Netaji’s Obituary to Nehru

Posted By Author on May 15, 2011


On hearing about sad demise of Jawaharlal Nehru Founder of Shaulmari Ashram, His Holiness Sardanandji was disturbed very much. On the next day he dictated the following obituary, i.e., on 27th May 1964 and told to give it to newspapers for publication. However all Ashramites restrained him from doing so.

On 30/10/1967  His Holiness instructed me to find out the document on Nehru and send it to different anti Congress newspapers signed by him and as a translator with my signature. The document was traced from the records of the Ashram on 10/11/67 and I typed five copies. Next day I showed Him the Hindi translation. He made corrections and then told to wait. I suggested that it be released in a Press Conference. He again said Niharendu would be better man to do the job.”

Nehru in a Nutshell

“Historians will be baffled in making real assessment of Nehru’s character. A historian with really impartial attitude and with necessary depth of grasping and understanding after successfully analyzing relevant events is bound to discover both, genuine greatness and real meanness in Nehru. Unless he has the necessary knowledge and ability to penetrate deepest into the general mental constitution, such a character will always remain a dilemma to him. That the greatest greatness and the meanest meanness can comfortably co-exist in an exclusively mentally developed being is for general humanity yet to learn.”

“When a man develops himself exclusively in the mental way, he is almost sure to be a queer mixture of greatness and littleness, of bigness and smallness both the greatness and bigness coming out of his conscious, semiconscious and dormantly active processes to get himself developed as far as he can see through the sphere of development, the littleness and smallness an outcome of the untransformed aboriginal in him which can never even be totally controlled, not to speak of being transformed, by the most powerful mental processes and which only the divinising processes can successfully tackle and root out from the deepest of nature both external and internal. A glaring example of this queer admixture is the just gone Jawaharlal Nehru. He combined in himself vastness and narrowness both, the narrowness for which he will never be pardoned by the history of mankind, the greatness for which he will be adored for all time to come. And note a man who has taken recourse to exclusively mental process for development can never totally free himself from the debasing performance of priding and playing the role of an actor in spite of his otherwise real greatness. This is the tragedy of lopsided growth and all growths enacted by exclusive mental processes are bound to be lopsided inasmuch as it can ever give you the necessary knowledge and ability to penetrate into the unconscious and the mischief wrought out by the unconscious will always work as a source of imbalance. The thing would have been otherwise if he had the knowledge and necessary courage to dive deepest into the human nature, the attribute that he miserably lacked. Take note there is an ocean of difference between shallow introspection and deepest penetration. And to the intellectual man of the world what seems to be deep introspection in Jawaharlal Nehru is little deeper than shallow ones. A Gandhi would never leave a testament behind him for scattering his ashes on the soils and rivers of India, but Nehru did and the difference between the two is obvious. One totally careless about what others speak of him, the other dominated by the parading motive of leaving an imprint on humanity by all sorts of devices. For leaving behind such a testament there are two possible interpretations that are apparently contrary to each other, but at certain stages of development one complements the other. The attachment for the motherland may be so strong that the slavishly he clings to it. And generally speaking, men both high and low, are slaves to the mechanism of nature and note that love is quite different from attachment, and both attachment and hatred are but perversion of love pure and simple and as such from the standpoint of highest development there is little to choose between the two. It is not an academic ornamentation but true to the very letter. Secondly, it may be a device on the part of the man to make people speak of his love for the country very highly after final disappearance from the scenes of the earthly drama. In case of Nehru it is, I think, not merely a heterogeneous amalgamation but a mutual absorbing of the two ingredients. When such ingredients apparently pulling toward different directions but having a subtle affinity amongst them get compounded in manifesting human nature, the character becomes more complex, difficult to interpret. Leaving aside for the time being the problem of life at work in vegetation, we may say, a higher type of life starts in amoeba and protoplasm in impotent simplicity, it develops through warring complexities in animal and man through different stages and finally into the digest and the noblest and the most powerful simplicity and smoothness that are within the reach only of an integrally divinised man.”

“Jawaharlal Nehru was always extremely careful in dealing with man of political importance consciously knowing, his dealing with them was bound to affect the historical assessment about him and definitely there he was to a great extent an actor performing a designed drama. On the other hand he was not only careless but also perhaps not a little scornful in dealing with something, which had little scope according to his own understanding to leave any mark on history. But, here the gentleman has miserably erred. ‘The foolish medieval notion that the history is nothing but the replica of life of political dignitaries’ has already lost its silly grasp over the rising consciousness of humanity. In that respect his cunning played supreme, not that he was speculatively ignorant about this import of modern history but as far as subjective realization of the import was concerned, his self-persuasion is not much better than total failure. The vastness and generosity of his nature is out of question. But, out of question too is the parallel existence of narrowness in him. In brief, in him combined the pigmy and the tall.”

“But, all the dark elements manifestly active in his mental constitution notwithstanding, it will have to be admitted, in the field of politics many centuries have very rarely got one to equal him.”

(Baba gave a list of newspapers to send this article: Organiser, Modern Review, Bhawan’s Journal, Current, Blitz, Mother India, Assam Tribune, Hindu. Times of India, Basumati, Maratha, Aaj Banaras, Tribune (Ambala), Nagpur Times, Jugwani, Shillong Times)

We then gossiped on other topics.  Rajat and Dinu arrived after filing case.  They reported that it was decided to set up a judicial enquiry in brawl of Falakata.  Again chat on other matters ensued.  I was restless.  At 9.30 P.M. Baba granted permission to leave.  Immediately I went to sleep without food.

About the author



Comments are closed.