Total Pageviews

Sunday, May 20, 2012

The Fall of Devagiri

Devagiri, the capital of the Yadav dynasty. The Seuna Yadavas who traced their ancestory to Lord Krishna. Once, a place known for its immense riches. The Devagiri Fort built about 200 metres high was an architectural masterpiece. An impregnable fortress lying atop the hill. The glorious capital of the Yadav dynasty. How did it fall? How did the Hindu rule over the Deccan end. How did this once famous capital city of the Yadav dynasty lay in ruins?

Ramdev Ray, the King of Devagiri, was enjoying the prosperity of his kingdom. The people were happy with their lives. The King and his subjects remained blissfully oblivious to the danger looming in from the north. The forces of Jalaluddin Khilji led by his son-in-law and nephew Allauddin Khilji were on a rampage looting and destroying everything in their path. One after another the Hindu kingdoms were getting destroyed. The Sultanate forces greedily swallowing everything in their path. Temples destroyed, villages and cities looted, women kidnapped and raped, all in the name of Allah. The Sultanate hordes marched on with the battle cry of Allah-ho-Akbar.

The fame of Devagiri's riches and prosperity reached Allauddin's ears. With just a force of 8000 of his Afghan soldiers, he marched towards Devagiri. The news of his approach reached Raja Ramdev Ray. Hitherto oblivious to the Sultanate danger, the Raja was rudely awakened from his slumber. With the crown prince Shankar Dev away with the army, Ramdev had only an army of 4000 at his service to defend Devagiri against the onslaught of Allauddin Khilji. Utter lack of preparation in front of such grave danger.

The forces of Allauddin Khilji made their way to Devagiri swiftly destroying everything in their path. Ramadev Ray marched against Allauddin's forces. But Ramdev's army was no match to the disciplined and barbarous hordes of Allauddin. Ramdev's forces made a hasty retreat to the fort of Devagiri, leaving the city of Devagiri at the mercy of Allauddin's murderous army. The city was soon painted red with the blood of its innocent citizens. The cries of women and young girls filled the air as Allaudin's men took them forcibly. Temples were razed to ground. Ramadev watched helplessly as Allaudin Khilji and his army conducted the rape of Devagiri.

Khilji laid a seige to the fort of Devagiri. Surrounded by the enemy Ramdev Ray watched helplessly as resources within the fort continued to deplete. The crafty and cunning Khilji spread the rumor that this was only the advance force of the Sultan's army. Ramdev Ray shuddered at the thought of the approaching massive army of the Sultan. With food and resources within the fort on the verge of exhaustion, Ramdev Ray surrendered uncondtionally to Khilji. Khilji demanded exhoribant amount as ransom and tribute from the Raja, to which the Raja agreed.

As Ramdev Ray acceded to the demands of Allauddin Khilji, the crown prince Shankar Dev, who had heard of Khilji's attack, was marching towards Devagiri with his army to rescue and free Devagiri. Khilji, with his force of just 8000 knew he was in trouble. Ramdev Ray was worried that if Shankar Dev attacked Khilji, then the approaching force of the Sultan would completely destroy Devagiri. He sent a messenger to Shankar Dev and informed him of the treaty made with Khilji. Shankar Dev was furious and did not pay heed and continued to march towards Khilji's forces. As Shankar Dev's army closed in, Khilji led his forces against him, leaving a force of 1000 behind to continue the seige of Devagiri fort. The armies met and a bloody battle ensued. The forces of Shankar Dev were gaining an upper hand. Suddenly, the 1000 soldiers that Khilji had left behind marched towards the battlefield raising a cloud of dust and storm. Thinking that the approaching army was the massive army of the Sultan, Shankar Dev's army started fleeing. Khilji's men butchered the fleeing army of Shankar Dev. Shankar Dev watched helplessly as the victory was turned into a defeat. Khilji's rumour had done the trick. Shankar Dev had to retreat.

Once again Khilji laid the seige to Devagiri and demanded even more exhoribiant amount from Ramdev Ray to which he agreed. Ramdev Ray even gave away his daughter in marriage to Khilji. Khilji, victorious, made his way back to Delhi and Ramdev Ray now ruled as a vassal of the Delhi Sultanate. The year 1294 AD thus marked the subjugation of the Hindu Kingdom of Devagiri by the Delhi Sultanate.

Years passed. Allauddin Khilji was now the Sultan of Delhi. Murdering his own uncle and father-in-law Jalaluddin Khilji, he had ascended the throne of Delhi. The kingdom of Devagiri continued paying the exhoribant tribute to the Sultan of Delhi. As the Sultan was enriched, the people of Devagiri were suffering from the burden of the exhoribant tribute. Shankar Dev could withstand it no more and stopped the payment of all the tribute to the Sultan. The coward and traitor King Ramdev Ray wrote to Allauddin Khilji that his son Shankar Dev and some his senior courtiers have taken the decision and he, Ramdev Raya, is agreeing to them only because fear and requested Khilji to send one of his senior officers to take control of the situation. Fie upon such ruler.

Allauddin Khilji despatched a mighty force of 30,000 under the leadership of his General, Malik Kafur to Devagiri. The forces of Kafur and the Yadavs met. Gruesome battle ensued. The forces of Shankar Dev however were defeated by Malik Kafur. Raja Ramdev Ray was captured by Malik Kafur. The army of Kafur, wrought destruction upon the city of Devagiri, which was again looted and raped.

Ramdev Ray was taken to Delhi and brought before Sultan Allauddin Khilji. Ramdev Ray once again accepted to pay an exhoribant annual tribute to the Sultan and became his vassal. For this cowardly act, Ramdev Ray was bestowed the title "Ray Rayan" i.e. King of Kings. The shameless Ramdev stayed in Delhi for 6 months before returning to Devagiri.

Two years later, in 1309, Ramdev Ray died. The brave Shankar Dev ascended the throne of Devagiri. He proclaimed himself as an independent ruler. No longer was Devagiri a vassal of the Sultan. All payment of tribute to the Sultan was stopped. Devgiri was once again free. Allauddin Khilji knew that before this very Shankar Dev, he had closely escaped death. He waited for 3 years. 3 years, no tribute was sent from Devagiri to Delhi.

Finally, in the year 1312, Allauddin Khilji ordered Malik Kafur, to march to Devagiri with a huge force and to destroy Devagiri, to take control and to establish Islamic rule over Devagiri. With a huge force, Malik Kafur attacked Devagiri. With the shouts of Allah-ho-Akbar, the destruction of Devagiri began. The forces of Shankar Dev fell before the onslaught of Malik Kafur's army. Shankar Dev himself fell in the battle, killed by Malik Kafur. Devagiri was now under Malik Kafur's control.

Year 1316, and Allauddin Khilji fell ill in Delhi. Malik Kafur was recalled to Delhi. As Malik Kafur went back to Delhi, Harpal Dev, the son-in-law of Ramdev Ray, rebelled and defeated the forces left behind by Malik Kafur and proclaimed himself as the ruler of Devagiri and stopping the payment of all tribute to Delhi. Devagiri was free again.

Allauddin Khilji died in the December of 1316 and a bloody battle for the throne of Delhi ensued. Malik Kafur was soon murdered. Out emerged the bloodiest of them all as the victor and the new Sultan of Delhi, Qutubuddin Mubarik Khan.

The new Sultan's eyes were now fixed on Devagiri and Harpal to whom he wanted to teach a lesson. Qutubuddin marched with his armies to Devagiri. In the battle that ensued, the Yadav forces were defeated. Harpal Dev was captured and brought before the Sultan. The cruel Sultan ordered Harpal to be flayed alive and to leave him hanging on the gates of Devagiri. "Uski khal khichkar Devagiri ke darwaze pe latka di jaye" had thundered the Sultan. As Harpal writhed and cried in pain with his skin peeled off with a sharp knife, his body bathed in his own blood, the Sultan watched gleefully deriving immense pleasure from the pain and torture of his enemy. The Sultan's revenge was complete. His blood thirst quenched for a while. With his skin peeled off his body, Harpal's body was left hanging at the gates of Devagiri for all to see. As crows and vultures preyed upon the body of the brave King of Devagiri, the sun had set upon the Hindu rule in Devagiri & Deccan.

Devagiri was in few years renamed as Daulatabad by the mad Sultan Muhammad Tughlaq, who for 2 years shifted the capital from Delhi to Devagiri along with the entire population of Delhi. The last of it's Hindu indentity was now gone. Devagiri became Daulatabad.

The Sultans and their armies continued looting the people and kidnapping and raping the womenfolk. Forcible conversions became the order of day. No one was safe. Temples were razed down and Mosques built in their place. Hindus had become slaves in their own country, their own land. The Sun had set upon the Hindu rule and people waited hoping against hope for the Sun to rise again.

Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

My Tweets on Hinduism - 25th April 2012

On seeing the response to my tweets on Hinduism today, I decided to compile them all and post it here on my blog. Here all my tweets about Hinduism today. Proud to be a Hindu!

My tweets on Hinduism - 25th April, 2012:

No one can ever say that he knows all about Hinduism. It's almost impossible. Hinduism is much more vast & diverse than one can imagine.

The current visible form of Hinduism is the result of many changes and reforms carried out throughout the long history of this nation.

Hinduism recognises that there are different paths to the ONE! Every sect therefore finds recognition under Hinduism. This is truly secular!

In fact, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism were reformist movements. Although now seen as independent religions there is an underlying unity.

Before the muslim invasion in India, people of different beliefs lived in peace side by side. Philosophical debates were the order of the day.

With the arrival of muslims, started the forcible conversions at the point of sword. Intellectual debates gave way to brute force.

A glorious culture found itself being corrupted by the barbarous muslim tribes. With muslims came the worst period in Indian history.

Religions having their birth in the Indian soil have an inherent tolerance in them & they recognise the other's right to believe differently.

The inherent defect in the muslim & christian religion is in the fact that they believe theirs is the only way to God & rest all are damned.

That's where Hinduism or properly called 'Sanatan Dharma' excels. It recognises that there different paths to reach the same destination.

Taking into consideration the ancient 'Sanatan Dharma', every religion, every sect will find shelter under one roof of 'Sanatan Dharma'.

The problem with modern hinduism too seems to be in aping the muslims in being intolerant and becoming hate mongers.

Hindus need to remember that by demonising other religions you are gaining nothing. Instead be proud of being hindu & spread that pride.

Having pride in being Hindu doesn't mean to keep on wasting energy in hating other religions. That way you will alienate your own people.

First & foremost need is to educate the Hindus of their own glorious culture and superior philosophical & intellectual thoughts.

Hinduism isn't only the superficial rituals of the priestly class or the blind following of so called 'babas'. It's much more.

Let Hindus learn the glorious philosophy of Vedanta and they will find the modern quantum physics paling in front of it.

The modern science 'discovered' & started speaking of atoms, molecules, energy, waves etc. Of which our ancient sages spoke long back.

Albert Einstein gave us theory of relativity, then what else is the doctrine of 'Maya' given to us by our sages?

Aeroplanes are thought to be modern inventions, then what was the 'Pushpaka Vimana' mentioned in the Ramayana?

The more you will learn about the glorious past of this nation & level of knowledge amassed by the sages of past, the more proud u will be!

Hindus, think for your self. You need not be fooled by the pseudo secularists. Learn more about your own religion & you won't be fooled.

Tales of past need not be pure myths. Although somewhat modified & corrupted with time, they do contain some hidden truth. Search for it.

As blind faith in religion is not good, so is blind disbelief in it not good. Open your eyes & see the truth wherever you can.

Hinduism contains everything for everyone. To each his own. A path to suit every temperament. Bhakti, Jnana, Karma, Raja, Laya etc.

Hindus, be proud of being Hindu. Learn more of your own glorious religion. It doesn't consists of mindless rituals as we are made to believe.

Hinduism is but above all in its vast intellectual and philosophical glory. Dissect the rituals, trace them to their origin & u will know!

Read about the lives of the glorious sages of the past & u will find that not 1 was a product of blind faith but of sincere search for truth.

*******

My sincere thanks to everyone who read these random musings of mine. And thanks a lot to the tweeples who retweeted my tweets! Glory to you all!
Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Remembering Swatantryaveer Savarkar

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (28.5.1883 - 26.2.1966)

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar
(28th May 1883 - 26th February 1966)

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar also better known as Swatantryaveer Savarkar is one of the shinning stars of the Indian freedom struggle and the revolutionary movement. He was a man of many talents; a poet, writer, playwright, philosopher, social reformer and a politician. He was a proponent of liberty as the ultimate ideal.

Early Life:            

Vinayak was born in the family of Damodar and Radhabai Savarkar in the village of Bhagur, near the city of Nasik, Maharashtra. At the age of fifteen he vowed before the family deity to conduct an armed revolt against the British Rule and liberate India. On 1st January, 1900, Vinayak organised a youth group called Mitra Mela, a secret revolutionary society and encouraged revolutionary and nationalist views of passion using this group.

In 1901, Vinayak Savarkar married Yamunabai, daughter of Ramchandra Triambak Chiplunkar, who supported his university education. Subsequently in 1902, he enrolled in Fergusson College, in Pune. In. May, 1904, he founded Abhinav Bharat, a revolutionary organisation along with his fellow students and friends. In 1905, during Dussehra festivities Vinayak organised setting up of a bonfire of foreign goods and clothes. Vinayak was soon expelled from college due to his activities but was still permitted to take his Bachelor of Arts degree examinations. After completing his degree, nationalist activist Shyam Krishnavarma helped Vinayak to go to England to study law, on a scholarship.

In London:

After his joining Gray's Inn law college in London Vinayak took accommodation at India House. Organised by expatriate social and political activist Pandit Shyamji, India House was a thriving centre for student political activities. Savarkar soon founded the Free India Society to help organise fellow Indian students with the goal of fighting for complete independence through a revolution, declaring,

“We must stop complaining about this British officer or that officer, this law or that law. There would be no end to that. Our movement must not be limited to being against any particular law, but it must be for acquiring the authority to make laws itself. In other words, we want absolute independence”

On 10th May, 1907, Savarkar celebrated the Golden Jubilee of the Indian War of Independence of 1857 in London. Savarkar envisioned a guerrilla war for independence along the lines of the famous armed uprising of 1857. Studying the history of the revolt, from English as well as Indian sources, Savarkar wrote the book, The History of the War of Indian Independence in 1908. He analyzed the circumstances of 1857 uprising and assailed British rule in India as unjust and oppressive. It was via this book that Savarkar became one of the first writers to allude the uprising as India's "First War for Independence." The book was banned from publication throughout the British Empire. Madame Bhikaji Cama, and expatriate Indian revolutionary obtained its publication in the Netherlands, France and Germany. Widely smuggled and circulated, the book attained great popularity and influenced rising young Indians.

Savarkar was studying revolutionary methods and he came into contact with a veteran of the Russian Revolution of 1905, who imparted him the knowledge of bomb-making. Savarkar had printed and circulated a manual amongst his friends, on bomb-making and other methods of guerrilla warfare. In 1909, Madan Lal Dhingra, a keen follower and friend of Savarkar, assassinated British MP Sir Curzon Wylie in a public meeting. Dhingra's action provoked controversy across Britain and India, evoking enthusiastic admiration as well as condemnation. Savarkar published an article in which he all but endorsed the murder and worked to organise support, both political and for Dhingra's legal defence. At a meeting of Indians called for a condemnation of Dhingra's deed, Savarkar protested the intention of condemnation and was drawn into a hot debate and angry scuffle with other attendants. A secretive and restricted trial and a sentence awarding the death penalty to Dhingra provoked an outcry and protest across the Indian student and political community. Strongly protesting the verdict, Savarkar struggled with British authorities in laying claim to Dhingra's remains following his execution. Savarkar hailed Dhingra as a hero and martyr, and began encouraging revolution with greater intensity.

Arrest in London, the epic escape and re-arrest:

In India, Ganesh Savarkar had organised an armed revolt against the Morley-Minto reforms of 1909. The British police implicated Savarkar in the investigation for allegedly plotting the crime. Hoping to evade arrest, Savarkar moved to Madame Cama's home in Paris. He was nevertheless arrested by police on March 13, 1910. In the final days of freedom, Savarkar wrote letters to a close friend planning his escape. Knowing that he would most likely be shipped to India, Savarkar asked his friend to keep track of which ship and route he would be taken through. When the ship S.S. Morea reached the port of Marseilles on July 8, 1910, Savarkar escaped from his cell through a porthole and dived into the water, swimming to the shore in the hope that his friend would be there to receive him in a car. But his friend was late in arriving, and the alarm having been raised, Savarkar was re-arrested.

The Savarkar Case:

Savarkar's arrest at Marseilles caused the French government to protest to the British, which argued that the British could only revover Savarkar if they took appropriate legal proceedings for his rendition. This dispute came before the Permanent Court of International Arbitration in 1910, and it gave its decision in 1911. The case excited much controversy as was reported by the New York Times, and it considered it involved an interesting international question of the right of asylum. The Court held, firstly, that since there was a pattern of collaboration between the two countries regarding the possibility of Savarkar's escape in Marseilles and since there was neither force nor fraud in inducing the French authorities to return Savarkar to them, the British authorities did not have to hand him back to the French in order for the latter to hold rendition proceedings. On the other hand, the tribunal also observed that there had been an "irregularity" in Savarkar's arrest and delivery over to the Indian Army Military Police guard.

Transportation for Life:

Arriving in Mumbai, he was taken to the Yervada Central Jail in Pune. Following a trial, Savarkar was awarded transportation for life on 24th December, 1910 and then again on 31st January, 1911, thus becoming the only person in the history of British Empire to have received it twice! He was transported on July 4, 1911 to the infamous Cellular Jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

His fellow captives included many political prisoners, who were forced to perform hard labour for many years. Reunited with his brother Ganesh, the Savarkars nevertheless struggled in the harsh environment. Forced to arise at 5 a.m., tasks including cutting trees and chopping wood, and working at the oil mill under regimental strictness, with talking amidst prisoners strictly prohibited during mealtime. Prisoners were subject to frequent mistreatment and torture. Contact with the outside world and home was restricted to the writing and mailing of one letter a year. In these years, Savarkar withdrew within himself and performed his routine tasks mechanically. Obtaining permission to start a rudimentary jail library, Savarkar would also teach some fellow convicts to read and write.

Savarkar, deprived of pen and paper, composed his poems and then wrote them on the prison walls with thorns and nails, memorised ten thousand lines of his poetry and later transmitted them to India through his fellow prisoners who also memorised these lines.
Savarkar appealed for clemency in 1911 and again during Sir Reginald Craddock's visit in 1913, citing poor health in the oppressive conditions. In 1920, the Indian National Congress and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Vithalbhai Patel and Bal Gangadhar Tilak demanded his unconditional release. Savarkar tactically signed a statement endorsing the trial, verdict and British law, and renouncing violence, a bargain for freedom.

On May 2, 1921, the Savarkar brothers were moved to a jail in Ratnagiri, and later to the Yeravda Central Jail. He was finally released on January 6, 1924 under stringent restrictions – he was not to leave Ratnagiri District and was to refrain from political activities for the next five years. However, police restrictions on his activities would not be dropped until provincial autonomy was granted in 1937.

Savarkar and Hindutva:

During his incarceration, Savarkar's views began turning increasingly towards Hindu cultural and political nationalism, and the next phase of his life remained dedicated to this cause. In the brief period he spent at the Ratnagiri jail, Savarkar wrote his ideological treatise – Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?. Smuggled out of the prison, it was published by Savarkar's supporters under his alias "Maharatta." In this work, Savarkar promotes a radical new vision of Hindu social and political consciousness. Savarkar began describing a "Hindu" as a patriotic inhabitant of Bharatavarsha, venturing beyond a religious identity. While emphasising the need for patriotic and social unity of all Hindu communities, he described Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism as one and same. He outlined his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra" as "Akhand Bharat", purportedly stretching across the entire Indian subcontinent.

 After his release, Savarkar founded the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha on January 23, 1924, aiming to work for the social and cultural preservation of Hindu heritage and civilisation. Becoming a frequent and forceful orator, Sarvakar agitated for the use of Hindi as a common national language and against caste discrimination and untouchability. Focusing his energies on writing, Savarkar authored the Hindu Pad-pada-shahi – a book documenting and extolling the Maratha empire – and My Transportation for Life – an account of his early revolutionary days, arrest, trial and incarcertaion. He also wrote and published a collection of poems, plays and novels. Another activity he started was to reconvert to Hinduism those who had converted to other faiths.

Savarkar also strived for the eradication of untouchability. In 1930, he started Ganeshotsav festival open to all castes. He also organised inter-dining ceremonies of all Hindus. He was also instrumental in opening of Patitpavan mandir to all Hindus.

Savarkar and Hindu Mahasabha:

Although disavowing revolution and politics, Savarkar grew disenchanted with the Congress's emphasis of non-violence and criticised Gandhi for suspending Non-cooperation Movement following the killing of 22 policemen in Chauri Chaura in 1922.

He soon joined the Hindu Mahasabha, a political party founded in 1911 and avowed to Hindu political rights and empowerment. The party was disengaged from the Indian independence movement, allowing Savarkar to work without British interference. As his travel restrictions weakened, Savarkar began travelling extensively, delivering speeches exhorting Hindu political unity and criticising the Congress and Muslim politicians. Savarkar and the Mahasabha did not endorse the Salt Satyagraha launched by the Congress in 1930, and neither Savarkar nor any of his supporters participated in civil disobedience. Savarkar focused on expanding the party's membership, revamping its structure and delivering its message.

Savarkar moved to Mumbai and was elected president of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937, and would serve until 1943. The Congress swept the polls in 1937 but conflicts between the Congress and Jinnah would exacerbate Hindu-Muslim political divisions. Jinnah derided Congress rule as a "Hindu Raj", and hailed December 22, 1939 as a "Day of Deliverance" for Muslims when the Congress resigned en masse in protest of India's arbitrary inclusion into World War II. Savarkar's message of Hindu unity and empowerment gained increasing popularity.

Savarkar publicly encouraged Hindus to enlist in the military, which his supporters described as an effort for Hindus to obtain military training and experience potentially useful in a future confrontation with the British.  Under his leadership, the Mahasabha won several seats in the central and provincial legislatures. Hindu Mahasabha activists protested Gandhi's initiative to hold talks with Jinnah in 1944, which Savarkar denounced as "appeasement." He assailed the British proposals for transfer of power, attacking both the Congress and the British for making concessions to Muslim separatists.

Savarkar propagated the idea of 'Akhand Bharat' and opposed the partition of India. However, Savarkar's opposition ultimately failed to prevent the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Savarkar's Works:

Savarkar wrote more than 10,000 pages in the Marathi language. His literary works in Marathi include "Kamala", "Mazi Janmathep" (My Life Sentence), and most famously "1857 - The First War of Independence", about what the British referred to as the Sepoy Mutiny. Savarkar popularised the term 'First War of Independence'. Another noted book was "Kale Pani" (similar to Life Sentence, but on the island prison on the Andamans), which reflected the treatment of Indian freedom fighters by the British. In order to counter the then accepted view that India's history was a saga of continuous defeat, he wrote an inspirational historical work, "Saha Soneri Pane" (Six Golden Pages), recounting some of the Golden periods of Indian history. At the same time, religious divisions in India were beginning to fissure. He described what he saw as the atrocities of British and Muslims on Hindu residents in Kerala, in the book, "Mopalyanche Band" (Muslims' Strike) and also "Gandhi Gondhal" (Gandhi's Confusion), a political critique of Gandhi's politics. Savarkar, by now, had become a committed and persuasive critic of the Gandhi-an vision of India's future.

He is also the author of poems like "Sagara pran talmalala" (O Great Sea, my heart aches for the motherland), and "Jayostute" (written in praise of freedom), one of the most moving, inspiring and patriotic works in Marathi literature. When in the Cellular jail, Savarkar was denied pen and paper. He composed and wrote his poems on the prison walls with thorns and pebbles, memorised thousands lines of his poetry for years till other prisoners returning home brought them to India. Savarkar is credited with several popular neologisms in Marathi and Hindi, like "Hutatma"(Martyr),"Mahapaur" ( Mayor),Digdarshak (leader or director, one who points in the right direction), Shatkar (a score of six runs in cricket), Saptahik (weekly), Sansad (Parliament), "doordhwani" ("telephone"), "tanklekhan" ("typewriting") among others.
He chaired Marathi Sahitya Sammelan in 1938.

Arrest and acquittal in Gandhi's assassination:

Following the assassination of Gandhi on January 30, 1948, police arrested Nathuram Godse and his alleged accomplices and conspirators. Godse was the editor of Agrani - Hindu Rashtra a Marathi daily from Pune which was run by a company "The Hindu Rashtra Prakashan Ltd." This company had contributions from such eminent persons as Gulabchand Hirachand, Bhalji Pendharkar and Jugalkishore Birla. Savarkar had invested Rs. 15000 in the company. Savarkar a former president of the Hindu Mahasabha, was arrested on 5 February 1948, from his house in Shivaji Park, and kept under detention in the Arthur Road Prison, Mumbai. He was charged with murder, conspiracy to murder and abetment to murder. A day before his arrest, Savarkar in a public written statement, as reported in The Times of India", Mumbai dated 7 February 1948, termed Gandhi's assassination a fratricidal crime, endangering India's existence as a nascent nation. Nathuram Godse took complete responsibility for the assassination and Savarkar was subsequently acquitted.

Later Life and Death:

Despite his exoneration, Savarkar's role in the plot remains a source of intense controversy but at the time the public held him answerable for instigating the murder. Public outrage over Gandhi's murder wrecked the fortunes of the Hindu Mahasabha, whose membership and activity dwindled into insignificance. Savarkar's home in Mumbai was stoned by angry mobs, and his political influence and activism sharply curtailed by widespread public anger. His activities remained confined to occasional speeches and publishing his writings.

He considered RSS and its associate organizations with equal ideology. But RSS had a stronger appeal to the votaries of Hindutva. RSS founder Keshav Baliram Hedgewar had the highest respect for Savarkar, and RSS continues to acknowledge Savarkar's efforts for the Hindu unity. Savarkar also admired and participated in the activities of RSS.

In 1966 Savarkar renounced medicines, food and water leading to his death on February 26, 1966. He was mourned by large crowds that attended his cremation. He had written an article 'Atma-hatya or Deh-tyaag', arguing that suicide in most cases is taking one's life, but renouncing life after the body was no longer capable of functioning properly was a different matter. He left behind a son Vishwas and a daughter Prabha Chiplunkar. His first son, Prabhakar, had died in infancy. His home, possessions and other personal relics have been preserved for public display.

Congress apathy towards Savarkar after his death:

After his death, since Savarkar was championing militarization, some thought that it would be fitting if his mortal remains were to be carried on a gun-carriage. A request to that effect was made to the then Defence Minister, Y.B. Chavan, who later on became Deputy Prime Minister of India. But Chavan turned down the proposal and not a single minister from the Maharashtra Cabinet showed up in the cremation ground to pay homage to Savarkar. In New Delhi, the Speaker of the Parliament turned down a request that it pay homage to Savarkar. In fact, after the independence of India, Jawaharlal Nehru had put forward a proposal to demolish the Cellular Jail in the Andamans and build a hospital in its place. When Y.B. Chavan, as the Home Minister of India, went to the Andamans, he was asked whether he would like to visit Savarkar's jail but he was not interested. Also when Morarji Desai went as Prime Minister to the Andamans, he too refused to visit Savarkar's cell.

Conclusion:

Veer Savarkar stands as one of the greatest patriot of the motherland. A man who fought for freedom of 'Akhand Bharat'. A man who deserves greater honour and respect than he's been presently given. A salute to this great patriot and hero of Indian freedom struggle!

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Vasudeo Balwant Phadke - The Forgotten Hero of Indian Freedom Struggle


Vasudeo Balwant Phadke
(4th November, 1845 - 17th February, 1883)

We all have learnt history in our school, but how many of us know about Vasudeo Balwant Phadke? Vasudeo Balwant Phadke, the father of armed revolution in India! A man with a lion's heart! He rose against the British Raj and even took control of the city of Pune for few days even with his limited resources. Read on and know this great son of India and the history of our nation which is hardly taught in the schools and colleges nowadays!

Birth and Early Years

Vasudeo Balwant Phadke was born on 4th November, 1845 in Shirdhon village in Panvel, Maharashtra in a Marathi Brahmin family. Vasudev was highly devoted to his mother from childhood. Vasudev preferred learning skills like wrestling and horse riding over his school education and eventually dropped out of school. Eventually he moved to Pune and took the job as a clerk with military accounts department in Pune for 15 years. Krantiveer Lahuji Vastad Salve a then prominent social figure based in Pune was the mentor of Vasudev. Lahuji Salve, an expert wrestler operated a gymnasium. Lahuji preached the importance of independence from British Raj. Lahuji belonged to the Mang community, an untouchable community, taught Vasudev the importance of getting backward castes into mainstream freedom movement. It was during this period that Vasudev began attending lectures by Mahadeo Govind Ranade which mainly focused on how the British Raj policies hurt the Indian economy. Vasudev was deeply hurt by how this was leading to widespread suffering in the society. In 1870, he joined a public agitation in Pune that was aimed at addressing people's grievances. He also took a vow to use only Khadi clothes and Swadeshi articles. Vasudev founded an institution called the Aikya Vardhini Sabha, for ventilating the first school of national education in Pune to educate the youth. While working as clerk, Vasudev was not able to see his dying mother due to the delay in approval of his leave by his British superior officer. His anger and grief knew no bounds and this incident enraged Vasudev and happened to be the turning point in his life.

Revolt with the help of the Ramoshis

In 1875, after the then Gaikwad ruler of Baroda was deposed by the British, Phadke launched protest speeches against the government. This was also the period of a sever famine in the state. Vasudeo was greatly affected by the scenes of death and devastation and the callousness of the British rulers to the woes of the people. Severe famine coupled with the evident apathy of the British administration propelled him to tour the Deccan region, urging people to strive for a free republic. Echoing the words of Thoreau, he thundered that it was the right of all men to refuse allegiance to and to resist the government when its tyranny or inefficiency was great and unendurable. He told his countrymen that Swaraj was the only remedy for their ills and asked them to strive for their independence. Unable to get support from the educated classes, he gathered a band of people from the Ramoshi caste. People from the Kolis, Bhils and Dhangars were also included later. He taught himself to shoot, ride and fence. He organised around 300 men into an insurgent group that aimed at liberating India from British rule. Vasudev intended to build an army of own but lacking funds they decided to break into government treasuries. The first raid was done in a village called Dhamari in Shirur taluka in Pune district. The income tax which was collected for British Raj was kept in the house of local business man Mr. Balchand Fojmal Sankla. They attacked the house and took the money for the benefit of famine stricken villagers. There they collected about four hundred rupees but this led to his being branded as a dacoit. To save himself Vasudev had to flee from village to village, sheltered by his sympathisers and well-wishers, mostly the lower class of the society. Impressed by his zeal and determination, the villagers of Nanagaum offered him protection and cover in the local forest. The general plot would be to cut off all the communications of British forces and then raid the treasury. The main purpose of these raids was to feed famine-affected farmer communities. Vasudev performed many such raids in areas near Shirur and Khed talukas in Pune.

Meanwhile, the leader of Ramoshi Daulatrav naik who was the main supporter of vasudev, headed towards western coastal area - konkan . On the date 10, 11 May 1879, they raided Palaspe and Chikhali. They looted near about 1.5 lakh rupees. While returning towards ghat matha Major Daniel organised attack on Daulatrav naik. During this attack Daulatrav naik was shot dead. Daulatrav naik's death gave a big setback to Vasudev's revolt against the British raj. Due to the death of Daulatrav naik, Vasudev lost the support. That's why he decided to move to south, and headed for Shri Shaila Mallikarjun shrine. After overcoming the moral defeat, Vasudev again recruited about 500 Rohilas to form strong army to start a fresh fight against the British Raj.

Capture and Death

Vasudev's plans to organize several simultaneous attacks against the British Raj nationwide were met with very limited success. He once had a direct engagement with the British army in the village of Ghanur, whereafter the government offered a bounty for his capture. Not to be outdone, Phadke in turned offered a bounty for the capture of the Governor of Bombay, announced a reward for the killing of each European, and issued other threats to the government. He then fled to Hyderabad State to recruit Rohilla and Arabs into his organisation. A British Major, Henry William Daniell and Abdul Haque, Police Commissioner to the Nizam of Hyderabad, pursued the fleeing Vasudev day and night. The British move to offer a bounty for his capture met with success: someone betrayed Phadke, and he was captured in a temple after a fierce fight at the district of Kaladgi on 20 July 1879 while he was on his way to Pandharpur. From here he was taken to Pune for trial. Vasudev and his comrades were housed in the district session court jail building, near Sangam bridge, which now happens to be the state C.I.D. building. His own diary provided evidence to have him sentenced for life. Vasudev was transported to jail at Aden, but escaped from the prison by taking the door off from its hinges on 13 February 1883. But his escape was too short lived: he was recaptured and put back in prison. Vasudev then went on a hunger strike to death. On 17 February 1883 Vasudev breathed his last breath as a result of his protest hunger strike.

***********

Remember this hero who fought for independence of our country with limited resources and limited support. Let us honour his memory. Let everyone know that such a brave freedom fighter existed and fought valiantly for Swaraj!

***********
Sources: wikipedia.org
             indianpost.com

Monday, January 30, 2012

Why I Killed Gandhi - Nathuram Godse's Final Speech In Court

Everyone knows that Nathuram Godse assassinated Mahatma Gandhi but what led to Godse taking such a drastic step? He wasn't some uneducated fanatic but a well educated man and also a freedom fighter. Now read below to know the reasons that led Nathuram Godse to assassinate Gandhiji.

Nathuram Godse was arrested immediately after he assassinated Gandhiji, based on a F. I. R. filed by Nandlal Mehta at the Tughlak Road Police staton at Delhi . The trial, which was held in camera, began on May 27, 1948 and concluded on February 10, 1949. He was sentenced to death.
An appeal to the Punjab High Court, then in session at Simla, did not find favour and the sentence was upheld. The statement that you are about to read is the last made by Godse before the Court on the May 5, 1949.

Such was the power and eloquence of this statement that one of the judges, G. D. Khosla, later wrote, "I have, however, no doubt that had the audience of that day been constituted into a jury and entrusted with the task of deciding Godse's appeal, they would have brought a verdict of 'not Guilty' by an overwhelming majority"

WHY I KILLED GANDHI - Nathuram Godse.

Born in a devotional Brahmin family, I instinctively came to revere Hindu religion, Hindu history and Hindu culture. I had, therefore, been intensely proud of Hinduism as a whole. As I grew up I developed a tendency to free thinking unfettered by any superstitious allegiance to any isms, political or religious. That is why I worked actively for the eradication of untouchability and the caste system based on birth alone. I openly joined RSS wing of anti-caste movements and maintained that all Hindus were of equal status as to rights, social and religious and should be considered high or low on merit alone and not through the accident of birth in a particular caste or profession.

I used publicly to take part in organized anti-caste dinners in which thousands of Hindus, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Chamars and Bhangis participated. We broke the caste rules and dined in the company of each other. I have read the speeches and writings of Ravana, Chanakiya, Dadabhai Naoroji, Vivekanand, Gokhale, Tilak, along with the books of ancient and modern history of India and some prominent countries like England , France , America and Russia . Moreover I studied the tenets of Socialism and Marxism. But above all I studied very closely whatever Veer Savarkar and Gandhiji had written and spoken, as to my mind these two ideologies have contributed more to the moulding of the thought and action of the Indian people during the last thirty years or so, than any other single factor has done.

All this reading and thinking led me to believe it was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus both as a patriot and as a world citizen. To secure the freedom and to safeguard the just interests of some thirty crores (300 million) of Hindus would automatically constitute the freedom and the well-being of all India , one fifth of human race. This conviction led me naturally to devote myself to the Hindu Sanghtanist ideology and programme, which alone, I came to believe, could win and preserve the national independence of Hindustan , my Motherland, and enable her to render true service to humanity as well.

Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji's influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them.. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day.

In fact, honour, duty and love of one's own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita.. [In the Mahabharata], Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action.

In more recent history, it was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji that first checked and eventually destroyed the Muslim tyranny in India . It was absolutely essentially for Shivaji to overpower and kill an aggressive Afzal Khan, failing which he would have lost his own life. In condemning history's towering warriors like Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind Singh as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit. He was, paradoxical as it may appear, a violent pacifist who brought untold calamities on the country in the name of truth and non-violence, while Rana Pratap, Shivaji and the Guru will remain enshrined in the hearts of their countrymen for ever for the freedom they brought to them.

The accumulating provocation of thirty-two years, culminating in his last pro-Muslim fast, at last goaded me to the conclusion that the existence of Gandhi should be brought to an end immediately. Gandhi had done very good in South Africa to uphold the rights and well-being of the Indian community there. But when he finally returned to India he developed a subjective mentality under which he alone was to be the final judge of what was right or wrong. If the country wanted his leadership, it had to accept his infallibility; if it did not, he would stand aloof from the Congress and carry on his own way.

Against such an attitude there can be no halfway house. Either Congress had to surrender its will to his and had to be content with playing second fiddle to all his eccentricity, whimsicality, metaphysics and primitive vision, or it had to carry on without him. He alone was the Judge of everyone and every thing; he was the master brain guiding the civil disobedience movement; no other could know the technique of that movement. He alone knew when to begin and when to withdraw it. The movement might succeed or fail, it might bring untold disaster and political reverses but that could make no difference to the Mahatma's infallibility. 'A Satyagrahi can never fail' was his formula for declaring his own infallibility and nobody except himself knew what a Satyagrahi is. Thus, the Mahatma became the judge and jury in his own cause. These childish insanities and obstinacies, coupled with a most severe austerity of life, ceaseless work and lofty character made Gandhi formidable and irresistible.

Many people thought that his politics were irrational but they had either to withdraw from the Congress or place their intelligence at his feet to do with as he liked. In a position of such absolute irresponsibility Gandhi was guilty of blunder after blunder, failure after failure, disaster after disaster. Gandhi's pro-Muslim policy is blatantly in his perverse attitude on the question of the national language of India . It is quite obvious that Hindi has the most prior claim to be accepted as the premier language. In the beginning of his career in India , Gandhi gave a great impetus to Hindi but as he found that the Muslims did not like it, he became a champion of what is called Hindustani.. Everybody in India knows that there is no language called Hindustani; it has no grammar; it has no vocabulary. It is a mere dialect, it is spoken, but not written. It is a bastard tongue and cross-breed between Hindi and Urdu, and not even the Mahatma's sophistry could make it popular. But in his desire to please the Muslims he insisted that Hindustani alone should be the national language of India . His blind followers, of course, supported him and the so-called hybrid language began to be used. The charm and purity of the Hindi language was to be prostituted to please the Muslims. All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus.

From August 1946 onwards the private armies of the Muslim League began a massacre of the Hindus. The then Viceroy, Lord Wavell, though distressed at what was happening, would not use his powers under the Government of India Act of 1935 to prevent the rape, murder and arson. The Hindu blood began to flow from Bengal to Karachi with some retaliation by the Hindus. The Interim Government formed in September was sabotaged by its Muslim League members right from its inception, but the more they became disloyal and treasonable to the government of which they were a part, the greater was Gandhi's infatuation for them. Lord Wavell had to resign as he could not bring about a settlement and he was succeeded by Lord Mountbatten. King Log was followed by King Stork. The Congress which had boasted of its nationalism and socialism secretly accepted Pakistan literally at the point of the bayonet and abjectly surrendered to Jinnah. India was vivisected and one-third of the Indian territory became foreign land to us from August 15, 1947.

Lord Mountbatten came to be described in Congress circles as the greatest Viceroy and Governor-General this country ever had. The official date for handing over power was fixed for June 30, 1948, but Mountbatten with his ruthless surgery gave us a gift of vivisected India ten months in advance. This is what Gandhi had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what Congress party calls 'freedom' and 'peaceful transfer of power'. The Hindu-Muslim unity bubble was finally burst and a theocratic state was established with the consent of Nehru and his crowd and they have called 'freedom won by them with sacrifice' – whose sacrifice? When top leaders of Congress, with the consent of Gandhi, divided and tore the country – which we consider a deity of worship – my mind was filled with direful anger.

One of the conditions imposed by Gandhi for his breaking of the fast unto death related to the mosques in Delhi occupied by the Hindu refugees. But when Hindus in Pakistan were subjected to violent attacks he did not so much as utter a single word to protest and censure the Pakistan Government or the Muslims concerned. Gandhi was shrewd enough to know that while undertaking a fast unto death, had he imposed for its break some condition on the Muslims in Pakistan , there would have been found hardly any Muslims who could have shown some grief if the fast had ended in his death. It was for this reason that he purposely avoided imposing any condition on the Muslims. He was fully aware of from the experience that Jinnah was not at all perturbed or influenced by his fast and the Muslim League hardly attached any value to the inner voice of Gandhi.

Gandhi is being referred to as the Father of the Nation. But if that is so, he had failed his paternal duty inasmuch as he has acted very treacherously to the nation by his consenting to the partitioning of it. I stoutly maintain that Gandhi has failed in his duty. He has proved to be the Father of Pakistan. His inner-voice, his spiritual power and his doctrine of non-violence of which so much is made of, all crumbled before Jinnah's iron will and proved to be powerless. Briefly speaking, I thought to myself and foresaw I shall be totally ruined, and the only thing I could expect from the people would be nothing but hatred and that I shall have lost all my honour, even more valuable than my life, if I were to kill Gandhiji. But at the same time I felt that the Indian politics in the absence of Gandhiji would surely be proved practical, able to retaliate, and would be powerful with armed forces. No doubt, my own future would be totally ruined, but the nation would be saved from the inroads of Pakistan . People may even call me and dub me as devoid of any sense or foolish, but the nation would be free to follow the course founded on the reason which I consider to be necessary for sound nation-building.

After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone whatsoever. I took courage in both my hands and I did fire the shots at Gandhiji on 30th January 1948, on the prayer-grounds of Birla House. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus. There was no legal machinery by which such an offender could be brought to book and for this reason I fired those fatal shots. I bear no ill will towards anyone individually but I do say that I had no respect for the present government owing to their policy which was unfairly favourable towards the Muslims. But at the same time I could clearly see that the policy was entirely due to the presence of Gandhi.

I have to say with great regret that Prime Minister Nehru quite forgets that his preachings and deeds are at times at variances with each other when he talks about India as a secular state in season and out of season, because it is significant to note that Nehru has played a leading role in the establishment of the theocratic state of Pakistan, and his job was made easier by Gandhi's persistent policy of appeasement towards the Muslims. I now stand before the court to accept the full share of my responsibility for what I have done and the judge would, of course, pass against me such orders of sentence as may be considered proper. But I would like to add that I do not desire any mercy to be shown to me, nor do I wish that anyone else should beg for mercy on my behalf. My confidence about the moral side of my action has not been shaken even by the criticism levelled against it on all sides. I have no doubt that honest writers of history will weigh my act and find the true value thereof some day in future.

***************

Now think and judge for yourself!