doctors would perform it.
I am keeping the clock under lock and key and shall bring it on my coming
there.
I go to Bombay on August 11 to meet Jinnah. I admire Sarojini Devi's optimism.

But I am going to Bombay with much hope.
Yours,
BAPU

Aligarh
November 4, 1929
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I have just got your letter. How shall I console you? Hearing others describe
your state, I said to myself, "Have I been guilty of putting undue pressure on
you?" I have always believed you to be above undue pressure. I have always
honoured your resistance. It has always been honourable. Acting under that
belief, I pressed my suit. Let this incident be a lesson. Resist me always, when
my suggestion does not appeal to your head or heart. I shall not love you the
less for that resistance.
But, why are you dejected? I hope, there is no fear of public opinion in you. If
you have done nothing wrong, why dejection? The ideal of independence is not
in conflict with greater freedom. As an executive officer now and president for
the coming year, you could not keep yourself away from a collective act of the
majority of your colleagues. In my opinion, your signature was logical, wise and
otherwise correct. I hope, therefore, that you will get over your dejection and
resume your unfailing cheerfulness.
The statement you may certainly make. But there is no hurry about it at all.
Here are copies of two cables just received. Please show these to father also.
If you feel like talking things over with me, don't hesitate to catch me,
wherever you like.
I hope to see Kamala hale and hearty when I reach Allahabad.
If you can, do wire that the blues are over.
Yours,
BAPU

Ras
19-3-1930
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
You are in for a whole night vigil but it is inevitable if you are to return before
tomorrow night. The messenger will bring you where I may be. You are reaching
me at the most trying stage in the march. You will have to cross a channel at
about 2 a.m. on the shoulders of tried fishermen. I dare not interrupt the
march, exen for the chief servant of the nation.
Love,
BAPU

Yeravda Central Prison, Poona
February 13, 1933
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
In the hope of giving you a good letter against your splendid letter, I have been
postponing writing to you. But I can do so no longer. Daily the work is
increasing. I must, therefore, write now and do the best I can. I wonder if you
are allowed an innocent paper like the Harijan. I am sending it in the hope that
you will get it. If you do, you will please let me have your opinion. The fight
against sanatanists is becoming more and more interesting, if also increasingly
difficult. The one good thing is that they have now been awakened from long
lethargy. The abuses they are hurling at me are wonderfully refreshing. I am all
that is bad and corrupt on this earth. But the storm will subside, for I apply the
sovereign remedy of ahimsa, non-retaliation. The more I ignore the abuses, the
fiercer they are becoming. But it is the death dance of the moth round a lamp.
Poor Rajagopalachari and Devadas! They are also in for it. They are dragging
out the engagement with Laxmi and weaving round it foul charges. Thus is
untouchability being supported!!
...Our time is being wholly occupied by the untouchability work. Sardar

Vallabhbhai contributes all the envelopes for the ever increasing number of
outgoing letters. He is the diligent newspaper reader who digs out odd bits of
information on untouchability and what not. He is also a factory for the
inexhaustible supply of mirth. The inspection day is just the same to him as any
other day. He never has any request to make. With me never a day passes but I
have some request to make. But I do not know which is the happier. Why may I
not be as happy as he, if I can take my defeats without putting a long face!
We all envy your solitude and your studies. It is true that our burdens are of our
own making or more accurately of my own making. I have dashed to pieces all
Vallabhbhai's hope of becoming a good Sanskrit scholar. He cannot concentrate
on his studies in the midst of the excitement of Harijan work and the daily dish
of spiced criticism which he enjoys like the Bengal footballers their game.

Mahadev continues to be what Shaukat Ali described him to be—the hamal of

the party. No work is too much for him or beyond him. Chhaganlal Joshi is still
finding his feet. But, he is flourishing with the spring now well on us; he cannot
fail to blossom out. We are not a bad assortment. We observe the rules of the
game and so make a fairly decent family, strictly regulated by the code of
Varnashrama, which between Dr. Ambedkar and me will soon provide a new
sensation for the sanatanists. More trouble for me, but none of my seeking I
assure you. I have now only space and time enough to say we all hope your
progress all round continues steadily.
Love from us all,
BAPU

Yeravda Central Prison, Poona
May 2, 1933
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
As I was struggling against the coming fast, you were before me as it were in
flesh and blood. But it was no use. How I wish I could feel that you had
understood the absolute necessity of it. The Harijan movement is too big for
mere intellectual effort. There is nothing so bad in all the world. And yet, I
cannot leave religion and, therefore, Hinduism. My life would be a burden to
me if Hinduism failed me. I love Christianity, Islam and many other faiths
through Hinduism. Take it away and nothing remains for me. But then, I cannot
tolerate it with untouchability—the high and low belief. Fortunately, Hinduism
contains a sovereign remedy for the evil.
I have applied the remedy. I want you to feel, if you can, that it is well if I
survive the fast and well also if the body dissolves in spite of the effort to live.
What is it after all—more perishable than a brittle chimney piece. You can
preserve the latter intact for ten thousand years, but you may fail to keep the
body intact even for a minute. And surely, death is not an end to all effort.
Rightly faced, it may be but the beginning of a nobler effort. But I won't
convince you by argument, if you did not see the truth intuitively. I know that
even if I do not carry your approval with me, I shall retain your precious love
during all those days of ordeal. . .
Love from us all,
BAPU

Delhi
March 9, 1936
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
So you return leaving Kamala for ever in Europe. And yet her spirit was never
out of India and will always be your precious treasure, as it will be of many of
us. I shall never forget the final talk that melted our four eyes.
< Heavy responsibility awaits you here. It is laid on you, because you are well
able to bear it. I dare not come to you as I would have, if my body had regained
its original elasticity. There is nothing organically wrong with me. The body has
even gained in weight. But it has lost now the vitality it seemed to have only
three months ago. Strange to say, I never felt any illness. And yet the body had
become weak and the instrument registered high blood pressure. I have to be
careful!
I am in Delhi to rest for a few days. If your original plan had been carried out, I
would have remained in Wardha for our meeting. It would have been quieter
there for you. But if it is the same thing to you, we may meet in Delhi, where I
should be till the 23rd instant at least. But if you prefer Wardha, I can return
there earlier. If you come to Delhi, you could stay with me in the Harijan
quarters newly built in Kingsway—quite a good place. You will tell me, when
you can, the date of our meeting. Rajendra Babu and Jamnalalji are or will be
with you. Vallabhbhai also would have been, but we all thought it would be
better if he stayed away. The other two have gone there not for political
discussion but for condolence. The political discussion will take place when we
have all met and when you have finished the domestic work.
I hope Indu bore well the grief of Kamala's death and the almost immediate
separation from you. What is her address?
May everything be well with you.
Love,
BAPU

Segaon
July 15, 1936
DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
1. I hope you got my wire about the Government of India letter. I procured it
yesterday and read it through. Nobody has ever written to me about the
subject matter. My reading of the letter confirms my view that you should take
legal notice of the libel.
2. If you will not misunderstand me, I would like you to keep me free of the
Civil Liberties Union. I do not like for the time being to join any political
institution. And there is no meaning in a confirmed civil resister joining it.
Apart however from my joining or not joining the union, mature consideration
confirms me in my opinion that it "would be a mistake to approve Sarojini or for
that matter any civil resister as president. I am still of opinion that the
president should be a well known constitutional lawyer. If that does not
commend itself to you, then you should have an author of note who is not a
law-breaker. I would also ask you to restrict the number of members. You need
quality, not quantity.
3. Your letter is touching. You feel to be the most injured party. The fact is
that your colleagues have lacked your courage and your frankness. The result
has been disastrous. I have always pleaded with them to speak out to you freely
and fearlessly. But having lacked the courage, whenever they have spoken,
they have done it clumsily and you have felt irritated. I tell you that they have
dreaded you because of your irritability and impatience of them. They have
chafed under your rebukes and magisterial manner and above all your
arrogation of what has appeared to them your infallibility and superior
knowledge. They feel that you have treated them with scant courtesy and
never defended them from socialists' ridicule and even misrepresentation.
You complain of their having called your activity harmful. That was not to say
that you were harmful. Their letter was no occasion for recounting your virtues
or your services. They were fully conscious of your dynamism and your hold

over the masses and youth of the country. They know that you cannot be
dispensed with. And so they wanted to give way.
I look upon the whole affair as a tragi-comedy. I would, therefore, like you to
look at the whole thing in a lighter vein. I do not mind your taking the A.I.C.C.
into your confidence. But I do want you not to impose on it the unbearable task
of adjusting your family quarrels or choosing between them and you. Whatever
you do, you must face them with accomplished things.
Why do you resent their majority being reflected in all the sub-committee etc.?
Is it not the most natural thing? You are in office by their unanimous choice,
but you are not in power yet. To put you in office was an attempt to find you in
power quicker than you would otherwise have been. Any way, that was at the
back of my mind when I suggested your name for the crown of thorns. Keep it
on, though the head be bruised. Resume your humour at the committee
meetings. That is your most usual role, not that of a care-worn and irritable
man, ready to burst on the slightest occasion.
How I wish you could telegraph to me that 011 finishing my letter you felt as
merry as you were on that new year's day in Lahore when you were reported to
have danced round the tricolour flag.
You must give your throat a chance.
I am revising my statement. I have decidcd not to publish it, till you have seen
it.
I have decided that nobody should see our correspondence besides Mahadev.
Love,
BAPU

Segaon
August 28, 1936
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
Our conversation of yesterday has set me thinking. Why is it that with all the
will in the world I cannot understand what is so obvious to you? I am not, so far
as I know, suffering from intellectual decay. Should you not then set your heart
on at least making me understand what you are after? I may not agree with
you. But I should be in a position to say so. Yesterday's talk throws no light on
what you are after. And probably what is true of me is true of some others. I
am just now discussing the thing with Rajaji. I should like you to discuss your
programme with him, if you can spare the time. I must not write at length,
having no time. You know what I mean.
Love,
BAPU

Segaon, Wardha
June 25, 1937
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
Just received your statement on the Frontier policy. Khan Saheb and I have
read it. I like it very well. I wonder if the Spanish bombing and the British are
exactly alike! Has the extent of the British damage been known? What has been
the ostensible reason given for the British bombing? Do not smile or be angry
that I do not know these things so well as you do. I can learn very little from
the little I see of the newspapers. But don't trouble to answer my questions. I
shall follow the reactions to your statement. May be, these will throw some
light. And in any case you will fill in the gaps when we meet. I hope the
Maulana will come. But even if he cannot, I would like you to hold on to the
date. Let us have the three quiet days.
Love,
BAPU

July 3,1937
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
. . . Your calling khadi "livery of freedom" will live as long as we speak the
English language in India. It needs a first class poet to translate into Hindi the
whole of the thought behind that enchanting phrase. For me, it is not merely
poetry but it enunciates a great truth whose full significance we have yet to
grasp.
BAPU

July 15, 1937
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
Today is the election day. I am watching.
But this I write to tell you that I have begun to write on the function of
Congress ministries and allied topics. I hesitated but I saw that it was my duty
to write, when I felt so keenly. I wish I could send you an advance copy of my
article for Harijan. Mahadev will see this. If he has a copy, he will send it.
When you see it, you will please tell me if I may continue to write so. I do not
want to interfere with your handling of the whole situation. For I want the
maximum from you for the country. I would be doing distinct harm if my writing
disturbed you.
BAPU

On the train
August 3, 1937
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I am writing this on the train taking us to Delhi. Herewith is my foreword or

whatever it may be called. I could not give you anything elaborate.
You have "perhaps" before Pushtu and Punjabi. I suggest your removing the
adverb. Khan Saheb, for instance, will never give up Pushtu. I believe, it is
written in some script, I forget which. And Punjabi? The Sikhs will die for
Punjabi written in Gurmukhi. There is no elegance about that script. But I
understand that it was specially invented like Sindhi to isolate the Sikhs from
the other Hindus. Whether such was^the case or not, it seems to me impossible
at present to persuade the Sikhs to give up Gurmukhi.
You have suggested a common script to be evolved out of the four Southern
languages. It seems to me to be as easy for them to substitute Devanagri, as a
mixture of the four. From the practical standpoint, the four do not admit of an
invented mixture. I would, therefore, suggest your confining yourself to the
general recommendation that, wherever possible, the provincial languages
which have vital connection with Sanskrit, if they are not offshoots from it,
should adopt the revised Devanagri. You may know that this propaganda is
going on.
Then, if you think like me, you should not hesitate to express the hope that as
Hindus and Muslims are one day bound to be one at heart, they will also, who
speak Hindustani, adopt one script, that is, Devanagri, because of its being
more scientific and being akin to the great provincial scripts of the languages
descended from Sanskrit.
If you adopt my suggestions in part or in toto, you will have no difficulty in

laying your finger on the spots recognizing the necessary changes. I had
intended to do so myself, in order to save your time. But I must not put that
strain on my system just now.

I take it that my endorsement of your suggestions does not mean that I must
ask the Hindi Sammelan to give up the use of the word Hindi. I am sure, that
cannot be your meaning. I have taken it to the farthest limit possible, as far as
I can think.
If you cannot accept my suggestions, it would be better for the sake of

accuracy to add the following sentence to the "Foreword": "At any rate I have
no hesitation in heartily endorsing them in a general way."
Love,
BAPU
I have very carefully gone through Jawaharlal Nehru's essay on the Hindi-Urdu
question. The question has latterly become an unfortunate controversy. There
is no valid reason for the ugly turn it has taken. Be that as it may, Jawaharlal's
essay is a valuable contribution to a proper elucidation of the whole subject
considered from the national and purely educational point of view. His
constructive suggestions, if they are widely accepted by the persons concerned,
should put an end to the controversy which has taken a communal turn. The
suggestions are exhaustive and eminently reasonable.
M. K. GANDHI

August 3, 1937
Segaon, Wardha
October 10, 1939
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I could see that though your affection and regard for me remain undiminished,
differences in outlook between us are becoming most marked.
Perhaps, this is the most critical period in our history. I hold very strong views
on the most important questions which occupy our attention. I know you too
hold strong views on them but different from mine. Your mode of expression is
different from mine. I am not sure that I carry the other members with' me in
the views that I hold very strongly. I cannot move about. I cannot come in
direct touch with the masses, not even with the Congress workers. So I feel
that I must not lead if I cannot carry you all with me. There should be no
divided counsels among the members of the Working Committee. I feel that you
should take full charge and lead the country, leaving me free to voice my
opinion. But if you all thought that I should observe complete silence, I should,
I hope, find no difficulty in complying. If you think it worth while, you should
come and discuss the whole thing.
Love,
BAPU

Sevagram, Wardha
October 24, 1940
DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I was glad to have your wire. If any statement has been allowed, you will have
seen it before this. If you are ready, you may now ceremonially declare your
civil disobedience. I would suggest your choosing a village for your audience. I
do not suppose they will allow you to repeat your speech. They were not ready
with their plans, so far as Vinoba was concerned. But should they let you free, I
suggest your following the plan laid down for Vinoba. But, if you feel otherwise,
you will follow your own course. Only I would like you to give me your
programme. You will fix your own date, so as to leave me time for announcing
the date and place. It may be that they will not let you even fulfil your very
first programme. I am prepared for every such step on the part of the
Government. Whilst I would make use of every legitimate method seeking
publicity for our programme, my reliance is on regulated thought producing its
own effect. If this is hard for you to believe, I would ask you to suspend
judgment and watch results. I know you will yourself be patient and ask our
people on your side to do likewise. I know what strain you are bearing in giving
me your loyalty. I prize it beyond measure. I hope it will be found to have been
well placed. For it is "do or die". There is no turning back. Our case is
invulnerable. There is no giving in. Only I must be allowed to go my way in
demonstrating the power of non-violence when it is unadulterated.
Maulana Saheb 'phoned saying I should choose another man for the second
satyagrahi. I told him I could not do so if you consented to come in.
I would like your reaction to the step I have taken regarding Harijan,
BAPU

Poona
5-10-1945
MY DEAR JAWAHARLAL,
I have been desirous of writing to you for many days but have not been able to
do so before today. The question of whether I should write to you in English or
Hindustani was also in my mind. I have at length preferred to write to you in
Hindustani.
The first thing I want to write about is the difference of outlook between us. If
the difference is fundamental then I feel the public should also be made aware
of it. It would be detrimental to our work for swaraj to keep them in the dark. I
have said that I still stand by the system of Government envisaged in Hind
Swaraj. These are not mere words. All the experience gained by me since 1909
when I wrote the booklet has confirmed the truth of my belief. Therefore, if I
am left alone in it I shall not mind, for I can only bear witness to the truth as I
see it. I have not Hind Swaraj before me as I write. It is really better for me to
draw the picture anew in my own words. And whether it is the same as I drew
in Hind Swaraj or not is immaterial for both you and me. It is not necessary to
prove the Tightness of what I said then. It is essential only to know what I feel
today. I am convinced that if India is to attain true freedom and through India
the world also, then sooner or later the fact must be recognized that people
will have to live in villages, not in towns, in huts, not in palaces. Crores of
people will never be able to live at peace with each other in towns and
palaces. They will then have no recourse but to resort to both violence and
untruth. I hold that without truth and non-violence there can be nothing but
destruction for humanity. We can realize truth and non-violence only in the
simplicity of village life and this simplicity can best be found in the charkha and
all that the charkha connotes. I must not fear if the world today is going the
wrong way. It may be that India too will go that way and like the proverbial
moth burn itself eventually in the flame round which it dances more and more
furiously. But, it is my bounden duty up to my last breath to try to protect
India, and through India the entire world from such a doom. The essence of

what I have said is that man should rest content with what are his real needs
and become self-sufficient. If he does not have this control he cannot save
himself. After all the world is made up of individuals just as it is the drops that
constitute the ocean. I have said nothing new. This is a well known truth.
But I do not think I have stated this in Hind Swaraj. While I admire modern
science, I find that it is the old looked at in the true light of modern science
which should be reclothed and refashioned aright. You must not imagine that I
am envisaging our village life as it is today. The village of my dreams is still in
mind. After all every man lives in the world of his dreams. My ideal village will
contain intelligent human beings. They will not live in dirt and darkness as
animals. Men and women will be free and able to hold their own against any
one in the world. There will be neither plague, nor cholera nor smallpox; no
one will be idle, no one will wallow in luxury. Everyone will have to contribute
his quota of manual labour. I do not want to draw a large scale picture in
detail. It is possible to envisage railways, post and telegraph offices etc. For me
it is material to obtain the real article and the rest will fit into the picture
afterwards. If I let go the real thing, all else goes.
On the last day of the Working Committee it was decided that this matter
should be fully discussed and the position clarified after a two or three days
session. I should like this. But whether the Working Committee sits or not I
want our position vis-a-vis each other to be clearly understood by us for two
reasons. Firstly, the bond that unites us is not only political work. It is
immeasurably deeper and quite unbreakable. Therefore, it is that I earnestly
desire that in the political field also we should understand each other clearly.
Secondly neither of us thinks himself useless. We both live for the cause of
India's freedom and we would both gladly die for it. We are not in need of the
world's praise. Whether we get praise or blame is immaterial to us. There is no
room for praise in service. I want to live to 125 for the service of India but I
must admit that I am now an old man. You are much younger in comparison and
I have, therefore, named you as my heir. I must, however, understand my heir
and my heir should understand me. Then alone shall I be content.

One other thing. I asked you about joining the Kasturba Trust and the
Hindustani Prachar Sabha. You said you would think over the matter and let me
know. I find your name is already in the Hindustani Prachar Sabha. Nanavati
reminded me that he had been to both you and Maulana Saheb in regard to this
matter and obtained your signatures in 1942. That, however, is past history.
You know the present position of Hindustani. If you are still true to your then
signature, I want to take work from you in this Sabha. There won't be much
work and you will not have to travel for it.
The Kasturba Fund work is another matter. If what I have written above does
not and will not go down with you I fear you will not be happy in the trust and I
shall understand.
The last thing I want to say to you is in regard to the controversy that has
flared up between you and Sarat Babu. It has pained me. I have not really
grasped it. Is there anything more behind what you have said? If so you must
tell me.
If you feel you should meet me to talk over what I have written, we must
arrange a meeting.
You are working hard. I hope you are well. I trust Indu too is fit.
Blessings from Bapu

Anand Bhawan, Allahabad
October 9, 1945
MY DEAR BAPU,
I have received today, on return from Lucknow, your letter of the 5th October.
I am glad you have written to me fully and I shall try to reply at some length
but, I hope, you will forgive me if there is some delay in this, as I am at present
tied up with close-fitting engagements. I am only here now for a day and a half.
It is really better to have informal talks but just at present I do not know when
to fit this in. I shall try.
Briefly put, my view is that the question before us is not one of truth versus
untruth or non-violence versus violence. One assumes as one must that true co-
operation and peaceful methods must be aimed at and a society which
encourages these must be our objective. The whole question is how to achieve
this society and what its content should be. I do not understand why a village
should necessarily embody truth and non-violence. A village, normally speaking,
is backward intellectually and culturally and no progress can be made from a
backward environment. Narrow-minded people are much more likely to be
untruthful and violent.
Then again, we have to put down certain objectives like a sufficiency of food,
clothing, housing, education, sanitation etc. which should be the minimum
requirements for the country and for everyone. It is with these objectives in
view that we must find out specifically how to attain them speedily. Again it
seems to me inevitable that modern means of transport as well as many other
modern developments must continue and be developed. There is no way out of
it except to have them. If that is so inevitably a measure of heavy industry
exists. How far that will fit in with a purely village society? Personally I hope
that heavy or light industries should all be decentralized as far as possible and
this is feasible now because of the development of electric power. If two types
of economy exist in the country, there should be either conflict between the
two, or one will overwhelm the other.

The question of independence and protection from foreign aggression, both

political and economic, has also to be considered in this context. I do not think
it is possible for India to be really independent, unless she is a technically
advanced country. Tarn not thinking for the moment in terms of just armies but
rather of scientific growth. In the present context of the world we cannot even
advance culturally without a strong background of scientific research in every
department. There is today in the world a tremendous acquisitive tendency
both in individuals and groups and nations, which leads to conflicts and wars.
Our entire society is based on this more or less. That basis must go and be
transformed into one of cooperation, not of isolation which is impossible. If this
is admitted and is found feasible, then attempts should be made to realize it
not in terms of an economy, which is cut off from the rest of the world, but
rather one which co-operates. From the economic or political point of view an
isolated India may well be a kind of vacuum which increases the acquisitive
tendencies of others and thus creates conflicts.
There is no question of palaces for millions of people. But there seems to be no

reason why millions should not have comfortable up-to-date homes where they
can lead a cultured existence. Many of the present overgrown cities have
developed evils which are deplorable. Probably we have to discourage this
overgrowth and at the same time encourage the village to approximate more to
the culture of the town.
It is many years ago since I read Hind Swaraj and I have only a vague picture in
my mind. But even when I read it twenty or more years ago it seemed to me
completely unreal. In your writings and speeches since then I have found much
that seemed to me an advance on that old position and an appreciation of
modern trends. I was, therefore, surprised when you told us that the old
picture still remains intact in your mind. As you know, the Congress has never
considered that picture, much less adopted it. You yourself have never asked it
to adopt it except for certain relatively minor aspects of it. How far it is
desirable for the Congress to consider these fundamental questions, involving
varying philosophies of life, it is for you to judge. I should imagine that a body
like the Congress should not lose itself in arguments over such matters which

can only produce great confusion in people's minds resulting in inability to act
in the present. This may also result in creating barriers between the Congress
and others in the country. Ultimately, of course, this and other questions will
have to be decided by representatives of free India. I, have a feeling that most
of these questions are thought of and discussed in terms of long ago, ignoring
the vast changes that have taken place all over the world during the last gen-
eration or more. It is 38 years since Hind Swaraj was written. The world has
completely changed since then, possibly in a wrong direction. In any event any
consideration of these questions must keep present facts, forces and the human
material we have today in view, otherwise it will be divorced from reality. You
are right in saying that the world, or a large part of it, appears to be bent on
committing suicide. That may be an inevitable development of an evil seed in
civilization that has grown. I think it is so. How to get rid of this evil, and yet
how to keep the good in the present as in the past is our problem. Obviously
there is good too in the present.
These are some random thoughts hurriedly written down and, I fear, they do
injustice to the grave import of the questions raised. You will forgive me, I
hope, for this jumbled presentation. Later I shall try to write more clearly on
the subject.
About Hindustani Prachar Sabha and about the Kasturba Fund, it is obvious that
both of them have my sympathy and I think they are doing good work. But I am
not quite sure about the manner of their working and I have a feeling that this
is not always to my liking. I really do not know enough about them to be
definite. But at present I have developed a distaste for adding to my burden of
responsibilities when I feel that I cannot probably undertake them for lack of
time. These next few months and more are likely to be fevered ones for me and
others. It seems hardly desirable to me, therefore, to join any responsible
committee for form's sake only.
About Sarat Bose, I am completely in the dark as to why he should grow so

angry with me, unless it is some past grievance about my general attitude in
regard to foreign relations. Whether I was right or wrong, it does seem to me
that Sarat has acted in a childish and irresponsible manner. You will remember

perhaps that Subhas did not favour in the old days the Congress attitude
towards Spain, Czechoslovakia, Munich and China. Perhaps this is a reflection of
that old divergence of views. I know of nothing else that has happened.
I see that you are going to Bengal early in November. Perhaps I may visit
Calcutta for three or four days just then. If so, I hope to meet you.
You may have seen in the papers an invitation by the President of the newly
formed Indonesian Republic to me and some others to visit Java. In view of the
special circumstances of the case I decided immediately to accept this
invitation subject of course to my getting the necessary facilities for going
there. It is extremely doubtful if I shall get the facilities, and so probably I shall
not go. Java is just two days by air from India, or even one day from Calcutta.
The Vice-President of this Indonesian Republic, Mohammad Hatta, is a very old
friend of mine. I suppose you know that the Javanese population is almost
entirely Muslim.
I hope you are keeping well and have completely recovered from the attack of
influenza.
Yours affectionately,
JAWAHARLAL

Glossary
Abala, void of strength; weak; woman.
Abhayadan, an assurance of protection from danger.
Abhishekam, anointment; sprinkling of water on deity.
Abvabs, a kind of cess.
Acharya, preceptor; teacher.
Achutistan, land of the untouchables.
Adharma, irreligion.
Adivasi, aborigines.
Agiari, Zoroastrian fire-temple.
Ahimsa, non-violence.
Akhada, physical culture institute.
Akhand Hindustan, undivided India.
Allah-O-Akbar, God is great.
Alpatma, little soul.
Amla, officer; staff.
Anushthanam, practice of religious rites.
Aparigraha, non-possession.
Arati, a waving of lamps; a form of worship.
Archana, worship.
Ardhanga, better half; wife.4
Artha, wealth.
Ashram, a hermitage; a place for study and discipline of life.
Ashramite, an ashram inmate.
Asprishya, untouchable.

Asura, a demon.
Atman, soul.
Ati-Shudra, lower in caste than a Shudra; untouchable. Aulia, a Muslim saint.
Avarna, not belonging to any of the four castes according to the Hindu
scriptures. Avatar, an incarnation of God. Ayat, a verse in the Koran.
Ayurvedic, belonging to Hindu system of medicine.
Azadi, independence.
Azan, a call to Muslim prayer.
Ba, mother.
Babu, Mr.
Babul, a twig used as tooth-brush. Badi, cottage.
Badshah, emperor.
Bajri, a kind of millet,
Bakr-Id, a day of Muslim festival
Bande Mataram, Hail Mother; the refrain of the Indian national anthem known
by the same name.
Bania, a trader.
Bapu, father.
Basti, slum.
Begar, forced labour.
Behn, sister.
Bhai, brother.
Bhajan, a hymn.
Bhakta, a devotee.
Bhakti, devotion.

Bhandar, store.
Bhangi, scavenger.
Bharat-ki-jai, victory to Bharat, i.e., India.
Bharat Mata, Mother India.
Bharat Mata-ki-jai, victory to Mother India.
Bharat Milap, Rama's reunion with his brother Bharat.
Bhoga, enjoyment.
Bhogi, a voluptuary.
Bidi, indigenous cigarette.
Bigha, a measure of land, generally five-eighths of an acre.
Brahma, creator of the universe.
Brahmachari, one observing continence.
Brahmacharya, continence.
Brahman, the Absolute; one universal essence; the Supreme Soul of the
Vedanta philosophy.
Brahmavidya, knowledge of the Supreme Spirit.
Chaddar, a sheet worn as a wrap.
Chakki, grinding-stone.
Chakwat, a kind of green leaves.
Chamar, an untouchable caste; leather worker.
Chandal, a pariah who lives by scavenging and hunting; an outcaste.
Chapati, thin flat cake made of wheat flour; bread.
Chaprasi, a peon; office messenger.
Charkha, a spinning wheel.
Chatram, an institution for free distribution of cooked food.

Chaturmas, a period of four months; a vow of fasting and semi-fasting during

the four months of the rainy season.
Chhatak, one-eighth of a pound.
Chirag, an oil lamp.
Cowrie, shell, once used as a coin.
Dakshina, a gift in money or kind given to a Brahmin.
Dal, pulse cooked in liquid form.
Dargah, mausoleum or tomb of a Muslim saint.
Daridranarayan, God in the form of the indigent and poor.
Darshan, sight of a venerated person or deity.
Dar-ul-harb, land of the non-believers, i.e., of non-Muslims.
Das, servant.
Dasanudas, servant of servants.
Dasturi, commission.
Deenbandhu, friend of the poor.
Deshbandhu, friend of the country.
Deti leti, dowry system as known in Sind.
Devadasi, a female dedicated to the service of gods or a temple; a courtesan.
Devkapas, a kind of cotton.
Dewan, prime minister.
Dhanush takli, a spinning instrument plied with a bow.
Dharma, duty; religion.
Dharmashala, a building donated for charitable uses; a pilgrim's rest-house.
Dhed, a sweeper caste; an untouchable.
Dhobi, a washerman.

Dhoti, a long piece of cloth used as a lower garment by men in India.
Dilruba, string instrument.
Diwali, Hindu festival of lamps.
Do rupiya ek bar, teen rupiya, panch rupiya, two rupees once, three rupees,
five rupees—an auction-code.
Doha, couplet; a kind of Hindu metre.
Dom, the menial tribe, untouchables, employed especially on burial and

burning grounds.
Dubla, an untouchable caste of Gujarat.
Dukkhi, unhappy; sufferer.
Duragraha, insistence on wrongdoing or untruth; as opposed to satyagraha.

Duragrahi, one practising duragraha.
Durbar, ruler's court.
Dussehra, Hindu festival before Diwali.
Ekadashi, eleventh day of the Hindu half-month when fasting is observed.
Ezhava, a prosperous and educated untouchable caste.
Fatwa, a decree of Muslim divines.
Fakir, a Muslim ascetic.
Firman, edict; an ordinance.
Gadi, a throne; a post of authority.
Garbi, a folk-dance of Gujarat.
Garvi, great and glorious.
Gayatri, an invocation of sun-god; a mantra recited by the twice-born Hindus.

Ghanchi, oil-presser.
Ghani, oil-press.
Ghar, house.
Ghat, bathing place on a bank of a river or tank; a mountain range.
Ghee, clarified butter.
Girasia, absentee landlord of Kathiawad belonging to Rajput community.
Goonda, hooligan.
Goondaism, hooliganism.
Goonda raj, reign or rule of hooligans.
Gopal, cowherd.
Gopi, milkmaid.
Goraksha, cow protection.
Goseva Sangh, an institution dedicated to the service of cows.
Gosevak, a person dedicated to the service of the cow; a worshipper of the

cow.
Goshala, cowshed.
Gram, village.
Gram Udyog, village industry.
Gram Udyog Sangh, Village Industries Association.
Granth Saheb, the sacred book of the Sikhs.
Guna, quality; attribute,
Gur, molasses.
Guru or gurudev, a preceptor; a spiritual guide.
Gurudwara, a Sikh temple.

Hakim, a doctor practising the Muslim system of medicine.
Hal, plough.
Halpati, owner of a plough; farmer.
Hamsaya, neighbour.
Hari bol, utterance of the name of god Hari.
Harijan, a man of God; untouchable.
Hartal, a strike.
Haveli, a Vaishnava temple.
Hijra, a Muslim era.
Hijrat, mass migration.
Himsa, violence.
Hindostan Hamara, our India; refrain of a national song.
Holi, Hindu spring festival.
Hunda, an illegal cess paid by the tenants either in crops or in money as a

substitute for indigo cultivation on their lands.
Id, a day of Muslim festival.
Id Mubarak, Id good wishes.
Iman, honour,
Inquilab Zindabad, Long live revolution.
Ishwar, Creator; Supreme Personal God.
Jai, victory.
Jai Hind, victory to India.
Jamadar, a petty officer.
Jamdani, hand-woven cotton textile with traditional design.

Jam-i-jam, the Universal Provider.
Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Hind, association of Muslim divines in India.
Janab, sir.
Janmashtami, the birthday of Krishna.
Japa, repeating of prayers.
Jazirat-ul-Arab, holy region of Arabia.
Jatiya Sarkar, national government, parallel government.
Jayanti, anniversary.
Jawahar, jewel.
Jehad, religious war of Muslims against unbelievers.
Ji, an affix added to names denoting respect, e.g., Gandhiji.
Jirga, council of the elders.
Jnani, wise, possessor of supreme knowledge.
Jowari, large millet; a common food grain in India.
Kabab, grilled meat preparation.
Kachrapati, scavenging department.
Kafir, infidel; a term of contempt.
Kalipuja, worship of the Goddess Kali.
Kaliyuga, fourth age of the world—the age of universal degeneracy,
Kalma, basic Muslim prayer.
Kalpadrum, the Universal Provider.
Kama, love, lust.
Kamadhenu, cow of plenty, supposed to yield all desired objects.
Karma, action; retribution, fate.

Karmabhumi, the land of action; the land where realization is sought through
action.
Karma Yoga, philosophy of detached action.
Karmayogi, one practising the doctrine of detached action.
Kathak, a classical dance of India.
Khadi or khaddar, hand-woven cloth from hand-spun yarn.
Khal, canal.
Khalifa, Muslim civil and religious ruler.
Khalsa, pure; a name for the Sikhs.
Khan, nobleman. Khansama, a cook; a servant.
Khatedar, registered occupant of land.
Khilaf, against.
Khilafat, suzerainty of Caliph.
Khol, a sort of drum.
Khuda, God. /
Khudai Khidmatgar, Servant of God, Red Shirt volunteer.
Kirpan, sword.
Kisan, peasant.
Kisan-Majdoor-Praja-Raj, peasants' and wbrkers' rule.
Kisan sabha, peasants' organization.
Kismet, fate.
Kotwal, police officer.
Kshai, defeat; destruction.
Kshetrapal, guardian of the field.
Kudta or kurta, man's upper garment; an Indian shirt.
Kulapati, chancellor.

Kumkum, red ochre; auspicious vermilion mark put on the forehead.
Kurbani, sacrifice; offering.
Lathi, stick.
Lokamanya, respected by the people.
Lok Sevak Sangh, organization for the service of people.
Lota, a small metal water-pot.
Lungi, a waist-cloth.
Luni, a sort of green leaves.
Ma-bap, parent; parental.
Mahajan, merchant; banker.
Mahanta, custodian of a temple.
Mahar, untouchable caste.
Maharaja, king; ruler.
Maharana, king.
Maharani, queen.
Mahatma, a great soul.
Mai, thick string connecting and regulating the two discs of a spinning wheel.
Mala, beads.
Mamlatdar, a chief revenue officer of a taluk.
Mandal, conference; association.
Mandir, a Hindu temple.
Mangal mala, beads worn by Hindu women whose husband is living; a token of
luck for a married woman.
Mantra, a sacred formula or incantation.

Manzil, residence.
Masjid, mosque.
Matrubhasha, mother tongue.
Maulana, a Muslim divine.
Maulvi, a Muslim priest.
Maya, illusion.
Mehtar, scavenger.
Mehtarani, woman scavenger.
Mela, fair.
Mohalla, area.
Mohur, a defunct gold coin of India.
Mokhtiar, advocate; legal intermediary before the court.
Moksha, liberation of soul.
Mukti, emancipation; liberation.
Muni, a sage.
Munj, grass used for making paper or string.
Nagar, town.
Nama rupa, name and form.
Namasankirtan, recitation of God's name.
Namashudra, low caste; untouchable.
Namaskar, salute.
Namaz, Muslim prayer.
Nawabzada, son of a nawab.
Nayee Talim, New Education or Basic Education.
Neem, a bitter twig used as tooth-brush.

Netaji, leader.
Neti neti, the Vedantic doctrine of" not this, not this."
Nira, unfermented fresh juice from a palm tree or a date tree.
Nirvana, nothingness; release from the cycle of rebirth; supreme bliss.
Om, Hindu mystic syllable.
Paisa, pice.
Pak, pure.
Pan, betel.
Panchama, belonging to the fifth caste; an outcaste.
Panchayat, a village council of five elected members, a council of village

elders.
Panda, a Brahmin host and guide to pilgrims.
Pandal, canopy.
Pandit, a learned Hindu teacher; a prefix to certain Brahmin family names,

e.g., Pandit Nehru.
Pani, water.
Paramatma, the Supreme Spirit.
Pariah, outcaste.
Parishad, conference.
Pasos and temeins, Burmese dress.
Patel, a village headman.
Patidar, a landlord.
Phooka, an unnatural and cruel method of continuing the lactation period of a

cow or buffalo.

Phoongyi, a Buddhist monk.
Pinjrapole, a shelter for crippled and aged cows.
Prabhat Pheri, a squad singing devotional or patriotic songs in the morning.
Pradip, lamp.
Praja Mandal, states' peoples association.
Pranam, salutation.
Prasad, food offered to idols or the remnants of such food.
Purdah, veil; the custom of keeping women in seclusion or under a veil.
Purdanashin, a woman observing purdah.
Puri, a variety of fried Indian bread (cake).
Purna, full; complete.
Purna Swaraj, Complete Independence.
Purnima, full-moon day.
Qaid-e-Azam, great leader.
Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram, etc., a hymn in praise of Rama.
Raj, rule.
Raja, king.
Rajakiya, political.
Rajas, passion or activity.
Raja Saheb, king; titular head.
Ramdhun, chanting of the name of Rama.
Ram Raj, kingdom of Rama; beneficent rule.
Ramzan, a sacred Muslim month during which fast is observed.
Ramalila, action play of Rama.

Ramanam, the name of god Rama.
Rana, king.
Rani, queen.
Rasa, passion; sentiment.
Rashtrabhasha, national language.
Rashtradharma, duty towards nation.
Rashtrapati, Congress President.
Rashtriya shala, national school.
Rishi, a seer.
Roti, bread.
Ryot, an Indian peasant.
Sabha, assembly; conference.
Sabhi bhumi Gopalki, all land belongs to the cultivator.
Sadagraha, firmness in a good cause.
Sadhana, a persistent effort; dedication.
Sadhu, a virtuous man leading the life of an ascetic; an ascetic.
Safai, cleaning.
Salam, salutation.
Salam Alaikum, peace be unto you.
Samabhava, equability.
Samadhi, sepulchre.
Samagra Gramseva, all-round service to a village.
Sammelan, conference.
Samskar, impression of previous deeds; innate tendencies inherited from the

past life.

Samvat, a Hindu era.
Sanatana, ancient; orthodox.
Sanatana Dharma, orthodox Hinduism.
Sanatani, sanatanist, orthodox Hindu.
Sangathan, organization.
Sangh, organization.
Sanyasa, renunciation of worldly life.
Sanyasi, one who has renounced the worldly life; a recluse.
Sardar, nobleman; an honorific term, e.g., Sardar Patel.
Sarkar, government; authority.
Sari, a long piece of cloth worn as outer garment by Indian women.
Sarvadharmasamatva, equal regard for all faiths and creeds.
Sat, that which exists.
Sat Shri Akal, God is Truth.
Satta, a sort of agreement.
Satva, goodness or purity.
Satvik, virtuous.
Satya, truth.
Satyagraha, " a force which is born of truth and love or non-violence ";
tenacious clinging to truth; civil or non-violent resistance.
Satyagrahi, one practising satyagraha.
Savarna, Caste Hindu.
Sena, army.
Senna, leaves of indigenous plants used in Ayurvedic medicine as a purgative.
Sepoy, a policeman.
Seva, service.

Seva Dal, volunteer corps.
Seva Sangh, service league.
Shabnam, Subnum, a variety of a superfine muslin cloth—hand-spun and hand-

woven.
Shahanshah-e-Pakistan, emperor of Pakistan.
Shakti, power.
Shamiana, a canopy.
Shanti, peace.
Shanti Sena, peace brigade.
Sharanarthi, refugee.
Shariat, Muslim law.
Shastra, the religious law books of the Hindus.
Shastri, one conversant in shastra.
Sher-e-Kashmir, lion of Kashmir.
Shikha, tuft of hair worn on the head of a Hindu.
Shloka, verse.
Shraddha, Hindu ceremony in memory of the dead.
Shri, Mr.
Shrimati, Mrs., Miss.
Shuddhi, re-conversion.
Smriti, that which is remembered and handed down by tradition, includes the
three portions of the Vedas.
Snatak, one who has finished his course of studies; a graduate.
Sthitaprajna, man of steady wisdom.
Stridhan, a, woman's private property over which she exercises independent

control.

Suran, a kind of root vegetable.
Surnai, a kind of wind instrument.
Sutra, aphorism.
Suttee, devoted wife; defunct custom of self-immolation of the Hindu wife with
her deceased husband.
Swadeshi, belonging to or made in one's own country.
Swami, a monk.
Swaraj, self-government; self-rule.
Swarajist, member of the Swaraj Party; one who demands swaraj.
Tabarruk, food offered to idols or the remnants of such food.
Tabligh, religious propaganda and conversion as practised by Muslims.
Tahsil, subdivision of a district.
Takli, spindle-like spinning instrument.
Tal, rhythm.
Talati, a village accountant.
Taluk, a revenue division.
Tamas, stolid, dark.
Tapas, tapasya or tapascharya, penance; austerity; single-minded devotion.

Tatta, split-bamboo partition.
Tebhaga, a contract between a landlord and cultivator in which one-third of

the crop yield goes to the landlord.
Tejas, energizing principle.
Thali, metal plate.
Thana, a police station.
Thug, cheat.

Tinkathia, a compulsory planting of indigo in a portion of a tenant's holding on

nominal remuneration.
Tirtha, holy place.
Tola, a weight equivalent to 180 grains (troy).
Topi, a cap.
Tuiasi, a plant sacred to the Hindus.
Tyaga, renunciation.
Udyog bhawan, industries centre.
Ulema, muslim divines.
Ulu, uludhwani, an utterance of welcome on auspicious occasion.
Urs, anniversary celebration of a Muslim saint.
Vaidya or vaidyaraj, a doctor practising the Hindu system of medicine.
Vaishnava, a devotee of Vishnu.
Vakil, pleader.
Vanar Sena, children's volunteer corps.
Varna, caste.
Varna Dharma, Hindu religion as based on the four castes.
Varnashram, the four castes and stages of life sanctioned by the Hindu religion.
Vasant Panchami, a day of spring festival.
Vedavadarata, one occupied with the literary discussion of the Vedas.
Videshi, foreign.
Vidyalaya, a school.
Vidyapith, a college.
Virya, vital essence.

Yajna,- religious sacrifice.
Yamaraja, God of death.
Yavana, barbarian; a foreigner.
Yoga, intense concentration on one subject.
Yogi, one who practises yoga.
Yogic, practice pertaining to yoga.
Zamindar, landlord.
Zamindari, landlordism.
Zenana, veiled part of house in which women are secluded. Zerait, a system
under which tenants had to plough on the indigo factory land or had to supply
their bullocks and ploughs for a nominal wage. Zindabad, long live.

Bibliography
ADHIKARI, G. :
Gandhism—A Review, 1940, Bombay.
AGARWAL, S. N. :
Gandhism—A Socialist Approach, Kitab Mahal, Allahabad.
ALEXANDER, H. G. I
The Indian Ferment, 1929, Williams and Norgate, London. India Since Cripps, 1944,
Penguin, London.
ALL-INDIA CONGRESS COMMITTEE :
Satyagraha in Gandhijis Own Words, 1935, Allahabad. Congress and War Crisis,
1940, Allahabad. Congress Bulletin, Swaraj Bhawan, Allahabad.
AMBEDKAR, B. R. :
Ranade, Gandhi and Jinnah, 1943, Thacker & Co. Ltd., Bombay. Pakistan and
Partition of India, 1945, Thacker & Co. Ltd., Bombay. What Congress and,, Gandhi have
done to the Untouchables, 1945, Thacker & Co. Ltd., Bombay.
ANDREWS, C. F. :
Mahatma Gandhi’s Ideas, 1929, Allen and Unwin, London.
Mahatma Gandhi: His Own Story, 1930, Allen and Unwin, London.
Mahatma Gandhi at Work, 1931, Allen and Unwin, London,
ANDREWS, C. F. & MOOKERJI, GIRIJA !
The Rise and Growth of the Congress, 1938, Allen & Unwin, London.
ARYAN PATH :
Special Hind Swaraj Number, September 1931, Theosophy Co., Bombay.
ATHALYE, D. V. :
The Life of Lokamanya Tilak, 1921,- Swadeshi Publishing Co., Poona.
The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, 1931, Swadeshi Publishing Co., Poona.
AZAD, MAULANA ABUL KALAM :
India Wins Freedom, 1959, Orient Longmans, India.

BALVANTSINHA :
Under the Shelter of Bapu, 1962, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmed- abad.
BANDOPADHYAYA, N. C. :
Gandhism in Theory and Practice, 1923, Ganesh & Co., Madras.
BARDOLI INQUIRY COMMITTEE
Report, 1928, Bombay.
BARR, F. MARY I
Bapu, 1949, International Book House, Bombay.
BERNAYS, ROBERT :
Naked Fakir, 1931, Victor Gollancz, London.
BESANT, ANNIE I
How India Wrought for Freedom, 1915, Theosophical Publishing House, Madras.
Future of Indian Politics, 1922, Theosophical Publishing House, Madras.
BIRLA, G. D. :
In the Shadow of the Mahatma, 1953, Orient Longmans Ltd., India.
BOLTON, GLORNEY:
The Tragedy of Gandhi, 1934, Allen & Unwin, London.
BOSE, NIRMAL KUMAR :
Studies in Gandhism, 1947, Indian Associated Publishing Co., Calcutta.
Selections from Gandhi, 1948, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
My Days with Gandhi, 1953, Nishana, Calcutta.
BOSE, SUBHAS CHANDRA :
The Indian Struggle, 1935, Wishart, London.
BRAILSFORD, H. N. :
Rebel India, 1931, Victor Gollancz, London.
BRITISH-INDIA MERCHANT :
India on the Brink, 1931, P. S. King & Son, London.
Searchlight on Gandhi, 1931, P. S. King & Son, London.

BROCKWAY, FENNER A. :
The Indian Crisis, 1930, Victor Gollancz, London.
BRYANT, JOHN FORBES :
Gandhi and Indianization of the Empire, 1924, J. Hall & Son, Cambridge.
CAMBELL-JOHNSON, ALAN :
Mission with Mountbatten, 1951, Robert Hale Ltd., London.
CATLIN, GEORGE :
In the Path of Mahatma Gandhi, 1948, Macdonald Co., London.
CAVEESHVAR, SARDUL SINGH:
India's Fight for Freedom, 1936, National Publications, Lahore.
CHAKRAVARTY, AMIYA I
Mahatma Gandhi and the Modern World1945, Book House, Calcutta.
CHAKRAVARTY, D. AND BHATTACHARYA, C. :
Congress in Evolution, 1940, Calcutta.
CHANDER, JAG PRAVESH (edited by):
Tagore and Gandhi Argue, 1945, Indian Printing Works, Lahore,
CHATTERJEE, B. C.:
Gandhi or Aurobindo, 1921, The Saraswati Library, Calcutta.
CHATTERJEE, B. L. :
Champion of the Proletariat, 1944, Piakashani, Calcutta.
CHOUDHARY, R. :
Bapu as I saw him, 1959, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
CHINTAMANI, C. Y. :
Indian Politics since the Mutiny> 1937, George Allen, London.
COATMAN, J. :
India in 1925-6, 1926-7, 1927-8, 1928-9, Calcutta.
CONGRESS INQUIRY COMMITTEE I
Report on Civil Disobedience, 1922, Tagore & Co., Madras.

COMMUNIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN
Is India Different? Correspondence between Shapurji Saklatwala and M. K. Gandhi,

1927, London.
COUPLAND, R. :
The Constitutional Problem in India, 1944, Oxford University Press, London and
Bombay.
CROZIER, F. P. :
A Word to Gandhi, 1931, Williams & Norgate, London.
DANGE, s. A. :
Gandhi v. Lenin, 1921, Bombay.
DANTWALA, M. L. :
Gandhism Reconsidered, 1944, Padma Publications, Bombay.
DASGUPTA, ARUNCHANDRA :
Non-violence the Invisible Power, 1948, Khadi Pratisthan, Sodepur.
DASGUPTA, H. N. I
Subhas Chandra> 1946, Bharat Book Agency, Calcutta.
DATTA, DHIRENDRA MOHAN :
The Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, 1953, University of Wisconsin Press, Canada.
DESAI, MAHADEV I
The Diary, 1953, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
The Epic of Travancore, 1937, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Gandhiji in Indian Villages, 1927, S. Gairesan, Madras.
The Gita According to Gandhi, 1946, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, 1941, George Allen & Unwin, London.
Nation's Voice, 1932, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
A Righteous Struggle, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
The Story of Bardoli, 1929, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Two Servants of God, 1935, Hindustan Times, Delhi.
With Gandhiji in Ceylon, 1928, S. Ganesan, Madras.

DESHPANDE, P. G. :
Gandhiana, 1948, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
DHAWAN, GOPINATH I
The Political Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi> 1951, Navajivan Publishing House,

Ahmedabad.
DISORDERS INQUIRY COMMITTEE (HUNTER COMMITTEE) :
Report, 1919-20, Calcutta.
DIWAKAR, R. R. :
Glimpses of Gandhiji, 1949, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
Satyagraha—Its Technique and History, 1946, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
DOKE, JOSEPH J. :
M. K. Gandhi, 1909, G. A. Natesan & Co., Madras.
DUNCAN, RONALD:
Selected Writings of Mahatma Gandhi1951, Faber & Faber, London.
DURANT, WILL .
The Case for India, 1930, Simon & Schuster, New York.
DUTT, R. PALME :
India Today, 1947, People's Publishing House, Bombay.
EDIBE, HALIDE :
Inside India, 1937, George AV.r , I don.
EL WIN, V. & WINSLOW, J. !
The Dawn of Indian Freedom, 1931, Allen & Unwin, London.
FEDERATION OF INTERNATIONAL FELLOWSHIPS I
Report of the Federation of International Fellowships held at Sabarmati in 1928,

Sabarmati.
FISCHER, FREDERICK B. :
The Strange Little Brown Man, Gandhi, 1932, Long & Smith, New York.
FISCHER, LOUIS I
A Week with Gandhi, 1942, Duell, Sloan & Pearce, New York.

Gandhi and Stalin> 1947, Harper & Brothers, New York.
The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, 1950, Harper & Brothers, New York.
FULOP-MILLER, RENE I
Gandhi and Lenin, 1927, Putnam, London. Gandhi the Holy Man, 1931, Putnam,
London.
GANDHI, M. K. :
An Autobiography or the Story of My Experiments with Truth, 1940, Navajivan

Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Basic Education, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Bapu's Letters to Mira (1924-48), 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Christian Missions, 1941, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Communal Unityy 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Constructive Programme, 1941, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Cent Per Cent Swadeshi or The Economics of Village Industries, 1938, Navajivan
Press, Ahmedabad.
Delhi Diary, 1948, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Diet and Diet Reform9 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Drinks, Drugs and Gambling, 1952, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Economic and Industrial Life and Relations, 1957, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad.
Economics of Khadi, 1941, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Ethical Religion, 1922, S. Ganesan, Madras.
Food Shortage and Agriculture, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
For Pacifists, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
From Yeravda Mandir, 1937, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
GandhijVs Correspondence with the Government, 1942-4, 1945, Navajivan

Gandhij’s Correspondence with the Government, 1944-7, 1959, Navajivan

A Guide to Health, 1921, S. Ganesan, Madras.

Harijan, 1933-40, 1942, 1946-8, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Hind Swaraj, 1938, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Hindu Dharma, 1950, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Hindu-Muslim Tension, 1924, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
In Search of the Supreme, 1961, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Indian Opinion, 1904-14, Natal.
Indian States' Problem, 1941, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Jail Experiences, 1922, Tagore & Co., Madras.
Key to Health, 1948, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Letters to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, 1957, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Letters to Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, 1961, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
My Early Life, (edited by Mahadev Desai), 1932, Oxford University Press, Bombay.
My Soul's Agony, 1932, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Non-Violence in Peace and War, Part I', 1945, Part II, 1949, Navajivan Publishing
House, Ahmedabad.
Poona Statements (Correspondence between Gandhiji and Jawaharlal Nehru),

1933, Lucknow.
Ramanama, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Rebuilding our Villages, 1952, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Rowlatt Bills and Satyagraha, 1919, G. A. Natesan & Co., Madras.
Sarvodaya, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Satyagraha, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Satyagraha in South Africa, 1928, S. Ganesan, Madras.
Self-Restraint v. Self-indulgence, 1947, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Songs from Prison, 1934, Allen and Unwin, London.
Speeches and Writings, 1933, G. A. Natesan & Co., Madras.
Swadeshi, True and False, 1939, Poona.
Towards New Education, 1953, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Towards Non-violent Socialism, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.

To Ashram Sisters, 1952, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
To a Gandhian Capitalist, 1951, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
To the Students, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Unto This Last, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
Wheel of Fortune, 1922, Ganesh & Co., Madras.
Women and Social Injustice, 1942, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Young India, 1919-32, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Young India, volumes I, II, III, 1919-22, 1924-6, 1927-8, Ganesan, Madras.
GANDHI, MANUBEHN I
Bapu—My Mother, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
GEORGE, S. K. :
Gandhi's Challenge to Christianity, 1939, Allen & Unwin, London.
GHOSH, P. G. :
From Nagpur to Lahore, 1931, Abhoy Ashram, Comilla.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Congress Responsibility for the Disturbances (7^42-3), 1943, Delhi.
Correspondence with Mr. Gandhi, 1944, New Delhi.
Gandhian Outlook and Techniques, 1953, New Delhi.
Homage to Mahatma Gandhi, 1948, Delhi.
The Collected Works of Gandhi, vols. I-VIII, 1958-62, Delhi.
GRAY, R. M. & PAREKH, M. G. :
Mahatma Gandhi, 1924, Association Press, Calcutta.
GREGG, RICHARD B. :
A Discipline for Non-violence, 1941, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Economics of Khaddar, 1928, S. Ganesan, Madras.
The Power of Non-violence, 1938, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
The Psychology and Strategy of Non-violence, 1929, Madras.
Which Way Lies Hope ? 1952, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.

GUPTA, N. :.
Gandhi and Gandhism, 1945, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
HEATH,CARL:
Gandhi, 1944, George Allen, London.
HINDUSTAN TIMES :
India Unreconciled, 1943, Delhi.
Gandhi-Jinnah Talks, 1944, Delhi.
HINDUSTANI TALIMI SANGH I
Basic National Education, Syllabus, 1939, Sevagram.
Educational Reconstruction, 1940, Sevagram.
One Step Forward, 1940, Sevagram.
Two Years' Work, 1941, Sevagram. HINGORANI, A. T, (edited and published at Karachi
by):
My Appeal to the British, 1942.
Daridranarayan, 1946.
HOLMES, JOHN HAYNES :
The Christ of Today, 1922, Tagore & Co., Madras.
Mahatma Gandhi {MemoriarService), 1948, Community Church, N. Y.
My Gandhi, 1953, Harper, New York.
HOLMES, W. H. G. :
Twofold Gandhi, 1952, Mowbray & Co. Ltd., London.
HOSSAIN, SYED :
Gandhi the Saint as Statesman, 1937, Sutton House, Los Angeles.
HOYLAND, JOHN S. :
The Case for India, 1929, London.
Indian Crisis, 1944, Macmillan, New York.
The Cross Moves East, 1931, George Allen & Unwin, London,
Gopal Krishna Gokhale, 1933, Y.M.C.A. Publishing House, Calcutta.

HUSAIN, s. ABID :
The Way of Gandhi and Nehru, 1959, Asia Publishing House, Bombay.
INDIAN OPINION :
Golden Number (Passive Resistance Movement in South Africa, 1906-14), 1914,

Phoenix, Natal. JACK, HOMER A. (edited by):
The Gandhi Reader, 1956, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, U.S.A.
The Wit and Wisdom of Gandhi, 1951, The Beacon Press, Boston. JAIN, j. c.:
The Murder of Mahatma Gandhi, 1961, Chetana Ltd., Bombay.
JAYAPRAKASH NARAYAN :
Gandhiji's Leadership and The Congress Socialist Party, 1940.
JONES, E. STANLEY:
Mahatma Gandhi: An Interpretation, 1948, Hodder & Stoughton, London.
JONES, M. E. :
Gandhi Lives, 1948, David Mckay Co., Philadelphia, U.S.A.
KALELKAR, KARA :
Stray Glimpses of Bapu, 1950, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
KHALIQUZZAMAN, CHOUDHRY I
Pathway to Pakistan, 1961, Longmans, Lahore.
KIRPALANI, K. R. :
All Men are Brothers, 1959, UNESCO, Paris.
KRIPALANI, J. B. :
The Gandhian Way, 1938, Vora & Co., Bombay.
Gandhi the Statesman, 1951, Ranjit Publishers, Delhi.
KRISHNADAS
Seven Months with Mahatma Gandhi, 1928, S. Ganesan, Madras.
KUMARAPPA, BHARATAN !
On Tour With Gandhiji, 1945, Aundh.

KUMARAPPA, J. C. :
Why the Village Movement, 1936, A.I.V.I.A., Wardha.
Gandhian Economic Thought, 1951, Vora & Co., Bombay.
LAJPAT RAI:
Ideals of Non-co-operation, 1924, S. Ganesan, Madras.
Unhappy India, 1928, Banna Publishing Co., Calcutta.
LESTER, MURIEL:
Entertaining Gandhi, 1932, Ivor Nicholson & Watson, London.
Gandhi—World Citizen, Kitab Mahal, Allahabad.
LOHIA, DR. R. I
Mystery of Sir Stafford Cripps, 1942, Padma Publications, Bombay.
MAHADEVAN, S. :
Mahatma Gandhi's Warning and Flashes in Harijan Tour, 1936, Madras.
MASANI, R. P.:
Dadabhai Naoroji, 1939, George Allen, London.
MASHRUWALA, K. G. I
Gandhi and Marx, 1951, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
MAURER, HERRYMONI
Great Soul, 1948, Doubleday, U.S.A.
MAZUMDAR, AMBIKA CHARAN !
Indian National Evolution, 1917, G. A. Natesan & Co., Madras.
MEHERALLY, YUSUF .
Leaders of India, 1946, Padma Publications, Bombay.
MEHTA, ASOKA, AND PATWARDHAN, ACHYUT !
The Communal Triangle in India, 1942, Kitabistan, Allahabad.
MIRA BEHN:
Gleanings, 1949, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
The Spirit's Pilgrimage, 1960, Longman's, London. KITRA, N. N. (published by):

Indian Annual Register, Calcutta.
MONTAGU, EDWIN S. :
An Indian Diary, 1930, William Heinemann, London.
MUKERJEE, HIREN :
Indian Struggle for Freedom, 1946, Kutub, Bombay. Gandhiji: A study, 1958,
National Book Agency, Calcutta.
NAG, KALIDAS :
Tolstoy and Gandhi, 1950, Pustak Bhandar, Patna.
NAIR, C. SANKARAN :
Gandhi and Anarchy, 1922, Tagore & Co., Madras.
NAMBOODRIPAD, E. M. S. :
The Mahatma and the Ism, 1958, People's Publishing House, Delhi.
NANDA, B. R. :
Mahatma Gandhi, 1958, George AJlen & Unwin, London.
NATESAN, G. A. :
Congress Presidential Addresses, vols. I & II, 1935, Madras.
Mahatma Gandhi—The Man and His Mission, 1943, Madras.
NAYYAR, SUSHILA :
Kasturba, 1948, Wallingford, Pennsylvania, Pendle Hill.
NEHRU, JAWAHARLAL :
Art Autobiography, 1936, John Lane, London.
The Discovery of India, 1941, Signet Press, Calcutta.
Eighteen Months in India, 1938, Kitabistan, Allahabad.
Mahatma Gandhi, 1949, Signet Press, Calcutta.
The Unity of India, 1941, Lindsay Drummond, London.
NOMAN, MOHAMMAD !
Muslim India, 1942, Kitabistan, Allahabad.
PARIKH, NARHARI D. I

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, vols. I & II, 1953, 1956, Navajivan Publishing House,
Ahmedabad.
PATEL, M. s.:
The Educational Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, 1953, Navajivan Publishing House,

Ahmedabad.
PATIL, s. K. (edited by):
March of Events, 1940, 1945, Bombay.
PAUL & CO.:
Gandhiji in England, 1932, Madras.
PEOPLE'S PUBLISHING HOUSE :
Correspondence between Mahatma Gandhi and P. C. Joshi, 1945, Bombay.
PESHAWAR CONGRESS INQUIRY COMMITTEE :
Report, 1930, Bombay.
PIDDINGTON, A. B. I
Bapu Gandhi, 1930, Williams & Norgate, London.
POLAK, H. s. L., BRAILSFORD, H. N., PETHICK-LAWRENCE
Mahatma Gandhi, 1949, Odhams Press, London.
POLAK, MILLIE GRAHAM :
Mr. Gandhi—The Man, 1931, Allen & Unwin, London.
POWER, F. PAUL :
Gandhi on World Affairs, 1961, Perennial Press, Bombay.
PRABHU, R. K. AND RAO, u. R. (edited by):
Conquest of Self, 1943, Thacker & Co., Bombay.
India of My Dreams, .1947, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, 1945, Oxford University Press, Bombay.
PRASAD, RAJENDRA I
Gandhiji in Chainparan, 1928, S. Ganesan, Madras. India Divided, 1947, Hind Kitabs
Ltd., Bombay.
PUNJAB SUB-COMMITTEE, INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS I

Report, 1920, Lahore.
PYARELAL:
The Epic Fast, 1932, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
A Pilgrimage for Peace, 1950, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
A Nation Builder at Work, 1952, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
Gandhian Techniques in the Modern World, 1953, Navajivan Publishing House,

Ahmedabad.
Mahatma Gandhi, vol. I—1956, vol. II—1958, Navajivan Publishing House,

Ahmedabad.
RADHAKRISHNAN, s. (edited by):
Mahatma Gandhi, 1939, Allen & Unwin, London. RAMACHANDRAN, G. :
A Sheaf of Gandhi Anecdotes, 1946, Hind Kitabs, Bombay.
RAMAN, T. A. :
What does Gandhi Want ? 1942, Oxford University Press, New York.
RANADE, R. D.:
The Conception of Spiritual Life in Mahatma Gandhi and Hindi Saints, 1956,
Gujarat Vidya Sabha, Ahmedabad.
RAO, G. RAMACHANDRA:
An Atheist with Gandhi, 1951, Navajivan Press, Ahmedabad.
RAO, R. v.:
Gandhian Institutions of Wardha, 1947, Thacker & Co., Bombay.
RAY, B. G. :
Gandhian Ethics, 1950, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
RAY CHAUDHURY, P. C. :
Gandhiji's First Struggle in India, 1955, Navajivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad.
REYNOLDS, REGINALD :
India, Gandhi and World Peace, 1931, London.
ROLLAND, ROMAIN :
Mahatma Gandhi, 1924, Allen & Unwin, London.

ROW, J. G. :
Gandhi the Mahatma, 1931, Epsworth Press, London.
SARMA, D. S. :
The Gandhi Sutras, 1949, The Devin-Adair Company, New York.
SHEEAN, VINCENT I
Lead, Kindly Light, 1949, Random House, New York.
SHRIDHARANI, K. :
War Without Violence, 1939, Harcourt Brace & Co., New York.
SHUKLA, CHANDRASHANKER (edited by):
Conversations of Gandhiji, 1949, Vora & Co., Bombay.
Gandhi's View of Life, 1951, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay.
Gandhiji As We Know Him, 1945, Vora & Co., Bombay.
Incidents of Gandhiji's Life, 1949, Vora & Co., Bombay.
Reminiscences of Gandhiji, 1951, Vora & Co., Bombay.
SINGH, G. N. :
Landmarks in Indian Constitutional and National Development, 1933, India Book

Depot, Benares.
SITARAMAYYA, PATTABHI:
Gandhi and Gandhism, vols. I & II, 1924, Kitabistan, Allahabad.
History of the Indian National Congress, vols. I & II, 1947, Padma Publications,
Bombay.
SMITH, w. c.:
Modem Islam in India, 1943, Minerva Book Shop, Lahore.
SPRATT, P. I
Gandhism : An Analysis, 1939, Huxley Press, Madras.
SUNDERLAND, J. T. I
India in Bondage, 1929, Modern Review, Calcutta.
SWAMI SHRADDHANANDI
Inside Congress, 1946, Phoenix Publications, Bombay.

TAGORE, RABINDRANATH :
Mahatmaji and the Depressed Humanity, 1932, Visva-Bharati, Calcutta.
TENDULKAR, D. G., M. CHALAPATHI RAU, MRIDULA SARABHAI AND VITHALBHAI K. JHAVERI (edited by):
Gandhiji: His Life and Work, 1944, Karnatak Publishing House, Bombay.
TENDULKAR, D. G.:
Gandhi in Champaran, 1957, Publications Division, Delhi.
VEGETARIAN NEWS :
Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Number, 1948, London.
VISVA-BHARATI QUARTERLY :
Gandhi Memorial Peace Number, 1949, Santiniketan.
WADIA, P. A. :
Mahatma Gandhi, 1939, New Book Co., Bombay.
WALKER, ROY:
Sword of Gold, 1945, London.
WATSON, F. & BROWN, M. !
Talking of Gandhiji, 1957, Orient Longmans, India.
WILLIAMS, RUSHBROOK L. F. I
India in 1919, 1921, 1921-22, 1924-25, Delhi.
YAGNIK, INDULAL K. :
Gandhi as I know Him, 1945, Delhi.
YUNUS, MOHAMMAD I
Frontier Speaks, 1942, Minerva Book Shop, Lahore.
ZACHARIAS, H. G. E. :
Renascent India, 1933, Allen & Unwin, London.

Mahatma Vol8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mahatma Vol8

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Mahatma Vol8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MAHATMA – Volume Eight [1947-1948]

First Edition : January 1954

Printed & Published by:

The Publications Division

Government of India, Patiala House

New Delhi 110 001

01. India Divided ( 1947 )

"What is brahmacharya? It is the way of life which leads us to Brahma (God). It

The H.M.G.'s proposals envisaged the creation of Pakistan, if demanded by the

Speaking on the plan embodied in H. M. G.'s announcement Gandhi said on June

of the decision of the Congress Working Committee accepting division of India.

Brave people were never perturbed by mere suspicions. He himself believed

dangerous method at this time. He, therefore, suggested the method of

listen, if taking advantage of the prevailing misery and discontent of the

"You all claim to be servants of the country. As such, it is up to you to shed

In the same connection, another correspondent harshly rubuked Gandhi for

Gandhi had a visit from some non-Muslims from stricken Rawalpindi. He

independent Travancore. Referring to the telegram, Gandhi said that he was

He made bold to declare that if a referendum were taken, the Christians of

achieving the freedom. Dr. Choithram Gidwani characterized the resolution as a

Those who talked in terms of an immediate revolution or of an upheaval in the

Gandhi emphasized that he was not pleading on behalf of the Working

Kripalani, in his concluding speech at the A.I.C.C., said :

definite steps, as in non-violent non-co-operation, that leads to the desired

02. Rights And Duties ( 1947 )

Referring to the movement for an independent N.W. Frontier state called

On his return from Hardwar, Gandhi read in the newspapers a colourful

"This division of India, with a subdivision of the provinces, puts us on our

Addressing the prayer meeting on June 24, he referred to the several

In conclusion he exposed the fallacious argument put forth by Sir C. P.

A correspondent had asked him as to how, having depended on British troops

A correspondent asked whether he contemplated any kind of friendship or

Gandhi said in reply on June 27 that he contemplated the closest friendship

"I place the following for your consideration:

"(b) It is physically impossible for millions of caste-ridden Hindus to hold well-

"I have not shown this to any of my friends."

nothing but contempt. It is distortion of the religious precept for a dissolute

Gandhi's speeches were interpreted to mean that he was hankering after a

musical enough to capture the imagination. Incidentally, he should also

Gandhi then referred to a letter he had received, complaining that the

03. I Too Am A Socialist ( 1947 )

In an editorial entitled, "Who Is a Socialist?" he wrote:

"Socialism is a beautiful word and, so far as I am aware, in socialism, all the

"This socialism is as pure as crystal. It, therefore, requires crystal-like means to

"And, therefore, only truthful, non-violent and pure-hearted socialists will be

In the second article on socialism Gandhi wrote:

"It is very difficult completely to silence these two doubts. Nevertheless, it is

The relation of the princes remained in a most unsatisfactory condition. He had

On July 7 his message was read out at the prayer gathering:

"There is an alternative which is also almost, if not quite, as difficult.

then, he preferred to defer judgement in spite of the correspondent's profound

He felt that the Governor-Generalship of Pakistan was going to be an acid test

At one stage he had thought of going to Uttar-Kashi before going anywhere

The public on hearing of his proposed pilgrimage to Uttar-Kashi began to

But humanly speaking, Pakistan would be a legally established fact on August

On July 16, he referred to the movement for Dravidistan, South India

The speeches in the House of Commons reported in the newspapers emphasized

word to be true had to be supported by corresponding action throughout the

Referring next to the question of untouchability, he stated that South India,