Essentials of Hindutva- III

Essentials of Hindutva- III


Although Indians were by no means cut off from the outside world before the rise of Buddhism and although their world activities had already assumed such dimensions as to give a just occasion to our patriotic poet law-givers to claim,

एतद्देशप्रसूतस्य सकाशादग्रजन्मन: |
स्वं स्वं चरित्रं शिक्षेरन् पृथिव्यां सर्वमानवा: ||

[Let all the people of the world learn their duties from the elders born in this land]; yet as far as the present arguement is concerned, the international life of India after the rise of Buddhism, requires chiefly to be considered. Because it was about this time when political enterprise having exposed or exhausted all possibilities of expansion in our own land naturally began to overflow its limits to an extent unevidenced before and the communications with the outsiders began to knock at our doors more impudently and even imperatively than they ever had done. In addition to these political developments the great and divine mission that set in motion ‘the wheel of the law of Righteousness’ made India the very heart- the very soul- of almost all the then known world. To countless millions of human souls from Egypt to Mexico, the land of the सिन्धु came to be the land of their Gods and God-men. Thousands of pilgrims from distant shores poured into this country and thousands of scholars, preachers, sages and saints went from this land to all the then known world. But as the outside world persisted in recognizing us by our ancient name ‘Sindhu’ or ‘Hindu’ both these in-coming and out-going processes helped mightily to render that epithet to be the most prominent of our national names. The necessity of political and diplomatic correspondence with various states, who knew us as Hindus or Indus, must also have, by making it incumbent on our people to respond to it, revived the use of this epithet first side by side with and then at times even instead of the name Bharatkhand.

But if the rise of Buddhism has thus enabled this epithet to grow in prominence throughout the world and made us more and more conscious of ourselves as Hindus, then strange to say the fall of Buddhism only carried this process further than ever.



We fear that the one telling factor that contributed to the fall of Buddhism more than any other has escaped that detailed attention of scholars which it deserves. But as the subject in hand does but remotely involve its treatment here we cannot treat it here in full. All that we can do here is to make a few general remarks and leave them to be expounded and detailed out to a more favourable occasion if the work be done by others better fitted to do it. Can it be that philosophical differences alone could have made our nation turn against Buddhism? Not wholly: for, these differences had been there all along and even flourished side by side with each other. Can it be the general inanition and demoralization of the Buddhist Church itself? Not wholly: for, if some of the Viharas sheltered a loose, lazy and promiscuous crowd of men and women who lived on others and spent what was not theirs on disreputable pursuits of life yet, on the other hand the line of those spiritual giants of Arhats and Bhikkus had not altogether ended: nor had such scenes been peculiar to the Buddhist Viharas alone! All these and many other shortcomings would not have attracted such fierce attention and proved fatal to Buddhist power in India had not the political consequences of the Buddhist expansion been so disastrous to the national virility and even the national existence of our race.

No prelude to a vast tragedy could be more dramatic in its effect in foreshadowing the culminating catastrophe than that incident in the life of Shakya Sinha when the news of the fate of the little tribal republic of the Shakyas was carried to their former Prince when he was just laying the foundation stone of the Buddhist Church. He had already enrolled the flower of his clan in his Bhikku-sangha and the little Shakya Republic thus deprived of its bravest and best, fell an easy victim to the strong and warlike in the very life time of Shakya Sinha. The news when carried to him is said to have left the Enlightened unconcerned. Centuries rolled on; the Prince of the Skakyas had grown into the Prince of Princes-the Lokajit-the great conqueror of worlds. The confines of his little Shakya State expanded and embraced the confined the confines of India; and as if to give a touch of poetical precision and poetical justice, the woeful fate that had overtaken the tribal republic of Kapil-Vastu befell the whole of Bharatvarsha itself and it fell an easy prey to the strong and warlike- not like Shakyas to their own kith and kin- but the Lichis and Huns! Of course the Enlightened would perhaps remain as unaffected as ever, even if this news could ever reach him like the first. But the rest of Hindus then could not drink with equanimity this cup of bitterness and political servitude at the hands of those whose barbarous violence could still be soothed by the mealy – mouthed formulas of Ahimsa and spiritual brotherhood, and whose steel could still be blunted by the soft palm leaves and rhymed charms. We do not mean to underrate- much less accuse the services of the great brotherhood and its Divine Mission. We have only to point out the concomitance that is too glaring to escape the attention of any student of history. We know that it could easily be pressed against this statement that the greatest and even the most powerful Indian Kings and Emperors known, belong to the Buddhist period. Yes, but known to whom- to Europeans and those of us who have unconsciously imbibed not only their thoughts but even their prejudices. There was a time when every school history in India opened from the Mohammedan invasion because the average English writers of that time knew next to nothing of our earlier life. Lately the general knowledge of Europe has extended backwards to the rise of Buddhism and we too are apt to look upon it as the first and even the most glorious epoch of our history. The fact is, it is neither. We yield to none in our love, admiration and respect for the Buddha- the Dharma- the Sangha. They are all ours. Their glories are ours and ours their failures. Great was Ashoka, the Devanampriya, and greater were the achievements of Buddhist Bhikkus. But achievements as great if not greater and things as holy and more politic and statesmanlike had gone before them and indeed enabled them to be what they were. So, we do not think that the political virility or the manly nobility of our race began and ended with the Mauryas alone- or was a consequence of their embracing Buddhism. Buddhism has conquests to claim but they belong to a world far removed from this matter-of-fact world- where feet of clay do not stand long, and steel could be easily sharpened, and तृष्णा- thirst- is too powerful and real to be quenched by painted streams that flow perennially in heavens. These must have been the considerations that must have driven themselves home to the hearts of our patriots and thinkers when the Huns and Shakas poured like volcanic torrents and burnt all that thrived. The Indians saw that the cherished ideals of their race- their thrones and their families and the very Gods they worshipped- were trampled underfoot, the holy land of their love devastated and sacked by hordes of barbarians, so inferior to them in language, religion, philosophy, mercy and all the soft and human attributes of man and God- but superior to them in strength alone- strength that summed up its creed, in two words- Fire and Sword! The inference was clear. Clear also was the fact that Buddhist logic had no argument that could efficiently meet this new and terrible dualism- this strange Bible of Fire and Steel. So the leaders of thought and action of our race had to rekindle their Sacrificial Fire to oppose the sacrilegious one- to reopen the mines of Vedic fields for steel- to get it sharpened on the altar of Kali, ‘the Terrible’, so that Mahakal, ‘the ‘Spirit of the Times’ be appeased. Nor were their anticipations belied. The success of the renovated Hindu arms was undisputed and indisputable. Vikramaditya who drove the foreigners from the Indian soil and Lalitaditya who caught and chastised them in their very dens from Tartary to Mongolia were but complements of each other. Valour had accomplished what formulas had failed to. Once more the people rose to the heights of greatness that shed its luster on all departments of life. Poetry and philosophy, art and architecture, agriculture and commerce, thought and action felt the quickening impulse which consciousness of independence strength and victory alone can radiate. The reaction as usual was complete even to a fault. “Up with the Vedic Dharma! Back to the Vedas!” The national cry grew louder and louder, more and more imperative, because this was essentially a political necessity.



Buddhism had made the first and yet the greatest attempt to propagate a universal religion. “Go, ye Bhikkus, to all the ten directions of the world and preach the law of Righteousness!” Truly, it was a law of Righteousness- it had no ulterior end in view, no lust for land or lucre quickening its steps; and grand though its achievements were it could not eradicate the seeds of animal passions nor of political ambitions nor of individual aggrandizement in the minds of all men to such an extent as to make it safe for India to change her sword for a Rosary. Even then, to set an example, did India declare her will to “take more pleasure in the conquest of peace and righteousness than in the conquest of arms!” Nobly she tried: Ah! So nobly as to make herself ridiculous in the eyes of lust and lucre- had she not issued Royal edicts to the effect that the very water be strained before it was poured out for horses and elephants to drink, so as to enable the tiny lives in the waters to escape immediate death? And had she not opened corn-throwing centers in the midst of the seas that fish be fed in the oceans of the world? Nor had the very fish ceased to feed on each other! Nobly did she try to kill killing by getting killed- and at last found out that palm leaves at times are too fragile for steel! As long as the whole world was red in tooth and claw and the national and racial distinction so strong as to make men brutal, so long if India had to live at all a life whether spiritual or political according to the right of her soul, she must not lose the strength born of national and racial cohesion. So the leaders of thought and action grew sick of repeating the mambos and jumbos of universal brotherhood and bitterly complained:

ये स्वया देव निहिता असुराश्चैव विष्णुना |

ते जाता म्लेच्छरूपेण पुनरध्य महान्तले ||

व्यपाद्यन्ति ते विप्रान् धरन्ति यज्ञादिका: क्रिया: ||

हरन्ति मुनिकन्याश्च्य पापा: किं किं न कुर्वति ||

म्लेच्छाक्रान्ते च भूलोके निर्वषट्करमंगले |

यज्ञयागादि विच्छेदाद्देवलोकोद्वसिदति || (गुणाडय)

  1. Those that were killed by you, O God, and the Asuras killed by Vishnu are once again born on this earth in the form of the Mlencchas.
  2. They kill the Brahmans, destroy the religious rites like the sacrifices, abduct the daughters of the sages ; what sins do they not commit !
  3. If the earth is conquered by the Mlecchas this land of the gods will perish, because of the abolishing of sacrifices and other religious rites.

And when the barbarian hordes of the Shakas and the Huns- who had ravaged their fair land that had in utter confidence clad herself in a Bhikku’s dress, changed her sword for Rosary and had taken to the vows of Ahimsa and nonviolence- were expelled beyond the Indus and further, and a strong national state was firmly established, then it was but natural that the leaders of our race should have realized what an immense amount of strength could be derived if but the new national State was backed up by a Church as intensely national.



The reaction against universal tendencies of Buddhism only grew more insistent and powerful as the attempt to re-establish the Buddhist power in India began to assume a more threatening attitude. Nationalist tendencies refused to barter with our national independence and accept a foreign conqueror as our over-Lord. But if that foreign invader happened to be favourably inclined towards Buddhism, then he was sure to find some secret sympathizers among the Indian Buddhists all over India, even as Catholic Spain could always find some important section in England to sympathize with their efforts to restore a Catholic dynasty in England. Not only this but dark hints abound in our ancient records to show that at times some foreign Buddhist powers had actually invaded India with an express national and religious aim in view. We cannot treat the history of this period exhaustively here but can only point to the half symbolic and half actual description given in one of our Puranas of the war waged on the अर्यदेशज्ञा: by the न्युन्पति (the king of the Huns) and his Buddhist allies. The record tells us in a mythological strain how a big battle was fought on the banks of the river ‘हहा’, how the Buddhist forces made China the base of their operation (“चीनदेशमुपागम्य युद्ध्भूमिरकारयत्”), how they were reinforced by contingents from many Buddhist nations:

श्यंदेशोद्ध्वा लक्षास्तथा लक्षाशच्य जापका: |

दशलक्षाश्चीनदेश्या युद्धाय समुपस्थिता: ||

And how after a tough fight the Buddhists lost it and paid heavily for their defeat. They had formally to renounce all ulterior national aims against India and give a pledge that they would never again enter India with any political end in view. The Buddhists as individuals had nothing to fear from India- the land of toleration- but they should give up all dreams of endangering the national life of India and her independence

सवैंशच्य बौदधवृंदैशच्य तत्रेय सपर्थ कृतम् |

आर्यदेशं न यस्याम: कदाचिद्राष्ट्रद्येतवे || (भविष्यपुराण प्रतिसर्गपर्व)



And how after a tough fight the Buddhists lost it and paid heavily for their defeat. They had formally to renounce all ulterior national aims against India and give a pledge that they would never again enter India with any political end in view. The Buddhists as individuals had nothing to fear from India- the land of toleration- but they should give up all dreams of endangering the national life of India and her independence

सवैंशच्य बौदधवृंदैशच्य तत्रेय सपर्थ कृतम् |

आर्यदेशं न यस्याम: कदाचिद्राष्ट्रद्येतवे || (भविष्यपुराण प्रतिसर्गपर्व)

And thus we find that institutions that were the peculiar marks of our nation were revived- वर्णाश्रमव्यवस्था which could not be wiped away even under the Buddhist sway, grew in popularity to such an extent that kings and emperors felt it a distinction to be called “वर्णव्यवस्थापनपर:”, (सोनपत ताम्रलेख)- “वर्णाश्रमव्यवस्थापनप्रवृतचक्र:” (मघवत ताम्रपट). Reaction in favour of this institution grew so strong that our nationality was almost getting identified with it. Witness the definition that tries to draw a line of demarcation between us and foreigners-

चातुर्वर्ण्यव्यवस्थानं यस्मिन्देशे न विध्यते |

तं म्लेच्छदेशं जनीयादार्यावर्तस्तत: परम्: ||

From this it was but a natural step to prohibit our people from visiting shores which were uncongenial- in some cases fiercely hostile- to such peculiar institutions as these and where our people could not be expected to receive the protection that would enable to keep up the spirit and letter of our faith. Reckless as the reaction was, it was perfectly intelligible when viewed at politically; for, do we not frequently meet with patriotic thinkers even now in our land who would stand for laws prohibiting our men from emigrating to nations where they are sure to be subjected to national disabilities and dishonours?



Thus it was political and national necessity that was at once the cause and the effect of the decline of Buddhism in India. Buddhism had its geographical centre of gravity nowhere. So it was an imperative need to restore at least the national centre of gravity that India had lost in attempting to get identified with Buddhism. When the nation grew intensely self-conscious as an organism would do and was in direct conflict with non-self, it instinctively turned to draw the line of division and mark well the position it occupied so as to make it clear to themselves where they exactly stood and to the world how they were unmistakably a people by themselves- not only a racial and national, but even a geographical and political unit. On the southern side of our country the natural and strategic limits were already reached, sanctioned and sanctified. The frame-work of the deep and boundless seas in which our southern peninsula is set is almost poetical in its grace and perfection. The समुद्रदर्शन had pleased the eyes of generations of our poets and patriots. But on the north-western side of our nation the commingling of races was growing rather too unceremonious to be healthy and our frontiers too shifty to be safe. Therefore it would have been a matter of surprise if the intense spirit of self-assertion that had found so benign an asylum under the patronage of the Mahakal of Ujjain had not made our patriots turn to this pressing necessity of drawing a frontier line for us that would be as vivid as effective. And what could that line be but the vivacious yet powerful stream-the River of rivers-the ‘Sindhu’? The day on which the patriarchs of our race had crossed that stream they ceased to belong to the people they had definitely left behind and laid the foundation of a new nation were reborn into a new people that, under the quieting star of a new hope and a new mission, were destined by assimilation and by expansion to grow into a race and a new polity that could only be most fittingly and feelingly described as Sindhu or Hindu.



Nor was this attempt to identify our frontier line with the river Indus an innovation. In fact it was but the natural consequence of the great war-cry of the national revivalists ‘Back to the Vedas.’ The Vedic State based on and backed up by the Vedic Church must be designed by the Vedic name, and- so far as it was then possible- identified with the Vedic lines. And this process of events which the very general trend of history should have enabled us to anticipate seems to have actually gone through. For one of patriotic Puranas assures us that Shalivahan the grandson of the great Vikramaditya after having defeated the second attempt of foreigners to rush in and expelled them beyond the Indus, issued a Royal Decree to the effect that thenceforth the Indus should constitute the line of demarcation between India and other non-Indian nations.:

एतस्मिन्नंतरे तत्र शालिवाहन भूपति: |

विक्रमादित्यस्यपौत्रश्च्य पित्रुराज्यं प्रपेदिरे ||

जित्वा शकान् दुराधर्यान् चीनंतत्तिरिदेशज्ञान् |

वळ्हिकान् कामरुपांश्च्य रोमजान् खुरजान् शठान् ||

तेषां कोषन् गृहित्वाच दण्डयोग्यानकारयत् |

स्थापिता तेन मर्यादा म्लेच्छार्यांणाम् प्रुश्च्यक पृथक् ||

सिन्धुस्थानमितिज्ञेयं राष्ट्रमार्यस्य चोत्तमम् |

म्लेच्छस्थानं परं सिन्धौकृतं तेन महात्मना || (भविष्यपुराण, प्रतिसर्गपर्व अ.२).

  1. There-after the grandson of Vikramaditya Shalivahan, ascended the throne of his forefathers.
  2.  Having Conquered the irresistible Shakas, the Chinese, the Tartars, the Balhikas, Kamrupas, Romans, Khorajas and Shathas and
  3.  Having seized their treasures and punishing the offenders he demarcated the boundaries of the Aryans and the Mlecchas.
  4. The best country of the Aryans is known as Sindhusthan whereas the Mlecch country lies beyond the Indus. This demarcation was made by the great king



The most ancient of the names of our country of which we have a record is सप्तसिन्धु or सिन्धु. Even भारतवर्ष is and must necessarily be a latter designation, besides being personal in its appeal. The glories of a person however magnificent lose their glamour as time passes on. The name that recommends itself by appealing to such personal glories and achievements can never be so effective and a permanent source of ever rising consciousness of gratitude and pride as a name that, besides being reminiscent of such national achievements and beloved personal touches, is in addition to it associated with some great beneficent and perennial natural phenomena. The Emperor Bharat is gone and gone also as many an emperor as great- but the सिन्धुgoes on forever: forever inspiring and fertilizing our sense of gratitude, vivifying our sense of pride, renovating the ancient memories of our race- a sentinel keeping watch over the destinies of our people. It is the vital spinal cord that connects the remotest past to the remotest future. The name that associates and identifies our nation with a river like that, enlists nature on our side and bases our national life on a foundation, that is, so far as human calculation are concerned, as lasting as eternity. All these considerations must have fired the imagination of the then leaders of thought and action and made them restore the ancient Vedic name of our land and nation सिन्धुस्थान- the best nation of Aryans.

The epithet सिन्धुस्थान besides being Vedic had also a curious advantage which could only be called lucky and yet is too substantial to be ignored. The word सिन्धु in Sanskrit does not only mean the Indus but also the Sea- which girdles the southern peninsula- so that this one word सिन्धु points out almost all frontiers of the land at a single stroke. Even if we do not accept the tradition that the river ब्रह्मपुत्र is only a branch of the सिन्धु which falls into flowing streams on the eastern and western slopes of the Himalayas and thus constitutes both our eastern as well as western frontiers, still it is indisputably true that it circumscribes our northern and western extremities in its sweep and so the epithet सिन्धुस्थान calls up the image of our whole Motherland- the land that lies between सिन्धु and सिन्धु- from the Indus to the Seas.



But it must not be supposed that the epithet सिन्धु recommended itself to our patriots only because it was geographically best fitted. For we find it emphatically stated that the concept expressed by this word was national and not merely geographical, सिन्धुस्थान was not merely a piece of land but it was a nation which was ideally if not always actually a state (राज्ञः राष्ट्रम्). It also clearly followed that the culture that flourished in सिन्धुस्थान and the citizens thereof were सिन्धु even as they had been in the Vedic days. सिन्धुस्थान was the राष्ट्रमार्यस्य चोत्तमम्, ‘best nation of the Aryas’ as distinguished from म्लेच्छास्थान, the land of the foreigners. However it must be clearly pointed out that the definition is not based on any theological hair-splitting or religious fanaticism. The word Arya is expressly stated in the very verses to mean all those who had been incorporated as parts integral in the nation and people that flourished on this our side of the Indus whether वैदिक or अवैदिक, ब्राह्मण or चाण्डाल, and owning and claiming to have inherited a common culture, common blood, common country and common polity; while म्लेच्छ also by the very fact of its being put in opposition to सिन्धुस्थान meant foreigners nationally and racially and not necessarily religiously.



This Royal Decree was as all Royal Decrees in सिन्धुस्थान had generally been the mere executive outcome of a strong and popular movement. For, the custom of looking upon अटक as the veritable Indian land’s end as the very word अटक signifies could not have been originated and observed so universally and so long, had it not been inspired by and appealing to our national imagination. This custom that is so tenaciously and reverently observed by millions of people, premiers and peasants alike, is a good proof that strongly corroborates the fact that some such royal edict sanctioning the identification of our frontiers with the ancient सिन्धु and associating the name of our land and nation with it as सिन्धुस्थान had actually been issued; and that the highest religious sanctification consecrating this royal sanction and popular will must have enabled this attempt to restore the Vedic name of our country to triumph in the end. Of course centuries had yet to pass and momentous events to happen to shape and mould the destinies of the words सिन्धु and सिन्धुस्थान till they came to be as powerfully influential as to colour the thought of our whole nation and be the cherished possession of our race. But after all they have done it and today we find that while thousands would not know what आर्यावर्त or भारतवर्ष exactly means yet the very man in the street will understand and recognize the names हिन्दु and हिन्दुस्थान as his very own.


The verses from भविष्यपुराण quoted above seem to be quite trustworthy so far as their general purport is concerned: firstly because they record a general tradition that, unlike dates or individual successions, can easily be remembered longer. Secondly, independently of that, the general trend of our history as shown points to some such state of affairs. Thirdly, it is not necessary here for our arguments to be very precise either about the date of this Decree or even the king by whom it was issued. And fourthly, the author does not seem to have been writing about things only haphazardly or to which he is entirely a stranger. For the family table that he gives of the House of Vikramaditya is again given in other part of the work and the two agree closely with each other. The writer who knows of details about the House is likely to know the SALIENT facts of the most distinguished king that belonged to it.

After all, the main resources of our history had been and must ever be our national traditions remembered or recorded in our ancient Puranas, Epics and Literature. Their details may be challenged, their dates determined and rejected, but on account of discrepancies here or miraculous colouring there which are in fact common to all ancient records of mankind, we cannot dismiss them altogether, especially where the acts recorded have not an impossible or unnatural clement in them or when they do not contradict events otherwise proved to be indisputably true. The habit of doubting everything in the Puranas till it has been corroborated by some foreign evidence is absurd. The sounder process would be to depend on our works especially where general traditions and events are concerned till they are found to be unreliable in the light of any more weighty and less ambiguous evidence and not simply on account of the airy imaginings of someone to whom it does not seem probable. Take the case of this भविष्यपुराण itself; because it contains some inaccuracies and even absurdities- and is Plutarch free from them? Are we to reject the personality of Alexander himself because of the supernatural touches given to the story of his birth? Would it be reasonable to doubt, say the following verse?

चन्द्रगुप्तस्य सुतः पौरस्याप्रेषते: मुताम् |

सुलवस्य तथोद्वाह्य यवनी बौद्धतत्पर: ||

[The son of Chandragupta with leanings towards Buddhism then married the Yavani daughter of Sulava, Governor of Purus.]

In fact we owe a debt of gratitude to these Puranas and Epics for having preserved all ancient and venerable records of our people through revolutions which had effaced the very traces of whole nations and whole civilizations elsewhere in the world. For, after all, these records of our ancient and patriotic Puranas and Histories are at any rate more faithful, more accurate, and more reliable than the modern up-to-date western puranas that have such convincing discoveries to their credit as the one which assures us that Ramayana sings of the foundation of Vijayanagar or the other which asserts that Gautam- the Buddha- was merely the Sun or the Dawn personified!



But before we proceed to state what further developments the history of this epithet had to undergo we feel it incumbent to render an apology to ourselves. We have while writing this section wounded our own feelings. So we hasten to add that the few harsh words we had to say in explaining the political necessity that led to the rejection of Buddhism in India should not be understood to mean that we have not a very high opinion of that Church as a whole! No, no! I am as humble an admirer and an adorer of that great and holy संघ- the holiest the world has ever seen- as any of its initiated worshipper. We are not initiated not because the संघ is not worthy of us, but because we are not worthy of stepping on the footsteps of the Temple that has lasted longer because it rested on ideas than many a great palace that rested on rocks. The consciousness that the first great and the most successful attempt to wean man from the brute inherent in him was conceived, launched and carried on from century to century by a galaxy of great teachers- Arhats and Bhikkus who were born in India, who were bred in India and who owned India as the land of their worship- fills us with feelings too deep for words. And if these be our feelings for the संघ then what shall we say about its great Founder- the Buddha- the Enlightened? I, the humblest of the humble of mankind can dare to approach Thee, O ताथागत, with no other offering but my utter humility and my utter emptiness! Although I feel that I fail to catch the purport of thy words yet I know that it must be so, because while thy words are gathered from the lips of Gods, my ears and my understanding are trained to the accents and the din of this matter-of-fact world. Perhaps it was too soon for thee to sound thy march and unfurl thy banner while the world was too young and the day but just risen! It fails to keep pace with thee and its sight gets dazzled and dimmed to keep the radiance of the banner in full view.

चराणामन्नमचरा दंष्ट्रिणामप्यदष्ट्रिणः।
अहस्ताश्च सहस्तानां शूराणां चैव भीरवः॥ (मनुस्मृति)

[Immobile forces arc the easy prey of the mobile ones those with no teeth fall a prey to those with deadly fangs; those without hands succumb to those with hands, and the cowards to the brave.]

As long as the law of evolution that lays down the iron command is too persistent and dangerously imminent to be categorically denied by the law of righteousness whose mottoes shine brilliantly and beautifully- but as the stars in the heavens do- so long the banner of nationality will refuse to be replaced by that of Universality and yet, that very national banner hallowed as it is by the worship of gods and goddesses of our race, would have been the poorer if it could not have counted the Shakyasinha under its fold. But as it is, thou art ours as truly as Shri Rama or Shri Krishna or Shri Mahavir had been and as the words were but the echoes of yearnings of our national soul, thy visions, the dreams of our race, even so, if ever the law of Righteousness rules triumphant on this our human plane, then thou wilt find that the land that cradled thee, and the people that nursed thee, will have contributed most to bring about that consummation, if indeed the fact of having contributed thee has not proved that much already !!



DISCLAIMER: This work belongs to Swatantryaveer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. It has been reproduced as a blog to convey his message to the readers of this blog in order to fight out the day in and day out abuse of Hindutva, the powerful philosophy, propounded by Savarkar himself.