• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
VOL. 77 : 16 OCTOBER, 1939 - 22 FEBRUARY, 1940
1
1. LETTER TO INDIRA NEHRU
[After October 15, 1939]1
CHI. INDU,
You must have now lost the habit of writing Hindi. But I must
write, mustn\u2019t I, in therashtrabhasha ?

Have you gone there for studies or for falling ill? How did you contract pleurisy? I have suffered the pangs of pleurisy. May God restore you soon to health.

Blessings from
BAPU
From a photostat of the Hindi: C. W. 9805. Courtesy: Nehru Memorial
Museum and Library
2. NOTES
APOSER

A Britisher has written to Deenabandhu Andrews a letter on the war expounding his own views. He is an ardent pacifist. Deenabandhu has shared the letter with me. In it occur the following paragraphs:

For India too I think that this is a very critical time. The danger I see is that Britain may promise full Dominion Status or something of the kind, and as a result India will raise an army and become one more military-minded nation. Her witness for the way of non-violence and soul-force would then be largely discounted.

How can Gandhiji as a believer in non-violence ask for clarification of war aims with a view to getting India\u2019s support for Britain in this way of war? The only thing that he can do and that we should all be doing is to build up an army of men and women who are committed to the way of love and forgiveness and to receive but never to return violence. We have to work this out to see how it will alter our daily life as well as all our thinking and acting towards other communities and nations. We have to be disciplined in this and also to

1 In her book, With No Regrets, Krishna Hutheesing explains that the

addressee went hiking during the autumn of 1939, got soaked and caught a chill which developed into pleurisy. In a letter dated November 6, 1939, Jawaharlal Nehru had written to the addressee that he had a joint cable \u201cfrom Agatha and Bhandari that you are going to Europe\u201d. She went to Leysin (in Switzerland) after having spent some time in Middlesex Hospital.Vide also the preceding item and \u201cLetter to Jawaharlal Nehru\u201d. 25-10-1939.

2
THE COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI
learn to act together as one man. Along this line I see tremendous
possibilities.

Of course we should also use all the influence we can to urge Britain to acknowledge and put into practice full democracy in India as it is a high principle quite apart from whether India helps Britain in the war or not.

The danger that the writer senses is real. I dealt with it last week.1 The writer cavils at my sympathy with the Allies. I have shown it as an out-and-out believer in non-violence, even because of my belief. Whilst all violence is bad and must be condemned in the abstract, it is permissible for, it is even the duty of, a believer in ahimsa to distinguish between the aggressor and the defender. Having done so, he will side with the defender in a non-violent manner, i.e., give his life in saving him. His intervention is likely to bring a speedier end to the duel and may even result in bringing about peace between the combatants. Applying the argument to the present war, if the Congress actively sides with the Allies in a non-violent way, the Congress assistance will lift the Allied cause to a high moral plane and the Congress influence will be effectively used in the cause of peace. What is more it will be the special business of the Congress to see that, if the war is fought to a finish, no humiliation is heaped upon the vanquished. That is the role I have conceived for the Congress. The declaration of independence has become a necessity. The question having been raised, the Congress cannot help Britain if Britain is secretly fighting for imperialism while it declares to the world that the fight is for saving democracies. For Britain to be in the right a clear declaration of her war aim is a necessity, irrespective of the Congress policy.

SEGAON, October 16, 1939
Harijan,2 1 - 1 0 - 1 9 3 9
3. THE FICTION OF MAJORITY

It is painful to find the British Press and Britishers advancing the minority claim to prevent the declaration suggested2 by the Congress, if I may say so, in the common interest. If the force of the Congress suggestion has not been overwhelmingly felt, the declaration will not

1Vide\u201cOn Trial\u201d, 10-10-1939.
2VideAppendices \u201cWorking Committee\u2019s Manifesto\u201d, 14-9-1939 and
\u201cA.I.C.C. Resolution\u201d, 14-10-1939.
VOL. 77 : 16 OCTOBER, 1939 - 22 FEBRUARY, 1940
3

come. There need be no dejection among Congressmen if it does not. We shall get our independence when it is deserved. But it would be well for the British Government and the Allied cause, if the minority argument were not flung in the face of a credulous world. It would be honest to say that the British desire to hold India yet awhile. There will be nothing wrong in such a desire. India is a conquest. Conquests are not surrendered except when the conquered successfully rebel, or under an awakened conscience the conqueror repents of the conquest, or when the conquered territory ceases to be a profitable concern. I had hoped and still hope that the British, having become war-weary and sickened over the mad slaughter involved in the present war, would want to close it at the earliest possible moment by being above board in every respect and therefore in respect of India. This they can never be, so long as they hold India in bondage.

I know that many have been angry with me for claiming an exclusive right for the Congress to speak for the people of India as a whole. It is not an arrogant pretension. It is explicit in the first article of the Congress. It wants and works for independence for the whole of India. It speaks neither for majority nor minority. It seeks to represent all Indians without any distinction. Therefore those who oppose it should not count, if the claim for independence is admitted. Those who support the claim simply give added strength to the Congress claim.Britain has hitherto held India by producing before the world

Indians who want Britain to remain in India as ruler and arbiter between rival claimants. These will always exist. The question is whether it is right for Britain to plead these rivalries in defence of holding India under subjection or whether she should now recognize the mistake and leave India to decide upon the method of her own government.

And who are the minorities? They are religious, political and social: thus Mussalmans (religious), Depressed Classes (social), Liberals (political), Princes (social), Brahmins (social), non-Brahmins (social), Lingayats (social), Sikhs (social?), Christians\u2014Protestants and Catholics (religious), Jains (Social?), Zamindars (political?). I have a letter from the Secretary of the All-India Shia Conference registering their claim for separate existence. Who are the majority in this medley? Unfortunately for unhappy India even Muslims are somewhat divided and so are the Christians. It is the policy of the

of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...