Friday, August 22, 2014

Was the Caste a reason to kill Mahatma Gandhi?

Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination has always been a subject of controversy. There still is a majority of people that support and admire Nathuram Godse, the murderer, for his so-called brave act of assassinating and old and frail man . To justify the murder, they have ample of so called valid reasons, such as Gandhiji’s appeasement of Muslim’s, Gandhiji’s fast to force Indian Government to pay Rs. 55 crore to Pakistan and partition itself and so on.

Fact is otherwise. Attempts on Gandhiji’s life were made various times prior to his death, first being in 1934 and third in 1944. There were no talks of Pakistan then, so there was no question of partition or Rs. 55 crore. Nahuram Godse led three murder attempts and succeeded finally on 30th January 1948.

Doesn’t this fact prove that Nathuram was determined to assassinate Mahatma for quite some time?

So it is clear that plan was hatched to kill Gandhi long before partition and related invented issues. Prior to Gandhi’s entry in Indian politics, Muslim appeasement was already was at helm under the leadership of Bal Gangadhar Tilak. Lucknow Pact was signed by Tilak himself, that granted separate electorates to the Muslims. In this particular case Gandhi just followed the policy of his predecessor Bal Tilak. Muslim’s, Savarkar and even Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar had acknowledged inevitability of the Two-Nation-Theory. In fact Gandhi was only man who till his death had opposed the very idea of partition. Gandhi even denied separate electorates to any other community in his life time though had to bear tremendous pressure from the other leaders including Dr. Ambedkar.

So the logic provided to support murderer doesn’t stand on any ground.

Now the question arises, why after all Gandhi was assassinated?

What was the exact reason behind most gruesome murder of an apostle of the peace?

Now we need to look at the scenario that existed then in Indian society. No need to mention India has been a rigid caste-based society. Brahmins being ranking top in the social order and Shudra’s at the bottom. In Indian history Shudra’s were denied even basic rights. As per Vedic theology only two Varna’s being existent, Brahmin and Shudra in Kaliyuga. The untouchables were treated as Avarna’s, having no class at all! Gandhi, as he belonged to Baniya (Trader) caste, was Shudra, ranking lowest in the Vedic social order. Shudra simply mean here the peopel those do not belong to the Vedic religion. Having no rights over Vedic rites!

Here we must not forget that Vedicism had tightened its grip over Non-Vedic religion of the masses. For at least over thousand years Vedic Brahmins practically had led Indian masses, by hook or by crook...because of the circumstantial opportunities in religion as well as in administration. During Peshava era, Chitpavani Brahmins had become de-facto rulers of the most part of the country. Because of this, particularly Maharashtrian Brahmins, thought themselves belonging to the Ruling class, the way Muslim’s too campaigned in the same line during that period.

In a way, both Muslims and Chitpavan Brahmins of Maharashtra had one thing in common that both were under conviction that they being the rulers of the past of the country should not lose their historical position after independence.

During the same time, almost entire India had fallen to the impeccable charm and saintly warmth of Gandhi, a phenomena that never ever had occurred in the Indian History. A low caste Hindu person becoming absolute leader was the last thing Brahmins of Maharashtra would have anticipated and tolerated. The fact was that no matter how deeply they hated him, were unable to replace him with new leadership of their favor for Gandhi's phenomenal existence.

They tried to find their leadership in Vi. Da. Savarkar after his release from Andman. meanwhile, in 1925, a fanatic Hinduist organization, Rashtriya Svayansevak Sangh (RSS), was formed with a aim to unite Hindu people under Vedic leadership. Success of Hitler of Germany was their idol. Golwalkar Guruji openly commended his ways and plead Muslim's of India too should meet with the fate of Jews. Naturally they did not like the Gandhian ways of unarmed revolution. Savarkar openly criticized Gandhi heavily. Nathuram Godse was his staunch follower. However it shortly dawned on the both fanatic wings that it was impossible to replace Gandhiji with Vedic leadership, hence they had no choice but remove him.

Also Brahmins could see it inevitable that the new political order after independence will adhere to the democratic principles and that the democracy will sabotage their historical dominance. Winning of Gandhi was winning of democracy, thus placing orthodox Vedic Brahmins in sheer minority.

We can imagine how frustrated some orthodox groups would have been and reacted. Savarkar, after his Andaman episode had turned Hindutvavadi (Vedicists), thinking Hinduist policy could attract Hindu’s in masses towards him, but apparently failed. Also one should not forget his idols were fascists. He always dreamt for armed revolution. Naturally he could not tolerate Gandhian way of non-violence that was succeeding to the heights no one could ever dream of. Gandhi stood strong in their fanatic ways!

Had he been successful, Savarkar bringing armed revolution, charging entire nation and get freedom; the whole scenario after independence would have been entirely different, but not to his avail. It was phenomenal success of Gandhiji that was bringing Independence closer, not by any violent acts committed by the handful of revolutionaries.

Adding to their frustration was a fact that even Gandhiji being of low caste, many secular Brahmins too had become Gandhi's staunch followers. Maharashtrian, especially Chitpavan Brahmins, couldn't tolerate losing their dominance over populace they had strived for! The hardcore fanatics finally were left with no option but to kill Gandhi! The attempts to kill him began in 1934 when there was no issue those are being portrayed by the supporters of Nathuram Godse or Savarkar, except that Gandhiji was gaining phenomenal popularity and command over freedom movement, leaving far behind the class that thought they were one destined to rule the country! They designed the plan to assassinate Gandhiji, attempted four times and finally succeeded in the last.

We should take the note of a fact that the outburst of communal riots killing about a million Hindu and Muslim took place in bordering and partition-affected regions. No Hindu or even a Muslim, who truly was badly affected by that insanity, ever thought of killing Gandhi holding him responsible for the inhuman bloodbath.

Then how come that a bunch of people sitting in Maharashtra, spreading out Bunches of hateful thoughts,  having not even a single scratch over their body as a result of communal riots held Gandhi responsible for the partition and the aftermath? Writing his death sentence? Doesn't it seem insane?

Yes...but insanity was committed!

Hence, looking at the history, I can state that Gandhi was killed because he belonged to lower caste and his dominance and spell over Indian masses had became intolerable for the Vedic people from Maharashtra those belonged to the caste of Peshava’s, former rulers of India.

Otherwise there is no plausible reason behind that gruesome act that shook the world. Gandhiji's fast was not for immediate release of Rs. 55 crore but for the restoration of peace in riot-affected Delhi. Gandhiji was not in anyway responsible for the partition. It was actually made inevitable when Bal Tilak had signed Lucknow pact that assigned separate electorates to the Muslims.

Then, looking at all the circumstances surrounding assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, we find no plausible, logical reason to it except that it was his caste that made him intolerable to the so-called high caste people of Maharashtra those thought who belonged to the former ruling class!

We need to re-access the true reasons behind assassination of Gandhiji in the light of above facts!


  1. Madanlal Pahva also made an attempt to kill Gandhiji 7 days before Godse. I did not know that he was a Chitpawan.

  2. Sanjay sonawani@your analysis proves you, to be one of the sick minded so called mulnivasi.

  3. Abhiram Dixit : नथुराम महामूर्ख होता, क्रूर , विकृत होता आणि गांधीजी हे भारताचे राष्ट्रपिता आहेत यावर आपल्यात एकमत आहे. पारिभाषिक व्याख्यात अडकले कि तर्कशास्त्र मेले . ते . माझा प्रश्न सरळ आहे . नथुराम ब्राम्हण वादी होता आणि गांधीजी ब्राम्हण विरोधी होते असे त्याला वाटल्याने त्याने गांधिजिंचा खून केला काय ? तसे असेल तर त्याबद्दल काही पुरावे आहेत काय ? ऐतिहासिक घट्नाबद्दल भाष्य करायचे असेल तर काहीतरी जुजबी तरी पुरावे नकोत का ?भारतात लोकशाही येणार आहे आणी त्यात गांधीजी हे आपले शत्रू असणार नाहीत , इव्हढी साधी अक्कल तत्कालीन ब्राह्मणाना होतिच . महाराष्ट्रातला ब्राम्हणेतर पक्ष गांधिनिच कोङ्ग्रेस मध्ये आणला होता . पंडित नेहरुना गांधीजी पंत प्रधान बनवत होते . गांधी ब्राम्हण विरोधी असल्याने त्यांचा खून करुया असे ब्राम्हणाना वाटण्याचे काहीही कारण नाही .

    कडवा हिंदुत्व वाद फ़ेनेटिक असतो आणी सिंधी हिंदुच्या वर झालेल्या अन्यायाने पेटुन नथुराम वेडसर कृत्य करू शकतो . नथुराम वेडसर आणि सिनिक असल्याचे पुरावे गोपाळ गोडसेंच्या पुस्तकातच आहेत . नथुरामला पाण्यात देव दिसत असत तो ध्यान लावून बसे - असे काहीसे बरेच गोपाळ गोडसेंनि लिहिले आहे . नथुरामला गांधीचे हिंदु हिताचे राजकारण कळालेच नाही . तेव्हढी परिपक्वता त्याच्यापाशी नव्हती . हिंदुत्व नावाच्या राजकीय विचार र्सरणिकडेहि त्याकाळी नव्हती . फाळणी झाली म्हणुन पाक बांग्लादेश्चा केंन्सर कापून टाकला गेला आणि सुधृढ बालक म्हणून भारत नावाचे नवजात राष्ट्र प्रगतीसाठी सिद्ध झाले . हेही नथूराम ला कळले नाही . असो

    नथुरामला ब्राम्हणी दहशतवादी ठरवणे हे गांधिवर अन्यायकारक आहे . हिंदु मुस्लिम प्रश्न नथुरामला न समजल्याचे हे फलित आहे . प्रत्येक वाइट गोष्टीत ब्राम्ह्ण्य असलेच पाहिजे हा हेका तर्कशुद्ध नाही . विशुद्ध जातीय आहे

  4. गांधींचा समावेशक हिंदुत्ववाद, सहिष्णुतावाद भारताने स्वीकारला होता. तो तथाकथित सनातन्यांना सहन होण्यासारखा नव्हता. यामुळे गांधींना दूर केल्याशिवाय आपल्याला कोणी विचारणार नाही अशी धारणा या लोकांच्या मनात पक्की झालेली असावी व म्हणून गांधीचा अडसर दूर करण्याचा निर्धार त्यांनी केला असावा असे परिस्थितीचा अभ्यास केल्यानंतर जाणवते.

  5. Gandhi being "Vaishya-baniya" with the help of TATA-BIRLA-GOYENKA could aquire leadership of Congress post death of Tilak. This virtually demolisshed Chitpawan leadership at national level.

  6. Methinks, Baniya-vaniya belongs to Vaishyas and not to Shudras. Besides, Dr Ambedkar himself looked upon Gandhiji's attitude toward Shudras as condescending and inadequate.

    We should stop reading all events in Indian history through the prism of caste.

    Further, for better or worse,the Hindumahasabha to which Nathuram belonged to was pledged to ending caste disparity.

    The reasons for the the killing are elsewhere and do not appear to stem from caste-maybe they are found in an unthinking,futile mentality.