RSS and the Freedom Movement

RSS and the Freedom Movement

Dr. Monmohan Vadya

(From the book “We and the World Around”, Pages: 26-33)

Some time back, a journalist came to visit me. During our conversation, he asked, “What role did the RSS play in the Independence struggle?” In response, I enquired what he meant by the “Independence struggle”. He was caught by the hop. He could not speak anything. Perhaps he too was a victim of the propaganda against RSS. After a while, he replied in a low and hesitant voice, “The one which Mahatma Gandhi did”. I asked, “So, nothing happened before Gandhiji? Did the trinity of Lal-Bal-Pal have no contribution? Did Subhash Chandra Bose and revolutionary movements like the Anushilan Samiti have no role in the Independence struggle?” He kept mum. Then I asked, “how many satyagrahas happened under Gandhiji’s leadership?” He was unsure of that. I answered, three satyagrahas took place in 1921, 1930 and 1942. He did not know it. I informed him that the founder of RSS, Dr. Hedgewar (who passed away in 1940), had participated in the satyagraha before (in 1921) and after (in 1930) he founded the RSS, for which he suffered imprisonment also.

I had to narrate this incident because for several decades now systematic attempts have been made to tell selective parts of history to the people of the country. The people of Bharat are being led to believe that independence was gained purely because of the Congress and the Satyagraha of 1942, and nobody else made any contribution to the cause. This is a propaganda. Of course, the satyagraha provided a simple and easy-to-adopt means for the common people to participate in the Independence struggle through Charakha and Khadi. However, to crown a particular movement or a party as the sole benefactor of the entire struggle is to play with history and an outright insult to the efforts of all others who attained martyrdom to free our motherland.

Now, if we want to discuss RSS in the freedom struggle, then we have to start with Dr. Hedgewar. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar was born in 1889. The fervour of the Independence struggle reached Nagpur in 1904-1905. Yet, in 1897, the 8-year-old Keshav threw away the sweets in a dustbin that were distributed in the school on the occasion of the diamond jubilee of Queen Victoria’s coronation. This was the reflection of his anger and annoyance for being a slave to the British. In 1907, Keshav invited the wrath of his school management for making both sections of his matric class sing ‘Vande Mataram’ in front of a government inspector in his school and was expelled from the school as a punishment for the same. This was against the tyrannical order called the Risley Circular which banned the public chanting of Vande Mataram. For his medical education, he chose Calcutta over Mumbai, even though the latter had the facilities, Calcutta was the hub of revolutionary activities. There he became a core group member of the top revolutionary organisation – Anushilan Samiti.

He returned to Nagpur in 1916 after becoming a qualified doctor. At that time, almost all the top leaders of the Independence struggle were married, leading a family life and had their own means to earn for the family. Even as family men, these people were actively involved in the Independence movement. Coming from a family that could barely make ends meet, it was expected that Dr. Hedgewar thought along the same lines. The family would’ve also expected him to lead a normal social life and support them financially. Nevertheless, he decided not to follow the medical profession and not to marry. Doctor ji could have very well emulated his contemporaries. However, his desire for independence was so intense that he gave no thought to his personal life. He felt such urgency for independence that he often said till the time our country is enslaved, I don’t have the time to think about myself. Therefore, he channelized all his energy towards the freedom movement. He dedicated all his might, time and ability to the nation and joined every type of movement for independence.

Dr. Hedgewar had unflinching faith in Lokmanya Tilak. All the responsibilities of logistics for the Congress session held in Nagpur in 1920, were given to Dr. Hardikar and Dr. Hedgewar, who inducted 1200 volunteers for the same. Dr. Hedgewar was the joint secretary of the Nagpur city unit of Congress at that time. He had proposed to the resolution committee of the Congress to come up with a resolution with a clear objective – “to have Poorna Swaraj (total independence) in Bharat, turn it into a republic, and free the world from the clutches of capitalism.” After nine years, in the Lahore session of 1929, the Congress accepted his suggestion of Poorna Swaraj от complete self-rule. Pleased with this, Doctorji instructed all the shakhas of the RSS to congratulate Congress on January 26, 1930. After Lokmanya Tilak’s demise on August 1, 1920, all Tilak supporters in Nagpur were in mourning. Thereon, the Congress’s independence struggle continued under Gandhiji’s leadership. In 1921, Mahatma Gandhiji supported the Khilafat during the Non-Cooperation Movement with a view to expand the social base against imperialism and accommodate the Muslims that were hurt by the abolition of the Khilafat in Turkistan by the British. Many Congress leaders and nationalist Muslims were against this decision. Initially, the Non-Cooperation Movement was not very effective in and around Nagpur. However, Dr. Hedgewar, Dr. Cholkar, Samimulla Khan etc., changed this scenario. Even after disagreement with the decision of the Congress about Khilafat, he did not make the objection public. He took part in the movement with the sole purpose of opposing imperialism. He was indifferent towards the political atmosphere around him or the views of vocal Tilak supporters. He had to suffer one year in prison, charged with sedition.

Even after knowing the importance and priority of attaining independence, one question haunted Dr. Hedgewar – how could a handful of Englishmen, who came from 7000 miles away for trade, rule this large country? There must be some flaw within us. He realised that our society had forgotten its real self and got divided along the lines of castes, provinces, languages and faith, that it was unorganised and marred by bad practices. The British benefited from this and managed to rule over us. This history might repeat itself in the future as well if the society remained the same even after gaining independence. He would suggest this when he said “when Nagnath goes, Sapnath may come” (when one perpetrator leaves, another may show up). Hence, it is imperative to make our society proud of itself, become aware and organised, as well as liberate it from all bad practices and infuse national character in it. He realised that this work could be done only by staying away from politics and publicity and by working silently and consistently. He founded Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh in 1925 with this vision. He had cordial and intimate relations with all political and social movements, activities and leaders even after founding RSS.

The Civil Disobedience Movement was started by Gandhiji on April 6. 1930, in Dandi (Gujarat). The decision to support this movement was taken in November 1929 in the three-day meeting of RSS sanghachalaks. As per the RSS policy, Dr. Hedgewar decided to participate in this satyagraha in his individual capacity. Some other swayamsevaks also joined him. To ensure Sangh’s work continued uninterrupted he handed over the charge of sarsanghachalak to his trusted colleague Dr. L.V. Paranjpe. Shri Babasaheb Apte and Bapurao Bhedi were entrusted to travel, ensuring unhindered Sangh work. Initially, 3,000-4,000 people accompanied him from Nagpur on July 21 during this satyagraha. By the time they reached the venue of the satyagraha in Pusad (Vidarbha) in 1930, 10,000 people had gathered. Dr. Hedgewar was sent to jail for nine months in this satyagraha. He resumed the responsibility of sarsanghachalak after his release and refocused on RSS work.

Hindu Mahasabha and Arya Samaj had given a call of satyagraha under the banner of Bhagyanagar Nihshastra Pratikar Mandal in 1938 to oppose Nizam’s atrocities against the Hindus in Bhagyanagar (Hyderabad). Doctorji gave consent to those swayamsevaks who sought permission to participate in that satyagraha. But he clarified that they could do so in an individual capacity. When the organisers frequently mentioned in their press releases that RSS had participated in the Bhagyanagar satyagraha, Doctorji wrote a letter and asked them not to mention RSS.

Doctorji had deliberately devised this strategy with a vision and clear thinking. He understood the difference between the transitory, momentary and conflict-ridden political movements and the consistent, uninterrupted and constructive nature of RSS work. He wanted movements to be successful without hampering the perpetual work of RSS. Even during the jungle satyagraha, he participated with many other swayamsevaks after entrusting the responsibility of sarsanghachalak to Dr. Paranjape.

On August 8, 1942, Mahatma Gandhi gave the historic call of “British! Go Back” in the Congress session at the Gowalia Tank ground in Mumbai. From the next day itself, the movement caught momentum all over the country and arrests of leaders started in many places.

Agitations at Bawali (Amaravati), Ashti (Wardha) and Chimur (Chandrapur) in Vidarbha were remarkable. The news from Chimur was broadcast even on Berlin Radio. The agitations there were led by Uddhavrao Korekar of Congress and RSS functionaries Dada Naik, Baburao Begade and Annaji Siras. The only death from a British bullet in that agitation was that of RSS swayamsevak Balaji Raipurkar. Congress, Shri Gurudev Seva Mandal of Shri Tukdoji Maharaj and RSS swayamsevaks collectively organised the agitation and satyagraha in Chimur. Cases were filed against 125 satyagrahis in this agitation which included many swayamsevaks.

Besides this, senior members and pracharaks of RSS at many places all over Bharat vehemently jumped into this movement, such as Shri Jaidevji Pathak (pracharak in Rajasthan), who was later active in Vidya Bharati, Dr. Annasaheb Deshpande at Arvi (Vidarbha), Ramakant Keshav (Balasaheb) Deshpande, who later founded the Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram in Jashpur (Chhattisgarh), Vasantrao Oak in Delhi who later became the Prant pracharak of Delhi, Krishna Vallabh Prasad Narayan Singh (Babuaji) in Patna and who later shouldered the responsibility of Bihar Sanghachalak, Chandrakant Bhardwaj (Delhi), whose foot was hit with a bullet that could never be removed. Dattatray Gangadhar (Bhayyaji) Kasture in Ujjain (Madhya Pradesh), Madhavrao Devale in East Uttar Pradesh were a few among many others.

Along with the tyranny of the British on one hand satyagraha was going on, while on the other many agitators went underground and worked for steering the movement. To give shelter to the underground workers during those times was not free from risk. Many Sangh swayamsevaks took that risk and sheltered many of them. Innumerable names can be cited like these. It was nearly impossible to collate and document these details in those days.

Dr. Hedgewar’s life is a glowing example of total dedication to the independence of the nation. The path that he chose for the same was to organise a national-thinking, flawless, virtuous Hindu society. Until 1947, the main objective enshrined in the oath of RSS was “to make the Hindu nation independent.”

Hedgewar’s Vision – RSS’ Vision

In Bharat, the society has displayed the tendency to take extreme positions. Even in Doctorji’s lifetime, the society was divided into the binaries of Congress-revolutionaries, Tilak supporters-Gandhi supporters, violence-nonviolence, Hindu Mahasabha-Congress etc. The trend was of scoring political brownie points over each other. Sometimes, owing to their differences, they would fiercely oppose each other, instead of fighting against British imperialism. A resolution to condemn the revolutionaries was to come up in the provincial session of the Madhya Prant Congress presided by Loknayak Ane in 1921. Dr. Hedgewar intervened and convinced him that even though he did not believe in the path of the revolutionaries, their patriotism should not be doubted. The proposed resolution was withdrawn after his intervention. Thus, Doctorji’s life was not determined by the narrow outlook of political views, philosophy and policies of violence-nonviolence, Congress-revolutionaries, etc. The fundamental aim of attaining independence was far more important than a personality or a particular path.

A class considering Bharat merely a political entity always tries to take credit for everything. It pursues unilateral propaganda to take the sole credit for Bharat’s independence without recognising the role and contributions of others. The freedom that Bharat gained was a cumulative result of all-round efforts from armed revolutionaries to non-violent satyagrahis, Indian National Army and the rebels in the British Army, etc. The role of prevalent precarious situations in England after World War II and their inability and reluctance to rule the colonies cannot be completely ruled out either. The British eventually gave independence to other colonies too, where there was no freedom struggle like Bharat.

The satyagraha in 1942 was the last satyagraha led by Mahatma Gandhiji and Bharat attained independence in 1947. However, to say that independence was gained only because of the Quit India Movement in 1942 and the people who were arrested for participating in that movement is ridiculous.

I’m reminded of a story here that goes like this- A farmer was very hungry. The wife was serving rotis and he was eating. However, his hunger was not satisfied. He was satisfied only after eating the eleventh roti. The upset husband scolded his wife for not serving the eleventh roti earlier. His logic was the futile effort of eating so many rotis could have been avoided, and he would have experienced satisfaction earlier. The idea itself is laughable.

Similarly, giving credit for Bharat’s independence solely to the 1942 Quit India Movement is laughable. If we go through some historical accounts, we get a clearer picture of this movement-

While granting independence to Bharat, British PM Clement Atlee said “Gandhi’s nonviolence movement had next to zero effect on the British. The former acting Governor of West Bengal P. M. Chakraborty (C) of Kolkata High court) opined, “When I was the acting governor, Lord Attlee, who had given us independence by withdrawing British rule from India, spent two days in the governor’s palace in Calcutta during his tour of India. At that time, I had a prolonged discussion with him regarding the real factors that had led the British to quit India. My direct question to Attlee was that since Gandhi’s Quit India Movement had tapered off quite some time ago and in 1947 no such new compelling situation had arisen that would necessitate a hasty British departure, why did they have to leave? In his reply Attlee cited several reasons, the main among them being the erosion of loyalty to the British crown among the Indian Army and Navy personnel as a result of the military activities of Netaji.” He is further quoted as thus – “Towards the end of our discussion, I asked Attlee what was the extent of Gandhi’s influence upon the British decision to leave India? On hearing this question, Attlee’s lips became twisted in a sarcastic smile as he slowly chewed out the word, ‘m-i-n-i-m-a-l.” [Ranjan Borra, “Subhash Chandra Bose, The Indian National Army, The War of India’s liberation”. Journal of Historical Review, Vol 20,(2001), No 1 ref. 46]

Ramesh Chandra Mujumdar, the famous historian also has echoed similar thoughts. He opines, “…. It was the cumulative effect of all three (revolutionary activities, non-violent satyagraha of congress and military efforts in the name of Azad Hind Sena) that brought freedom to India. In particular, the revelations made by the INA trial, and the reaction it produced in India, made it quite plain to the British, already exhausted by the war, that they could no longer depend upon the loyalty of the sepoys for maintaining their authority in India. This had probably the greatest influence upon their final decision to quit India.” (Mujumdar, Ramesh Chandra, – Three phases of India’s Struggle for Freedom, BVN Bombay India 1967. PP 58-59.)

After reading this, to think that the Quit India movement in 1942 had no contribution in Bharat’s independence would be inappropriate. However, it isn’t right to believe that suffering in jail is the only characteristic of being a patriot. Besides the people who went to join the freedom struggle, those who looked after the families of those who were in prison, who worked underground, who gave shelter to the underground activists, who aroused patriotism in the students through education that inculcated national character, and those who propagated and practised “swadeshi” and economic blockade of British goods, who provided reliable alternative through the swadeshi industries and all those who created national awareness through the folk art, journalism, stories, novels and dramas made contributions in their own way. We need to take cognisance of all those silent contributors as well.

Bharat is not a mere political entity. It is a cultural unit based on the enduring, comprehensive and integral vision built on spirituality-based eternal thinking and vision of thousands of years. This vision and the culture stemming out of it provides a unique identity to this varied society spreading from Hind Mahasagar (Indian Ocean) to the Himalayas. Therefore, whenever there is a political change, just before that or simultaneously, a process of cultural awakening by spiritual leaders takes place in Bharat. It is visible that if the situation is more critical, the manifestation of this spiritual force becomes stronger. Precisely owing to this, the Bhakti Movement spread all over Bharat during the 12th to 16th centuries during the Mughal rule. An uninterrupted chain of significant spiritual figures like sadhus, saints and sanyasis were seen in every region, from Swami Ramanand in the north to Ramanujacharya in the far south. The tradition of spiritual leaders like Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Shri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Swami Vivekananda is apparent during British rule. No political change has been successful or permanent in the history of Bharat without the spiritual and cultural awakening. Therefore, the impact of cultural awakening should not be undermined and evaluated by political parameters. It must be underlined that the spiritual and cultural awakening that goes on silently and calmly has much more significance for a nation like Bharat.

Endnote:

This article first appeared in Organiser on December 11, 2016.