This is Part VI of a series on Savarkar’s social reform campaign in Ratnagiri. The previous five parts are:

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

Part II: Campaign Against Caste Discrimination in Schools

Part III: Promoting Inter-Caste Social Integration

Part IV: Breaking the Caste Monopoly Over the Janeu

Part V: Support to Ambedkar's Mahad Satyagraha

---

Another major form of discrimination was the denial of temple entry to ‘untouchables.’

Temples were not only places of worship. They were also important centres of social, religious and political interaction. By keeping ‘untouchables’ out of temples, they were excluded from these activities, further weakening feelings of brotherhood, unity and social equality.

Savarkar continued to work for temple entry. However, while many of his other social reform efforts succeeded, this remained a particularly difficult issue because the Orthodox strongly opposed any change.

At the time, several temple-entry movements were taking place across the Bombay Presidency.

In Ratnagiri, where Savarkar was confined, the Vitthal Temple became the centre of his temple-entry campaign. People of different castes had already gathered in its precincts in 1925 to mourn the death of C. R. Das. In November 1929, Savarkar called for the complete and unconditional opening of the temple to all castes.

Because temple entry was such a sensitive issue across the Bombay Presidency, the city magistrate was also present to observe a public meeting organised by Savarkar.

In a fiery speech, Savarkar laid out all his arguments in favour of a total eradication of untouchability and an entry into the temple. At the end of it, he asked his audience if anyone had objections to raise. There was pin-drop silence and none objected.

As a result, hundreds of untouchables peacefully entered the Vitthal Temple without any agitation or confrontation.

For those who entered, every step into the temple represented a small blow against a centuries-old social practice. Singing songs in praise of their deity, they entered the temple in what was an deeply emotional moment, and many people were moved to tears.

Savarkar composed a special Marathi poem for the occasion, titled ‘Mala Devaache Darshan Gheudya’, meaning ‘Allow Me to See My God’. Everyone sang it after entering the temple.

YouTube Video of the poem

---

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone,” pp. 77–79.

---

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

Part II: Campaign Against Caste Discrimination in Schools

Part III: Promoting Inter-Caste Social Integration

Part IV: Breaking the Caste Monopoly Over the Jneau

---

Due to the widespread practice of untouchability in the 1920s, marginalised castes, then referred to as ‘untouchables’, were often denied access to public water sources for their daily needs.

The Bombay Legislative Council passed resolutions to address this discrimination, but they were largely ineffective and remained mostly on paper.

In protest against this discrimination, on 20 March 1927, Ambedkar and his followers marched to Chavdar Tale. This protest became known as the Mahad Satyagraha and marked an important moment in the struggle against untouchability. Ambedkar drank water from the lake to assert the right of the so-called untouchables to use public water sources. The act sparked strong opposition and caused a major uproar among members of other castes.

The next day, on 21 March 1927, orthodox Hindus performed a purification ritual at Chavdar Lake. They also unilaterally rejected the earlier Legislative Council resolution that had allowed marginalised castes to use the lake.

In response, Ambedkar launched another agitation and began enrolling people into the movement. Different social organisations offered varying levels of support, and even among non-Brahmin groups, not all castes supported the movement.

Savarkar, however, gave unconditional support to Ambedkar’s Mahad Satyagraha.

He stated:

> Untouchability must be condemned and abolished not only as the need of the hour but also as the command of true religion; not only as a policy or as an act of expediency but also as a matter of justice, not only as a matter of obligation but also as a service to humanity.

He declared that the pious and bounden duty of every Hindu was to restore full human rights to their co-religionists.

On 7 September 1927, writing in the Shraddhanand Savarkar said that Hindus should accept and support the right of ‘untouchables’ to take water from the Chavdar Tale in Mahad. In the same article he appealed to the untouchables:

> Don’t threaten to leave Hinduism if the so-called upper-caste Hindus oppose your just demand. The Hindu religion is not an exclusive preserve of upper castes alone. It belongs to you as much as it belongs to them

He further added in this article:

> If, on account of the high caste Hindus obstructing the legitimate rights of our untouchable brothers, the latter then resort to Satyagraha, how can we blame them in any way? Of course, we would prefer that such disputes are settled peacefully with negotiations rather than confrontations. I can say from my own experience that it is possible to convince the high caste people that the untouchability in public places and facilities such as drinking water is wrong and that it can be removed by appealing to them in the name of brotherly love. However, we are also aware of the fact that, if in some cases, the problem is not solved, the untouchables will have to resort to civil disobedience. This is not and should not be a norm but may regrettably become inevitable.

> We have been preaching that in public places such as schools, public tanks, water taps, municipalities, district councils and gatherings, we must allow the untouchables access, not only less or perhaps more than what Muslims have. It is their legitimate right. Therefore, we do not blame Dr. Ambedkar in any way for his movement for the right of untouchables to take water form public tanks.

> Muslims are allowed to take water from the same tank and wash their utensils and yet our untouchable brothers are forbidden to take water from it even in days of scarcity of water. Not only that, when they tried to exercise their legal rights to take water, they were beaten up. We cannot believe that this beating took place because of the rumours that they were about to enter Hindu temples.

---

Primary Reference: Samagra Savarkar Vangmaya, Vol. 3, p. 485.

Secondary Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone”

---

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

Part II: Campaign Against Caste Discrimination in Schools

Part III: Promoting Inter-Caste Social Integration

---

To break the Brahmin monopoly over Vedic knowledge, which had traditionally been kept inaccessible to other castes (Vedokta bandi), Savarkar taught the sacred Gayatri mantra freely to everyone.

In May 1929, he organized a function in Ratnagiri where he declared that anyone who considered himself a Hindu had the right to perform Vedic ceremonies, since the Vedas belonged to all Hindus. He also argued that everyone should have the right to wear the sacred thread (Janeu).

He distributed sacred threads to several members of the Mahar and Chamar communities. At the time, the sacred thread represented a major social distinction between Brahmins and non-Brahmins. By giving it to people considered “untouchable,” Savarkar directly challenged this caste-based exclusion.

One might ask why Savarkar, who advocated dismantling the caste system, supported the continued practice of wearing the sacred thread, which many saw as a symbol of caste oppression.

There were two possible approaches: either reject and abolish the symbol entirely, or make it available to everyone and thereby remove its discriminatory character.

Savarkar chose the second approach. Rather than advocating methods such as forcibly entering people’s homes and cutting off their sacred threads, as some social reformers elsewhere had done, he tried to preserve the religious significance and sentiments associated with the practice while removing its caste-based exclusivity.

The untouchable communities were deeply moved by these efforts. They invited Savarkar to preside over the Untouchables Conference at Malvan in 1928.

At the conference, everyone sang Vedic hymns together. Savarkar distributed sacred threads to the participants amid loud applause. He said:

> A battle royal has been raging for the last seven generations over the right of studying the Vedas. Here is the sacred thread. Take them. When non-Hindus are reading the Vedas, why should not the Hindu Mahars read them? The feud over this problem was useless. Let us expiate the sins we committed. We are all responsible for our political subjugation. That is now the past. At least now let us declare an oath that we shall rectify our past blunders and win back our wealth and glory. The people who regard untouchability, which has been a disgrace to humanity, as a part of their religion, are really the fallen people.

Savarkar’s speech deeply moved one of the leaders of the untouchables, Sergeant Ghatge. He stood up and declared:

> Now, who says that Mahars should convert and become Muslims? We Mahars and Chamars love the Hindu Dharma and will never abandon it. The Brahmins might convert to Islam, but we will not!

Savarkar’s approach was intended to create greater acceptance and inclusion within Hindu society, rather than leaving marginalized communities excluded from religious and social life.

After the Malvan conference, Pandurang Nathuji Rajbhoj, a prominent leader of the depressed classes from Poona, observed:

> I was really sceptical of the Savarkarian movement at the beginning. My contact and discussions with Barrister Savarkar and my personal observation have thoroughly convinced me of its far-reaching effect. I am extremely rejoiced to declare that this famous leader of the political revolutionaries is also an out and out social revolutionist!

---

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone”

---

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

Part II: Campaign Against Caste Discrimination in Schools

---

From 1927 onwards, Savarkar made another daring attempt. On the occasions of Hindu festivals such as Dussehra or Makar Sankranti, Hindu Sabha representatives belonging to the untouchable communities such as Mahars, Chamars or Bhangis would accost the upper castes with their wishes:

> ‘We greet you on behalf of the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha by offering you the sona leaves. Please allow us to at least come as far as you allow non-Hindus in your homes. Is it not an insult to regard the untouchables, who follow the same religion as you do, as being inferior to the non-Hindus?’

Many would be moved by this and Savarkar and his untouchable associates would be welcomed into homes. They would exchange the sona leaves symbolizing camaraderie, distribute sweets and shout, ‘Long live Hindu Dharma.’

Savarkar recounts that many people also shouted and abused them, throwing them away from their doorsteps with vile curses. But the group never gave up. They kept persisting in their attempts and played on the humanity of the oppressors. Gradually the resistance petered out. By 1930, despite the fact that names of people who exchanged the leaves with other castes and untouchables started getting published in newspapers, more than 90 per cent of households in Ratnagiri welcomed Savarkar’s team.

Savarkar then shifted his attention to another important demographic—women. Most often women hardly had any say in determining such matters. Here too, the women’s wing that included Savarkar’s wife Yamunabai sat with other women, convinced them and urged them to mix with women of other castes. The attempt began in 1925. Only five women (which included Yamunabai) of the upper castes were willing to participate. Untouchable women who were hesitant had to be induced through incessant pleas to give up their reluctance and meet the upper caste women. With time, hundreds of women began mixing with each other freely, and without any prejudices.

Even in places of public entertainment such as theatres and cinemas, untouchables were seated separately. When some of Savarkar’s plays were staged in Ratnagiri, he gave free passes to untouchables to occupy prominent front seats. This caused a lot of unease. The local magistrate too intervened and wondered if this would create a law-and-order situation. Savarkar assured him that it would be his responsibility to maintain amity. Finally, after long arguments with the audiences who had gathered to watch the play, everyone reconciled and sat together to enjoy the show.

Owners of public carriages and carts refused to seat untouchables, though they had no problems with non-Hindus. The Hindu Sabha actively campaigned with the drivers of these carriages and urged them to seat everyone without any discrimination. They even paid for the journeys of untouchables. Mock journeys were organized just to display to the rest of society that an untouchable was happily travelling around town in a public carriage! Yet again, after immense resistance, slowly this fortress too was breached by Savarkar.

In 1925, on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti, a new temple was built by the Guravas in Shirgaon. Their community leader Mahadev Laxman requested Savarkar to inaugurate the temple after its consecration. Savarkar pleaded that the untouchable Mahars and Mangs too be allowed to circumambulate the temple. Laxman grudgingly agreed. The temple was thus thrown open to all castes.

Cutting across caste barriers, women performed the ritual of offering each other Haldi-Kumkum or turmeric and vermillion, as symbols of auspiciousness. It was on this occasion that the famous song composed by Savarkar ‘Tumhi amhi sakal Hindu bandhu bandhu’ (All of us Hindus are brethren) was sung. The importance of this act of letting all castes participate in the worship lies in the breaking of one of the seven shackles of Sparsha bandi where the application of turmeric and vermilion on the forehead meant touching a woman from the lower caste.

On 16 June 1925, when Congress leader Chittaranjan Das died, a memorial service was to be held at the Vitthal temple of Ratnagiri. Savarkar insisted that untouchables too must be allowed to participate in this memorial service. The organizers agreed and Mahar, Chamar and other castes joined this meeting.

In Shirgaon, a Satyanarayan pooja was performed in the house of a Chamar. Savarkar and his associate Vishnupant Damle accepted the holy offering or prasad from the hands of the untouchable, thereby breaking the traditional Roti bandi, which forbade upper castes from dining with untouchables.

At another Satyanarayan puja organized on 29 May 1927 by the non-Brahmin communities of Kunbi and Bhandari castes, Savarkar made a passionate plea to let his untouchable friends participate in the event too. Those who were sitting outside the house were finally allowed to come in and participate in the ceremonies. This was breaking the hierarchies among the lower castes themselves.

Similarly, in 1928, be it during the Gokulashtami celebrations in August or in a circus show in Ratnagiri, Savarkar used all opportunities to integrate the untouchable community with the rest of society.

---

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone”

---

---

The statement of Revolutionary Madan Lal Dhingra in British court, was as follows:

> I do not want to say anything in defence of myself, but simply to prove the justice of my deed. As for myself, no English law court has got any authority to arrest and detain me in prison, or pass sentence of death on me. That is the reason I did not have any counsel to defend me.

> And I maintain that if it is patriotic in an Englishman to fight against the Germans if they were to occupy this country, it is much more justifiable and patriotic in my case to fight against the English. I hold the English people responsible for the murder of 80 millions of Indian people in the last fifty years, and they are also responsible for taking away £100,000,000 every year from India to this country. I also hold them responsible for the hanging and deportation of my patriotic countrymen, who did just the same as the English people here are advising their countrymen to do. And the Englishman who goes out to India and gets, say, £100 a month, that simply means that he passes a sentence of death on a thousand of my poor countrymen, because these thousand people could easily live on this £100, which the Englishman spends mostly on his frivolities and pleasures.

> Just as the Germans have no right to occupy this country, so the English people have no right to occupy India, and it is perfectly justifiable on our part to kill the Englishman who is polluting our sacred land. I am surprised at the terrible hypocrisy, the farce, and the mockery of the English people. They pose as the champions of oppressed humanity—the peoples of the Congo and the people of Russia—when there is terrible oppression and horrible atrocities committed in India; for example, the killing of two millions of people every year and the outraging of our women. In case this country is occupied by Germans, and the Englishman, not bearing to see the Germans walking with the insolence of conquerors in the streets of London, goes and kills one or two Germans, and that Englishman is held as a patriot by the people of this country, then certainly I am prepared to work for the emancipation of my Motherland.

> Whatever else I have to say is in the paper before the Court. I make this statement not because I wish to plead for mercy or anything of that kind. I wish that English people should sentence me to death, for in that case the vengeance of my countrymen will be all the more keen. I put forward this statement to show the justice of my cause to the outside world, and especially to our sympathizers in America and Germany.

The Court was stunned and the room fell silent. When asked if he still wanted recourse to legal aid, an irritated Dhingra said:

> I have told you over and over again that I do not acknowledge the authority of the Court. You can do whatever you like. I do not mind at all. You can pass sentence of death on me. I do not care. You white people are all-powerful now, but remember, it shall have our turn in the time to come, when we can do what we like.

The judge pronounced Dhingra guilty and sentenced him to death by hanging.

Even as he was being led away by the police, Dhingra addressed the judge and said: “Thank you, my Lord. I don’t care. I am proud to have the honour of laying down my life for the cause of my motherland.”

Dhingra conveyed two wishes: that he be given a small mirror so that he could be sure he was going to the gallows with the same cheerful face, and that he be cremated in strict accordance with Hindu rites, with no non-Hindu allowed to touch his body. He also directed that his clothes and belongings be sold and that the money obtained be used for the nationalist cause.

Final statement of Revolutionary Madan Lal Dhingra published in Daily News in London, in the morning edition of 16 August 1909, a day before Dhingra’s execution. The editor’s note included the following preface to Dhingra’s final statement, titled “Challenge”:

> A copy has been placed in our hands of the statement which Dhingra drew up before the murder, intending it to be read as if it had been subsequently drawn up. To this document the prisoner referred in the course of the trial, but it was not given to the public. We may add that a copy has been, for some time, in the possession of certain of Dhingra’s compatriots. The statement is as follows:

> I admit, the other day, I attempted to shed English blood as a humble revenge for the inhuman hangings and deportations of patriotic Indian youths. In this attempt I have consulted none but my own conscience; I have conspired with none but my own duty. I believe that a nation held in bondage with the help of foreign bayonets is in a perpetual state of war. Since open battle is rendered impossible to a disarmed race, I attacked by surprise; since guns were denied to me, I drew forth my pistol and fired.

> As a Hindu, I feel that a wrong done to my country is an insult to God. Poor in health and intellect, a son like myself has nothing to offer to the Mother but his own blood, and so I have sacrificed the same on her altar. Her cause is the cause of Shri Rama. Her services are the services of Shri Krishna. This War of Independence will continue between India and England so long as the Hindu and the English races last (if this present unnatural relation does not cease).

> The only lesson required in India at present is to learn how to die, and the only way to teach it is by dying ourselves. Therefore I die and glory in my martyrdom.

> My only prayer to God is: may I be reborn of the same Mother and may I re-die in the same sacred cause till the cause is successful and she stands free for the good of humanity and the glory of God.

> Vande Mataram!

---

Source material: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: Echoes from a Forgotten Past (1883–1924), pp. 203–216.

Edit is made by: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DaHmT7UsRaO/

---

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

---

In 1925, the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha undertook the most challenging work of admitting children of untouchables to schools along with other children. This was to strike at the very root of the system by encouraging behavioural changes from childhood.

Hitherto, children of untouchables could not sit in the same classrooms as the rest of society. They squatted outside the rooms and heard the lectures, beyond the walls and sight of upper-caste children. The teachers never touched their notebooks or slates. Even when they wanted to punish one of them, they would throw a stick at them rather than go near and beat them up. There was not a single school in the towns of Ratnagiri or Malwan where children were taught together.

A half-hearted government circular of 1923 urged schools to intermix children of all castes. But given the societal taboos that remained, a circular merely on paper.

Hence, starting 1925, Savarkar decided to tackle this problem head-on. In Dapoli, Khed, Chiplun, Devarukh, Sangameshwar, Kharepatan and other places, he conducted a series of lectures, public debates and tours to convince and urge people to let children study together.

In public meetings he exposed the hypocrisy of his opponents:

> Can you prevent Christian children from attending public schools? No! You dare not, since you know the consequences. The British Government will reply with bullets. You insult the untouchables because they are ignorant and helpless. But you yield to the unjust demands of the Muslims because they are aggressive. When a Mahar becomes a Muslim or a Christian convert, you treat him as your equal. But as a Mahar, he will not receive the same treatment.

In the town of Ratnagiri, he pursued this crusade painstakingly, in school after school. Interestingly, the non-Brahmin communities such as the Marathas, Kulavadis, Bhandaris and others were more resistant to change than the Brahmins.

When the chairman of the School Board passed a resolution to allow children to study together, Savarkar faced severe opposition from all communities throughout the district. Brahmins, Marathas, Khots, Savkars, Patils and all communities protested to get the decision cancelled.

There were strikes, skirmishes, violent agitations, riots and even sabotage in Kotavade, Fonda, Kanakavali, Shiposhi, Kandalgaon, Adivare and other villages against Savarkar’s moves. This naturally terrified the School Board.

In 1929, the District Board passed a resolution that mixing of children in schools was not compulsory. But Savarkar refused to give up. On one hand, he wanted to bring about a change of heart among the people, and on the other, he wanted to take this struggle to the higher authorities and even the legislative council.

While Savarkar and his colleagues were labouring so hard for the cause of the children of the untouchables, their own parents were fearful or hesitant to participate wholeheartedly. The Hindu Sabha members paid the parents to send their children to school, provided textbooks, notebooks, pencils and slates to urge them to go. Despite that, they were reluctant. They kept making excuses.

During the rainy season, they would tell Savarkar that he must provide umbrellas first and only then they would send their children to school. But even when that was done, there was dereliction.

Finally, after seven long years of relentless struggle and several thousand rupees spent on this cause by the Hindu Sabha from the fund that was collected slowly, Savarkar’s efforts began to yield fruits. Children began to be taught together in a few schools. The movement then slowly spread to others by word of mouth.

Savarkar writes about how important this intermixing at the level of children was:

> High caste children come in contact with children from untouchable families at a very young age and this was very important. On the one hand, education helps to uplift the untouchable children. On the other hand, this early contact makes upper caste children realize that these untouchables whom their families despise, are just like them. Some of them can be as clever or even better than them. This removes all arrogance of superiority of birth. When this evil practice is uprooted from their minds at a very early age, it has a positive impact throughout their life. Hence we recommend every reformer to study our work and methodology that we adopted in these seven years.

Savarkar wrote several letters to those in positions of power on this matter and brought to their notice the names of schools that still continued with the abhorrent practice of discriminating children based on caste. He also made efforts to get untouchables employment in government.

On behalf of the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha, he made a presentation to British officer Mr Lamington, ICS, who had the special responsibility of looking after the interests of repressed classes in Bombay Presidency. Savarkar told him in an appeal in 1932:

> Once the children are educated together, they will not accept the caste hierarchy in later life. They will not feel the need to observe caste divisions. Therefore the Government Regulations of 1923 should be strictly enforced. In addition, the Government must abandon the title of ‘Special Schools for Low-Caste Children’. This very title creates a feeling of inferiority among children attending the school.

An incident that underscores how important this was in Savarkar’s mind occurred in 1932. A visitor came to him with a plea to invite him to his village. Savarkar immediately asked him if there was a school in the village, whether untouchables were allowed to attend them and, if so, whether the children sit together and study. The visitor was flummoxed. He sheepishly answered that they sat separately.

Savarkar politely told him with folded hands: “Give my regards to the villagers. I have only one request to them. At least in the sacred house of Goddess Saraswati, the goddess of learning, they should not follow any discrimination. Once they accept this small request of mine, I will set aside all other work and readily come to your village.”

The district magistrate was to himself attest the beneficial results of Savarkar’s efforts: “It is the good result of Mr. Savarkar’s lectures that the untouchable boys have been allowed to sit mixed and get their education without any invidious distinction being made in their case.”

In 1928, when an untouchable teacher was transferred to a school that was attended largely by upper-caste children, all hell broke loose. The orthodox Hindus tried every means to get this order rescinded. Savarkar prevailed upon the School Board not to succumb to such pressures.

The Board finally threatened the opponents that it would shut the school down if such demands were made. This finally made them see sense and wind up their meaningless agitation.

---

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone”

---

As implied by the title, I am talking about the current dimagi naxal phenomenon that has caught onto Indian political discourse now.

I honestly want to ask the Opposition point blank what they are exactly doing by creating a backlash to this. For the communists it makes sense why they would react like this, why did the Opposition somehow create a backlash on this remark? Where is the implication that this is targeting GenZ? I am Gen Z and even I don't think it targets us.

Like "Urban Naxal" is a well known term, it is a reference to intellectuals who provide ideological support to Maoism and anti-state anarchy activities. This is simply another term for the same. Have the Opposition and liberandus lost their minds? Are they that desperate for attention?

Even the surrounding social media activity for this makes no sense. Somehow the Prime Minister referred to a certain set of people, and a bunch of morons thought it referred to them and are now barking about it. Of course looking at it, it looks like the activity of bots, but there is no way the discussion had stooped to this level, that any remark made by the Prime Minister is somehow a dogwhistle. This ideally should be agreed upon by all parties and anyone interested in the nation's security. Even the so-called Constitution defenders should agree on this. Yet somehow the discourse has stooped to such a level. I can't even wrap my mind around the logic behind this phenomenon as well.

This is more of a rant than anything, but just wanted to convey how I feel about this stupidity.

Edit: https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/the-unfinished-war-of-ideas-how-indian-intellectuals-built-and-kept-naxalism-alive

Source - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patit_Pavan_Mandir

https://savarkar.org/en/encyc/2017/5/23/Patitpavan-Mandir.html

Veer Savarkar was among the early Indian political thinkers who warned about communal division and argued that Hindus needed to be united and militarily prepared to defend themselves.

Savarkar had correctly identified communal and Pan-Islamic movements as potential threats to India’s territorial unity. His response was based on Hindu consolidation, social reform, and military preparedness.

He strongly opposed the Khilafat movement, which placed religious interests above national interests. He also feared that its Pan-Islamic character could encourage foreign intervention in India.

In his book Hindutva (1923), Savarkar developed the idea of Hindu Sangathan, seeking to unite Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, and other Indic communities into a broader political identity.

He defined a Hindu as someone who regarded India as both their Pitribhu (fatherland) and Punyabhu (holy land), compare this with idea of Pan-Islamism where someone may reside in India but his loyalty may be extraterrestrial.

Savarkar considered caste discrimination and untouchability serious weaknesses within Hindu society. He argued that Hindus needed to overcome these divisions and stand together as a united community.

Savarkar criticised Congress’s approach to Hindu-Muslim unity, particularly its response to communal violence such as the Moplah rebellion. He believed that maintaining unity at all costs could prevent Hindus from recognising and responding to genuine threats.

For Savarkar, militarisation was therefore part of a broader programme of Hindu unity, social reform, political organisation, and national self-defence. If Hindu society haf then listened to him then we wouldn't have faced so much suffering in the partition.

Images in post are by: https://www.instagram.com/p/DQcWlyZjOfN/

This painting was created by Punjabi artist Kishan Chand Aryan, who survived the Rawalpindi massacres and was 28 years old at the time.

The following account is from Stern Reckoning book by G. D. Khosla, an Indian Civil Service officer who later became Chief Justice of the Punjab High Court. As a senior member of the colonial-era Indian administrative and judicial establishment, Khosla had firsthand administrative knowledge of the events and wrote his account soon after Partition.

Page 107:

> Conditions in the rural areas of Rawalpindi beggar description.

> On March 6, 1947, meetings were held in the village mosques and the Muslims were told that the Jumma Mosque at Rawalpindi had been razed to the ground by Hindus and Sikhs and that the city streets were littered with Muslim corpses. The audience were exhorted to avenge these wrongs.

> The village population of the district of Rawalpindi has a large proportion of Muslim military pensioners possessing firearms and other weapons. These men, incited in this manner, rose up against the non-Muslim residents and attacked one village after another.

> The modus operandi was almost invariably the same. A mob of Muslims armed with all kinds of weapons, shouting slogans and beating drums, approached a selected village and surrounded it from all sides. A few non-Muslim residents were immediately killed to strike terror throughout the village. The rest were asked to embrace Islam. If they refused or showed reluctance a ruthless assault was launched upon non-Muslim life and property.

> Some members of the mob started looting and burning their houses and shops. Others searched out young and good-looking girls and carried them away. Not infrequently young women were molested and raped in the open, while all around them frenzied hooligans rushed about shouting, looting and setting fire to houses.

> Most of the non-Muslims would leave their houses and run to the local Gurdwara or a house affording some measure of protection or defence and there men, women and children, huddled together, would hear the noise of carnage, see the smoke rising from their burning homes and wait for the end. The horror of what they saw or heard made them insensible to pain or suffering. Some women would commit suicide or suffer death at the hands of their relations with stoic indifference, others would jump into a well or be burnt alive uttering hysterical cries. The men would come out and meet death in a desperate sally against the marauders.

> Some villages were completely wiped out. Houses and shops were looted and then burnt down and demolished. Conversion saved the lives of many but not their property. Refusal to accept Islam brought complete annihilation. The men were shot or put to the sword. In some cases small children were thrown in cauldrons of boiling oil. In one village men and women who refused to embrace Islam were collected together and after a ring of brambles and firewood had been placed around them they were burnt alive. A woman threw her four-month old baby to save it from burning. The infant was impaled upon a spear and thrown back into the fire.

Savarkar gave this message on July 3, 1947.

This post was originally created by @dhamraitss on Instagram, please do follow her as she posts similar stuff regularly:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DLJIJL3oqo1/

The photograph was published in Life magazine on 9 September 1946, on page 38, as part of an article titled Vultures of Calcutta.

Reference:

1. Life magazine, 9 September 1946

2. Google Arts & Culture — “Aftermath of Calcutta Riots”

3. TIME — “Vultures of Calcutta: The Gruesome Aftermath of India’s 1946 Hindu-Muslim Riots”

---

On 6 January 1924, after spending almost fourteen years in prison, Savarkar was conditionally released by the British Government.

Several factors led to this decision.

First, years of harsh imprisonment had severely damaged Savarkar's health. The British Government feared that if such a prominent political prisoner died in custody, it would spark widespread public outrage, damage the government's reputation, and possibly encourage more people to join the revolutionary movement.

Second, public pressure for his release continued to grow. His supporters became increasingly vocal, and campaigns demanding the release of the Savarkar brothers gained momentum across the country.

The Bombay National Union organized a massive petition calling for their release, collecting more than 75,000 signatures.

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: Echoes from a Forgotten Past, p. 419.

In the Legislative Assembly, legislator Vithalbhai Patel moved a resolution on 24 February 1920 recommending amnesty for the Savarkar brothers and other political prisoners.

A year later, on 26 March 1921, legislator Rangaswamy Ayyangar moved another resolution in the Council concerning a petition signed by more than 50,000 people seeking amnesty for the Savarkar brothers. The resolution urged the House to recommend their release to the Governor-General in Legislative Council.

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: Echoes from a Forgotten Past, p. 424.

Despite sustained pressure from family members, political leaders, the public, and even international supporters, the Government remained unwilling to release Savarkar. Officials feared that his return would once again revive revolutionary activity in the Deccan, which had largely subsided after the arrest of the Savarkar brothers.

By 1922, however, the government faced increasing and justified criticism for continuing to imprison the Savarkar brothers, especially after other political prisoners involved in similar conspiracy cases had already been released.

Following his interview with the Governor of Bombay, the authorities concluded that releasing Savarkar under strict restrictions in the remote district of Ratnagiri was safer than keeping him in prison.

Accordingly, on 6 January 1924, Savarkar was released from prison under two strict conditions. He had to remain confined to Ratnagiri district and was prohibited from taking part in political activities. These restrictions were initially imposed for five years, however, the British Government repeatedly extended them and even considered sending him back to the Cellular Jail, claiming that he had violated the conditions of his release by making seditious speeches. This tells us that Britishers still did not trusted him to have quit his revolutionary ways, He was finally granted complete freedom in 1937.

---

Excerpt from 'My Transportation for Life'

> Just then I received a call from the Superintendent to meet him in the office. At the same time a trusted man sent me a message that I was free.

> The political convicts who had stayed with me, worked with me, and suffered with me, in whose company I had passed so many years of my hard life in the Andamans, were full of joy at the news. Their eyes shone full of tears. But I trembled that I was leaving them behind in that prison. They heartily congratulated me. The Sikhs among them, some of whom were sixty years old, said, “Babuji, come closer to us, do not forget us.” And they locked me up in their embrace full of affection and reverence. They added, “You have been on transportation for life long before us. You had passed seven or eight years in the Andamans when we came there. Why then should you be sorry that you go out, while we remain behind? Is it not right that you should precede us? If you are free, we are as good as free. In fact, your freedom will pave the way for us. At least it will pave the road to freedom for our motherland.”

> I answered, “It all depends upon the strength that God will give me to complete the task. But, my brothers, you will surely bear me out when I say that, ground down under the sufferings as I was during the fourteen long years that I spent in the Andamans and even to the last day here, I have not flinched or retracted from what I was preaching all my life. I have given you the stories of all our martyrs and I have advised all along to hold firm by our creed of violent resistance if circumstances were to force it upon us. I have kept the flag flying. When I heard the sentence passed upon me fourteen years ago, the words dancing upon my lips were the same that are dancing upon them today. I uttered them then, I have uttered them during my long stay in prison, and they come forth from my mouth today, to be carved on your heart and mind, and to ring in your ears for good. Let us say all of us, Glory to the Goddess of Freedom; Victory to our Mother.”

> We greeted one another with these words, we hailed our mother, and then I parted from them.

> As soon as I stepped into the office, the Superintendent read out to me the order of my release. It was that for five years after my release I was to take no part in politics and stay at Ratnagiri as a prisoner on parole.

> All the inmates of the prison, my fellow-countrymen, prisoners and officers, the youngest as well as the oldest, formed a circle round me. They said with one voice, “Savarkar, you have been an exile from your country like Rama who went to the forest for fourteen years, abandoning his beloved Ayodhya. You have passed through similar trials, sorrows and bereavements. Hail to you, Savarkar, may God bless you. The whole country rejoices today and its joy knows no bounds.”

> I could not contain myself for the kind words spoken by them and for the affectionate heart they betokened. And I replied, “There is one great omission in this comparison. Rama went into exile, but Rama finished Ravana and won the battle. I have gone into exile and suffered, but Ravana is still alive. I shall feel myself free only when that is accomplished. With God's grace even that task will accomplish itself like many other minor things to which I have put my hand. Some day, sometime, that also will happen, and you must realise the difference, and it must give you acute pain.”

> My relative had come to fetch me away. The prison gate was opened and I came out. What varied means I had used to secure my release! And how I felt then that I was escaping, not through the open gate, but through its keyhole.

> At last I was a free man. I looked about me and said to myself I had scored over my life sentence of fifty years. But who dares say that I may not be sent back to serve it to the full? It was not yet time, methought, to bid final goodbye to this prison. I must not forget it yet. Was I not free at Marseilles? Had I not made my escape? This may be but the repetition of that experience, for India's battle for freedom has yet to be won, and the struggle must go on.

> Indulging in such kind of talk with my friends, and smiling at the same time, I entered the car and it moved on its wheels. It brought me into the land of the living and had left behind my sentence to perish. The boundary line was crossed, and I was both alive and free.

> The greetings that I received from the whole country, as I came back alive to them, made me for a time oblivious of myself. On the very first day of my freedom, I was floating, as it were, in the upper air of my country. When it hailed me as a hero and patted me on the back, all the wounds inflicted on me during my fourteen years of prison life seemed to heal. And the only thing that remained with me were these reminiscences.

> Therefore, as I had invoked the Goddess with the words "That another image," in order to fortify myself against the intending shadow of the death sentence and to be prepared to swallow the cup of poison it was holding out to my lips, I now recall the same Goddess to my mind with deep gratitude for my survival and, bowing my head, take final leave of her. I pray that the heavenly Goddess may go back, for the time being, to her abode.

---

Dear Reader

The story is told. The curtain is rung down on it. Two life sentences have been run. And I have brought together my recollections of them within the cover of this book. They are narrated in brief outline to you; they are put together within the narrowest compass.

When I came into this world, God sent me in it on a sort of life sentence. It was the span of life allotted to me by Time to stay in this "prison-house of life." This story is but a chapter of that book of life—a longer story not yet ended. As I completed this chapter as a dedication to my great worship of the ideal, so the book of life may end as a dedication to it without break or faltering.

Yes, I am free. The iron fetters on my feet are broken. But the chain of longing that binds my heart still remains. I have come out of the stone walls which had buried me. But my soul is still imprisoned, for my vision is not yet reached. The horizon that limits it is not yet crossed. It engirdles my soul and stifles it.

Dear Reader, surely you must have been wearied to hear my story, and put out by the endless repetitions it contains. But I am as much tired in writing as you may begin reading it, this weary tale of my life. It has been a long and weary way for me also. How I have suffered and how much fatigue of the mind I have passed through in putting it on paper! But I shall be more than paid for it if you feel the same disgust for it that I have felt. For you can finish reading it in a day, while I had to live it for fourteen long years of transportation. And if the story is so tiresome, unendurable and disgusting to you, how much must the living of it have been to me! Every moment of those fourteen years in that jail has been an agony of the soul and the body to me, and to my fellow-convicts in that jail. It was not only fatiguing, unbearable and futile to us all. It was equally, or more, excruciating as well, to them and to me. And it is only that you may know it, and feel the fatigue, the disgust and the pain of it, as we have felt it, that I have chosen to write it for you. I hope you will have through it some idea of what we have passed through, what we have endured.

Dear Reader, I lay down my pen and take leave of you. My broken pen I cannot put aside, however, without telling you never to forget those who stuck to their task, disheartening and trying though it was; who embraced it to the last; who were nearly burnt up in that fiery ordeal; and who came out of it because nothing could burn them up completely in it. Lest you forget! Dear Reader, I say it to you as my last word, do not forget them. For sooner or later the memory of them will serve you and be your salvation; nothing else will avail!

---

Reference: My Transportation For Life

Get the PDF of the whole book from here: https://savarkar.org/en/pdfs/My-Transportation-for-Life-Veer-Savarkar.pdf

---