What do you think?
Rate this book
Veer Savarkar : The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition
If India looks forward to its 75th year of Independence, it is also looking at 75 years of the country’s partition. Perhaps the biggest human tragedy of the twentieth century, it was marked by unparalleled violence that was suppressed by interested parties for their own political and ideological reasons. In the analysis of the real factors that led to Partition lies the lesson to protect India’s unity and integrity, as exemplified by the relentless but unsuccessful attempt by Veer Savarkar to prevent the birth of Pakistan.
Arguably the greatest symbol of India’s national integration, Savarkar’s warnings on the threats to India’s security have come true in the past seven decades. Veer Savarkar: The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition uncovers Savarkar, the thinker and the father of India’s national security who has shown the best possible pathway towards one nation that rises above religious, caste and regional feelings. It also proves the falsity of charges levelled against Savarkar from time to time and exposes the motives behind them. It reveals, for the first time, the manner in which the Narendra Modi-led government has implemented Savarkar’s national security and diplomatic vision.
Arguably the greatest symbol of India’s national integration, Savarkar’s warnings on the threats to India’s security have come true in the past seven decades. Veer Savarkar: The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition uncovers Savarkar, the thinker and the father of India’s national security who has shown the best possible pathway towards one nation that rises above religious, caste and regional feelings. It also proves the falsity of charges levelled against Savarkar from time to time and exposes the motives behind them. It reveals, for the first time, the manner in which the Narendra Modi-led government has implemented Savarkar’s national security and diplomatic vision.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published October 12, 2021
26 people are currently reading
162 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
July 13, 2022
As the name of the book suggests, it deals with a very specific idea – could Veer Savarkar have prevented the Partition of India? The authors take us through Savarkar’s life and his repeated warnings on the threats to India’s security and the dangers due to the politics of appeasement. It also suggests how the Narendra Modi Government is currently implementing Savarkar’s national security & diplomatic vision.
While Savarkar is often criticized for his ‘Hindutva’ doctrine, he always believed in the principle of true democracy without concessions for anyone. He put the nation before everything else including religion, caste and regional pride.
Savarkar was also a passionate social reformer. He fought against untouchability, encouraged inter-caste dining, inter-caste marriages and the process of reconversion for any non-Hindu who was keen to adapt the Hindu religion.
He undertook the purification of Marathi by replacing Persion words with Sanskrit ones. He coined the Hindi words such as ‘Doordarshan’ for ‘television’ and ‘Mahapour’ for ‘mayor’. Despite his strong views on language purity, Savarkar was flexible and open to accepting foreign words if there were no synonyms for them in an Indian language.
Savarkar maintained that the words ‘Hindu’, ‘Hindi’, ‘Hindustani’ and ‘Indian’ have the same etymological origin in the river ‘Indus’. He beseeched the Constituent Assembly to adopt Bharat as the name of our nation, Hindi as the national language and Devanagari as the national script. He wrote, “On the banks of the Sindhu our ancient seers sang their first prayers and on the banks of the Sindhu they said their evening prayers, and in respect of whom hundreds of hymns are written.” He warned against the separation of Sindh saying its Hindu culture would get sacrificed as a result.
He called for renaming of the Arabian Sea as ‘Ratnakar’ or ‘Sindhu Sagar’. He had suggested that the new capital of Gujarat should be named after Sardar Patel as ‘Vallabh Nagar’.
He did not believe in opposing for the sake of opposition. His motto was, “Vayam Panchadhikam Shatam (from the Mahabharata). He was a great believer in Shadguna Niti, or the six-fold diplomatic policy: treaty, battle, escape, hold, aid & deceive.
He wrote, “It was in the darkest hour of the night that Shri Krishna was born. It is the indomitable spirit of our inherent vitality that has enabled our national being to prove most immortal in relation to other races or nations.”
Savarkar believed that an enemy’s enemy should be seen as a friend and that there were no permanent friends or permanent enemies on the platform of nations. He believed that had India has an iron-willed prime minister or a steel-nerved president after Independence, not just Nepal and Bhutan but even Burma and far-away Indian semi-colonies such as Mauritius and Dutch Guyana would have joined the Indian Union.
However, Savarkar’s non-populism became an impediment to his acceptability. He was also hamstrung by his attitude and adherence to his beliefs. He sometimes used extremely harsh language to criticize his opponents. He was too much of a realist for a populist nation like India.
I enjoyed reading this book and discovering new facets of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s life. The authors have pieced together his life story through several incidents of the Hindu Mahasabha meetings and his interactions with leaders of nations such as the UK and the USA. I recommend this book to anybody who’s interested in Indian history and/or the events leading up to India’s Partition and its aftermath. You will not be disappointed. Thank you Indica Books for sending me a review copy.
While Savarkar is often criticized for his ‘Hindutva’ doctrine, he always believed in the principle of true democracy without concessions for anyone. He put the nation before everything else including religion, caste and regional pride.
Savarkar was also a passionate social reformer. He fought against untouchability, encouraged inter-caste dining, inter-caste marriages and the process of reconversion for any non-Hindu who was keen to adapt the Hindu religion.
He undertook the purification of Marathi by replacing Persion words with Sanskrit ones. He coined the Hindi words such as ‘Doordarshan’ for ‘television’ and ‘Mahapour’ for ‘mayor’. Despite his strong views on language purity, Savarkar was flexible and open to accepting foreign words if there were no synonyms for them in an Indian language.
Savarkar maintained that the words ‘Hindu’, ‘Hindi’, ‘Hindustani’ and ‘Indian’ have the same etymological origin in the river ‘Indus’. He beseeched the Constituent Assembly to adopt Bharat as the name of our nation, Hindi as the national language and Devanagari as the national script. He wrote, “On the banks of the Sindhu our ancient seers sang their first prayers and on the banks of the Sindhu they said their evening prayers, and in respect of whom hundreds of hymns are written.” He warned against the separation of Sindh saying its Hindu culture would get sacrificed as a result.
He called for renaming of the Arabian Sea as ‘Ratnakar’ or ‘Sindhu Sagar’. He had suggested that the new capital of Gujarat should be named after Sardar Patel as ‘Vallabh Nagar’.
He did not believe in opposing for the sake of opposition. His motto was, “Vayam Panchadhikam Shatam (from the Mahabharata). He was a great believer in Shadguna Niti, or the six-fold diplomatic policy: treaty, battle, escape, hold, aid & deceive.
He wrote, “It was in the darkest hour of the night that Shri Krishna was born. It is the indomitable spirit of our inherent vitality that has enabled our national being to prove most immortal in relation to other races or nations.”
Savarkar believed that an enemy’s enemy should be seen as a friend and that there were no permanent friends or permanent enemies on the platform of nations. He believed that had India has an iron-willed prime minister or a steel-nerved president after Independence, not just Nepal and Bhutan but even Burma and far-away Indian semi-colonies such as Mauritius and Dutch Guyana would have joined the Indian Union.
However, Savarkar’s non-populism became an impediment to his acceptability. He was also hamstrung by his attitude and adherence to his beliefs. He sometimes used extremely harsh language to criticize his opponents. He was too much of a realist for a populist nation like India.
I enjoyed reading this book and discovering new facets of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s life. The authors have pieced together his life story through several incidents of the Hindu Mahasabha meetings and his interactions with leaders of nations such as the UK and the USA. I recommend this book to anybody who’s interested in Indian history and/or the events leading up to India’s Partition and its aftermath. You will not be disappointed. Thank you Indica Books for sending me a review copy.
April 10, 2022
4.5 Stars
One Liner: Informative and easy to read.
Veer Savarkar has been a controversial personality in India for many decades. While the left cabal hates him, the non-left looks up to his values, and there are enough people on the fence who don’t know what to believe.
The partition of India and Pakistan has for long been a gut-wrenching topic. The generational trauma of the survivors of the partition and the subsequent Kashmir genocide (along with the Moplah massacre, the Direct Action Day) are hard to forget, no matter how many intellectuals want to brush them under the carpet.
This book focuses on the events leading to the partition and how Savarkar came close to preventing it from happening. The book isn’t an emotional appeal or an intense read. It has an easy conversational writing style and presents facts with relevant proofs and footnotes.
The book debunks various lies spread about Savarkar and presents the aspects that were hidden from being common knowledge. Do you know that Savarkar was a crusader for equal rights for everyone? He conducted camps to empower the so-called untouchables, organized inter-caste dinners and supported those who wanted to marry people from other castes. The only condition was that the marriage had to be for love and not forced or in the name of revenge. While Ambedkar got into the limelight (not without reason), Savarkar was conveniently pushed into the dark.
Savarkar was emphatic about equal rights, which meant he was dead against the appeasement politics by Congress. Nothing much has changed over the years. In fact, things have gone from bad to worse.
The role of Congress in partition, oh, well! The party has always been a bunch of narrow-minded, visionless politicians (except for a few noteworthy leaders) who never really related to reality, even if it hit them in the face.
When you read the predictions Savarkar made, you realize just how right he was. The book shows his visionary side, and I couldn’t help but admire his grasp of human psychology and the inherent differences in the thought processes of different communities.
The partition has been a psychological game, a manipulation of masses at its very best, which continues even today. What’s crucial to recognize here is that the ones who are hardworking rarely call themselves a victim. It’s almost always the ones with privileges that think they are entitled to special treatment.
The sad truth is that we hardly know of the great Muslim leaders who truly worked for the nation rather than for religious dominance. Many of them fought lone battles, ousted by their own people. Those are the men (& women) we need to know about (the book mentions a few of them, and I couldn’t remember reading about any of them earlier).
Another (not-so) surprising aspect is that the two-nation theory was first proposed by Syed Ahmed Khan in the 1830s something and promoted by Jinnah. But the blame falls on Savarkar, who wanted to keep the country united. (And no, I didn’t get to know of this after reading the book. I found out about this around 4-5 years ago.)
I have to add a point that my heart stopped when I read that the great Mahatma thought there was no need to have an army for India after the partition. He didn’t want Indians to defend themselves from their ‘brothers’. Given the number of attacks we faced during the last 7.5 decades, this one statement was enough to show his inability to see the truth for what it is. Thank God, good sense prevailed in some of the then Congressmen who rejected his words.
I could write a lot more, but will instead leave you with a couple of quotes from the book.
I respect his ability to see patterns by stripping away the disguises with such ease. How clear and precise his opinions were! Sure, he was far from perfect; but who is flawless?
The book has some repetitions and quite a few references to the current government (which might actually dilute the purpose of the book). However, it presents the partition from a broader perspective with emphasis on the political and personal ambitions/ ideologies of a handful of men who successfully messed up millions of lives for their benefit.
I received a review copy from Indica Books in exchange for an honest review. All opinions expressed are my own.
This review is posted as a part of the Thousand Reviewers Club.
*****
PS: I haven’t yet read any other books about Savarkar, and this is my first major reading about this complex national leader.
One Liner: Informative and easy to read.
Veer Savarkar has been a controversial personality in India for many decades. While the left cabal hates him, the non-left looks up to his values, and there are enough people on the fence who don’t know what to believe.
The partition of India and Pakistan has for long been a gut-wrenching topic. The generational trauma of the survivors of the partition and the subsequent Kashmir genocide (along with the Moplah massacre, the Direct Action Day) are hard to forget, no matter how many intellectuals want to brush them under the carpet.
This book focuses on the events leading to the partition and how Savarkar came close to preventing it from happening. The book isn’t an emotional appeal or an intense read. It has an easy conversational writing style and presents facts with relevant proofs and footnotes.
The book debunks various lies spread about Savarkar and presents the aspects that were hidden from being common knowledge. Do you know that Savarkar was a crusader for equal rights for everyone? He conducted camps to empower the so-called untouchables, organized inter-caste dinners and supported those who wanted to marry people from other castes. The only condition was that the marriage had to be for love and not forced or in the name of revenge. While Ambedkar got into the limelight (not without reason), Savarkar was conveniently pushed into the dark.
Savarkar was emphatic about equal rights, which meant he was dead against the appeasement politics by Congress. Nothing much has changed over the years. In fact, things have gone from bad to worse.
The role of Congress in partition, oh, well! The party has always been a bunch of narrow-minded, visionless politicians (except for a few noteworthy leaders) who never really related to reality, even if it hit them in the face.
When you read the predictions Savarkar made, you realize just how right he was. The book shows his visionary side, and I couldn’t help but admire his grasp of human psychology and the inherent differences in the thought processes of different communities.
The partition has been a psychological game, a manipulation of masses at its very best, which continues even today. What’s crucial to recognize here is that the ones who are hardworking rarely call themselves a victim. It’s almost always the ones with privileges that think they are entitled to special treatment.
The sad truth is that we hardly know of the great Muslim leaders who truly worked for the nation rather than for religious dominance. Many of them fought lone battles, ousted by their own people. Those are the men (& women) we need to know about (the book mentions a few of them, and I couldn’t remember reading about any of them earlier).
Another (not-so) surprising aspect is that the two-nation theory was first proposed by Syed Ahmed Khan in the 1830s something and promoted by Jinnah. But the blame falls on Savarkar, who wanted to keep the country united. (And no, I didn’t get to know of this after reading the book. I found out about this around 4-5 years ago.)
I have to add a point that my heart stopped when I read that the great Mahatma thought there was no need to have an army for India after the partition. He didn’t want Indians to defend themselves from their ‘brothers’. Given the number of attacks we faced during the last 7.5 decades, this one statement was enough to show his inability to see the truth for what it is. Thank God, good sense prevailed in some of the then Congressmen who rejected his words.
I could write a lot more, but will instead leave you with a couple of quotes from the book.
Dr. Mukund Ramrao Jayakar said, ‘The word communalism has acquired a most extraordinary significance these days [even before the partition]. If I venture to speak for Hindu rights, I am a communalist, but if a Muslim with nationalist tendencies fights for Muslim rights, he still remains a nationalist.’ [This was about Jinnah.]
If nationalism means that the Hindus should cease to be Hindus, even culturally, racially, or religiously, while all other non-Hindu Indians despise to adopt that attitude in their own cases, then such a nationalism is the most criminal and dastardly betrayal of our true national soul and ancestral heritage.
Any nation who helps India or is friendly towards her struggle for freedom is our friend and the nation which opposes us or presents a policy inimical to us is our foe.
I respect his ability to see patterns by stripping away the disguises with such ease. How clear and precise his opinions were! Sure, he was far from perfect; but who is flawless?
The book has some repetitions and quite a few references to the current government (which might actually dilute the purpose of the book). However, it presents the partition from a broader perspective with emphasis on the political and personal ambitions/ ideologies of a handful of men who successfully messed up millions of lives for their benefit.
I received a review copy from Indica Books in exchange for an honest review. All opinions expressed are my own.
This review is posted as a part of the Thousand Reviewers Club.
*****
PS: I haven’t yet read any other books about Savarkar, and this is my first major reading about this complex national leader.
December 16, 2022
मैं कहूँगी कि सबसे बेहतरीन किताबों में से एक क्योंकि सावरकर को समझने की जरूरत है, उनकी विचारधारा के साथ-साथ उनके चरित्र को भी सामने लाने की जरूरत है।
July 10, 2022
A Fabulous Narrative of A Misunderstood Indian
This book is a riveting read of the decades that led to our independence and the authors' views of its relevance in today's times. The book, as the authors have stated, is dedicated to the future generations of India to build a strong, united and resilient nation. The word "United" is of infinite importance throughout this book.
As we celebrate our 75th year of Independence from the British rule, this book is a great source of time-travel to the 1920s and after. It takes us through the geopolitical and cultural landscape of those times, bringing out deeply researched nuggets from various sections of the society of the times.
Most of us would have read History in School and moved on. In our History textbooks, names like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and Mirza Ismail find prominent mentions as forward-looking individuals of the time. This book provides a counter-narrative and brings out instances from their talks and speeches to provide a balanced view of many such personalities, including Rajaji and Gandhiji. This book also acts as a mirror for Indians of today, to not take independence for granted, to not take life for granted. Individual vigilance and being aware of your immediate as well as geo-surroundings is a big takeaway from Veer Savarkar's life.
For someone who is deeply interested in History and Geopolitics, this book is just mind-blowing! Savarkar's knowledge of world politics, History for that time, I think, was phenomenal. His predictions of the world war and strategies for United India around that time is remarkable. His predictions and foresight during the freedom movement and that of India long after his life, have been proved to be accurate. If Savarkar, like many others even today, had not taken into account History and Geopolitics, India may have looked very different from what it is today. His strength was a deep knowledge of the past and the situational present and his ability to articulate truth-maxims based out of that knowledge which was heeded by the people either as actions or warnings.
Savarkar was a progressive leader with a deep courage of conviction. The Author provides certain scenarios from Savarkar's life of social reforms - it could be dining together with untouchables or even building a temple for untouchables or making them part of chant ceremonies - the intent behind it to have the community united and integrated in the presence of foriegn, divisive forces. This is needed even today.
Savarkar's leadership traits from his speeches to his actions, is a rarity in the world. Indians should be thankful for timely interventions of such people and for them to have walked on our motherland to move the nation ahead, strength to strength. The book has many such instances. The narrative speed that the authors have brought in is absolutely commendable.
This book is a must-read for all History students and interested minds. Since the human mind has a limited retention power or memory, there is a tendency to simplify a narrative for mass consumption. Such treatment of History has been a bane across civilzations and time. A multi-perspective, nuanced narrative of our modern history would not only serve humanity but also guide them, so as to not repeat blunders and learn from those as a collective society. This book is a wonderful example of the latter, with deep research and evidence-based narrative to bring out the legendary personality of Veer Savarkar.
Lastly, the book also provides a graphic account of the partition, arguably the worst human tragedy in our epoch, making the world wars and the holocaust look tiny in front of it. To think that there were our brothers and sisters who went through such a horrific life in the recent past should make us value life and land and not take it for granted.
Rupa Publishing has done a great job with the publishing of the book, including the embossed cover with emphasis on the cap and the spectacles of Veer Savarkar - the attention to detail on the cover also brings out the passion that the authors have in narrating the life of this legendary Indian. Kudos to the authors and all the other authors quoted as references in this book without whose journaling and documentation, these real-life stories would have vapourised, with time, into ether.
Brace yourself for a walk back in time and to unlearn!
This book is a riveting read of the decades that led to our independence and the authors' views of its relevance in today's times. The book, as the authors have stated, is dedicated to the future generations of India to build a strong, united and resilient nation. The word "United" is of infinite importance throughout this book.
As we celebrate our 75th year of Independence from the British rule, this book is a great source of time-travel to the 1920s and after. It takes us through the geopolitical and cultural landscape of those times, bringing out deeply researched nuggets from various sections of the society of the times.
Most of us would have read History in School and moved on. In our History textbooks, names like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan and Mirza Ismail find prominent mentions as forward-looking individuals of the time. This book provides a counter-narrative and brings out instances from their talks and speeches to provide a balanced view of many such personalities, including Rajaji and Gandhiji. This book also acts as a mirror for Indians of today, to not take independence for granted, to not take life for granted. Individual vigilance and being aware of your immediate as well as geo-surroundings is a big takeaway from Veer Savarkar's life.
For someone who is deeply interested in History and Geopolitics, this book is just mind-blowing! Savarkar's knowledge of world politics, History for that time, I think, was phenomenal. His predictions of the world war and strategies for United India around that time is remarkable. His predictions and foresight during the freedom movement and that of India long after his life, have been proved to be accurate. If Savarkar, like many others even today, had not taken into account History and Geopolitics, India may have looked very different from what it is today. His strength was a deep knowledge of the past and the situational present and his ability to articulate truth-maxims based out of that knowledge which was heeded by the people either as actions or warnings.
Savarkar was a progressive leader with a deep courage of conviction. The Author provides certain scenarios from Savarkar's life of social reforms - it could be dining together with untouchables or even building a temple for untouchables or making them part of chant ceremonies - the intent behind it to have the community united and integrated in the presence of foriegn, divisive forces. This is needed even today.
Savarkar's leadership traits from his speeches to his actions, is a rarity in the world. Indians should be thankful for timely interventions of such people and for them to have walked on our motherland to move the nation ahead, strength to strength. The book has many such instances. The narrative speed that the authors have brought in is absolutely commendable.
This book is a must-read for all History students and interested minds. Since the human mind has a limited retention power or memory, there is a tendency to simplify a narrative for mass consumption. Such treatment of History has been a bane across civilzations and time. A multi-perspective, nuanced narrative of our modern history would not only serve humanity but also guide them, so as to not repeat blunders and learn from those as a collective society. This book is a wonderful example of the latter, with deep research and evidence-based narrative to bring out the legendary personality of Veer Savarkar.
Lastly, the book also provides a graphic account of the partition, arguably the worst human tragedy in our epoch, making the world wars and the holocaust look tiny in front of it. To think that there were our brothers and sisters who went through such a horrific life in the recent past should make us value life and land and not take it for granted.
Rupa Publishing has done a great job with the publishing of the book, including the embossed cover with emphasis on the cap and the spectacles of Veer Savarkar - the attention to detail on the cover also brings out the passion that the authors have in narrating the life of this legendary Indian. Kudos to the authors and all the other authors quoted as references in this book without whose journaling and documentation, these real-life stories would have vapourised, with time, into ether.
Brace yourself for a walk back in time and to unlearn!
May 22, 2022
‘Legacy is not what I did for myself. It is what I am doing for the next generation.’ -Vitor Belfort
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a leading Indian politician, activist, and a writer, had a dream of an independent, strong, and prosperous India. He dedicated his whole life to achieve it, but he never got his due even in free India. He was always ostracized as a communal leader. However, he continues to inspire people even today who have kept his legacy alive.
The authors of the book have tried to bring forth the dispassionate analysis of his life and time and have argued that had his timely warnings been taken into consideration the country could have prevented the partition. They observed that Savarkar had a keen sense of national security, and defense and his Nation First vision resonates with the current government.
The book focuses on the circumstances which led to India’s partition. It shows how the minority appeasement policy of Congress made the ground on which the Muslim leadership based their agenda of partition. It also shows how Savarkar tried his best to counter the shenanigans of Muslim League. He asked Hindu youth to join the British army and get arms training in view of the future threat as there were more Muslims than Hindus in the army. He was proved right as during partition 90 per cent of the Muslim soldiers chose to go with Pakistan. The book also analyses Savarkar’s unalloyed nationalism and argues that he never discriminated anyone on the basis of religion.
The book is divided into 8 chapters and has a calendar of life events of Savarkar given towards the end of the book followed by Bibliography and Index. Citations and references can be easily accessed from the footnotes of the pages. The language of the book is quite lucid. However, repetition of the same information makes it a little boring.
The readers should keep in mind that this book is not the biography of Veer Savarkar. Although the authors provided an account of some mistakes committed by him, but it is not clear why he did not become as popular as Gandhi or Nehru and why the Hindu Mahasabha could not gather majority of Hindu votes in the final round of elections before partition. Also, the premise that the present government is implementing Savarkar’s national security and diplomatic vision is not convincing.
Overall, an interesting book to read. It is my first book on Savarkar, and it has intrigued me to know more about him and my next step would be to read his complete biography.
Thanks to Indica books, for sending me this book as a part of the Thousand Reviewers Club.
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a leading Indian politician, activist, and a writer, had a dream of an independent, strong, and prosperous India. He dedicated his whole life to achieve it, but he never got his due even in free India. He was always ostracized as a communal leader. However, he continues to inspire people even today who have kept his legacy alive.
The authors of the book have tried to bring forth the dispassionate analysis of his life and time and have argued that had his timely warnings been taken into consideration the country could have prevented the partition. They observed that Savarkar had a keen sense of national security, and defense and his Nation First vision resonates with the current government.
The book focuses on the circumstances which led to India’s partition. It shows how the minority appeasement policy of Congress made the ground on which the Muslim leadership based their agenda of partition. It also shows how Savarkar tried his best to counter the shenanigans of Muslim League. He asked Hindu youth to join the British army and get arms training in view of the future threat as there were more Muslims than Hindus in the army. He was proved right as during partition 90 per cent of the Muslim soldiers chose to go with Pakistan. The book also analyses Savarkar’s unalloyed nationalism and argues that he never discriminated anyone on the basis of religion.
The book is divided into 8 chapters and has a calendar of life events of Savarkar given towards the end of the book followed by Bibliography and Index. Citations and references can be easily accessed from the footnotes of the pages. The language of the book is quite lucid. However, repetition of the same information makes it a little boring.
The readers should keep in mind that this book is not the biography of Veer Savarkar. Although the authors provided an account of some mistakes committed by him, but it is not clear why he did not become as popular as Gandhi or Nehru and why the Hindu Mahasabha could not gather majority of Hindu votes in the final round of elections before partition. Also, the premise that the present government is implementing Savarkar’s national security and diplomatic vision is not convincing.
Overall, an interesting book to read. It is my first book on Savarkar, and it has intrigued me to know more about him and my next step would be to read his complete biography.
Thanks to Indica books, for sending me this book as a part of the Thousand Reviewers Club.
July 16, 2022
India is a free country for 75 years, Partition is done and Savarkar is long dead. Why should anyone bother reading this book?
To the TL:DR crowd : So that the vivisected Indian territory which we have inherited doesn't slip away because of our naivety, ignorance of history, and rose-tinted vision of reality. If you think the relevance of the book ended with the Partition, be aware that the politics of manufactured grievances is more commonplace now, 100 years after Savarkar with the breaking India forces still active.
Now, should ‘you’ read this book?
If you want to shut your eyes and pretend everything is hunky-dory, give this one a miss. Hindu rights dying a thousand deaths at the altar of so-called secularism will become just too glaring to ignore once you have turned the pages. The parallels between pre- and post-independent India are uncanny and unmistakable.
About the Book
The book analyzes the circumstances for about 40 years in the pre-independent India and how Savarkar represented the strongest and at times, the lone voice in favour of freedom of a unified undivided India. It focuses on his role in foiling several attempts to the Partition and successfully retaining huge parts of the Indian territory on the current Indian map. It is not a biography covering Savarkar’s entire life, or even political career, though general references to those are made in the preface.
The language of the book is moderately easy. The authors have done a good job of putting complex historical events into easily understandable sections. The packaging and cover design are simple but appealing and the hardbound gives a nice to hold-and-read feel.
The book starts at the time of the inception of the Two-Nation theory in the 1880s, the pro-Muslim stance of Congress, and the rise of the Muslim League leading to increasing concessions to Muslims at the cost of Hindu rights. Enter Savarkar, post his release from the Ratnagiri Jail, demanding "one person, one vote" irrespective of class and religion in opposition to 22% Muslims having up to 50% representation in politics (while the other minorities didn't find any need for special treatment). That was his ultra-pro-max-Hindu stance; take note, all ye seculars, pun intended.
The next 4 chapters form the core of the book detailing the Indian political, social and military scenario, and the international relations in the backdrop of the World Wars guiding the Indian Independence struggle, the interactions of the British with Congress, Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, and the key turning events on the Indian and the World stage finally culminating in the Partition. Reading the book in hindsight, it was alternately painful and anger-inducing to go through the chapters leading up to the Partition.
While a few of us might know a bit about Savarkar's revolutionary activities, even fewer know about his diplomacy, his knowledge of world history and affairs, his political prowess, and dare I say, his sharp insight into the nature of the political leaders and ability to see far into the future. Not only he predicted the fatal impact of the weak leadership of the Congress and the evil machinations of the Muslim League leadership and mobilized Hindus to counter the growing threat, but also foresaw the Kashmir valley issue as well as security threats in the North-West Frontier states (in current Pakistan), Punjab and Bengal long before anyone took notice (and which remain sore spots as we speak).
The last couple of chapters deal with Savarkar's warnings and prophecies on national security and international diplomatic relations for post-1947 India and offer some theories for his idiosyncrasies and failures. Even in post-partition India, Gandhi didn’t feel the need for a standing army and over 90% of the Muslims in the then-Indian army decided to join Pakistan. Without intervention from Savarkar, one of the strong champions of the militarization of Hindus, even the territorial integrity of current-day India and saving it from the aggression of newly-formed Pakistan would have become a fanciful daydream.
This is the history of 100 years of appeasement politics.
This is the history of compromises and more compromises and the receding rights of the Hindus.
This is the history of Savarkar, Hindu Mahasabha, and common Hindus putting up a fight against the Pakistan scheme in the name of "right to self-determination", the popularity of which is used/misused to justify practically any nonsense even today.
And this is the history which should have been taught in schools and colleges.
I held Savarkar in high esteem and knowing about the circumstances in which he operated only increased my regards for this great albeit brutally blunt and non-populist man.
As Savarkar contended, "Indian provinces are not private properties of Gandhiji and Rajaji so that they could make a gift of them to anyone they liked" and those who were not committed to the unity and integrity of India had no right to the democratic principle of representation in proportion to the population. 100 years down the line, the words hold truer than ever.
To the TL:DR crowd : So that the vivisected Indian territory which we have inherited doesn't slip away because of our naivety, ignorance of history, and rose-tinted vision of reality. If you think the relevance of the book ended with the Partition, be aware that the politics of manufactured grievances is more commonplace now, 100 years after Savarkar with the breaking India forces still active.
Now, should ‘you’ read this book?
If you want to shut your eyes and pretend everything is hunky-dory, give this one a miss. Hindu rights dying a thousand deaths at the altar of so-called secularism will become just too glaring to ignore once you have turned the pages. The parallels between pre- and post-independent India are uncanny and unmistakable.
About the Book
The book analyzes the circumstances for about 40 years in the pre-independent India and how Savarkar represented the strongest and at times, the lone voice in favour of freedom of a unified undivided India. It focuses on his role in foiling several attempts to the Partition and successfully retaining huge parts of the Indian territory on the current Indian map. It is not a biography covering Savarkar’s entire life, or even political career, though general references to those are made in the preface.
The language of the book is moderately easy. The authors have done a good job of putting complex historical events into easily understandable sections. The packaging and cover design are simple but appealing and the hardbound gives a nice to hold-and-read feel.
The book starts at the time of the inception of the Two-Nation theory in the 1880s, the pro-Muslim stance of Congress, and the rise of the Muslim League leading to increasing concessions to Muslims at the cost of Hindu rights. Enter Savarkar, post his release from the Ratnagiri Jail, demanding "one person, one vote" irrespective of class and religion in opposition to 22% Muslims having up to 50% representation in politics (while the other minorities didn't find any need for special treatment). That was his ultra-pro-max-Hindu stance; take note, all ye seculars, pun intended.
The next 4 chapters form the core of the book detailing the Indian political, social and military scenario, and the international relations in the backdrop of the World Wars guiding the Indian Independence struggle, the interactions of the British with Congress, Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, and the key turning events on the Indian and the World stage finally culminating in the Partition. Reading the book in hindsight, it was alternately painful and anger-inducing to go through the chapters leading up to the Partition.
While a few of us might know a bit about Savarkar's revolutionary activities, even fewer know about his diplomacy, his knowledge of world history and affairs, his political prowess, and dare I say, his sharp insight into the nature of the political leaders and ability to see far into the future. Not only he predicted the fatal impact of the weak leadership of the Congress and the evil machinations of the Muslim League leadership and mobilized Hindus to counter the growing threat, but also foresaw the Kashmir valley issue as well as security threats in the North-West Frontier states (in current Pakistan), Punjab and Bengal long before anyone took notice (and which remain sore spots as we speak).
The last couple of chapters deal with Savarkar's warnings and prophecies on national security and international diplomatic relations for post-1947 India and offer some theories for his idiosyncrasies and failures. Even in post-partition India, Gandhi didn’t feel the need for a standing army and over 90% of the Muslims in the then-Indian army decided to join Pakistan. Without intervention from Savarkar, one of the strong champions of the militarization of Hindus, even the territorial integrity of current-day India and saving it from the aggression of newly-formed Pakistan would have become a fanciful daydream.
This is the history of 100 years of appeasement politics.
This is the history of compromises and more compromises and the receding rights of the Hindus.
This is the history of Savarkar, Hindu Mahasabha, and common Hindus putting up a fight against the Pakistan scheme in the name of "right to self-determination", the popularity of which is used/misused to justify practically any nonsense even today.
And this is the history which should have been taught in schools and colleges.
I held Savarkar in high esteem and knowing about the circumstances in which he operated only increased my regards for this great albeit brutally blunt and non-populist man.
As Savarkar contended, "Indian provinces are not private properties of Gandhiji and Rajaji so that they could make a gift of them to anyone they liked" and those who were not committed to the unity and integrity of India had no right to the democratic principle of representation in proportion to the population. 100 years down the line, the words hold truer than ever.
April 24, 2022
This book tells the unknown version of the story of India's tragic division and Savarkar's efforts to prevent it. It provides unique insights on combating divisive influences in order to achieve the dream of an unified India, as the title suggests. It takes a broader view of the split, focusing on the political and personal ambitions of a small group of men who successfully messed up millions of lives for their own gain.
Savarkar was arguably the most vocal political voice for the Hindu community throughout India's freedom struggle. An alleged atheist and a staunch rationalist who opposed orthodox Hindu beliefs and encouraged inter-caste marriage and dining. Savarkar was adamant about equal rights, which meant he was opposed to other national parties' appeasement policies.
When one reads Savarkar's prophecies, one realises how accurate he was. The book reveals his visionary side, and one may admire his understanding of human psychology and the underlying distinctions in other communities' mental processes.
There is also a comparison and contrasts of Savarkar's beliefs with those of his contemporaneous leaders. Certain flaws in his character have also been noted. This book discusses how his ideas and values have been incorporated into the Indian constitution, as well as the current Indian regime's approach to external threats. It clearly explains how Savarkar was one of the few leaders throughout the independence war who recognised the significance of princely rulers for the new India.
The book doesn’t provide details to know him as a person. The book could have concentrated more on Veer Savarkar and less on India's division, as the title suggests. There are some repeats in the text in the book. Overall a worth reading.
Savarkar was arguably the most vocal political voice for the Hindu community throughout India's freedom struggle. An alleged atheist and a staunch rationalist who opposed orthodox Hindu beliefs and encouraged inter-caste marriage and dining. Savarkar was adamant about equal rights, which meant he was opposed to other national parties' appeasement policies.
When one reads Savarkar's prophecies, one realises how accurate he was. The book reveals his visionary side, and one may admire his understanding of human psychology and the underlying distinctions in other communities' mental processes.
There is also a comparison and contrasts of Savarkar's beliefs with those of his contemporaneous leaders. Certain flaws in his character have also been noted. This book discusses how his ideas and values have been incorporated into the Indian constitution, as well as the current Indian regime's approach to external threats. It clearly explains how Savarkar was one of the few leaders throughout the independence war who recognised the significance of princely rulers for the new India.
The book doesn’t provide details to know him as a person. The book could have concentrated more on Veer Savarkar and less on India's division, as the title suggests. There are some repeats in the text in the book. Overall a worth reading.
November 20, 2021
Eye opener ! This is an extremely well written account of one of the most distorted figures in Indian history. Read this book to understand the other side - a perspective regarding freedom struggle and also on internal and external security related thoughts that you would have never heard of earlier.
November 21, 2021
This book reveals true politics at the time of India's partition and Veer Savarkar's role and efforts in it as a freedom fighter and patriot in the stormy politics of those times. This is a must-read book for anyone interested in the true events and history of India.
June 15, 2022
The story is based on ‘Veer Savarkar’s journey throughout his life, which was taken from true incidents from his own written appx. 6000 books. His leadership qualities, drawbacks & struggles is precisely highlighted. His main fight & concern was on Indian brotherhood, equality, religion, 1947 freedom.
He was known as a great thinker, good chess player and was compared with ‘Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’.
His foresightedness & right judgement was always accurate towards nation which he predicted incidents happening before hand.
Book highlights on india-pakistan partition (cause & impact till date), indo-china fights, country security, political administration, secularism, etc. He emphasised to use our language & give importance to Sanskrit, Hindi & Marathi compared to French & English
Author’ work should be really appreciated who has introduced us to ‘Savarkar’ who has laid his life to bring India in forefront & dedicated himself working for India keeping approach as 'Country First'.
Language used is pure Hindi !
He was known as a great thinker, good chess player and was compared with ‘Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar’.
His foresightedness & right judgement was always accurate towards nation which he predicted incidents happening before hand.
Book highlights on india-pakistan partition (cause & impact till date), indo-china fights, country security, political administration, secularism, etc. He emphasised to use our language & give importance to Sanskrit, Hindi & Marathi compared to French & English
Author’ work should be really appreciated who has introduced us to ‘Savarkar’ who has laid his life to bring India in forefront & dedicated himself working for India keeping approach as 'Country First'.
Language used is pure Hindi !
June 6, 2022
Name📖:-Veer Savarkar
✍️Writer Name:-Uday Mahurkar and Shri Chirayu Pandit
📌THIS is a true story based storybook.Life journey of Savarkar is written here.His commitment, achievement is unbelievable.
I liked the way author analysis and research the whole matter and present in front of us.
✨The used language in this book is easy and rich.
This book is for all those who wants to learn leadership.
The book advances proof to demonstrate that Savarkar's Hindutva is basically unalloyed patriotism in light of genuine 'Country First'
✨the book is an inspiring book for students.
My Rating:-5/5
Absolutely superb👌....
✍️Writer Name:-Uday Mahurkar and Shri Chirayu Pandit
📌THIS is a true story based storybook.Life journey of Savarkar is written here.His commitment, achievement is unbelievable.
I liked the way author analysis and research the whole matter and present in front of us.
✨The used language in this book is easy and rich.
This book is for all those who wants to learn leadership.
The book advances proof to demonstrate that Savarkar's Hindutva is basically unalloyed patriotism in light of genuine 'Country First'
✨the book is an inspiring book for students.
My Rating:-5/5
Absolutely superb👌....
May 21, 2022
“How can a man be so accurate and prophetic about the machinations of divisive forces” was the recurring thought I kept wondering throughout the length of this book.
While this book is not a biography of Veer Savarkar, it does brings to light an entire new perspective of him (from his life and his works) which has been overlooked/ understudied all these years. This book also puts forth the Savarkar’s side of explanation for some of the popular (mis)conceptions about his life, his affiliations and his agenda.
The main premise of this book is regarding the events leading to the partition of India that happened in 1947 CE and is centered around the activities of leading revolutionary and a political maestro Veer Savarkar.
The origin’s for the vivisection can be traced back to as far back as 1880 CE, to the actions of Syed Ahmed Khan; the founder of Aligarh Muslim university. He can be termed as the father of “2 nation theory” which believed that the geographical unit called India had 2 separate nations (Hindu and Muslim) living in it. The theory which was later materialized into a reality by Mohammed Ali Jinnah by choking the Congress into submission.
Indian National Congress right from its inception had been chasing the mirage called Hindu-Muslim unity. The book, and myself called this unity a “mirage” because, of 2 main reasons: the pan-ismalic mindset of majority of Muslims of that era and the approach Congress employed of Muslim appeasement at the cost of Hindu rights in its course of attaining this unity.
This mirage chase gathered momentum with the arrival of M.K. Gandhi to the political arena and the countdown for the partition had begun.
The book traces the exact timeline of events that culminated in the partition, and shows that the first standout event that appears to have emboldened a section of separatists in the United India is the “Khilafat movement”.
Congress or specifically Gandhi gave his unequivocal support to a pan-ismalic moment known as “Khilafat movement” hoping that this might cajole the Muslim community into joining the freedom movement. But instead, what happened was, as soon as the Khilafat agitation failed to achieve its objective, the fury of the Moplah Muslims in Kerala was directed towards innocent Hindus who had infact cooperated with them during the movement owing to the call of Gandhi.
The book then shows the ignorance displayed by top leadership of the Congress in acknowledging the violence and bloodshed caused by the moplahs, and shows how such submissive tactics by the Gandhi and his Congress just encouraged the separatists to make further demands for concessions and privileges instead of joining him to achieve the common goal of independence.
This minority appeasement of Congress, convinced/forced Jinnah to take the communal road to draw the Muslim community towards his Muslim League, which showed its true intention in its 1940 resolution.
The 1940 Pakistan resolution as it is commonly called, practically demanded the vivisection of the country on communal lines and the Gandhi’s response to this made the partition of the country almost a forgone conclusion.
This book falsifies the commonly held belief that Pandit Nehru was the one responsible for partition and Gandhi had opposed the partition by fighting tooth and nail. The dispassionate analysis of the events presented in this book shows that it was Gandhi who had virtually agreed on the partition in the name of “right of self determination” of the Muslim community.
Gandhi was the mastermind behind the Desai-Liaquat pact, which meant that the Congress would treat 22 per cent Muslims in undivided India as 50 per cent in all political matters. In one stroke, the pact reduced Hindus to a
minority in their motherland because they too were to be treated as 50 per cent despite their population being 75 per cent. With this, the Congress practically conceded that Hindus and Muslims are two seperate entities in India, which proved to be the first step for the realization of Jinnah’s two-nation theory.
Gandhi was the enforcer for Rajaji’s C.R plan which opened the floodgates for Pakistan. C.R plan meant that, based on the votes of adults in the NW and NE regions of United India, the Muslims could demand a separation from the Indian union.
Surprisingly, atleast for me, Nehru fought the partition plan with an unnatural grit and even went to the extent of virtually rejecting the chance to preside an interim government by opposing the cabinet mission which had suggested a weak center and strong provincial government post-independemce. Therefore, when Nehru said “had Gandhi stood firm against the Pakistan scheme, Congressmen would have followed him” after independence, it does feel like an honest assessment of the situation.
In such a hopeless situation, when the unity of the nation was rolling down the spiral, there was one man, one party who gave there all trying to prevent the partition.
I had known him as a great revolutionary, had read his “First war of Indian independence”, had heard of his transportation for life, but this book presents a different facet of him altogether. The book introduces us to Veer Savarkar- father of National security.
Present day leftist cabal wants us to believe that Savarkar was nothing more than a apologist, a communal arm chair warrior. The book successfully debunks these myths and shows that the “Hindutva” concept of Savarkar meant nothing other than unflinching nationalism, where the welfare of the nation holds the precedence over race, religion, caste, creed etc.
Hindutva was Savarkar’s antidote for the poison of minority appeasement propagated by the Congress. Savarkar’s Hindutva was the idea where there would be equal rights for all instead of the Congress’s way of appeasement of minority at the cost of Hindu rights.
I won’t list everything Savarkar did to stop partition, one should read the book to know all the facets of the concept “Hindutva” and all the efforts Savarkar made to prevent the partition. It’s really an eye opener when you realize how easily the left had manipulated the image of Savarkar.
The book doesn’t limit itself to Savarkar’s activities just around partition. It also showcases the programs Savarkar undertook to the uplifting of the Hindu community. He used to organize intercaste dinings, supported temple entry for dalits, encouraged the shuddhi movement among others to eradict the dogmas prevalent in the society during his times.
Finally, this book is not an apologia for Veer Savarkar. The book just presents the facts -as is- dispassionately. The book also discusses the mistakes committed by Savarkar, controversies which were not even necessary and possible reasons why Savarkar could not achieve the stardom or fan following of Gandhi.
The book narrates the painful saga of India’s vivisection where a very large section of people disowned their motherland-just like that. One could literally feel the frustration of country’s unity slipping out of the hand while reading through the pages of the blunders created by Gandhi and Congress. The readers too will the same helplessness Savarkar might have felt when the country was partitioned inspite of his mighty efforts. The book shows the readers some hope while it narrates the change in India’s present diplomatic policies which is actually keeping inline with Savarkar’s vision of national security.
The book is an eye opener and a must read. My heartfelt gratitude to the Indica team for sending this book for me.
Review: 4.5/5
While this book is not a biography of Veer Savarkar, it does brings to light an entire new perspective of him (from his life and his works) which has been overlooked/ understudied all these years. This book also puts forth the Savarkar’s side of explanation for some of the popular (mis)conceptions about his life, his affiliations and his agenda.
The main premise of this book is regarding the events leading to the partition of India that happened in 1947 CE and is centered around the activities of leading revolutionary and a political maestro Veer Savarkar.
The origin’s for the vivisection can be traced back to as far back as 1880 CE, to the actions of Syed Ahmed Khan; the founder of Aligarh Muslim university. He can be termed as the father of “2 nation theory” which believed that the geographical unit called India had 2 separate nations (Hindu and Muslim) living in it. The theory which was later materialized into a reality by Mohammed Ali Jinnah by choking the Congress into submission.
Indian National Congress right from its inception had been chasing the mirage called Hindu-Muslim unity. The book, and myself called this unity a “mirage” because, of 2 main reasons: the pan-ismalic mindset of majority of Muslims of that era and the approach Congress employed of Muslim appeasement at the cost of Hindu rights in its course of attaining this unity.
This mirage chase gathered momentum with the arrival of M.K. Gandhi to the political arena and the countdown for the partition had begun.
The book traces the exact timeline of events that culminated in the partition, and shows that the first standout event that appears to have emboldened a section of separatists in the United India is the “Khilafat movement”.
Congress or specifically Gandhi gave his unequivocal support to a pan-ismalic moment known as “Khilafat movement” hoping that this might cajole the Muslim community into joining the freedom movement. But instead, what happened was, as soon as the Khilafat agitation failed to achieve its objective, the fury of the Moplah Muslims in Kerala was directed towards innocent Hindus who had infact cooperated with them during the movement owing to the call of Gandhi.
The book then shows the ignorance displayed by top leadership of the Congress in acknowledging the violence and bloodshed caused by the moplahs, and shows how such submissive tactics by the Gandhi and his Congress just encouraged the separatists to make further demands for concessions and privileges instead of joining him to achieve the common goal of independence.
This minority appeasement of Congress, convinced/forced Jinnah to take the communal road to draw the Muslim community towards his Muslim League, which showed its true intention in its 1940 resolution.
The 1940 Pakistan resolution as it is commonly called, practically demanded the vivisection of the country on communal lines and the Gandhi’s response to this made the partition of the country almost a forgone conclusion.
This book falsifies the commonly held belief that Pandit Nehru was the one responsible for partition and Gandhi had opposed the partition by fighting tooth and nail. The dispassionate analysis of the events presented in this book shows that it was Gandhi who had virtually agreed on the partition in the name of “right of self determination” of the Muslim community.
Gandhi was the mastermind behind the Desai-Liaquat pact, which meant that the Congress would treat 22 per cent Muslims in undivided India as 50 per cent in all political matters. In one stroke, the pact reduced Hindus to a
minority in their motherland because they too were to be treated as 50 per cent despite their population being 75 per cent. With this, the Congress practically conceded that Hindus and Muslims are two seperate entities in India, which proved to be the first step for the realization of Jinnah’s two-nation theory.
Gandhi was the enforcer for Rajaji’s C.R plan which opened the floodgates for Pakistan. C.R plan meant that, based on the votes of adults in the NW and NE regions of United India, the Muslims could demand a separation from the Indian union.
Surprisingly, atleast for me, Nehru fought the partition plan with an unnatural grit and even went to the extent of virtually rejecting the chance to preside an interim government by opposing the cabinet mission which had suggested a weak center and strong provincial government post-independemce. Therefore, when Nehru said “had Gandhi stood firm against the Pakistan scheme, Congressmen would have followed him” after independence, it does feel like an honest assessment of the situation.
In such a hopeless situation, when the unity of the nation was rolling down the spiral, there was one man, one party who gave there all trying to prevent the partition.
I had known him as a great revolutionary, had read his “First war of Indian independence”, had heard of his transportation for life, but this book presents a different facet of him altogether. The book introduces us to Veer Savarkar- father of National security.
Present day leftist cabal wants us to believe that Savarkar was nothing more than a apologist, a communal arm chair warrior. The book successfully debunks these myths and shows that the “Hindutva” concept of Savarkar meant nothing other than unflinching nationalism, where the welfare of the nation holds the precedence over race, religion, caste, creed etc.
Hindutva was Savarkar’s antidote for the poison of minority appeasement propagated by the Congress. Savarkar’s Hindutva was the idea where there would be equal rights for all instead of the Congress’s way of appeasement of minority at the cost of Hindu rights.
I won’t list everything Savarkar did to stop partition, one should read the book to know all the facets of the concept “Hindutva” and all the efforts Savarkar made to prevent the partition. It’s really an eye opener when you realize how easily the left had manipulated the image of Savarkar.
The book doesn’t limit itself to Savarkar’s activities just around partition. It also showcases the programs Savarkar undertook to the uplifting of the Hindu community. He used to organize intercaste dinings, supported temple entry for dalits, encouraged the shuddhi movement among others to eradict the dogmas prevalent in the society during his times.
Finally, this book is not an apologia for Veer Savarkar. The book just presents the facts -as is- dispassionately. The book also discusses the mistakes committed by Savarkar, controversies which were not even necessary and possible reasons why Savarkar could not achieve the stardom or fan following of Gandhi.
The book narrates the painful saga of India’s vivisection where a very large section of people disowned their motherland-just like that. One could literally feel the frustration of country’s unity slipping out of the hand while reading through the pages of the blunders created by Gandhi and Congress. The readers too will the same helplessness Savarkar might have felt when the country was partitioned inspite of his mighty efforts. The book shows the readers some hope while it narrates the change in India’s present diplomatic policies which is actually keeping inline with Savarkar’s vision of national security.
The book is an eye opener and a must read. My heartfelt gratitude to the Indica team for sending this book for me.
Review: 4.5/5
March 14, 2022
Book Review: Veer Savarkar the Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition
Author:
Publishers:
Point:8/10
“Dhagdhagle Agnikunda, Validani Bharat Bhuvar, Dashadisha Tujhi Jayghosh, Swatantraveer Savarkar “
So, the attempt of the Tukde Tukde Gang to defame Savarkar ended up with popularising him as many books have published about him (Two of them are bestsellers) and a Mahesh Manjrekar movie on him is coming.
So, the author of this book thinks that this time is the dawn of Savarkar era as the current government is taking many measures of national security preached by him and he is inspiring the youth of this era. When you think, “it is true?” The answer comes, “yes". Because of the high popularity of Vikram Sampath’s works on Savarkar are bestsellers now and most of the readers are from youths. This indicates that, the current generation wants to know true history by reading book, not by social media memes.
Many of the tukde tukde gang portrays Savarkar as the founder of the two nation theory. But this book proved that the real father of this theory is Syed Ahmed Khan. The author provided the process of thinking that leaded to the partition of our nation, which is very similar to the thoughts of pseudo-secularists and Islamists of now a days.
The author provided the tragic story of partition in Savarkar’s view point. How the Muslim league became aggresive about special rights of the Moslems and the Congress surrendered to it every time. When the accused-communal Savarkar demanded equal rights for every Indian. This tendency of the Congress and unawareness of Hindus toward Savarkar's call led to the partition of our beloved nation. This book also provides the vision of Savarkar for national security and national integration. At last, the author also blamed Savarkar for some of his blunders.
If you have read Vikram Sampath’s Savarkar series, you can’t skip this book.
Author:
Publishers:
Point:8/10
“Dhagdhagle Agnikunda, Validani Bharat Bhuvar, Dashadisha Tujhi Jayghosh, Swatantraveer Savarkar “
So, the attempt of the Tukde Tukde Gang to defame Savarkar ended up with popularising him as many books have published about him (Two of them are bestsellers) and a Mahesh Manjrekar movie on him is coming.
So, the author of this book thinks that this time is the dawn of Savarkar era as the current government is taking many measures of national security preached by him and he is inspiring the youth of this era. When you think, “it is true?” The answer comes, “yes". Because of the high popularity of Vikram Sampath’s works on Savarkar are bestsellers now and most of the readers are from youths. This indicates that, the current generation wants to know true history by reading book, not by social media memes.
Many of the tukde tukde gang portrays Savarkar as the founder of the two nation theory. But this book proved that the real father of this theory is Syed Ahmed Khan. The author provided the process of thinking that leaded to the partition of our nation, which is very similar to the thoughts of pseudo-secularists and Islamists of now a days.
The author provided the tragic story of partition in Savarkar’s view point. How the Muslim league became aggresive about special rights of the Moslems and the Congress surrendered to it every time. When the accused-communal Savarkar demanded equal rights for every Indian. This tendency of the Congress and unawareness of Hindus toward Savarkar's call led to the partition of our beloved nation. This book also provides the vision of Savarkar for national security and national integration. At last, the author also blamed Savarkar for some of his blunders.
If you have read Vikram Sampath’s Savarkar series, you can’t skip this book.
Read
May 14, 2022Due to character limitations of Goodreads, This is not my full review. You can read it here:
https://www.keetabikeeda.in/post/veer...
This book is not a biography. If you want to read a detailed biography of Savarkar, I will highly suggest you read the extremely detailed two volumes written by Shri Vikram Sampath Ji and the early works by Shri Dhananjay Keer ji. What this book is, is exactly what is the title of the book. The book talks about the various things that led to the partition of the country, and what could have prevented it.
2022 marks the diamond jubilee of India's Independence, but it also marks 75 years to the horrifying partition, which saw 1.5 million deaths and plunder and rape of thousands of women in what was nothing less than medieval vandalism. It was the greatest catastrophe to hit humanity in the twentieth century, perhaps even greater than the Nazi Holocaust. But the pressures of vote-bank politics have worked overtime in this country to ensure that the nation forgets this tragedy and doesn’t draw a lesson from it. The book attempts to ensure that the country draws the right lessons from that gory attempt to prevent its recurrence.
SAVARKAR AND THE MERCY PETITION. IS IT REALLY THAT SIMPLE?
During his internment in Ratnagiri between 1924 and 1937, Savarkar led the most potent movement against untouchability in Indian history and called this the Hindu Sangatan. Its high point was the opening of the first ever Hindu temple in Ratnagiri in recent history that allowed the entry of untouchables-namely the Patit Pavan Mandir. From Gandhi, to Ambedkar everyone lauded the movement.
Ever since partition in the seven odd decades, quite a lot has been written about Savarkar. A set of writers from the far-Left, pan-Islamist mindset condemned Savarkar either in their books or columns for his `divisive thinking’ and `harsh treatment of Muslims’. These same people have gone great lengths to defame Savarkar and make him unacceptable to the new generation by focusing on his clemency petitions to the British government seeking release from rigorous imprisonment form the Cellular Jain in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Ratnagiri Jail, where he passed the last three years of his rigorous imprisonment before being set free by the British in 1924 and allowed to do non-political work within the precincts of Ratnagiri district. Most of his petitions for clemency were for all the prisoners who were with him and not just for him. He talked about these petitions in the Marathi Book `Andamanchya Andheritun’{from the darkness of Andaman) He says he tried to impress his fellow prisoners by giving the example of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, the nationalist hero who tried the same ruseto come out of Aurangazeb’s captivity in Agra in 1666 among other examples. The left and the pan Islamist writers have not just deliberately ignored Savarkar’s writings about the justification behind his clemency petitions but have gone further and found a cunning way of contrasting Savarkar’s patriotism and mercy petitions to Bhagat Singh’s sacrifice in embracing the gallows with a smiling face. They appropriated Bhagat Singh and projected him as a face of Left ideology, thus contrasting the patriotism of Hindutva revolutionary forces with that of communists. This appropriation of Bhagat Singh requires a closer look after the plethora of evidence that is available. Questions were raised about his autobiographical essay titled `Why Am I An Atheist’, published by a Left Historian. All his collective works which he wrote in jail is available in the national archives EXCEPT for the manuscript of this essay. Leftists declare him an atheist because they claim the found a book on Lenin in his jail cell. What they fail to mention is they found 4 other books, which include one on Maharana Pratap, one on Guru Gobind Sing and one on Punjab’s romantic legend, Heer-Ranjha. The last line in his letter from jail to his younger brother says, “Jo rab nu Manzoor (Whatever God ordains)”. No further questions, your honor.
HSRA or the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, a nomenclature that was selected only because it symbolized the fight against British imperialism and was apparently inspired by Lenin’s revolution against the Russian imperialism, which was then not very old. Bhagat Singh in his article, `Vishwa Prem’ wrote , `We describe Savarkar as an arch anarchist and vitriolic revolutionary but ultimately he was a brave believer in world brotherhood’. He even quoted Savarkar several times in his Jail Diaries from Savarkar’s Hindu Pad Padashahi. These quotes no where indicate he had communist leanings. One quote says, ‘It is easy to break the shackles of political bondage, but very difficult to break the shackles of cultural bondage’. Another one says, ‘It is good to die rather than accept conversion(to other religious faiths) but it is even better to fight and defeat the violent forces ranged against Dharma and die in doing so.
THE ALIGARH MOVEMENT
The book first talks about the forces that led to the partition. Like the Two-Nation theorists. It all began at Aligarh. You must have read about the `The Aligarh Movement’. The moorings of the Aligarh Movement trace back to `Sir’ Syed Ahmed Khan(1817-98), recognized as a Mohammedan social reformist, educationist and founder of the Indian Patriotic Association and the Muhammad Anglo-Oriental College (MAO College in 1875), later known as the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).
Sir Syed was of two mouths. In front of the Muslim audience, he warns against the parliamentary system of governance. And that in such system it Muslim Interests will not be safeguarded under a Hindu leader and as Muslims ruled over Hindu’s for centuries, if Hindu’s rule over Muslims now, it will be. He said that the British Christians were their Abrahamic cousins and it is better to be ruled by them than Kaffir Hindus. On the other hand he was a member of the INC and was all for Hindu-Muslim unity against the British. The truth of the matter is that Syed Ahmed spoke in two voices. The moderate one meant for the consumption of Moderate Hindus, who too had donated huge amounts of money for the Aligarh College, and the hardline, separatist voice to inspire his Muslim brethren in Aligarh and beyond.
The city of Aligarh has been well known for its lock industry. But the deadlock created by the Aligarh Movement hindered the progress of the Indian Nation, long after Syed’s death in 1898. His successors felt the need for the a political party to safeguard Muslim Interests and rights and to inculcate loyalty to the British in the hearts of Muslims. The All India Muslim League, better known as the Muslim League was thus born in December 1906. The Muslim League president placed a 12 point demand before the British government, whose tone was similar to that of Aga Khan. Which were then granted in 1909 in the Morley-Minto Reforms. Gopal Krishna Gokhale, better known as Gandhi’s political mentor , himself expressed to William Wedderburn(one of the Congress Founders), the disquiet he felt over `the not only unjust but monstrously unjust’ representation granted to the Moslems. In his statement, Gokhale made three strong, historical points about the reforms in spite of his moderate thoughts.
1. The Muslims of this land have descended from the Hindu stock. Their attitude has undergone a change due to forced conversion. Hindus are far ahead of Muslims in matters of numerical strength, wealth, education and social conscience. The present national awakening has been achieved mainly by Hindus. They are moderate and submissive and also weakened by caste differences.
2. Muslims claim they ruled over India for 500 years. It must however be remembered that Hindus ruled for several thousand years prior to it and even before the arrival of the British. Hindus had established their rule by defeating the Muslims
3. It is strange that those who do not owe their allegiance to India are getting better representation than those with patriotic fervor
Contrary to Gokhale’s strong stand against the Morley-Minto Reforms, his disciple Gandhi supported the reforms by giving his own logic, thus overlooking the divisive agenda of a section of Muslims , who were pan Islamists. To directly quote him…” I am emphatically of the view that the Hindus should give to the Muslims whatever they ask for, and willingly accept whatever sacrifice this may involve. Unity will be brought about only through such mutual generosity”.
GANDHI: REALLY A MAHATMA?
In its eagerness to present a united front against the British policy of dividing Hindus and Muslims by enticing the latter, the Congress signed the Lucknow Pact in 1916. This is often seen as the foundation of Muslim appeasement in the country. The Lucknow Pact had opened the doors for a Muslim-appeasement policy, which was to ultimately lead to India’s partition and continues to bedevil the nation till this day and impede its progress.
During the Khilafat Movement, Gandhi declared Hindu (or the Congress) support to the pan-Islamic movement of the Muslims and used it to launch the non-cooperation movement against the draconian Rowlatt Act 1919 and the Jallianwala Bagh killing of innocent Hindus and Sikhs by General Dyer. This impractical alliance was fraught with disastrous consequences as Muslims cared little for the Congress agenda and were concerned with only the success of the Khilafat agitation. Hindus, at large, were not attracted by the Congress–Muslim alliance; in fact, they felt some kind of disconnect with it. Gandhi too rejected the suggestion point blank saying there couldn’t be any preconditions when it came to a genuine friendship between two friends. Not just that, Gandhi also looked the other way, despite his steadfastness to the ideal of non-violence, when the Maulanas involved in the movement recited violent verses from the Koran centered around the concept of jehad and killing of Kafirs while taking potshots at the British government on the Khilafat issue.
Dr K.B. Hedgewar, originally a Congress worker of Nagpur who went to jail during the Khilafat movement and before that a revolutionary of the Anushilan Samiti, starting the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in 1925 as a Hindu bulwark against the rising Muslim appeasement and Islamic fanaticism. Hedgewar’s transformation from a simple Congress worker to a defender of Hindu faith and culture is interesting. Once Hedgewar and a Muslim leader named Samiulla Khan were travelling for a conference during the Khilafat days. Hedgewar casually asked Khan that the ‘Gandhian cap is accepted by everyone nowadays. Why don’t you wear that instead of [the] Turkish skull cap?’ Samiulla answered: ‘I am a Muslim first. This cap is my religious symbol. So, there is no question of doffing it. Hedgewar understood that when Hindus removed their turbans for the Gandhian cap, Muslims kept their skull caps intact. Therefore, their closeness to the Congress was for an Islamic cause and not for a common cause.
Gandhi’s pro-Muslim bias—evident from his observation that ‘the Mussalman as a rule is a bully, and the Hindu as a rule is a coward’, and his reference to Rana Pratap, Chhatrapati Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh, who successfully fought against Muslim rule, as ‘misguided patriots’. After Bhagat Singh’s act of killing British officer John Saunders, who was responsible for Lala Lajpat Rai’s death, Gandhi warned: ”The Bhagat Singh worship has done and is doing incalculable harm to the country… The deed itself is being worshipped as if it was worthy of emulation. The result is goondaism and degradation wherever this mad worship is being performed. The Congress is a power in the land, but I warn Congressmen that it will soon lose all its charm if they betray their trust and encourage the Bhagat Singh cult whether in thought, word or deed”.
After Udham Singh shot dead Michael O’Dwyer in March 1940 and took heroic revenge of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Gandhi called it an ‘insane act.
Deshbandhu Chittaranjan Das, a member of the Swarajya party within the Congress, struck the Bengal Pact in 1923 with the Muslims in Bengal on the eve of an important election. The pact allowed Muslims: 1. The authority to indulge in cow slaughter without opposition from Hindus.
2. Sixty per cent reservation in jobs to Muslims in Bengal and 80 per cent reservation in jobs in the Calcutta Municipal Corporation.
3. Ban on the Hindu community taking out religious processions from near the mosques.
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the Congress president during the most crucial period before Partition, and widely regarded as a towering symbol of Hindu–Muslim unity, shocked everyone by his views on the Bengal Pact, which were published in his autobiography India Wins Freedom. He called the rejection of the Bengal Pact as the first seed of Partition and eulogized Chittaranjan Das for creating a great nationalist atmosphere amongst the Bengal Hindus by signing the Bengal Pact.
THE LIBERAL JINNAH
Sheshrao B. More, a scholar of Muslim politics, insists that Jinnah, like most Muslim leaders of his time, had a separatist streak from the beginning, but differed from others because of his sophistication. He is known to have been protecting Muslim interests from within the Congress, even while maintaining a liberal face on the surface.
His stand as a Muslim League leader in 1924 gives a clear indication of his penchant to snatch special concessions for Muslims. The meeting of the Muslim League on 24 May 1924 in Lahore, presided over by Jinnah as president, put conditions for any Constitution of India acceptable to Muslims. In this, the first condition was aimed at keeping the Centre weak ‘with full autonomy to the provinces with central government functions being confined to matter of general and common concern’. This condition was also in contradiction of the Government of India Act of 1935 aimed at a strong Centre, which could have prevented Partition had it not been abandoned in the wake of World War II. One of the other conditions was that the mode of representation in elected bodies shall guarantee adequate and effective protection to minorities in every province and would be through separate electorates but with the provision that no majority shall be reduced to a minority and even to equality.
The moment for Jinnah to turn openly communal arrived after the Simon Commission came to India in 1928 and was boycotted by all except the Muslim League led by Mian Muhammad Shafi and the Justice Party of Madras. The Congress boycotted the commission for having no Indian member on it and for its one-sided nature. Later, the Congress called an all-party conference to demonstrate to the British rulers that Indians were capable of setting the national agenda on their own without a Simon Commission. Both the Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League, led by Jinnah, participated in the conference. However, the views of the Muslim League differed on representation of various communities in state legislatures and on separating Sindh from the then Bombay province. Jinnah also wanted other concessions from the Congress, including separate electorates for Muslims, more in proportion to their numbers. In the meantime, Motilal Nehru’s Nehru Report, seeking dominion status for India and recommending joint electorates based on fair play and rejecting the special demands of the Muslims, started creating waves to the detriment of the Muslim League and Jinnah. Jinnah called an all-party conference at Calcutta to discuss this report. Opposing Jinnah’s pro-Muslim demands at this conference, well[1]known educationist and politician Dr Mukund Ramrao (M.R.) Jayakar, who had been associated with both the Hindu Mahasabha and the Congress and had also been the director, along with Jinnah, on the board of The Bombay Chronicle, said: ‘The word communalism has acquired a most extraordinary significance these days. If I venture to speak for Hindu rights, I am a communalist, but if a Muslim with nationalist tendencies fights for Muslim rights, he still remains a nationalist. There is no use hiding the fact that all the amendments put forward by Mr Jinnah had their origin in communal spirit’.
After the denial of his demands at the all-party meeting, Jinnah convened an All Parties Muslim Conference at Delhi in 1929 and took a giant step towards realizing his ambition. He openly donned Muslim colors by presenting a charter of 14 demands on behalf of the Muslim community. (Fourteen Points of Jinnah - Wikipedia). On a closer look, one can trace the foundations of Pakistan to these demands, the major features of which include a weak Centre, provincial autonomy, promoting Muslim religious and political interests at the cost of Hindu rights, separation of Sindh from Bombay province, and on the other hand, no territorial redistribution affecting the Muslim majority in Punjab, Bengal and the North-West Frontier Province. Now it was clear that Jinnah had decided the political course of his life promoting pro-Muslim agenda at Hindu cost and used it to become the undisputed leader of the Muslims.
Choudhary Rahmat Ali, a Muslim student of Gujjar origin from India’s Hoshiarpur district studying in Cambridge University, coined the word ‘Pakistan’ for this proposed nation in a pamphlet titled Now or Never: Are We to Live or Perish. In this pamphlet, he implored the Muslims to break away from India to form a separate Islamic State, the time for which he thought was most opportune at that moment. The time was also opportune for Jinnah’s rise as the undisputed leader of the Muslims in India. It coincided with Gandhi becoming the supreme leader of the Hindus after he refused to attend the first Round Table Conference in London in 1930 following Viceroy Lord Irwin’s refusal to give him any assurance on his demand for a new Constitution and dominion status for India. Leaders of other parties attended the conference. Muslim leaders were unaffected by Gandhi’s absence, as they were busy playing their own game of seeking more and more concessions in connivance with the British. However, as Gandhi launched the Salt Satyagraha in India that year, the Hindu leaders attending the conference in London such as Munje and Tej Bahadur Sapru lost face as they were seen as traitors by the Hindu populace, which had started seeing Gandhi and the Congress as patriots. This was in spite of the fact that Munje demanded complete independence from British rule at the conference and also opposed special demands of the Muslims, thus protecting Hindu rights. The British prime minster Ramsay MacDonald dropped a hint of what was to come when he harped on the need for special powers to be vested in the Viceroy to protect the interest of the minorities, which, he said, was the British government’s responsibility. Significantly, in a few years of Jinnah’s 14 demands came the British Communal Award after the second Round Table conference of 1931, which in many ways addressed many of Jinnah’s demands. Interestingly, the second Round Table Conference was attended by Gandhi following a compromise with the British in the form of the Gandhi–Irwin Pact, but he could make no impact on the Muslim League and Muslim demands. He also failed to prevent the Muslim League and other Muslim representatives from allowing him to be the sole representative of all Indians at the conference..
.
Received the book from Indica Book Club for the 1000 Reviews Program. Grateful to Indica Book Club for this initiative.
https://www.keetabikeeda.in/post/veer...
This book is not a biography. If you want to read a detailed biography of Savarkar, I will highly suggest you read the extremely detailed two volumes written by Shri Vikram Sampath Ji and the early works by Shri Dhananjay Keer ji. What this book is, is exactly what is the title of the book. The book talks about the various things that led to the partition of the country, and what could have prevented it.
2022 marks the diamond jubilee of India's Independence, but it also marks 75 years to the horrifying partition, which saw 1.5 million deaths and plunder and rape of thousands of women in what was nothing less than medieval vandalism. It was the greatest catastrophe to hit humanity in the twentieth century, perhaps even greater than the Nazi Holocaust. But the pressures of vote-bank politics have worked overtime in this country to ensure that the nation forgets this tragedy and doesn’t draw a lesson from it. The book attempts to ensure that the country draws the right lessons from that gory attempt to prevent its recurrence.
SAVARKAR AND THE MERCY PETITION. IS IT REALLY THAT SIMPLE?
During his internment in Ratnagiri between 1924 and 1937, Savarkar led the most potent movement against untouchability in Indian history and called this the Hindu Sangatan. Its high point was the opening of the first ever Hindu temple in Ratnagiri in recent history that allowed the entry of untouchables-namely the Patit Pavan Mandir. From Gandhi, to Ambedkar everyone lauded the movement.
Ever since partition in the seven odd decades, quite a lot has been written about Savarkar. A set of writers from the far-Left, pan-Islamist mindset condemned Savarkar either in their books or columns for his `divisive thinking’ and `harsh treatment of Muslims’. These same people have gone great lengths to defame Savarkar and make him unacceptable to the new generation by focusing on his clemency petitions to the British government seeking release from rigorous imprisonment form the Cellular Jain in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Ratnagiri Jail, where he passed the last three years of his rigorous imprisonment before being set free by the British in 1924 and allowed to do non-political work within the precincts of Ratnagiri district. Most of his petitions for clemency were for all the prisoners who were with him and not just for him. He talked about these petitions in the Marathi Book `Andamanchya Andheritun’{from the darkness of Andaman) He says he tried to impress his fellow prisoners by giving the example of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, the nationalist hero who tried the same ruseto come out of Aurangazeb’s captivity in Agra in 1666 among other examples. The left and the pan Islamist writers have not just deliberately ignored Savarkar’s writings about the justification behind his clemency petitions but have gone further and found a cunning way of contrasting Savarkar’s patriotism and mercy petitions to Bhagat Singh’s sacrifice in embracing the gallows with a smiling face. They appropriated Bhagat Singh and projected him as a face of Left ideology, thus contrasting the patriotism of Hindutva revolutionary forces with that of communists. This appropriation of Bhagat Singh requires a closer look after the plethora of evidence that is available. Questions were raised about his autobiographical essay titled `Why Am I An Atheist’, published by a Left Historian. All his collective works which he wrote in jail is available in the national archives EXCEPT for the manuscript of this essay. Leftists declare him an atheist because they claim the found a book on Lenin in his jail cell. What they fail to mention is they found 4 other books, which include one on Maharana Pratap, one on Guru Gobind Sing and one on Punjab’s romantic legend, Heer-Ranjha. The last line in his letter from jail to his younger brother says, “Jo rab nu Manzoor (Whatever God ordains)”. No further questions, your honor.
HSRA or the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, a nomenclature that was selected only because it symbolized the fight against British imperialism and was apparently inspired by Lenin’s revolution against the Russian imperialism, which was then not very old. Bhagat Singh in his article, `Vishwa Prem’ wrote , `We describe Savarkar as an arch anarchist and vitriolic revolutionary but ultimately he was a brave believer in world brotherhood’. He even quoted Savarkar several times in his Jail Diaries from Savarkar’s Hindu Pad Padashahi. These quotes no where indicate he had communist leanings. One quote says, ‘It is easy to break the shackles of political bondage, but very difficult to break the shackles of cultural bondage’. Another one says, ‘It is good to die rather than accept conversion(to other religious faiths) but it is even better to fight and defeat the violent forces ranged against Dharma and die in doing so.
THE ALIGARH MOVEMENT
The book first talks about the forces that led to the partition. Like the Two-Nation theorists. It all began at Aligarh. You must have read about the `The Aligarh Movement’. The moorings of the Aligarh Movement trace back to `Sir’ Syed Ahmed Khan(1817-98), recognized as a Mohammedan social reformist, educationist and founder of the Indian Patriotic Association and the Muhammad Anglo-Oriental College (MAO College in 1875), later known as the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).
Sir Syed was of two mouths. In front of the Muslim audience, he warns against the parliamentary system of governance. And that in such system it Muslim Interests will not be safeguarded under a Hindu leader and as Muslims ruled over Hindu’s for centuries, if Hindu’s rule over Muslims now, it will be. He said that the British Christians were their Abrahamic cousins and it is better to be ruled by them than Kaffir Hindus. On the other hand he was a member of the INC and was all for Hindu-Muslim unity against the British. The truth of the matter is that Syed Ahmed spoke in two voices. The moderate one meant for the consumption of Moderate Hindus, who too had donated huge amounts of money for the Aligarh College, and the hardline, separatist voice to inspire his Muslim brethren in Aligarh and beyond.
The city of Aligarh has been well known for its lock industry. But the deadlock created by the Aligarh Movement hindered the progress of the Indian Nation, long after Syed’s death in 1898. His successors felt the need for the a political party to safeguard Muslim Interests and rights and to inculcate loyalty to the British in the hearts of Muslims. The All India Muslim League, better known as the Muslim League was thus born in December 1906. The Muslim League president placed a 12 point demand before the British government, whose tone was similar to that of Aga Khan. Which were then granted in 1909 in the Morley-Minto Reforms. Gopal Krishna Gokhale, better known as Gandhi’s political mentor , himself expressed to William Wedderburn(one of the Congress Founders), the disquiet he felt over `the not only unjust but monstrously unjust’ representation granted to the Moslems. In his statement, Gokhale made three strong, historical points about the reforms in spite of his moderate thoughts.
1. The Muslims of this land have descended from the Hindu stock. Their attitude has undergone a change due to forced conversion. Hindus are far ahead of Muslims in matters of numerical strength, wealth, education and social conscience. The present national awakening has been achieved mainly by Hindus. They are moderate and submissive and also weakened by caste differences.
2. Muslims claim they ruled over India for 500 years. It must however be remembered that Hindus ruled for several thousand years prior to it and even before the arrival of the British. Hindus had established their rule by defeating the Muslims
3. It is strange that those who do not owe their allegiance to India are getting better representation than those with patriotic fervor
Contrary to Gokhale’s strong stand against the Morley-Minto Reforms, his disciple Gandhi supported the reforms by giving his own logic, thus overlooking the divisive agenda of a section of Muslims , who were pan Islamists. To directly quote him…” I am emphatically of the view that the Hindus should give to the Muslims whatever they ask for, and willingly accept whatever sacrifice this may involve. Unity will be brought about only through such mutual generosity”.
GANDHI: REALLY A MAHATMA?
In its eagerness to present a united front against the British policy of dividing Hindus and Muslims by enticing the latter, the Congress signed the Lucknow Pact in 1916. This is often seen as the foundation of Muslim appeasement in the country. The Lucknow Pact had opened the doors for a Muslim-appeasement policy, which was to ultimately lead to India’s partition and continues to bedevil the nation till this day and impede its progress.
During the Khilafat Movement, Gandhi declared Hindu (or the Congress) support to the pan-Islamic movement of the Muslims and used it to launch the non-cooperation movement against the draconian Rowlatt Act 1919 and the Jallianwala Bagh killing of innocent Hindus and Sikhs by General Dyer. This impractical alliance was fraught with disastrous consequences as Muslims cared little for the Congress agenda and were concerned with only the success of the Khilafat agitation. Hindus, at large, were not attracted by the Congress–Muslim alliance; in fact, they felt some kind of disconnect with it. Gandhi too rejected the suggestion point blank saying there couldn’t be any preconditions when it came to a genuine friendship between two friends. Not just that, Gandhi also looked the other way, despite his steadfastness to the ideal of non-violence, when the Maulanas involved in the movement recited violent verses from the Koran centered around the concept of jehad and killing of Kafirs while taking potshots at the British government on the Khilafat issue.
Dr K.B. Hedgewar, originally a Congress worker of Nagpur who went to jail during the Khilafat movement and before that a revolutionary of the Anushilan Samiti, starting the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in 1925 as a Hindu bulwark against the rising Muslim appeasement and Islamic fanaticism. Hedgewar’s transformation from a simple Congress worker to a defender of Hindu faith and culture is interesting. Once Hedgewar and a Muslim leader named Samiulla Khan were travelling for a conference during the Khilafat days. Hedgewar casually asked Khan that the ‘Gandhian cap is accepted by everyone nowadays. Why don’t you wear that instead of [the] Turkish skull cap?’ Samiulla answered: ‘I am a Muslim first. This cap is my religious symbol. So, there is no question of doffing it. Hedgewar understood that when Hindus removed their turbans for the Gandhian cap, Muslims kept their skull caps intact. Therefore, their closeness to the Congress was for an Islamic cause and not for a common cause.
Gandhi’s pro-Muslim bias—evident from his observation that ‘the Mussalman as a rule is a bully, and the Hindu as a rule is a coward’, and his reference to Rana Pratap, Chhatrapati Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh, who successfully fought against Muslim rule, as ‘misguided patriots’. After Bhagat Singh’s act of killing British officer John Saunders, who was responsible for Lala Lajpat Rai’s death, Gandhi warned: ”The Bhagat Singh worship has done and is doing incalculable harm to the country… The deed itself is being worshipped as if it was worthy of emulation. The result is goondaism and degradation wherever this mad worship is being performed. The Congress is a power in the land, but I warn Congressmen that it will soon lose all its charm if they betray their trust and encourage the Bhagat Singh cult whether in thought, word or deed”.
After Udham Singh shot dead Michael O’Dwyer in March 1940 and took heroic revenge of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, Gandhi called it an ‘insane act.
Deshbandhu Chittaranjan Das, a member of the Swarajya party within the Congress, struck the Bengal Pact in 1923 with the Muslims in Bengal on the eve of an important election. The pact allowed Muslims: 1. The authority to indulge in cow slaughter without opposition from Hindus.
2. Sixty per cent reservation in jobs to Muslims in Bengal and 80 per cent reservation in jobs in the Calcutta Municipal Corporation.
3. Ban on the Hindu community taking out religious processions from near the mosques.
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the Congress president during the most crucial period before Partition, and widely regarded as a towering symbol of Hindu–Muslim unity, shocked everyone by his views on the Bengal Pact, which were published in his autobiography India Wins Freedom. He called the rejection of the Bengal Pact as the first seed of Partition and eulogized Chittaranjan Das for creating a great nationalist atmosphere amongst the Bengal Hindus by signing the Bengal Pact.
THE LIBERAL JINNAH
Sheshrao B. More, a scholar of Muslim politics, insists that Jinnah, like most Muslim leaders of his time, had a separatist streak from the beginning, but differed from others because of his sophistication. He is known to have been protecting Muslim interests from within the Congress, even while maintaining a liberal face on the surface.
His stand as a Muslim League leader in 1924 gives a clear indication of his penchant to snatch special concessions for Muslims. The meeting of the Muslim League on 24 May 1924 in Lahore, presided over by Jinnah as president, put conditions for any Constitution of India acceptable to Muslims. In this, the first condition was aimed at keeping the Centre weak ‘with full autonomy to the provinces with central government functions being confined to matter of general and common concern’. This condition was also in contradiction of the Government of India Act of 1935 aimed at a strong Centre, which could have prevented Partition had it not been abandoned in the wake of World War II. One of the other conditions was that the mode of representation in elected bodies shall guarantee adequate and effective protection to minorities in every province and would be through separate electorates but with the provision that no majority shall be reduced to a minority and even to equality.
The moment for Jinnah to turn openly communal arrived after the Simon Commission came to India in 1928 and was boycotted by all except the Muslim League led by Mian Muhammad Shafi and the Justice Party of Madras. The Congress boycotted the commission for having no Indian member on it and for its one-sided nature. Later, the Congress called an all-party conference to demonstrate to the British rulers that Indians were capable of setting the national agenda on their own without a Simon Commission. Both the Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League, led by Jinnah, participated in the conference. However, the views of the Muslim League differed on representation of various communities in state legislatures and on separating Sindh from the then Bombay province. Jinnah also wanted other concessions from the Congress, including separate electorates for Muslims, more in proportion to their numbers. In the meantime, Motilal Nehru’s Nehru Report, seeking dominion status for India and recommending joint electorates based on fair play and rejecting the special demands of the Muslims, started creating waves to the detriment of the Muslim League and Jinnah. Jinnah called an all-party conference at Calcutta to discuss this report. Opposing Jinnah’s pro-Muslim demands at this conference, well[1]known educationist and politician Dr Mukund Ramrao (M.R.) Jayakar, who had been associated with both the Hindu Mahasabha and the Congress and had also been the director, along with Jinnah, on the board of The Bombay Chronicle, said: ‘The word communalism has acquired a most extraordinary significance these days. If I venture to speak for Hindu rights, I am a communalist, but if a Muslim with nationalist tendencies fights for Muslim rights, he still remains a nationalist. There is no use hiding the fact that all the amendments put forward by Mr Jinnah had their origin in communal spirit’.
After the denial of his demands at the all-party meeting, Jinnah convened an All Parties Muslim Conference at Delhi in 1929 and took a giant step towards realizing his ambition. He openly donned Muslim colors by presenting a charter of 14 demands on behalf of the Muslim community. (Fourteen Points of Jinnah - Wikipedia). On a closer look, one can trace the foundations of Pakistan to these demands, the major features of which include a weak Centre, provincial autonomy, promoting Muslim religious and political interests at the cost of Hindu rights, separation of Sindh from Bombay province, and on the other hand, no territorial redistribution affecting the Muslim majority in Punjab, Bengal and the North-West Frontier Province. Now it was clear that Jinnah had decided the political course of his life promoting pro-Muslim agenda at Hindu cost and used it to become the undisputed leader of the Muslims.
Choudhary Rahmat Ali, a Muslim student of Gujjar origin from India’s Hoshiarpur district studying in Cambridge University, coined the word ‘Pakistan’ for this proposed nation in a pamphlet titled Now or Never: Are We to Live or Perish. In this pamphlet, he implored the Muslims to break away from India to form a separate Islamic State, the time for which he thought was most opportune at that moment. The time was also opportune for Jinnah’s rise as the undisputed leader of the Muslims in India. It coincided with Gandhi becoming the supreme leader of the Hindus after he refused to attend the first Round Table Conference in London in 1930 following Viceroy Lord Irwin’s refusal to give him any assurance on his demand for a new Constitution and dominion status for India. Leaders of other parties attended the conference. Muslim leaders were unaffected by Gandhi’s absence, as they were busy playing their own game of seeking more and more concessions in connivance with the British. However, as Gandhi launched the Salt Satyagraha in India that year, the Hindu leaders attending the conference in London such as Munje and Tej Bahadur Sapru lost face as they were seen as traitors by the Hindu populace, which had started seeing Gandhi and the Congress as patriots. This was in spite of the fact that Munje demanded complete independence from British rule at the conference and also opposed special demands of the Muslims, thus protecting Hindu rights. The British prime minster Ramsay MacDonald dropped a hint of what was to come when he harped on the need for special powers to be vested in the Viceroy to protect the interest of the minorities, which, he said, was the British government’s responsibility. Significantly, in a few years of Jinnah’s 14 demands came the British Communal Award after the second Round Table conference of 1931, which in many ways addressed many of Jinnah’s demands. Interestingly, the second Round Table Conference was attended by Gandhi following a compromise with the British in the form of the Gandhi–Irwin Pact, but he could make no impact on the Muslim League and Muslim demands. He also failed to prevent the Muslim League and other Muslim representatives from allowing him to be the sole representative of all Indians at the conference..
.
Received the book from Indica Book Club for the 1000 Reviews Program. Grateful to Indica Book Club for this initiative.
June 18, 2022
Touted to be an ardent pragmatic practitioner of Hindu philosophy, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar is known as our Independence activist and politician who formulated the Hindu nationalist policy- Hindutva.
All of us have a brief glimpse in the life of this revolutionary man, however there is never a detailed description about all of his achievements and the turmoil that went through his mind when he saw certain unfavorable things happening right in front of him.
‘Veer Savarkar : The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition’ by author Uday Mahurkar is therefore a good attempt by the author to bring to light the philosophies, thinking and views of a great leader.
Veer Savarkar was amongst the contentious political thinkers of the twentieth century who had firm views in everything that he believed in.
And this is the main reason why even after so many years after he passed away, his ideologies and thoughts are something that many follow.
A well written book by the author that not only glorifies everything but also shares some instances where there might have been few shortcomings, this is a must read for all. Hence I am going to give this FIVE STARS ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
All of us have a brief glimpse in the life of this revolutionary man, however there is never a detailed description about all of his achievements and the turmoil that went through his mind when he saw certain unfavorable things happening right in front of him.
‘Veer Savarkar : The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition’ by author Uday Mahurkar is therefore a good attempt by the author to bring to light the philosophies, thinking and views of a great leader.
Veer Savarkar was amongst the contentious political thinkers of the twentieth century who had firm views in everything that he believed in.
And this is the main reason why even after so many years after he passed away, his ideologies and thoughts are something that many follow.
A well written book by the author that not only glorifies everything but also shares some instances where there might have been few shortcomings, this is a must read for all. Hence I am going to give this FIVE STARS ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
August 9, 2022
We certainly know that Veer Savarkar and his brothers played pivotal role amongst all the revolutionaries in Indian fight of independence. His literature spanning 6000 pages over the lifetime has invoked emotions of nationalism and true love for the motherland. His poetry gives goosebumps till date. For every fake narrative built against Veer Savarkar, there are enough people who know his unparalled devotion to Bharat Mata.
HOWEVER, even his ardent followers, only know 'Savarkar- the revolutionary', but surprisingly no one knows in depth 'Savarkar- THE VISIONARY'. He is trying to present his views in non emotional way.
Savarkar's views and opinions regarding National security and integration were unmatched in his time. He had foreseen the threat of division of our beloved country and inspired a large number of Hindu youth to participate in the British led army for world war, so that at the time of partition there would be enough number of soldiers to Guard and protect our nation, else Pakistan would have got more than Kashmir. It alarmed Muslim league to the great extent. Had he been present in the 1942 congress resolution giving provinces the right to self determination (cessation) would never have got presented, thus seeds of division could have never fruictified.
The author also presents similarity and differences between Savarkar's views and his contemporary leaders. His certain shortcomings have also been duly recorded.
The author also presents how his thoughts and principles have been embedded in the constitution as well current Indian regime's way of dealing with external threats.
The book discusses the muslim appeasement politics followed by congress, for unity in figting against British, to the extent unfathomable to the sane mind. Gandhi was obsessed with Hindu Muslim unity at any cost, even if it meant non fate treatment to majority community. The Aligarh University, the Muslim league, the tabligi jamaat, all were trying to get maximum seats in disproportionate way in all the positions of power.
His inclusive policies would certainly draw nationalistic people from all the religions towards his vision.
The author, Uday Mahurkar (Centreal Information Commissioner, Govt of India), has done a credible job in highlighting missing part of the great history.
HOWEVER, even his ardent followers, only know 'Savarkar- the revolutionary', but surprisingly no one knows in depth 'Savarkar- THE VISIONARY'. He is trying to present his views in non emotional way.
Savarkar's views and opinions regarding National security and integration were unmatched in his time. He had foreseen the threat of division of our beloved country and inspired a large number of Hindu youth to participate in the British led army for world war, so that at the time of partition there would be enough number of soldiers to Guard and protect our nation, else Pakistan would have got more than Kashmir. It alarmed Muslim league to the great extent. Had he been present in the 1942 congress resolution giving provinces the right to self determination (cessation) would never have got presented, thus seeds of division could have never fruictified.
The author also presents similarity and differences between Savarkar's views and his contemporary leaders. His certain shortcomings have also been duly recorded.
The author also presents how his thoughts and principles have been embedded in the constitution as well current Indian regime's way of dealing with external threats.
The book discusses the muslim appeasement politics followed by congress, for unity in figting against British, to the extent unfathomable to the sane mind. Gandhi was obsessed with Hindu Muslim unity at any cost, even if it meant non fate treatment to majority community. The Aligarh University, the Muslim league, the tabligi jamaat, all were trying to get maximum seats in disproportionate way in all the positions of power.
His inclusive policies would certainly draw nationalistic people from all the religions towards his vision.
The author, Uday Mahurkar (Centreal Information Commissioner, Govt of India), has done a credible job in highlighting missing part of the great history.
February 26, 2023
The foreword states that whom we worship as heroes of the Indian freedom movement are actually not heroes but the very people who committed a series of blunders that made an united India into a divided India. Savarkar has been painted as an anarchist and a revolutionary but is far better person than the people who have been praised as heroes of freedom in India.
Growing up in Tamil Nadu I haven't heard of Savarkar in my school or college days. There was no mention about him in the history books and his existence as a freedom fighter came to my knowledge a few years before. I was intrigued about his role in the freedom movement and when I got this book as a part of the Indica 1000 reviewers club I was pleasantly surprised.
I am thankful that my eyes have been opened and I was shocked that till now what I knew about the freedom movement is distorted bits and pieces. While non viiolence has been hailed by the people as the cause of freedom I personally feel that tolerance should be to a certain level only. When the enemy doesn't fight fair, then it would be dumb to be mute spectator.
People have condemned Savarkar for his extermist views but his "Nation First" philosophy needs to be heralded. He had opposing views on ideological levels but he always respected the other leaders of the freedom movement. When the separate state was demanded in Aligarh he was the first to oppose as everyone else thought sending the Bristhers out was the agenda and were in an utopian world.
The conspiracy of the two nation theory as early as 1878 and the separation theory of Sir Syed and the divide and rule theory of the British left the people of the nation turned out to be a loaded gun during the partition.Though he was invited to join congress he related to Major Subash Chandra Bose better. He was against appeasement politics of the congress and he joined the Hindu MahaSabha. He said the word "Hindutva" represented the ancient history of the nation and the word Sindu as in Sapta Sindu was made as Hindu by the persians.
The forethought of Sarvarkar on the colonial mindset taking over the Hindu mindset of the people and that making people forget our past glories and our advancement in science and technology in ancient times still holds true. Now we are obsessed with English forgeting our native languages which has histories and literature over 2000 years old.
Savarkar was projected as an hater of other religions but he wanted to safeguard the nation from sindh to assam and from Kashmir to Travancore. He said people with congress mindset will not live in pakistan after partition but the minorities will live in every single territory in India thus proving the appeasement nature of the minorities.
Savarkar's battle for united India failed because of the non-cooperation of the congress leaders even though in 1942 the Akandh Hindustan Resolution was passed. After quit India movement Jinnah accused the congress of trying to establish a Hindu Raj and the plan for partition was announced by Lord Mountbatten in AIR in May 1947.
Savarkar's national security vision is talked about throughout this book and his idea of unalleged nationalism in the spirit of true Nation First Policy.
This book was an eye-opener for me and I think the part Veer Savakar played must be introduced in the history books of children in middle school all over India.
Growing up in Tamil Nadu I haven't heard of Savarkar in my school or college days. There was no mention about him in the history books and his existence as a freedom fighter came to my knowledge a few years before. I was intrigued about his role in the freedom movement and when I got this book as a part of the Indica 1000 reviewers club I was pleasantly surprised.
I am thankful that my eyes have been opened and I was shocked that till now what I knew about the freedom movement is distorted bits and pieces. While non viiolence has been hailed by the people as the cause of freedom I personally feel that tolerance should be to a certain level only. When the enemy doesn't fight fair, then it would be dumb to be mute spectator.
People have condemned Savarkar for his extermist views but his "Nation First" philosophy needs to be heralded. He had opposing views on ideological levels but he always respected the other leaders of the freedom movement. When the separate state was demanded in Aligarh he was the first to oppose as everyone else thought sending the Bristhers out was the agenda and were in an utopian world.
The conspiracy of the two nation theory as early as 1878 and the separation theory of Sir Syed and the divide and rule theory of the British left the people of the nation turned out to be a loaded gun during the partition.Though he was invited to join congress he related to Major Subash Chandra Bose better. He was against appeasement politics of the congress and he joined the Hindu MahaSabha. He said the word "Hindutva" represented the ancient history of the nation and the word Sindu as in Sapta Sindu was made as Hindu by the persians.
The forethought of Sarvarkar on the colonial mindset taking over the Hindu mindset of the people and that making people forget our past glories and our advancement in science and technology in ancient times still holds true. Now we are obsessed with English forgeting our native languages which has histories and literature over 2000 years old.
Savarkar was projected as an hater of other religions but he wanted to safeguard the nation from sindh to assam and from Kashmir to Travancore. He said people with congress mindset will not live in pakistan after partition but the minorities will live in every single territory in India thus proving the appeasement nature of the minorities.
Savarkar's battle for united India failed because of the non-cooperation of the congress leaders even though in 1942 the Akandh Hindustan Resolution was passed. After quit India movement Jinnah accused the congress of trying to establish a Hindu Raj and the plan for partition was announced by Lord Mountbatten in AIR in May 1947.
Savarkar's national security vision is talked about throughout this book and his idea of unalleged nationalism in the spirit of true Nation First Policy.
This book was an eye-opener for me and I think the part Veer Savakar played must be introduced in the history books of children in middle school all over India.
August 10, 2022
A revolutionary book about a revolutionary man!!
Veer Savarkar was a man whose true worth is unknown to majority of Indians . This book tries to bring to light the ideology of this man who could have possibly prevented the partition of India . He was a true visionary who worked wholeheartedly for the formation of an undivided Hindu rashtra. According to him “ hindutva is not a word but a history “. His idea of hindutva was sadly always mistaken for communalism .
Savarkar’s thoughts were much ahead of the times. He fought the congress tooth and nail against the latters Muslim appeasement policies . He had realised early on that it was this pacifist attitude that would eventually become the cause for partition. He realised that the congress policies were making Hindus a minority in their own country. His idea of hindutva was not special treatment for Hindus but rather equal treatment for all. But unfortunately he was greatly misunderstood and the congress lost no chance to paint him a traitor.
Savarkar was not just a Hindu nationalist but a Hindu rationalist. He believed in not just protection of culture but progress of culture .
Instead of believing Blind belief n superstition, he advocated testing ideas on the touchstone of science n following the path that contributed to the good of the nation.
Post partition, he revealed an unparalleled security and geopolitical vision for India . If the then government had heeded his ideas, then perhaps the position of India in the world would be different today .
This is an extraordinary book and I would urge everyone to please read it.
I would like to thank @Indicacademy for giving me the opportunity to read this book in exchange for an honest review. #1000reviewersclub.
Veer Savarkar was a man whose true worth is unknown to majority of Indians . This book tries to bring to light the ideology of this man who could have possibly prevented the partition of India . He was a true visionary who worked wholeheartedly for the formation of an undivided Hindu rashtra. According to him “ hindutva is not a word but a history “. His idea of hindutva was sadly always mistaken for communalism .
Savarkar’s thoughts were much ahead of the times. He fought the congress tooth and nail against the latters Muslim appeasement policies . He had realised early on that it was this pacifist attitude that would eventually become the cause for partition. He realised that the congress policies were making Hindus a minority in their own country. His idea of hindutva was not special treatment for Hindus but rather equal treatment for all. But unfortunately he was greatly misunderstood and the congress lost no chance to paint him a traitor.
Savarkar was not just a Hindu nationalist but a Hindu rationalist. He believed in not just protection of culture but progress of culture .
Instead of believing Blind belief n superstition, he advocated testing ideas on the touchstone of science n following the path that contributed to the good of the nation.
Post partition, he revealed an unparalleled security and geopolitical vision for India . If the then government had heeded his ideas, then perhaps the position of India in the world would be different today .
This is an extraordinary book and I would urge everyone to please read it.
I would like to thank @Indicacademy for giving me the opportunity to read this book in exchange for an honest review. #1000reviewersclub.
July 1, 2022
The book "Veer Sawarkar" Written by Uday Mahurkar and Shri Chirayu Pandit, is a non-ficiton read about life of Veer Sawarkar. In this book the authors take us through the hurdles and down hills Veer Sawarkar had to pave to achieve the success. Through this book we can learn about standing for ourselves, standing for the right, leadership, importance of communication, confidence and self esteem.
.
It is very rare to read book that serves the purpose of finding a good non fiction book and this book goes into those rare category of books that needs more attention from the readers. The language is quite easy to read if you are good with the language but as I am a beginner I had to cross check words to know what the authors were trying to explain. But overall, it's a great read.
.
It is very rare to read book that serves the purpose of finding a good non fiction book and this book goes into those rare category of books that needs more attention from the readers. The language is quite easy to read if you are good with the language but as I am a beginner I had to cross check words to know what the authors were trying to explain. But overall, it's a great read.
June 24, 2022
Veer Swarkar is an amazing book written by the Uday Mahurkar .First I appreciate its cattchy cover ,which is good enough to attract any reader. It is quite handy with only 843 pages .
Veer Sawarkar is one of the prominent figure at the time of Indian Independence. During the time of Independence their is the chaos in our country.
Various political party wants to achieve their political goals,but its led to the partication of our country. At that time V.D sawarkar trying hard to remain united. story is full of struggle with great experience ,how he tried hard but ,at that time political unstablity was its peak ,people were fighting and there is lawlessness and bloodshed in whole country.
This story is full of twist and turns and author has narrated the story at great pace.The language of the book is simple smooth and its content is so enriched that it never let you bore . In simple word i would like to say tremendous work done by the author.
I really want to appreciate author work ,how she maintain the flow and choosen magnificent plot and its subplot. The book is so exciting that i personally took couple of days to finish it.
Pls read this once . I guarantee you are going to witness an amazing experience.
Thankyou.
Veer Sawarkar is one of the prominent figure at the time of Indian Independence. During the time of Independence their is the chaos in our country.
Various political party wants to achieve their political goals,but its led to the partication of our country. At that time V.D sawarkar trying hard to remain united. story is full of struggle with great experience ,how he tried hard but ,at that time political unstablity was its peak ,people were fighting and there is lawlessness and bloodshed in whole country.
This story is full of twist and turns and author has narrated the story at great pace.The language of the book is simple smooth and its content is so enriched that it never let you bore . In simple word i would like to say tremendous work done by the author.
I really want to appreciate author work ,how she maintain the flow and choosen magnificent plot and its subplot. The book is so exciting that i personally took couple of days to finish it.
Pls read this once . I guarantee you are going to witness an amazing experience.
Thankyou.
June 3, 2024
Gives a comprehensive understanding of the Islamic separatist movement in India and how Veer Savarkar talked about India's National security and threats
June 18, 2022
Name📖:-Veer Savarkar
Author :-Uday Mahurkar and Shri Chirayu
PanditThe book is separated into 8 chapters.In this book expounded on before the nation and its new age, the segment of India, which occurred because of the legislative issues of submission, has the fruitfulness of introducing the genuine story and changing the history.It shows how the minority conciliation strategy of Congress made the ground on which the Muslim initiative based their plan of partition.
The book advances proof to demonstrate that Savarkar's Hindutva is basically unalloyed patriotism in light of genuine 'Country First' .
My opinion - The Book is an Inspiring Book and hence, all those who wish to lead some place or situation Must Read the Book.
My ratting - 4/5(⭐)
Author :-Uday Mahurkar and Shri Chirayu
PanditThe book is separated into 8 chapters.In this book expounded on before the nation and its new age, the segment of India, which occurred because of the legislative issues of submission, has the fruitfulness of introducing the genuine story and changing the history.It shows how the minority conciliation strategy of Congress made the ground on which the Muslim initiative based their plan of partition.
The book advances proof to demonstrate that Savarkar's Hindutva is basically unalloyed patriotism in light of genuine 'Country First' .
My opinion - The Book is an Inspiring Book and hence, all those who wish to lead some place or situation Must Read the Book.
My ratting - 4/5(⭐)
May 11, 2022
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, known as Veer Savarkar for his role in the freedom struggle of India, was born in 1883 and, according to some, developed the Hindutva philosophy so strident in today’s India since the rise to power of BJP in 2014. Indeed, he endorsed the idea of a Hindu Rashtra and the militarization of Hindus (as distinct from Indians) long before the sordid saga of independence and partition. The main thesis of the book, as disclosed by its title and the explanatory sub-title, is that, had he had his way, India would have gained independence with out the birth pangs of a partition.
To support this contention, the book harks back to the birth of the two nation theory which took place around the time that Veer Savarkar was born. Tracing the thought process of the Congress and the emergence of Muslim League, it then refers to the role Veer Savarkar played by demanding ‘one person, one vote’ to oppose the disproportionate representation of Muslims in contemporary politics.
The book takes a deep look at the years before partition in terms of the political and social turmoil and the roles of other leaders from the Congress and the Muslim League. The background to the partition is well known but the book dwells more on the insights that Veer Savarkar had and the prophetic predictions he made about many events yet to follow then. His abhorrence of appeasement politics is brought out in detail by the book and his powerlessness to alter the course of history is left as a lamentable fact for the reader to ruminate, digest, and fume over.
The book does not pretend to be a dispassionate treatise but will go down well with Hindu readers while a Muslim reader may feel compelled to abandon it halfway (if he has not already shunned it after reading the sub-title). For an avid history reader, it will hold his interest adequately. The look and feel of the book are commendable and add to the book’s attractive appeal for a Hindu reader.
To support this contention, the book harks back to the birth of the two nation theory which took place around the time that Veer Savarkar was born. Tracing the thought process of the Congress and the emergence of Muslim League, it then refers to the role Veer Savarkar played by demanding ‘one person, one vote’ to oppose the disproportionate representation of Muslims in contemporary politics.
The book takes a deep look at the years before partition in terms of the political and social turmoil and the roles of other leaders from the Congress and the Muslim League. The background to the partition is well known but the book dwells more on the insights that Veer Savarkar had and the prophetic predictions he made about many events yet to follow then. His abhorrence of appeasement politics is brought out in detail by the book and his powerlessness to alter the course of history is left as a lamentable fact for the reader to ruminate, digest, and fume over.
The book does not pretend to be a dispassionate treatise but will go down well with Hindu readers while a Muslim reader may feel compelled to abandon it halfway (if he has not already shunned it after reading the sub-title). For an avid history reader, it will hold his interest adequately. The look and feel of the book are commendable and add to the book’s attractive appeal for a Hindu reader.
May 27, 2022
मुझे पसंद है जिस तरह लेखक ने विभाजन से पहले मंच का वर्णन किया था। किताब हमें ऐसे तथ्य देती है जिनके बारे में हम पहले नहीं जानते थे। विभाजन एक काली रेखा थी जो हमारे बीच खींची गई थी। उसी के दुष्प्रभाव हम अब तक अनुभव कर रहे हैं।
March 7, 2024
विभाजन के विवरण और स्वतंत्रता सेनानियों के कई समूहों के योगदान को जानने के लिए और निश्चित रूप से उन धूर्त लोगों के बारे में जो देश को तोड़ने पर आमादा थे और उनका विरोध करने और भारत के दीर्घकालिक दृष्टिकोण के लिए एक रोड मैप बनाने में सावरकर की भूमिका को जानने के लिए शानदार किताब।
August 8, 2022
This is a very well written book about the contributions of Veer Savarkar for our nation's freedom struggle. The book has a forward written by Sri Mohan Bhagwat, Sarsanghchalak, RSS. Savarkar always opposed the Muslim appeasement policies of the Indian National Congress, that started with the Khilafat Movement under the leadership of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. It highlights the blunders committed by the Congress throughout our freedom struggle under Gandhi's leadership, which finally led to the tragic partition and killing of thousands of people. Chapters 7 and 8 explain the strategic far-sighted thinking of Savarkar about our national security and diplomacy. His views are very relevant even today. This is a book which every nationalist citizen of Bharat should read.
May 26, 2022
स्वतंत्रता सेनानियों के कई समूहों के विभाजन और योगदान के विवरण और निश्चित रूप से देश को तोड़ने और उनका विरोध करने में सावरकर की भूमिका और भारत की दीर्घकालिक दृष्टि के लिए एक रोड मैप बनाने के बारे में जानने के लिए शानदार किताब।
April 16, 2022
This book interprets Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the man, his message of ‘Hindutva’, and his political journey in a new-book which the authors claim provides a ‘new-interpretation’ of Savarkar’s ideology by contextualizing his struggle against colonialism, casteism/untouchability, Congress appeasement of Muslim league politics, and Muslim communalism in British India. The authors believe the age of Savarkar has arrived – indeed, this follows the voluminous biography by Vikram Sampath and the important book by Vaibhav Purandare. However, despite a valiant effort, Mahurkar and Pandit’s book fails to break new ground, and is at best, an updated version of the landmark hagiography by Dhananjay Keer published several decades ago. However, the excessive reliance on its predecessor also proves to be the current work’s weakness. Several quotes in this book are directly referenced from Keer’s work such as Savarkar’s contrasting position from Jinnah with respect to equal treatment as opposed to preferential treatment for minorities demanded by the latter. Some other claims include Savarkar’s ‘sacrifice’ in not joining the Congress party on his release from Ratnagiri by the British, or his influence on Bose’s decision to form the Indian National Army with foreign support. Although, Keer did have personal access to Savarkar, the man and interviewed him in writing his biography, for achieving reliable objectivity, some of the statements need to be corroborated from Savarkar’s vast oeuvre that spans thousands of pages or even testimony from his contemporary political, if not ideological critics.
The book title also suggests that Savarkar was the man who could have prevented partition. However, Savarkar’s position to prevent partition was inspired by the American civil war and Lincoln who preferred civil war to secession. Irrespective of the historical merit of Savarkar versus the Congress party’s position, Savarkar unlike Gandhi failed to create any mass movement in modern India, and electorally was unable to achieve any modicum of success, a fact noted by the great historian, R C Majumdar who contrasted that with the messianic success of Jinnah in enlisting wholehearted support of the Muslim community for creating Pakistan. Clearly, the idea that Savarkar could individually have done anything to prevent partition in absence of electoral success through the Hindu Mahasabha is preposterous. Nevertheless, the authors effectively argue the role of Savarkar in promoting enlistment of Hindus in the army (which helped British win the war against the Nazis). Hindu militarization and representation in the army was effective in strengthening the Hindu position during independence, although it was not exploited by the blundering Congress leadership in the years leading to partition and independence.
Despite these shortcomings, the book is an important addition to Savarkar literature from Hindu sympathetic voices and should be useful for objective students of Indian history. Nevertheless, the definitive critical biography on Savarkar is still awaited.
The book title also suggests that Savarkar was the man who could have prevented partition. However, Savarkar’s position to prevent partition was inspired by the American civil war and Lincoln who preferred civil war to secession. Irrespective of the historical merit of Savarkar versus the Congress party’s position, Savarkar unlike Gandhi failed to create any mass movement in modern India, and electorally was unable to achieve any modicum of success, a fact noted by the great historian, R C Majumdar who contrasted that with the messianic success of Jinnah in enlisting wholehearted support of the Muslim community for creating Pakistan. Clearly, the idea that Savarkar could individually have done anything to prevent partition in absence of electoral success through the Hindu Mahasabha is preposterous. Nevertheless, the authors effectively argue the role of Savarkar in promoting enlistment of Hindus in the army (which helped British win the war against the Nazis). Hindu militarization and representation in the army was effective in strengthening the Hindu position during independence, although it was not exploited by the blundering Congress leadership in the years leading to partition and independence.
Despite these shortcomings, the book is an important addition to Savarkar literature from Hindu sympathetic voices and should be useful for objective students of Indian history. Nevertheless, the definitive critical biography on Savarkar is still awaited.
May 4, 2022
अथ चेतत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि |
तत: स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि || 33||
- Bhagavad Gita-2.33 If, however, you refuse to fight this righteous war, abandoning your social duty and reputation, you will certainly incur sin.
An Indian childhood means implicit belief in the national myth of the benevolent father and the genial Chacha(Uncle) duo of M.K Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru.
However, there are warts in the woodwork too numerous to ignore. An ageless civilization that shed off the yoke of British imperialism a mere 75 years ago has to its credit numerous heroes, unfathomably wise spiritual teachers and countless common men whose contributions have been sadly forgotten in the unthinking political cult of mindless deification. Biographies of Savarkar have popped up over the past few years particularly by Vaibhav Purandare and Vikram Sampath. However this book is largely on Mr. Savarkar's role in opposing the brutal vivisection of the country.
In the long list of leaders who have not been given their due by previous dispensations, this single name looms large mainly due to the controversies and needless vilification done by a sycophantic Leftist-Islamist axis that reserved its particular venom for an unabashedly patriotic non-populist leader whose biggest crime in their opinion was to adhere to an Indic perspective.
The brown man's burden in the modern age is that India is not exactly Bharat and Bharat is not precisely India. Our modern society is a confused medley of self-abnegation, excessive and sometimes irrational pride and most critically, visceral hatred for a rich heritage that has been spawned by ignorance and indifference.
Savarkar was in the middle of the spectrum, he earned the ire of traditionalists as well when he condemned the rot in Hindu society manifest in an irrational reverence for the cow and a rigid and decrepit caste system that had become insular largely due to the numerous invasions and their devastating effect on the Brahminical patriarchy. He understood the true import of Sri Krishna's words in the Bhagavad Gita, varnas as fluid designations due to intrinsic qualities and not solely birth. Savarkar's great friendship with Dr B.R. Ambedkar, another patriot who is selectively misquoted and misunderstood these days stems from that realisation.
Although the main focus of the book is Mr. Vinayak Damodar 'Veer' Savarkar, it starts off with the hellish hotbed and cauldron of seperatism that spawned and fueled the Islamic 'two-nation' hypothesis that led to one of the most bloody and tragic events in human history, India's partition. Syed Ahmed, the Aligarh Muslim University, the Aga Khan and rich Muslim landowners that colluded with the British are dealt with in extensive detail. Curiously, however in the appeasement template perfected by a Conmangress and other political copy-cats, Jews, Nazis and foreign events occupy a larger part of the media and general landscape than the bloody events that took place within our doors and keep on repeating with devastating regularity.
In the COVID pandemic era, a temptation to describe these historical faux pas w.r.t narratives as social distancing of a modern setup that has been subliminally indoctrinated with a sanitized version of past events. Young and old alike tend to dismiss real events as 'historical' fluff that is irrelevant for their present lives
It is ironical that people who suffered for India's freedom are now condemned as 'stooges' and 'puppets' of the British raj by the very people who enjoyed power, privilege and influence due to their kowtowing before colonial masters. Harvard-educated windbags pontificate on all and sundry while perpetuating a Nehruvian dystopia that is inherently unsuited for the 21st century. Our political princes party on foreign shores while the country keeps boiling practically every month on issues that range from frivolous to fictional.
The early Congress with its stalwarts like Dadabhai Naoroji, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai and Aurobindo Ghosh among others play a major part in the first part of the book. It was heartening to read Bhagat Singh drawing inspiration from Savarkar and even meeting him along with Rajguru.
In the present day, Singh's Arya Samaj and Sikh upbringing has been sidelined apart from his ire at the brutal beating of a Punjabi Hindu Lajpat Rai that led to his death. The sorry spectacle of anti-nationals, biased historians and shrewd political operators like Tharoor misappropriating Singh as a Communist icon merely due to his musings on atheism are an insult to the patriotic spirit of a man who would despise such vile treachery. Socialism was in vogue those days due to the recent success of the Soviet Union and its struggle against imperialists that had impressed many including Savarkar and Nehru. Savarkar was in touch with patriots throughout the country, including Master Tara Singh in the Punjab, Rash Bihari Bose and S.P Mukherjee in Bengal apart from the Travancore Kingdom and Sir C.P Iyer, its diwan.
A point stressed on umpteen times in this book is that above all, Savarkar was a realist who always advocated calibrating and changing strategies based solely on national interest. It is a fact that he was wily and masterful. Madanlal Dhingra, a rambunctious patriotic Punjabi from a rich Amritsar family was inspired to exterminate Curzon Wyllie due to Savarkar's influence. However, the jury is still out on the most infamous killing of them all, the 1948 assassination of the 'Mahatma'. Although the authors have largely absolved him of involvement insisting that he respected opponents of every hue and dispensation, many books on the subject including a few in Marathi believe Veer Savarkar played a part.
Mr. Savarkar's transformation from a typical 'pseudo-secularist' to the ideological founder of a more assertive brand of Sanatan Dharma viz. 'Hindutva' took place in his painful and long incarceration in the Andaman Cellular Jail. Maharashtra with firebrands like Vasudeo Balwant Phadke, the Chaphekar brothers, Tilak among others was on the forefront of violent rebellion apart from the Punjab and Bengal.
That the British considered him an 'extreme' subversive threat due to his intelligence was evident when they sentenced him to a record 50 year imprisonment at the young age of 28. The situation in this place was more inhumane and solitary than present day hellholes like Guantanomo that may appear to be a 'vacation' in comparison. The Irish jailor gladly colluded with Islamic jailors and inmates in their attempt to convert Hindu(particularly Bengali) and Sikh convicts who formed the large majority. Amrish Puri played a Pathan jailor with great aplomb and terrifying effect in a 1996 Malayalam Mohanlal movie on the Andaman cellular jail inmates.
The writers of this book have also given a convincing explanation of his clemency petitions that are 'mocked' by 'present-day' politicians and the Leftist-Islamist nexus who have the luxury of distance. Savarkar asked for mercy not only for himself but for many other inmates. In contrast, Nehru and Gandhi spent a lot less time in British jails and that too on the mainland. Motilal, Jawaharlal's father and an eminence grise lawyer even managed to pull a few strings to get Jawahar out from Nabha jail in two weeks on the condition that he would not enter the princely state.
However, the main takeaway and major thrust of this book begins in the middle and continues to the end. Savarkar's prescience in observing the devastating effect of Congress's appeasement template taking centrestage particularly after Gandhi taking centrestage and his support to the medieval fanatic 'Khilafat' movement in the name of 'Hindu-Muslim' unity. The horrible 'Moplah' massacres in Kerala in the 1920s were dismissed by Gandhi with such inane comments as 'The Muslim is by nature a bully, and the Hindu is by nature a coward'. Savarkar with his profound reading and understanding of world history and the religious scriptures of Indic faiths including Jainism and Buddhism apart from Hinduism countered the emasculating 'ahimsa' construct of Gandhi with relevant examples of Jain kings aided by Munis apart from the Buddha advocating violence for a righteous cause as true dharma.
The sagely demeanour, PR and appeal of Gandhi to the Indian masses apart from the masterful machinations of the Muslim League would prove to be the death-knell for Savarkar's dream of a United(Akhand) India(Bharat). It is to the author's credit that despite the painful text, we are offered a window into Savarkar's soul and transported into those times long ago, that were quite different and still very similar.
The Hindu Mahasabha's spirited opposition to the Muslim League's evil plans managed to block the creation of multiple Pakistans. Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, a Tamil icon who I personally admired due to reading his 'Mahabharata' and 'Ramayana' at a very early age came up with a dastardly 'Rajaji' plan for the division of India under Gandhi's tutelage.
Savarkar opposed this tooth and nail, organising protests across undivided India and rightfully questioned whether an ancient country was the personal fiefdom of Gandhi and Nehru. The Mahatma's negotiations lacked both self-respect and courage, Savarkar rightfully asserted when Gandhi went 27 times to meet Jinnah with the latter not paying a single return visit. Also, Muslim League goons were entirely disrepectful of Gandhi and his entourage. Unlike Gandhi, Rajagopalachari and Nehru later on, Savarkar was empathetic to the sufferings of the entire nation, from Punjab and Sind to Bengal, Gujarat and the South.
The authors suggest that Veer Savarkar planted the idea of 'escape' in Subhash Bose's head, but fail to mention the assistance of Punjabi Communist sympathisers and a remarkable quintuple agent Hindu Khatri Bhagat Ram Talwar(Codename 'Silver') apart from Sikhs from Calcutta to Kabul apart from Saifuddin Kitchlew who helped him understand the culture of the lands he was going to pass through.
The fact that Veer Savarkar was an inspiration and in regular contact with many stalwarts of the age is stressed quite forcefully. Savarkar was also instrumental in the militarisation of sections of the Hindu population and recruitment of Hindus in the army, that served them well in the light of genocidal Islamic mobs that mobilized after the Muslim League's 'Direct Action' Day. RSS founders, also ex-Congressmen disenchanted with its spineless appeasement drew inspiration from Savarkar.
Post-independence, Savarkar warned Nehru repeatedly not to compromise on national integrity and be wary of China and not kowtow on Tibet as well as China. The man's wisdom and his Kautilyan realpolitik approach were not appreciated by India's first Prime Minister who was obsessed with his own delusions about non-alignment and Asian brotherhood. When the Pakistani PM Liaquat Ali Khan visited India in 1952, Savarkar was placed under arrest. Nehru also allowed the birthplace of the 'Pakistan' movement, the Aligarh Muslim University to enjoy protected status and flourish in India. He even allied with the All India Muslim League, an offshoot of the party that caused the country's partition in a 1950s election.
Although in some places it reads like a hagiography with its advocacy and explanation of Savarkar's viewpoint, it is towards the end that a little criticism of the him does take place. Moody and temperamental at times, Savarkar's long incarceration and the stigma and ostracism orchestrated by the Nehru government based on his perceived role in the Gandhi assassination would have taken a toll is what the authors contend. Like many anti-Hindu pogroms to the present day, the 1948 anti-Brahmin riots that took place pan-India after Gandhi was killed is a historical fact that is forgotten and glossed over.
The fact that Savarkar's conception of Hindutva was not rabid vitriol like the heathen and infidel bashing of other faiths but rather an evolved all-encompassing respect for patriotic, sane and hard-working people from all faiths is something that is deliberated obfuscated by a street-smart, servile, deliberately vindictive and sometimes intellectually deficient opposition. The tragedy of present-day dialectic is the refusal to condemn monolithic Abrahamic faiths that effectively censor dissent and ensure forced compliance but prattle on relentlessly using colonial constructs that were meant to divide and rule. The authors also have indicated this, albeit indirectly.
To sum up, Vinayak Damodar 'Veer' Savarkar will always be a controversial figure, prone to misinterpretation and unfounded calumny. His ideas will continue to invite debate and inspire true patriots. It is a tragedy that present-day Maharashtra does not have the intellectual heft, patriotism, calibre and wisdom of leaders like Savarkar, Tilak or Gokhale. As a pointer, one of Asia's richest municipal corporations has a long way to go in making India's financial capital even remotely like Shanghai.
However, what shines through in this book is the profound love Savarkar had for the country and his conception of a majestic, united, vast Indian motherland with economic, intellectual and military muscle that would have served as a beacon for the world. Although, the reality is different, Indic as well as other readers can always draw inspiration from the Savarkar world-view which deserves more respect and analysis than it has got in the post-independence era. Sincerely thank Indica for sending me this book.
तत: स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि || 33||
- Bhagavad Gita-2.33 If, however, you refuse to fight this righteous war, abandoning your social duty and reputation, you will certainly incur sin.
An Indian childhood means implicit belief in the national myth of the benevolent father and the genial Chacha(Uncle) duo of M.K Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru.
However, there are warts in the woodwork too numerous to ignore. An ageless civilization that shed off the yoke of British imperialism a mere 75 years ago has to its credit numerous heroes, unfathomably wise spiritual teachers and countless common men whose contributions have been sadly forgotten in the unthinking political cult of mindless deification. Biographies of Savarkar have popped up over the past few years particularly by Vaibhav Purandare and Vikram Sampath. However this book is largely on Mr. Savarkar's role in opposing the brutal vivisection of the country.
In the long list of leaders who have not been given their due by previous dispensations, this single name looms large mainly due to the controversies and needless vilification done by a sycophantic Leftist-Islamist axis that reserved its particular venom for an unabashedly patriotic non-populist leader whose biggest crime in their opinion was to adhere to an Indic perspective.
The brown man's burden in the modern age is that India is not exactly Bharat and Bharat is not precisely India. Our modern society is a confused medley of self-abnegation, excessive and sometimes irrational pride and most critically, visceral hatred for a rich heritage that has been spawned by ignorance and indifference.
Savarkar was in the middle of the spectrum, he earned the ire of traditionalists as well when he condemned the rot in Hindu society manifest in an irrational reverence for the cow and a rigid and decrepit caste system that had become insular largely due to the numerous invasions and their devastating effect on the Brahminical patriarchy. He understood the true import of Sri Krishna's words in the Bhagavad Gita, varnas as fluid designations due to intrinsic qualities and not solely birth. Savarkar's great friendship with Dr B.R. Ambedkar, another patriot who is selectively misquoted and misunderstood these days stems from that realisation.
Although the main focus of the book is Mr. Vinayak Damodar 'Veer' Savarkar, it starts off with the hellish hotbed and cauldron of seperatism that spawned and fueled the Islamic 'two-nation' hypothesis that led to one of the most bloody and tragic events in human history, India's partition. Syed Ahmed, the Aligarh Muslim University, the Aga Khan and rich Muslim landowners that colluded with the British are dealt with in extensive detail. Curiously, however in the appeasement template perfected by a Conmangress and other political copy-cats, Jews, Nazis and foreign events occupy a larger part of the media and general landscape than the bloody events that took place within our doors and keep on repeating with devastating regularity.
In the COVID pandemic era, a temptation to describe these historical faux pas w.r.t narratives as social distancing of a modern setup that has been subliminally indoctrinated with a sanitized version of past events. Young and old alike tend to dismiss real events as 'historical' fluff that is irrelevant for their present lives
It is ironical that people who suffered for India's freedom are now condemned as 'stooges' and 'puppets' of the British raj by the very people who enjoyed power, privilege and influence due to their kowtowing before colonial masters. Harvard-educated windbags pontificate on all and sundry while perpetuating a Nehruvian dystopia that is inherently unsuited for the 21st century. Our political princes party on foreign shores while the country keeps boiling practically every month on issues that range from frivolous to fictional.
The early Congress with its stalwarts like Dadabhai Naoroji, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Lala Lajpat Rai and Aurobindo Ghosh among others play a major part in the first part of the book. It was heartening to read Bhagat Singh drawing inspiration from Savarkar and even meeting him along with Rajguru.
In the present day, Singh's Arya Samaj and Sikh upbringing has been sidelined apart from his ire at the brutal beating of a Punjabi Hindu Lajpat Rai that led to his death. The sorry spectacle of anti-nationals, biased historians and shrewd political operators like Tharoor misappropriating Singh as a Communist icon merely due to his musings on atheism are an insult to the patriotic spirit of a man who would despise such vile treachery. Socialism was in vogue those days due to the recent success of the Soviet Union and its struggle against imperialists that had impressed many including Savarkar and Nehru. Savarkar was in touch with patriots throughout the country, including Master Tara Singh in the Punjab, Rash Bihari Bose and S.P Mukherjee in Bengal apart from the Travancore Kingdom and Sir C.P Iyer, its diwan.
A point stressed on umpteen times in this book is that above all, Savarkar was a realist who always advocated calibrating and changing strategies based solely on national interest. It is a fact that he was wily and masterful. Madanlal Dhingra, a rambunctious patriotic Punjabi from a rich Amritsar family was inspired to exterminate Curzon Wyllie due to Savarkar's influence. However, the jury is still out on the most infamous killing of them all, the 1948 assassination of the 'Mahatma'. Although the authors have largely absolved him of involvement insisting that he respected opponents of every hue and dispensation, many books on the subject including a few in Marathi believe Veer Savarkar played a part.
Mr. Savarkar's transformation from a typical 'pseudo-secularist' to the ideological founder of a more assertive brand of Sanatan Dharma viz. 'Hindutva' took place in his painful and long incarceration in the Andaman Cellular Jail. Maharashtra with firebrands like Vasudeo Balwant Phadke, the Chaphekar brothers, Tilak among others was on the forefront of violent rebellion apart from the Punjab and Bengal.
That the British considered him an 'extreme' subversive threat due to his intelligence was evident when they sentenced him to a record 50 year imprisonment at the young age of 28. The situation in this place was more inhumane and solitary than present day hellholes like Guantanomo that may appear to be a 'vacation' in comparison. The Irish jailor gladly colluded with Islamic jailors and inmates in their attempt to convert Hindu(particularly Bengali) and Sikh convicts who formed the large majority. Amrish Puri played a Pathan jailor with great aplomb and terrifying effect in a 1996 Malayalam Mohanlal movie on the Andaman cellular jail inmates.
The writers of this book have also given a convincing explanation of his clemency petitions that are 'mocked' by 'present-day' politicians and the Leftist-Islamist nexus who have the luxury of distance. Savarkar asked for mercy not only for himself but for many other inmates. In contrast, Nehru and Gandhi spent a lot less time in British jails and that too on the mainland. Motilal, Jawaharlal's father and an eminence grise lawyer even managed to pull a few strings to get Jawahar out from Nabha jail in two weeks on the condition that he would not enter the princely state.
However, the main takeaway and major thrust of this book begins in the middle and continues to the end. Savarkar's prescience in observing the devastating effect of Congress's appeasement template taking centrestage particularly after Gandhi taking centrestage and his support to the medieval fanatic 'Khilafat' movement in the name of 'Hindu-Muslim' unity. The horrible 'Moplah' massacres in Kerala in the 1920s were dismissed by Gandhi with such inane comments as 'The Muslim is by nature a bully, and the Hindu is by nature a coward'. Savarkar with his profound reading and understanding of world history and the religious scriptures of Indic faiths including Jainism and Buddhism apart from Hinduism countered the emasculating 'ahimsa' construct of Gandhi with relevant examples of Jain kings aided by Munis apart from the Buddha advocating violence for a righteous cause as true dharma.
The sagely demeanour, PR and appeal of Gandhi to the Indian masses apart from the masterful machinations of the Muslim League would prove to be the death-knell for Savarkar's dream of a United(Akhand) India(Bharat). It is to the author's credit that despite the painful text, we are offered a window into Savarkar's soul and transported into those times long ago, that were quite different and still very similar.
The Hindu Mahasabha's spirited opposition to the Muslim League's evil plans managed to block the creation of multiple Pakistans. Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, a Tamil icon who I personally admired due to reading his 'Mahabharata' and 'Ramayana' at a very early age came up with a dastardly 'Rajaji' plan for the division of India under Gandhi's tutelage.
Savarkar opposed this tooth and nail, organising protests across undivided India and rightfully questioned whether an ancient country was the personal fiefdom of Gandhi and Nehru. The Mahatma's negotiations lacked both self-respect and courage, Savarkar rightfully asserted when Gandhi went 27 times to meet Jinnah with the latter not paying a single return visit. Also, Muslim League goons were entirely disrepectful of Gandhi and his entourage. Unlike Gandhi, Rajagopalachari and Nehru later on, Savarkar was empathetic to the sufferings of the entire nation, from Punjab and Sind to Bengal, Gujarat and the South.
The authors suggest that Veer Savarkar planted the idea of 'escape' in Subhash Bose's head, but fail to mention the assistance of Punjabi Communist sympathisers and a remarkable quintuple agent Hindu Khatri Bhagat Ram Talwar(Codename 'Silver') apart from Sikhs from Calcutta to Kabul apart from Saifuddin Kitchlew who helped him understand the culture of the lands he was going to pass through.
The fact that Veer Savarkar was an inspiration and in regular contact with many stalwarts of the age is stressed quite forcefully. Savarkar was also instrumental in the militarisation of sections of the Hindu population and recruitment of Hindus in the army, that served them well in the light of genocidal Islamic mobs that mobilized after the Muslim League's 'Direct Action' Day. RSS founders, also ex-Congressmen disenchanted with its spineless appeasement drew inspiration from Savarkar.
Post-independence, Savarkar warned Nehru repeatedly not to compromise on national integrity and be wary of China and not kowtow on Tibet as well as China. The man's wisdom and his Kautilyan realpolitik approach were not appreciated by India's first Prime Minister who was obsessed with his own delusions about non-alignment and Asian brotherhood. When the Pakistani PM Liaquat Ali Khan visited India in 1952, Savarkar was placed under arrest. Nehru also allowed the birthplace of the 'Pakistan' movement, the Aligarh Muslim University to enjoy protected status and flourish in India. He even allied with the All India Muslim League, an offshoot of the party that caused the country's partition in a 1950s election.
Although in some places it reads like a hagiography with its advocacy and explanation of Savarkar's viewpoint, it is towards the end that a little criticism of the him does take place. Moody and temperamental at times, Savarkar's long incarceration and the stigma and ostracism orchestrated by the Nehru government based on his perceived role in the Gandhi assassination would have taken a toll is what the authors contend. Like many anti-Hindu pogroms to the present day, the 1948 anti-Brahmin riots that took place pan-India after Gandhi was killed is a historical fact that is forgotten and glossed over.
The fact that Savarkar's conception of Hindutva was not rabid vitriol like the heathen and infidel bashing of other faiths but rather an evolved all-encompassing respect for patriotic, sane and hard-working people from all faiths is something that is deliberated obfuscated by a street-smart, servile, deliberately vindictive and sometimes intellectually deficient opposition. The tragedy of present-day dialectic is the refusal to condemn monolithic Abrahamic faiths that effectively censor dissent and ensure forced compliance but prattle on relentlessly using colonial constructs that were meant to divide and rule. The authors also have indicated this, albeit indirectly.
To sum up, Vinayak Damodar 'Veer' Savarkar will always be a controversial figure, prone to misinterpretation and unfounded calumny. His ideas will continue to invite debate and inspire true patriots. It is a tragedy that present-day Maharashtra does not have the intellectual heft, patriotism, calibre and wisdom of leaders like Savarkar, Tilak or Gokhale. As a pointer, one of Asia's richest municipal corporations has a long way to go in making India's financial capital even remotely like Shanghai.
However, what shines through in this book is the profound love Savarkar had for the country and his conception of a majestic, united, vast Indian motherland with economic, intellectual and military muscle that would have served as a beacon for the world. Although, the reality is different, Indic as well as other readers can always draw inspiration from the Savarkar world-view which deserves more respect and analysis than it has got in the post-independence era. Sincerely thank Indica for sending me this book.
July 24, 2023
Well, while the authors say that this is apolicitical but it seldom is the case for such topics ...book has a lot of one vs the other kind of tone and is also subtly provoking at times ...but yes there is a lot of information on Veer Savarkar...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews