A wise man once told me that one should always hear the other - TopicsExpress



          

A wise man once told me that one should always hear the other person’s point of view, even if the other person is devil himself. So out of curiosity (and because I share the same surname) I searched “why Godse killed Gandhi?” and I soon realized that Godse is easily one of the most misunderstood characters in Indian history He was not a Hindu fanatic as many have labeled him to be. He worked tirelessly to help refugees who came from today’s Pakistan to India. He helped Hindu’s who were badly injured and handicapped, but even then he did not attack a single Muslim person. This itself says two things 1) He was not a Hindu fanatic 2) He was not a violent or mentally unstable man. Now let’s take a closer look at who Nathuram Godse really was. Nathuram Godse was the editor of then newspaper “Agrani”. He was a sharp, astute and intelligent man. In his last article which was apparently changed overnight. Nathuram Godse said “Gandhi should be stopped - at any cost…..his assassination is not just inevitable but a delayed action which should have happened Long time ago” I said to myself “What would have turned a editor of a leading newspaper into a murderer? Why on earth would any one leave a happy life and go on to kill Gandhi…which was a certain ticket to death and humiliation that will last for eternity?. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathuram_Godse It contains Nathuram’s answer to charge sheet in which he replied why he assassinated Gandhi. The charge sheet was kept away from public for many years, and false stories about his fanaticism, insanity and violent behavior were spread by the government. In his answer to charge sheet he said “I don’t refute Gandhi’s theory of non-violence. He may be a saint but he is not a politician. His theory of non-violence denies self-defence and self-interest. The non-violence that defines the fight for survival as violence is a theory not of non-violence but of self-destruction. The division of the nation was an unnecessary decision. There was no need for a separate nation. Had it been a demand, Maulana Azad would not have stayed back in India. But because Jinnah insisted and because Gandhi took his side, India was divided, in spite of opposition from the nation and the Cabinet. Here I would repeat when it comes to national interest. An individual is never greater than a nation.” Since the year 1920, after the demise of Lokmanya Tilak, Gandhi’s influence in the Congress became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal… and were reinforced by the slogans of truth and non-violence. To imagine that the bulk of mankind is or can ever become capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life… is a mere dream. It was the heroic fight put up by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj that first checked and eventually destroyed tyranny in India. It was absolutely correct tactic for Shivaji to kill Afzal Khan as the latter would otherwise have surely killed him. In condemning Shivaji, Rana Pratap and Guru Gobind as misguided patriots, Gandhiji has merely exposed his self-conceit. In a democracy you cannot put forward your demands at knife-point. Jinnah did it and Gandhi stabbed the nation with the same knife. He dissected the land and gave a piece to Pakistan. We did picket that time but in vain. By going on fast unto death for 55crore aid to Pakistan, The Father of our Nation performed his paternal duties for Pakistan! Gandhi blackmailed the cabinet with his fast unto death. His body, his threat to die are causing the destruction — geographical as well as economical — of the nation. The religions are again dividend into castes; they will demand sub-divisions of the divisions. What remains of the concept of one nation, national integration? Why did we fight the British in unison for independence? Why not separately? Bhagat Singh did not ask only for an independent Punjab or Subhash Chandra Bose for an independent Bengal? This is what Gandhiji had achieved after thirty years of undisputed dictatorship and this is what the Congress Party calls ‘Freedom’. Never in the history of the world has such slaughter been officially connived at or the result described as Freedom, and ‘Peaceful Transfer of power’ If what happened in India in 1946, 1947 and 1948 is to be called peaceful one wonders what would be the violent (he is referring to mass killing during partition). Nehru and his crowds however called it `Freedom won by them at sacrifice’. Whose sacrifice? After Nathuram Godse finished his argument it is said that there was silence in the court many had tears in their eyes. Justice Khosla, one of the three judges hearing the appeal, wrote after his retirement: “There was a deep silence when he ceased speaking. Many women were in tears and men coughing and searching for their handkerchiefs... I have no doubt that had the audience of the 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.” Appeasement is not justified all the time. When an enemy points a gun at you, there are only 2 options - kill or get killed. We did not achieve freedom only through non violence. Bhagat Singh, Subhash Chandra Bose, Chandrasekhar Azad, Rajguru, Ashfaqulla Khan. All of them gave ultimate sacrifice for their country. These men were dreaded by Englishmen which gave rise to freedom of India. At the same time I would say that killing any man is a serious offence. He might not be correct in doing so either, but his arguments had valid points. One thing is clear, he did not kill Gandhi because he hated Gandhi. He killed him because from his point of view Gandhi was taking country in wrong direction. Having said this Gandhi too took some questionable decisions? What was the purpose of giving 55 crore to Pakistan? Why did Gandhi fast unto death so that congress would provide aid to Pakistan? Why didn’t Gandhi stop execution of Bhagat Singh, when Gandhi had opportunity to do so? After pondering on all these things there was (rather is) one question that remains unanswered Was Nathuram a Hindu fanatic or true Nationalist?? Nathuram Godse - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Posted on: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:15:30 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015