BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj called Nathuram Godse a patriot in parliament, and there was, and still is, much hoo-ha!
Patriotism is a point of view.
To us Indians, Bhagat Singh was a patriot. To the then rulers of this country – the British – he was a terrorist. So was Chandra Shekar Azad. To Akbar, Rana Pratap was a terrorist. To Aurangzeb, Shivaji was a terrorist.
Father Of The Nation
We have been hyped into believing that Mohandas Gandhi is the father of the nation. I know of him – Gandhi was the next door neighbor of my great grandfather’s house in Rajkot, Gujarat, on a lane still known as Dr. Bam Lane.
So a few months ago (June.2014), I asked a question to a hall full of 372 MBA students in Pune:
HOW MANY OF YOU BELIEVE THAT GANDHI IS THE FATHER OF THE NATION?
Only 18 (out of 372) raised their hands – that is less than 5%!
I was not surprised. I ask this question to my students every year and the results have been the same over the years. These were students of age group 20-23 in a top MBA college in Pune.
I teach in many MBA colleges in Pune including Symbiosis. I have also been a visiting professor in BITS Pilani for over a decade. Every year I teach about 1500 students, mostly in Pune . I have been teaching since 1988 and my student base today would be @ 30,000 spread all over the world.
On my facebook page ,I asked about Sakshi Maharaj’s comment on Nathuram Godse . Here are the responses –
Again I asked on facebook, (where I have 36000 friends & followers):
According to you Who is father of the Nation (India)?
<1> Chanakya/Kautilya===330 BCE==2344 years ago.
<2> Chandragupta Maurya–326 BCE=2340 years ago.
<3> Emperor Ashoka–250 BCE=2264 years ago.
<4> Akbar Badshah–1600 AD==414 years ago
<5> Gandhi –1948=66 years ago.
<6> Sardar Patel–1950==64 years ago.
<7> Any other? Give name.
The responses are here:
Nathuram Godse had no personal enmity with Gandhi. Godse’s Logic and thought process (below) show that he was a very brilliant analyst.
“Since the year 1920, that is, after the demise of Lokamanya Tilak, Gandhiji’s influence in the Congress first increased and then became supreme. His activities for public awakening were phenomenal in their intensity and were reinforced by the slogan of truth and non-violence, which he paraded ostentatiously before the country. No sensible or enlightened person could object to those slogans. In fact there is nothing new or original in them. They are implicit in every constitutional public movement. But it is nothing but a mere dream if you imagine that the bulk of mankind is, or can ever become, capable of scrupulous adherence to these lofty principles in its normal life from day to day. In fact, honour, duty and love of one’s own kith and kin and country might often compel us to disregard non-violence and to use force. I could never conceive that an armed resistance to an aggression is unjust. I would consider it a religious and moral duty to resist and, if possible, to overpower such an enemy by use of force. [In the Ramayana] Rama killed Ravana in a tumultuous fight and relieved Sita. [In the Mahabharata], Krishna killed Kansa to end his wickedness; and Arjuna had to fight and slay quite a number of his friends and relations including the revered Bhishma because the latter was on the side of the aggressor. It is my firm belief that in dubbing Rama, Krishna and Arjuna as guilty of violence, the Mahatma betrayed a total ignorance of the springs of human action.“
Now decide for yourself whether Nathuram Godse was a patriot.
Quod Erat Demnostrandum ! (“which had to be demonstrated”)
Image Source: 1