Madhada Ashram- Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Madhada Ashram- Mahatma Gandhi

 

Bhai Shivji had sent to the newspapers a statement in reply to my article regarding Madhada Ashram and himself. This statement he has now sent to me for publication; but as it has already appeared in the daily newspapers, I see no need to publish it here. However, as a certain portion of it referring to his relations with me is of interest to the public, I give below my reply to it. I was sad to read Bhai Shivji’s statement. He has adopted the proverbial method of the thief attacking the warder. There are no differences of opinion between Bhai Shivji and myself. But I have formed a certain opinion regarding his character and his management of affairs on the basis of Shivji’s own confessions. This opinion I conveyed to the executive committee of the Kathiawar Political Conference, and I proposed, as I felt bound, to publish it in the Navajivan. But before I did so, I wrote to Bhai Shivji, so as to avoid any injustice being done to him.

The question before me was whether I should or should not publish my opinion about Bhai Shivji. This cannot be described as a difference of opinion. It was certainly I who suggested the idea of the Panch. That was for Bhai Shivji’s satisfaction and not for mine. There are no allegations against me. Being a public worker I had the duty of making an inquiry into the charges against a colleague. I started the inquiry and, as it was being made, I kept Bhai Shivji informed about it. Finally, I had a meeting with him, and in view of the confessions which he then made there remained nothing more for me to do. Bhai Shivji was found guilty on his own admission.

When the case was placed before the committee of the Conference on the same day, and when it became imperative for me to publish it in the Navajivan, Bhai Shivji changed his attitude. If Bhai Shivji or any of his friends wish to know from me the details of the confessions made by Shivji, together with the details of the inquiry that I had made, then I am willing to write to them these details. Bhai Shivji and his friends are at liberty to publish my correspondence with them or with others on this matter. I do not wish to bore the readers by publishing it myself. I must, however, say that Bhai Shivji’s behaviour in every respect, after my inquiry about him, has confirmed my opinion against him. First, I was the judge and others were the complainants. They had given money to Bhai Shivji. When my viewpoint became unacceptable to Bhai Shivji, even I was declared to be a complainant. Now Bhai Shivji, in his statement, seems to consider me at fault. But he and all those who are interested in the social workers obeying more or less the rules and regulations of morality, and who desire faultless management of public funds should know that the proposal to appoint the Panch was for the benefit of Bhai Shivji. He is still guilty in my opinion. His lapses are grave and he has confessed most of them. The panchnama, which I could never have signed, was drawn up as far as I know, by Bhai Shivji himself. By issuing this statement Bhai Shivji has added salt to the wound and made his guilt worse.

 

Reference:

 

Navajivan, 7-11-1926