“The path to hell is paved with good intentions” – French Abbot Bernard of Clairvaux
In our life, we would have faced situations at different points of time where there could be a compulsion to choose between two equally unpleasant/pleasant choices. At the spur of the moment, we may be driven to certain debatable decisions with which we may ourselves differ later. Ergo, it is always prudent to be practical and pragmatic while probing into any perplexing problem.
Our Ithihasas and Puranas illustrate many such knotty situations where one will not be able to conclusively decide rights and wrongs.
For instance, there is a perennial debate among scholars and consequently a favourite topic in ‘Pattimanram’s [Debates in Tamil] about two seemingly contrasting characters in Ramayanam viz., Kumbakarna and Vibheeshana, with the group divided into two diametrically antithetical factions, each vociferously advancing arguments and asserting that one is right and the other is, naturally wrong.
But, life does not offer such a binary solution. There can be a win-win situation when both are right. Also, determination of what is right and what is wrong is not that simple, since it is swayed by individual perception, values, attitudes, beliefs, habits and even moods, creating distorted and defective dialectic, as a consequence of which, the final decision of each will definitely differ.
Our scriptures describe ‘Dharma’ as under.
आपस्तम्ब:
न धर्माधर्मौ चरत: आवां स्वः इति, न देवा:, न गन्धर्वा:, न पितर:, इत्याचक्षतेयं धर्मोयधर्म इति, यस्त्वार्या: क्रियमाणां प्रशंसन्ति स धर्म: यद्गर्हन्ते सोयधर्म: इति।
Apasthambha:
[Dharma and Adharma do not tell that I am Dharma and I am Adharma. Devas, Gandharwas and pithrus (manes) would not tell that this is Dharma; this is Adharma by showing their real form. So, understand that which is praised by saints as Dharma and which is not accepted by them is Adharma.]
Looking at the characters from Ramayana, Kumbakarna is not a villain. He advises Ravana to return Sita and seek pardon from Sri Rama. When Ravana refuses, he feels that he should not desert his brother at the most crucial hour and sacrifices his life for Ravana. Vibheeshana also advises Ravana and when he declines, he feels that Dharma is superior to fraternal relations, leaves him, goes and surrenders at the feet of Sri Rama. The fact that both are sterling personalities is splendidly portrayed by Kamban during the scene where Vibheeshana goes to Kumbakarna to persuade him to come to the side of Sri Rama. Despite the fact that they are facing each other in the battle field as foes, it is strange there is not even an iota of acrimony between them; instead, it is boundless love between brothers! The entire episode exhibits the poetic genius of Kamban and an exquisite treat in literature for all Tamil lovers.
Now, coming to our 2Gs. We are referring to Gandhi and Godse. Anybody praising one ipso facto treats the other as traitor instantly. Why should it be so? The moment their names are mentioned, one is obsessed with prodigious prejudice for the one and profuse praise for the other as a result of which one is no longer able to see reason. For him, one is pitch black and the other is alabaster white. But does it have to be so? Can there not be any denouement when both of them are laudable? Let us go deeper into history and find out.
Gandhi, The Idealist
Gandhi ji grew listening to stories of Prahlad, Harischandra and Sri Rama from the lap of his mother. He was immensely influenced by all the three characters from infancy. Prahlad’s refusal to yield to his demon father in spite of being subjected to unimaginable harsh treatment, Harischandra’s steadfast adherence to the principle of Truth even after losing everything in life, Sri Rama’s unflinching resolution to keep his father’s promise, had made indelible impression in his nascent mind. He attempted to adopt those lofty principles in his own personal life verbatim et literatim. A frugal, austere, abstemious, upright life at all points of time in life was his motto and he practised it in the utmost precise, punctilious, perfect manner. Even while suffering bestial blows at the hands of the brutal british, he never relented nor retaliated but bore the brunt with forbearance and fortitude. He was a perfectionist to the core. He never compromised on moral values. Non-violence [Ahimsa], Truth, spartan living were at the core of his heart. He proved that even in Kali Yuga, one can embrace the eternal ethical dicta of Krita Yuga with elan.
In short, he lived such an exceptionally exemplary life that prompted Albert Einstein to remark thus: ‘Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth’. He can be considered as an ‘Avatar’ descended for a specific purpose.
Let us look at him from another angle. In the strictest sense, Gandhiji was not a political leader. He was more like an exacting parent for the masses. He treated the people as his own children and therefore, as a doting, dutiful father, wanted them to lead an austere, ascetic, abstinent life, following the principles of Ahimsa, truth, abnegation like himself. He was so rigid and relentless, steadfast and stubborn that he overlooked the basic axiom that the rules that are applicable to the individual cannot be thrust on the society as a whole. Society is comprised of heterogenous masses, majority of whom cannot mentally reconcile themselves to the highest moral values. Still, since he was treated almost as an incarnation by the hindu masses, they implicitly obeyed all his commands and suffered alongwith him. Unfortunately, his munificence was mercilessly milked to the maximum by the minorities under the crafty, conniving, calculative leadership of Jinnah, to the detriment and disaster of the hindus. Blinded by excessive altruism, he could not perceive the ground realities.
Godse, The Realist
Godse was not a trigger-happy radical fanatic as being pictured by his adversaries. An educated Brahmin, leading a normal life, engaged in journalism. He did not hate Gandhi as a person. Instead, he had the highest regard for Gandhi’s selfless services to the nation. Godse’s only ‘fault’ was that he was extremely patriotic. However much one may condemn his action, the fact remains that he is a patriot. He did not kill for personal gains; he had acknowledged that Gandhi was a selfless leader; he was very much aware that his own name, career, image and life will all be ruined by his gruesome act and he will be condemned by all.
Initially he was in RSS and then he joined Hind Maha Sabha. His blood boiled when the nation was partitioned. He could not swallow the gory, gruesome genocide on The Direct Action Day and, according to him, Gandhi’s appalling apathy towards it was unpardonable. After partition, Pakistan was due to get ₹55 crores from the imperial treasury, which Vallabhbhai Patel rightly withheld insisting on a solution to Kashmir. On the other hand, Gandhi went on a fast and forced for immediate payment. Godse was not only furious but felt forlorn that there was nobody to expound, educate and enlighten Gandhi, the folly of his foolish stance. He felt there was no other go.
In fact, he harbored no enmity against Gandhi. He says, ‘Gandhiji did undergo sufferings for the sake of the nation. He did bring about an awakening in the minds of the people. He also did nothing for personal gains.’ He avers that the media failed to play its role of pointing out the flaw in Gandhiji’s perception.
Godse was sentenced to death along with one of his accomplices, Narayan Apte. Justice G.D. Khosla, who was on the bench of the East Punjab High Court, which started the final hearing of the accused’s appeal, wrote in his own book, The Murder of the Mahatma: “The highlight of the appeal before us was the discourse delivered by Nathuram Godse in his defence. He spoke for several hours discussing, in the first instance, the facts of the case and then the motive which had prompted him to take Mahatma Gandhi’s life… The audience was visibly and audibly moved. There was a deep silence when he ceased speaking. Many women were in tears and men were coughing and searching for their handkerchiefs. This silence was accentuated and made deeper by the sound of an occasional subdued sniff or a muffled cough… 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 in a verdict of ‘not guilty’ by an overwhelming majority.”
Before his execution, Godse wrote to his parents: “You are the students of the Gita and have also learnt the Puranas. Lord Krishna had recited this Gita to enlighten Arjun and the very same Lord Krishna had, with his Sudarshan wheel, chopped off the head of an Aryan king, Shishupal, not on a battlefield but on a sacrificial ground. My mind is pure and my feelings are absolutely righteous; millions of people might speak in a million different ways, but my mind has not become uneasy or shaken with repentance even for the moment. If there is any heaven, I shall certainly have my place reserved there for me.”
Nathuram Godse and Narayan Apte were executed in Ambala jail at 8 A.M. on Tuesday, November 15, 1949, i.e., after twenty one and a half months of the shooting incident. On reaching the platform they recited a verse of devotion to the Motherland.
नमस्ते सदा वत्सले मातृभूमे – त्वया हिन्दुभूमे सुखं वर्धितोहम् । महामङ्गले पुण्यभूमे त्वदर्थे पतत्वेष कायो नमस्ते नमस्ते..
[Salutations to thee, O motherland, I have grown in thy lap of love and happiness.
O immensely auspicious motherland! My life in thy service! Salutations, Salutations!]
They shouted slogans which reverberated over the radius of a hundred feet in the silent atmosphere around.
‘Akhand Bharat Amar Rahe!
‘Vande Mataram.‘
Conclusion
Human tendency is to deify their dear leader, put him on the highest pedestal and start blindly worshipping him. That is quite convenient for them since, by doing so, they can absolve themselves from the compulsion of having to live like him. During his time, Gandhi reached such an empyrean level that he could impose his standpoint on any issue upon the entire nation and in case of any dissention, he invariably resorted to fasting, to pressurise others into submission. While the arcadian masses implicitly obeyed his commandments and silently suffered, this aspect was exploited to the hilt by the perfidious minorities, to the detriment and disaster of the hindus, the monstrosity of which Godse could not countenance and condone. In fact, he did not pull the trigger in a fit of instant rage. He pondered over all the possible causatum and finally could not find any other solution.
We hasten to add that, even for a fraction of a moment, we do not support nor justify violence; not at all. A crime is a crime, that is all. Nobody has the right to take the life or property of others. And anybody who does it, whatever be the palmary motive, deserves punishment. What happened was an inexorable tragedy in the annals of history. But, Gandhi has been extolled and kept at such an exalted firmament that any attempt to evaluate an event in his life or any estimate, let alone paying any semblance of encomium on Godse is viewed with extreme execration. In hindsight, we can speculate that if only both of them had had a one to one meeting where they could have had a plain, frank, open heart-to-heart discussion, if Godse had been able to convince a receptive Gandhi on the futility of pandering to the minorities at the colossal loss to the Hindus, who were considering him as Mahatma and whom he could browbeat into submission with his Satyagraha technique, and thus prevented Gandhi from indulging in excessive extravagance, history would have been completely different. It just did not happen. History is abound with lots of such ifs and buts.
At this juncture, a bizarre burlesque in our daft Dravidian clan is worth mentioning. While one can understand the instant repulsion and revulsion of the true Gandhi lovers at deifying or even justifying Godse, nay, even looking at the events from his standpoint, it is puerile and preposterous that those who are illegitimately glorifying a known notorious criminal Prabhakaran and his ignominious terrorist gang (Perarivalan, et al) and consequently forfeit their right, also joining the bandwagon in condemning Godse!
Finally, no man is perfect; also, nobody can be. Man is an amalgam of mixed qualities. It will therefore be prudent, politic, practical and profitable for us, if, instead of blindly deifying personalities or, on the other hand, probing and nitpicking blemishes in others, we attempt to recognise positive profiles and postulates of each, so that we can imbibe their respective sterling qualities viz., Gandhi’s purity and perfection in personal life as also Godse’s profound patriotism and passion for motherland.
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.