Savarkar Quotes

On 1 August 1939, Savarkar spoke at a public meeting organized at Tilak Smarak Mandir in Poona. In his speech, he talked about the three different schools of thought prevalent in the Congress, led by three different leaders—Gandhi, Subhas Bose and Manabendranath Roy—and how it is different from the school of thought of the Hindu Mahasabha. He said: In today’s Congress, there are three schools of thought . . . Gandhian school of thought has truth and non-violence as its key ideas. But Gandhian non-violence is inimical to Hindutva. Hindu philosophy says violence for violence sake is bad, but violence is permissible to destroy evil and protect the good, and such violence is good conduct. But Gandhian thought makes no such distinction. They believe in non-violence under all conditions. Second school of thought is led by Subhas Bose and the Forward Bloc. His policies and means used are similar to our thought process and we could work together on certain issues, but even they are obsessed with this mirage of Hindu-Muslim unity. The third school of thought is of Manvendranath (sic) Roy and that is not acceptable to us at all. They believe in the policy of active Muslim appeasement. The Hindu Mahasabha has the interests of Hindus in mind always.

Of whomsoever else he might be the conqueror, Alexander was never the conqueror of India! He did not even see the courtyard (of the palatial edifice) of India, and to many others he was never known (even by name) !

V.D. Savarkar disagreed with those Hindus who expected much from the recognition of the common origin of Hindus and Indian Muslims: “Some well-meaning but simple-minded Hindus amuse themselves with the thought … that inasmuch as the majority of Indian Moslems also are in fact allied to us by race and language … they could easily be persuaded to acknowledge this homogeneity and even blood relation with the Hindus and merge themselves into a common National Being if but we only remind them of these affinities and appeal to them in their name. … As if the Moslems do not know it all!! The fact is that the Moslems know of these affinities all but too well: the only difference [is] that while the Hindus love these affinities which bind the Hindu to a Hindu…—the Moslems hate the very mention of them and are trying to eradicate the very memory of it all.

That valiant Macedonian supreme commander and emperor Alexander, in his thirties and the future Indian captain-general and emperor Chandragupta just on the threshold of his twenties, but as yet merely a wandering nonentity stood face to face sizing up each other for a few moments! It appeared as if two lustrous suns, one fast approaching his zenith and the other not as yet risen fully out of the misty shroud of the early dawn, were staring at each other's eyes.

In his survey, Alexander came to know that although these world-forsakers, ascetics, recluses and others were all wandering alone, their opinions exerted a powerful influence because of their disinterestedness, fearlessness and their disregard for any consequences whatever, upon the governments of Indian republics and also on the monarchies.

It seems a common weakness among all human societies and communities, in a greater or lesser degree, to attempt to judge the greatness or meanness of an individual, not so much from his manifest virtues or vices as from the race, the community or the family he is born in. That is why as the time passes such inflated anecdotes about their family tradition are propagated and popularized through plays, poems and novels or through folklores. Was Chandragupta a concubine's son? Was he not a Kshatriya ? What matters though! Chandragupta could have said with justifiable pride, "More than any of you, nominal caste-born Kshatriyas, who bowed your heads to the Mlechhas, the Greek emperor and his commanders, I, a 'peerless' Chandragupta, have a greater claim to being a Kshatriya in as much as with my sword I have completely vanquished those very Mlechhas in every battlefield.

He attacked the viceroy’s speeches to this effect and quoted the instance of Hitler who when asked to vacate Poland by Chamberlain said that he would do so when Britain decided to vacate India.

Commenting on the police’s questionable role in the whole case, Tushar Gandhi writes: One of the crucial factors in the success of the murder plot was that the police—who were hampered by Gandhi’s decision not to allow additional security and frisking of his visitors—did not think of placing constables or inspectors from Bombay, Poona or Ahmednagar at Birla House, who would have been able to identify Godse, Apte and Karkare . . . The Congress Government and at least some of the members of the Cabinet were fed up of the interventions of the meddlesome old man. To them, a martyred Mahatma would be easier to live with . . . the way the investigation was carried out, and the lackadaisical approach of the police in trying to protect Gandhi’s life, leads one to believe that the investigation was meant to hide more than it was meant to reveal. The measures taken by the police between 20th and 30th January 1948 were more to ensure the smooth progress of the murderers, than to try and prevent his murder.

So long as we continue to be so cowardly as to yield to any preposterous demand on the part of the Moslems to keep up the show of unity and so terribly afraid of Moslems’ discontent as to allow even the integrity of our Motherland to get broken up into pieces, is it not more likely that this very financial and economical starvation of these would-be Moslem states may goad them on to encroach once more on our Hindu provinces and instigated by the religious fanaticism, which is so inflammable in the frontier tribes even now and urged on by the ideal of a Pathanistan under the lead of the organized forces of the Ameer, may threaten to invade you if you do not handover to them the remaining parts of the Punjab right up to Delhi to make them financially and economically self-supporting?

The case of the Communists of India was a curious one. The secret correspondences exchanged between P.C. Joshi, the general secretary of the Communist Party of India (CPI) and Sir Reginald Maxwell, the home member of the Government of India, make it clear that they ‘acted as stooges and spies of the British Government, and helped them against their own countrymen fighting for freedom’.

He also declared that P.C. Joshi and a few designated senior politburo members had been ‘in touch with the Army Intelligence and supplied the C.I.D. chiefs with such information as they would require against nationalist workers who were connected with the 1942 struggle or against persons who had come to India on behalf of the Azad Hind Government of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’.

N.C. Chatterjee, one of Savarkar’s close colleagues in the Mahasabha, vented his frustration in a letter to Moonje: The entire Hindu population is with Gandhiji and his movement and if anybody wants to oppose it, he will be absolutely finished and hounded out of public life. The unfortunate statement of Veer Savarkar [opposing Quit India] made our position rather difficult in Bengal. It is rather amusing to find that Mr. Jinnah wants the Mussalmans not to join the Congress movement and Mr. Savarkar wants the Hindus not to join the same. Even when the Congress movement has made a great stir and it shows that it has got thousands of adherents.

Savarkar took on Nehru’s repeated attacks on the Hindu Sangathanist leadership. Reacting to one of Nehru’s assertion that any attempt by Hindu Sangathanist leaders to establish a Hindu Rashtra in India would meet the same fate that Hitler and Mussolini met in Europe, Savarkar denounced his threats through a statement on 22 October 1947. As if the mere demand for a Hindu Raj constitutes a danger to his Government so much more imminent, impending, incalculably disastrous as to call for his immediate attention than the already established Moslem Raj in Pakistan where fanatical atrocities, arson, bloodshed and butchery have been the order of the day . . . Pusillanimous enough to tolerate these diabolical actions and threats on the part of the Moslems against his ‘Indian Union’ Pandit Nehru and his pseudo-nationalistic section in the Congress are delivering mock heroics against the Hindus and swearing that they will fight tooth and nail against those who demand a Hindu Raj.

In a rare approach of postulating a broad humanitarian acceptance, Vinayak (Savarkar) always emphasized that he or his associates must not hate the British; that they should be considered enemies only till the time they illegitimately captured and subjugated Indians. But once India was liberated from these shackles, there should be no trouble embracing them as friends and fellow humans. So much so that if tomorrow another country captured England in a similar illegal and exploitative way, Indians must be the first to support England’s right to struggle and free itself.

In a rare approach of postulating a broad humanitarian acceptance, Vinayak always emphasized that he or his associates must not hate the British; that they should be considered enemies only till the time they illegitimately captured and subjugated Indians. But once India was liberated from these shackles, there should be no trouble embracing them as friends and fellow humans. So much so that if tomorrow another country captured England in a similar illegal and exploitative way, Indians must be the first to support England’s right to struggle and free itself.

The term Hindutva was invented in this sense by V. D. Savarkar in 1923 and was adopted by the BJP as its ideology in 1989. Therefore, not all Hindus are or need be supporters of Hindutva despite the assumption of the latter that they are. As a belief system Hinduism accommodates a range of beliefs and sometimes even non-belief. The sect, in contrast, has always had a particular definition that its followers observe, as with Hindutva. So far, those identified with Hindutva have tended to be viewed as a minority group within the majority community of the religion, Hinduism. This could of course change. Does Hindutva lack the confidence and security of actually being the majority community despite its claims to the contrary?

At that time, my friend Madhwarao, a leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s intellectual circle, came to my small house in Mysore, riding pillion on somebody’s scooter. I was surprised to see him transformed. He was usually dressed in the Sangh Parivar uniform, but that day he came wearing a T-shirt and trousers. As he settled down, Madhwarao said, ‘You must be surprised at my clothes. I have gone underground now.’ I asked him a question then. ‘Why do you oppose Indira Gandhi? I just don’t understand it. She dismissed the DMK government that was inimical to the Aryans. She enforced family planning programmes on Muslims to prevent them from having too many children. She split Pakistan and facilitated the creation of Bangladesh. She got India the atom bomb. By annexing Sikkim, she expanded the country. She made sure trains ran on time. The idea of Savarkar’s India was reinforced through Indira Gandhi. Why then do you oppose her?’ An intellectual like Madhwarao had no answer to this. A few years later, when Vajpayee, whom Govindacharya described as ‘just a mask’, was the prime minister, some prominent RSS leaders said that Indira Gandhi was our true leader.

• Whether it is Godse or Savarkar, what they broadly wanted was unity of the Hindus of India. A unity that ignores the inherent diversity, and silences those who do not consider India their punyabhoomi. Without this unity it is impossible to build a strong nation. Some Muslims in Pakistan also think along these lines. But Bangladesh separated primarily because of language. Blood was shed. • The unity that Gandhi desired was one in which everyone retained their faith, preserved their own unique cultures and accepted ahimsa. Unity comes naturally to those who live in harmony despite their differences. This becomes possible when ahimsa is the basis of their lives. The life force of every community lies in its uniqueness. Whether it is food, games, worship, dress, concept of God, differing methods of prayer, the many climates that nurture mountains, forests, valleys, flora and fauna – they are all part of a chain. This multiplicity is the warp and weft of the ecological system of the living world.

Before beheading one such Brahmin, when Alexander asked him as to why he instigated a certain Indian ruler against the Greeks, he fearlessly and firmly replied that it was his most sacred tenet and that if he were to live, he ought to live honorably, else he should die honorably.

ग्रामे-ग्रामे स्थितो देवः देशे देशे स्थितो मखः। गेहे गेहे स्थितं द्रव्यं धर्मश्चैव जने जने॥ (—भविष्य पुराण, प्रतिसर्ग पर्व)

राजधानियों और किलों की आखिर औकात ही कितनी होती है! अपनी स्वतंत्रता वापस लेने के लिए जो लोग दृढ़प्रतिज्ञ हुए, उन्होंने अपनी दृढ़ इच्छाशक्ति से अपने हृदय को ही अभेद्य दुर्ग बना लिया।

सदियों की दासता के कारण कुछ दुर्बल-हृदय लोग कल्पना ही नहीं कर पाते थे कि मुसलमानों के विरुद्ध युद्ध छेड़कर हिंदू यशस्वी भी हो सकते हैं। दूसरी तरह के लोग वे थे जो बेशरमी की हद पार कर या लाभ-हानि का नाप-तौल करके ही कुछ करते थे अथवा जो मुसलिम साम्राज्य में ही अपना हित देखते थे।

राज्य यह कहते हुए अपने प्रख्यात शिष्य के ही हवाले कर दिया कि ‘‘यह शिवाजी का नहीं, अपितु धर्म का राज्य है।

शिवाजी महाराज का देहांत मराठी इतिहास का आरंभ है। उन्होंने हिंदूप्रतिष्ठान की नींव डाली। उसका हिंदू साम्राज्य में परिवर्तन होना अभी शेष था। वह परिवर्तन उनके देहांत के उपरांत हुआ। जिस प्रकार नाटक का सूत्रधार सभी कलाकारों तथा उनके कार्य के बारे में सूचना देकर खुद परदे के पीछे चला जाता है और उसके बाद नाटक या महाकाव्य शुरू होता है, उसी प्रकार जिन व्यक्तियों के माध्यम से यह महान् कार्य संपन्न होना था, उनका मार्गदर्शन कर शिवाजी महाराज स्वयं तिरोधान हो गए।

सिंधुस्थान कोई छोटा सा क्षेत्रीय संघ नहीं है। वह एक राष्ट्र है अर्थात् ‘राज्ञः राष्ट्रम्’। इस अर्थ में वह सदा किसी एक शासन के अधीन नहीं रहा, तथापि एकता की भावना के कारण निश्चित रूप से एक अखंड राष्ट्र था। वहाँ जिस संस्कृति का विकास हुआ तथा जो लोग इस राष्ट्र के नागरिक बने, उन दोनों को वैदिक काल की प्रथा के अनुसार ‘सिंधु’ कहा जाता।

हिंदू तथा उनकी संस्कृति मानव के निराशा तथा निरुत्साही आत्मा को शीतल चंद्रप्रकाश के समान सदैव आनंद तथा उत्साह का स्रोत बनी हुई है।

ऐसे विश्वधर्म का क्या उपयोग, जिसने हिंदुसथान को असुरक्षित और असजग अवस्था में तो छोड़ा ही, साथ-साथ अन्य राष्ट्रों की क्रूरता और पशुता भी कम न करा सका। संरक्षण का एकमात्र मार्ग अब नजर आता है, तो वह है—राष्ट्रीयता की भावना से उत्पन्न, बलशाली एवं पराक्रमी पुरुषों की समर्थ शक्ति। अवास्तव तत्त्वज्ञान के जंजाल में फँसकर हिंदुस्थान ने अपना रक्त तो बहाया, परंतु उसका परिणाम विपरीत हुआ।

शालिवाहन संवत् १५५२ (ई.स. १६३०) में शिवाजी महाराज का जन्म हुआ।

मराठों ने सीधे उसकी छावनी पर धावा बोलकर, मानो सिंह की गुफा में घुसकर उसकी अयाल नोंचने की ही हिम्मत दिखाई। खुद बादशाह ही उन्हें वहाँ मिल जाता, लेकिन उसके भाग्य से वह उस समय अपने सुवर्ण कलशवाले वस्त्रागार में नहीं था।

यहाँ ‘आर्य’ शब्द का प्रयोग इसीलिए किया गया है ताकि सिंधु नदी के इस ओर के अपने वैभवशाली राष्ट्र के तथा जातियों के सभी अनिवार्य घटकों का उसमें समावेश हो। इसमें वैदिक या अवैदिक, ब्राह्मण अथवा शूद्र आदि भेद नहीं किया गया। केवल समान संस्कृति, रक्त-संबंध देश तथा राज्यसंस्था का उत्तराधिकार जिन्हें प्राप्त हुआ है, वे सभी ‘आर्य’ कहलाते हैं।

आर्यावर्त दक्षिणापथ अथवा जंबुद्वीप और भारतवर्ष हम लोगों की राजनीतिक अथवा सांस्कृतिक विशेषताएँ स्पष्ट रूप से प्रकट करने हेतु असमर्थ सिद्ध हुए। हिंदुस्थान नाम में सामर्थ्य विद्यमान थी। सिंधु से सागर तक की भूमि हम लोगों की जन्मभूमि है—यह माननेवाले तथा सिंधु के इस तट पर निवास करनेवाले लोगों को स्पष्ट रूप से ज्ञात हो गया कि इस भूमि को एक ही नाम हिंदुस्थान से पहचाना जाता है।

हिंदुस्थान की प्रतिष्ठा तथा स्वातंत्र्य अबाधित केवल हिंदुस्थान की ही नहीं, अपितु सारे हिंदुत्व की संस्कृति तथा सार्वजनिक जीवन से जुड़ी एकता को प्रस्थापित करने का कार्य अधिक महत्त्वपूर्ण समझा गया था। इसी हिंदुत्व के लिए सैकड़ों रणभूमियों पर युद्ध करना पड़ा तथा हर प्रकार की राजनीतिक युक्ति का भी प्रयोग करना पड़ा। ‘हिंदुत्व’ शब्द हमारे संपूर्ण राजनैतिक जीवन की रीढ़ की हड्डी बन गया। इतना कि कश्मीर के ब्राह्मणों की यातनाओं से मलाबार के नायरों की आँखें अश्रुपूरित हो जातीं।

जब तक राष्ट्रीय तथा वांशिक भेद मानव को पशुता तक पहुँचाने के लिए पर्याप्त रूप से प्रबल हैं तब तक अपनी आत्मा के प्रकाश के अनुसार किसी भी प्रकार के आध्यात्मिक अथवा राजकीय जीवन में उन्नति करनी है तो राष्ट्रीय तथा जातीय बंधनों से उत्पन्न शक्ति की अवहेलना करना हिंदुस्थान के लिए उचित नहीं होगा।

जब तक राष्ट्रीय तथा वांशिक भेद मानव को पशुता तक पहुँचाने के लिए पर्याप्त रूप से प्रबल हैं तब तक अपनी आत्मा के प्रकाश के अनुसार किसी भी प्रकार के आध्यात्मिक अथवा राजकीय जीवन में उन्नति करनी है तो राष्ट्रीय तथा जातीय बंधनों से उत्पन्न शक्ति की अवहेलना करना हिंदुस्थान के लिए उचित नहीं होगा। इसीलिए विश्वबंधुत्व आदि शब्दों का केवल वाणी में ही प्रयोग किए जाने के कारण तथा कृति विहीनता के कारण विद्वानों के मन में घृणा उत्पन्न हुई। बहुत खेदपूर्वक उन्होंने कहा— ये त्वया देव निहिता असुराश्चैव विष्णुना। ते जाता म्लेच्छरूपेण पुनरद्य महीतले॥ व्यापादयन्ति ते विप्रान् घ्रन्ति यज्ञादिकाः क्रियाः। हरन्ति मुनि कन्याश्च पापाः किं किं न कुर्वन्ति॥ म्लेच्छाक्रांते च भूलोके निर्वषट्कारमंगले। यज्ञयागादि विच्छेदाद्देवलोकेऽवसीदति॥ (—गुणाढ्य२७) जिस नितांत रम्य भूमि ने श्रद्धायुक्त अंतःकरण से भिक्षु वस्त्रों को अंगीकृत किया था, खड्ग को त्यागकर हाथों में सुमरिनी लेकर भगवान् का नाम जपते हुए अहिंसा की प्रतिज्ञा की थी, उस भूमि को जलाकर जिन्होंने वीरान बना दिया, उन शक, हूणों की हिंस्र टोलियों को सिंधु के पार खदेड़ दिया गया तथा एक नई सुदृढ़ राजसत्ता स्थापित की गई। उस समय के राष्ट्रीय नेताओं को इस बात का अनुभव हुआ होगा कि यदि धर्म ने भी इस कार्य को सहायता दी तो कितना प्रचंड शक्तिसामर्थ्य निर्माण किया जा सकता है।

हिंदुस्थान में ही परिपक्व हुए तथा हिंदुस्थान को ही अपनी मातृभूमि मानकर उसे पूजनेवाले अनेक श्रेष्ठ अर्हताओं तथा भिक्षुओं के महान् कर्म संघों ने मानव को अपनी मूल पाशवी प्रवृत्तियों से दूर करने का प्रथम तथा यशस्वी प्रयास करने का संकल्प करने के पश्चात् उसका प्रयोग अनेक शतकों तक किया। इसी एक बात से हमारी भावनाएँ इस प्रकार आंदोलित हो उठती हैं कि उन्हें शब्दों में प्रकट करना असंभव है। जिस संघ के लिए हमारे मन में इस प्रकार की भावनाएँ विद्यमान हैं। उस परमज्ञानी बौद्ध भगवान् के लिए हम किन शब्दों में आदर व्यक्त कर सकते हैं? हे तथागत बुद्ध! अत्यंत क्षुद्र कोटि के हीनतम मानव के रूप में हमारे दैन्य तथा अल्पता को ही तुम्हारे चरणों पर अर्पण करने हेतु हम तुम्हारे सम्मुख उपस्थित होने का साहस नहीं कर सकते। तुम्हारे उपदेश का सार हमारी बुद्धि ग्रहण नहीं कर सकती। तुम्हारे शब्द ईश्वर के मुख से निकले शब्द हैं।

(मनु)। यह दुष्टता जब तक इस विश्व में हावी रहेगी और जब तक आकाश में चमकने वाले तारों की भाँति दूर से ही सुहानेवाले सत्य धर्म के विचार इस दुष्टता की पराजय नहीं करते, तब तक कोई भी राष्ट्र अपना ध्वज त्यागकर विश्वबंधुत्व का ध्वज फहराने के लिए मान्यता नहीं देगा।

स्पेन के कैथोलिक इंग्लैंड के सिंहासन पर कैथोलिक पंथ के राजा को आसीन करने का प्रयास कर रहे थे। उन्हें सहानुभूति दरशानेवाला एक प्रमुख गुट इंग्लैंड में प्रत्यक्ष रूप से विद्यमान था। उसी प्रकार बौद्ध धर्म के अनुकूल विचार रखनेवाले कुछ आक्रमणकारियों को भी हिंदुस्थान में चल रहे युद्ध के समय गुप्त रूप से सहानुभूति दिखानेवाले अनेक बौद्धधर्मीय लोग यहाँ भी विद्यमान थे। इसके अतिरिक्त बाहर के बौद्धधर्मीय राष्ट्रों ने निश्चित राष्ट्रीय तथा धार्मिक उद्देश्य से हिंदुस्थान पर आक्रमण किए थे। इन घटनाओं के स्पष्ट प्रमाण हम लोगों के प्राचीन ग्रंथों में विभिन्न स्थानों पर मिलते हैं।

शालिवाहन संवत् १६०२ (ई.स. १६८०) में शिवाजी महाराज का स्वर्गवास हो गया। उसके कुछ ही महीने पश्चात् श्रीरामदास स्वामीजी ने भी महाप्रयाण किया।

उस समय हिंदुस्थान विश्वबंधुत्व तथा अहिंसा के नशे में इतना डूबा हुआ था कि आक्रमणकारियों का प्रतिकार करने की इसकी शक्ति ही नष्ट हो चुकी थी। इसी हिंदुस्थान में अन्याय के प्रति लोगों के मन में कटु द्वेष प्रज्वलित करने का तथा शाश्वत प्रतिकार-शक्ति का वरदान प्राप्त करा देने के लिए दोनों के लिए पूज्य, पूजा-प्रार्थना तथा मठ-संस्थाओं को नष्ट करना आवश्यक था।

इस आर्य देश तथा राष्ट्र पर हूणों के राजा न्यूनपति तथा उसके बौद्धपंथीय सहायकों ने एक साथ मिलकर जो आक्रमण किया तथा जिसका लाक्षणिक और यथार्थ, परंतु संक्षिप्त वर्णन हम लोगों के प्राचीन ग्रंथों में मिलता है, उसका निर्देश हम यहाँ करनेवाले हैं। इस प्राचीन ग्रंथ में कुछ पौराणिक प्रकार से ‘हहा नदी के तट पर प्रचंड युद्ध किस प्रकार किया गया, बौद्धों की सेनाओं का शिविर चीन देश में किस कारण स्थापित हुआ’ (चीन देशमुपागम्य युद्धभूमीमकारयत्) विभिन्न बौद्ध राष्ट्रों की सहायक सेनाएँ उन्हें किस प्रकार आकर मिलीं तथा इस कारण उनके सैन्य की संख्या में कितनी वृद्धि हुई (श्याम देशोद्भलक्षास्तथा लक्षाश्च जापकाः। दश लक्ष्याश्चीनदेश्या युद्धाय समुपस्थितः॥) तथा अंत में बौद्धों को किस प्रकार पराभूत होना पड़ा और इस पराजय के फलस्वरूप उन्हें कितना जबरदस्त दंड मिला—आदि का वर्णन किया गया है। अंततः बौद्धों को प्रकट रूप से अपनी राष्ट्रीय ध्येयाकांक्षाओं को स्वीकार करना पड़ा तथा उन्हें त्यागना पड़ा। भविष्य में किसी प्रकार के राजकीय उद्देश्य से हिंदुस्थान में प्रवेश न करने की स्पष्ट तथा बंधनकारक शपथ उन्हें लेनी पड़ी। हिंदुस्थान सभी के साथ सहिष्णुतापूर्वक आचरण करता था। अतः बौद्धों को व्यक्तिगत रूप से किसी तरह का भय होने का कोई कारण नहीं था। हिंदुस्थान की स्वतंत्रता तथा राजनीतिक जीवन के लिए संकट उत्पन्न करनेवाली सभी आकांक्षाओं का त्याग करना उनके लिए आवश्यक था। ‘सर्वैश्च बौद्धवृदैश्च तत्रैव शपथं कृतम्। आर्यदेशं न यास्यामः कदाचिद्राष्ट्रहेतवे॥’ (—भविष्यपुराण, प्रतिसर्ग पर्व)

उस पत्र में लिखा है—‘‘आचार्य दादाजी कोंडदेव और अपने साथियों के साथ सह्याद्रि पर्वत के शृंग पर ईश्वर को साक्षी मानकर लक्ष्य प्राप्ति तक लड़ाई जारी रखने और हिंदुस्थान में ‘हिंदवीस्वराज्य’—हिंदू-पदपादशाही—स्थापित करने की क्या आपने शपथ नहीं ली थी? स्वयं ईश्वर ने हमें यह यश प्रदान किया है और हिंदवीस्वराज्य के निर्माण के रूप में वह हमारी मनीषा पूरी करनेवाला है। स्वयं भगवान् के ही मन में है कि यह राज्य प्रस्थापित हो।’’ शिवाजी महाराज की कलम से

विजयनगर के पतन के बाद स्वतंत्र राजा—छत्रपति—के रूप में स्वयं का अभिषेक कराने की हिम्मत किसी भी हिंदू राजा की नहीं हुई थी। इस राज्याभिषेक से मुसलिम सेना की अजेयता का भ्रम दूर हुआ। इसके पश्चात् मुसलमान रणक्षेत्र में कभी भी हिंदुओं की बराबरी नहीं कर सके।

धर्म एक अत्यधिक प्रभावी शक्ति है। लूटपाट करने की लालसा भी ऐसी ही एक प्रबल शक्ति है। जब यह शक्ति धर्मभावना पर हावी हो जाती है, तब उनके संयोग से एक भयावह दानवी शक्ति उपजती है। वह मानव का संहार करती है तथा प्रदेशों को जलाकर नष्ट कर देती है।

धर्म के लिए प्राण देने चाहिए। शत्रुओं का संहार कर प्राण तजने चाहिए। संहार करते हुए अपना राज्य हासिल करना चाहिए। सभी मराठों को संगठित करना चाहिए। महाराष्ट्र धर्म की श्रीवृद्धि करनी चाहिए। अगर तुम अपने कर्तव्य से विमुख हुए तो पूर्वजों के उपहास के पात्र बनोगे।’’ श्री रामदास स्वामी की ये सीखें

The Hindutva view of Islam is characterized by a progressive softening from V.D. Savarkar through M.S. Golwalkar down to the present BJP. And even Savarkar was not uniformly the hawk he is always made out to be. In general, the organized Hindutva movement has never produced a very sophisticated discourse on Islam, merely a few sweeping generalisations whether in a hostile or a flattering sense. In the founding statements of the RSS, there is no trace of a fundamental critique of Islam, nor is there any in the books and speeches of its leaders.

These well-meaning but unthinking friends take their dreams for realities. That is why they are impatient of communal tangles and attribute them to communal organizations. But the solid fact is that the so-called communal questions are but a legacy handed down to us by centuries of a cultural, religious and national antagonism between the Hindus and the Muslims.

Elaborating on the accusation made on the Hindu Mahasabha of being a communal organization and a mirror image of the Muslim League, he said: The fact is that Nationalism and Communalism are in themselves either equally justifiable and humane or not. Nationalism when it is aggressive is as immoral in human relation as is Communalism when it tries to suppress the equitable rights of other communities and tries to usurp all to itself. But when Communalism is only defensive, it is as justifiable and humane as an equitable Nationalism itself. The Hindu nationalists do not aim to usurp what belongs to others. Therefore, even if they be called Hindu communalists they are justifiably so and are about the only real Indian Nationalist. For, a real and justifiable Indian Nationalism must be equitable to all communities that compose the Indian Nation. But for the same reason the Moslems alone are communalists in an unjustifiable, anti-national and treacherous sense of the term. For it is they who want to usurp to themselves all that belongs to others. The Indian National Congress only condemns itself as an anti-national body when it calls in the same breath the Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League as bodies equally communal in the reprehensible or treacherous sense of that term. Consequently if to defend the just and equitable rights of Hindus in their own land is communalism then we are communalists par excellence and glory in being the most devoted Hindu communalists which to us means being the truest and the most equitable Indian Nationalists!

His attention was drawn to Pandit Nehru’s statement regarding the Muslim influx in Assam that migrations are inevitable since nature hates vacuum. Savarkar retorted that Pandit Nehru was neither a philosopher nor a scientist and did not know that nature also abhors poisonous gases!

Joshi’s letters revealed how ‘unconditional help’ was being offered to the government to fight the underground workers and Bose’s Indian National Army soldiers, and how the CPI received financial aid from the government and had a secret pact with the League to undermine the Congress activity in several ways.

Savarkar maintained that while he agreed with the ‘Quit India’ slogan if it implied independence in the truest sense, but he found its interpretation by Gandhi as being ‘wholly inadequate and unsatisfactory

he took a dig at the Congress remembering Hindus and their votes only during elections: Next election when they come to your Hindu doors to beg for votes tell them in all honesty and humility ‘Sirs Congressmen you are Indian Nationalists; but I am a Hindu and this is a Hindu Electorate? Then how can you accept a vote so tainted by communalism? Please go to a truly “Indian Nationalist electorate”, to beg for votes wherever you may find it; and if you find it nowhere in the world today please wait till a pure and simple and truly “Indian electorate”, comes into being!’ Do you think you will find a dozen Congress candidates honest enough to do so? None, none!

That the Congress had to stress on the need for Hindu–Muslim unity as a goal in itself showed that this unity was lacking and needed to be achieved (after all they had no Hindu–Christian or Hindu–Parsi unity goals).

Without beginning or end am I, inviolable am I. Vanquish me? In this world no such enemy is born! Resolutely, as the Upholder of Dharma, Challenging very Death, into the battlefield charge I. A sword cannot slice me nor can fire burn me, Craven Death itself shall flee in fear of me, aye! And yet, O Foolish Foe, By fear of Death you dare to scare me! Pushed into the cage of a ferocious lion Reduce him to a cowering servility, I will! Flung into the blaze of a roaring inferno Reduce it to a gentle halo of brilliance, I will! Bring on your mighty, skilled armed Legion, Your weapons and missiles that deadly fire spill! Ha! Like Lord Shiva consuming the poison Halahal, Gulp down and digest all, I will!

enemy

Diagnosing this alleged antipathy of the Muslims, he elaborated: The Moslems in general and Indian Moslems in particular have not as yet grown out of the historical stage, of intense religiosity and the theological concept of state. Their theology and theocratical [sic] politics divide the human world into two groups only—The Moslem land and the enemy land. All lands which are either entirely inhabited by the Moslems or are ruled over by the Moslems are Moslem lands. All lands, which are mostly inhabited by non-Moslem power are enemy lands and no faithful Moslem is allowed to bear any loyalty to them and is called upon to do everything in his power by policy or force or fraud to convert the non-Moslem there to Moslem faith, to bring about its political conquest by a Moslem power. It is no good quoting sentences here or there from Moslem theological books to prove the contrary. Read the whole book to know its trend. And again it is not with books that we are concerned here but with the followers of the book and how they translate them in practice. You will then see that the whole Moslem history and their daily actions are framed on the design I have outlined above. Consequently, a territorial patriotism is a word unknown to the Moslem—nay is tabooed, unless in connection with a Moslem territory. Afghans can be patriots for Afghanisthan is a Moslem territory today. But an Indian Moslem if he is a real Moslem—and they are intensely religious as a people—cannot faithfully bear loyalty to India as a country, as a nation, as a State, because it is today ‘an Enemy Land’ and doubly lost; for non-Moslems are in a majority here and to boot it is not ruled by any Moslem power, Moslem sovereign. Add to this that of all non-Moslems the Hindus are looked upon as the most damned by Moslem theologians. For Christians and Jews are after all ‘Kitabis’, having the holy books partially in common. But the Hindus are totally ‘Kafirs’ as a consequence their land ‘Hindusthan’ is pre-eminently an ‘enemy’ and as long as it is not ruled by Moslems or all Hindus do not embrace Islam . . . What wonder then that the Muslim League should openly declare its intention to join hands with non-Indian alien Moslem countries rather than with Indian Hindus in forming a Moslem Federation? They could not be accused from their point of view of being traitors to Hindusthan. Their conscience was clear. They never looked upon our today’s ‘Hindusthan’ as their country, nation. It is to them already an alien land, and enemy land—‘a Dar-ul-Harb’ and not a ‘Dar-ul-Islam!!

Ambedkar’s fears were shared even by British educationalist and member of the Council of India, who had served as the director of the University of London Institute in Paris, Theodore Morrison, whom he quotes as having said way back in 1899: The views held by the Mahomedans (certainly the most aggressive and truculent of the peoples of India) are alone sufficient to prevent the establishment of an independent Indian Government. Were the Afghan to descend from the North upon an autonomous India, the Mahomedans, instead of uniting with the Sikhs and the Hindus to repel him, would be drawn by all the ties of kinship and religion to join his flag.

The only lesson required in India at present is to learn how to die and the only way to teach it is by dying ourselves. Therefore I die and glory to my martyrdom. My only prayer to God is: may I be reborn of the same Mother and may I re-die in the same sacred cause till the cause is successful and she stands free for the good of humanity and the glory of God.

Mr Dhingra’s defence is inadmissible. In my view, he has acted like a coward. All the same, one can only pity the man. He was egged on to do this act by ill-digested reading of worthless writings.

On his return to Britain, he was appointed aide-de-camp to the Secretary of State for India, Lord George Hamilton. One of his main tasks was the control of high-ranking Indian visitors to Britain and the continent who were suspected of seditious activities. This included native Indian princes such as Gaekwad, the Maharaja of Baroda.79

Surendranath Banerjea and on 4 July, one by Gopalkrishna Gokhale, castigated Dhingra for this brazen act. Gokhale mentioned that the foul act had ‘blackened the Indian name and is one for which Indians would have to hang their heads in shame before the whole civilized world’.

Lord Ripon had taken charge as viceroy in 1880, he was heartily welcomed by all and his carriage was reverentially pulled by the scholarly pandits of Kashi.

Lala Har Dayal, Virendranath Chattopadhyay, Senapati Bapat, V.V.S. Aiyar, M.P.T. Acharya, J.C. Mukherjee, Madan Lal Dhingra, Gyanchand Verma, Bhai Parmanand, Sardar Singh Rana and Madame Bhikaji Cama.

He was one of the founding members and the vice-president of the Indian Home Rule Society of Shyamji and had formed a Paris Indian Society in 1905, along with another revolutionary luminary, Madame Bhikaji Rustom Cama. Three fellowships of Rs 2000 each were offered in the name of Indian heroes—Maharana Rana Pratap of Mewar, Shivaji Maharaj and Mughal Emperor Akbar.

Vinayak had a frail and petite body since childhood and he had shaved his head like all Brahmin boys to maintain a pigtail.

Despite the case built by Vinayak’s lawyers, on the ambiguous and farcical use of the same Act that was being invoked to extradite him to India, Justice Vaughan Williams refused to take note.

If Savarkar had any sweetheart, his country was the only sweetheart he had.

The growth of mutual respect went hand in hand as Hindu nationalism became dominant. Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, the founding father of the Hindu nationalist paramilitary organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), was an admirer of Nazism. Hindu fundamentalism and hatred of Muslims is at the heart of BJP thinking. A pioneer of this ideology, Veer Savarkar, wrote that India’s model for its “Muslim problem” should be how the Nazis managed their “Jewish problem.” The RSS has evolved since its founding but an admiration of Nazism remains in some contemporary sections of the party.

It is not the videshi [foreign] cloth that we burn but the videshi [foreigner] itself - the treacherous attachment to foreigners and consequent betrayal of our Nation that we mean to burn here.

Oh Muslims! Just think what the Europeans reduced you to after they escaped from the clutches of the Bible, to master the sciences that are beneficial for our times. You were pushed out of Spain, you were subjected to massacres, and you were crushed in Austria, Hungary, Serbia and Bulgaria. Your control over Mughal India was snatched away. They are ruling you in Arabia, Mesopotamia, Iraq and Syria. Just as our [Hindu] yajnas, prayers, Vedas, holy books, penances, curses could not harm the Europeans, so too will your Quran, martyrdoms, namaz, religious lockets make no difference to them. Just as the maulvis sent armies to war in the belief that the men who fought under the banner of Allah would never lose, so did our pundits peacefully sit back to repeat the name of Rama a million times. But none of this prevented the Europeans. With their advanced weapons, they not only decimated the Muslim armies, but they even toyed with the fallen flag of Allah.

Oh Muslims! Just think what the Europeans reduced you to after they escaped from the clutches of the Bible, to master the sciences that are beneficial for our times. You were pushed out of Spain, you were subjected to massacres, and you were crushed in Austria, Hungary, Serbia and Bulgaria. Your control over Mughal India was snatched away. They are ruling you in Arabia, Mesopotamia, Iraq and Syria. Just as our [Hindu] yajnas, prayers, Vedas, holy books, penances, curses could not harm the Europeans, so too will your Quran, martyrdoms, namaz, religious lockets make no difference to them. Just as the maulvis sent armies to war in the belief that the men who fought under the banner of Allah would never lose, so did our pundits peacefully sit back to repeat the name of Rama a million times. But none of this prevented the Europeans. With their advanced weapons, they not only decimated the Muslim armies, but they even toyed with the fallen flag of Allah.

A Fearful Demagogue SAVARKAR AND THE MUSLIM QUESTION AS I SUGGESTED in the introduction, only a kaleidoscopic view gives us the full picture of Savarkar’s life and thought. This is particularly important when approaching the development of his anti-Muslim views, which have over the last century become the normative views of the current Hindu right wing. In this chapter, I will weave together not one, not two, but six different strands of Savarkar’s anti-Muslim braid.1 The first strand is the Gandhi-helmed anticolonial nationalist movement in India in the post-World War I period when the colonial government put out yet another “reform” package. The second is the Caliphate as a theory, mourned ideal, and practice in its last iteration in Ottoman and Republican Turkey. The third takes us to the debates in India about the Caliphate, referred to as Khilafat in India, and, relatedly, the discussions of the proposed hijrat (migration) to Afghanistan in India among Muslim intellectuals, leaders, and businessmen.2 The fourth strand returns us to Turkey and Mustafa Kemal’s abolition of the Caliphate in 1924. In the fifth we follow, in summary, the progress of the Indian Khilafat movement (the only such movement in the world). The sixth is the immediate cause for Savarkar’s expostulations, namely his anger about Gandhi’s support for the Khilafat movement. Savarkar, from house arrest, attacked virtually every iteration of the ideas and events laid out above—the idea of the Khilafat, the movement and its leaders, Gandhi, Muslims, and all Hindus who supported Khilafat. While he did not criticize the reform package, he insisted that Muslims were taking advantage of it. Once I trace the trajectory of each of these strands, I will move on to what Savarkar had to say about the Muslim question. I do this for two reasons. First, the strands allow us a broader look at the regional, national, and global context that framed Savarkar’s views. Second, Savarkar’s views about Muslims build on all of these strands, especially the way in which the Khilafat movement revealed for him the fundamental disloyalty of Muslims to India. But this was not all, for he came to see Muslims as a monolithic community that was defined as much by its proclivity for violence as by its foundational claims for a distinctive—and exclusive—political sovereignty of its own. In both cases, he felt lay extraordinary dangers for Hindus.

it is said that the renowned British playwright and novelist Somerset Maugham fashioned the character and narrative of an Indian revolutionary in a chapter of his short-story collection, Ashenden: Or the British Agent, on Virendranath’s activities.

Writing about Vinayak’s influence on him, Bapat states: Before I met Savarkar, I had planned a revolutionary pamphleteer and lecturer’s life for myself. A few months after I met him, I cancelled my plan and took up the idea of going to Paris for learning bomb-making . . . One chief reason for change of mind was the impression that Savarkar made on me by his brilliant writing and speaking. Here was a born revolutionary, writer, and speaker. I said to myself, I may well leave writing and turn to revolutionary work.29

Many people in India are demanding independence, so Sir Henry Cotton15 calls them extremists. But in England too there is another political movement that can be called ‘Extremist.’ They recently had a huge meeting in Hyde Park. Large numbers of English women have joined this new movement. They want political rights at par with men (the Suffragette movement). Miss Emmeline Pankhurst spoke at the meeting at Hyde Park. She said, ‘We know that pitiable condition of women in England is a result of our political slavery. We want political freedom and men folk to co-operate with us for achieving it. But if they do not give us that freedom, we are quite capable of snatching it from their hands. If we wish we can bring England to a halt within a day and seize our political freedom.’ Listen fellow countrymen! An Englishwoman is saying this and we call ourselves moderate Indian men!! Never again should any country grind under slavery.16

He concurred with Gandhi that Ramachandra was the life and soul of India but urged the audience to remember that even he could not establish Rama Rajya (his kingdom) without slaying Ravana who symbolized tyranny, aggression and injustice. If Ramachandra had merely sat on a fast, it was unlikely that his kingdom could have been established.

Niranjan Pal described that poignant moment: Presently he commenced to hum a song, he sang as he composed. It was a Marathi song, describing the pitiable serfdom of India. Forgetful of all else Savarkar went on singing . . . Presently, tears began to roll down his cheeks . . . His voice became choked. He sobbed . . . but he still sang. The song remained unfinished . . . he burst and began to weep like a child.159 This catharsis manifested itself in the form of that immortal melody that has haunted innumerable people ever since—Ne majasi ne parat matrubhoomila, sagara, prana, talamalalaa.

Time would be the best arbiter of a man’s significance, he adds. After all, the universe is intelligent enough to remove vestiges that serve no purpose, in order to create space for the new.

Accordingly, the Indian National Congress took shape and its first session was held in Bombay on 28 December 1885 with seventy-two delegates in attendance. Hume assumed the charge as general secretary and Womesh Chunder Bonnerjee of Calcutta was elected president. The Congress had no intentions of seeking independence from British rule and instead pledged unswerving loyalty to the Crown.

While it is nice to describe a beautiful rose in full bloom, it would be incomplete without a description of everything—right from its roots, the stem, the manure and nutrients that have sustained it, the fresh and dried leaves as also the thorns, in order to conceptualize the beauty of that rose in all its dimensions. Likewise, for a human being’s biography, he needs to be presented ‘as is’ and not ‘as should be’—from head to toe, nothing more, nothing less, as transparent and true to reality as one can be. Everything that can be said or unsaid, that is embarrassing or praiseworthy has to be documented without inhibitions and fears.

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.

The nation that has no consciousness of its past has no future.

An honest tale speeds best, being plainly told.

Savarkar went a step yet further than Golwalkar. He brazenly supported the Manusmriti, which said that a Shudra who insults a high-caste man with gross invectives should have his tongue cut out, for the former was of low origin; that if he arrogantly taught Brahmins their duty, the king should cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears; that a low-caste man who tried to place himself on the same seat with a man of high caste should be branded on his hips and be banished or the king should cause his buttocks to be gashed.38 Of this same text, Savarkar said, ‘Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshipable after Vedas for our Hindu nation.

counterfeit. These criminals were hauled up before

पल भर के लिए उसका मन बिलकुल निस्तब्ध, निःशब्द हो गया। परंतु उसके उस बहिर्मन की जड़ता और अंतर्मन दोनों में उस विधान पर अनजाने में न जाने क्या चर्चा हो गई, उसकी वह तल्लीन संज्ञाहीनता हलकी होते ही एक स्पष्ट संदेह उसके मन से निकलकर उसे टोकने लगा

ईश्वर यदि सज्जनों का संकटमोचन करने योग्य परम दयालु तथा सर्वसमर्थ है भी, तो वह उन निरपराध सुजनों को पहले ही संकट में क्यों ढकेलता है भला! दुर्जनों को इतना बलवान क्यों बनाता है कि वे उन सज्जनों पर असंगत अत्याचार करें, उन्हें शिकंजे में लें! सज्जनों की परीक्षा के लिए! फिर भगवान् सर्वज्ञ, अंतर्यामी कैसे हो सकते हैं! इस तरह का विधान कि दुष्टों के हाथों से उस भक्त को दारुणिक यंत्रणा, पीड़ा पहुँचाए बिना भगवान् को यह ज्ञात नहीं होता कि यह भक्त खरा है या खोटा, ईश्वर की सर्वज्ञता तथा परम दयालुता को क्या कलंक लगाना ही नहीं

प्रायः सभी के सिर झुके हुए तथा आँखें डबडबाई हुई थीं। कम-से-कम मन में तो भय समाया ही हुआ था, चेहरे उतरे हुए थे, पास खड़े व्यक्ति से एक शब्द भी न बोलते हुए; और यदि बातचीत करें भी तो किसी लड़की जैसे शरमाते, सकुचाते, छुईमुई बनते, धीमे स्वर में फुसफुसाते हुए, चार-चार की कतार में निहायत फटीचर वेश में नपे-तुले डग भरते हुए वे चल रहे थे। सिपाही के ‘ठहरो’ कहते ही वे रुक जाते, ‘बैठो’ कहते ही बैठ जाते और ‘उठो’ कहते ही उठ जाते। सौ-सवा सौ लोग जरा भी हो-हल्ला न करते हुए चल रहे थे। इतने शांत, संयत जीवों का वह समुदाय!

चालान का अर्थ है उस जहाज घाट का वह गुट, जिसके साथ विभिन्न कारागृहों में पड़े काले पानी के दंडितों को इकट्ठा कर समुद्र पार अंदमान भेजने के लिए लाया जाता है।

इस प्रकार इन गरीब, बेचारे, दीन-हीन, दुर्बलों पर अपने माँ-बाप, बीवी-बच्चों से आजीवन बिछुड़ने का प्रसंग थोपकर काले पानी पर असंगत संत्रास तथा कष्ट का शिकार बनाने के लिए इस तरह ले जाया जा रहा था! राजहठ की यह कैसी निष्ठुरता तथा दंड की यह कैसी क्रूरता! जो उन्हें मात्र दुर्दशा में तड़पते देखते हैं अथवा उनकी पीड़ा देखते ही इसकी विवंचना छोड़कर कि वह पीड़ा रोगहारक शल्यक्रिया की है या मारक शस्त्राघात की है, जिनके मन सिर्फ आठ-आठ आँसू बहाती पिलपिली उबासीयुक्त दया का अनुभव करते हैं, ऐसे लोगों के मन में उन घोंघा सदृश हीन-दीन दिखनेवाले चलते हुए दंडितों के प्रति अनुकंपा और हार्दिक सहानुभूति ही उत्पन्न होती और मन-ही-मन क्रोध का उफान यदि किसी के प्रति उमड़ता हो तो वह पुलिसवालों की निर्दय, निष्ठुर, नृशंस, जुल्मी लट्ठबाजी के प्रति। बंदूकों से संगीनें ठूँस-ठूँसकर पुलिसवालों के दल कुछ पीछे, कुछ आगे, कोई डंडे तानकर चारों ओर अंगार उगलते, कठोर स्वर में बरसाते हुए समूह को ठीक उसी प्रकार ठेल-ठेलकर आगे हाँक रहे थे, जैसे कोई कसाई चौपायों के झुंड को आगे ठेलता है। कोई तनिक भी ऊँचे स्वर में बोलता या सुस्ताने की कोशिश करता तो उसे डंडे के बल पर आगे खदेड़ दिया जाता; तनिक भी कोई ‘तू-तड़ाक’ पर उतरता तो पुलिसवाले के तीन-चार डंडे उसकी खोपड़ी पर बरसने लगते। न पूछताछ, न गवाह, न ही कोई प्रमाण। सीधे डंडे से बातचीत। तमाम न्यायनिर्बंध उसी में समाए हुए।

ऊपरी तौर पर देखनेवालों को असली अत्याचारी और निर्दयी लगती पुलिस तथा असली दीन-दुखियारे, दुर्बल ‘बेचारे’ लगते ‘चालान’ वाले।

सामने जिस सागर में उन्हें अब उतरना था, वह ऊँची-ऊँची विशाल लहरों को लहराता, बाद में उस जहाज घाट पर उन लहरियों से धड़ाधड़ टकराता, उमड़-उमड़कर बहती-छलकती फेनिल लहरियों द्वारा प्रचंड क्रोधावेग से गर्जन-तर्जन के साथ फुफकारता हहर-हहर नाद करता था। दंडितों में से प्रायः सभी ने जीवन में पहली बार सागर दर्शन किया था, इसलिए उस विशाल जलाशय का इस तरह प्रचंड क्रोधावेग से उमड़ता-उछलता-लरजता रूप देखकर उस भीषण दृश्य के आघात के साथ ही उनका दिल धौंकनी के समान धड़कने लगा। एक-दूसरे से बातचीत करना उनके लिए सख्त मना होने के बावजूद इस अनिवार आघात से, किसी से और कुछ उद्गार सुनने की इच्छा से हर एक निकटवर्ती दंडित से खुसुर-फुसुर करने लगा, ‘यही है वह काले पानी का सागर।

श्मशान घाट ले जाते समय शव को अगर कुछ अहसास होता हो तो उसे जो लगता होगा, वही काले पानी पर जाते दंडितों को तब होता होगा, जब उन्हें ‘महाराजा’ पर चढ़ाया जाता है। कम-से-कम जिनमें महसूस करने की मानवीयता शेष है, उन्हें यही अहसास होता है कि ‘महाराजा’ एक कब्र है, न कि जहाज। इसमें जो दफनाया गया वह बाहर भी निकलेगा तो काले सागर के उस पार यमलोक में, यमपुरी में, न कि इस लोक में।

मनुष्य नृशंस, क्रूर श्वापदों को मनुष्यों की बस्ती से दूर जंगल में खदेड़ सका, परंतु मनुष्य के मन ही में कितने सारे नृशंस श्वापद कैसे घात लगा बैठे, घर बनाकर विचर रहे हैं! मन के तहखाने के ताले जब कभी इस तरह से खुले, वे नृशंस श्वापद तितर-बितर होकर भगदड़ मचाते हैं। तभी इस दारुण सत्य को नकारना असंभव होता है। जिसे हम मानवता, मनुष्यता कहते हैं वह एक सजी-सँवरी क्वेट्टा नगरी है। उसके नीचे भूचालीय राक्षसी वृत्तियों की कई परतें फैली हुई हैं। मात्र दया, दाक्षिण्य, माया-ममता, न्याय-अन्याय की नींव पर ही यह मानवता की क्वेट्टा नगरी उभारी जाने के कारण, इस भ्रम में कि वह अटल-स्थिर-दृढ़ होनी चाहिए, जो लापरवाही से घोड़े बेचकर सोता है उसका सहसा ही विनाश हो जाता है, पूरा राष्ट्र पलट जाता है। रफीउद्दीन

किसी मुसलमान को लूटना हो तो वह उसे सिर्फ ‘काफिर का दोस्त’ जैसी गाली देता और फिर अपनी कसम से मुक्त होता।

हिंस्र जानवरों की तरह हिंस्र पशुतुल्य मनुष्य भी यदि किसी दंड से सचमुच डरते हैं तो शारीरिक दंड से, न कि मानसिक। मन अर्थात् मान के संदर्भ में डर उन्हें लगभग नहीं के बराबर होता है। हिंस्र जानवर हिलता है कोड़ों की फटकार से। हिंस्र श्वापद मनुष्य भी कोड़ों से ही हिलता

यह भी सौ फीसदी सच है कि यमलोक सिधारना हो तो मखमली कालीन बिछे पलक-पाँवड़ों से ठुमक-ठुमककर नहीं जा सकते, नागफनी एवं सेमल के कँटीले जंगल में से ही राह निकालते जाना पड़ता है। भई, मरघट में डेरा डालना हो तो वहाँ जलती चिताएँ, हड्डियों के टुकड़े, पैरों को जलाती गरम राख, तड़ातड़ फूटती कपालों के स्वर और भूतों की चीखें ही संगी-साथी होती हैं। घोर भयानक निराशा है यह। भई, यदि मन में यही जिज्ञासा ठाठें मार रही है कि मानवी मन का काला पानी क्या चीज है तो उस काले पानी का वही यथार्थ रूप दिखाना चाहिए जैसे होता है। उसके ऊपर यों ही शिष्टाचारस्वरूप गुलाब जल छिड़का तो वह घोर वंचना होगी। गुलाब जल उस काले जल की विडंबना है, न कि शोभा।

उसके हाथ ऊपर उठाकर उन्हीं दो लकडि़यों के ऊपर के छोरों पर लोहे की दो दूसरी कडि़यों में बाँधे गए। गरदन एक पट्टे में फँसाई गई। एक थाली में जंतुघ्न दवा तथा कोड़े मारना समाप्त होते ही घावों पर लगाई जानेवाली मरहम-पट्टियाँ लेकर औषधालय का मिश्रक (कंपाउंडर) तथा उसके पीछे-पीछे डॉक्टर भी वहाँ आ धमके। सिपाही पंक्ति में खड़े हो गए। बदन पर मात्र लँगोटी छोड़कर रफीउद्दीन को सिर से पाँव तक नंगा किया गया। उसने मुँह से चूँ तक नहीं किया। उसकी वह उद्दंड-उजड्ड आदत जो हमेशा फन उभारकर फुफकारती थी, न जाने कहाँ गायब हो गई। यद्यपि वह चेतनाशून्य अवस्था में अपनी दुर्दशा निहार रहा था, तो भी कट्टर दुश्मन बने उस जमादार से, जो सारी व्यवस्था खड़ा रहकर करवा रहा था, उसने एक शब्द भी नहीं कहा। वह बोल ही नहीं सका। ढन

न्याय-अन्याय का जय-पराजय से सुतराँ संबंध नहीं होता। इस तथ्य को हम जितनी जल्दी सीख लें उतना ही अच्छा है। न्याय-अन्याय का मामला अलग है और जय-पराजय का अलग। जय-पराजय का यदि किसी से वास्ता है तो वह पराक्रम से है, न कि न्याय से। याद रखो। रट लो यह शब्द—पराक्रम। जयमंत्र। यह शब्द सीखो।

पिंडारियों के अमर, खान प्रभृत्ति ने ही—जो स्पष्ट रूप में डाकू-लुटेरे थे—क्या टोंक जैसी रियासतों की स्थापना नहीं की?

बंदीगृह की मौन, कठोर पत्थर की दीवारें इन्हीं कुछ लोगों को किसी भी नीतिग्रंथ से अधिक संयम सिखाती हैं।