Mahatma Gandhi's killer venerated as Hindu nationalism resurges in India

[MenInG]

Last Sunday, in a nondescript building in the India city of Gwalior, 200 miles south of Delhi, a large crowd of men gathered. Most wore bright saffron hats and scarves, a colour evoking Hindu nationalism, and many held strands of flowers as devotional offerings.

They were there to attend the inauguration of the Godse Gyan Shala, a memorial library and “knowledge centre” dedicated to Nathuram Godse, the man who shot Mahatma Gandhi. The devotional yellow and pink flowers were laid around a black and white photograph of Godse, the centrepiece of the room

On 30 January 1948, Godse stepped out in front of Gandhi and shot him three times at point-blank range. A fervent believer in Hindu nationalism, Godse thought Gandhi had betrayed India’s Hindus by agreeing to partition, leading to the creation of Pakistan, and by championing the rights of Muslims. In 1949, Godse was hanged for Gandhi’s murder.

In the following decades, Godse was widely decried as a terrorist and traitor, the murderer of the “father of India”. Yet, in recent years, as Hindu nationalism has moved from an extremist fringe to mainstream Indian politics – the ruling Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) has a Hindu nationalist agenda at their core – Godse’s public reputation has steadily shifted from being condemned as traitor to being venerated as a misunderstood Indian patriot.

Meanwhile, Gandhi’s vision of a secular India with equal rights for all religions has been eroded and subjugated since the BJP came to power in 2014.

“Godse did the right thing by killing Gandhi,” said Devendra Pandey, 53, national secretary of Hindu Mahasabha, the Hindu nationalist organisation behind the memorial library. He was vocal in his belief that India should be declared “a country rightfully for Hindus” and that its 200 million Muslims should move to Pakistan.

“Godse considered Gandhi as his father, so to kill him must have caused him great pain but he had a very real reason,” he said. “Godse took action because Gandhi betrayed India – this library will teach the next generation how Godse was a true nationalist martyr.”

The library is just one of many recent efforts to memorialise and revere Godse. Hindu Mahasabha, which Godse belonged to and which now has about 750,000 members across India, has erected several Godse statues and attempted to set up temples in his name.

The organisation celebrates Godse’s birthday in May as a holy day. In the Maharashtra city of Pune, a silver vessel that supposedly contains Godse’s ashes, following his dying wish for them not to be scattered until India and Pakistan were reunited, has become a popular place of pilgrimage. Videos of sermons by extremist Hindus glorifying Godse have spread across social media.

Pandey said the Hindu Mahasabha plans to open several similar education and memorial centres dedicated to Godse across India. However, there is still much resistance to the glorification of Gandhi’s killer. Two days after the Godse memorial library was opened this week, it had to close on the orders of the local magistrate. And members of Hindu Mahasabha have been arrested for attempts to erect Godse memorials and hold ceremonies in his honour.

“This reverence of Godse and the glorification of violence is all tied to the ascendancy of the BJP,” said Audrey Truschke, assistant professor of South Asian history at Rutgers University in New Jersey. “It began emerging in the last decade and has been accelerating to the point where a greater percentage of people in India are now willing to accept this; and it is shaping, and reshaping, people’s views of Mahatma Gandhi in decidedly unhelpful ways.”

Ramachandra Guha, a historian who wrote a biography of Gandhi, said it was unsurprising that, as the BJP pushed forward its Hindu nationalist agenda, including a citizenship law seen to directly discriminate against Muslims, Godse’s legacy was being revived in India.

Godse had been a member of the RSS, the extremist Hindu nationalist cultural organisation that is seen as a BJP umbrella organisation. Most senior figures in the ruling BJP government, including the prime minister, Narendra Modi, have held positions in the RSS.

“Privately, the BJP has always disliked and mistrusted Gandhi and there has always been some admiration for Godse among members,” said Guha. “The BJP dislike Gandhi for being effeminate, they believe his non-violence movement made India weak, they distrust him for agreeing to partition and, above all, hate that he believed in equal rights for Muslims. The dislike runs deep, so it’s not surprising that now the BJP are so powerful, both politically and socially, that it has risen to the surface.”

Guha said the debate around Godse “takes you to the heart of what’s happening in India today”. He added: “This worship of Godse is symptomatic of a really dangerous transformation in our political life, in our public life, in our institutional life and in our cultural life. It raises the question of India’s future: are we now the Hindu majoritarian nation that Godse always wanted?”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...lism-resurges-in-india?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

[CricketCartoons]

It was quite ironic, that the hindutva supporter Mohandas Gandhi, was killed by a hindu nationalist. Assassination turned him into a martyr and martyrdom covered the ugliness of his beliefs. RSS was simply a more aggressive version of MK Gandhi's vision.

 

[CricketCartoons]

"If untouchables do not fall as Hindus, then it will “lead to bloodshed. Untouchable hooligans will make common cause with Muslim hooligans and kill caste Hindus”.

if Indians were asked to guess who said this, they will guess it to be some rss supporter.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I read the article from top to bottom as we British are mostly unaware of Godse and his relation to Gandhi other than the murder itself. I see the article suggests that the BJP regarded Gandhi as somewhat effeminate in his teachings, but isn't that what made his appeal worldwide, whereas Godse and his ilk were reviled?

Why would you want to raise the profile of a cowardly killer who blindsided a great figure like Gandhi with gun in a crowd?

 

[Pakpak]

''He was vocal in his belief that India should be declared “a country rightfully for Hindus” and that its 200 million Muslims should move to Pakistan.

.....

In the Maharashtra city of Pune, a silver vessel that supposedly contains Godse’s ashes, following his dying wish for them not to be scattered until India and Pakistan were reunited''


These people are some of the most confused humans out there. They want all the Muslims to be shipped to Pakistan but also want Pakistan India reunited?

 

[CricketCartoons]

I read the article from top to bottom as we British are mostly unaware of Godse and his relation to Gandhi other than the murder itself. I see the article suggests that the BJP regarded Gandhi as somewhat effeminate in his teachings, but isn't that what made his appeal worldwide, whereas Godse and his ilk were reviled?

Why would you want to raise the profile of a cowardly killer who blindsided a great figure like Gandhi with gun in a crowd?

Appeal for Mohandas is based on false adulation written by indian nationalist historians and govts who don't want revolutions. When his truth started coming out, his statues started to get demolished in other countries. The biggest achievement by Mohandas was that he kept indian revolutionaries in check and helped the british stay in control. Till the age of 60 he was against independence.
As late as 77 years of age, he used to sleep naked with great niece to test himself. Of course even then he didnt deserve to be assassinated. And that is why I hate Godse, who turned this charlatan into a martyr. If only he had died his natural death, perhaps then there would be less blind devotion to him.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Appeal for Mohandas is based on false adulation written by indian nationalist historians and govts who don't want revolutions. When his truth started coming out, his statues started to get demolished in other countries. The biggest achievement by Mohandas was that he kept indian revolutionaries in check and helped the british stay in control. Till the age of 60 he was against independence.
As late as 77 years of age, he used to sleep naked with great niece to test himself. Of course even then he didnt deserve to be assassinated. And that is why I hate Godse, who turned this charlatan into a martyr. If only he had died his natural death, perhaps then there would be less blind devotion to him.

I think his appeal to Britons was his appeal to non violence and peaceful protests, and also his simple dress and skinny fragile physique which suggested a more cerebral and ascetic lifestyle which fits our perception of Indians. Not sure at all where Godse would fit in other than as some enraged lunatic with issues.

 

[Technics 1210]

This is not news to be honest, but the world needs to know the truth; the largest terrorist organisation in the world is BJP. This is why Modi was banned from entering the West.

India's image slowly but surley being reduced to dust.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

This is not news to be honest, but the world needs to know the truth; the largest terrorist organisation in the world is BJP. This is why Modi was banned from entering the West.

India's image slowly but surley being reduced to dust.

Not really. Perhaps when they become any sort of a threat to western hegemony over world resources then the world will give a second thought to India's image, right now it is of little interest. China is a far bigger threat to our domination.

 

[Pakpak]

Not really. Perhaps when they become any sort of a threat to western hegemony over world resources then the world will give a second thought to India's image, right now it is of little interest. China is a far bigger threat to our domination.

Pretty much. The West if anything will become more pro-India as time goes by as India is their tool right at China's border. You can see this on BBC too, only if sneakily. You'll see ten pro-India news articles to one Chinese (which is always anti-Chinese). You'll also see a lot of articles on India's culture or food or tidbits about Indian life. All to position the average Western reader to have pro-Indian bias and anti-Chinese.

Considering how much mob killing, lynchings and so have happened in India, the brutal lockdown in Kashmir still going on, you hear NOTHING on it on Western news at all unless you specifically sit down and look for it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I think his appeal to Britons was his appeal to non violence and peaceful protests, and also his simple dress and skinny fragile physique which suggested a more cerebral and ascetic lifestyle which fits our perception of Indians. Not sure at all where Godse would fit in other than as some enraged lunatic with issues.

He started wearing only dhoti at the age of 52, and that became his iconic image, but it gives a wrong impression about him. he used to dress up before that.

You can be forgiven that he didn't appreciate violence, because that is the lie that has been told.

Some of his quotes:

He alone can practise ahimsa who knows how to kill’ – in fact, ‘practise of ahimsa may even necessitate killing.

For years we have been deprived of our fighting capacity. How are we to acquire the use of arms for which our ancestors practised penances and took severe pledges?

The only thing where he practiced non violence was when it came against the british. he didn't want indians to take up violence against the british, but FOR the british.

Sisters, you should encourage your husbands and brothers and sons and not to worry them with your objections. If you want them to be true men, send them to the army with your blessings. Don’t be anxious about what may happen to them on the battle-field.....And if they fall, console yourselves with the thought that they have fallen in the discharge of their duty and that they will be yours in your next incarnation.

 

[DeadBall]

Appeal for Mohandas is based on false adulation written by indian nationalist historians and govts who don't want revolutions. When his truth started coming out, his statues started to get demolished in other countries. The biggest achievement by Mohandas was that he kept indian revolutionaries in check and helped the british stay in control. Till the age of 60 he was against independence.
As late as 77 years of age, he used to sleep naked with great niece to test himself. Of course even then he didnt deserve to be assassinated. And that is why I hate Godse, who turned this charlatan into a martyr. If only he had died his natural death, perhaps then there would be less blind devotion to him.

Gandhi, Mother Theresa and many other revered personalities have been exposed for the frauds that they were. I wonder if there are any role models for today's children to look up to.

 

[Colorblind Genius]

It was quite ironic, that the hindutva supporter Mohandas Gandhi, was killed by a hindu nationalist. Assassination turned him into a martyr and martyrdom covered the ugliness of his beliefs. RSS was simply a more aggressive version of MK Gandhi's vision.

This is slightly off the topic but I have sometimes wondered about this and asking this for my own knowledge.

In the pre-Islamic era, I think a major part of Hindu philosophy taught that the soul is sent back to earth seven times or something after death. And then there are variations in this philosophy but there wasn't perhaps a thing such as "martyr", or a "Shaheed" is it?

Many indians say, "Hamaray Jawaan "Shaheed" ho gaye"?
How? Shahaadut is not a Hindu concept, is it? Is there are sansikrit or Hindi term for "Shahaadut"?

I have a feeling that this is a borrowed term which actually has no roots in Hindu philosophy. Can you look into the old Hinduism teachings and see if there is any mention of a "martyr" in the religious stories of Gita etc?

 

[CricketCartoons]

This is slightly off the topic but I have sometimes wondered about this and asking this for my own knowledge.

In the pre-Islamic era, I think a major part of Hindu philosophy taught that the soul is sent back to earth seven times or something after death. And then there are variations in this philosophy but there wasn't perhaps a thing such as "martyr", or a "Shaheed" is it?

Many indians say, "Hamaray Jawaan "Shaheed" ho gaye"?
How? Shahaadut is not a Hindu concept, is it? Is there are sansikrit or Hindi term for "Shahaadut"?

I have a feeling that this is a borrowed term which actually has no roots in Hindu philosophy. Can you look into the old Hinduism teachings and see if there is any mention of a "martyr" in the religious stories of Gita etc?

This is better left for another thread as it is off topic. btw I used the word martyr in its general sense of someone dying for an ideology.

 

[Giannis]

Meh who cares, mans worse than Bill Cosby

 

[Colorblind Genius]

This is better left for another thread as it is off topic. btw I used the word martyr in its general sense of someone dying for an ideology.

OK no probs.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

He started wearing only dhoti at the age of 52, and that became his iconic image, but it gives a wrong impression about him. he used to dress up before that.

You can be forgiven that he didn't appreciate violence, because that is the lie that has been told.

Some of his quotes:






The only thing where he practiced non violence was when it came against the british. he didn't want indians to take up violence against the british, but FOR the british.

Those are certainly eye opening quotes, but against that, even in the OP article it suggests that BJP considered Gandhi as somewhat effeminate and find him an embarrassment. If he was really a proponent of violence, then what would that make RSS and people like his killer Godse?

I feel perhaps you are taking some of his quotes out of context. We have seen the British movie biopic called Gandhi which starred Ben Kingsley, and the Mahatma seemed quite a decent chap. It was the pro Pakistan Mr Jinnah who came across as quite sinister in a handsome sort of fashion.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Those are certainly eye opening quotes, but against that, even in the OP article it suggests that BJP considered Gandhi as somewhat effeminate and find him an embarrassment. If he was really a proponent of violence, then what would that make RSS and people like his killer Godse?

I feel perhaps you are taking some of his quotes out of context. We have seen the British movie biopic called Gandhi which starred Ben Kingsley, and the Mahatma seemed quite a decent chap. It was the pro Pakistan Mr Jinnah who came across as quite sinister in a handsome sort of fashion.

Even BJP had to fall in line and invoke the "mahatma" and pay tributes to him, because it will be a political suicide otherwise, and the image of india = land of gandhi has its uses. In private they don't have respect for him, but their reasons are different. Just because RSS doesn't like someone doesn't mean that person should be supported. The dalits don't like him too ( they have different reasons).

Which of the quotes is out of context? An example of out of context quote will be the ones where he praised hitler and admired him (but that was before holocaust happened). I used quotes where there was no doubt of what he meant, and neither were they said when he was in his youth.

 

[Technics 1210]

Not really. Perhaps when they become any sort of a threat to western hegemony over world resources then the world will give a second thought to India's image, right now it is of little interest. China is a far bigger threat to our domination.

Exaclty the point. India will never hold a candle to China, which is why China will remain a threat, thus important from a political and economical perspective, whereas India is just the fluff you get on a 99 flake ice cream.

 

[Technics 1210]

Those are certainly eye opening quotes, but against that, even in the OP article it suggests that BJP considered Gandhi as somewhat effeminate and find him an embarrassment. If he was really a proponent of violence, then what would that make RSS and people like his killer Godse?

I feel perhaps you are taking some of his quotes out of context. We have seen the British movie biopic called Gandhi which starred Ben Kingsley, and the Mahatma seemed quite a decent chap. It was the pro Pakistan Mr Jinnah who came across as quite sinister in a handsome sort of fashion.

In essence the majority of Indians are terrorist sympathisers when supporting the BJP.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Even BJP had to fall in line and invoke the "mahatma" and pay tributes to him, because it will be a political suicide otherwise, and the image of india = land of gandhi has its uses. In private they don't have respect for him, but their reasons are different. Just because RSS doesn't like someone doesn't mean that person should be supported. The dalits don't like him too ( they have different reasons).

Which of the quotes is out of context? An example of out of context quote will be the ones where he praised hitler and admired him (but that was before holocaust happened). I used quotes where there was no doubt of what he meant, and neither were they said when he was in his youth.

Out of context would mean doesn't really fit in with British idea of Gandhi, which I suppose could come across as slightly patronising, but at the same time, British view of things is usually considered more highly than Indian worldwide. I think even Indians understand this.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Out of context would mean doesn't really fit in with British idea of Gandhi, which I suppose could come across as slightly patronising, but at the same time, British view of things is usually considered more highly than Indian worldwide. I think even Indians understand this.

Agree with it. The great brit Churchill sahib had the best idea of MKG.

 

[captain.hansolo]

Agree with it. The great brit Churchill sahib had the best idea of MKG.

Eh?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Eh?

The half clothed fakir as Churchill called him. Cpt will be aghast if he gets to know what the british sahib mountbatten used to call Q-e-A.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The half clothed fakir as Churchill called him. Cpt will be aghast if he gets to know what the british sahib mountbatten used to call Q-e-A.

Would not be aghast at all. I'd happily share any amount of British humour and anecdotes with regard to subcontinental labels but most of them will just end up as ******** so what's the point?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Would not be aghast at all. I'd happily share any amount of British humour and anecdotes with regard to subcontinental labels but most of them will just end up as ******** so what's the point?

The point is that you cannot pick and choose when it comes to british opinion of SC leaders. If you think MKG is good despite evidence in the form of his own words, just because some british think he was good, thn you must also agree with Churchill on MKG and Mountbatten on Q-e-A.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The point is that you cannot pick and choose when it comes to british opinion of SC leaders. If you think MKG is good despite evidence in the form of his own words, just because some british think he was good, thn you must also agree with Churchill on MKG and Mountbatten on Q-e-A.

Gandhi is revered around the world, not just in Britain, he is considered a great figure in Australia, Europe and the Americas. Perhaps there is a different version which we don't know about, but if Indians themselves don't correct these misconceptions, you can hardly blame anyone else for continuing to believe what is already common knowledge.

From a Pakistani POV, there was a film made about Mr Jinnah to try to do exactly that and present him in a more equitable light. I have never seen any such attempts to try to correct views held about Gandhi from the Indian side.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Gandhi is revered around the world, not just in Britain, he is considered a great figure in Australia, Europe and the Americas. Perhaps there is a different version which we don't know about, but if Indians themselves don't correct these misconceptions, you can hardly blame anyone else for continuing to believe what is already common knowledge.

From a Pakistani POV, there was a film made about Mr Jinnah to try to do exactly that and present him in a more equitable light. I have never seen any such attempts to try to correct views held about Gandhi from the Indian side.

So you do agree with Churchills view on MKG and Mountbatten's on Q-e-A?

I am fine with MKG's image being intact. It is very beneficial for india. Ideally I shouldn't be exposing the mahatma, on a Pakistani forum of all places. But such is my hatred for this person that I am willing to ignore those minor considerations.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So you do agree with Churchills view on MKG and Mountbatten's on Q-e-A?

I am fine with MKG's image being intact. It is very beneficial for india. Ideally I shouldn't be exposing the mahatma, on a Pakistani forum of all places. But such is my hatred for this person that I am willing to ignore those minor considerations.

Its common knowledge , while BLM was happening, Ghandi was also criticised for being Racist.

But he still seen as the example of India , if RSS are the new image you wont see white people becoming Hari Krishnas as much.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Its common knowledge , while BLM was happening, Ghandi was also criticised for being Racist.

But he still seen as the example of India , if RSS are the new image you wont see white people becoming Hari Krishnas as much.

Hare Krishnas are apolitical. You can think of them as sufis, while RSS would be more like JuD.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

"If untouchables do not fall as Hindus, then it will “lead to bloodshed. Untouchable hooligans will make common cause with Muslim hooligans and kill caste Hindus”.

if Indians were asked to guess who said this, they will guess it to be some rss supporter.

Very interesting quote. I always pegged Gandhi for a Hindu nationalist as all his political activism was seeped in religious rhetoric but I never knew this was the extent of it. This borders on bigotry. Gandhi was a known racist because of his views on black South Africans who he believed were not equal to the whites but this adds another layer to his personality.

How ironic that today he is lionized as an icon of non-violence in the West, when he was the furthest thing from that.

Despite everything though, I think Gandhi deserves alot of credit for making the British leave. The way he riled up the masses to cause anarchy and chaos scared the British straight as this was something they had not seen much of in India which is why I find it particularly ironic that he is portrayed today as an icon of non-violence.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Despite everything though, I think Gandhi deserves alot of credit for making the British leave. The way he riled up the masses to cause anarchy and chaos scared the British straight as this was something they had not seen much of in India which is why I find it particularly ironic that he is portrayed today as an icon of non-violence.

Till the age of 60 he never wanted British to leave, and only wanted home rule and dominion status. He had people expelled from the congress party if they wanted full independence. He had a country wide movement called off because crowd killed policemen who had fired on them. He never supported violence against the british, i guess just for that he should be called an icon of non violence. One of bhagat singh's colleague wrote that gandhi is wrong when it calls it violence, because violence is physical force applied for injustice, not when you fight back against it. So it is understandable why govts all over prefer to fete MKG and ignore the definition of violence by the revolutionaries.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

So you do agree with Churchills view on MKG and Mountbatten's on Q-e-A?

I am fine with MKG's image being intact. It is very beneficial for india. Ideally I shouldn't be exposing the mahatma, on a Pakistani forum of all places. But such is my hatred for this person that I am willing to ignore those minor considerations.

I don't really have any reason not to agree with Churchill's views about Gandhi, no idea what Mountbatten's view on the Quaid was so not in any position to comment. In any case why would I care about his view?

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

Till the age of 60 he never wanted British to leave, and only wanted home rule and dominion status. He had people expelled from the congress party if they wanted full independence. He had a country wide movement called off because crowd killed policemen who had fired on them. He never supported violence against the british, i guess just for that he should be called an icon of non violence. One of bhagat singh's colleague wrote that gandhi is wrong when it calls it violence, because violence is physical force applied for injustice, not when you fight back against it. So it is understandable why govts all over prefer to fete MKG and ignore the definition of violence by the revolutionaries.

Whether he supported it in principle or not is beside the point. He influenced Congress supporters to set fire to India in the pre-1947 timeframe. And in the end it made a great deal of difference.

 

[Tubs]

So those Indians who point and laugh at Pakistan for extremism have no leg to stand on now. This is India's Mumtaz Qadri, but at a larger scale. South Asia is getting overrun with extremists, and India is the biggest contributor now it seems.

 

[Technics 1210]

Lets get real. Gandhi was lucky. If WW2 hadn't depleted the British empire of it's military and economy, there's wasn't a chance in hell of a 'pacifist' gaining independence against the 'violent' British. The British were weakened post WW1 infact, and from then on WW2 was the seal of the British Empire.

Gandhi didn't gain independence, but rather the British were forced to leave due to the aftermath of WW2 - Ghandi fluked it.

Remember, many before Gandhi failed but they were literally shot down.

Gandhi recieved credit for what was simply an act of attricition.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Lets get real. Gandhi was lucky. If WW2 hadn't depleted the British empire of it's military and economy, there's wasn't a chance in hell of a 'pacifist' gaining independence against the 'violent' British. The British were weakened post WW1 infact, and from then on WW2 was the seal of the British Empire.

Gandhi didn't gain independence, but rather the British were forced to leave due to the aftermath of WW2 - Ghandi fluked it.

Remember, many before Gandhi failed but they were literally shot down.

Gandhi recieved credit for what was simply an act of attricition.

I feel he had an understanding with the British, that he will control the masses and the Brits would throw a concession here and there. In 1930 he did his famous Salt March, asking people not to pay tax on salt, to put pressure on the Brits to give dominion status. It hardly affected the govts revenue and they humoured him. If he had asked people not to pay any taxes, that would have hurt the govt badly. But instead he chose to stop paying taxes on one item which hardly mattered. Stupid indians celebrate that march as an important contribution to the freedom movement.