#4 Why Idiots Hate Gandhi: Part-3

"Kirata-Hunandhra-Pulinda-Pulkasa
Abhira-Sumbha Yavanah Khasadayah
Ye 'Nye Ca Papa Yad-Apasrayasrayah
Sudhyanti Tasmai Prabhavishnave Namah"
- Bhagavat Gita 2.4.18

Note: This was very difficult to write, for there were a lot of unpleasant things- that'd rather remain unsaid. But, that wouldn't do any justice to the title of this post. The sequence of narration is rather slippery, so please bear with me.

A little history of religion wouldn't hurt. In fact, it is necessary that we know it, for it has played (and still plays) a major part in the shaping of our country's policies.

The Jews had the word 'Kofer', the Christians- 'Infidel', the Muslims- 'Kafir', and the Hindus- oh wait, Hindus? How can one define a Hindu? Did it denote someone belonging to a race, or a region, or a belief system? Well, before we do that let's see who was not a Hindu. The term for a non-Hindu (even before there was a term to denote someone belonging to the Hindu religion, ironically) was 'Mleccha'.

Now, those Sanskrit stanzas at the beginning of the post- they were not for just a Classic opening.
The stanza's first two lines mention a number of Mlecchas:
Kiratas- People of Mongoloid ancestry, who inhabit Nepal and North-East India
Hunas- The Huns
Andhra- Do I need to say?
Pulindas- Greeks
Pulkasas- People from a province called 'Pulkasa', race unknown
Abhiras- Again, the people from a kingdom called 'Abhira', near the dried banks of the river Saraswati
Sumbha- Name of a kingdom, inhabitants' race unknown
Yavanas- Ionians
Khasadayas- People with no hair on their upper lips- Mongols, Chinese

We take for granted that before the advent of Jainism, Hinduism was the only religion in India. False. Now, as is evident from the stanzas mentioned, even during the purported time of Krishna- there were those who didn't follow what we today regard as the Hindu religion. Which puts us back to the question- how do we define a Hindu?
Every Indian would know the Indus-Sindhu-and-hence-Hindu story. I'm not repeating it here. Etymology apart, the religion of the people who were called Hindus wasn't really a "religion". It was more of a belief system. Its core values were derived from the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Puranas- in that chronological order. It was Adi Shankaracharya, who formed the Shan-Matha (Six Religions), during his travel across ancient India; and it was that, which cemented this belief-system into a "loose" religion. Loose, because people still had the freedom to choose their "favourite" God, and worship them. Till this day, it has how Hinduism has been.
Hence, it is safe to say that India has never been a Hindu Nation.

Now, Bharatavarsha means exactly that. It is a Hindu Utopian Model- call it "Ram Rajya" or "Hindu Rashtra" or whatever you may. The movement to establish Bharatavarsha has been in motion for centuries, now. For comparison, it is similar to the retaking of Israel by the Jews and the Reconquista to form Christian Spain.

So, what does any of this have to do with Gandhi? Enter Politics.

Godse claimed in his famous speech that the foremost reason for the assassination of Gandhi was the Partition of India. What he failed to mention was how many times people had tried to assassinate Gandhi, before him. There were a grand total of five attempts at Gandhi's life before 30th January 1948. One of them- at Panchgani in 1944, is quite a remarkable one. The attempt was carried out by none other than Godse himself! In 1944 (when Godse first tried to kill Gandhi), India's Partition was still a theory- called the Two-Nation Theory. This leads us to conclude that Godse killed Gandhi for an entirely different reason. Let's take a look at his tutelage.

Veer Savarkar was a great patriot and served a jail sentence at Andaman. He is also the father of the Hindutva movement (curiously, he was an atheist). He had a vision of establishing Bharatavarsha. As early as 1937, he said: "India cannot be assumed today to be Unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary there are two nations in the main — the Hindus and the Muslims.". His statement in 1943: "I have no quarrel with Mr Jinnah's two-nation theory. We, the Hindus, are a nation by ourselves; and It is a historical fact that the Hindus and the Muslims are two nations.” But, when talks for Partition were taking place in earnest, Savarkar reversed his previous stand, and was opposed to the Partition.
Godse was a member of the Hindu Mahasabha and a close confidant of Veer Savarakar.

The demand for a Hindu Nation was unfair, since India has been home to people belonging to so many other religions, since ancient times. Gandhi, and the other Secular leaders of pre-Independent India were opposed to the idea of a Hindu India, on that basis. This didn't stand well with the Hindu Nationalists, and hence Gandhi had been a target of assassination, ever since he professed his love for all religions.

Two things are now very clear:
1. Godse always wanted Gandhi dead. The Partition was merely a ploy for killing Gandhi. He hated Gandhi's principles of non-violence, more than anything else. He was afraid that, through these principles- Gandhi was appeasing the Muslims. He stated: "All his experiments were at the expense of the Hindus."
2. Bharatavarsha was impossible with Gandhi alive, for he was opposed to a Theocratic state.

The Partition happened because the Muslims were afraid of the rise of a Hindu Nation, and the British did only but encourage this fear. Gandhi is not to be blamed for this. The top Congress leaders even offered the post of first Prime Minister of a United India to Jinnah, giving him the liberty to choose an All-Muslim Cabinet to extinguish this fear. Didn't work.

Till the rise of the Big-time Corrupt, what did people hate more than anything? Vote-bank politics. Gandhi is often regarded as the Father of Vote-bank politics. That is why he is hated by many, so vehemently. Godse, non-violence, Bhagat Singh, etc.- just a cover for their hatred. (Come on, who the hell are we kidding? Everyone HATES Vote-bank Politics.)

But, is Gandhi really the said-Father of this shameful policy? Well, that's another thing entirely. Why did Gandhi do what he did? What was his Politics? Why was his Politics successful in ridding India of the British rule?

Satyagraha.