Indian Political Science Association

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK

Author(s): Vishwanath Prasad Varma
Source: The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 19, No. 1 (JANUARY-MARCH 1958),
pp. 15-24
Published by: Indian Political Science Association
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42748889
Accessed: 01-04-2020 15:14 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Indian Journal of Political Science

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOK AM AN Y A TILAK
By
VlSHWANATH PRASAD VARMA

Professor of Politics Patna College

I. FOUNDATIONS OF TILAK'S POLITICAL THOUGHT

If political philosophy means the speculative construction of an idealistic

utopia, then Tilak has not given us any picture of the politically perfect society
in this sense of the term political philosophy. He does not discuss the feature
and possibilities of the best State as Plato, Aristotle and Cicero da: He does
not create the architectonic of the conceptually perfect State in the manner
of Hegel and Bosanquet. His main problem in life was the political emanci-
pation of India and hence there is an element of great realism in his political
ideas and outlook. However, he was not a realist in the Hobbesian and
Machiavellian sense of the term. He was never a political pragmatist. He
was deeply versed in ancient Sanskrit philosophy and his political thought
represents a synthesis of the some of the dominant conceptions of Indian
thought and the nationalistic and democratic ideas of the modern west.
The dominant metaphysical assumptions of Tilak also influenced his
political ideas. He was a Vedantist. The metaphysics of non-dualism of the
Vedanta, implied, according to him, the political conception of natural rights.
Because the spirit is the supreme reality and because all men participate in
that absolute essence, hence all have the same autonomous spiritual poten-
tiality. Hence Advaitism taught him the supremacy of the concept of
freedom.1 "Freedom was the soul of the Home Rule Movement. The divine
instinct of freedom never aged

soul which Vedanta declares to be not separat

with him. This freedom was a principle that
freedom according to Tilak was a divine attri
with the autonomous power of creativism. With
spiritual life was possible. Foreign imperialism k
hence Tilak fought against the British empire. Th
foundations for the political struggles for li
engaged.
Tilak's nationalism was also influenced by the western theories of
national independence and self-determination. In the famous trial speech
of 1908 he quotes with approval John Stuart Mill's definition of nationality.3
In 1919 and 1920 he accepted the Wilsonian concept of self-determination
and pleaded for its application to India.4 Hence Tilak's philosophy of
nationalism was a synthesis of the Vedantic ideal of the spirit as self-contained
freedom and the western conceptions of Mazzini, Burke, Mill and later on of
Wilson. This synthesis he expressed in terms of Swarajya, a Vedic term
which was used in Maharashtra to indicate the Maratha polity ofShivaji.

1 Tilak, Gita Rahasya (Hindi edition of 1950) p. 399.

2 Speeches and Writings of Tilak (G. A. Natcsan & Co., Madras), p. 354.
3 Tilak's Trial (1908); p. 138.
4 Tilak's letter to Wilson and Clemenceau in 1919. 1 his letter is published also in the
Mahratta.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
1 6 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

Because of his spiritual approach, Lokamanya regarded that Swarajya

was not only a right but a Dharma.5 He also gave a moral and spiritual
meaning of Swarajya. Politically, Swarajya meant Home Rule. Morally,
it meant the attainment of the perfection of self-control which is essential for
performing "one's duty" (Swadharma). It also hada spiritual significance
because it meant the realization of spiritual inner freedom and contemplative
delight. Tilak defined the spiritual connotation of Swarajya in these terms :
"It is a life centered in self and dependant upon self. There is Swaraj in this
world as well as in the world hereafter. The Rishis who laid down the law
of duty betook themselves to forests, because the people were already enjoyin
Swarajya or People's dominion which was administered and defended in the
first instance by the Kshatriya Kings. It is my conviction, it is my thesis,
that Swaraj in the life to come cannot be the reward of a people who have
not enjoyed it in this world/'6 Hence Tilak wanted both political liberty an
spiritual freedom.

2. NATIONALISM, REVIVALISM AND HINDUISM

Tilak's nationalism had a revivalistic orientation. He wanted to brin

to the front the message of the Vedas and the Gita for providing spiritu
energy and moral enthusiasm to the nation. A recovery of the healthy an
vital traditions of the old culture of India was essential. He said : "a true
nationalist desires to build on old foundations". Reform based on utter
disrespect for the old does not appeal to him as constructive work. "We do
not want to anglicize our institutions and so denationalize them in the name o
social and political reforms."7 Hence he pointed out that the Shiva
and the Ganapati festivals had been encouraged by him because they
served to link contemporary events and movements with historical
traditions.

But because Lokamanya was, partially, a revivalist, it must not be

thought that he was a mere Hindu nationalist. As a person, he had
intense pride in Hindu religion and culture. As a political leader
he wanted to preserve the legitimate interests of the Hindu people
and would not sanction cowardice and surrender. But it is wrong to
say that he was a mere Hindu nationalist and was opposed to the
Moslems. Zacharias says that Tilak was the spokesmon of an anti-Moslem
retaliation.8 A British historian, Powell Price, says that "The Muslim
League was an answer to the Indian National Congress, necessary because
the possibility of self-government raised the spirit of separation which the
intolerance of Tilak had emphasized."9 Chirol says that due to Tilak's
extreme orthodoxy the Moslem members of the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha
resigned from that body. Palme Dutt blames Lokamanya Tilak and Sri
Aurobindo Ghosh because their identification of national awakening with the
revival of Hinduism cut off the Moslem masses from the national movement.10
But all these are partial and even incorrect interpretations of the political
thought and action of Lokamanya. Jinnah, Dr. M. A. Ansari and
Hasan Imam have praised the nationalistic sentiments and spirit of
compromise of the Lokamanya, because due to his wise counsel and modera-
tion the Lucknow Pact of 1916 could be achieved. Shaukat Ali and Hasarat

6 Tilak's speech at Yeotmal, after the Lucknow Congress of 1916, Speeches p. 256.
6 B. G. Tilak, "Karmayoga and Swaraj", Speeches and Writings of Tilak . pp. 276-280.
7 Tilak's letters, Mahratta , 13 December, 1919.
8 Zacharias, Renascent India, p. 121.
9 Powell Price, A History of India , p. 599*
10 R. Palme Dutt, India Today , p. 383.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 1 7

Mohani regarded Tilak as their political Guru. Shaukat Ali says : "I
like to mention again for the hundredth time that both Mahomed
myself belonged and still belong to Lokamanya Tilak's political pa
Hasarat Mohani says : "I even at that early age, chose the Lokam
as the ideal Leader for me. . . . During that period I had ample o
tunities of appreciating the thought and ability of almost all Indian p
leaders and basing my remarks on that close personal study, I can
without the least fear of contradiction, that I found the Lokamanya g
and superior to every other leader in every respect;

all through Tilak's life I was both intellectu

follower of his, anyone can well judge thereby,
towards him."12 Hasan Imam as the preside
Congress went to the extent of calling Tilak
Imam stated : "Let me say, and it is with g
Tilak is my father in point of politics."13 Furt
to support the Khilafat movement if the ma
behind that. Tilak had proposed the Congres
of the Ali brothers. If Tilak would have been anti-Moslem he could never
have commanded the confidence of the great Moslem leaders. Hence it can
be said, that with the profoundest regard for Hinduism in private life,
as a political leader Tilak had a broad policy calculated to lead to national
emancipation.

3. TILAK'S THEORY OF NATIONALISM

Lokamanya wanted to substantiate the nationalistic movement in India

by a strong cultural and religious revival of Hinduism. But he also accepted
the economic arguments for nationalism. Dadabhai Naoroji made famous
the "Drain Theory" in Indian economics. Both Lokamanya and Gokhale
accepted that foreign imperialism resulted in the enormous "drain"
of India's resources. In 1897 Tilak wrote three articles in the
Kesari at the time of the Diamond Jubilee celebrations of Queen Victoria
In the article written on the 22nd June he stated that India's arts and
industries had declined under the British rule. He wrote that the various
economic enterprises and investments in India, under the ownership and
management of the foreign capitalists, only created a delusion of prosperity.
He referred to the evidence given by Dadabhai before the Welby Commis-
sion14 of 1896 wherein that veteran patriarch of Indian politics had shown that
during the imperialistic sway of Great Britain India had become impoverished
and economically ruined. He referred to the economic "drain" of India
also in the interview he gave to Nevinson in 1907.15

Tilak held that the attainment of Swarajya would be a great victory

for Indian nationalism. Hence he gave to Indians the Mantra: "Swarajya
is the birth-right of Indians". Although in his speeches and writings
Lokamanya always said that Swarajya did not imply the negation and
severance of ultimate British sovereignty,, still people knew that in his heart
of hearts he always wanted complete independence. He once wrote that
Swarajya is "the foundation and not the height of our future posperity."16
He always pointed out that the path of the attainment of Swarajya was full of

11 S. V. Bapat (Ed.), Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. II p. 576.

12 Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. Ill pp. 36-37.
13 Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. Ill p. 218.
14 Welby Commission Roport, 2 Volumes.
15 H. W. Nevinson, The New Spirit in India (London, 1908).
16 Speeches and Writings p« ¿73.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
1 8 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

suffering and misery. During the Home Rule days Lokamanya always was
careful to say that he was not opposed to the King-Emperor but he only
wanted to change the anglo-Indian bureaucracy. He confidently asserted
that to preach against the despotism of the bureaucracy was not sedition.
Since Lokamanya did not advocate the doing away with the King-Emperor
whence Bipin Chandra Pal says that Lokamanya was a believer in "imperial
fédération5' which would be composed of Great Britain, Ireland and Egypt,
India and the dominions, each absolutely autonomous internally but com-
bined for the purposes of protection and progress.17
We have earlier referred to the fact that Tilak was a Vedantist in his
metaphysical views. His conceptions of freedom as a divine instinct in man,
and of Swarajya as inner self-realization, indicate his Vedantic views. His
belief in human fellowship also followed from his Vedantism. In a way, he
pleaded for the reconciliation between the ideal of nationalism and the Vedantic
conception of human unity. In a speech he once said: "If the Vedantic
ideal is higher, it necessarily includes the national ideal which is lower.
The two are not irreconcilable if you know how to reconcile them. The two
àre not opposed to each other. One includes the other much in the same
way as thousand includes five hundred. The two ideals are mutually
consistent and both of them demand a kind of self-sacrifice and self-control.
Both of them demand in addition to self-control and self-sacrifice, a kind of
higher altruistic feeling by which man is impelled to ignore selfish considera-
tions and to work for persons and for objects which do not in the least savour .
of any egotistic aim. The feeling is one of love for humanity, for the equality
of man before God, and it is the spirit of that feeling that governs the two
ideals, Vedantic and national."18
Edward Shillito has written a book entitled Nationalism : Man9 s other
Religion . In that book there is a chapter entitled "The two Tilaks".
Shillito says that Narayan Vaman Tilak, the Christian poet, was a believer
in the kingdom of God on earth while Bal Gangadhar Tilak was a strong believer
in Swarajya. Shillito has presented an imaginary dialogue between the two
Tilaks.19 ; But Shillito's interpretation is inadequate. Although Lokamanya
Tilák was a great patriot and a convinced nationalist he definitely states
in his commentary on the Gita that love of the country is only a step to
cosmopolitanism. He quotes part of the famous Sanskrit Shloka which means
that for the wise man of generous feelings the whole world is one big
family.20

4. TILAK AND THE MODERATES

Lokamanya Tilak has won lasting fame by creating the vital found
tions of an assertive nationalism. He was an extremist and there were seve-
ral factors responsible for that. Temperamentally he was buoyant and
represented the aggressive vigorous spirit of manhood. He had been inspired
by the careers and exploits of Shivaji and the other Maratha heroes who
represented struggle and fight and successful victories. His extremism had
also been influenced by his growing disillusion at the coercive and repressive
technics of the bureaucracy. But although an extremist, he believed in legal
17 B. G. Pal. Indian Nationalism . The Chanter entitled "Tilak".
18 Speeches of Tilak (published by Indian Stores, Bellary), pp. 15-16, quoted i
G. V. Ketkar, "Real Basis of Tilak's nationalism", Mahratta, August 3, 1951.
19 Edward Shilitto's book on Nationalism (London, 1933). The dialogue between t
two Tilaks is given in pp. 1 13-121, as a subsection of the Chapter "Education for Life
the Nation."
20 B. G. Tilak, Gita-Rahasya (Hindi edition of 1950), p. 398.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK Tg

methods of agitation. He was twice elected to the Bombay legislative

Council. He contemplated election also a third time. He formed the Cong-
ress Democratic Party in 1920 for contesting elections. But although Tilak
accepted the framework of the existing law he wanted to use the areas of
action left free by the law of the British government to intensify the national-
ist movement in the country. Ranade, Pherozeshah Mehta and Gokhale
went to the extent of regarding the British rule in India as part of divine
dispensation21 but the leaders of the extremist party always believed in the
independent destiny of India. In a speech in 1909 Gokhale defended passive
resistance22 but although Tilak and Gokhale might at times have used the
same words and might have put their faith in the same political objectives
still there was fundamental difference in their political technics. The activi-
ties of Lokamanya in the famine agitation of 1896, in the movements of 1 9^5
to 1908, and during the Home Rule days were calculated to train the people
in organized action. He wanted to infuse a spirit of dynamic activism and
assertiveness among a people who had grown enervated and prostrate. His
advocacy of no-rent campaign in 1896, his stress on national education, his
advocacy of picketing for the purpose of stopping the sale of liquor and his
firm support of Swadeshi and boycott definitely showed that Lokamanya
wanted that the national movement should have its strong roots in co-ordi-
nated and united action by the Indian people. Before Tilak came into
active prominence as a leader, the Indian nationalist movement was commit-
ted to a philosophy of intellectual discussion on occidental lines. He taught
the gospel of Indianization of the nationalist movement. Hence his technics
of political action and his philosophical defence of the nationalist movement
were oriented to the historical heritage of the people of India. If some of
the important moderate leaders looked only to Burke, Mazzini and Spencer
for intellectual inspiration, Tilak also looked to Shivaji and Nana Fadnavis
and the Bhagavadgita. Tilak's attempts to Indianize the policy and orient-
ation of the nationalist movement brought to him the support of Lala Lajpat
Rai who in several respects closely associated himself with Gokhale. Lalaji
in distinguishing the technics and ideas of Tilak and Gokhale writes : ''Tilak
was the man of the people. Gokhale was the man of the intelligentsia. Tilak
was a hero for all times to come. His heroism at times verged on reckless-
ness and regardlessness of consequences to himself and his co-workers.
Gokhale was a careful politician, weighing every word before he uttered,
and balancing every thought he gave expression to, always trying to say the
right thing but in a way most inoffensive to the authorities that be, and the
people that he criticised. Tilak was a blunt incisive speaker who never
minced matters, spoke few words, but gave out the truth free from all emba-
rassments of language and all the coverings of diplomacy. Gokhale was an
accomplished speaker, full of pathos, who prepared everything beforehand,
and realised the significance of every word that he uttered. Gokhale's ethics
would not sanction any violence in politics. Tilak would not only justify it
but even press it under certain conditions."23 The later history of Indian
nationalism, however, showed the efficiency of the methods of Tilak.

5. THE POLITICAL THOUGHT OF TILAK AND AUROBINDO

Lokamanya was a political extremist but there were differences between
his political thought and the political conceptions of the Bengal school of
21 Pherozeshah Mehta's Speech as Chairman of the reception committee of the Bom-
bay Congress of 1904.
22 Quoted in the Life of Vithalbhai ratds p. lyy.
23 S. V. Bapat (Ed.) Three Volumes of Reminiscences and Ancedotes oj Lok. 1 tlak (In
Marathi & English), Vol. II, p. 661.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
£0 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

extremist nationalists. Daring the days of the anti-partition agitation Pal,

Aurobindo, Shyam Sundar Ghakravarti, Ashwini Kumar Datta and oth
leaders of Bengal worked under the guidance of Tilak. Lokamanya w
decidely the acknowledged leader of the new Party. But still on the pla
of thought there were subtle differences between the ideas of Tilak an
Aurobindo. In Aurobindo we find the concept of Kali as the Zeit-gás
(spirit of the time). He refers to God as the captain of the nationali
movement. He confesses having visions of Krishna in the Alipore Jail. The
writings of Pal and Aurobindo are characterized by an exalted, inspired an
fervid emotionalism. In Aurobindo there is a passion for metaphysical
abstractions and theological symbols. After return from the Alipore J
Aurobindo said that Sanatan Dharma itself was nationalism. Lokamany
on the other hand, had a strong sense for the real and the concrete. Ther
is a constant appeal in his writings and speeches for making immedia
changes in the administrative mechanism of the country and there is less
emphasis on the visions of the spiritualized society and the gnostic communi
If Aurobindo was inspired by the teachings of Bankima Chandra about the
country as the Mother, Tilak was influenced by the character and personali
of Shivaji and Nana Fadnavis. In the character of Bengal there is an excess
of emotionalism and imagination. In Maharashtra we find a predomina
of accurate common sense and sober realism.24 This difference in the
characteristics of the two provinces is revealed in the different theoreti
approaches of Sri Aurobindo and Lokamanya.
Ti tlak emphasized the psychological conception of nationalism and sa
that a feeling of common belongingness was essential for constitutin
agglomeration of people into a nation.25 But Aurobindo and Pal stressed
spiritual-religious conception of nation. Aurobindo considered nationa
as a pure and Sattvika religion. Tilak said that Swarajya was essential
freeing India from the evils of an alien bureaucratic pattern. But Aurobi
said that the political salvation of India was essential for the spirit
redemption of mankind. The notion of messianism, the conception t
India was rising for shedding the glories of Sanatan Dharma in the world
very strong in Aurobindo.
Lokamanya had a passionate love for India's independence but as a pro
gram for political achievement he always sponsored the concept of Swara
under British sovereignty. Tilak fought for Swarajya (home rule) while t
political extremist of Bengal clamoured for Swatantrata (independenc
Lokamanya was a great politician and hence as an objective he always
forward only the concept of Swarajya or home rule or self-government.27
and Aurobindo during the Swadeshi days talked of independence. (La
on Pal became an advocate of imperial federation) Aurobindo challenged t
right of foreign imperialism to force "an inferior civilization" on In
Tilak spoke cautiously and said after the Calcutta Congress: "As an id
independence is all right but you cannot work for it without brin
yourself within the clutches of law. Working for it will be waging
against the King".28 But altnough in his speeches and writing^ Tilak alw
avoided the word independence and always contented himself with the w
self-government still the British government thoroughly realized that he

24 Cf. Zacharias, Renascent India p. 151.

25 N. G. Kelkar, Life and limes of Tilak, pp. 4öb- 07.
26 Tilak? s Writings in the Kesari , 4 Volumes (in Marathi), Vol. Ill, pp. 248-249.
27 In a speech at the seventeenth anniversary of Tilak s death, reported in the
Mahr atta, August 6, 1937, V. D. Savarkar stated that Tilak taught the principle of
complete independence.
28 Reminiscences , Vol. I, p. 483.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 21

their greatest political antagonist. The British Governm

was one individual in India whom no seductions and no favours could ever
dissuade from his self-chosen path. The indomitable Tilak was the most
relentless and biggest opponent of the British empire in India till the moment
of his death.

Both the Bengal extremists and Lokamanya accepted the conception of

passive resistance. According to Lokamanya Swadeshi and boycott were the
technics of passive resistance.29 But according to Aurobindo passive resistance
had a more comprehensive conception. Passive resistance, to Aurobindo,
meant the resistance against or transgression of an unjust law or an unjust
decree in a peaceful way. Hence Aurobindo was satisfied not only with
preaching Swadeshi and the morality of boycott but he also preached the
resistance to unjust laws and unjust decrees.30

6. WAS TILAK A REVOLUTIONARY ?

The foreign critics of Tilak's political philosophy and technics as also

Indian revolutionaries, especially of Maharashtra, regard Tilak as a revolu-
tionary. Ghirol wrote in his book India : "Tilak had been the first to create
the atmosphere which breeds murders."31 John S. Hoyland, the biographer
of Gokhale says that Mr. Tilak had been "coquetting with doctrines of
physical force."32 Branson, the advocate-general who conducted the prosecu-
tion case against Tilak in 1908 said that Tilak's articles contained "a covert
threat of mutiny" and in substance he (Tilak) was preaching "Swarajya or
bombs."33

Lokamanya Tilak was never an advocate of absolute Ahimsa.34 He

never accepted the absolute form of non-violence as upheld by the pacifists
and Tolstoy. He supported the action of Shivaji in killing Afzal Khan.
He appreciated the daring and skill of Ghapekar as also the patriotic fervour
of the Bengal revolutionaries. As a philosopher, Lokamanya put the
highest premium on purification of intentions. The external action could
never be considered the criterion of moral worth. Hence if an Arjuna or a
Shivaji or any other ardent patriot would commit some violent deed being
impelled by higher altruistic motives Lokamanya would not condemn such
persons. (But certainly, he once condemned the revolutionary and violent
activities and that was in his letter to the Mahr atta on the 28 th August, 19 14).
But although a metaphysical defender of altruistic violence, Lokamanya
never preached political murder nor did he ever incite any body to commit
murder as a political means. For himself he accepted the legal methods of
political organization and agitation. He felt that the situation in the country
was not suitable for revolutionary activity. In 1906 he had gone to Nasik
and he admonished the people there not to engage in violent revolutionary
activities. But he would ask people to desist from such activities not on
moral grounds but on ground of expediency. Once he said: "From begging
to open rebellion choose anything according to your ability and do it, but
remember the supremacy of Swadharma."
It is very true that Lokamanya was in touch with some of the leading
revolutionaries of those days. He knew Shyamji Krishnavarma well. On
29 Tilak's Speech at Beleaum in September, 1906.
30 Sri Aurobindo, The Doctrine of Passive Resistance .
31 V. Chirol, India , p. 122.
82 Tohn S. Hoyland, Gokhale , p. 25.
33 N. G. Kelkar, Tilak's Trial of 1908 , pp. 197 and 198.
34 Tilak, Git a Rahasya (Hindi edition), pp. 375,377,392 and 394.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
22 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

July 4, 1905 Tilak wrote an article in the Kesari on the work of Krish
and there he compared the latter's political opinions to those of H
Damodarpant Savarkar, the father of V. D. Savarkar, was an adm
Lokamanya. During his school days Vinayak Savarkar composed
eulogising Tilak. Savarkar and his brother were responsible for ftíun
Mitra Mela and the Abhinav Bharat.35 These societies were committed t
ideal of independence for India which was to be won even by armed
In 1905 Savarkar had taken a leading part in the bonfire of foreign c
and when principal Paranjpey fined Savarkar rupees ten, Tilak de
this action of the authorities and wrote : "They are not our Gurus".3
kar kept in touch with Lokamanya while the former was a stud
Fergusson College and Tilak wrote a letter of introduction for Sav
Shyamji Krishnavarma.37 Perhaps Tilak was in touch with Savarkar in
The biographer of Savarkar says that from his talks with Gokhale, M
had scented "that Tilak was in close touch with Savarkar and the British
government had asked the India government to arrange for his incarceration.
For just before the decision of the Tilak case some of the members of the
Abbinava Bharat had intercepted in Bombay one night a message from the
British government regarding the Tilak affair which contained the informa-
tion."38 At the Poona provincial conference of 19 15 some of the delegates
wanted a resolution urging the release of Savarkar and other political pri-
soners. But there were chances of division on this resolution. Lokamanya
wanted all resolutions to be passed unanimously. Hence this resolution
was dropped.39 It is possible that either during 1919 or 1920 Lokamanya
wrote a letter to Montagu requesting the release of Savarkar.40 But although
Ttlak knew Savarkar very well and was mtersted in the latter's affairs
and activities there is no proof for holding that Tilak goaded the latter to
revolutionary and terroristic activities.
Sometimes it has been said that Tilak was a revolutionary because
he was behind the arms factory opened in Nepal in 1903. After the
Calcutta Congress of 1901, Mataji, a Maharashtriyan woman living in
Calcutta requested Tilak and Vasukaka Joshi to go to Nepal. Khadilkar went
there and adopted the pseudonym of Krishnarao Bhat. The plan was to
open an arms factory in Nepal. Khadilkar began to do some work in this
connexion under the guise of engaging in some business activities. But the
plan for opening the factory had to be dropped because Damu Joshi of Kolha-
pur revealed the plan to the Maharaja of Kolhapur. Through the Maharaja
of Kolhapur the British Government came to know of the plan and the whole
scheme collapsed. Khadilkar was saved through the help of the Maharaja
of Nepal.41 The Nepal incident only shows that Lokamanya wanted an arms
factory to be opened in Nepal but it does not necessarily and conclusively
indicate that he had plans of creating an armed revolution against the British
government during the early years of the twentieth century.
Dr. P. S. Khankhoje in a series of articles in the Kesari in the month of
August 1953 and February 1954 has tried to interpret Lokamanya as the tea-
cher and preceptor of the revolutionary youth of the country.42 He also says
*5 Dhananiava Keer. Life of V . D. Savarkar p. 9.
18 Ibid., pp 19-20.
37 Ibid., p. 25.
38 Ibid., pp. 38-39.
39 Reminiscences . Vol. II, p. 27.
40 Dhananiava Keer, Savarkar. p. 144.
41 The second volume of Khadilkar's Mararhi essays as also the Marathi biography of
Vasukaka Joshi by Deosririkar.
42 Dr. P. S. Khankhoje's articles in the Kesari August 2, 1953, August 4, 1953 and
February 23, 1954.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 23

that Tilak instructed some of these young men to acquire military tra
It is true that these letters refer to a phase of Tilak's personality whic
not been well known so far. But still they do not give any concrete and p
evidence to prove that Lokamanya himself was a revolutionary. Lokam
was the greatest political leader of the day and was an ardent nationali
hence young men of partiotic feelings looked to him for inspiration. Ho
Dr. V. M. Bhatta of Poona holds that till 1908 Tilak closely associate
revolutionists and encouraged them.43 He says that Tilak did not refer to rev
tionary actions and policies in his speeches and writings but only discl
them to persons in his close confidence like Khadilkar and Vasukaka Jos
Lokamanya used to say that there are three types of people in the wo
Those who have the preponderance of Sattvika elements in them prefer spiri
and moral contemplation and teach their fellow-men by their own exam
virtuous living. Those who have the preponderonce of Rajasika elem
them take to the work of political agitation and propaganda. Thos
have the preponderance of Tamasika element in them take recourse to v
activities. But Tilak discouraged revolutionary and violent activities by
Tamasika people. In 1906 he visited Nasik for the Shivaji festival an
invited for the Pansupari. He himself says: "I advised them to co
their activities to strictly constitutional work or education, and not t
wrong."45
In the Poona Shivaji festival speech of June, 1907, Tilak said that wha
nationalist party wanted might appear "like a revolution in the sense t
means a complete change in the theory of the government of India as
put forward by the bureaucracy. It is true that the revolution mus
bloodless revolution, but it would be folly to suppose that if there is t
no shedding of blood there are also to be no sufferings to be undergon
the people. .. .Your revolution must be bloodless but that does not
that you may not have to suffer or go to jail." Thus it appears that
did not contemplate any armed insurection or revolution.
Some of the greatest Indian leaders who had worked with Lokaman
(or several years have denied that Tilak was a revolutionist. Sri Aurobi
Ghosh writes: e:lt is equally a mistake to think of Mr. Tilak as by natu
revolutionary leader; that is not his character or his political temperam
....In a free India he would probably have figured as an advanced
Liberal stateman eager for national progress and greatness

á born Parliamentarian, a leader for the Assem

with the people outside as the constant source
referee in differences .... Such a man is no natural revolutionist, but a
constitutionalist by temper, though always in such times necessarily the
leader of an advanced party or section. A clear constitution he could use,
amend and enlarge would have suited him much better than to break existing
institutions and get a clear field for innovations which is the natural delight
of the revolutionary temperament."46
G.R. Das also holds that Lokamanya was not a revolutionary. There
was 'no dark plunge of the revolutionary in him'. Tilak was too solid and
strong a personality and he did not have the impatience and the restlessness
which characterize a revolutionary. Das thinks that Tilak was a conservative

43 Dr. V. M. Bhatta expressed this opinion in a letter he has written to the author of
this paper.
44 N. C. Kelker, Life of Tilak (In Marathi), Vol. 3, pp. 46-47 of Section 8.
45 V. Chirol, Tilak , (Oxford University Press) pp. 130-131 and p. 179,
46 §ri Aurobindo, Bankim - Tilak - Dayananda , pp. 25-27.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
24 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

by instinct, and compromise was the essence of his politics altho

lost sight of the ideal to which his whole being moved.47
Bipin Chandra Pal, a colleague of Lokamanya for over a de
that Tilak was not a revolutionary. In his book Indian Nationali
out that the temperament, the superior native intelligence, the
education and the firm grasp of the solid political realities of Lo
are against the assumption that he had any real revolutiona
nationalist leaders of Bengal and Maharahstra taught the gos
reliance and no mendicancy/' and not of violent revolution. Lok
opposed to the apthy, despair and frustration that pervaded
life. Bipin Chandra Pal points out that the teachings of Lok
other extermist nationalist leaders were exaggerated into revoluti
and slogans because the psychological foundations of nationalism
sight of by the revolutionists and terrorists. Hence some of th
"turned from steady, sober but devoted and lawful workers int
hysteric revolutionaries." Bipinchandra Pal concludes that it is n
to accuse Lokamanya of any criminal or revolutionary aims.
Sarladevi Chaudharani met Lokamanya and in the course of t
view she asked him questions about the appropriateness of th
She says: "Tilak told me distinctly he did not approve of the da
less authorise them, if for nothing else, simply on the score of
practically useless for political purposes. But looking to differen
nature and the varying processes of evolution suited to different tem
he did not codemn them openly."48

Lokamanya did not believe in the possibility of armed ma

There was neither any trained leadership nor any effective party
of action, available in India. Lokamanya was never a revoluti
sense in which the leaders of radical left-wing movement in
countries are revolutionaries. Lokamanya's outlook was also diff
the nihilists and terrorists of Russia who occasionally committe
murders and assassinations. He accepted legal methods of agitati
not sanction on grounds of policy and expediency the use of re
weapons, although he did not condemn the latter on moral groun

7. CONCLUSION

Lokamanya, as a political philosopher has given us a theory of national^

ism. He did not have the time to elaborate upon the other conceptions of
political science like sovereignty, justice, property, etc., although he has
referred to these. His theory of nationalism was a synthesis of the teachings
of both eastern and western thinkers. He was a thorough believer in democracy
and that was the secret of his unique hold on the masses.49 He did not adopt
an idealistic or conceptual and speculative approach to politics. He belonged
to the school of realism. But he never tolerated the excesses of realism into
the apotheosis of the cult of power, force and success, Hence his school of
political thought can be characterized as nationalism founded opon "Demo-
cratic Realism."

47 Reminisences , Vol. II, p. 623.

48 S. V.Bapat (Ed.), Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Tilak , (In Marathi and English)
Vol. I, pp. 249-250. , "
"i K¿7*
yo / 1 yo / Varma' "T»lak's Plac

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms