Facts without Comment

Many a good-natured Hindu simpleton is heard to ejaculate with a prudish air: ‘How can this be? I don’t think the Mahomedan proselytising campaign is so bad as your comments suggest. Facts would certainly belie them!’ If they would, none would be gladder than we. But friends, don’t you see that between us, the comment which is decidedly based on a mere ‘I think’, a mere silly hope that hopes against hope, is the only comment that you just passed on my comments? For, my comments are avowedly not based on a mere ‘I think’. But your remark that want only asserts ‘facts would certainly belie them’ is certainly belied by facts, for it is confessedly guilty of being based on no more solid a foundation than a hollow ‘would’. Is it not your business also, Oh good friend, to leave your cosy corner and gather facts for yourselves, if only to prove my comments false? What right have you to demand facts from me alone? Why don’t you bring out your facts which you say would certainly belie my comments? But, although, you have no right to dub my comments as certain to be belied by facts without citing a single fact to support your own, nevertheless, I have determined to treat you with an unalloyed dose of facts and facts alone for which you so dreadfully thirst but to get at which, you would not stretch out your lazy hand so much as an inch further. I hope your green opium dreams would not be disturbed even by this strong dose. We cite only those reports that come of the papers published during this current month alone. If all reports that the press had reported of Mahomedan campaign of conversion during the last four years are to be cited, a volume would not suffice. So, we call only a few of them and only out of those which happened within the last month alone. Mr. Vilas Rai Dal reports from Sambhar: ‘Ever since the Hasan Nizami scheme has begun its nefarious activity, several Hindus have been converted to Mohamedanism. Almost every Mohamedan down to the street urchins are ever on the lookout for a helpless or unprotected Hindu that they might hammer upon and entangle him in their net. Only very recently, they caught hold of two Brahmin women and made them Mohamedans. One Hindu preacher opposed them. But as the chief officer as well as lower ones are Moslems, they soon intimidated him into silence. The Moslem shopkeepers, those who visit Hindu ladies for selling glass bangles, Moslem servants in Hindu houses—all try to seduce or kidnap boys and girls and

generally force them to accept Mohamedanism. Only the other day, I visited one of these victims and as a sample of what happens in scores of cases at Sambhar, I reproduce our conversation. The name of the victim is Taka. He was a Brahmin. He burst into tears as soon as the subject of this apostasy was touched and said: I was a Kashmiri Brahmin. I was one day suddenly called by a certain survey officer who was a Moslem, notorious for partiality and fanaticism in Hindu circles. He offered me a pan but as I refused to eat it, his servants suddenly fell upon me and belaboured me so mercilessly that I fell senseless on the ground. When I recovered, I found myself a helpless prisoner in the Moslem hands who took me to a mosque, cut off my choti (shikha), paid off my debts to the Hindu shopkeepers, changed my name to Nizamuddin and kept me under a close Moslem surveillance. My wife and uncle came to see me but returned deadly shocked and weeping at my helpless state.’ This Brahmin wished to come back to the Hindu fold. He disclosed several cases of Hindu victims in Sambhar alone, whose names were noted down by me. The Christians also are making great progress in this State. If things go on like that, Sambhar would cease to contain a Hindu home.” The Hindu reports “The Mohamedans have organised a secret society in the district of Nababshah whose activities are assuming dangerous proportions. In this one district, and in one month, four or five Hindu lads have been kidnapped. “A Hindu woman has lodged a complaint that some Moslems of Karachi have decamped with her young son and that she could not ascertain his whereabouts. “In the town of Naushahara, the Hindu papers report the presence of a disciple of Hasan Nizami school who, guised as a Sufi, has been busy seducing young Hindu boys away, making them abjure the Hindu faith. One of his own pet disciples gave out his secret designs.” The Sindh Kesari reports that Moslems have kidnapped a young Hindu lad at Karachi aged 16. The Daily Hindu of Hyderabad observes: “The campaign of kidnapping, seducing and abducting Hindu boys and girls is being persistently carried on throughout Sindh. The Khilafatists are at the forefront. On the 17th of April, some Mohamedans had secured a Hindu lad —Har Nathoo, eight years old. They had kidnapped the boy at some other place. Evidently a Hindu leader came to know of this wretched affair and succeeded in recovering the boy, who was duly re-initiated into the Hindu

fold by restoring his sacred thread and the Shikha. Thereupon, the local Mohamedans made a Mohamedan woman to file a suit against the Hindus for having forcibly converted to Hinduism her lad, namely, Har Nathoo. But the police inquiry resulted in establishing the Hindu contention. But seeing the case had resulted against them, the Moslems stole the lad right from the police custody and were on the point of despatching him to Hyderabad. But fortunately, some Hindu gentlemen detected the poor lad thus being forcibly smuggled by the Moslems and once more, the police secured his possession. None of the Moslems is as yet arrested.” The same paper publishes that a Madrasi Hindu with his wife and daughter got stranded in Hyderabad on account of his money being robbed on the railway station. Moslem propagandists, who are ever on the lookout in Hyderabad for an opportunity to catch any helpless Hindu in their nets, got hold of that Madrasi and took him to Moslem quarters. But fortunately, a Hindu Sikh gentleman got news of the affair and took the duped Madrasi, his wife and daughter to the office of the Hindu Sabha, and thus saved them. A Hindu girl was abducted and held in illegal custody by some Moslems in Hyderabad. The Hindus on coming to know of this dreadful affair, informed the police and released the poor girl. Mr. Subhanilal reports that a Hindu woman named Amara Bai was on the point of being abducted by two Moslems, Muhmud and Jumma. They had arranged every thing for the forcible carrying away of that woman. Just then, some Hindu gentleman detected it and informed the police. But the police too seemed inclined to let the Moslems have the possession of the woman. As the Hindu yielded not and threatened further proceedings, they at last succeeded in saving the woman and sent her back to her husband, who is a resident in Delhi. The scandalous activities of Bengali Moslem gundas and proselytisers, working hand in hand, have become so persistent and so notorious that one cannot understand how the Hindus in East Bengal have grown so incredibly emasculated. Hundreds of cases have occurred in that part continuously for the last three years and more, monotonously repeating the same story of a Moslem abducting or outraging and then forcing the Hindu girl or wife to Mohamedanism. To choose only one case, let us cite the story of Gubrasani, the daughter of the mukhtyar of Gaivanda. Khijuruddin and other Moslem rowdies rushed in the house of her father and forcibly carried this poor girl

away. She was confined and tortured, dishonoured and outraged, but she refused to give her consent to live with them as a Moslem. She once got an opportunity, effected her escape and reaching a railway station, was on the point of leaving the place. But the Daroga there happened to be a Mohamedan, he intervened and handed back that helpless girl into the hands of those Mohamedan miscreants who had abducted her. At last, the whereabouts of the girl being known, the police arrested those Moslem criminals along with that Daroga and the case was tried before the Magistrate of Rangpoor. The miscreants were punished but an important side-issue brought to light in an authoritative way the evil that is corroding Hindu life in Eastern Bengal not only now—now that it is brought to light —but for decades and decades in the past. The accused in this case wanted to get their case transferred from Rangpoor to some other court on the ground that the popular feeling at Rangpoor was so excited against them as to affect the decision of their case. The Magistrate set aside and refused to grant their petition, observing with silent eloquence that cases of Hindu women being similarly abducted and ill-treated have become such a common occurrence in Eastern Bengal, that people have ceased to take any special notice of them and so they could never excite the popular feeling there. These words of a magistrate are so plain and yet so dreadful that the ‘Agrasar’ is made to observe that no stronger remarks could be passed in condemning the effeminacy that has overtaken the Hindus of East Bengal and the criminal negligence, with which West Bengal passively witnesses all this, without so much as raising a word of protest against this Moslem rowdyism that has such a fanatical method in its monstrous madness. A breath of Lord Lytton has shocked our sense of chivalry, but the rude and indecent clasp of the garlic-smelling Moslem gunda may be silently borne. From Badan, the sad tale of the oppression of Mohamedan Zamindars informs us that one Devi Bhavani, a Hindu Chambhar, was the latest victim of religious fanaticism. He was all of a sudden attacked by half a dozen Moslems, under the protection of Zamindars, and was forcibly fed with unclean food at the hand of Mohamedans; the whole society of the Chambhars is being intimidated and oppressed with a view to forcing them to embrace Islam. The Zamindars have ordered washermen, barbers and other castes not to render services to the Chambhars unless they leave the Hindu fold. The Mohamedan police too is passively witnessing this dreadful and criminal campaign of religious persecution. The villages of

Datagant, Bikhanli, Khiri and several other places in the district of Etava are groaning under similar religious persecution and Hindus in dozens and scores, have been systematically forced to leave the faith of their forefathers. Mr. Devi Dutt Dwivedi declares that some of these Hindu victims to Moslem barbarism have prayed to be readmitted into the Hindu fold through shuddhi. Before the District Magistrate of Sylhut, a Hindu widow stated that she got widowed at the age of ten. She was aged about fourteen years, at the time of her complaint. Once while she was bathing at a ghat, one rascal Mubarik suddenly fell on her, thrust a piece of cloth in her mouth and decamped with her. He kept her in confinement and committed a series of outrages. He took her then to a rich Mohamedan, threatening her all the while with a pointed dagger to acquiesce in all that he did and said. In the meanwhile, she saw her brother coming down with a constable, at the sight of which, she suddenly cried aloud ‘brother! oh my brother! Here, am I, thy sister Tarangin!’ The story and its pathos need not be gone into further enough to state that in this case, at least the rascal Mubarik got sentence of four years rigorous imprisonment. We can multiply similar incidents reported from Kashmir to Kamorin ad nauseum. But we refrain from doing so and will end this sad tale with two significant remarks. One is a caution printed prominently in the Arjun—the leading Hindi Daily of Delhi. It warns all Hindus that inasmuch as the filthy activity of Moslem gundas has been renewed in Delhi, Hindus should not allow their sisters and wives and mothers and daughters to go unattended, to bath, to the ghats of the Jamanaji nor would they remain outside after dusk. For, several reports have reached us that show that Moslem gundas take most indecent liberty with Hindu ladies and harass them most dreadfully in some quarters of the city. This is the state of the capital of all India! What are we to think of out-of-the-way villages and towns on the frontier or in the Punjab in Sindh and other provinces! This also must be borne in mind that each of these cases that has come to light conceals behind it dozen that are not known. Last of all, in the presence of such grave and persistent provocation, there is not a single case of a Hindu being guilty of carrying or trying to kidnap or abduct a Moslem boy or girl under the influence of fanatical barbarism. Fortunately, it is not in their grain.

Here then, are a few facts and no comment. In fact, comment on such facts does only clothe their naked heinousness. Let them see, who have eyes to see! —Mahratta, 3-5-1925 ❑ .

The Late Shriyut V.V.S. Aiyer In Memoriam

Heavy griefs have often embittered our life, but none heavier than what thy sudden death caused, Oh friend, ever taxed our capacity to endure. Memories of those momentous years and trying days rise in a flood and struggling to find a vent, keep knocking at the gates of our heart. How we wish we could have spoken them all and recited our reminiscences; but our lips must remain sealed. How we long to write of thy goodness and gentleness of disposition—how, when betrayed, thou stood'st unshaken, how thou served'st them who owned thee not and how thou suffered'st when unknown and madest not the slightest mention of it when thou gotst known—how we long to write of it all; but our pen is a broken reed. The noble story of thy life must for, the time being, may perhaps for all time to come, remain untold. For while those who can recite it are living, the time to tell it may not come, and when the time comes when all that is worth telling will no longer remain suppressed and will be eagerly listened to, the generation that could have recounted it might have passed away. Thy greatness, therefore, must stand undimmed but unwitnessed by man, like the lofty Himalayan peaks. Thy services and sacrifices must lie buried in oblivion as do the foundations of a mighty castle. The news of thy sudden death was bitter enough. But bitterer by for, is this our inability to relate to posterity under what heavy obligations thou hast placed them and to express the fulness of our personal and public grief. For, indeed, he was a pillar of strength, a Hindu of Hindus and in him, our Hindu race has lost one of the most exalted representatives and a perfect flower of our Hindu civilization. Ripe in experience, hallowed by sufferings and devoted to the service of man and God, the cause of Hindu Sanghatan was sure to find in him, one of its best and foremost champions in Madras. In 1907 A.D. or somewhere there, one day the maidservant at the famous India House in London handed a visiting card to us as we came downstairs to dine, and told us the gentleman was awaiting in the drawing room. Presently, the door was flung open and a gentleman neatly dressed in European costumes and inclined to be fashionable, warmly shook hands with us. He told us he had been a pleader at Rangoon and he had come over to England to qualify himself as a full-fledged barrister. He was past thirty and seemed a bit agreeably surprised to find us so young. He assured us of his intention to study English music and even assured that he was eager to

get a few lessons in dancing as well. We, as usual, entered our first mild protest against thus dissipating the energy of our youth in light-hearted pastime when momentous issues hung in balance. The gentleman, unconvinced but impressed, took our leave promising to continue to call upon us every now and then. He was Shriyut V.V.S. Aiyer In 1910 A.D., somewhere in March, we stood as a prisoner then only very recently pent up in Brixton—the formidable prison in London. The warder announced visits. Anxiously, we accompany the file of prisoners to the visiting yard. We stand behind the bars wondering who could have come to call on us and thus invited the unpleasant attentions of the London police. For, to acknowledge our acquaintance from the visitor's box in front of the prison bars, was a sure step to eventually get behind them. The visitors are let in. They crowdedly pass past our window. Presently, one dignified figure enters the box in front of us. It was V.V.S. Aiyer. His beard was loosely waving on his breast. He was unkempt. He was no longer the neatly dressed fashionable gentleman. His whole figure was transformed with some great act of dedication of life. “Oh leader!” he feelingly accosted us, “why you left Paris at all”! Soothingly, I said: “Friend, what is the use now of discussing it here. Rightly or not I am here, pent up in this prison-and the best way now is to see what is to be done next, how to face the present.” While fully occupied in discussing future plans, the bell rang and the warders came rushing and shouting unceremoniously: “Time is up.” With a heavy heart, we looked into each others’ eyes. We knew it would perhaps be the last time we ever saw each other in this life. Tears rose, Suppressing them we said: “No! no! We are Hindus. We have read Gita. We must not weep in the presence of these unsympathetic crowds.” We spoke in Hindi; curious crowds of English men watched the ‘young Indian rebel ‘ and his friend. We parted, I watched him till he disappeared and said to my mind: “Alas! it is well nigh, impossible to see this loving soul again.” For, one of the two fates was certain to fall to my lot, the gallows or the Andamans, and neither could hold any prospect before me of seeing my friends again. This was in 1910 A.D.; fourteen years rolled by, and the impossible actually happened. Travelling the most dangerous and meandering bypaths and bylanes and subterenean passages of life so formidably bordering the realms of death, I met Shriyut Aiyer a couple of months ago. He had travelled all the distance from Madras to Bombay to enable us to revel a

few hours in the wines of romantic joy. We forgot for a while, the bitterness and the deep pangs of the afflicted and tortured past and lightly gossiped as boys fresh from schools meeting back after a long holiday. He took my leave. I watched him disappear and said to my mind, now can call him again, any time I like. Little I knew that it was then that he was to disappear beyond all human recall. When human wisdom shook its head and snorted out ‘impossible’, events proved it possible and when it gaily assured itself ‘at any time,’ Destiny put in a stern never; thus oft, fate seems to act with no nobler intention but to mock and humiliate human calculations! With Aiyer, the politician, we cannot concern ourselves here. It is the loss of Aiyer, the scholar, the friend, the noblest type of a Hindu gentleman, the author of Kural, the saintly soul, whose life has been one continuous sacrifice and worship that we so bitterly bewail to-day and bitterly chafe at our inability to pay a public tribute to his memory in a fashion worthy of the noble Dead. Oh, the times on which our generation has fallen! The noblest sink down and are washed off to the shores of Death, while the unworthy keep gaily swimming on the tides of Life. But thou hast done thy duty. Friend! It was for Human Love that thou livedst and thou diedst too for Human Love, even as a martyr unto her. Thou knewst no peace in life, oh, soldier of God. But Peace be with Thee in Death. Oh friend! Peace be with thee and divine rest!’ —(Mahratta 28-6-1925) $\square$

Then Who is Who, Pray? While cursorily glancing over the papers, our eye caught a heap of capitals, which, scanning a little closer, revealed a list of names of Pratap, Shivaji, Govind singh and others. Out of respect for these heroic representatives of our race, we naturally read a sentence or two of the article wherein those occurred, when to our surprise, we found ourselves face to face with the ghost of that hackneyed lie which had been killed and buried a dozen times over in the past and which asserted that the Hindus could not be said to be a race and could not, therefore, claim to inherit the blood of Pratap and Shivaji and Govind. We were just on the point of sweeping aside this statement as a contemptuous vapouring of foreign malice or ignorance, when somewhere about the sentence, the eye caught another familiar name. It was of Mahatma Gandhi. Without going further in the article, we instinctively felt that he must have been the author of that statement. It was worthy of no one else in India. From what other source can such profound shallowness flow than from the perennial fountain of ‘Himalayan mistakes!’ To level down to dust at a single non-violent stroke, the cherished love and pride and exalted emotions of a whole race that fondly felt in its vein the blood of a Shivaji and a Shankaracharya or a Pratap or a Chhatrasal or a Chaitanya flow—only a Mahatmaic audacity can accomplish that! Let the silly and unscientific Hindus disown forthwith the superstitious belief that after all, they were the sons of those sires who fought at Haldighat and were martyred at Sarhind and won at Udgir and ruled at Delhi! Gandhiji tells us we cannot be said to inherit the blood of Pratap and Shivaji and Govind. But then do we inherit any one’s blood at all? We are born in Maharashtra—can we claim to inherit the blood of Shivaji at least? The caste system that prevails amongst the Hindus and the consequent absence of the custom of intermarriages amongst them, which seems to be the reason, which prevents a Gujarati from owning the blood of a Rajput Pratap or a Maratha Shivaji in his veins, ought to, if true and sound a reason in the first case, prevent us also from claiming to inherit the blood of Shivaji. For, Brahmins in Maharashtra married not with the Bhonsle and other Kshatriya castes. Taking a step further, not only the Brahmins but also the Vaishyas and Shudras and Atishudras, the Prabhus and Saraswats— almost all of those crores of Hindus who go by the name of Maharashtrians, cannot look upon Shivaji as one of their forefathers any more than a

Gujarati can. Even amongst those who are Kshatriyas of Shivaji’s caste, all cannot claim him as their ancestor; for many—nay, the majority of their families had no blood connection with the Bhonsles or the Jadhavas. Leaving aside the question of Shivaji, we cannot positively succeed in proving that we possess the blood of even the Peshavas in our veins unless and until our genealogy reveals a marriage connection with the Bhats and other families relating to the Peshavas. All Brahmins also cannot claim common blood, for they all do not intermarry. So, then taking the last case of Maharashtra, not only does a Gujarati or a Bengali or a Madrasi or a Punjabi Hindu fail to establish his superstitious belief that claims Bajirao and Shivaji and Ramdas and Nana and Bhau and the hundred other heroic figures that fought for, died for and won the cause of Hindu-patpadashahi in the past as his glorious forefathers, but even a Maratha, a Maharashtrian, must disown them unless indeed, any one of them can produce a genealogy establishing an individual blood relation through inter-marriage. Nor can all Rajputs claim Pratap for their ancestor, nor the Sikhs Guru Govind for theirs. In such an anomalous situation, all that one can state is that Sambahji alone inherited the blood of Shivaji or following the more unobjectionable style of Satyakama Jabali of old, assert that any given person can claim the blood of his mother alone—and of no one else. So, then, the poor Hindu is no racial entity at all. Shri Ram and Shri Krishna are mere persons to him, with whom he has nothing more in common either in blood or ancestry than he has with the citizens of Timbuctoo or with the man in the moon! Thus, he who used to live and breathe and had his being in a sublime conviction of his consanguinity and affinity with the seers and heroes and warriors, with Ram and Krishna and Shivaji, find the stream of his lifeblood suddenly choked and dried up, lost in bogs and sands of Mahatma Sahara of absurdity, and stand alone, a unity by himself, no one in the world whom he can call his kith or kin outside the scrap of his family-genealogical chart. But then, the Hindu suffers not alone. He has to undergo the pangs of bereavement in company with almost all the world. If a Hindu cannot be said to possess the blood of a Pratap or a Shivaji, as Englishman too cannot by the same analogy, be said to be positively entitled to inherit the blood of a Cromwell or a Shakespeare. For, in spite of a general custom of intermarriages amongst the English people, no one can assert that every English individual has affinity with all other English people or has entered

through his family in an individual blood relation with every other English family, which he can prove as soon as summoned by M. Gandhiji to do so. How can the cockney in the East London dare to claim to inherit the blood of the house of York or the proud Earls, whose pedigree boasts of pure patrician blood, that for generations and generations admitted none but a patrician within its sacred precincts? If a Hindu cannot be said to possess the blood of a Pratap and Ram or Rohidas Chambhar on account of the absence of the custom of intermarriages amongst castes and consequent absence of individual blood relations with the persons or their families, with whom he claims consanguinity, then an Englishman too cannot necessarily be said to inherit the blood of a Shakespeare, or an American of Washington, or an Italian, of Mazzini, or a German, of Frederick the Great, on account of the absence of any positive proof of his or any of his family being allowed to mix his blood with that of the other, in spite of the custom of intermarriages amongst the European nations that can suggest a mere possibility of consanguinity or affinity, but cannot in itself be a positive proof thereof. The only advantage that a cockney of East London has over the Hindu is that the cockney may be imaginatively looked upon as a blood relation of, say, Henry VIII. Just as he may be imaginably looked upon to be the prospective King of England or, for the matter of that, of all Europe! But just as in spite of this imaginable possibility of being the Emperor of all Europe, he, so far as facts are concerned, remains a cockney amongst cockneys; even so, in spite of a possibility of being otherwise, he, so far as all practical proofs are concerned, cannot be said to inherit the blood of a Shakespeare or Hampden or Pitt or the Black Prince and, most certainly, not of all these put together. And yet the school-children of these every cockneys are made to short till they get hoarse in their school: We are the sons of sires that baffled, crowned and martyred tyranny! They defied the field and scaffold, for their birthright-so will we!” Foolish rhodomontade! How can all English children be supposed to have entered through their families into blood relation with all those Englishmen, who centuries and centuries ago, ‘baffled, crowned and martyred tyranny! We sincerely hope that if ever Mahatma Gandhi comes to wield the power of a Supreme World Censor—God forbid!—which he hypothetically granted to himself on the occasion of opening the offices of the Hindusthan Times at Delhi, he would give his second attention to suppress throughout Europe—nay all the world over—these foolish blusterings of intoxicated

fancy that sings “We are the sons of sons that baffled.” What lies! No man should be allowed to state that he is the son of any other sire, but his individual father and mother and at the most, of those, whom he can prove on written testimony to have entered into blood connection with his family. We were going to claim his first attention for this task but that he has already reserved, as he declared in that speech for the still more urgent business of suppressing all other papers but Young India and Nav-Jivan! The poor Mahratta, of course, being destined to be the first fat kid to be sacrificed to the Goddess of Liberty, as Gandhiji had seen her. But if a mere chance that the cockney in the East London has, of conceivably being related through blood in the ninetieth generation before him to, say Thomas-a-Backet by virtue of the custom of intermarriages, entitles him to claim him as his sire, then surely, the chance, that the poor Hindu too has, of being somehow, somewhere and somewhen relation through blood to the illustrious names of Hindu history must entitle him, in spite of the caste system and absence of the custom of intermarriages amongst the Hindus, to claim to inherit their blood. For, first of all, the racial stock of the Aryans used to intermarry amongst themselves. Even a casual acquaintance with the Vedic literature can convince—has convinced, every one, of the fact, outside the Sabarmati Ashram. Secondly, even the mere mention of the Aunloma (अनुलोम) and Pratiloma (प्रतिलोम) theory of marriage, which the most ancient Smrities record, and the hundreds of examples that lie scattered throughout the pages and periods of the history and mythology of our race, prove that these systems actually affected the everyday life of the people. The mere mention of these should be enough to prove that the racial blood of our ancestors could never be said to have been absolutely locked in watertight compartments. Mahabharat abounds with precedents—the very heroes of that epic show that even the kingly houses, did at times, admit strains of popular blood. The birth stories of Vyasa, Valmiki, Parashuram or Vashishtha, the origin of the castes of Suta and Magadha down to Chandals, the descriptions of the harems of Krishna and Arjun and Bhima—who married Hedamba—Chandragupta and Ashoka-down to Mahadaji Scindia who descended from a Rajput mother and a Mahratha—all these and hundreds of other illustrations joined with the supreme fact that Nature has and will ever prove stronger than all the caste rules and regulations, prove to the hilt that the caste system has not been and perhaps was never meant to be, an absolute and imperious dam

and that the life-current of our mind flowed richly from the Himalayan altitudes of our ancestry to common plains. We, Hindus, own a common life, a common blood pulsed through our veins, and we have as much a right to assert that we inherit the blood of Pratap and Shivaji and Shankaracharya, as the Englishman has to claim that of Shakespeare or the American of Washington. Dravidians or Aryans—we are, Indians even through blood, Hindus first and everything else next. —Mahratta, 14-6-1925 ❑

Crushing Reply to Sir Kishan Prasad

The following statement is issued by Br. Savarkar, the President of the Hindu Mahasabha, in reply to the Article published by Maharaja Sir Kishan Prasad of Hyderabad regarding the Hindu Civil Resistance Movement: In spite of the personal respect, which every Hindu feels for the elderly, noble and highly placed Maharaja Sir Kishan Prasad, we cannot but denounce the statement he has recently issued carrying down the Hindu Mahasabha and Arya Samaj Civil Resistance Movement against the intolerably anti-Hindu policy of the Nizam Government as untrue, timid and treacherous. His charges against the Arya Samaji in particular are not only baseless but base. For, if during the last fifty years or so, any section of Hindudom had really proved itself to be the Defender of the Hindu faith, culture and community, it is the Arya Samaj that has done so. Neither the Hindu Mahasabha nor the Arya Samaj has launched this civil resistance movement in a light mood. Thousands of Hindus groaning under the Nizam Rule had for years been calling upon the Hindu Mahasabha to come to their rescue. Just on the very eve of the Civil Resistance Movement, the Maharashtra Provincial Hindu Sabha had deputed trusted workers to investigate into the grievances of our co-religionists in the Nizam State and they, after studying the situation on the spot, had published reports full of unimpeachable facts and figures to substantiate that the condition of the Hindus was actually worse than what had come to light. The leaders of the Civil Liberties Union, who hail from the state itself, have borne ample testimony to the same fact. Nay, the Hindu leaders, who now under the spell of the State Congress, are persisting in a guilty silence had only the other day, been loudest in condemning the Nizam Government’s policy as most detrimental to Hindu interest and dictated by Moslem fanaticism. Does the Maharaja, Sir Krishan Prasad venture to say that he has any better right to represent the Hindu feeling than these thousands of aggrieved Hindus in the State? But apart from all that, the very statement of Maharaja carries with it its own refutation. During the course of the statement, he boastfully asserts that he and his ancestors had ever gloried in living contentedly under the subjection of the Moslem rule for generations together. The long subjection of the Hindus in Hyderabad State is a historical fact and one can understand if a Hindu tolerates it as an inevitable evil. But what are we to think of a

Hindu of the eminence of the Maharaja, who glories in the fact that his Hindu ancestors had been contented slaves throughout centuries under the political domination of the Moslems? Is it not a fact that it is these contented Hindu slaves who proved traitors to the Hindu cause in the past, fought for their Moslem masters against the emancipating forces of the Maratha Empire and enabled the Moslem rule to survive in Hyderabad? The Nizam was defeated in battles after battles at Bhopal, Udgir, Kharda and the Marathas liberated Hindu Provinces from Nagar to Nagpur and from Nagpur to Orissa from the grip of the Moslem rule. But it is to the treacherous assistance of these contentedly slavish 'Ancestors', that gave the Nizam Government the long lease of life it enjoys. Otherwise, the forces of the Maratha Empire would have freed the Hindus in Hyderabad long ago and spared them their present serfdom, Instead of hanging his head down in shame at the thought of this continuous political and racial subjection of the Hindus to Moslem domination, the Maharaja parades it as if it was an additional feather in his cap. This one fact proves as no detailed Hindu grievance can ever do, the thoroughness with which the anti-Hindu policy of the Nizam Government has succeeded in emasculating the Hindu spirit in the dominions and how not a vestige of self-respect is left even in the best of them by the age-long serfdom to which the Moslem rule had reduced them. It is this supreme task and not only the removal of local and detailed minor grievances of the Hindus—this task of emancipating the Hindu mind from this slavish mentality—that the Hindu Mahasabha had set before itself. The Mahasabha demands that the Hindus in the Nizam Dominions must be allowed all Civil Liberties in equal measure in common with other non-Hindu citizens, so that they may grow to their full height as self- respecting men, who would not tolerate anything that implies racial inferiority or humiliation to which they are subjected as Hindus. So far as the right of representing our Sanatani Section which the Maharaja wants to monopolise is concerned, it cannot be better refuted than by pointing out to the one single fact that the President of Warnashram Swaraja Sangha of Maharashtra and the leader of the Sanatanists all over India—Dharmaveer Vishwasrao Davre—is rotting even at this moment in the Nizam's jail under the very nose of the Maharaja, for championing the cause of the Hindu Mahasabha and Arya Samaj Civil Resistance Movement. The spirit of the real Sanatan Dharma is represented by

Dharmaveer Davre. What Maharaja Kishan Prasad represents in his article is not the spirit of Sanatan Dharma but of Sanatan slavery. He is playing that part today, which Raja Man Singh played so ignobly in days gone by when he posed as the leader of the Rajputs in lieu of Rana Pratap. It is not even now too late for the Maharaja to repent, to go in sackcloth and ashes and as a gentleman bold enough to make amends for this untrue and treacherous article by boldly confessing the truth. —Mahratta 12-5-1939 ❏

Freedom and Democracy The following Cablegram was sent by Br. Savarkar, the President of the Hindu Mahasabha, to President Roosevelt of U.S.A. on 23rd April, 1939: “If your note to Hitler is actuated by disinterested human anxiety for safeguarding Freedom and Democracy from Military Aggression, pray ask Britain too to withdraw her armed domination over Hindusthan and let her have free and self-determined Constitution. A Great Nation like Hindusthan can surely claim at least as much international justice as small nations in your opinion do.” Britain’s Policy towards India The statement issued by the Viceroy regarding Britain’s policy towards India with reference to the present war situation is disappointing to a degree. The four or five columns of the verbose statement could have well been compressed into four or five sentences, so far as substance is concerned. The rest is full of platitudes. The Viceroy refers to the old and often discarded declaration that India’s ultimate goal is Dominion Status, made somewhere in 1919 A. D. It has not materialised since during the last twenty years and was almost forgotten till this war broke out. The present repetition of those same vague phrases may share the same fate, if things are allowed to drift in this manner by the Indians, till another war breaks out some twenty years hence. H.E. the Viceroy should realise that India is sick of running after this wordy mirage. She refuses to look upon the Dominion Status as an ultimate goal. But instead, insists upon it as an immediate step to be taken. A constitution based on that Status must be conceded by Britain to India, just at the end of this war, at the latest. A definite and the shortest time limit to the actual introduction of this constitution was the essential thing, which was expected by the Indian political world and it is precisely this very point that has studiously been omitted in the statement issued by His Excellency. Even now, it is not too late to mend. The British Government must bear in mind that India can never extend a willing co-operation unless she feels that the cause of her own freedom is likely to be served in a substantial measure by offering responsive co-operation to Britain. The Advisory Board contemplated in the statement is welcomed. But then, it has not its functions and powers defined. If it is going to be a mere appendage to serve as a camouflage to conceal autocratic high-handedness,

then it can only mean an insult added to injury. But if it is made to serve as a tentative measure with powers, more or less equal to a Federal Board of Ministers, is entrusted without reservation with matters concerning Indian defence during the war time and if its advice carried into effect as that of a responsible Council of Ministers, it may prove a step in advance on the line of political progress. But much will still depend on its composition. The Hindu Mahasabha must secure such a representation on it as is in keeping with the proportion to population of the Hindus! ❏

Moslem Chinaman: Hidden Motive of Chinese Moslem Mission to India The following statement is issued by Barrister V. D. Savarkar, the President of the Hindu Mahasabha, in connection with the Chinese Moslem Mission to India: We had no mind to give expression to the details, which point beyond doubt to well-concerted activities on the part of the Indian Moslems to inject the Chinese Moslems too with the Pakistani virus, while the Chinese Moslem Mission led by Mr. Woo was in India on behalf of our friendly neighbour China. But the Moslem Mission is grievously transgressing its national and friendly task and has, in its message recently sent to the Moslems at Nellore, been guilty of betraying anti-Hindu tendency. It has, consequently, forfeited the right of a national hospitality on the part of the Hindus and I feel myself quite justified in exposing the real nature of the movement, so that Hindudom may be warned of the dire consequences, which must result, if it is not watched, opposed and checked in time. Burma Lesson A couple of years ago, I had issued a statement warning the Burmese that there was growing rapidly a hybrid Moslem population in Burma, which would in near future constitute a similar danger to the homogeneity of the Burmese people, as it did in the case of India. The Moslems used to marry Burmese girls in large numbers for at least a century in the past and were very particular in bringing up their progeny as Moslems, while no Moslem would, as a rule, give his girl in marriage to a Burmese. The easy-go-lucky Burmese hardly suspected political danger out of such designed social relations. But soon after that, the Burmo-Moslem riots, miscalled the Indo- Burmese riots, started. The Moslems paid a heavy price for their mischief and the eyes of the Burmese got opened. Just then, the Japanese invasion took place and held all such questions in suspension. China Follows Suit Next to Burma comes China. The Moslem population there is to be counted in crores. China was once ruled by the Tartars, and when the Tartars embraced Islam, these Moslems made China their home and for a short period, even looked upon themselves as a ruling class. But the great Buddhistic Empire, which rose on the ashes of the Tartars, showed the Moslems their right place and they were more or less thoroughly reduced to