How patriotic the RSS is
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, founded at Nagpur on 27th September, 1925 by Dr. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar (1889–1940), trying to teaching us nationalism, but this RSS once had opposed the Indian national flag. RSS had said that the national flag should be awash in saffron and should particularly drop the colour green, which it believes was included to please Muslims and they believed number three as evil.
After the first Republic Day in 1950, the Sangh never hoisted the Tricolour at its Nagpur headquarters. After 52 years they changed the practice in 2002. The National Flag was first hoisted at the Sangh headquarters on August 15, 1947 and then on January 26, 1950. The Tiranga was seen flying next time at the RSS premises on 26 January, 2002, when it was hoisted at the HQ and Smruti Bhawan, the building that houses the memorials of its founder Hedgewar and Guru Golwalkar. However, RSS claims that RSS did not hoist the national flag because private citizens were not allowed to host the national flag up until 2002 when a revised Flag Code was announced by the then Union Govt.
In 2002, when the Sangh decided to hoist the National Flag at its headquarters, its national executive member K Suryanarayana Rao told reporters in Bangalore the RSS did not biannually hoist the flag because till a few days ago, there were stringent rules restricting the hoisting of the flag only on government buildings. “Now that the rules have been relaxed, we will also hoist the flag,” he said. Rao said the RSS had also been reluctant to hoist the flag at their shakas because the swayamsevaks wanted to participate in the general Republic Day and Independence Day functions with the mainstream. “If we hold the function at the shakas, naturally all of them have to be present there and will miss out the functions at schools and offices,’’ he pointed out, according to Times of India.
But this claim is half-true. Until 2002 private citizens were not allowed to hosted national flag, but there was no restrictions on special occasions like Republic Day (26th January), Independence Day (15th August). But RSS did not hosted national flag even on Republic Day or Independence Day until 2002.
In 2001 three activists of Rashtrapremi Yuwa Dal — president Baba Mendhe, and members Ramesh Kalambe and Dilip Chattani, along with others — entered the RSS headquarters in Reshimbagh, Nagpur, on 26 January, the Republic Day of India, and forcibly hoisted the national flag there amid patriotic slogans. The incharge of the premises Sunil Kathle first tried to stop them from entering the premises and later tried to prevent them from hoisting the tri-colour. The RSS took them to court for it. Offences were registered by the Bombay Police against the trio under relevant sections of Bombay Police Act and IPC, who were then jailed. They were discharged by the court of Justice R. R. Lohia after eleven years on 6 August, 2013 for lack of evidence. [State of Maharashtra vs Vijay Kalambe; Case Type: Regular Criminal Case (RCC); Case Number: 3100176; Year: 2001; State: Maharashtra; District: Nagpur; Court Complex: Nagpur, District and Session Court]
Keshav Baliram Hedgewar (1889–1940), founder of RSS, was not happy when Congress appointed committee recommended the Swaraj Flag in 1931. The Swaraj flag became the official flag of Congress at the 1931 meeting. But K.B. Hedgewar said that our national flag should be saffron colour:
“This was how I was caught, as a mouse is caught by the cat ! In 1931, the Congress appointed a committee consisting of seven members-Sardar Patel, Pandit Nehru, Pattabhi seetaramayya, dr. N.S. Hardikar, Acharya Kaka Kalelkar, Master Tara Singh and Maulana Azad-to decide about the National Flag for the country. The committee went into all the aspects and finally presented a unanimous report. Our National Flag should be of one single colour and it is the saffron colour which can represent to the maximum extent the entire populace of India. This colour has a speciality of its own over the other colours and reflects the ancient tradition of India.”
[Source:- Dr. Hedgewar: The Epoch Maker, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1981]
RSS highly criticised the Constituent Assembly’s decision to select the Tricolour as the National Flag. Its mouthpiece Organiser (dated 17 July, 1947) carried an editorial titled “National Flag”, that saffron flag be made the national flag of Independent India. The RSS’s mouthpiece Organiser, in an article dated 14 August, 1947, titled “Mystery behind the Bhagwa Dhwaj”, stated:
“The people who have come to power by the kick of fate may give in our hands the Tricolor but it never be respected and owned by Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil, and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect and is injurious to a country.”
[Organiser (dated 14 August, 1947), titled “Mystery behind the Bhagwa Dhwaj”]
Similarly, the second Sarsanghchalak (or, “Chief”) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Madhavrao Sadashivrao Golwalkar (1906–1973), in an essay titled “Drifting and Drafting” published in his book ‘Bunch of Thoughts’, wrote:
“Our leaders have set up a new flag for our country. Why did they do so? It is just a case of drifting and imitating. How did this flag come into being? During the French Revolution, the French put up three stripes on their flag to express the triple ideas of ‘equality’, ‘fraternity’ and ‘liberty’. The American Revolution inspired by similar principles took it up with some changes. Three stripes therefore held a sort of fascination for our freedom fighters also. So, it was taken up by the Congress. Then it was interpreted as depicting the unity of the various communities-the saffron colour standing for the Hindu, the green for the Muslim and the white for all the other communities. Out of the non-Hindu communities the Muslim was specially named because in the minds of most of those eminent leaders the Muslim was dominant and without naming him they did not think that our nationality could be complete! When some persons pointed out that this smacked of a communal approach, a fresh, explanation was brought forward that he ‘saffron’ stood for sacrifice, the ‘white’ for purity and the ‘green’ for peace and so on. All these interpretations were discussed in the Congress Committees during those days. Who can say that this is a pure and healthy national outlook? It was just a politician’s patchwork, just political expediency. It was not inspired by any national vision or truth based on our national history and heritage. The same flag has been taken up today as our State Flag with only a glorious past. Then, had we no flag of our own? Had we no national emblem at all these thousands of years? Undoubtedly, we had. Then, why this void, this utter vacuum in our minds?”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
Golwalkar, second chief of the RSS, while addressing a gathering in Nagpur on July 14, 1946, stated that:
“We firmly believe that in the end the whole nation will bow before this saffron flag.”
[Source:- Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. I, Published by Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur]
Even RSS opposed the constitution and wanted Manu-Smriti as Indian constitution. Statement of the most prominent ideologue of the RSS, Golwalkar:
“Our Constitution too is just a cumbersome and heterogeneous piecing together of various articles from various Constitutions of Western countries. It has absolutely nothing, which can be called our own. Is there a single word of reference in its guiding principles as to what our national mission is and what our keynote in life is? No! Some lame principles form the United Nations Charter or from the Charter of the now defunct League of Nations and some features form the American and British Constitutions have been just brought together in a mere hotchpotch.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966, page-(237–238)]
The Indian Constitution was adopted by the Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949, whereas four days later, RSS’s mouthpiece Organizer in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained:
“The worst about the new constitution of Bharat is that there is nothing Bhartiya about it. The drafters of the Constitution have incorporated in it elements of British, American, Canadian, Swiss and sundry other constitutions. But there is no trace of ancient Bhartiya constitutional laws, institutions, nomenclature and phraseology in it…But in our constitution, there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.”
[Organiser (dated 30 November, 1949)]
RSS was perhaps referring to Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar’s opposition to Manusmriti — he actually burnt it on 25 December, 1927, in a small town/village, Mahad in Konkan, the coastal region of Maharashtra under the leadership of Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar as a symbol of rejection of the religious basis of untouchability. The event was arranged during the Mahad Satyagraha. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, father of Indian Constitution, called upon Dalits to commemorate December 25 as the Manusmriti Dehen Diwas (Manusmriti burning day).
On 6 February, 1950 the Organizer carried another article, titled “Manu Rules our Hearts”, written by a retired High Court Judge named Sankar Subba Aiyar, that reaffirmed their support for the Manusmriti as the final lawgiving authority for Hindus, rather than the Constitution of India. He wrote:
“Even though Dr. Ambedkar is reported to have recently stated in Bombay that the days of Manu have ended it is nevertheless a fact that the daily lives of Hindus are even at present-day affected by the principles and injunctions contained in the Manusmrithi and other Smritis. Even an unorthodox Hindu feels himself bound at least in some matters by the rules contained in the Smrithis and he feels powerless to give up altogether his adherence to them.”
[Organiser (dated 6 February, 1950), titled “Manu Rules our Hearts”]
RSS trying to constructing there role in freedom struggle by ignoring the facts that they were the criticised of the Non-cooperation Movement (1920–21) and the Quit India Movement (1942) and there cooperation with British.
The Non-cooperation Movement and the Quit India Movement (QIM) are two great milestones in the history of the Indian Freedom Movement. What the nationalist Golwalkar thought about these movements is clear from the his comments:
“Definitely there are bound to be bad results of struggle. The boys became unruly after the 1920–21 movement. It is not an attempt to throw mud at the leaders. But these are inevitable products after the struggle. The matter is that we could not properly control these results. After 1942, people often started thinking that there was no need to think of the law.”
[Source:- Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. IV, Published by Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur, (page-41)]
K.B. Hedgewar was also critical of Non-Cooperation movement. Remark of Hedgewar about Non-Cooperation Movement:
“As a result of the Non-Cooperation Movement of Mahatma Gandhi the enthusiasm [for nationalism] in the country was cooling down and all evils in social life which that movement generated were menacingly raising their heads. As the tide of national struggle came to ebb mutual ill-will and jealousies came on the surface. Personal quarrels raged all round. Conflicts between various communities had started. Brahmin-non-Brahmin conflict was nakedly on view. No organisation was integrated or united. The yavan-snakes reared on the milk of Non-Cooperation were provoking riots in the nation with their poisonous hissing.”
[Cited in K.B. Hedgewar’s biography by C.P. Bhishikar, titled Keshav Sanghnirmata, published by Suruchi Prakashan, (page-7)]
In 1930, Mahatma Gandhi started Salt Satyagraha. According to Hedgewar’s biography ‘Sangh Vriksh ke Beej: Dr. KeshavRao Hedgewar’, when Gandhi launched the Salt Satyagraha in 1930, Dr Hedgewar decided to participate only individually and not let the RSS join the freedom movement officially. His biography stated:
“In 1930 Mahatma Gandhi had called upon the people to break different laws of the government. Gandhiji himself launched Salt Satyagraha undertaking Dandi Yatra. Dr. Sahed [Hedgewar] sent information everywhere that the Sangh will not participate in the Satyagraha. However, those wishing to participate individually in it were not prohibited. This mean that any responsible worker of the Sangh could not participate in the Satyagraha.”
[Source:- Sangh-Viraksh ke Beej, written by C.P. Bhishikar, published by Suruchi Prakashan, in 1994, (page-20)]
Hedgewar was sent to jail a second time by the British government during Salt Satyagraha. This was the last time that he was sent to jail. But there is no answer to the question as to why the RSS as an organisation did not join the struggle.
MS Golwalker in his book ‘Bunch of Thoughts’ include a passage that was critical of anti British nationalism:
“The theories of territorial nationalism and of common danger, which formed the basis of our concept of a nation, had deprived us of the positive and inspiring content of our real Hindu Nationhood and made many of the ‘freedom movements’ virtually anti-British movements. Anti-Britishism was equated with patriotism and nationalism. This reactionary view has had disastrous effects upon the entire course of the freedom struggle, its leaders and the common people.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
MS Golwalker said that fighting against the British was not a part of RSS’s agenda.
“many people worked with the inspiration to free the country by throwing the British out. After the formal departure of the British this inspiration slackend. In fact there was no need to have this much inspiration. We should remember that in our pledge we have talked of freedom of the country through defending religion and culture, there is no mention of departure of British from here.”
[Source:- Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. IV, Published by Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur, (page-2)]
What Golwalkar thought of the people sacrificing their lot for the country is obvious from his following words. He asked the great revolutionaries who wished to lay down their lives for the freedom of the motherland the following question as if he was representing the British:
“But one should think whether complete national interest is accomplished by that? Sacrifice does not lead to increase in the thinking of the society of giving all for the interest of the nation. It is borne by the experience up to now that this fire in the heart is unbearable to the common people.”
[Source:- Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. I, Published by Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur, (page-61–62)]
To join freedom struggle was discouraged by Golwalkar, for RSS, religions came before duty for freedom movement, it becomes clear from what M.S. Golwalkar said:
“There was some unrest in the mind due to the situation developing in the country from time to time. There was such unrest in 1942. Before that there was the movement of 1930–31. At that time many other people had gone to Doctorji (Hedgewar). The delegation requested Doctorji that this movement will give independence and the Sangh should not lag behind. At that time, when a gentleman told Doctorji that he was ready to go to jail, Doctorji said ‘definitely go, but who will take care of your family then?’ The gentleman replied, ‘I have sufficiently arranged resources not only to run the family expenses for two years but also to pay fines according to requirement’. Then Doctorji told him, ‘If you have fully arranged for the resources then come out to work for Sangh for two years’. After returning home, that gentleman neither went to jail nor came out to work for the Sangh.”
[Source:- Shri Guruji Samagra Darshan (Collected Works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. IV, Published by Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur, (page-39–40)]
How the RSS denigrated the martyrdom by freedom fighters is evident from the following comment by MS Golwalkar:
“There is no doubt that such men who embrace martyrdom are great heroes and their philosophy too is pre-eminently manly. They are far above the average men who meekly submit to fate and remain in fear and inaction. All the same, such persons are not held up as ideals in our society. We have not looked upon their martyrdom as the highest point of greatness to which man should aspire. For, after all, they failed in achieving their ideal, and failure implies some fatal flaw in them.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
Madhukar Dattatreya Deoras, the third chief of the RSS, narrated an incident of Hedgewar “saving” him and others from following the path of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. Interestingly this appeared in a book published by the RSS itself:
“While studying in college, (we) youth were generally attracted towards the ideals of revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh. Emulating Bhagat Singh we should do some or other act of bravery: this came to our mind often. We were less attracted towards Sangh (RSS) since current politics, revolution etc. that attracted the hearts of youth, were generally less discussed in the Sangh. When Bhagat Singh and his companions were awarded death sentence our hearts were so excited that some friends together vowed to do something directly and planned something terrible; and, in order to make it succeed we decided to run away from our homes. But to run away without informing our Doctorji (Hedgewar) would not have been proper. Considering this, we decided to inform Doctorji about our decision. I was assigned the job to inform Doctorji by a group of my friends. Together, we went to Doctorji and, with great courage, I explained my feelings before him. After listening to our plan Doctorji took a meeting of ours to discard this foolish plan and made us realize the superior work of the Sangh. This meeting continued for seven days, at night, from ten to three. The brilliant ideas of Doctorji and his valuable leadership brought a fundamental change in our ideas and ideals of life. Since that day we took leave of mindlessly made plans; our lives got a new direction, and our mind got stabilised in the work of Sangh.”
[Source: Smritikan-Param Pujiye Dr. Hedgewar Ke Jeewan Kee Vibhin Gahtnaon Ka Sankalan, (A collection of memoirs of persons close to Hedgewar in Hindi), written by H. V. Pingle, published by RSS Prakashan Vibhag, Nagpur, 1962, (page 47–48)]
According to the RSS biographer C. P. Bhishikar, Hedgewar talked only about Hindu organisations and avoided any direct comment on the Government. His biography ‘Sangh-Viraksh ke Beej’ stated:
“After establishing the Sangh, Doctor Saheb in his speeches used to talk only of Hindu organization. Direct comment on the government used to be almost nil.”
[Source:- Sangh-Viraksh ke Beej, written by C.P. Bhishikar, published by Suruchi Prakashan, in 1994, (page-24)]
Nathuram Godse’s ties with RSS and ban on RSS
RSS constantly claiming that Nathuram Vinayak Godse (1910–1949) had quite RSS before the killing of Mahatma Gandhi. Godse joined RSS in 1932. Gandhi was shot dead by Nathuram Vinayak Godse on 30 January, 1948. Almost 73 years after the assassination, mystery still shrouds the ownership of Italian pistol used to kill the Mahatma.
RSS denies Gandhi’s assassin as one of its own. “The Sangha Chalak of Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh, Bombay, in a statement says the alleged assassin of Mahatma Gandhi was never connected in any way with the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh,” the Hindustan Times reported on 2 February 1948.
On 21 November, 1993, Lal Krishna Advani issued a statement saying Godse had nothing to do with RSS. “Nathuram Godse was a bitter critic of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh”, he said, The Times of India reported on 22 November, 1993. “His charge was that the RSS had made Hindus impotent. We have had nothing to do with Godse. The Congress is in the habit of reviving this allegation against us when it finds nothing else,” he added.
On 30 December, 2010, former RSS spokesman Ram Madhav told news agency Indo-Asian News Service (IANS) that Godse left RSS in mid-1930s.
On 8 November, 1948, Godse made a statement to the special court trying to proved that he quite RSS:
“I have worked for several years in RSS and subsequently joined the Hindu Mahasabha and volunteered myself as a soldier under its pan-Hindu flag.
[Source: Why I Assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, written by Nathuram Godese, (Page-36)]
In the court statement, further, he said:
“I am one of those volunteers of Maharashtra who joined the Sangha in its initial stage. I also worked for a few years on the intellectual side in the Province of Maharashtra. Having worked for the uplift of the Hindus, I felt it necessary to take part in the political activities of the country for the protection of the just rights of the Hindus. I, therefore, left the Sangha and joined the Hindu Mahasabha.”
[Source: Why I Assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, written by Nathuram Godese, (Page-111)]
In 1948, during the trial, Godse had said that he had acted independently. In the court he said:
“After having fully considered the question, I took the final decision in the matter, but I did not speak about it to anyone.”
[Source: The Murder of the Mahatma, written by G. D. Khosla (Formerly Chief Justice of Punjab, who heard the appeal of Nathuram Godse. & others and gave his most historic verdict in the case of assassination)]
Nathuram Godse’s straightforward declaration has lately been challenged by none other than his brother and accomplice Gopal Godse. Nathuram Godess’s brother Goapl Godse and his family suggests that he never really left the RSS.
In an interview (interviewed by Arvind Rajgopal) to Frontline Magazine in January 28, 1994, Nathuram Godese’s brother Gopal Godse (also convicted in the assassination plot and was sentenced to 18 years for his part in the assassination), had said that all the three Godse brothers — Nathuram, Dattatreya and Gopal were part of the RSS and had not left the organisation. According to Gopal Godse, Nathuram said it because Golwalkar and the RSS were in a lot of trouble after the murder of Gandhi. Gopal Godse said:
“All the brothers were in the RSS. Nathuram, Dattatreya, myself and Govind. You can say we grew up in the RSS rather than in our homes. It was like a family to us.
“Nathuram become a baudhik karyavah (intellectual worker) in the RSS. He has said in his statement that he left the RSS. He said it because Golwalkar and the RSS were in a lot of trouble after the murder of Gandhi. But he did not leave the RSS,”[Gopal Godse’s interview to Frontline magazine in January 28, 1994]
While the interviewer (Arvind Rajagopal) asked Gopal how he felt about LK Advani saying Godse had nothing to do with RSS, Gopal said, against the umpteenth statement by Hindu nationalist leader LK Advani disowning Nathuram. Gopal replied bluntly described it as an act of “cowardice”. he’d said:
“You can say that RSS did not pass a resolution saying that ‘go and assassinate Gandhi’. But you do not disown him.”
[Gopal Godse’s interview to Frontline magazine in January 28, 1994]
Talking to Economists Times, Satyaki Savarkar, son of Gopal Godse’s daughter late Himani Savarkar (Himani Savarkar was also the daughter-in-law of Narayan Savarkar, the younger brother of Vinayak Savarkar) and grand nephew of Nathuram Godse and Veer Savarkar, said the family has preserved all important writings of both Nathuram and Gopal Godse, some of which, according to him, clearly indicate that Nathuram Godse was a dedicated member of the RSS but had increasingly become disillusioned with the sangh for not being radical enough. He said:
“Nathuram joined the RSS when he was in Sangli in 1932. He remained a boudhik karyawah till his death. He was neither expelled nor did he ever leave the organisation.
“I am definitely upset with the RSS for denying the fact that he was a swayamsevak. I understand that they do not support the act of killing Gandhiji but they cannot run away from the facts,”
He added,
“There is enough proof that he was extremely critical of the RSS and had severed ties with it. There is no process of expulsion followed in the RSS.”
Satyaki Savarkar said,
“It is believed that Nathuramji continued organising hindutva shibirs, similar to an RSS shibir even in the 1940s. He however felt only a revolt could change the situation for the hindus then and that couldn’t be achieved through constitutional methods.”
Satyaki Savarkar told news agency Press Trust of India (PTI) that RSS boycottedd Nathuram, but Nathuram was not expelled from RSS, nor he did leave the organisation. He said:
“After the assassination the Sangh did boycott Nathuram and condemned the killing. However, neither was he expelled, nor did he leave the organisation till the last moment of his life,”
[Source:- Hindustan Times]
However, Satyaki added that RSS was not involved in Gandhi’s murder. He said,
“…….. Nathuram had clarified that the decision to kill Gandhi was his own and RSS did not have any role in it,”
[Source:- Hindustan Times]
Although, then Home Minister Sardar Patel accused that RSS was not involved, but RSS’s activities lead Gandhi’s assassination.
Pro-Hindutava scholar Dr Koenrad Elst, in his 2001 book ‘Gandhi and Godse’, wrote that the claimed by Nathuram Godse that he leaved RSS, simply was to avoid creating more trouble for RSS. He wrote:
“Nathuram contrived to create the impression that the RSS had little to do with him, simply to avoid creating more trouble for the RSS in the difficult post-assassination months.”
[Gandhi and Godse, written by Dr Koenrad Elst, in 2001]
Dr Koenrad Elst in his book wrote that Nathuram Godse ideologically still was an RSS man and he sang the nationalist RSS song Namaste sada vatsale matribhume when he walked to the gallows. He wrote:
“There is really no controversy here. Nathuram Godse never rejected the RSS, but he was not functioning within the RSS structure in the years before the murder. He had chosen to do political work whereas the RSS scrupulously stayed out of party politics. Ideologically, he still was an RSS man. That is why he sang the nationalist RSS song Namaste sada vatsale matribhume (“I bow to thee, loving Motherland, always”), a fixed part of every RSS shaakhaa (branch) meeting when he walked to the gallows.”
[Source: Gandhi and Godse, written by Dr Koenrad Elst, in 2001]
When RSS ideologue MG Vaidya on 15 November, 2015, said that Godse was not a hero but a murderer, Ashok Sharma, the then national vice-president of Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha said that Hindu Mahasabha (HM) was the parent body of RSS. He told Times of India:
“The RSS is the biggest traitor that has betrayed not only the country but also the Hindus. Few are aware of the fact that the Hindu Mahasabha (HM) was the parent body of RSS. But, after Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination in 1948, RSS leaders severed all ties with the Hindu Mahasabha and joined hands with Nehru and tried to distance themselves from Gandhi’s killing. These are the real traitors who abandoned the Hindu Mahasabha when it was being persecuted for killing Gandhi.”
[Former national vice-president of Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha Ashok Sharma told Times of India]
A widely researched article in The Caravan magazine by Dhirendra K. Jha published on January 1, 2020, offers several clues to Godse’s uninterrupted association with the RSS and cites the lack of documentary evidence to confirm a formal break-up.
Most curiously, the article says, “Early on 15 November 1949, shortly before his execution, Godse recited a prayer: ‘Namaste sada vatsale matrubhume/ Twaya Hindubhume sukham vardhitoham/ Mahanmangale punyabhume twadarthe/ Patatvesha kayo namaste, namaste!’”
A translation: “O affectionate motherland, I eternally bow to you/ O land of Hindus, you have reared me in comfort/ O sacred and holy land/ May this body of mine be dedicated to you and I bow before you again and again!”
“These four Sanskrit sentences constitute the first of the three stanzas of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s official prayer, which continues to be sung to this day at its shakhas — regular assemblies meant for physical and ideological training.”
“There are also several reasons to doubt Godse’s November 1948 statement, in which he claimed that he had left the RSS,” the article says.
“By this point, having been tutored by a lawyer, Godse was on a drive to take complete responsibility (for) the murder and was trying to implicate as few people as possible. The ponderous statement, which consisted of 150 paragraphs and took Godse five hours to read in the courtroom, was not entirely of his preparation — a fact disclosed later by P.L. Inamdar, one of a group of lawyers working with the Hindu Mahasabha and defending the accused.
‘“In Nathuram’s case, it was primarily Jamnadas Mehta, Barrister-at-Law from Bombay, who assisted him in preparing the statement,’ Inamdar wrote. Apart from being one of the prominent lawyers of the group, Mehta was also a long-time associate of V.D. Savarkar.”
The author Dhirendra K. Jha reveal that a statement Godse gave in March 1948, six months before his statement to the special court, proves that he was working for both the RSS and Mahasabha at the same time.
Pages 18 and 19 of the document, in which he describes the early 1940s, make this clear. “Once again I began to take up the work of Hindu Mahasabha,” the statement says. “Simultaneously, I remained active in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.”
“There is no evidence — document or testimony — to suggest exactly when Godse formally joined Hindu Mahasabha and thereby, as presumed by many, left the RSS,” the article says.
“None of the two statements he made after the assassination of Gandhi — the pre-trial statement recorded in Marathi and the statement made on 8 November 1948 during his trial at Red Fort — say anything about it.”
“The first mention of Godse’s relationship with the Mahasabha came in late 1938. That year, the Hindu Mahasabha, in concert with the Arya Samaj, a society with its headquarters in Delhi and roots in Punjab, launched an agitation against the nizam of Hyderabad to secure demands for Hindus, arguing that the Muslim ruler was suppressing their civil liberties and culture. The agitation — referred to as a satyagraha by Hindutva organisations — was a passive-resistance movement aimed at obtaining certain political concessions from the nizam,” the article says.
“Godse played a significant role in the movement.” “He was soon arrested, and imprisoned in Hyderabad for a year. He was released along with other satyagrahis after the agitation was withdrawn,” the article says.
Dhirendra K. Jha wrote in his article in Caravan that, “in an undated letter written just before the Hyderabad satyagraha, he advised Savarkar on how the movement to unite Hindus could be strengthened by basing it on the edifice of the RSS. “Its workers are really able leaders,” he wrote. “At present they have the support of the youths. If in future, any work is to be undertaken, it would be advisable to carry it out in consultation with Dr Hedgewar, who is a leader of your calibre and who is capable of doing a job which ten leaders cannot accomplish.”’
“In the Hyderabad jail, Godse organised RSS shakhas and held regular exercises, inculcating the gospel of the Sangh even among those satyagrahis who belonged originally to the Hindu Mahasabha. VG Deshpande, the general secretary of the Mahasabha, who led the second batch of volunteers into Hyderabad and was arrested and kept in the same jail, recounted in an interview that Godse administered him the RSS pledge in prison. This was published in The Gandhi Murder Trial, by the former RSS pracharak Tapan Ghosh.”
“A document that cements the case that Godse indeed remained an RSS member was seized from the RSS headquarters in Nagpur in the aftermath of the assassination, and can now be found in the records section of Delhi’s Nehru Memorial Library. The document pertained to a meeting of the organisation’s Bombay provincial unit in 1940 — two years after Godse is believed to have joined the Mahasabha,” the article says.
“Page eight of the document has the name ‘N.V. Godse, tailor’ inside a list of ‘RSSS organisers of Poona’ who had attended the meeting. (The organisation was then often referred to as RSSS.) As per the report, the organisers’ meeting was held on 11 May 1940, and the attendees included ‘Tatyarao Savarkar’ — another name of V.D. Savarkar — Kashinath Pant Limaya, the Provincial Organiser of Bombay Province, Dr Hedgewar Sar Sanghchalak Nagpur, Madhav Rao Golwalkar of Nagpur, Bapur Saheb Sohoni, Berar Provincial RSSS Organiser, Appaji Joshi, Wardha District Organiser of the RSSS and others from Nasik, Poona, Satara, Ratnagiri, Bombay, East Khandesh. Godse is named third from the top,” the article says.
In a speech on December 8, 1947 while addressing about 2500 volunteers of the Sangh collected in their camp on Rohtak Road, Golwalkar remarked:
“Mahatma Gandhi could not mislead them any longer. We have the means whereby such men can be immediately silenced, but it is our tradition not to be inimical to Hindus. If we are compelled, we will have to resort to that course too.”
[Source: Reports by Kartar Singh, Inspector, C. I. D., dated December 7 and 9, 1947]
RSS members were told to tune in to the radio to hear ‘good news’ at night before Gandhi was killed. Historian and lawyer A.G Noorani, quoting from the records of Pyarelal Nayyar, personal secretary to Gandhi at the time, wrote:
“A letter which Sardar Patel received after the assassination from a young man, who according to his own statement had been gulled into joining the RSS organization but was later disillusioned, described how members of the RSS at some places had been instructed beforehand to tune in their radio sets on the fateful Friday for the ‘good news’.”
[Source: The RSS and the BJP: A Division of Labour, written by Abdul Ghafoor Majeed Noorani, (page 56)]
He went to wrote that after death of Gandhiji sweets were distributed by RSS members. He wrote:
“After the news, sweets were distributed in RSS circles at several places including Delhi.”
[Source: The RSS and the BJP: A Division of Labour, written by Abdul Ghafoor Majeed Noorani, (page 56)]
Sardar Vallabhai Patel, the first Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, said in early January 1948 that the RSS activists were “patriots who love their country”. He asked the Congressmen to ‘win over’ the RSS by love, instead of trying to ‘crush’ them. In a speech in Lucknow on 6 January 1948, Patel said:
“In the Congress, those who are in power feel that by the virtue of authority they will be able to crush the RSS. You cannot crush an organisation by using the danda. The danda is meant for thieves and dacoits. They are patriots who love their country. Only their trend of thought is diverted. They are to be won over by Congressmen, by love.”
[Source:- Hindustan Standarad (dated 8 January, 1948)]
But, things changed sharply after Gandhi’s assassination. Patel completely changed his views on the RSS, after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on 30 January, 1948. On 3 February 1948, four days after the assassination, Golwalkar was arrested. A day later, the RSS was banned. The government communique dated 4th February 1948, justifying the ban stated that it was imposed because “undesirable and even dangerous activities have been carried on by members of the Sangh.”
“In their resolution of February 2, 1948, the Government of India declared their determination to root out the forces of hate and violence that are at work in our country and imperil the freedom of the Nation and darken her fair name. In pursuance of this policy the Government of India have decided to declare unlawful the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in the Chief Commissioner’s. Similar action is also being taken in the Governor’s Provinces …... Undesirable and even dangerous activities have been carried on by members of the Sangh. It has been found that in several parts of the country individual members of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh have indulged in acts of violence involving arson, robbery, dacoity, and murder and have collected illicit arms and ammunitions. They have been found circulating leaflets exhorting people to resort to terrorist methods, to collect fire arms, to create disaffection against the Government and suborn the Police and the Military.”
[The government communique dated 4th February 1948, (cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
On May 14, 1948, President Dr. Rajendra Prasad wrote a letter to Sardar Patel. He warned Patel that RSS was indulging in violence. The relevant portion of the letter is given below:
“There is a persistent rumour that June 15 is fixed as a date for something big happening and panic is growing. It is feared that RSS might do something on that date. I am told that RSS people have a plan of creating trouble. They have got a number of men dressed as Muslims and looking like Muslims who are to create trouble with the Hindus by attacking them and thus inciting the Hindus. Similarly there will be some Hindus among them who will attack the Muslims and thus incite the Muslims. The result of this kind of trouble amongst the Hindus and Muslims will be to create a conflagration.”
[Source:- Nehru Patel: Agreement Within Difference — Select Documents & Correspondences 1933–1950, by Neerja Singh, published by Natioanl Book Trust, (page-43)]
Government of India not directly accused for killing of Gandhi, but Government of India accused RSS for created violent and hateful environment.
On July 18, 1948, Patel wrote letter to Hindu Mahasabha’s leader Syama Prasad Mookerjee, rejecting his defence of the RSS:
“As regards the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha, the case relating to Gandhiji’s murder is sub-judice and I should not like to say anything about the participation of the two organisations, but our reports do confirm that, as a result of the activities of these two bodies, particularly the former, an atmosphere was created in the country in which such a ghastly tragedy became possible. There is no doubt in my mind that the extreme section of the Hindu Mahasabha was involved in this conspiracy. The activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of Government and the State. Our reports show that those activities, despite the ban, have not died down. Indeed, as time has marched on, the RSS circles are becoming more defiant and are indulging in their subversive activities in an increasing measure.”
[Source:- SELECT CORRESPONDENCE OF SARDAR PATEL 1945–50, VOLUME 2, Navjivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1977, (page-276–277) ]
In a letter written to Golwalkar, dated 11 September, 1948, Sardar Patel stated expressing his concerns about RSS activities and criticised RSS for distribute sweets after Gandhi’s murder:
“In the areas where there was the need for help and organisation, the young men of the R.S.S. protected women and children and strove match for their sake. No person of understanding could have a word of objection regarding that. But tile objectionable part arose when they, burning with revenge, began attacking Mussalmans. Organising the Hindus and helping them is one thing but going in for revenge for its sufferings on innocent and helpless men, women and children is quite another thing. Apart front this, their opposition to the Congress, that too of such virulence, disregarding all considerations of personality, decency or decorum, created a kind of unrest among the people. All their speeches were full of communal poison. It was not necessary to spread poison in order to enthuse the Hindus and organise for their protection. As a final result of that poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life of Gandhiji. Even an iota of the sympathy of the Government or of the people no more remained for the R.S.S. In fact opposition grew. Opposition turned more severe, when the RSS men expressed joy and distributed sweets after Gandhiji’s death. Under these conditions it became inevitable for the Government to take action against the RSS. Since then, over six months have elapsed. We had hoped that after this lapse of time, with full and proper consideration the RSS persons would come to the right path. But from the reports that come to me, it is evident that attempts to put fresh life into their same old activities are afoot.”
[Sardar Patel letter to M.S. Golwalkar dated 11 September, 1948, (cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
Although, Patel wanted to merge RSS with Congress party. In the same letter Patel said,
“I am thoroughly convinced that the R. S. S. men can carry on their patriotic endeavour only by joining the Congress and not by keeping separate or by opposing.”
[Sardar Patel letter to M.S. Golwalkar dated 11 September, 1948, (cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
But RSS refused to join. Golwalkar said,
“Congress in the political field and the RSS in the cultural domain could compliment and converge.”
In a letter to M.S. Golwalkar, dated 10th November, 1948, Sardar Patel accused RSS as “anti-national”:
“These real objectives appear to be completely opposed to the decisions of the Indian Parliament and the provisions of the proposed Constitution of India. The activities, according to our information, are anti-national and often subversive and violent.”
[Sardar Patel letter to M.S. Golwalkar dated 10th November, 1948, (cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
In November 14, 1948, a press notice issued by Home Ministry of Government of India accused RSS as anti-national and subversive:
“The information received by the Government of India shows that the activities carried on in various forms and ways by the people associated with the R.S.S. tend to be anti-national and often subversive and violent and that persistent attempts are being inside by the R.S.S. to revive an atmosphere in the country which was productive of such disastrous consequences in the past. For these reasons, the Provincial Governments have declared themselves opposed to the withdrawal of the ban and the Government of India have concurred in view of the Provincial Governments.”
[Press notice issued by Home Ministry of Government of India dated November 14, 1948, (Cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
Nathuram Godse and his accomplice Narayan Dattatreya Apte were hanged to death at Ambala Jail on November 15, 1949 after they were convicted for killing the Mahatma. Other five convicts, along with Nathuram’s brother Gopal Vinayak Godse were awarded life sentence. Hindu Mahasabha leader Veer Savarkar was acquitted for lack of evidence.
The ban on the RSS was eventually lifted on July 11, 1949, for condition that RSS will respect the Indian constitution and the national flag, abjuring violence and secrecy and should work under a written and published constitution. The draft of the constitution was sent to the Government of India in April, 1949. RSS Chief, Mr. Mahadev Sadashiv Golwalkar, has given an undertaking that the Sangh will function as a cultural and democratic organisation and will respect the constitution and the flag of the Indian Union, it will also abjure secrecy and violence, according to The Hindu.
Government communique (regarding the removal of the ban on RSS) dated 11th July, 1949, stated that:
“In consultation with the Provincial Governments, the Central Government have had under consideration the question of removal of the ban on the R.S.S. The factors governing the problem clearly emerged during the discussion which the leader of the organisation had with Sardar Patel in October last year. In brief, they were that the R.S.S. should function under a written and published Constitution, restricting its activities to the cultural sphere, abjuring violence and secrecy, professing loyalty to the Constitution of India and the National Flag, and providing for a democratic organisation. The public is already familiar with the history of the breakdown of these talks and the course which events took thereafter………
The R.S.S. leader has undertaken to make tile loyalty to the Union Constitution and respect for the National Flag more explicit in the Constitution of the R.S.S. and to provide clearly that persons believing or resorting to violent and secret methods will have no place in the Sangh. The R.S.S. leader has also clarified that the Constitution will be worked on a democratic basis. In particular, the office of the Sarasanghachalak would in effect, be elective in that the successor would be nominated with the consent of the then Karyakari Mandal. It would be open to any member of the Sangh to leave it at any time without breaking the pledge and the admission of minors will be subject to the option of the guardian to withdraw his ward under a written request sent to the Sangh authorities.
In the light of the modifications made and clarifications given by the R.S.S. leader, the Government of India have come to the conclusion that the R.S.S. organisation should be given an opportunity to function as a democratic, cultural organisation owing loyalty to the Indian Constitution and recognising the National Flag eschewing secrecy and abjuring violence. Indeed the Government feel that, under a Constitution embodying these principles and worked in the right spirit, no reasonable objection can be taken to such functioning.”[The government communique dated 11th July, 1949, (cited in ‘Justice on Trial’, RSS, Bangalore, 1962)]
Although, now RSS pays tribute to Gandhiji, but history shows that for RSS leaders Gandhi was not “father of Nation”. On 6 July, 1944, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose first addressed Mahatma Gandhi as “Father of Nation” from Singapore on radio.
Supreme RSS workers denied to call Mahatma Gandhi as Father of Nation. The Times of India editorial (October 17, 1989) noted that senior BJP leader and a former active RSS worker Mr. Lal Krishna Advani denied that Mahatma Gandhi was the Father of the Nation. RSS worker and BJP’s icon Deen Dayal Upadhyaya said in 1961: “With all respect for Gandhiji, let us cease to call him Father of the Nation”.
Current RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said that Gandhiji was impresed by RSS. But RSS want to gives us a halsf-truth story for there own propaganda. RSS to not mention the uncomfortable facts. There are some observations which give an understanding of what Gandhiji thought of RSS. In Harijan (Gandhiji was the founder of weekly english newspaper Harijan) on August 9, 1942, Gandhi wrote:
“I had heard of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and its activities; and also know that it was a communal organisation.”
[Harijan, (dated August 9, 1942)]
In August and September of 1947, away from the celebration of Independence, Gandhi chose to be in Kolkata with some of his followers to calm the rioters down. In September 1947, the Mahatma Gandhi had gone on fast in Calcutta, seeking to stop the violence between Hindus and Muslims. Gandhiji began his fast for allaying the communal frenzy and restoration of sanity in Calcutta On September 1, 1947, and broke it on September 4, 1947. His attempts at peace-making were mocked in an article in the RSS’s magazine, Organiser. In an article titled “Nero Fiddled When Rome Burnt” the Organiser remarked: “History is repeating itself before our very eyes. From Calcutta Mahatma Gandhi is praising Islam and crying Allah-o-Akbar and enjoining Hindus to do the same, while in the Punjab and elsewhere most heinous and shameless barbarities and brutalities are being perpetrated in the name of Islam and under the cry of Allah-o-Akbar.”
RSS praised fascist Hitler and was inspired from Mussolini
At a time, when the entire world branded Hitler and his Nazi Party as the dictator and worst enemy of humankind, M.S. Golwalkar praised Germany. Golwalkar idolised the Holocaust by Nazi and declared that it could be an effective way to deal with the minorities of India saying,
“Come we next to the next ingredient of the Nation idea — Race, with which Culture and language are inseparably connected, where Religion is not the all absorbing force that it should be. German race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races — the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”
[We or our nationhood Defined, written by MS Golwalker, published by Bharat Publication, Nagpur in 1939, (page-35)]
Golwalkar, following the foot-steps of Hitler, arrived at the following solution for the minority “problem” in India, declaring Muslims and Christians as belonging to foreign races:
“From this stand point, sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations, the foreign races in Hindusthan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment not even citizen’s rights. There is, at least should be, no other course for them to adopt. We are an old nation: let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races who have chosen to live in our country.”
[We or our nationhood Defined, written by MS Golwalker, published by Bharat Publication, Nagpur in 1939, (page-47–78)]
In 2006, 67 years after its first publication, the RSS officially disowned M.S. Golwalkar’s book We, or Our Nationhood Defined on the ground that it was “neither representing the views of the grown Guruji nor of the RSS”, despite the fact that it was written by its former head and second RSS chief Guruji Golwalker himself. Former RSS spokesperson M G Vaidya while approving the removal the book from the Sangh’s pantheon of texts, says the book that is central to “us is Golwalkar’s Bunch of Thoughts since it consists of his views after he became sarsanghchalak on June 21, 1940”.
On March 19, 1931, at 3 p.m., in Palazzo Venezia, the headquarters of the fascist government, RSS co-founder and Hedgewar’s mentor BS Moonje met the Italian dictator Mussolini in Rome. He visited Italy as art of his trip to attend the First Round Table Conference in England in 1931.
Between February and March 1931, on his return from the round table conference, Moonje made a tour of Europe, which included a long stop-over in Italy. There he visited some important military schools and educational institutions. The highlight of the visit was the meeting with Mussolini. He was in Rome during March 15 to 24, 1931. On March 19, 1931, in Rome, he visited, among others, the Military College, the Central Military School of Physical Education, the Fascist Academy of Physical Education, and, most important, the Balilla and Avanguardisti organisations that were the mainstay of the fascist system of indoctrination of youths. After his visit to Italy he wrote:
“The Balilla institutions and the conception of the whole organisation have appealed to me most, though there is still not discipline and organisation of high order. The whole idea is conceived by Mussolini for the military regeneration of Italy. Italians, by nature, appear ease-loving and non-martial like the Indians generally. They have cultivated, like Indians, the work of peace and neglected the cultivation of the art of war. Mussolini saw the essential weakness of his country and conceived the idea of the Balilla organisation…. Nothing better could have been conceived for the military organisation of Italy…. The idea of fascism vividly brings out the conception of unity amongst people…. India and particularly Hindu India need some such institution for the military regeneration of the Hindus: so that the artificial distinction so much emphasised by the British of martial and non-martial classes amongst the Hindus may disappear. Our institution of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh of Nagpur under Dr Hedgewar is of this kind, though quite independently conceived. I will spend the rest of my life in developing and extending this Institution of Dr Hedgewar all throughout the Maharashtra and other provinces.”
[Source: “Hindutva’s foreign tie-up in the 1930s: Archival evidence” written by Marzia Casolari in Economic & Political Weekly, January 22, 2000]
He continues describing drills and uniforms:
“I was charmed to see boys and girls well dressed in their naval and military uniforms undergoing simple exercises of physical training and forms of drill.”
[Source: “Hindutva’s foreign tie-up in the 1930s: Archival evidence” written by Marzia Casolari in Economic & Political Weekly, January 22, 2000]
On January 31, 1934, Hedgewar presided over a conferenceabout fascism and Mussolini, organisedby Kavde Shastri. Moonje made the con-cluding speech. A few months later, on March 31, 1934Moonje, Hedgewar and Laloo Gokhalehad a meeting, the subject of which wasagain the military organisation of theHindus, along Italian and German lines. In this meeting Moonje said:
“I have thought out a scheme based on Hindu Dharm Shastra which provides for standardisation of Hinduism throughout India…But the point is that this ideal cannot be brought to effect unless we have our own swaraj with a Hindu as a dictator like Shivaji of old or Mussolini or Hitler of the present day in Italy and Germany…But this does not mean that we have to sit with folded hands untill (sic) some such dictator arises in India. We should formulate a scientific scheme and carry on propaganda for it.”
[Source: “Hindutva’s foreign tie-up in the 1930s: Archival evidence” written by Marzia Casolari in Economic & Political Weekly, January 22, 2000]
RSS’s opposition of Hindu code bill
RSS once opposed Hindu Code Bill which was passed to reformed the Hindu personal law in India. A draft Hindu Code Bill was introduced in the Constituent Assembly which incorporated several measures to empower Hindu women, the right to divorce, equal rights for women to inherit property and the abolition of polygamy. RSS condemned the bill and launched a vicious campaign against Nehru and Ambedkar. On 11 December, 1949, the RSS organized a public meeting at the Ram Lila grounds in Delhi. One speaker called it ‘an atom bomb on Hindu society’. The next day RSS workers burnt effigies of the prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Dr Ambedkar.
An article in the Organiser, dated November 2, 1949, characterised the Hindu Code Bill “as a direct invasion on the faith of the Hindus”, remarking that “its provisions empowering women to divorce is revolting to the Hindu ideology”.
An editorial published a month later (“The Hindu Code Bill”, the Organiser, December 7, 1949) led with this paragraph:
“We oppose the Hindu Code Bill. We oppose it because it is a derogatory measure based on alien and immoral principles. It is not a Hindu Code Bill. It is anything but Hindu. We condemn it because it is a cruel and ignorant libel on Hindu laws, Hindu culture and Hindu dharma”.
[Organiser, (dated December 7, 1949)]
The RSS then launched a full-fledged attack on the Hindu Code Bill. It organised hundreds of processions, dharnas and hartals to stop the bill, these addressed by sundry sadhus and sants. One speaker said,
“B.N. Rau the framer of this bill and Shri Ambedkar its pilot in the Assembly today, both declared themselves to be ‘not Hindus’ and married according to non-Hindu rites. That such men should have been entrusted with the job to ‘reform’ Hindu Dharma was a tragedy and a monstrosity”.
[Source:- Organiser, (dated December 14, 1949)]
RSS’s communal view
Since its foundation, RSS always has a dream of Hindu Rashtra. When the India get independent from British colonial rule, Organiser, on the eve of Independence (August 14, 1947) editorially declared: “Let us no longer allow ourselves to be influenced by false notions of nationhood… in Hindusthan only the Hindus form the nation and the national structure must be built on that safe and sound foundation… the nation itself must be built up of Hindus, on Hindu traditions, culture, ideas and aspirations.”
In a long chapter tittled “XVI INTERNAL THREATS” of his book Bunch of Thoughts he had explicitly identified Muslims and Christians as enemies of the nation, that allegedly posed a great menace to national security.
Golwalkar, who regarded all non-Hindus as foreign and thus impure elements, had told them how to stay in there dream ‘Hindu Nation’ by “losing all consciousness of their separate existence, forgetting their foreign origin” through his book We, or our Nationhood Defined. He wrote:
“It is worth bearing well in mind how these old Nations solve their minorities’ problem. They do not undertake to recognize any separate element in their polity. Emigrants have to get themselves naturally assimilated in the principal mass of the population, the National Race, by adopting its culture and language and sharing in its aspirations, by losing all consciousness of their separate existence, forgetting their foreign origin. If they do not do so, they live merely as outsiders, bound by all the codes and conventions of the Nation, at the sufferance of the Nation and deserving no special protection, far less any privilege or rights. There are only two courses open to the foreign elements, either to merge themselves in the national race and adopt its culture, or to live at its mercy so long as the national race may allow them to do so and to quit the country at the sweet will of the national race. That is the only sound view on the minorities’ problem. That is the only logical and correct solution. That alone keeps the national life healthy and undisturbed. That alone keeps the nation safe from the danger of a cancer developing into its body politic of the creation of a state within a state.”
[We or our nationhood Defined, written by MS Golwalker, published by Bharat Publication, Nagpur in 1939, (page-47)]
On 17 Septermber, 2018, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat discarded chunks of “Bunch of Thought” — a compilation of speeches of its former head, Guru MS Golwalkar.
“Bunch of Thoughts is a collection of speeches which were made in particular context and cannot remain eternally valid. Sangh is not a dogmatic organization. Time changes and, accordingly, our thoughts transform. In fact, it was only Dr Hedgewar who said that we were free to try to adapt to times as they change”, said Bhagwat.
Bhagwat said that Sangh acknowledges as valid only those parts of “ Bunch of Thoughts” which remain relevant to the current circumstance and have been put together in an in-house publication on Golwalkar “Guruji: Vision and Mission”.
Bhagwat was responding to a question on Golwalkar’s ‘Bunch of Thoughts where Muslims and Christians are called the enemy. He said that quote wasn’t there in the new edition.
“As far as Bunch of Thoughts goes, every statement carries a context of time and circumstance…his enduring thoughts are in a popular edition in which we have removed all remarks that have a temporary context and retained those that will endure for ages. You won’t find the (Muslim-is-an-enemy) remark there”. he said.
Baba Saheb Ambedkar in his book Pakistan, or, Partition of India warned us about the Hindu Nation. Throughout his life, Ambedkar opposed the communal politics of both the Muslim League and Hindutva forces. His book, Pakistan or The Partition of India (1940), stands testimony to his opposition to the nefarious designs of communal elements. Ambedkar wrote:
“If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country. No matter what the Hindus say, Hindusism is a menace to liberty, equality and fraternity. On that account, it is incompatible with democracy Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost.”
[Pakistan or The Partition of India, written by Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, published in 1940, (page 358)]
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in his speech “The Mantle Will Now Fall On Young Shoulders” in Jaipur on 17th December, 1947, said:
“I have received complaints against the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. If so many complaints are received, the Sangh should realise that there must be something wrong. I appreciate the enthusiasm of young men, but that should be diverted into constructive channels.
There is a great deal to be done to make India militarily strong. Very substantial industrial effort must back the army. All that cannot be achieved by the lathis of the Sangh which are being used for breaking the heads of a handful of Muslims. There is no point in your hoping to get Pakistan back into the Indian Union. It will come of its own accord and we should, therefore, let the Pakistan remain as they are. I am certain that whether they grow strong or weak, ultimately it would be better for us to get them back when they themselves feel like doing so.
We old men have completed our mission. India has secured her freedom. The mantle will now fall on young shoulders and they should be ready to undertake it. They cannot do this if they waste their efforts over trifles. If they follow the path, which the Sangh has been following, they would be doing a disservice to the country.”[Source: Selected Speeches and Writings of Vallabhbhai Patel, written by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel]
M.S. Golwalkar’s views on caste system
What was the view of RSS founder MS Golwalker about caste system? His view reflected on his book ‘Buch of Thoughts’. According to him, casteless society can not be raised,
“We know as a matter of history that our northwestern and northeastern areas, where the influence of Buddhism had disrupted the caste system, fell an easy prey to the onslaughts of Muslims. Gandhar, now called Kandahar, became completely Muslimised. Conversion took a heavy toll in East Bengal also. But the areas of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, which were considered to be very orthodox and rigid in caste restrictions, remained predominantly Hindu even after remaining as the citadels of Muslim power and fanaticism for a number of centuries. We know that even as late as Shivaji’s time, the socalled ‘low-caste’ also played an epic role in the resurrection of swaraj. Thus history bears eloquent witness to both sides of the picture. On the one hand, the socalled ‘caste-ridden’ Hindu Society has remained undying and unconquerable and still has the vitality to produce a Ramakrishana, a Vivekanada, a Tilak and a Gandhi after facing for over two thousand years the depredations of Greeks, Shakas, Hunas, Muslims and even Europeans, by one shock of which, on the other hand, the so-called casteless societies crumbled to dust never to rise again.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
For Golwalkar, caste system is not weakness. In his book ‘Bunch of Thoughts’, he wrote:
“If the caste system had really been the root cause of our weakness, then our people should have succumbed to foreign invasion far more easily than those people who had no castes.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
According to M.S. Golwalker Varna-vyavastha not discriminate us. In ‘Bunch of Thoughts’ he wrote:
“The other main feature that distinguished our society was the ‘Varna-vyavastha’. But today it is being dubbed ‘casteism’ and scoffed at. Our people have come to feel that the mere mention of Varna-vyavastha is something derogatory. They often mistake the social order implied in it for social discrimination.
The felling of inequality, of high and low, which has crept into the Varna system, is comparatively of recent origin. The perversion was given a further fillip by the scheming Britisher in line with his ‘divide and rule’ policy. But in its original form, the distinctions in that social order did not imply any discrimination such as big and small, high and low, among its constituents. On the other hand, the Gita tells us that the individual who does his assigned duties in life in a spirit of selfless service only worships God through such performance.”[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966, page-98]
Golwalkar went as far as saying that the caste system is essential for “social cohesion” and it prevented Indians from “succumbing to foreign invasion”. In his book Bunch of Thoughts he wrote:
“Castes, there were in those ancient times too, continuing for thousands of years of our glorious national life. There is nowhere any instance of its having hampered the progress or disrupted the unity of society. It, in fact, served as a great bond of social cohesion.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
Further, he wrote:
“If the caste system had really been the root cause of our weakness, then our people should have succumbed to foreign invasion far more easily than those people who had no castes. But what does history say? After the death of Mohammed Pygamber, his followers poured out form Arabstan in waves after waves with their swords dripping with blood and overran vast portions of the globe, trampling under their feet all the various empires that lay in their path — Iran, Egypt, Rome, Europe and all others right up to China. The people of those mighty empires were swept away before the fury of the Muslim onslaught-many never to appear again on the world stage.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
During an address at the School of Social Science of Gujarat University on December 17, 1960, Golwalkar said, “a married woman of any class must be fathered by a Namboodri Brahman and then she could be get children by her husband.”
“Today experiments in cross-breeding are made only on animals. But the courage to make such experiments on human beings is not shown even by the so-called modern scientist of today. If some human cross-breeding is seen today it is the result not of scientific experiments but of carnal lust. Now let us see the experiments our ancestors made in this sphere. In an effort to better the human species through cross-breeding the Namboodri Brahamanas of the North were settled in Kerala and a rule was laid down that the eldest son of a Namboodri family could marry only the daughter of Vaishya, Kashtriya or Shudra communities of Kerala. Another still more courageous rule was that the first off-spring of a married woman of any class must be fathered by a Namboodri Brahman and then she could be get children by her husband. Today this experiment will be called adultery but it was not so, as it was limited to the first child.”
[Source:- Organiser, (dated January 2, 1961)]
The above statement of Golwalkar suggests that he believed that the North Indian Hindu society specially Namboodri Brahamans had a superior race or breed and also an inferior race which needed to be improved through cross-breeding.
Thoughts on gender equality and modernism of women
M.S. Golwalker was against gender equality. Arguing against affirmative action for women, he wrote in ‘Bunch of Thoughts’:
“There is now a clamour for ‘equality for women’ and their ‘emancipation from man’s domination’! Reservation of seats in various positions of power is being claimed on the basis of their separate sex, thus adding one more ‘ism’ — ‘sexism!’ — to the array of casteism, communalism, linguism, etc.”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
In Bunch of Thoughts, he asks Hindu women to avoid being ‘modern’. According to Golwalkar, modern women think that ‘modernism lies in exposing their body more and more to the public gaze’! He wrote:
“Whatever be our personal or family deities, we have to conduct its worship with great devotion and keep aglow our holy family traditions. How tragic it is to see these things disappearing nowadays! In the South, at least, we often see the Tulasi Brindavan in front of our houses. As dusk sets in, our mothers light a lamp in front of it. Often we, listen to the sweet sounds of bells in the pooja-griha and witness the devotional worship going on there. But in the North, this has become a rare sight to see. “Modernism” has verily banished God from our homes. “Modernism” is taking the toll of many more of our cherished values of life. A couplet in Jnaneshwari says, “A pious man spreads a cover of modesty over his good actions just as a virtuous lady covers her body.” It describes the nature of virtuous womanhood. But “modern” women think that “modernism” lies in exposing their body more and more to the public gaze. What a fall!”
[Bunch of Thoughts, written by M.S. Golwalkar, published by Sahitya Sindhu Prakashana, Bangalore, in 1966]
Mohan Bhagwa’s view on marriage
Current RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat in a function on January 6, 2013, in Indore, gave an controversial statement terming marriage as social contract between husband and wife and a woman is bound by contract to husband to look after him.
“A husband and wife are involved in a contract under which the husband has said that you should take care of my house and I will take care of all your needs. I will keep you safe. So, the husband follows the contract terms. Till the time, the wife follows the contract, the husband stays with her, if the wife violates the contract, he can disown her.”
