They both came for humanity and fought for its liberty. They had contradictory ideas. They struggled for a common cause of independence but remained two poles apart when it comes about ideas. I am talking about Bhagat Singh and Mahatma Gandhi, sons of the nation who devoted their life for its freedom. But everything was very different in between them except one thing; an urge to submit themselves for the nation and its people. Bhagat Singh was a young revolutionary who always believed in the Eclectic ideas of revolution wheras Gandhi was an ultra-Idealist. Singh took conflicts as something necessary in the development of the society. Whereas the peace about which Gandhi talked was very far from this thinking. This was how the revolution in India lived its ages with these two souls.
Bhagat Singh, a boy from a revolutionary Sikh family was inclined towards extremist thoughts. He was an atheist and perceived religion as the bane for the society. He formed the Hindustan Socialist Republic Association(HSRA) during his struggle against the British Empire. He was also the admirer of Vladimir Lenin, a Communist revolutionary USSR who was the frontline leader of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Imperial Russia. His fondness for the Marxist philosphy was evident in his actions and writings. He was in the favour of armed revolutionary movement and justified this philosophy by attacking the theory of Gandhi itself. According to Singh, terrorism was necessary for any world-shattering movement. In one of the writings, ‘Philosophy of Bomb’, which he wrote when he was in jail, he actually gave the idea that the use of physical force for the betterment of the society and its people cannot be called as violence. According to him, the physical force which is applied for crushing the liberty of the people for inhuman intentions was the actual face of violence. If we take this justification of Singh we would find that he was not a violent revolutionary and claimed that if one can use his/her moral and ethical force for fighting for his/her rights then why he/she can’t use his/her physical force along with that for the very same pious intention. His concepts related to this were contrary to Gandhi and even antagonistic to his ideology and philosophy which prohibited the violence of any kind.
Gandhi was the man of liberal views and idealistic thoughts. His doctrines of Non-Violenceand Satyagrahaformed the basic premise of Gandhian philosophy. Gandhi was the one who wrote against the armed revolutionaries ( of which Bhagat Singh was a part) in his newspaper, ‘Young India’. In his article,‘The Cult of Bomb’ he tried to diminish the reputation of the armed revolutionaries among the common mass. He gave an emphasis on peaceful methods for attaining rights and independence eventually. He was very opposed to the nature of Singh and maintained that any nation who gets the independence on the premise of violence and blood cannot give birth to a fully democratic society or independent culture. According to him, the country like India with vast diversity needed a stable society which could not be achieved through the ‘barrel of guns’.In this perception of Gandhi we can very well judge him that though he was a Socialist but still maintained a distance from the Marxian concepts of violent Socialism on which Bhagat was very determined. Gandhi was a believer of mild version of Socialism which was actually a mixture of Nationalism and Collectivism. His tool of Satyagraha was aimed at peaceful and ethical protest against the evil opposition so that it could be changed into moral ally by making it realizing its mistakes. According to him with the power of Satyagraha one can turn its opposition into its own friend. This idea was highly criticized by Bhagat. He always stated that Gandhi’s idea of peaceful protest had done nothing for the poor Indians. According to Singh, if his (Gandhi’s) power of Satyagraha was real then why not a single enemy (among the British) was converted into nation’s friend in so many years.
They both were also very different on the religious lines. We have learned that Singh was an atheist whereas Gandhi was an open minded believer of religion. Though we can say that Gandhi’s perception towards religion was inclined on the Humanistic Values but still was greatly attached to the Hindu culutre and its religious norms. He was a rational theist who tried to take religion into each and every realm of his life. He was the one who gave the ideology ofconnecting religion with politics so that the latter could attain its purest form.But Bhagat Singh was opposed to these ideas which were too idealistic according to him in order to sustain in the world where Empires ruled the people in the name of good governance.
The debate between their ideas will continue in the future but their sacrifice in order to bring consciousness in the society will enlighten our past by empowering our present. They both walked on different paths but for the same goal which was supreme and most devout.
-Vishank Singh
(Student, University Of Delhi)
Contact- 9654751123
E-mail- vishanksingh1@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment