National Unity and 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

 

 

 

National Unity and Mahatma Gandhi 

 

 

 

I have resolved that there should be no opposition from me either at the Belgaum Congress or before that, so as to divide the country. I have already told Pandit Motilal Nehru that my attitude was that of perfect surrender, because we have become a house completely divided. Without anger or hatred, we must make Herculean efforts to get out of that condition, and the country could work, not for her good only, but for the good of humanity. With the exception of some details as to the “surrender”, to be published when a few people who have the right to be consulted have been invited to concur; the nature of the main agreement at which we arrived is indicated in what is said above. The spirit of us both is that we love India more than our own methods, and that we believe that India’s freedom is necessary for human progress. 1   

Now you understand why he is absent and now perhaps you will also understand why I have to perform the painful duty of withdrawing the resolution which I moved, not because I am sorry for that resolution, not because I am not in love with that resolution, not because the one I am now going to move is a better resolution by any means; I hold that that was far superior to the resolution which is now in my hand. But as I have said, our life is a perpetual struggle against oppressive environments and a perpetual struggle within our ranks. If we want unity, then adjustment and readjustment, a series of compromises honourable to both parties and to variety of opinions, is to be effected. We invest every occasion with the importance of a sacred siddhanta or principle from which not an iota should be removed. Many of the things which we call by the name of principles are no more principles than so many details which we do not call principles, and therefore this resolution is a result of attempts on the part of all parties in this house or those parties who are interested in that resolution and its principle amendments. It is a resolution of compromise between them, of a series of adjustment and readjustment between them. Hence, I feel that I am doing nothing wrong, not only that I am doing nothing wrong in asking for permission to withdraw that resolution although I consider it far superior to the resolution which I will presently move before you, but because I know that our national interest will be better served by the resolution which I consider far inferior to the former resolution because it will hold all parties together. They are no more inclined to divide the house than I was or Pandit Motilal was. Both of us were for dividing the house because we thought that we would win, but what would that victory means if it increased the bitterness, if it increased the weakening of our national unity and our national forces? 2

But I believe sincerely that no swaraj government could exist for twenty-four hours which continued to uphold the principle of untouchability. No untouchable need fear that his interests under swaraj will be neglected, as they are neglected now. At the present moment the untouchables cannot be protected by the British Government, since the British cannot afford to offend the various interests interested in maintaining untouchability. But a real Indian government would not be forced to surrender to these interests, for it would have a much greater interest to serve that of national unity. 3 In the interest of the national unity we desire to achieve, the adoption of Devanagari as a common script is so essential. Here it is a question of just shedding our provincialism and narrowness, there are no difficulties at all. Not that I do not like Tamil or Urdu scripts. I know both. But service of the motherland, to which all my life is being given and without which life would be insupportable for me, has taught me that we should try to lift unnecessary burdens off our people. The burden of knowing many scripts is unnecessary and easily avoidable. I would appeal to men of letters of all provinces to resolve their differences on this point and be agreed on this matter of prime importance. Then and then only can the Bharatiya Sahitya Parishad be a success. 4

It is not that I am making a fetish of language. It is not that I would refuse to have swaraj if I could have it at the cost of our language, as indeed I should refuse to have it at the cost of Truth and Non-violence. But I insist so much on the language because it is a powerful means of achieving national unity, and the more firmly it is established the broader based will be our unity. 5 On the question of hoisting the national flag the Working Committee hopes that care will be taken not to do anything that may imply any disrespect to the State flag by the State Congress or the national flag by the State authorities.

The final status of the national flag will depend not upon the ability to exercise compulsion but upon the correct conduct of Congressmen and the progressive record of service that the Congress establishes in the country. It should further be borne in mind that the national flag is the symbol of non-violence and national unity to be brought about by means strictly truthful and non-violent. It should further be borne in mind that though there is a growing party among Congressmen who seeks the total abolition of States as a relic of the Middle Ages, the policy of the Congress as a whole has hitherto been and remains one of friendliness to the States in the hope that they will recognize the signs of the times and establish responsible government within their borders and otherwise extend and guard the liberty of the people under their jurisdiction. 6 But the communal question seen from the right perspective is not as insoluble as it appears to be. Even now prudence coupled with large-heartedness may undo the wrong done to the cause of national unity. 7

 

 

References:

 

1. The Bombay Chronicle, 6-9-1924
2. Amrita Bazar Patrika, 29-12-1928
3. The New York Times, 12-9-1931
4. Harijan, 3-4-1937
5. Harijan, 3-4-1937
6. Harijan, 21-5-1938  
7. Harijan, 20-1-1940