Is It Fair to Compare Gandhiji with Savarkar?
Is It Fair to Compare Gandhiji with Savarkar?
In recent years, Indian public discourse has increasingly witnessed comparisons between two towering figures of its history — Mahatma Gandhi and Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Both men played influential roles in shaping the Indian freedom struggle and the nation’s political consciousness, but their methods, ideologies, and ultimate visions for India were vastly different. Yet, modern politics and media often place them side by side, measuring their patriotism, courage, or contributions as if they belonged to the same moral and ideological universe.
But the question arises — is it really fair to compare Gandhiji with Savarkar?
The answer requires us to look beyond political narratives and understand the contexts that made them who they were.
Two Men, Two Eras, Two Ideals
Though both Gandhi and Savarkar lived during the same period of colonial rule, their formative journeys were shaped by very different experiences.
Mahatma Gandhi emerged as a leader who believed that the means were as important as the ends. His concept of Satyagraha and Ahimsa (truth and non-violence) transformed the Indian freedom movement into a moral revolution. He envisioned a nation built on compassion, self-rule, inclusivity, and justice for all — irrespective of religion, caste, or class.
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, on the other hand, was a revolutionary nationalist who emphasized strength, discipline, and cultural pride. His ideology of Hindutva defined Indian identity in terms of cultural and religious belonging. To him, the freedom struggle was not just a fight against foreign domination but also a battle to reaffirm India’s Hindu civilizational core.
The contrast is clear: Gandhi sought freedom of the soul, while Savarkar sought freedom of the state. Gandhi preached love as resistance; Savarkar believed in force as assertion.
The Question of Methods
Gandhi’s philosophy was deeply moral and spiritual. He viewed violence as self-defeating and believed that justice gained through hatred would never endure. His campaigns of non-cooperation and civil disobedience inspired millions without a single weapon.
Savarkar, however, was a man of rational thought and pragmatic nationalism. He did not believe in moral idealism as a political strategy. He admired courage, physical strength, and decisive action — traits that made him skeptical of Gandhi’s insistence on non-violence. For Savarkar, violence in the defense of one’s nation was not immoral; it was justified.
Thus, comparing Gandhi’s path of peace with Savarkar’s call for power is like comparing fire with water — both have force, but they serve opposite purposes.
Their Vision of India
At the heart of the comparison lies their differing visions of what India should be.
For Gandhi, India was a moral and spiritual civilization. He dreamed of villages that were self-reliant, people who were compassionate, and politics that served humanity. His India belonged to everyone — Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Dalits, and even those without faith.
For Savarkar, India was first and foremost a Hindu Rashtra — a homeland for those whose culture, history, and ancestors were rooted in the soil of India. He viewed religion as the basis of national identity and unity.
While Gandhi’s dream was inclusive and universal, Savarkar’s vision was assertive and exclusive. Both sought to serve India, but they defined “India” differently.
The Nature of Their Patriotism
Both Gandhi and Savarkar loved their country deeply — but they expressed that love in different ways. Gandhi’s patriotism was rooted in moral reform. He wanted Indians to conquer their inner evils — greed, hatred, untouchability — before claiming political freedom. Savarkar’s patriotism was militant; it celebrated pride, bravery, and defiance.
To call one a patriot and the other not would be unjust. But to compare their patriotisms on the same scale is equally unfair. Gandhi’s courage was moral; Savarkar’s was physical. Gandhi sought to heal; Savarkar sought to defend. Both kinds of courage are valuable — but incomparable.
Modern Politics and the Misuse of Comparison
Today, comparing Gandhi and Savarkar has become more of a political tool than an intellectual inquiry.
Some political groups glorify Savarkar to diminish Gandhi’s relevance, while others defend Gandhi by dismissing Savarkar entirely. In this tug-of-war, truth becomes a casualty.
History should not be reduced to a popularity contest. Gandhi and Savarkar were products of different temperaments, philosophies, and goals. Their disagreements should be studied, not exploited. When one is raised by lowering the other, we lose the depth and diversity that made India’s freedom struggle unique.
Morality vs. Nationalism — A False Binary
One of the greatest mistakes in public discourse is to assume that Gandhi represented weakness and Savarkar represented strength. In truth, Gandhi’s strength lay in his refusal to hate. His power came from his ability to move hearts, not armies. Savarkar’s strength lay in his intellect and defiance — qualities that fueled his call for self-respect among Hindus.
They were not opposites as much as they were two sides of India’s complex struggle — one moral, one militant. Both believed in a free and proud India, but they took different roads to reach it.
Lessons from Both
Instead of comparing them, perhaps the wiser approach is to learn from both.
From Gandhi, we can learn humility, compassion, and the courage to fight hatred with love.
From Savarkar, we can learn determination, pride, and the refusal to bow before oppression.
India’s identity is vast enough to hold both Gandhi’s spinning wheel and Savarkar’s pen — one symbolizes peace, the other strength. When used together, they can still guide the nation toward a balanced, confident, and humane future.
Conclusion: Beyond Comparison, Toward Understanding
It is not fair to compare Gandhi and Savarkar, because they were never meant to be compared.
They belonged to different moral universes, yet both contributed to the awakening of Indian consciousness. Gandhi was the saint of India’s soul; Savarkar was the fire of its spirit.
To understand India, we must study both — not to choose one over the other, but to recognize how each defined patriotism, freedom, and duty in his own way.
The greatness of a civilization lies not in forcing uniformity, but in embracing complexity. Gandhi and Savarkar represent that complexity — the eternal debate between morality and power, compassion and courage, idealism and realism.
India does not need to pick sides. It only needs to remember — the soul and the sword must coexist, but never at the cost of humanity.
Comments
Post a Comment