by Ratan Sharda
There is another direct source of information of this subject. That is a personal interaction of Dattopant Thengdi at that time. Here is his account: “Guruji had to go to Chennai after his programme in the port city of Mangalore in September 1942. Swayamsevaks and prachaaraks were deeply upset and they were in a state of dilemma due to impact of the movement that was shaking up the whole nation. Questions like, why is Sangh inactive in these times? What is the use of its strength? etc. hurt their souls hard. I was prachaarak in Calicut in Kerala those days. Brethren there insisted that we should meet Shri Guruji and inform him of these ground realities. With this objective, I met Shri Guruji in Mangalore. Summary of his detailed response is as follows:
1.Sangh has its own code of conduct in such matters. According to these, when the Sangh founder, Doctorji took part in satyagrah, he kept Sangh out of the agitation and urged swayamsevaks to keep their Sangh work going without any disruption.
2.However, if we were to reach near the goal of independence by leaving aside this tradition, then we are not bound by it. Because our work and traditions have the same goal and independence is definitely our immediate goal.
3.It would have been desirable if the Congress had taken other parties and Sangh into confidence before initiating the agitation. But, it did not do so. Still, there is no reason to be upset. Independence gained through this movement will be for all, not just for Congress. So, it would not be right to show any ego in this matter.
4.It is a worrying prospect that Congress leaders have not made any preparations before launch of this agitation. People had to face and fight British rulers directly. There was no planned arrangement for this. Thought it is true that in a period of revolution, things won’t go as per plans; it is equally true that there should be some element of planning and leaders should be alert to take advantage of any situation that might arise. It is also true that policies and directions depend only on fervour of the people and leaders cannot do much about it. But, we must remember that it is fatal not to have any plans during a movement or revolution.
5.Inspite of all this, if a country was to gain independence with Sangh jumping into the agitation, we would have not been averse to it. But, when I took a comprehensive view, it was my firm belief that we would not be able to reach anywhere near the goal.
6.Many people have overestimated Sangh’s present strength. It is a situation where people who are in a place where Sangh is strong, believe that Sangh is equally strong in other places too. But, this is not the reality. To be victorious in a struggle, many other things need to be favourable apart from your strength. Of these, first is support from common people and their co-operation. Second is dissatisfaction among police, armed forces etc. Attitude of these sections of government is crucial before one takes the path of struggle. Even if these factors were favourable, still chances of success of our struggle would be bleak, this is my assessment. I believe that our strength will be limited from Belgaum to Gondia. Will we be able to achieve our objective with these limitations?
The truth is that our influence is limited to the central region of our country. Even if the struggle was to be successful in this limited area, it would be possible for our enemy to post its army from all the directions. People will get frustrated with such a development. But, if the zone of struggle were to be near the borders, it would be easy to put up a fight and would be more useful from strategy point of view.
In such circumstances, I believe that it would be fruitless for Sangh as an organisation to get involved in this movement. It doesn’t mean that we wish to save our skin. But the truth is that people will end up disappointed with this agitation.”5
In short, Sangh leadership comprehended the inherent weakness of this battle, practical view of the Sangh’s organisational status across India, society’s mental state and permitted swayamsevaks as patriotic citizens to take part in this national struggle and extend whole hearted co-operation to it. As a result many swayamsevaks jumped into this battle and took part to the best of their abilities along with common people, as a part of the society. In Vidarbha, swayamsevaks of Chimur launched agitation under the leadership of Ramakant Deshpande. Breaking the bounds of non-violence, it turned violent. A few British were also killed in an encounter. This encounter became famous in the history of this movement as ‘Chimur Ashti episode’. Deshpande was sentenced to death, but later commuted to imprisonment with some legal luminary’s intervention
Similar was the heroic story of Hemu Kalani of Sakkhar town in Sindh. He was busy removing fishplates from the railway tracks with his brave colleagues. Their objective was to frustrate the plans to move forces to suppress the struggle in various areas. Unfortunately, Hemu was arrested. His friends escaped. Hemu was awarded death sentence by the Army Court in 1943. Sindhi brethren in Mumbai celebrate the memory of martyr Hemu Kalani in Mumbai to this day.6 Unfortunately, his name is not celebrated as a freedom fighter in official records, probably because he was an RSS volunteer. He was disowned in Pakistan as he was a Hindu - from a community that was thrown out of Pakistan. And, he is no remembered in India because he belongs to an uprooted community that lost its entire land to Pakistan formation.
Apart from such activities, many swayamsevaks also helped the underground leaders of the movement. House of Sanghchaalak of North East Lala Hansraj was the secret place of stay for Aruna Asaf Ali. She herself speaks about it in an interview published in Hindi daily ‘Hindustan’ in August 1967. She says, “I was underground in 1942 agitation, Delhi Sanghchaalak Lala Hansraj provided me refuge in his house for 10-15 days and arranged for my complete safety. He saw to it that nobody got information about my stay at his house. Since, underground workers should not stay at for long at the same place, I moved out of his house dancing ‘Bhangra’ in an embroidered ghagra and chunari in a baraat (marriage procession). This dress was given to me by Lalaji’s wife. When I went to return it in due course, she refused to take it back, saying, keep it with you as our gift with our best wishes.”7
“When the famous Vedic scholar Pandit Shripad Damodar Satavalekar was Sanghchaalak of Aundh, he had given asylum for many days to the revolutionary underground leader Nana Patil who had experimented with the novel idea ‘Patri Sarkaar’. Nana Patil’s colleague Kisanveer had stayed at the house of Satara Sanghchaalak in Wai while working underground there. Famous Socialist leader Achyutrao Patwardhan had stayed at many Sangh swayamsevaks’ homes when he used to work underground and change places according to circumstances. Not only these people, but even the life-long bitter opponent of Sangh, follower of Gandhiji like Sane Guruji used to stay at Pune Sanghchaalak Bhausaheb Deshmukh’s house secretly.”8
The Congress committee member of Solapur, Ganesh Bapuji Shinkar had taken part in the satyagrah to press for the removal of ban on Sangh in 1948. He had resigned from Congress on grounds of democratic ethics before joining the satyagrah. He issued a statement clarifying his stand and it was published on 12th December, 1948. He says, “I had participated in Bharat Chhodo (Quit India) movement in 1942. Capitalist and agrarian community was scared of the government at that time, therefore we were not offered safe haven in their homes. We had to stay in Sangh workers’ homes to work underground. People from Sangh used to help us happily with our underground work. They also took care of all our needs. Not only this, if someone from amongst us fell sick, Sangh swayamsevak doctors used to treat us. Sangh swayamsevaks who were advocates, used to fight our cases fearlessly. Their patriotism and value based living was undisputable.”9
When anti-national Communists were acting like fifth columnists and getting agitating patriots arrested, the Sangh was doing its bit for the struggle. Eventually, the agitation cooled down after 75 days by the end of October. Scattered and weak leadership and disorganised agitation on one side and highly well entrenched ruling set up of British on the other, led to death of a well-intentioned movement in its infancy.
That British rulers were alert was well known. CID kept sending reports about the RSS Chief re
gularly. The report on 30th December 1943 says, “Rashtriya Swayamsevak is moving ahead rapidly towards building a highly significant all India organisation. Spokesmen of Sangh keep saying that the basic goal of Sangh is to achieve Hindu unity. In a programme in November 1943 in Lahore, M. S. Golwalkar declared that Sangh’s objective is to remove the feeling of untouchability and weaving together all sections of Hindu society in a single unifying thread. It is clear that Sangh is bent upon expanding its area of influence and this year it has been able to bring on board, the famous religious saint Sant Tukadoji Maharaj from Central Province for spreading its message.”
“Membership of Sangh is swelling continuously. In Central Province, membership has increased from thirty two thousand to thirty three thousand three hundred forty four. It has reached twenty thousand four hundred seventy six from eighteen thousand twenty nine in Mumbai and fourteen thousand from ten thousand in Punjab. A new dimension to their growth is their efforts to gain entry in the villages. M. S. Golwalkar laid a lot of stress on this aspect in the winter camp of Vardha - that Sangh should expand into villages.”
“Sangh office bearers from its head office are touring the shakhas in remote areas continuously, so that they can heighten interest of swayamsevaks in Sangh work, give them secret directions and strengthen the local organisation. We can see the recent well spread out tour of the present Chief of Sangh, M. S. Golwalkar as an example of such efforts. In last month of April he was in Ahmedabad, in May he was in Amravati and Pune. In June he was in Nasik and Banaras. He toured Chaandaa in August, Pune in September, Madras and Central Province in October, and Rawalpindi in November.”10
Thus, it is clear that Sangh was involved in Independence movement and particularly 1942 movement, a movement show cased as the cathartic period in independence struggle.
(Excerpts from Chapter 18 of Shri Guruji Golwalkar, Biography by Ranga Hari)
**********
1. Shri Guruji Punjab Mein - 29-30
2. Shri Guruji Samagra - 9
3. Sangh Beej se Vriksha - 60-61
4. Raashtraay Namah - 83-84
5. Pioneer of New Era - 54-55
6. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh – Sindh kaa Pravaas - 71
7. Rashtraay Namah - 85-86
8. Ibid - 86
9. Pahli Agnipareekshaa - 140-141
10. Sangh Beej se Vriksha - 63-66
Annexure III
Background of Ban on RSS in 1948
In his book ‘Golwalkar and R.S.S.’ author Jagat S. Bright writes, “R.S.S. had worked like Red Cross Society during period of independence and partition. Sangh’s contribution in saving innocent people from the explosion of Islamist blind faith before and after the independence was outstanding. Service that R.S.S. did for the society in those hours of grave danger was highly appreciated by the Deputy Prime Minister, Sardar Patel. Tireless efforts put in by Sangh to resettle the refugees properly could not be overlooked by anyone even if one wished to. This very fact generated jealousy and dread in political circles. Responding to it pointedly, Guruji had noted in the Vijayaadashami festival of that year on 24th October, 1947, “Reacting to the acknowledgement that Sangh has received for easing the pain of affected Hindu people of Punjab, an English daily has commented that it is ‘Unfortunate, but true.’ Various political parties also wish to confront Sangh in a similar manner. They are worried that in case Sangh enters the arena of electoral politics, what will be their fate. I wish to assure these parties trying to save their respective reputations with means fair or foul, that their fear is meaningless.”1
He sought people’s attention about their national duty, “First step upon attaining nation’s independence is to take pride in our forefathers, and not in philosophies of other nations like Russia, America, England etc. When every individual owns up the goal of national welfare, forgetting about self, only then the nation can arise. Independence will be founded only on selfless sacrifice.”2
As the day of independence drew near, he explained the meaning of this word to RSS activists. To his mind, independence did not simply mean transfer of power. Getting rid of slavery and being independent – he looked at both conditions differently. For him, Bharat’s ‘independence’ - not being dependent, and Bharat’s freedom – being free - were not the same. Former word symbolises lack of dependence while the latter symbolises the power of ‘self’. Addressing senior citizens in capital, Delhi, he said, “Liberating our intellect from the values (sanskaars) of other countries and evolving a system (tantra) of growth with our own feelings and will is ‘swa-tantra’ (system by self). But, a system that is born through ignoring our history, being slaves of intellect of others, inspired by other societies will not be ‘swa-tantra’ but ‘para-tantra’ (system of others, or slavery of others).’ Philosophy of nationalism is not a philosophy about political rights. We do not wish to borrow talent from outsiders to build our lives. We have our own talent. We will create our own way of life from it. A system that will symbolise our sense of pride, that would be built around comprehensive ‘Bharatiyata’, that through which flows perennial Bharatiya tradition, that is the system of national way of life.”3
Mahatma Gandhi was staying in a Harijan basti during this period. Our Harijan brethren had built a small but beautiful and clean temple for their forefather, effulgent soul, Sage Valmiki in one corner of the colony. On the other side there was a large settlement of Muslims. Therefore, the government had acknowledged internally that Mahatma’s life was not safe in that Harijan settlement. Gandhiji, on the other hand, was against posting of military or police for his security there. In this state of dilemma, top Congress leader Krishnan Nair met state prachaarak Vasantrao Oke and requested him to arrange for security of revered Bapuji. Vasantrao implemented a proper plan for this.4
Not even thirty days had passed since proclamation of independence when Muslim League hatched a conspiracy to blow up the top leaders of Bharat with a massive explosion. Alert swayamsevaks were doing their own investigation working day and night had done and passed on precise information to Sardar Patel. Based on this information, armed forces raided many places in Paharganj and surrounding areas and captured large cache of arms and explosives, and took action against the rebels. Dr. Bhagwandas, recipient of Bharat Ratna, lifted the lid off this conspiracy on page 19 in his book ‘Crises’, published from Allahabad. He notes, “I have confirmed information that some Sangh swayamsevaks of Delhi had gone to the extent of making a show of accepting Islam to gain trust of Muslim League members in order to get details of the conspiracy hatched by them. It is only because of this, that they could find and provide advance information to Sardar Patel about the conspiracy of 10th September to kill all the ministers and civil officers and thousands of Hindu citizens, unfurl Pakistan’s flag on Red fort and grab control of Indian government. If these young men, fired by ardour and patriotic feelings, had not provided information about this conspiracy in time, there would have no Indian government today.”5
Just as Guruji was getting ready to leave for Kolkata on September 9, he received a message from Mahatma Gandhi, “Please meet me before leaving.” “As you wish,” saying so, he went with Lala Hansraj ji to meet Mahatma ji in Birla Bhavan at 10.30 a.m. Situation was grave. Delhi was burning that week. Mahatma ji had reached Delhi only on September 9 after moving around in Kolkata. The situation in the capital had already turned for the worse before his arrival. Displaced commoner refugees moving into Ajmeri and Kashmiri gate of Delhi were livid with searing anger. Mahtama Gandhi and Guruji’s were meeting in the background of such an atmosphere. Probably, influenced by rumour mongers, truth seeker Bapuji asked him, “Even your hands are dirtied by blood, aren’t they?” Guruji’s answer was, “Not at all. They are not dirty, they are pure and clean.” Grasping the meaning of what Mahtama ji was indicating, Guruji clarified, “I cannot claim to be aware about the conduct of each and every swayamsevak of Sangh. However, Sangh’s objective is to serve Hindu society and Hindutva piously and Sangh wishes to achieve t
his objective without inflicting injustice on anybody else. Though, Sangh doesn’t wish to attack anybody, still it doesn’t believe in excessive non-violence. It teaches self defence. It has never taught about policy of revenge even by mistake. During the discussions, Gandhiji asked Guruji to give a written statement that would appeal people to be peaceful. Responding the suggestion, Guruji said, “Who will listen to me? Your words are respected everywhere, you are senior. So, it is ideal that you release the statement. If you wish so, you can mention my acceptance of your views.” Finally, this is how the statement was released. In the evening prayer meeting, Gandhiji declared that ‘Golwalkar had assured his full co-operation in establishing peace.’ Newspapers also published this statement on the next day.6
The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Guruji were gaining popularity very rapidly in that atmosphere. Unfortunately, the opposition to Sangh was rising slowly in Congress circles. Guruji had expressed his views on the reason behind this opposition in his Vijayaadashami lecture in Nagpur already.
Guruji had met Sardar Patel and Gandhiji in September. He had not been able to meet Prime Minister due to Prime Minister’s busy schedule. When Guruji visited Delhi again during his tour in October, this meeting was possible. Talks lasted for nearly one hour. Guruji could gauge that Nehruji’s attitude about Sangh was different and not favourable. Clarifying the objectives of Sangh, Guruji began by saying, “Lack of a fundamentally strong and capable organised power has resulted in our nation’s inability to influence the world today.” Diverting his target towards Sangh in an accusing tone, Nehruji said, “But such a power should not be evil.” Guruji grasped the import of these words. Responding that his understanding of Sangh power as evil was against the ground realities, he went on to present his analysis of disturbances in Northern states and added, “This sense of bitterness prevailing across the country is not because of Sangh, it is because of tragic partition.” After discussing about other related subjects, he took leave and requested him that atmosphere by the government should be created in such a way that feeling of co-operation would be encouraged.”7