Lokmanya Tilak

by A K Bhagwat

  At Calcutta, Tilak was suffering from a painful wound in the leg. He found great difficulty in walking but even then he carried on his innumerable activities without break or respite. The day on which he delivered a lecture at the Beadon Square was particularly strenuous and, while dressing the wound, the next day, it was clear that his agonies had increased. Vagbhat Narayan Deshpande, a young liberal of Satara, asked,19 “How can you bear all this strain in spite of this great agony?” Tilak looked at him, laughed and said in English, “My young man, it is the mind and not the body which works!”

  1

  2 Kesari, 19th June 1917”

  3 Kesari, 14th November 1916

  4

  5 The Uberator by Sisir Kumar Mitra, p. 155

  6

  7

  8 The History of the Congress by Pattabhi Sitaramayya, p. 214

  9

  10 Dr. Radhakrishnan’s translation

  11 Kesari, 18th July 1916.

  12 The History of the Congess by Pattabhi Sitaramayya, p. 225.

  13

  14 In his speech on the Mesopotamian muddle Montagu strongly criticised Chamberlain, the Secretary of State, and characterised the Indian Government as “far too wooden, far too iron, far too inelastic and far too antediluvian to subserve its purpose in moderntimes.”

  15 Reproduced from Mahatma, Vol. I, by Tendulkar, pp. 265-266

  16

  17

  18

  19

  THE ACCREDITED LEADERS

  15

  “Mr. Tilak’s principles of work have been accepted; the ideas which he had so much trouble to enforce have become the commonplaces and truisms of our political thoughts. The only question that remains is the rapidity of a now inevitable evolution. That is the hope for which Mr. Tilak still stands, a leader of all India.”

  ShriAurobindo(1918).

  On the 26th January 1918, on his return from Calcutta, Tilak attended the Poona District Conference at Lonavla. M. R. Jayakar, Barrister-at-Law, of Bombay, was the president. When Tilak arrived much earlier than expected, in the cold early morning, he announced that he had cancelled the procession which local enthusiasts had planned because he thought it would disturb Jayakar’s sleep, “And I know you hate all such shows.” Jayakar remonstrated that it was not a case of following his personal wishes.... But Tilak insisted, “I have not ceased to respect the tender delicacies of Hindu domestic life and like to avoid offending my host’s prejudices. It is an old Hindu sentiment that you have, when you are enjoying the hospitality of another, so to conduct yourself that you will not jar on your host’s nerves or offend his sentiments.”

  Berar Tour

  From February 5th, began a long tour of Berar and the Central Provinces, in the course of which Tilak addressed meetings at Khamgaon, Nandura, Akola, Murtizapur, Chanda, Wardha, Nagpur and Bhandara. B. G. Khaparde, who accompanied Tilak during this tour, has given a vivid description of this tour. It was not merely at the bigger towns that Tilak halted but also at small, wayside villages. As soon as his car halted, villagers flocked around, touching whatever part of the motor-car, as if it were a part of the Lokmanya’s body, and bowed reverently to it. The Lokmanya’s foot was still troubling him and yet he would go on totally unconcerned. The topics that he touched were the usual topics but they were elucidated so cogently that even an ignorant peasant could easily understand them. The object of the tour was explained as the collection of funds for the Home Rule deputation to be sent to England.

  During the course of his lectures he complimented the railway servants on their solidarity. They were, he said, among the most ardent supporters of his movement. Referring to the strike of the telegraph clerks, he said that unless there was complete unity it was no use going on a strike. If the railway servants are once united great national service could be expected of them.

  Referring to the war and its effects on India, Tilak said that it was inconceivable to think that India would keep on being lethargic while the great wave of democracy was sweeping over the world. In less than fifteen years there would be a time when the English would be compelled to arm the Indians and depend on their help. And then an armed and well-trained India will have to be satisfied by granting Swaraj to it. But when such a time comes all must stand united. Nothing will be achieved if we are not united. Politics is not an easy thing. One has to be diplomatic and try to score over one’s opponent, while keeping on smiling. Politics is like a non-ending game, in which every stage is reached, apparently by compromise, but this compromise has to be thrust on the opposite side. Constant agitation, therefore, had to be kept up so that the bureaucracy did not get overbearing.

  During the car-journey also, Khaparde records, Tilak conversed on various topics. Thus he said once that the critical faculty could and did exist side by side with intuitive inspiration. As an instance, he cited the example of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, who he said showed a combination of critical reason with an equal amount of faith and emotion. His Brahmo Samaj was based more on reason and the Bengalis being more emotional, Brahmoism did not take firm root there.

  Addresses and purses were presented everywhere and on the whole the tour was a huge success. On 23rd February, Tilak wanted to attend the A.I.C.C. meeting at Delhi but the Commissioner of Delhi, by an order, prevented him from entering Delhi. On 19th March, Tilak went to Sholapur and was given a purse of nine thousand rupees. A similar amount was given by the people of Poona also. Addresses were presented to Tilak at Bombay and Poona for he was soon to embark for London heading a deputation of the Home Rule League. The European war, however, dragged on and a stage was reached where it was felt that greater help from India was desirable.

  War Conferences

  A war conference was called by the Viceroy at Delhi on the 27th April. Care was taken to see that Tilak, Besant or the Ali brothers were not invited. Gandhi, who was invited and requested by the Viceroy to use his moral pressure on behalf of the British Government, wrote a letter to the Viceroy. In it, he expressed his regret for the exclusion from the conference of leaders like Lokmanya Tilak and the Ali brothers and also stated the people’s minimum demand. He wired to the Lokmanya to go to Delhi, which the latter could not do unless the orders against him were expressly cancelled. The government did not do this and Tilak could not go to the conference.

  Tilak was, however, invited for the Bombay Provincial War Conference convened by Lord Willingdon, Governor of Bombay. There was a difference of opinion between Tilak and Gandhi on the subject of helping the government in the war effort. Gandhi thought that with a true Home Ruler it must be an article of faith that the Empire must be saved. He was therefore for an absolutely unconditional and whole-hearted co-operation with the government. Tilak argued that help should be given only if the government was prepared to concede the demand of Home Rule. In the course of their talk Gandhi is reported to have said to Tilak, “Your ways are devilish!” Tilak patted Gandhi on the back and said, “My good friend, you have not burnt your fingers as yet while playing with this government. During the last forty years my fingers have been burnt more than once. When you will get your fingers burnt, I am sure you will go ahead of me.” Gandhi smiled and decided not to speak on the main resolution, supporting the government. Later, Tilak sent Gandhi a cheque for Rs. 50,000 as a guarantee of his good faith. The amount was to be forfeited if certain conditions were not fulfilled by Tilak. The conditions were that Tilak undertook to recruit 5,000 persons from Maharashtra, if Gandhi could secure a promise from the government beforehand that Indians would get commissioned ranks in the army. Gandhi’s position was that the help should not be in the nature of a bargain and he, therefore, returned the cheque to Tilak.1

  Writing in the Kesari on the Delhi Conference, Tilak termed it as “showy, prejudicial and disappointing.” It was expected that the conference would achieve something concrete, so that Indians might be able to serve their motherland
with greater zeal; but instead it had fizzled out in an idle show.

  This, says Tilak, was disappointing particularly when it is remembered that the waves of war in the west might any day come to the east and there is danger to India from Germany. It was the boast of the English that England’s might alone would be able to stem the tide of Germany but that boast is now no more. It has been realised that India’s help was needed and the war Conference was convened for this by the King-Emperor and the Secretary of State. The prejudiced bureaucracy has, however, thwarted the object of the conference and the conference achieved nothing more substantial than simply show. Tilak lastly sounded a note of warning that a cast -iron bureaucracy would not go on for ever. It was unfortunate that when Europeans and Indians are fighting shoulder to shoulder on the French battle-field, the bureaucracy in India should not be prepared to leave its despotic power. “The tide of the world has changed. The question of India’s freedom has become a question of world-freedom. For the sake of world-freedom India must be made free and given Swaraj.” India, said Tilak, would not come forward to help Britain unless a substantial share of self-government was given to her people.

  An article on the 18th June 1918 condemns Lord Willingdon for what happened in the Bombay War Conference, held a week before. In this conference, all the Home Rule leaders, like Tilak, Kelkar, Jamnadas Mehta, Horniman were invited. They tried to speak on Home Rule but were interrupted by the governor and therefore they staged a walk-out. M. A. Jinnah, who stayed behind, vehemently criticised the high-handed attitude of the Governor. Tilak pointed out that in every nation the people’s demands were answered only when the rulers were in difficulty. English history also shows that ‘Grievances before supply’ has been their motto. It was therefore the duty of the government to concede to the people their birthrights and make them truly loyal to them. In another article Tilak reiterated the demand for Home Rule by pointing out that true loyalty would arise only if the people come forward with a free will to help the government. “The true people’s army was raised in the days of old, voluntarily out of the people’s love of their land and its rulers. It is this feeling that should be aroused now. The present rulers are inviting the people to join but they are not prepared to grant their demand of freedom nor are they prepared to give them higher commissioned posts. Unless the bureaucracy was prepared to come down from its impossible position, no Home-Ruler would come forward to help them.”

  Tilak and the Revolutionaries

  Tilak’s stand therefore was that of wresting power by pressure politics. It is necessary to differentiate his position here from that of leaders like Gandhi, who were prepared to help, without any strings attached to their co-operation, and the revolutionary groups who not only would have nothing to do with the war-effort but would look upon war as a moment favourable for revolutionary activities. The Indian revolutionary groups abroad became particularly active at the outbreak of the war. Some of them tried to establish contacts with the Indian leaders. V. C. Chidambaran Pillai, a revolutionary of Madras, writes:2 “Next morning my Guru (Tilak) took me to his private chambers. He had a talk with me about the European war that was then going on and about a message that he received from some of the Indian patriots, who were then in Germany. The message was to the effect that certain occasions would arise during the course of the war and that Indians should do such and such things on those occasions. We discussed for two or three days about the advisability, possibility and the probable result of our carrying out the terms of the message. Here my Guru predicted that the occasions referred to in the message might not arise as there were several complications in Europe in connection with the war.”

  Among the revolutionary activities of the period, the most ambitious was the establishment of the “Indian National Party” in Berlin. In Bengal the revolutionaries decided to co-operate with the Germans to bring about a rising in Bengal. Narendra Bhattacharji went to Batavia to get into direct touch with the German agent there. The Ghadr party, under the powerful leadership of Hardayal, wanted to bring about a revolution in India from two ends — Bengal in the east and Punjab in the north-west. Pingley, a revolutionary from Maharashtra who had stayed in America for a number of years and who returned to India by the famous ship ‘Kanagata Maru,’ tried to infiltrate the Indian Army. A serious attempt to stir up a revolution in Punjab was made by the Pan-Islamist party, which was directed from Kabul by two Indian revolutionaries, Mahindra Pratap and Barkatulla. Tilak was always of opinion that a premature attempt at revolution would end in a disaster and he did not think that the situation would so develop as to create a suitable climate for revolution. His judgment was that England’s difficulties owing to war had only created opportunities for pressure politics and not for a revolution. If he had been convinced that the Empire was about to collapse, he would have striven to start a nationwide struggle and would have urged the Indian revolutionaries abroad to make their attempts for India’s liberation immediately. Under such circumstances if he had felt that there was a possibility of the two efforts at home and abroad — being synchronised, he would have given the call for a revolution; for did he not say to the impatient revolutionaries, “If there are 50 per cent chances of success, I would put my trust in God for the rest and start an armed revolution?” In his personal interview with Lord Willingdon at the time of the War Conference, it is reported that the Governor said to him, “Well, Mr. Tilak, from this I could clearly see that you mean to uproot the British Government by resorting to any unconstitutional and revolutionary means.” Tilak replied, “Yes, Sir, if I could I would. But it is impossible, impracticable and even suicidal for us to follow such Irish methods in the present state of the country, and therefore I must try my best in constitutionally but vehemently and desperately fighting with the government to reach the goal.” He was thus convinced that the time was not ripe for a revolution and as a practical statesman he so planned his strategy as to get the maximum advantage out of the situation that had arisen.

  An interesting incident has been recorded by Gangadharrao Deshpande, the veteran leader of Karnatak. He stated that certain Indian revolutionaries had brought some jewellery from Germany. Tilak did not think that any such aid would be very useful, but as he always wanted to explore new avenues, Gangadharrao was asked to utilise the money received from the exchange of jewellery “for establishing some kind of contacts with the army in Belgaum, with a view to having an opportunity to work in the army to find out what kind of response to a national call was likely to be received from that quarter.” Gangadharrao further stated, “However, we found that the army network was so tight that it was impossible to make any breach in it. No contact worth the name with any army men was possible.” This Gangadharrao reported to Tilak, and according to his (Tilak’s) instructions the jewellery was returned to those who had taken the risk to bring it to India. The suggestion made in some quarters that Tilak was pro-German in his attitude was a gross misrepresentation and the following observation of his fully clarifies his stand: “The bell of time is awakening us with the hope that there would be better days for India. We must try to heed this, or else the challenge of time would be wasted. Between the cruel Germans and the English, the latter are nearer to us by habit and inclination. We must help them if they ask for our aid, and if we help, they would be compelled to grant us more political rights in return.”

  Tilak on Gandhi

  The differences between Tilak and Gandhi came very clearly to the fore during the war. These two were nurtured in different circumstances and their experience of public life had moulded their minds differently. By nature and by inclination they evolved and subscribed to different philosophies. Gandhi’s technique of Satyagraha was a novel one and as yet it was looked upon more as a means than as an integrated philosophy of life. With its religious and ethical basis it was natural that Tilak would appreciate its potentialities but as a practical politician, working with approved and accepted methods of political agitati
on, he had his own doubts about the efficacy of this novel method in the practical field. A very clear and complete statement of his position in regard to Satyagraha was fortunately made available in March 1918, when Tilak wrote a Preface to a Life of Gandhi, written by the noted social worker Avantikabai Gokhale. She was an associate of Gandhi, during the Champaran campaign and had approached Tilak with a request for a Preface at the time of the Calcutta Congress; but Tilak was extremely busy then and it was after the Congress that he complied in an exhaustive exposition of Gandhi’s life and philosophy.

  As in his tributes to the departed worthies, with whom he had come into contact in his public career, Tilak tried to find out first the summum bonum of Gandhi’s genius. This, he said, was not the fact that Gandhi had been a barrister or that he was straightforward and simple. The educated classes have had numerous opportunities to demonstrate the powers of their intellect after the advent of British rule. There are few lives, however, that show outstanding qualities of character both inherent and acquired. In this world of action, karmabhumi, it is character that enables a person to master his circumstances and environment. Men who possess it are, however, rare. Gandhi’s life can hold up an ideal before the world because he possesses the qualities of character to a high degree. One might differ from his religious, social or other views but about this central part of his character there can be no two opinions.

  He goes on next to refer to the decadent state of penury to which India was reduced and stated that it was through no fault of the present generation. It was necessary, however, to analyse the causes of this decadence, for even though a person may not be individually responsible for his circumstances and environment, it is his sacred duty, both as an individual and as a member of society, to work for their betterment. This also is the main principle of all scriptures and all religions.