sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Nana Fadnavis, Sri Aurobindo

Indian Political Science Association

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK Author(s): Vishwanath Prasad Varma Source: The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 19, No. 1 (JANUARY-MARCH 1958), pp. 15-24 Published by: Indian Political Science Association Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42748889 Accessed: 01-04-2020 15:14 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Indian Journal of Political Science

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms OF LOK AM AN Y A TILAK

By VlSHWANATH PRASAD VARMA

Professor of Politics Patna College

I. FOUNDATIONS OF TILAK'S POLITICAL THOUGHT

If political philosophy means the speculative construction of an idealistic utopia, then Tilak has not given us any picture of the politically perfect in this sense of the term political philosophy. He does not discuss the features and possibilities of the best State as , and da: He does not create the architectonic of the conceptually perfect State in the manner of Hegel and Bosanquet. His main problem in life was the political emanci- pation of and hence there is an element of great realism in his political ideas and outlook. However, he was not a realist in the Hobbesian and Machiavellian sense of the term. He was never a political pragmatist. He was deeply versed in ancient philosophy and his political thought represents a synthesis of the some of the dominant conceptions of Indian thought and the nationalistic and democratic ideas of the modern west. The dominant metaphysical assumptions of Tilak also influenced his political ideas. He was a Vedantist. The of non-dualism of the , implied, according to him, the political conception of natural . Because the spirit is the supreme reality and because all men participate in that absolute , hence all have the same autonomous spiritual poten- tiality. Hence Advaitism taught him the supremacy of the concept of freedom.1 "Freedom was the soul of the Home Rule Movement. The divine

instinct of freedom never aged soul which Vedanta declares to be not separate from God but identical with him. This freedom was a principle that could never perish."2 Thus freedom according to Tilak was a divine attribute. Freedom was equated with the autonomous power of creativism. Without freedom no moral and spiritual life was possible. Foreign imperialism kills the soul of a nation and hence Tilak fought against the British empire. Thus there were philosophical foundations for the political struggles for liberty in which Tilak was engaged. Tilak's nationalism was also influenced by the western theories of national independence and self-determination. In the famous trial speech of 1908 he quotes with approval 's definition of nationality.3 In 1919 and 1920 he accepted the Wilsonian concept of self-determination and pleaded for its application to India.4 Hence Tilak's philosophy of nationalism was a synthesis of the Vedantic ideal of the spirit as self-contained freedom and the western conceptions of Mazzini, Burke, Mill and later on of Wilson. This synthesis he expressed in terms of Swarajya, a Vedic term which was used in to indicate the polity ofShivaji.

1 Tilak, Gita Rahasya ( edition of 1950) p. 399. 2 Speeches and Writings of Tilak (G. A. Natcsan & Co., Madras), p. 354. 3 Tilak's Trial (1908); p. 138. 4 Tilak's letter to Wilson and Clemenceau in 1919. 1 his letter is published also in the Mahratta.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 1 6 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

Because of his spiritual approach, Lokamanya regarded that Swarajya was not only a right but a .5 He also gave a moral and spiritual meaning of Swarajya. Politically, Swarajya meant Home Rule. Morally, it meant the attainment of the perfection of self-control which is essential for performing "one's duty" (Swadharma). It also hada spiritual significance because it meant the realization of spiritual inner freedom and contemplative delight. Tilak defined the spiritual connotation of Swarajya in these terms : "It is a life centered in self and dependant upon self. There is in this world as well as in the world hereafter. The Rishis who laid down the law of duty betook themselves to forests, because the people were already enjoying Swarajya or People's dominion which was administered and defended in the first instance by the Kshatriya Kings. It is my conviction, it is my thesis, that Swaraj in the life to come cannot be the reward of a people who have not enjoyed it in this world/'6 Hence Tilak wanted both political liberty and spiritual freedom.

2. NATIONALISM, REVIVALISM AND

Tilak's nationalism had a revivalistic orientation. He wanted to bring to the front the message of the and the Gita for providing spiritual energy and moral enthusiasm to the nation. A recovery of the healthy and vital traditions of the old was essential. He said : "a true nationalist desires to build on old foundations". Reform based on utter disrespect for the old does not appeal to him as constructive work. "We do not want to anglicize our institutions and so denationalize them in the name of social and political reforms."7 Hence he pointed out that the and the Ganapati festivals had been encouraged by him because they served to link contemporary events and movements with historical traditions.

But because Lokamanya was, partially, a revivalist, it must not be thought that he was a mere Hindu nationalist. As a person, he had intense pride in Hindu religion and culture. As a political leader he wanted to preserve the legitimate interests of the Hindu people and would not sanction cowardice and surrender. But it is wrong to say that he was a mere Hindu nationalist and was opposed to the Moslems. Zacharias says that Tilak was the spokesmon of an anti-Moslem retaliation.8 A British historian, Powell Price, says that "The Muslim League was an answer to the , necessary because the possibility of self- raised the spirit of separation which the intolerance of Tilak had emphasized."9 Chirol says that due to Tilak's extreme orthodoxy the Moslem members of the Poona Sarvajanik Sabha resigned from that body. Palme Dutt blames Lokamanya Tilak and Ghosh because their identification of national awakening with the revival of Hinduism cut off the Moslem masses from the national movement.10 But all these are partial and even incorrect interpretations of the political thought and action of Lokamanya. Jinnah, Dr. M. A. Ansari and Hasan Imam have praised the nationalistic sentiments and spirit of compromise of the Lokamanya, because due to his wise counsel and modera- tion the of 1916 could be achieved. Shaukat Ali and Hasarat

6 Tilak's speech at Yeotmal, after the Lucknow Congress of 1916, Speeches p. 256. 6 B. G. Tilak, "Karmayoga and Swaraj", Speeches and Writings of Tilak . pp. 276-280. 7 Tilak's letters, Mahratta , 13 December, 1919. 8 Zacharias, Renascent India, p. 121. 9 Powell Price, A , p. 599* 10 R. Palme Dutt, India Today , p. 383.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 1 7

Mohani regarded Tilak as their political . Shaukat Ali says : "I would like to mention again for the hundredth time that both Mahomed Ali and myself belonged and still belong to Lokamanya Tilak's political party."11 Hasarat Mohani says : "I even at that early age, chose the Lokamanya as the ideal Leader for me. . . . During that period I had ample oppor- tunities of appreciating the thought and ability of almost all Indian political leaders and basing my remarks on that close personal study, I can state without the least fear of contradiction, that I found the Lokamanya greater and superior to every other leader in every respect; all through Tilak's life I was both intellectually and practicaUy a blind follower of his, anyone can well judge thereby, of that love that I cherished towards him."12 Hasan Imam as the president of the Bombay special Congress went to the extent of calling Tilak his father in Indian politics. Imam stated : "Let me say, and it is with great pride, that Lokaipanya Tilak is my father in point of politics."13 Furthermore, Tilak had promised to support the if the majority of the Moslems were behind that. Tilak had proposed the Congress resolution for the release of the Ali brothers. If Tilak would have been anti-Moslem he could never have commanded the confidence of the great Moslem leaders. Hence it can be said, that with the profoundest regard for Hinduism in private life, as a political leader Tilak had a broad policy calculated to lead to national emancipation.

3. TILAK'S THEORY OF NATIONALISM

Lokamanya wanted to substantiate the nationalistic movement in India by a strong cultural and religious revival of Hinduism. But he also accepted the economic arguments for nationalism. made famous the "Drain Theory" in Indian economics. Both Lokamanya and Gokhale accepted that foreign imperialism resulted in the enormous "drain" of India's resources. In 1897 Tilak wrote three articles in the at the time of the Diamond Jubilee celebrations of Queen Victoria. In the article written on the 22nd June he stated that India's arts and industries had declined under the British rule. He wrote that the various economic enterprises and investments in India, under the ownership and management of the foreign capitalists, only created a delusion of prosperity. He referred to the evidence given by Dadabhai before the Welby Commis- sion14 of 1896 wherein that veteran patriarch of Indian politics had shown that during the imperialistic sway of Great Britain India had become impoverished and economically ruined. He referred to the economic "drain" of India also in the interview he gave to Nevinson in 1907.15

Tilak held that the attainment of Swarajya would be a great victory for . Hence he gave to Indians the : "Swarajya is the birth-right of Indians". Although in his speeches and writings Lokamanya always said that Swarajya did not imply the negation and severance of ultimate British sovereignty,, still people knew that in his heart of hearts he always wanted complete independence. He once wrote that Swarajya is "the foundation and not the height of our future posperity."16 He always pointed out that the path of the attainment of Swarajya was full of

11 S. V. Bapat (Ed.), Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. II p. 576. 12 Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. Ill pp. 36-37. 13 Reminiscences of Tilak, Vol. Ill p. 218. 14 Welby Commission Roport, 2 Volumes. 15 H. W. Nevinson, The New Spirit in India (London, 1908). 16 Speeches and Writings p« ¿73.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 1 8 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE suffering and misery. During the Home Rule days Lokamanya always was careful to say that he was not opposed to the King-Emperor but he only wanted to change the anglo-Indian bureaucracy. He confidently asserted that to preach against the despotism of the bureaucracy was not sedition. Since Lokamanya did not advocate the doing away with the King-Emperor whence says that Lokamanya was a believer in "imperial fédération5' which would be composed of Great Britain, Ireland and Egypt, India and the dominions, each absolutely autonomous internally but com- bined for the purposes of protection and progress.17 We have earlier referred to the fact that Tilak was a Vedantist in his metaphysical views. His conceptions of freedom as a divine instinct in man, and of Swarajya as inner self-realization, indicate his Vedantic views. His belief in human fellowship also followed from his Vedantism. In a way, he pleaded for the reconciliation between the ideal of nationalism and the Vedantic conception of human unity. In a speech he once said: "If the Vedantic ideal is higher, it necessarily includes the national ideal which is lower. The two are not irreconcilable if you know how to reconcile them. The two àre not opposed to each other. One includes the other much in the same way as thousand includes five hundred. The two ideals are mutually consistent and both of them demand a kind of self-sacrifice and self-control. Both of them demand in addition to self-control and self-sacrifice, a kind of higher altruistic feeling by which man is impelled to ignore selfish considera- tions and to work for persons and for objects which do not in the least savour . of any egotistic aim. The feeling is one of love for humanity, for the equality of man before God, and it is the spirit of that feeling that governs the two ideals, Vedantic and national."18 Edward Shillito has written a book entitled Nationalism : Man9 s other Religion . In that book there is a chapter entitled "The two Tilaks". Shillito says that Narayan Vaman Tilak, the Christian poet, was a believer in the kingdom of God on earth while was a strong believer in Swarajya. Shillito has presented an imaginary dialogue between the two Tilaks.19 ; But Shillito's interpretation is inadequate. Although Lokamanya Tilák was a great patriot and a convinced nationalist he definitely states in his commentary on the Gita that love of the country is only a step to . He quotes part of the famous Sanskrit Shloka which means that for the wise man of generous feelings the whole world is one big family.20

4. TILAK AND THE MODERATES Lokamanya Tilak has won lasting fame by creating the vital founda- tions of an assertive nationalism. He was an extremist and there were seve- ral factors responsible for that. Temperamentally he was buoyant and represented the aggressive vigorous spirit of manhood. He had been inspired by the careers and exploits of Shivaji and the other Maratha heroes who represented struggle and fight and successful victories. His extremism had also been influenced by his growing disillusion at the coercive and repressive technics of the bureaucracy. But although an extremist, he believed in legal

17 B. G. Pal. Indian Nationalism . The Chanter entitled "Tilak". 18 Speeches of Tilak (published by Indian Stores, Bellary), pp. 15-16, quoted in G. V. Ketkar, "Real Basis of Tilak's nationalism", Mahratta, August 3, 1951. 19 Edward Shilitto's book on Nationalism (London, 1933). The dialogue between the two Tilaks is given in pp. 1 13-121, as a subsection of the Chapter "Education for Life in the Nation." 20 B. G. Tilak, Gita-Rahasya (Hindi edition of 1950), p. 398.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK Tg

methods of agitation. He was twice elected to the Bombay legislative Council. He contemplated election also a third time. He formed the Cong- ress Democratic Party in 1920 for contesting elections. But although Tilak accepted the framework of the existing law he wanted to use the areas of action left free by the law of the British government to intensify the national- ist movement in the country. Ranade, Pherozeshah Mehta and Gokhale went to the extent of regarding the British rule in India as part of divine dispensation21 but the leaders of the extremist party always believed in the independent destiny of India. In a speech in 1909 Gokhale defended passive resistance22 but although Tilak and Gokhale might at times have used the same words and might have put their faith in the same political objectives still there was fundamental difference in their political technics. The activi- ties of Lokamanya in the famine agitation of 1896, in the movements of 1 9^5 to 1908, and during the Home Rule days were calculated to train the people in organized action. He wanted to infuse a spirit of dynamic activism and assertiveness among a people who had grown enervated and prostrate. His advocacy of no-rent campaign in 1896, his stress on national education, his advocacy of picketing for the purpose of stopping the sale of liquor and his firm support of Swadeshi and boycott definitely showed that Lokamanya wanted that the national movement should have its strong roots in co-ordi- nated and united action by the Indian people. Before Tilak came into active prominence as a leader, the Indian nationalist movement was commit- ted to a philosophy of intellectual discussion on occidental lines. He taught the gospel of Indianization of the nationalist movement. Hence his technics of political action and his philosophical defence of the nationalist movement were oriented to the historical heritage of the people of India. If some of the important moderate leaders looked only to Burke, Mazzini and Spencer for intellectual inspiration, Tilak also looked to Shivaji and and the Bhagavadgita. Tilak's attempts to Indianize the policy and orient- ation of the nationalist movement brought to him the support of who in several respects closely associated himself with Gokhale. Lalaji in distinguishing the technics and ideas of Tilak and Gokhale writes : ''Tilak was the man of the people. Gokhale was the man of the intelligentsia. Tilak was a hero for all times to come. His heroism at times verged on reckless- ness and regardlessness of consequences to himself and his co-workers. Gokhale was a careful politician, weighing every word before he uttered, and balancing every thought he gave expression to, always trying to say the right thing but in a way most inoffensive to the authorities that be, and the people that he criticised. Tilak was a blunt incisive speaker who never minced matters, spoke few words, but gave out the truth free from all emba- rassments of language and all the coverings of diplomacy. Gokhale was an accomplished speaker, full of pathos, who prepared everything beforehand, and realised the significance of every word that he uttered. Gokhale's ethics would not sanction any violence in politics. Tilak would not only justify it but even press it under certain conditions."23 The later history of Indian nationalism, however, showed the efficiency of the methods of Tilak.

5. THE POLITICAL THOUGHT OF TILAK AND AUROBINDO Lokamanya was a political extremist but there were differences between his political thought and the political conceptions of the school of

21 Pherozeshah Mehta's Speech as Chairman of the reception committee of the Bom- bay Congress of 1904. 22 Quoted in the Life of Vithalbhai ratds p. lyy. 23 S. V. Bapat (Ed.) Three Volumes of Reminiscences and Ancedotes oj Lok. 1 tlak (In Marathi & English), Vol. II, p. 661.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms £0 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE extremist nationalists. Daring the days of the anti-partition agitation Pal, Aurobindo, Shyam Sundar Ghakravarti, Ashwini Kumar Datta and other leaders of Bengal worked under the guidance of Tilak. Lokamanya was decidely the acknowledged leader of the new Party. But still on the of thought there were subtle differences between the ideas of Tilak and Aurobindo. In Aurobindo we find the concept of as the Zeit-gást (spirit of the time). He refers to God as the captain of the nationalist movement. He confesses having visions of in the . The writings of Pal and Aurobindo are characterized by an exalted, inspired and fervid emotionalism. In Aurobindo there is a passion for metaphysical abstractions and theological symbols. After return from the Alipore Jail Aurobindo said that Sanatan Dharma itself was nationalism. Lokamanya, on the other hand, had a strong sense for the real and the concrete. There is a constant appeal in his writings and speeches for making immediate changes in the administrative mechanism of the country and there is less emphasis on the visions of the spiritualized society and the gnostic community. If Aurobindo was inspired by the teachings of Bankima Chandra about the country as the Mother, Tilak was influenced by the character and personality of Shivaji and Nana Fadnavis. In the character of Bengal there is an excess of emotionalism and imagination. In Maharashtra we find a predominance of accurate common sense and sober realism.24 This difference in the characteristics of the two provinces is revealed in the different theoretical approaches of Sri Aurobindo and Lokamanya. Ti tlak emphasized the psychological conception of nationalism and said that a feeling of common belongingness was essential for constituting an agglomeration of people into a nation.25 But Aurobindo and Pal stressed the spiritual-religious conception of nation. Aurobindo considered nationalism as a pure and Sattvika religion. Tilak said that Swarajya was essential for freeing India from the evils of an alien bureaucratic pattern. But Aurobindo said that the political salvation of India was essential for the spiritual redemption of mankind. The notion of messianism, the conception that India was rising for shedding the glories of Sanatan Dharma in the world is very strong in Aurobindo. Lokamanya had a passionate love for India's independence but as a pro- gram for political achievement he always sponsored the concept of Swarajya under British sovereignty. Tilak fought for Swarajya (home rule) while the political extremist of Bengal clamoured for Swatantrata (independence).26 Lokamanya was a great politician and hence as an objective he always put forward only the concept of Swarajya or home rule or self-government.27 Pal and Aurobindo during the Swadeshi days talked of independence. (Later on Pal became an advocate of imperial federation) Aurobindo challenged the right of foreign imperialism to force "an inferior civilization" on India. Tilak spoke cautiously and said after the Calcutta Congress: "As an ideal, independence is all right but you cannot work for it without bringing yourself within the clutches of law. Working for it will be waging war against the King".28 But altnough in his speeches and writing^ Tilak always avoided the word independence and always contented himself with the word self-government still the British government thoroughly realized that he was

24 Cf. Zacharias, Renascent India p. 151. 25 N. G. Kelkar, Life and limes of Tilak, pp. 4öb- 07. 26 Tilak? s Writings in the Kesari , 4 Volumes (in Marathi), Vol. Ill, pp. 248-249. 27 In a speech at the seventeenth anniversary of Tilak s death, reported in the Mahr atta, August 6, 1937, V. D. Savarkar stated that Tilak taught the principle of complete independence. 28 Reminiscences , Vol. I, p. 483.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 21 their greatest political antagonist. The British Government knew that there was one individual in India whom no seductions and no favours could ever dissuade from his self-chosen path. The indomitable Tilak was the most relentless and biggest opponent of the British empire in India till the moment of his death.

Both the Bengal extremists and Lokamanya accepted the conception of passive resistance. According to Lokamanya Swadeshi and boycott were the technics of passive resistance.29 But according to Aurobindo passive resistance had a more comprehensive conception. Passive resistance, to Aurobindo, meant the resistance against or transgression of an unjust law or an unjust decree in a peaceful way. Hence Aurobindo was satisfied not only with preaching Swadeshi and the morality of boycott but he also preached the resistance to unjust laws and unjust decrees.30

6. WAS TILAK A REVOLUTIONARY ?

The foreign critics of Tilak's political philosophy and technics as also Indian revolutionaries, especially of Maharashtra, regard Tilak as a revolu- tionary. Ghirol wrote in his book India : "Tilak had been the first to create the atmosphere which breeds murders."31 John S. Hoyland, the biographer of Gokhale says that Mr. Tilak had been "coquetting with doctrines of physical force."32 Branson, the advocate-general who conducted the prosecu- tion case against Tilak in 1908 said that Tilak's articles contained "a covert threat of mutiny" and in substance he (Tilak) was preaching "Swarajya or bombs."33 Lokamanya Tilak was never an advocate of absolute .34 He never accepted the absolute form of non-violence as upheld by the pacifists and Tolstoy. He supported the action of Shivaji in killing Afzal Khan. He appreciated the daring and skill of Ghapekar as also the patriotic fervour of the Bengal revolutionaries. As a , Lokamanya put the highest premium on purification of intentions. The external action could never be considered the criterion of moral worth. Hence if an Arjuna or a Shivaji or any other ardent patriot would commit some violent deed being impelled by higher altruistic motives Lokamanya would not condemn such persons. (But certainly, he once condemned the revolutionary and violent activities and that was in his letter to the Mahr atta on the 28 th August, 19 14). But although a metaphysical defender of altruistic violence, Lokamanya never preached political murder nor did he ever incite any body to commit murder as a political means. For himself he accepted the legal methods of political organization and agitation. He felt that the situation in the country was not suitable for revolutionary activity. In 1906 he had gone to Nasik and he admonished the people there not to engage in violent revolutionary activities. But he would ask people to desist from such activities not on moral grounds but on ground of expediency. Once he said: "From begging to open rebellion choose anything according to your ability and do it, but remember the supremacy of Swadharma." It is very true that Lokamanya was in touch with some of the leading revolutionaries of those days. He knew Shyamji Krishnavarma well. On

29 Tilak's Speech at Beleaum in September, 1906. 30 Sri Aurobindo, The Doctrine of Passive Resistance . 31 V. Chirol, India , p. 122. 82 Tohn S. Hoyland, Gokhale , p. 25. 33 N. G. Kelkar, Tilak's Trial of 1908 , pp. 197 and 198. 34 Tilak, Git a Rahasya (Hindi edition), pp. 375,377,392 and 394.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 22 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

July 4, 1905 Tilak wrote an article in the Kesari on the work of Krishnavarma and there he compared the latter's political opinions to those of Hyndman. Damodarpant Savarkar, the father of V. D. Savarkar, was an admirer of Lokamanya. During his school days Vinayak Savarkar composed poems eulogising Tilak. Savarkar and his brother were responsible for ftíunding the Mitra Mela and the Abhinav Bharat.35 These were committed to the ideal of independence for India which was to be won even by armed revolt. In 1905 Savarkar had taken a leading part in the bonfire of foreign clothes and when principal Paranjpey fined Savarkar rupees ten, Tilak denounced this action of the authorities and wrote : "They are not our ".36 Savar- kar kept in touch with Lokamanya while the former was a student at Fergusson College and Tilak wrote a letter of introduction for Savarkar to Shyamji Krishnavarma.37 Perhaps Tilak was in touch with Savarkar in 1908. The biographer of Savarkar says that from his talks with Gokhale, Mürley had scented "that Tilak was in close touch with Savarkar and the British government had asked the India government to arrange for his incarceration. For just before the decision of the Tilak case some of the members of the Abbinava Bharat had intercepted in Bombay one night a message from the British government regarding the Tilak affair which contained the informa- tion."38 At the Poona provincial conference of 19 15 some of the delegates wanted a resolution urging the release of Savarkar and other political pri- soners. But there were chances of division on this resolution. Lokamanya wanted all resolutions to be passed unanimously. Hence this resolution was dropped.39 It is possible that either during 1919 or 1920 Lokamanya wrote a letter to Montagu requesting the release of Savarkar.40 But although Ttlak knew Savarkar very well and was mtersted in the latter's affairs and activities there is no proof for holding that Tilak goaded the latter to revolutionary and terroristic activities. Sometimes it has been said that Tilak was a revolutionary because he was behind the arms factory opened in Nepal in 1903. After the Calcutta Congress of 1901, Mataji, a Maharashtriyan woman living in Calcutta requested Tilak and Vasukaka Joshi to go to Nepal. Khadilkar went there and adopted the pseudonym of Krishnarao Bhat. The plan was to open an arms factory in Nepal. Khadilkar began to do some work in this connexion under the guise of engaging in some business activities. But the plan for opening the factory had to be dropped because Damu Joshi of Kolha- pur revealed the plan to the Maharaja of Kolhapur. Through the Maharaja of Kolhapur the British Government came to know of the plan and the whole scheme collapsed. Khadilkar was saved through the help of the Maharaja of Nepal.41 The Nepal incident only shows that Lokamanya wanted an arms factory to be opened in Nepal but it does not necessarily and conclusively indicate that he had plans of creating an armed against the British government during the early years of the twentieth century. Dr. P. S. Khankhoje in a series of articles in the Kesari in the month of August 1953 and February 1954 has tried to interpret Lokamanya as the tea- cher and preceptor of the revolutionary youth of the country.42 He also says

*5 Dhananiava Keer. Life of V . D. Savarkar p. 9. 18 Ibid., pp 19-20. 37 Ibid., p. 25. 38 Ibid., pp. 38-39. 39 Reminiscences . Vol. II, p. 27. 40 Dhananiava Keer, Savarkar. p. 144. 41 The second volume of Khadilkar's Mararhi essays as also the Marathi biography of Vasukaka Joshi by Deosririkar. 42 Dr. P. S. Khankhoje's articles in the Kesari August 2, 1953, August 4, 1953 and February 23, 1954.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF LOKAMANYA TILAK 23 that Tilak instructed some of these young men to acquire military training. It is true that these letters refer to a phase of Tilak's personality which had not been well known so far. But still they do not give any concrete and positive evidence to prove that Lokamanya himself was a revolutionary. Lokamanya was the greatest political leader of the day and was an ardent nationalist and hence young men of partiotic feelings looked to him for inspiration. However, Dr. V. M. Bhatta of Poona holds that till 1908 Tilak closely associated with revolutionists and encouraged them.43 He says that Tilak did not refer to revolu- tionary actions and policies in his speeches and writings but only disclosed them to persons in his close confidence like Khadilkar and Vasukaka Joshi. Lokamanya used to say that there are three types of people in the world.44 Those who have the preponderance of Sattvika elements in them prefer spiritual and moral contemplation and teach their fellow-men by their own example of virtuous living. Those who have the preponderonce of Rajasika element in them take to the work of political agitation and propaganda. Those who have the preponderance of Tamasika element in them take recourse to violent activities. But Tilak discouraged revolutionary and violent activities by the Tamasika people. In 1906 he visited Nasik for the Shivaji festival and was invited for the Pansupari. He himself says: "I advised them to confine their activities to strictly constitutional work or education, and not to go wrong."45 In the Poona Shivaji festival speech of June, 1907, Tilak said that what the nationalist party wanted might appear "like a revolution in the sense that it means a complete change in the theory of the as now put forward by the bureaucracy. It is true that the revolution must be a bloodless revolution, but it would be folly to suppose that if there is to be no shedding of blood there are also to be no sufferings to be undergone by the people. .. .Your revolution must be bloodless but that does not mean that you may not have to suffer or go to jail." Thus it appears that Tilak did not contemplate any armed insurection or revolution. Some of the greatest Indian leaders who had worked with Lokamanya (or several years have denied that Tilak was a revolutionist. Sri Aurobindo Ghosh writes: e:lt is equally a mistake to think of Mr. Tilak as by a revolutionary leader; that is not his character or his political temperament. ....In a free India he would probably have figured as an advanced Liberal stateman eager for national progress and greatness á born Parliamentarian, a leader for the Assembly, though always in touch with the people outside as the constant source of the mandate and the final referee in differences .... Such a man is no natural revolutionist, but a constitutionalist by temper, though always in such times necessarily the leader of an advanced party or section. A clear constitution he could use, amend and enlarge would have suited him much better than to break existing institutions and get a clear field for innovations which is the natural delight of the revolutionary temperament."46 G.R. Das also holds that Lokamanya was not a revolutionary. There was 'no dark plunge of the revolutionary in him'. Tilak was too solid and strong a personality and he did not have the impatience and the restlessness which characterize a revolutionary. Das thinks that Tilak was a conservative

43 Dr. V. M. Bhatta expressed this opinion in a letter he has written to the author of this paper. 44 N. C. Kelker, Life of Tilak (In Marathi), Vol. 3, pp. 46-47 of Section 8. 45 V. Chirol, Tilak , (Oxford University Press) pp. 130-131 and p. 179, 46 §ri Aurobindo, Bankim - Tilak - Dayananda , pp. 25-27.

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 24 THE INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE by instinct, and compromise was the essence of his politics although he never lost sight of the ideal to which his whole being moved.47 Bipin Chandra Pal, a colleague of Lokamanya for over a decade thinks that Tilak was not a revolutionary. In his book Indian Nationalism Pal points out that the temperament, the superior native intelligence, the very liberal education and the firm grasp of the solid political realities of Lokamanya, all are against the assumption that he had any real revolutionary aims. The nationalist leaders of Bengal and Maharahstra taught the gospel of "self- reliance and no mendicancy/' and not of violent revolution. Lokamanya was opposed to the apthy, despair and frustration that pervaded the national life. Bipin Chandra Pal points out that the teachings of Lokamanya and other extermist nationalist leaders were exaggerated into revolutionary gospels and slogans because the psychological foundations of nationalism were lost sight of by the revolutionists and terrorists. Hence some of the young men "turned from steady, sober but devoted and lawful workers into violent and hysteric revolutionaries." Bipinchandra Pal concludes that it is not at all just to accuse Lokamanya of any criminal or revolutionary aims. Sarladevi Chaudharani met Lokamanya and in the course of the inter- view she asked him questions about the appropriateness of the Lathi . She says: "Tilak told me distinctly he did not approve of the dacoities much less authorise them, if for nothing else, simply on the score of their being practically useless for political purposes. But looking to differences in human nature and the varying processes of suited to different temperaments he did not codemn them openly."48 Lokamanya did not believe in the possibility of armed mass uprising. There was neither any trained leadership nor any effective party for this type of action, available in India. Lokamanya was never a revolutionary in the sense in which the leaders of radical left-wing movement in the western countries are revolutionaries. Lokamanya's outlook was also different from the nihilists and terrorists of Russia who occasionally committed political murders and assassinations. He accepted legal methods of agitation. He did not sanction on grounds of policy and expediency the use of revolutionary weapons, although he did not condemn the latter on moral grounds.

7. CONCLUSION

Lokamanya, as a political philosopher has given us a theory of national^ ism. He did not have the time to elaborate upon the other conceptions of political science like sovereignty, , property, etc., although he has referred to these. His theory of nationalism was a synthesis of the teachings of both eastern and western thinkers. He was a thorough believer in and that was the secret of his unique hold on the masses.49 He did not adopt an idealistic or conceptual and speculative approach to politics. He belonged to the school of realism. But he never tolerated the excesses of realism into the apotheosis of the cult of power, force and success, Hence his school of political thought can be characterized as nationalism founded opon "Demo- cratic Realism."

47 Reminisences , Vol. II, p. 623. 48 S. V.Bapat (Ed.), Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Tilak , (In Marathi and English) Vol. I, pp. 249-250. , "

" i yoK¿7* / 1 yo / Varma' "T»lak's Place in World History," The Indian Ration, Patna August 1,

This content downloaded from 27.61.123.130 on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 15:14:41 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms