Gandhi and Nehru: The co-architects of the freedom movement I

 

Mahatma Gandhi’s birth anniversary

Gandhi and Nehru: The co-architects of the freedom movement I

The two tallest leaders of the Indian freedom movement were Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. In a historical context, it is doubtful whether the freedom struggle could have resulted in India gaining the independence in 1947 without them as the chief protagonists. They had contrasting personalities, differed in their approach to political, social and economic issues, and yet complemented each other. Gandhi was a political Saint, and Nehru was an intellectual radical. They learned from each other and accommodated each other’s point of view for the cause of freedom.  No one understood Gandhi better than Nehru and Nehru better than Gandhi. And if Gandhi is the father of the Nation, Nehru is the father of modern India.

They met first time in 1916. Soon Nehru came under the spell of Gandhi. Following the draconian Rowlett Act 1919, Gandhi started the Satyagraha Sabha, the members of which were pledged to disobey not only the Rowlett Act, but also other objectionable laws, leading to a nation-wide non cooperation movement against the British that meant sacrifice, courting arrest and going to jail.  Nehru joined the Satyagraha Sabha as he found it “a way out of the tangle, a method of action which was straight and open and possibly effective.” Pandit Motilal Nehru worried about the prospect of Jawaharlal going to jail “tried to sleeping on the floor to find out what it was like.”

The letters exchanged between Nehru and Gandhi reveal how they mutually admired and respected each other, and how they conducted themselves with dignity and the civility of highest order. An attempt is made  in this and the following article to understand these great fascinating charismatic leaders of the freedom movement, based on some selected letters from Nehru’s book A Bunch of Old Letters, conforming to  the chronology of events.

Nehru in his letter to Gandhi, January 11, 1928, wrote:

“I have admired you and believed in you as a leader who can lead this county to victory and freedom…During the non-cooperation period you were supreme…But since you came out of prison something seems to have gone wrong…you expected the khadi movement to spread rapidly and in a geometric ratio and then some direct action in the political field might be indulged in… It was difficult to believe that it would happen…such faith for an irreligious person like me is a poor reed to rely and I am beginning to think if we are to wait for freedom till khadi becomes universal in India as we shall have to wait till the Greek kalends… Reading many of your articles in Young India- your autobiography, etc.-I have often felt how very different my ideals were from yours. You have stated somewhere that India has nothing to learn from the West and that she has reached a pinnacle of wisdom in the past. I entirely disagree with this viewpoint and I neither think that the so-called Ram Rajya was very good in the past, nor do I want it back…You have advocated very eloquently and forcefully the claims of daridra-narayanana-the poor in India…I doubt very much if the fundamental causes of poverty are touched….You do not say a word against the semi-feudal zamidari system which prevails in a great part of India or against the capitalist  exploitation of both the workers and the consumers.”

 To this an angry Gandhi, in his letter January 17, reacted fearing parting of their ways:

 “Though I was beginning to detect some differences in viewpoint between you and me, I had no notion whatsoever of the terrible extent of these differences. While you were heroically suppressing yourself for the sake of the nation… The differences between you and me appear to me to be so vast and radical that there seems to be no meeting ground between us. I can’t conceal from you my grief that I should lose a comrade so valiant, so faithful, so able and so honest as you have always been…But this dissolution of comradeship-if dissolution must come- in no way affects our personal intimacy. We have long become members of the same family, and we remain such in spite of grave political differences.”  

 A bewildered Nehru responded in his letter January 23:

 “Your letter came as a bit of a shock and was painful reading. Painful because with relentless logic you had contemplated certain eventualities which I had not considered possible … I have no particular banner to unfurl nor had I thought of the possibility of any warfare between you and me.  I had certainly thought of differences of opinion, which may be fundamental, and of my following a line of action in regard to certain matters which may not meet with your approval…I presumed there would be considerable ground for common action…Is any assurance from me necessary that nothing that can ever happen can alter or lessen my deep regard and affection for you?...No one has moved me and inspired me more than you and I can never forget your exceeding kindness to me. There is no question of our personal relations suffering.”

In 1934, Nehru was suddenly released from prison because of his wife’s serious illness. The release was temporary and he was taken back to prison within ten days. During the interregnum, he wrote a letter to Gandhi on August 13, expressing his anguish and concern about the drift in the freedom movement and the unpleasant developments in the Congress:

“When I heard that you had called of the Civil Disobedience movement, I felt unhappy…I read your statement and this gave me one of the biggest shocks I have ever had...the reasons you gave for doing so and the suggestions you made for future work astounded me. I had a sudden and intense feeling, that something broke inside me, a bond that I had valued very greatly had snapped…I felt terribly lonely in this wide world…left high and dry on a desert island…I wondered often enough if I was not a square peg in a round hole, or a bubble  of conceit thrown about hither and thither on an ocean which spurned me...what had happened to those ideals…I function as a revolutionary…a person working for the fundamental and revolutionary changes, political and social, for I am convinced that no other changes can bring peace or satisfaction  to India and the world.…The leading figures of the Congress suddenly became those people who had obstructed us, held us back, kept aloof from the struggle and even cooperated with the opposite party in the time of our direst need…those who had proclaimed from the house-tops that they had given up politics-for politics were unsafe then- but who emerged with a jump to the front ranks when politics became safe.”

Gandhi wrote him a soothing letter on August 17:

”Your passionate and touching letter deserves a much long reply than my strength will permit… I understand your deep sorrow. You are quite right in giving full and free expression to your feelings...Let me assure you that you have not lost a comrade in me…I have the same passion that you knew me to possess for the common goal. I want complete independence for the country…You are hard on the members of the Working Committee. They are our colleagues such as they are.”

In his Autobiography, Nehru described the personality of Gandhi eulogizing him in a scintillating language:

“What a wonderful man was Gandhiji after all, with his amazing and almost irresistible charm and subtle power over people…And his service to India…He had instilled courage and manhood in her people, and discipline and endurance, and the power of joyful sacrifice for a cause, and, with all his humility, pride…He came to represent India to an amazing degree and to express the very spirit of that ancient and tortured land…He is an extraordinary paradox. I suppose all outstanding men are so to some extent…he is more or less of a philosophical anarchist…If the means are right; the end is bound to be right. That, I think, is the main background of his thought…A man…who has suppressed his passions and emotions, sublimated them and directed them in spiritual channels; a tremendous personality, drawing people to himself like a magnet, he knows his India well and reacts to her lightest tremors, and gauges a situation accurately and almost instinctively, and has a knack of acting at the psychological moment…in spite of his peasant outlook, he was the born rebel, a revolutionary out for big changes, whom no fear of consequences could stop.”

No one else, not even his closest followers, could understood Gandhi so well!