Why Godse killed Gandhi...

[rami]

This site is an attempt to provide some information about the violent assasination of India's great freedom fighter, Mahatma Gandhi, who believed in non-voilence throughout his life. The shocking fact is that the assasins were not headstrong fundamentalists but were highly educated intellectuals who loved their motherland as much, if not more, as Gandhiji. Then why did they do so ? There are two sides to every coin. This is just a humble attempt to flip the coin and bring out the other side of this dark episode in the history.

[rami]

He was born at the beginning of this century on May 19, 1910. His father Vinayakrao was in the postal service, his mother's name was Laxmi.

Vinayakrao was drawing a salary of Rs 15 per month. He used to spend Rs 10 on his family and send Rs 5 to his parents. Vinayakrao and his wife had three sons, none of them survived. They prayed to God, had their fourth son, Nathuram..

The rest of his life was very smooth.

He never stole in his childhood, so there was no question of apologising to his father. He never took a vow of celibacy as He was already practising celibacy. He was moving around the refugee camps and helping the destitute with food and clothes. But he did not wander half-naked because the refugees were naked. he never spun yarn, never cleaned his toilet, never observed silence till he was hanged. There was only one common factor in Gandhi's life and his. They were both the cause of each other's death. He wanted to live for his principles and he was prepared to die for his principles.

[rami]

Godse was not very well educated but he was very fluent speaker and a good Writer in English. He was also a skilled car-driver. He wanted to involve into serious politics and devote himself for the welfare of Hindus. He thought marriage as a hindrance to this and vowed "Brahmachryam" for himself.
In his early days Godse was a devotee of Gandhi. He has been to jail for his participation in "Non-cooperation" movement of Gandhi.

In the year 1937 he met Sawarkkar. He was very much inspired by Sawarkkar and he joined himself in the "Hindu Mahasabha". From 1947 he worked as an editor for "The Hindu Raashtra"

[bingleguy]

Good attempt Rami !

I used to hear of many who did not have a belief on the Great Mahatma ! Just wanna know what are their justifications on turning against a man who has dedicated his life to non-violence !

[rami]

[tscii:9d0af1f3b1]Even after India Pakistan partition, there were riots in both the countries. Lakhs of Hindus lost their wealth, riches and homes and fled towards India as refugees. Even the trains in which those Hindu refugees fled were not spared. The trains were attacked midway. A refugee train from a place called “Wah” was attacked mercilessly by muslim fanatics. More than 200 hindus were killed in that attack.

Many trains which came to “Koojraath” railway station, in the outskirts of Punjab, were attacked and more 500 passengers were killed. The refugee train “Quetta mail” from Quetta was attacked midway and 850 hindu refugees were massacred.
As a reply to a speech of Master Dharasingh in a Hindu meeting, thousands of Hindus in Rawal Pindi were brutally attacked. Lots and lots of ladies commited suicide to protect their chastity. The incident, which happened on 30th Nov 1947, is reffered as “Raawalpindi rape” by historians.
Godse and Apthe started hating Gandhi from the time he approved India-Pakistan partition.
[/tscii:9d0af1f3b1]

[Nakeeran]

Good thread Rami. Hope this gives more light on what happened actually.

I believe Godse wrote a book on what prompted him to assassinate Mahatma but was banned by the then Govt

Whatever said and done , whatever may be his intentions , killing someone is not the ultimate solution :cry:

By this time, I mean end 1947, Gandhiji was already virtually away from mainstream activity as he didnt take up any position in politics of free India. It was Nehru who took charge.

Looking forward to exchanges from others .

[dsath]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1751044.stm

[bingleguy]

Mahatma Gandhi, regarded as the father of Indian independence, did not attend the celebrations. Instead, Gandhi - who strived for a united India - spent the day with Indian Muslims in Calcutta.

A Quote from the article link given by dsath !

[dsath]

This is a link to a program in Radio 4 abt British colonialism. This is the 87th episode. The next 3 episodes are related to the same topic as well. This has nothing to do with Godse directly, but would help understand the events that unfolded before partition.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/empire/episodes/episode_87.shtml

[rocketboy]

According to one source , after the state of Pakistan was formed administrative problems started to crop up. Therefore Pakisthan came up with a proposal to link East Pakistan (the present day Bangaladesh ) and west Pakistan . According to the plan a road(you could say an area ) 10 km wide would be linking the east divison with the west. Now the RSS activists feared that if Pakistan requested Gandhi to sanction such a proposal then Gandhi would readily agree and the Mahathma's would be the final word as he was the father of the nation . They knew that Gandhi was pakisthan's best lobby so they had him eliminated through godse. I wonder what would have happened if we had allowed a road to be built across our country. I just can't imagine . Mahathma would have never known the crooked intentions of the Pakistani rulers. Still the assassination will go down in history as the most heinous crime ever committed. And sad too see some hubbers trying to justify his act and trying to show him in good light. And there was loss of lives on both sides. The Hindu brought out a dossier to mark the occasion of India's 50th year of independence. I got a better picture after reading that.

[crazy]

wowwwww good tread rami akka :) :thumbsup:

[rocketboy]

This is one useless thread.I don't think this bloody cold blooded murderer deserves a thread.

[rami]

[tscii:b5a7d96acb]In the Hindu Raashtra daily dated 9/7/1947, Godse had given the following message to the fellow Indians. “Brothers ! Our mother land has been cut into pieces. The eagles have torn her skin into bits. Hindu womens are being raped in the middle of the road. How long can we tolerate this. It’s a shame that lakhs of Hindus live like refugees in their own country. Women being raped burns my heart.”

He warned Gandhiji “Gandhiji ! By approving the Pakistan partition, you have stabbed the nation. Unless you change your activities, you must face harsh consequences. We consider the dividers of our nation as traitors our nation.”
[/tscii:b5a7d96acb]

[rami]

Noakhali, was another place which was badly hit by communal riots. The place was mainly a Hindu area, but there were no protectors there. At first the policemen would come into a village and force the Hindu villagers to surrender whatever arms they possessed by telling them that the Government had made even the possession of swords and knives an offence.

Then the Muslim mobs would swoop down on the defenseless Hindu villages. Accomplices would point out the houses of the richer Hindus. They would be looted and burned and the men killed, the women raped. Hindu women were regarded almost as a kind of perquisite of the Muslim elite.

[rami]

Thanks for all who visited this thread...

One clarification. This thread does not go into whether Gandhi was good or Godse was good.. It just tries to turn back into some black pages of history...
What every one is made to believe is Godse is one devil who killed the divine Gandhi. But as in any case, there is another side of coin which everyone ignores/ overlooks. This thread is an effort to look into the other side of the coin..

[rami]

[tscii:cc7a162df6]Gandhi had been to Noakhali at that time. Karkare another member of Hindu mahasabha met him there and explained the cruelties done to Hindus. But Gandhiji closed his eyes and replied “I haven’t seen any such incidents and my Islamic brothers would have never acted like that.”
Gandhiji after he returned from Noakhali was upset to find communal riots happening in Delhi also. So he started his Fasting till death. This fasting started on 13 January 1948. He had 7 petitions to the Indian Govt and an additional important goal.

What are the 7 petitions....

More to come
[/tscii:cc7a162df6]

[dsath]

Thanks for all who visited this thread...

One clarification. This thread does not go into whether Gandhi was good or Godse was good.. It just tries to turn back into some black pages of history...
What every one is made to believe is Godse is one devil who killed the divine Gandhi. But as in any case, there is another side of coin which everyone ignores/ overlooks. This thread is an effort to look into the other side of the coin..
Yes Rami, u r right there are 2 sides of a coin. But we often forget who tossed the coin.
There are 3 dimensions to this,
1) The tossing of the coin.
2)Hindu killings on one side.
3)Muslim killings on the other.

Both Hindus and Muslims were killed, raped, looted and lost their homeland? Its a strange paradox that Musharaf's native/birth place is in India while Advani's is in Pakistan.
I wouldn't agree that Gandhi was the only deciding soul who agreed for partition. They were lots of bigger players and it falls down to every one of them as well. Not least of all the 'ruler'. Do you know why the 1946 pre-partition talks failed?
Blaming partition on one person is not fair.

The British knew that religious tensions were flaring, so why did not they deploy adequate troops during partition? After enjoying all the benefits from India for 100s of years, the least they could have done was a proper pull out. Its a shame that they haven't learnt from their past mistakes and are hell bent on doing the same thing in Iraq all over again (under American wings). There is something with labour governments and messing up nations.

Recently i watched an episode of 'We the People' filmed in Pakistan. It was interesting to hear the Pakistani views on partition. One elderly journalist said that leaders from both sides should apologize unconditionally to both sides. However the younger generation seemed not to approve the idea. What is done cannot be reversed and they just want to move on. Don't we all?

[rami]

DSath .. The views I am just putting here are the views of Godse on partition.. not my views..

[dsath]

Am glad you clarified that Rami. 8-)

[Surya]

Wow...:shock: I just saw this thread!

Rami,
:clap: :clap: Excellent Thread. Marvellous attempt to look @ the other side of the Coin which many try to hide, or look over. 8-)

Please Continue! I love this thread!! 8-)

[rami]

Welcome Surya...

[thamizhvaanan]

nice thread ramya. it would be interesting to get into the mindset of the person who committed one of the most atrocious murders in history.

ramya, have u read Godse's biography? i dont remember the name of the book. it also contains his testimonial in court. he explains why he killed Gandhi. one will realise that he wasnt all evil, but rather a terribly misdirected soul. I think a film like Hey Ram brilliantly captures his point of view with the help of a fictional character. Sad that the film was killed by cheap politics.

[Nakeeran]

nice thread ramya. it would be interesting to get into the mindset of the person who committed one of the most atrocious murders in history.

ramya, have u read Godse's biography? i dont remember the name of the book. it also contains his testimonial in court. he explains why he killed Gandhi. one will realise that he wasnt all evil, but rather a terribly misdirected soul. I think a film like Hey Ram brilliantly captures his point of view with the help of a fictional character. Sad that the film was killed by cheap politics.

When a person of highest stature is done to death the word used is ASSASSINATION , not MURDER. Pl stand corrected. Dont bring disgrace to Mahatma by using such unparliamentary words. We expect highest decorum on our Mahatma WHO, EVEN FOR HIS END, DESERVES THE BEST WORDING

Digression : Heyram indeed was a better movie and it got its due publicity from politicians . It was not killed by them. Stand corrected again.

[thamizhvaanan]

Assassination N. Murder of a public figure by surprise attack.

So I stand corrected. I see no reason why the usage of the word "murder" is a disgrace. technically it is a murder :huh: . Whats the point to fret about? :huh: nakeerarey, ungalukku kutham kandupidipadhu romba pidikkuma :roll:

And Hey ram "was" killed by politicians. It already had all publicity, perhaps too much publicity, it needed. I dunno wat is there to correct here too. chumma edhunachum sollanumnu sollitu solladheenga :roll:

[thamizhvaanan]

This is one useless thread.I don't think this bloody cold blooded murderer deserves a thread.

Godse is a murderer, but apparently he hasnt commited murder :roll: .so rocketboy, dont disgrace Mahatma. Murderer is an unparliamentary word. eventhough it is a type of murder, one isnt supposed to call it a murder. that is blasphemous.

nakeerar vaazhgha :thumbsup:

[dsath]

This is another article that deals with partition.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1826/18260810.htm
A brief quote from the article



While Mohammed Ali Jinnah and the Muslim League bear heavy responsibility - since they demanded and pressed for Pakistan - the Congress cannot escape blame. Least of all the hypocritical Sangh Parivar. Its chief mentor V.D. Savarkar formulated the two-nation theory in his essay Hindutva, published in 1923, 16 years before Jinnah came up with it. The Hindu Mahasabha leader Lala Lajpat Rai wrote in The Tribune of December 14, 1924:

"Under my scheme the Muslims will have four Muslim States: (1) The Pathan Province or the North-West Frontier; (2) Western Punjab (3) Sindh and (4) Eastern Bengal. If there are compact Muslim communities in any other part of India, sufficiently large to form a province, they should be similarly constituted. But it should be distinctly understood that this is not a united India. It means a clear partition of India into a Muslim India and a non-Mulsim India." This was 16 years before the League adopted the Pakistan Resolution in Lahore, on March 23, 1940 (emphasis added, throughout).

[rami]

There were totally 7 conditions including.
1) Re-convert the mosques which were converted into Refugee camps and temples.
2) The muslims who have gone to Pakistan must be allowed to return back whenever they wish to.
And another most important condition. The Indian Govt to pay the balance Rs.55 crore to the Pakistan Govt. with immediate effect. In the partition agreement, Indian Govt had accepted to pay Rs.75 crores to the Pakistan Govt. Indian Govt paid only Rs.20 crores immediately, as it had known that the balance Rs.55 crores if given immediately would be used against India.

During the fast Gandhijis health condition was worsening. His kidneys were not functioning properly. Doctors felt that Gandhiji would move to Coma stage if he continued the fasting for few more days. Even if he wakes up after that, his body parts might be affected and cannot function as before. Gandhiji refused Nehru, Patel and various other leaders request to give up fasting. He was stubborn that unless his requests were promised, he would not give up the fasting.

[rami]

[tscii:64114af1b9]“India should pay the balance Rs.55 crores as promised. The Government must not hesitate.” The then deputy Prime Minister Mr. Vallabhai Patel and finance minister R.K. Shanmugam announced that they will pay the balance Rs.55 crores to Pakistan. All religious leader promised that they would follow the path of peace. After that Gandhiji gave up his fast on 18-Jan 1947.

The plan to assassinate Gandhi had begun on the very first day Gandhi started his fasting. Godse, Apthe and others were furious on hearing the Gandhis condition to pay Pakistan Rs.55 crores.

Godse told that “Gandhijis activities have become anti-Hindu nowadays. Hindus must live securedly in India. It wont be possible if Gandhiji is alive. So for the welfare of Hindus, Gandhiji must be killed.” Apthe accepted this. They decided not to wait anymore. They wanted to kill Gandhi as soon as possible.
[/tscii:64114af1b9]

[crazy]

rami akka: good job :clap:

[rami]

Thanks Crazy, TV, DSAth, Rocketboy, Nakkeeran, Surya and Bingle...
:notworthy:

[dsath]

A book titled ' Sarvarkar and Hindutva - The Godse Connection' written by AG Noorani examines the events leading to the murder/assassination/killing of Gandhi and the trial.

Here is a link for a review of that book by P K Datta of Delhi University.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2008/stories/20030425001007300.htm
A brief quote


Indeed, even before the trial, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel had, in a letter to Jawaharlal Nehru, clearly stated that Savarkar had masterminded the murder. In the court, approvers had testified to the intimate guru-chela relationship between Savarkar and the Godse brothers, but there was no corroborative evidence to nail down Savarkar's assertion that he had had merely formal relationships with them. Consequently, he was released.

[kannannn]

Savarkar was aquitted purely on technical grounds. However, his bodyguard and secretary later admitted that Ghodse and Savarkar met twice, just days before Gandhi's murder.

[dsath]

[tscii:5c55af2f8f]
Savarkar was aquitted purely on technical grounds. However, his bodyguard and secretary later admitted that Ghodse and Savarkar met twice, just days before Gandhi's murder.
The book also examines the Kapur commission’s findings. Another brief quote


The Kapur Commission was in a more fortunate position. It had access to testimonies of Savarkar's aides (including his bodyguard, secretary and so on) and important Hindu Mahasabha functionaries who were not available to the Atma Charan court. And all these testimonies indicated the intimate and inspirational hold of Savarkar on the Godse brothers. The weight of this evidence led Justice Kapur to reverse the conclusions of the court trial and state unambiguously that "all these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group".
[/tscii:5c55af2f8f]

[pizzalot]

Alright rami.

You are trying to be all neutral and secular and just want to report the facts. But can you make a small correction in the topic ? Can you rename it as "Why Godse Killed Mahatma Gandhi ?". Sure the Great Indian Soul and the Father Of The Nation deserves respect, doesn't he ? It is not Godse who is posting here .. it is rami correct ? So please correct and refer to Mahatma Gandhi with title. When the whole world refers to him as "Mahatma" so should you.

[pizzalot]

[tscii:d117f61dc2]
Savarkar was aquitted purely on technical grounds. However, his bodyguard and secretary later admitted that Ghodse and Savarkar met twice, just days before Gandhi's murder.
The book also examines the Kapur commission’s findings. Another brief quote


The Kapur Commission was in a more fortunate position. It had access to testimonies of Savarkar's aides (including his bodyguard, secretary and so on) and important Hindu Mahasabha functionaries who were not available to the Atma Charan court. And all these testimonies indicated the intimate and inspirational hold of Savarkar on the Godse brothers. The weight of this evidence led Justice Kapur to reverse the conclusions of the court trial and state unambiguously that "all these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group".
[/tscii:d117f61dc2]

It sounds like Godse was a mere gun while someonele pulled the trigger.

Dsath, can you explain us what motives they had to pull the trigger ?

[dsath]

It sounds like Godse was a mere gun while someonele pulled the trigger.

Dsath, can you explain us what motives they had to pull the trigger ?
Pizza,
Without doubt partition was one of the biggest migrations of humans seen in recent times. A total of 15 million were affected and 2 million dead including Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus. Such conditions form the ideal breeding ground for fundamentalist and fanatics from all communities. In India atleast the govt is able to exercise some amt of control, but in the case of Pakistan, the govt itself is in the hands of such elements. Even in today's world of information, any major incident is accompanied with lots of rumors.
So we must remember it would have been 100 times worse in those days.

[dsath]

[tscii:0e66a462b8]1. Gandhi's trial and the later Kapur commission established the link between Godse and Sarvarkar.
2. Sardar Patel was of the opinion that Sarvarkar masterminded the mission.
3. Sarvarkar was a revolutionist against the British.
4. After spending some time in the jail, he changed his ideas of nationalism. From anti-British he became anti-Muslim.
4. It was Sarvarkar who first introduced the concept of a separate Muslim nation for Muslims.
5. So it was not partition but Gandhi's demand to give 55 crores to Pakistan and his other demands regarding tolerance towards Pakistan and Indian Muslims, that was the main motivation to kill Gandhi.
6. Another important fact is that while Nehru and other leaders were political, Gandhi was not. His flavour of Hinduism was distinctly different and directly contradicted Sarvarkar's flavour. Sarvarkar might have considered him a threat to further his own ideologies and decided to eliminate him.
7. Lastly even if Sarvarkar had no direct involvement and the Kapur commission was wrong in its findings (which i find it hard to believe) his speeches to the community and writings inspired youths such as Godse to take action themselves.
8. Whether it was Sarvarkar or not, it will be safe to conclude that Godse's ideology was inspired from that of Sarvarkar’s.[/tscii:0e66a462b8]

[Surya]

[tscii:1e0600b355]Dsath,
Good Post. :)


4. It was Sarvarkar who first introduced the concept of a separate Muslim nation for Muslims.

Who spearheaded the ideology for the most part though? Through things like Direct Action Day and so on which resulted in Communal Violence and Sparked off the chain reaction of violent retaliation from Hindus and Sikhs all over India, including Calcutta. :)


5. So it was not partition but Gandhi's demand to give 55 crores to Pakistan

:clap: :clap:

Even though the other 2 did have something to do with it, the biggest part of the Pie goes to the 55 Crores. 8-)


Sarvarkar might have considered him a threat to further his own ideologies and decided to eliminate him.

Exactly.
Key Word = Might. :)


8. Whether it was Sarvarkar or not, it will be safe to conclude that Godse's ideology was inspired from that of Sarvarkar’s.

Yes it is. 8-)[/tscii:1e0600b355]

[kannannn]

7. Lastly even if Sarvarkar had no direct involvement and the Kapur commission was wrong in its findings (which i find it hard to believe) his speeches to the community and writings inspired youths such as Godse to take action themselves.

Savarkar's influence was so great on the youth of Maharashtra (especially brahmins) that many were willing to take the path of violence against British and later, Muslims. My fiancee's greatgrandfather, a follower of Savarkar, assasinated the Collector of Nasik in public (he was eventually hanged).

[Surya]

Wow! :o The Collector was British right?

These are some of the things he deservs a round of applause for. :clap: :clap: 8-)

[dsath]

Wow! :o The Collector was British right?

These are some of the things he deservs a round of applause for. :clap: :clap: 8-)
I am not so sure Surya. Sarvarkar was a passionate young man of his days. When everyone fought a common enemy, he fought them too. When that was no more possible ( remember his letter to the British pleading clemency in exchange for good behaviour) he chose to invent another enemy a weak one that could be fought with, without fear of persecution to vent his personal ego.
Unfortunately the events surrounding partition provided fertile grounds for Sarvakar's ideas.
Without partition Sarvarka's idea would have died without any takers. Or even a partition devoid of any violence would have been enough for Sarvarkar's idea to be dead.
Unfortunately we were not that lucky. His idea sowed the seeds for partition and divided we stand now. What benefit we have derived as a result are some broken mosques-temples-gurdwars, 2 million Hindus-Sikhs-Muslims killed/raped/looted, 3 divided nations continually in war with each other, crores of money channelled to the Western world for buying rockets/tanks/guns so that we could shoot each other and die, last but not least one beautiful state in a constant state of war proxy or direct.

[kannannn]

Yes Surya. The collector he killed was British. He was just 19 years at that time he was hanged and the gun he used was directly sent to him by Savarkar from London. All this is fine, but when Savarkar himself was faced with punishment in Andaman Islands he asked for mercy. That and many of his later acts and views annoy me.

[Surya]

Obviously Partition was not a good thing. But, do u really think that the hindus and muslims could've gotten along back then?

We had the British instigating one group against another.

Veer Savarkar introduced the Partition Idea, but who spiced it up? Wasn't it Muhamud Ali Jinnah who had things like Direct Action Day and so on which resulted in Communal Violence and Sparked off the chain reaction of violent retaliation from Hindus and Sikhs all over India, including Calcutta. Do you think that the idea of Partition wouldn't have popped up in anyone else's mind if he hadn't come up with it?

Kannannn, :)

Veer Savarkar was an influential leader, weather (excuse my spelling :P ) his cause was good or bad is a different issue which will take up pages of debating, and in the end we will not have achieved anything, but the point is that he was an influential leader. As a leader, his life is more important than the others. That's why leaders are given so much more importance in society. The have the power to guide people to do things which other followers like u or me (not talking about hindutva, followers of anything) may not have. :) that way, I don't see anything wrong his apology.

Again, I sense a diggression, back to Godse and Veer Savarkar. :)

[dsath]

Obviously Partition was not a good thing. But, do u really think that the hindus and muslims could've gotten along back then?

I am sure we could have just pulled it off if we have had independence before the war or if Atlee/Mountbatten acted with some commonsense.


Veer Savarkar introduced the Partition Idea, but who spiced it up? Wasn't it Muhamud Ali Jinnah who had things like Direct Action Day and so on which resulted in Communal Violence and Sparked off the chain reaction of violent retaliation from Hindus and Sikhs all over India, including Calcutta. Do you think that the idea of Partition wouldn't have popped up in anyone else's mind if he hadn't come up with it?

That is a very lame excuse.

[Surya]

It's not an excuse Dsath. It was MAJ who Intensified the Partition Idea, throught violent protests.

How is it lame to say that other people would've come up with it if it wasn't for him? It's the truth.

[Bharathbhattathiri]

"Hindus must bow their heads if Muslims want to kill them. We should follow the principle of ahimsa (non-violence) "
Mohan Gandhi. Bogus Principles of Peace

Results

Massacre of millions of Hindus and Sikh brothers.

Thousands of Hindu women raped and killed.

Loss of 1/3 part of our own motherland


How many people know that gandhi was jain ? i am not against jaindharma or anything but this Ahimsa concept is :x :x :x

[great]

Wow amazing thread , just happened to notice this thread :notworthy:

[great]

This is one useless thread.I don't think this bloody cold blooded murderer deserves a thread.

:lol: :lol: dont you feel when Gandhi is treated equal/above the god :evil: Godse defn needs a thread, dont just shoot in the open sky as Godse is a cold blooded murderer.

[pizzalot]

[tscii:c9964707e3]1. Gandhi's trial and the later Kapur commission established the link between Godse and Sarvarkar.
2. Sardar Patel was of the opinion that Sarvarkar masterminded the mission.
3. Sarvarkar was a revolutionist against the British.
4. After spending some time in the jail, he changed his ideas of nationalism. From anti-British he became anti-Muslim.
4. It was Sarvarkar who first introduced the concept of a separate Muslim nation for Muslims.
5. So it was not partition but Gandhi's demand to give 55 crores to Pakistan and his other demands regarding tolerance towards Pakistan and Indian Muslims, that was the main motivation to kill Gandhi.
6. Another important fact is that while Nehru and other leaders were political, Gandhi was not. His flavour of Hinduism was distinctly different and directly contradicted Sarvarkar's flavour. Sarvarkar might have considered him a threat to further his own ideologies and decided to eliminate him.
7. Lastly even if Sarvarkar had no direct involvement and the Kapur commission was wrong in its findings (which i find it hard to believe) his speeches to the community and writings inspired youths such as Godse to take action themselves.
8. Whether it was Sarvarkar or not, it will be safe to conclude that Godse's ideology was inspired from that of Sarvarkar’s.[/tscii:c9964707e3]

It looks like there are not many people opposing Sarvarkar's involvement in the muder.

So here I am with my theory on the motive of why they "had" to kill the Mahatma.

1. They were OK with The Mahatma when he faught in Ahimsa way agasint S.African whites.

2. They were OK with The Mahatma when he gathered the Indian masses for the first time in million years of History. (I did not even know who this man Sarvarkar was until I read about him in this thread).

3. They were OK with him when he joined hands with the Muslims to fight against the British.

4. I do not think it is the petty Rs.55 Crores that was the problem for a big Nation like India, when it is mutually agreed upon that India pays Pakistan (can you explain why this sum?).

What can be the ONLY possible reason for the murder is their Eternal Hatred On The Concept Equality among the Hindus. To the extent that they are even OK with it if practiced in other religions in India.

Proof:

1. They were OK with any Muslim ruler who ruled India accepting Manu Smirti. They were NOT OK with them when they abolished it. Suddenly "the temples were destroyed, Hindus were pushed from mountain tops or burnt alive " and all other stories sprung-up.

2. They were OK with the British as long as they closed their eyes on Sati or Varna Hindutva. But when they disclosed their wrath on such practices, they became the "divide and rule" foreigners.

3. They made the Mahatma agree upon the division of India on communal lines. So they were OK there. If the muslims were present, they cannot be vocal on their barbaric domination on the majorities. But what they could not really digest is his preaching of EQUALITY among the people which they stood opposed for thousands of years and his popularity was ever growing among the people of India.

4. The murder of The Mahatma is just one of several murders in the history of India. Atleast they let him live until 80 years. In other cases, those who preached equality in India, invariably have all attained "Mukti" or merged with "Jyoti" in their 20s or 30s.

5. At the stroke of the midnight hour, August 15, 1947 in India, the rest of the world was NOT sleeping. It was only the Indians who were sleeping since 4000 years before.

It is just about time for them to wake-up. I agree with others, that ahimsa is not the right path they must adopt after they wake-up ! The people against whom they have to fight are not the magnanimous British or other humans.

[great]

When a person of highest stature is done to death the word used is ASSASSINATION , not MURDER. Pl stand corrected. Dont bring disgrace to Mahatma by using such unparliamentary words. We expect highest decorum on our Mahatma WHO, EVEN FOR HIS END, DESERVES THE BEST WORDING

Digression : Heyram indeed was a better movie and it got its due publicity from politicians . It was not killed by them. Stand corrected again.

:lol: :lol: :lol: funny.DOnt command respect :evil: ppl should respect on their own :twisted:

reply for u Digression: Heyram is one of the well made film not only in tamil but in india as a whole.If you feel politicians publicised the movie in what way. I felt the govt could have given tax rebate or tax free if you look a few movies have got NIL Tax for Bindhast marati movie its snehidhiyae in tamil.I guess even few commercial hindi movies have got tax benifits .

[pizzalot]

When a person of highest stature is done to death the word used is ASSASSINATION , not MURDER. Pl stand corrected. Dont bring disgrace to Mahatma by using such unparliamentary words. We expect highest decorum on our Mahatma WHO, EVEN FOR HIS END, DESERVES THE BEST WORDING

Digression : Heyram indeed was a better movie and it got its due publicity from politicians . It was not killed by them. Stand corrected again.

:lol: :lol: :lol: funny.DOnt command respect :evil: ppl should respect on their own :twisted:

reply for u Digression: Heyram is one of the well made film not only in tamil but in india as a whole.If you feel politicians publicised the movie in what way. I felt the govt could have given tax rebate or tax free if you look a few movies have got NIL Tax for Bindhast marati movie its snehidhiyae in tamil.I guess even few commercial hindi movies have got tax benifits .

Is this guy Nakeeran commanding respect for The Mahatma or the murder, anti-social element Godsey ?

[dsath]

[tscii:af20341650]

1. They were OK with any Muslim ruler who ruled India accepting Manu Smirti. They were NOT OK with them when they abolished it. Suddenly the temples were "destroyed", Hindus were pushed from mountain top, burnt and all such stories sprung-up.

2. They were OK with the British as long as they did closed their eyes on Sati or varna rule. But when they disclosed their wrath on such practices, they became the "divide and rule" foreigners.

3. They made the Mahatma agree upon the division of India on communal lines. So they were OK there. But what they could not really digest is his preaching of EQUALITY among the people which they stood opposed for thousands of years.

4. The murder of The Mahatma is just one of several murders in the history of India. Atleast they let him live until 80 years. In other cases, those who preached equality, invariably have all attained "Mukti" or merged with "Jyoti" in their 20s or 30s.

5. At the stroke of the midnight hour, August 15, 1947 in India, the rest of the world was not sleeping. It was only the Indians who were sleeping since 4000 years before.

It is just about time for them to wake-up. I agree with others, that ahimsa is not the right path they must adopt after they wake-up !
pizza, by your own admission, you don't know much abt Sarvarkar so your theory cannot be accepted.
I think we have established considerably that Sarvarkar's ideology was mainly responsible for Gandhi's killing via Godse.
Now can we dig out to find what led to Sarvarkar to formulate his ideology?
What amazes me is both Sarvarkar and Jinnah started their career in politics opposing the British as nationalist. They wanted one Mother India. I am intrigued as to what lead the 2 leaders to choose the path of partition?
1. Sarvarkar was a young revolutionist choosing arms against ahimsa.
2. He was a staunch Hindu (here it is to be noted that except may be Chandra Bose other 'freedom fighters' were very religious, no matter which religion they followed but still largely tolerant to other religions).
3. It is rumored that Sarvarkar had an English girl friend. Can anyone throw more light on this please? If its true then it will prove that he was willing to accept other religion (not necessarily Muslim). But on the other side there is enough proof that he was involved in stoning a mosque when he was 12.
4. Throughout his life he never 'led' any major events both against the British as well as the Muslims but was 'involved' in them.
5. His major change of idea from Nationalism to Hindu-Nationalism seems to have happened when he spent time in the Andaman Jail.
6. While in jail, he formulated a hunger-strike idea. His idea gained popularity and on the eve of the strike he pulled out. The strike went on to become a success. The point is he formulated an idea, gathered momentum for it but was unable/unwilling to lead it.
7. He came out of jail not completing his sentence, but on grounds of clemency. He assured the British that he will not indulge in any activities against them.
8. So he invented another enemy to fight with - an enemy who was likely not to send him back to Andaman and thus was born the idea of a Hindu nation for the first time.
9. After Independence Sarvarkar sensed that to form a 'real' Hindu nation, it’s a prerequisite to destroy all other notions of Hinduism including Gandhi’s ahmisa Hinduism. The horrible atrocities during partition were the perfect backdrop to do such a thing.
9. As in many aspect of his life he never 'led' the saffron brigade. His ideologues were used as the print for the movement.
10. During his lifetime he was never recognized as its 'leader'.
11. Even in Gandhi's killing, the evidence presented before the Kapur commission established that he masterminded it. But as his style, he conceives an idea gathers momentum to it and finds someone else to execute it and that someone else happened to be - Godse.[/tscii:af20341650]

[pizzalot]

[tscii]pizza, by your own admission, you don't know much abt Sarvarkar so your theory cannot be accepted.


Yes, but I am willing to learn through this thread. My conclusion was based on analyzis of the people who currently support the murder and how and why they want history to be twisted.

I understand from your post that Sarvarkar was self-centric person with no real ideology or following. But who was he following ? Who was his mentor ? What was the ideology of his mentors ?

[P_R]

>> digression<<
It is rumored that Sarvarkar had an English girl friend. Can anyone throw more light on this please?The rumours I read was that Savarkar was a homosexual.

In Hey Ram, Abhyankar is portrayed as a reflection of Savarkar. This includes hints that cast doubt on his sexual orientation, his barely veiled hatred (jealousy) towards Mythili, which he carries to his deathbed extracting a celibacy promise from Saket <<end digression<<

[kannannn]

Obviously Partition was not a good thing. But, do u really think that the hindus and muslims could've gotten along back then?

We had the British instigating one group against another.

Veer Savarkar introduced the Partition Idea, but who spiced it up? Wasn't it Muhamud Ali Jinnah who had things like Direct Action Day and so on which resulted in Communal Violence and Sparked off the chain reaction of violent retaliation from Hindus and Sikhs all over India, including Calcutta. Do you think that the idea of Partition wouldn't have popped up in anyone else's mind if he hadn't come up with it?
There is an inherent conflict in your statements. On the one hand, you justify the concept of partition, but on the other, you don't accept Jinnah precipitating the idea. Savarkar wrote a letter of appreciation and support when the Dewan of Travancore refused to join the Indian Union. Both Jinnah and Savarkar were opppurtunists. When Jinnah understood that he wouldn't have a prominent role to play in Indian politics, he carved out a nation where he could play one. As dsath said, when Savarkar understood that he could no longer protest the British, he carved out a constituency against whom he could.

I think one of the reasons the hindu right wing wanted Gandhi away, was their frustation that they couldn't get the importance they thought they deserved on the national stage. Gandhi and congress were colossuses, and to gain attention to their organisation and their ideas in such a scenario required doing something dramatic.

As for the digression WRT Savarkar, it is important that to understand Godse we have to understand Savarkar. Another proof of the proximity between Godse and Savarkar: Godse accompanied Savarkar as a bodyguard to the Hindu Mahasabha conference at Shimoga in 1944.

[Bharathbhattathiri]

The rumours I read was that Savarkar was a homosexual.

Marxist anti national chinees bootlickers will tell anything first it was godse now veera savarkar :lol: even Jesus is homo sexual to them

[Bharathbhattathiri]

Gandhi and Godse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On January 30 1948 Nathuram Godse fired on Gandhi from close range and ended the life of Gandhi. Godse is often a misunderstood character. He is referred to as a Hindu fanatic. It is often hard to understand Godse because the Government of India had suppressed information about him. His court statements, letters etc. were all banned from the public until recently. Judging from his writings one thing becomes very clear - He was no fanatic. His court statements are very well read out and indicate a calm and collected mental disposition. He never even once speaks ill about Gandhi as a person, but only attacks Gandhi's policies which caused ruin and untold misery to Hindus. Another interesting point to note is that Godse had been working with the Hindu refugees fleeing from Pakistan. He had seen the horrible atrocities committed on them. Many women had their hands cut off, nose cut off, even little girls had been raped mercilessly. Despite this Godse did not harm even single Muslim in India which he could easily have. So it would be a grave mistake to call him a Hindu fanatic.

Let us start by studying the motive behind Godse's act. By seeing the nature of the assassination in public space and Godse's act of turning himself over to the Police, we can see that Godse did not do this for personal reasons. He very well knew that he would be hanged and his name would be disgraced as Gandhi was considered a saint. And again Godse could have run away and escaped punishment. But he did the reverse. He called a police officer and courted arrest. Before we proceed it would be wise to understand the backdrop of the assassination.

The British had decided to grant freedom to India in 1947. But at the time of granting freedom they decided to carve a separate country called Pakistan(Pure Land) for the sake of Muslims. Gandhi despite being the most influential Congress leader did not put any real effort to stop this. There was no fast unto deaths or processions to protest against this. Unfortunately many Hindu dominated areas like Lahore went to Pakistan and in order to 'purify' the land many Hindus were massacred, women abducted and married off to Muslims, and other such heinous acts were committed. The partition is regarded as the top ten tragedies of the world. Millions of Hindus escaped into India. The Hindus in India showed their anger by committing the same acts on Muslims. Gandhi went on a fast in order to protest the violence against Muslims. This angered many Hindus. Why did Gandhi not protest the acts of violence by Muslims. After all it was the Muslims who demanded a separate state where Islam alone would be practiced. It was the Muslims who started rioting first. After the creation of Pakistan, the Government of Pakistan demanded that India should give it Rs55 Crores as it's share from the Government treasury. This was quite an extraordinary amount at that time. Gandhi supported this decision and went on a fast until death till the Government released the money to Pakistan.

The subsequent acquiescence of the Government and the release of the Money to Pakistan was what convinced Godse that Gandhi had to be assassinated for the benefit of India. So we can see that Godse's motive was to do an act which would benefit his Motherland. At the time of assassination Gandhi was flanked by two girls with his arms on both of them. Godse pushed one girl away least she should be injured. We can see that Godse was not a mere fanatic who wanted to blindly murder anyone and everyone associated with Gandhi. He very well knew he was going to die for his act, but still he was very careful not to cause injury to innocent people associated with Gandhi.

At this point it would be interesting to study the reaction of the followers of Gandhi. After Gandhi was assassinated his followers went on a rampage in Mahrashtra(Godse's home state) and killed many Brahmins(Godse's caste) and set their houses and property on fire. Many people had to die simply because they were of the same caste as Godse. Suffice to say the followers of Gandhi reflect a lot about their leader.

[Bharathbhattathiri]

Gandhi and Bhagat Singh

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bhagat Singh was a fiery young revolutionary who was put to death at the tender age of 23. At the point of his death Bhagat Singh's popularity rivaled that of Gandhi. Bhagat Singh initially had great respect for Gandhi, but later felt his method of fighting was impotent and joined a revolutionary organisation - Hindustan Republic Association. To get a better understanding of the politics between Gandhi and Bhagat Singh, let us study the events that led to Bhagat Singh's martyrdom.

Bhagat Singh threw a bomb on April 8th 1929 at Delhi Central Assembly. Singh and his associate Dutt threw handouts, and bombed in the corridor taking great care not to cause injury and courted arrest after shouting slogans Inquilab Zindabad (Long Live, Revolution!). Earlier Bhagat had shot a British police officer in a case of mistaken identity. The intended target was another British police officer who had ordered a lathi charge and killed Lala Rajpat Rai an elderly and respectable Indian Nationalist. Bhagat Singh went on a hunger strike in prison and continued it for 55 days. News of the fast spread and soon Bhagat Singh's popularity spread like wild fire. Despite the Congress effort to portray him as unimportant, Bhagat Singh became a household name. The British were afraid that Bhagat Singh's popularity would make the Indians give up non-violent struggle under Gandhi and rise up in armed revolt, so they decided to finish him off. An emergency ordinance was declared and Bhagat Singh was sentenced to be hanged.

The whole of India was against this decision. Over a million telegrams, some actually signed in blood were sent requesting for the same thing - to commute the death sentences of Bhagat Singh and his associates. Some of the few people who sent telegrams included the King of Norway, American Businessmen, Prominent Jews and even British MPs. Even Congress members were in awe of this patriotic youth and wanted Gandhi to save Bhagat Singh. Netaji asked Gandhi not to sign the Gandhi-Irwin pact unless the British agreed to commute the death sentences of Bhagat Singh. But Gandhi was unrelenting. But the pressure was too much on Gandhi and he sent a letter to the Viceroy pleading the case for Bhagat Singh. But it was a very meek attempt by Gandhi. Neither did he give any speeches to the people who had completely surrendered to him, nor did he go on any fast unto deaths. The British still were very unsure of the reaction in India if Bhagat Singh was hanged. They needed to gain some ground so they could brace for any violent reactions. So they decided to sign the Gandhi-Irwin pact and agree to a compromise with the Indian people. And what concessions did the British offer - NOTHING. But nevertheless Gandhi signed the pact which ended the civil disobedience movement. Netaji remarked on the pact "Between us and the British lies an ocean of blood and a mountain of corpses. Nothing on earth can induce us to accept this compromise which Gandhiji had signed." The Gandhi-Irwin pact was signed on 4th March 1931. Bhagat Singh and his associates were hanged on 23rd March 1931.

Gandhi's signing of the Gandhi-Irwin pact just days before Bhagat Singh was hanged was totally inexplicable. The least Gandhi could have done was wait till the actual date of execution. This would have put a lot of pressure on the British. Also Gandhi's refusal to acknowledge Bhagat Singh's method of struggle was baffling. Bhagat Singh had blasted a bomb in the corridors of the Parliament. If he had wanted he could have used very powerful chemicals and killed many people. His actions clearly show that he was a non-violent person. His intention was only to draw attention towards his cause. Why should Gandhi oppose Bhagat Singh simply because his methods were different? Perhaps Gandhi was afraid that Bhagat Singh's popularity would outrank Ganhdi's? If we look at historical facts this was a definite possibility. According to "The History of the National Congress" Bhagat Singh's popularity rivaled that of Mahatma Gandhi in 1929. Bhagat Singh had been in the public eye for just a few years, compared to Gandhi's decades of presence in politics. It almost seems to quell such doubts Gandhi wrote this tribute

"Bhagat Singh and his two associates have been hanged. The Congress made many attempts to save their lives and the Government entertained many hopes of it, but all has been in a vain.

Bhagat Singh did not wish to live. He refused to apologize, or even file an appeal. Bhagat Singh was not a devotee of non-violence, but he did not subscribe to the religion of violence. He took to violence due to helplessness and to defend his homeland. In his last letter, Bhagat Singh wrote --' I have been arrested while waging a war. For me there can be no gallows. Put me into the mouth of a cannon and blow me off.' These heroes had conquered the fear of death. Let us bow to them a thousand times for their heroism.

But we should not imitate their act. In our land of millions of destitute and crippled people, if we take to the practice of seeking justice through murder, there will be a terrifying situation. Our poor people will become victims of our atrocities. By making a dharma of violence, we shall be reaping the fruit of our own actions.

Hence, though we praise the courage of these brave men, we should never countenance their activities. Our dharma is to swallow our anger, abide by the discipline of non-violence and carry out our duty."

We can see Gandhi's had no problem considering them heroes and bowing to them after their death, but before their death even debates on Bhagat Singh were banned during Congress working sessions!

[Bharathbhattathiri]

Download the Court Satement of Shree Nathuram Godse as an e-book format.

http://www.geocities.com/hindu-rastra/download.html

[Bharathbhattathiri]

"If devotion to one's country amounts to a sin, I admit I have committed that sin. If it is meritorious, I humbly claim the merit thereof. I fully and confidently believe that if there be any other court of justice beyond the one founded by the mortals, my act will not be taken as unjust. If after the death there be no such place to reach or to go, there is nothing to be said. I have resorted to the action I did purely for the benefit of the humanity. I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to lakhs of Hindus."
Shri Nathuram Godse

[Bharathbhattathiri]

Forgoten Heros [savarkar,lallajpatrai,subhashchandrabose,bhagatsin gh,rajguru,tansirani,shivaji,ranapratap and thousands of other freedom fighters] :cry:

Dirty politicians will only teach us only about duratma gandhi and one sided ahimsa

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veer_savarkar


Vinayak Savarkar was a great orator, prolific writer, historian, poet, philosopher and social worker who devoted his entire life to the cause of the Indian Independence movement. He is regarded by some as one of the greatest revolutionaries in the Indian freedom struggle, while others consider him a communalist and Machiavellian manipulator. He was also one of the most controversial figures of the independence movement.

Being a descendant of a line of Sanskrit scholars, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar took great interest in History, Politics, Literature and Indian culture. His book, First war of Indian Independence Movement: 1857, served as an inspiration for many freedom fighters.

Born in the village of Bhagur near Nasik, he was one among four children born to Damodarpant Savarkar and Radhabai. His initial education was at the Shivaji School, Nasik. He lost his mother at the age of nine. Brought up by his father, he was influenced by the freedom struggle in British India and got drawn towards it. He lost his father during the plague that struck India in 1899.

In March 1901, he married Yamunabai. Post marriage, in 1902, he joined Fergusson College in Pune to study further. In June 1906, he received a scholarship and left for London to study law.

Independence activism
As a student, Savarkar was involved in the Swadeshi movement. He later joined Bal Gangadhar Tilak's Swaraj Party.

When in London, he founded the Free India Society. The Society celebrated important dates on the Indian calendar including festivals, freedom movement landmarks, and was dedicated to furthering discussion about Indian freedom which came to be highly unacceptable to the British. He is reported to have quoted, "We must stop complaining about this British officer or that officer, this law or that law. There would be no end to that. Our movement must not be limited to being against any particular law, but it must be for acquiring the authority to make the laws itself. In other words, we want Absolute Political Independence."

In 1908, when he wrote "The Indian War of Independence 1857", the British government immediately enforced a ban on the publication in both Britain and India. Later, it was published by Madame Bhikaiji Cama in Holland, and was smuggled into India to reach revolutionaries working across the country against British rule.

In 1909, Madanlal Dhingra, a keen follower of Savarkar shot Sir Wyllie after a failed assassination attempt on the then Viceroy, Lord Curzon. In the political crisis that ensued, Savarkar stood out with a decision not to condemn the act.

When the then British Collector of Nasik, A.M.T. Jackson was shot by a anant kanhere, Savarkar finally fell under the net of the British authorities. He was implicated in the murder citing his connections with India House. A warrant was issued on 13th March, 1910, following which he was arrested in Paris. He hatched a plan to escape at Marseilles which failed.

He was captured and taken to Bombay (Mumbai) on the S.S. Morea, and imprisoned at the Yervada Prison. He was tried, and at the age of 27 years, sentenced to 50 years imprisonment at the infamous Cellular Jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. On 4th July, 1911, he was transported to the Andamans.

He appealed for clemency in 1911, and again in 1913, during Sir Reginald Craddock's visit. His supporters suggest that these actions should be viewed in the context of the systematic torture of political prisoners then rampant at the prison[citation needed], and his own declining health. It has also been suggested that his plea for clemency was a shrewd attempt by him to escape once again to the mainland and get involved in the covert actions against the British government. On the other hand, this act is also viewed by his critics as acquiescence to the British Empire. Indeed, this is the first act of Savarkar that would generate controversies for years to come.

In 1920, many prominent independence activists including Vithalbhai Patel, Mahatma Gandhi and Bal Gangadhar Tilak demanded the release of Savarkar and his brother in the Central Legislative Assembly.

On May 2, 1921, Savarkar was moved to Ratnagiri jail, and from there to the Yeravada jail. It was in Ratnagiri jail that Savarkar wrote the book 'Hindutva'. In January 6, 1924 he was released under conditions of stringent restrictions imposed on his travel and activities.


The Politician

Savarkar, though an atheist himself, reluctantly accepted the presidency of the Hindu Mahasabha, and was its president for seven consecutive years. During this time, he contributed significantly to its evolution as a separate political party.

When Britain declared war on Germany India was also included due to its status as a British colony. Savarkar stated - "Britain's claim of safeguarding human freedom was simply meaningless". Nevertheless, Savarkar asked Hindus to help the British in their war effort against Germany and Japan. His admirers have argued that this was a tactic to get more Hindus to pick up military training that could have been turned against the British later. His critics view this as a reiteration of his earlier capitulation to British interests.

The Hindu Mahasabha, under Savarkar's presidency, did not support the Quit India movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi in August 1942. The Communist Party of India and the Muslim League were the other political parties which did not support the Quit India Movement.

His view of post-independence India envisioned a militarily strong, cohesive and self-sufficient nation.


The writer

Veer Savarkar wrote more than 10,000 pages in Marathi language. His literary works in Marathi include "Kamala", "Mazi Janmathep" (My Life Sentence), and most famously "1857 - The First war of Independence", about what the British had conveniently called the Sepoy Mutiny. Savarkar popularized the term 'First War of Independence' - this is the only book in the world which banned befor printing. Another noted book was "Kala Pani" (similar to Life Sentence, but on the island prison on the Andamans), which reflected the treatment of Indian freedom fighters by the British. In order to counter the then accepted view that India's history was a saga of continuous defeat, he wrote an inspirational historical work, "Saha Soneri Pane" (Six Golden Pages), recounting some of the Golden periods of Indian history.

He wrote several books when in prison. Among those that he wrote when in Ratnagiri jail, was the profoundly influential book Hindutva, which deals with the Hindu nationalistic approach to the idea of the Indian nation and Hinduism. It may be noted here that Savarkar himself was an atheist, and conceptualized Hindutva as a unique way of life, rooted in and permeating every aspect of life on the Indian subcontinent. Other books written by him include "Hindu Padpadashahi" and "My Transportation for Life". At the same time, religious divisions in India were beginning to fissure. He described what he saw as the atrocities of British and Muslims on Hindu residents in Kerala, in the book, "Mopalyanche Band" (Muslims' Strike) and also "Gandhi Gondhal" (Gandhi's Nonsense), a political critique of Gandhi's politics. Savarkar, by now, had become a committed and persuasive critic of the Gandhian vision of India's future.

He is also the author of poems like "Sagara pran talmalala", and "Jayostute" (written in praise of freedom), claimed to be one of the most moving, inspiring and patriotic works in Marathi literature by his followers and some critics. When in the cellular jail, Savarkar was denied pen and paper. He composed and wrote his poems on the prison walls with thorns and pebbles, memorized more than ten thousand lines of his poetry for years till other prisoners returning home brought them to India.

He is credited with several popular neologisms in Hindi, like Digdarshak (leader, one who points in the right direction), Shatkar, Saptahik (Weekly, as in weekly periodicals/magazines) and Sansad (Parliament).


Social work

The Hindu Mahasabha claims that Savarkar worked hard to protect minority rights, though this is the subject of controversy. During the celebration of Hindu festivals, Savarkar supposedly visited Muslim and Christian homes to promote good will. He is claimed to have encouraged intercaste marriage, and assisted B. R. Ambedkar in the upliftment of the untouchables. This has been disputed by the political movements representing the lower castes in India themselves and is, again, the subject of much controversy.


Involvement in the assassination of Gandhi
In the period leading to, and immediately after, Indian Independence, the stand taken by Mahatma Gandhi regarding division of assets between India and Pakistan created deep divisions in the country. Savarkar, by now one of the fiercest critics of the Mahatma, expressed his opposition to Gandhi's stance in no uncertain terms during that period. Later, when Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse, there were several allegations that Savarkar masterminded the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. This had its origins in Godse's membership of the Mahasabha and presence at meetings chaired by Savarkar. Godse and Narayan Apte, the two main accused, were known to Savarkar and frequently visited him. Witnesses during the Gandhi assassination trial testified that Savarkar had blessed Nathuram Godse before he shot Gandhi, with the words Yashasvi howun yaa (Marathi: Come back with success). After Gandhi's assassination, mobs stoned Savarkar's home in Bombay, where he had shifted to from Ratnagiri. The Government of India at the time arrested Savarkar and indicted him in the assassination case, but was accquitted by the Supreme Court of India, for reasons of lack of evidence.

It is often claimed that Savarkar was "exonerated by the judge for lack of any evidence" in the Gandhi murder case. However, it is claimed that Judge Atma Charan found the approver Digambar Ramchandra Badge's evidence "direct and straight forward". But no independent corroboration (apart from Badge) was available during the duration of the trial in 1948-49. It is said to have became available only after Savarkar's death in 1966 when His secretary, Gajanan Vishnu Damle and bodyguard Appa Ramachandra Kasar deposed to Justice Kapur that Godse and accomplice Narayan Apte met Savarkar on January 23 or 24 on their return from Delhi well after they had met him on January 17. Gandhi was assassinated a few days later. These have been the subject of extensive investigative reports by a Marxist columnist, A G Noorani of Frontline magazine, a fortnightly newsmagazine with pronounced Marxist and 'Anti Hindutva' ideology.

After Savarkar's death, Godse's brother, Gopal, revealed the closeness of the relationship in his Marathi book Gandhi Hatya Ani Mi (Marathi: Gandhi's Assassination and Me), published in 1967. The Justice Kapur commission set up to investigate this matter concluded that "All these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder(Gandhi)by Savarkar and his group"


List of accused
List of People accused in the attempt and assassination of Mahatma Gandhi

Main Article:Attempts to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi

Nathuram Vinayak Godse
Narayan Dattatraya Apte
Vishnu Ramkrishna Karkare
Madanlal Kashmirilal Pahwa
Shankar Kistaiya
Gopal Vinayak Godse
Digambar Ramchandra Badge
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar
Dattatraya Sadashiv Parchure
Gangadhar Dandavate
Gangadhar Jadhao
Suryadeo Sharma

On Hindutva

Savarkar articulated the Hindutva ideology for the first time and wrote extensively on the subject. Savarkar defined a Hindu as one "who regards this land of Bharatvarsha, from the Indus to the Seas as his Father-Land as well as his Holy-Land that is the cradle of his religion".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veer_savarkar

[NOV]

Discussion on this subject is temporarily suspended, pending analysis.

Kindly refrain from continuing this discussion in any other thread. We seek your patience and look forward to your cooperation.

Please PM the moderators if you need further information.