Speeches and Writings oj

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

VOLUME 2

THE RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI BIRTH CENTENARY EDITION September 1969 Speeches and Writings of THE RIGHT HONOURABLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

Volume 2 FIRST EDITION 22 September 1969

© South Indian National Association Srinivasa Sastri Endowment Fund

PRICE : Rs. 20/- (set of two volumes); Rs. 10/- (each volume).

Printed at The Jupiter Press Private Limited, Madras-18 CONTENTS

PAGE LECTURES ON THE :

I. The Instructional Value of the Epic . . 1 II. , an Immaculate Human Being . . 7 III. The Episode . . 21 IV. Repudiation of . . 44 V. , the Trusted Friend . . 59 VI. Vindicated . . 73 VII. , Greatness without Goodness . . 77 VIII. Ravana, the Mighty . . 84 IX. Ravana's Infatuation for Sita . . 100 X. Sita, the Unapproachable . . 108 XI. The Abhisheka Ceremony of Rama and Sita 117

LETTERS .. 127

EDUCATION : The Schoolmaster's Test . . 205 Convocation Address at Annamalai University 218

BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAYS AND SKETCHES : My First Meeting with Gokhale (1925) . . 229 The Story of My Admission (1926) . . 234 Ranade (1842-1901) 239 Sir P. S. Sivaswami Aiyar (1864-1946) . . 25! V. Krishnaswami Aiyar (1863-1911) . . 256 Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar (1879-1966) . . 271

MAIN EVENTS IN SASTRI'S LIFE . . 277 LECTURES ON

THE RAMAYANA 1

THE INSTRUCTIONAL VALUE OF THE EPIC THE Ramayana has been told to us times without number. Every line of it has been scanned and commented upon minutely, not hundreds, not thousands but millions of times over. We have all conned every little thing in it. Nevertheless, somehow or other, in our mixed human nature, there is a tendency which we nourish to come again and yet again to the story, whether before breakfast or after siesta in the afternoon or midnight and it is time to be sleeping. At whatever time we go, to what• ever place, whoever the expounder may be, somehow or other there is that in us which helps us to put aside all disturbing illusions, all the things that are calculated to take us away from the environment of the story itself even while our circumstances are such as to cause distraction for the time. A child crying or somebody falling asleep on you and all the other things may be calling attention to the wretched world around you ; but even so, somehow there is in all of us, provided we are Hindus by training and in spirit, an ability, what shall I call it, an almost non-human ability to put aside those distractions and to remain under the influence of that illusion as though the whole thing were being enacted on the stage by men fully trained for the purpose amidst appointments of a first-class character, which will produce and maintain the illusion at its greatest. We have that amongst us. Everyone of us has it and it is a marvel how we retain it. I should ask you always to put yourselves in that condition and remain in it whenever you read this great epic. The whole thing is done before you with a set purpose and unless you help that purpose to fulfil itself in you, you read it for nothing. Everything, therefore, depends on the way in which you open the book and read it. I take up the book anywhere and read it. To me Sri Rama is not divine. Nevertheless, the illusion is always there, in full force. I can throw myself heart and soul into the very essence of the story. When I read that book, I read that book and do nothing else ; my whole mind is devoted 2 KT. HONBLE V. S. SIUNIVASA SASTRl to it. A hard-hearted man like me, 1 read it, and, strange to say, there is not a page which does not bring tears into my eyes! Any fine sentiment, any tender feeling, any affection between brother and brother, and re-union of beings that have been separated for a time, aye, any homage paid to friendship, to gratitude or to any of those eternal abiding virtues of human character, brings tears into my eyes ! ( stop ; I cannot go on. I have to wait and wipe my eyes and then go on. Why do I do that ? A hardened man of the world, why do 1 do that ? Why has it that effect on me ? I suppose it is because deep down in my nature, going to strata which perhaps in my waking life I shall never touch, there is a spirit of the utmost reve• rence and affection for those great characters. Why ? Even if Rama and Sita were not of this land but were the hero and heroine in an alien poem, I should feel probably not so very much affected but nearly as deeply. Human nature is human nature; whether nurtured here or in another land, it is just the same. And. that brings me to the main point of the lecture which I should like you to take away with you, viz., that the divinity of Sri Rama need not be questioned for a moment, no, I wish 1 can bring myself to believe it — but, I find as a matter of fact, that it is not essential to the understanding of the story or to profiting by the story. And, I can tell you without boasting that, perhaps, robbed as I am of that faith, I am able to get for the building up of my own nature more from the Ramayana than many another student of that book who believes in the divinity of the character but is not able, for some reason or other, to take in the real spirit in which the lives were lived. After all. when you come to look at it, it seems to be this way. There is the great vault of the heaven above. We are all under it. We function under it. Our lives are ordered under it. We quarrel and fight, we kill each other, acquire and lose. We do so many things under/this over-arching heaven. If thus fhe over-arching heaven enters into our lives, our doings and sayings, shapes our character and regulates the details of our lives, it does so and who can question it ? Whether I say that it does so or not, the fact is that it does. My belief does not affect it, my non-belief cannot abolish it. It is there, immutable, eternal, unalterable by the thought of ihe individual. I may be Lectures on the Ramayana 3 a man of science, I may be a man of logic, 1 may be a naturalist- minded man, this, that or something else ; but, if there is the influence of heaven on my life, though I may be ignorant of it, I cannot get away from it, It is there always, affecting everyone of my thoughts, giving shape to everyone of my doings, however big or however small, however significant to other people or however devoid of value to others. That which is done by me is subject to this eternal, immutable influence. So, if Rama and Sita and had divinity in them, they had it. Everywhere, in everyone in the story, that influence is there and will be there. It is not possible, it is not scientific, it is not accurate, it is not sensible to say that Rama was divine in some of his acts and not divine in others, that Sita behaved only in some parts of her life like Lakshmi. but that in some others she got out of her Lakshmi-hood by some strange device. If divinity appertained to these characters, it did appertain, aye and for ever. To try and separate some things in the Ramayana from other things in the same book for the quality of being especially marked by the divine influence or of being especially the symptom of divinity is. it seems to me, to show ignorance of the very fundamentals of the poem. The thought of divinity need not. therefore, affect your understanding of the poem. You may read the poem as an epic, as a great epic, that has influenced the whole lives of millions of people for generations upon generations. One word more, You all know — I need not elaborate it to an audience of this kind, but T will just remind you, I need only remind you — that even the theory of avatar, philosophi• cally stated, applies to all humanity in one sense, remote it may be and comprehended only by great students of our literature. In one sense, every single creature in this planet or elsewhere is merely an emanation from the one and only source of all life and the one and only cause of the Universe. In that wise, we are all avatars ; only, in us the divine element is not nearly so prominent as in the case of some others. It is a question only of degree, a question, as it were, only of the proportion of time and proportion of events in which the divinity plays its part. That, really and properly considered, is what distin• guishes one man from another, in a great man, the divine or super-human element manifests itself oftener. more clearly and 4 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI to better purpose than in the case of a comparatively ill-deve• loped man. That is why they speak sometimes of the evolu• tion of souls. Some souls are developed more than others on a higher plane and, therefore, in them it is possible for us to see, and in their writings and speeches it is possible for us to hear more often the note of divinity than in the case of other people not so fortunate or so far advanced in evolution as they. Sri Rama, if you will allow me for a moment to talk of him, — I cannot pretend to keep Rama from you any longer — was an embodiment of the great virtues of human character. Hear him speak, see him do things, have anything to do with him, come under his influence, you cannot escape the touch of divinity. That is why a study of his life is more profitable to us from the point of view of the soul than any study of the life of other heroes. Lives of other peoples are not without instruction too. Less evolved characters there always have been. For instance, it is the function of poets and novelists and others of sorts to create for our benefit, out of their superior knowledge and superior creative power, characters whom it is worth our while to study, to make them function upon a stage where human circumstances prevail, so that from these imperfect characters living in very imperfect conditions and created so as to dwell in our imagi• nation by men of imperfect development in authorship, — even these characters, I say, we do not read of without some profit. Vou take the novels of our great writers. They are not with• out benefit to us unless we read them as we play cards. But to those that study these great and moving books, with their hearts working on them, with their minds playing on them, and deriving at every stage something of value to their own building up, to them, all these books, like Jean Valjean, for instance, are of immense educational and spiritual value. I am mention• ing this just for the purpose of enforcing this point that even if a hard-hearted man, intellectually well-trained and merely prepared to learn and improve, even if such a man came to study the Ramayana and took it up only as a great poem writ• ten with a great purpose by a great man, — even if one did that, one would profit immensely. We all do much more ; we all value the Ramayana not merely as an epic poem, but as a poem that has gone to the shaping of the whole of India's Lectures on the Ramayana 5 history. It is that which charges that epic and the Mahabharata and other books of that nature with the deepest instructional value to us and we shall do well, therefore, with our minds attuned to the gathering of these spiritual lessons, to pay atten• tion to the great characters, Sri Rama, Sita, Hanuman and the others, as they slowly evolve. For, it is possible for us to see a certain evolution even of these characters. It is not as if they were born so. Sri Rama was no doubt God. But he came into the world like a child, was brought up like a child ; a great teacher took him in hand, taught him the things of the world, taught him the great meaning and the pur• pose of . the rivers and mountains and sacred places and the inner meaning of sacrifices. So it was that Rama grew under Vjsvamitra. Visvamitra is no small man though I have never ceased to blame for dismissing him so abruptly at the end never to meet him again. What a part Visvamitra played ! Just think of that! A man who had the making of the whole of Sri Rama's character, who taught him not merely tapas, yajna, the daily sacrifices, prayers and all that but, the very art of war ; a man who made Sri Rama what he was, who took Rama in hand in his plastic childhood, gave him shape and fitted him for the greatest part played by anyone. — a man of that type to be dismissed so summarily \ Was it fair I ask, of the poet ? T think it is a sudden exit, not to be tolerated. So Rama grew in family life, under father and mother and under, like any of us, a step-mother, who had human frailties, unfortunately. He had his difficulties of a joint family. You see how he went through them all in a story full of the tenderest pathos and the most moving emotions. You must study the character of Rama. Generally speaking, when there is a very highly developed character in a book, when you have a Sri Rama, critics of the modem day tel! us : " Oh, Sri Rama ? He is an uninspiring character. What is there in him ? He is a monster of perfec• tion. Before you tum the hundredth page, you can say exactly what he will say or what he will do next. He will do the rieht thing, the proper thing, and what must be done. He is not like us ; he does not belong to us," When in any book, a character is painted and portrayed almost perfect, the critic is very inipa- 6 RT. HONBLE V. S. SRINlVASA SASTR1 tieot. He says, "I want a man of flesh and blood like me, a fellow who is subject to the same temptations, who wants to eat well, who must have first-class coffee in the morning, a human being like me, who goes through life struggling like me. pinched, pressed, tortured, as most of us are. 1 want to know how a great man comes out of that all. That is a great man. who, going through the mill, undergoing my experiences, suffer• ing my sufferings, enjoying my joys, still comes out top, over• coming all those handicaps and limitations, showing in his fullest development the grandeur of human character, approaching the divinity from which he came and I came and you came, too. That is what we want." such critics say. " We want a man who is not a superman ; that has value to us. We want a man essentially human in his feelings, in his outlook on life, in his struggles and triumphs. We want him to be human, and being human, to triumph over his human limitations, develop his divinity, and in the end establish "himself in the throne of human hearts as King, unsurpassed." Sri Ramachandra than whom there is no better as husband, as son, as king, as man, we see him growing up. That is the beauty of the Ramayana. The man who reads the Ramayana thinking that from the beginning he is dealing with God, will get nothing out of it. You must read the story as a human story, lived among human beings by a human being, and, then, oh, what rich treasures there are of wisdom in it! I do not know how long 1 will take over Sri Rama. But however often we dwell on him. however long we deal with him. in whatever way we understand him, his life comprehending all other lives, playing its part in the shaping of every other inci• dent, will be full of lessons. By way of preparation, as it were. T may tell you that T shall beg you to deal with Rama not as a man in whom there was all knowledge, all propriety, all virtue, from the very beginning, unfailing till the very end — that is not the way to read his life — but, as a man who struggled, who was tempted, who had his weaknesses — do not be sur• prised ; 1 am not committing any defamation or any blasphemy ; he had his weaknesses — who put them down, overcame them, surpassed them all. It is only as we shall study Rama in that light that we shall get the richest treasure of wisdom from this great epic which I shall venture to study with you in our future talks, II

RAMA, AN IMMACULATE HUMAN BEING

Now then, if Rama, as I venture to think, was a real character of flesh and blood like ourselves, if he lived like us amidst surroundings of his day and his part of the world, if he was subject to the ordinary human feelings which we find daily at work amongst ourselves, if so, we must be prepared to find every now and then that he sometimes moved on one level and sometimes on another level and we shall have to judge his conduct or his sayings according to our belief as to the sphere in which at the moment he had his being. For we all know from experience that neither the best nor the lowest amongst us. neither men nor women, neither Westerners nor Easterners, none who is human is able to occupy one level of thought, one level of action, and one level of function ; we go up sometimes when we are in good moods, receptive of ethical notions, conscious of our duties, comparatively strong to resist temptations, in noble surroundings, amidst noble people, thinking noble thoughts and capable of doing noble deeds. Alas! such moments are not always available. It is only rarely that there is a combination of circumstances conducive to our being kept on our own highest level. Often, too often indeed, there are circumstances that drag us down, bad examples, sordid induce• ments, sordid considerations. Temptations of one kind or ano• ther beset us all round and even the men amongst us who have received the most careful training and who have trained them• selves most carefully and conscientiously, even we find that there is a certain environment of high quality necessary if we are to be ourselves at our highest. Too commonly we fall, we do improper things, we do things that wc would not have done otherwise or in other circumstances, we do things that we wish we hadn't done ; and we do them consciously, knowingly, hop• ing that others will not detect our fault, or if they did detect it. would forgive us on account of this or that other consideration. Sri Rama had the extraordinary merit. — I say merely extra• ordinary — what I mean is unequalled and unmatched merit, 8 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI of remaining most often at his own highest level. He seldom fell below it. If at any time he did, we could easily spot the conditions that determined the decline ; perhaps the decline was conscious, perhaps it was not, perhaps it was entirely excusable. Occasionally perhaps the excuses are difficult to find for us. men of limited vision. But the point, ladies and gentlemen, is — and don't be afraid of this thought, there is nothing wrong about it, nothing blasphemous — that occasionally we do find that Sri Rama did and said things which perhaps his own higher nature would not approve. It is not easy for us to say why he did these things, how he came to do them and how far they must be ascribed to defects in his character. 1 do not mean to go over the whole catalogue but before I begin the discus• sion actually, I wish to tell you finally, that in my judgment they do not take away even by a small particle from the subli• mity of Rama's character. The man must be thoroughly ignorant of human character, must be perversely blind and deaf to all that happens round him, who thinks because now and then Sri Rama showed the common qualities of human nature, that, therefore, he was of the common clay. No, I wish to say with• out any reservation that, considered as a human being should be considered, Rama stands almost immaculate. Almost imma• culate I say. Why I use the word ' almost', I wish with your permission to make clear today, by trying to understand certain episodes that are narrated in the poem. But before I do so. it is necessary to make a rapid survey of what Rama stands for today, and of how we hold him as unapproachable, as a man, as a husband, as a friend, as an ally in peace and war, as a king. No greater testimony is required to prove this than the fact that while he was only still twenty-five or twenty-six accord• ing to Sita, but thirty-seven or thirty-eight by ordinary calcula• tion, while he was only of that age, without any advantage of a kingdom to rule, of estates to distribute, of honours to give, of wealth to give away, without any of these advantages, he established himself, as I say at that young age, as the Supreme crown and glory of his age. All ailke who came into contact with him, whether senior to him in age or junior, whether kings or ordinary persons, whether great warriors, saints or sages, all alike bowed to him in reverence. Hts own brothers scarcely junior to him as we reckon ages amongst ourselves, even hts Lectures on the Ramayana 9 brothers, considered that he was by head and shoulders above them, far away in reach of character and entitled to their most obeisance. Whether in the Ayodhyakanda where be moved among people comparatively his equals, kings, queens and sages, or in the next two kandas where he was practically alone with his own brother and his wife, or in the Kishkindakanda where again he had a few people who looked up to him as ordinary people look up to each other, or in the Yuddhakanda where he did great deeds, commanded great armies, conducted signifi• cant campaigns, did doughty deeds of war, every one who came into contact with him put him in a class of his own and durst not compare himself or herself with him. Of this the most, the most striking proof is to be found in the concluding scene of the Yuddhakanda — I call it concluding, excluding the abhisheka part in itself — where just after the battle when he summoned to his great presence her who was the cause of the great war, her for whom he had incurred unparalleled sacrifices, whom he loved like his own life, and in whose absence he often threatened to take out his own life, summoning her to his great presence he gave expression to sentiments that shocked every single hearer, not her only, not only, not Vibhishana only, but the whole host of monkeys and any surviving there might have been. They all listened to him, they all saw him when he sat apparently in State, all by himself, lost in serious sentiments of harsh, unfeeling, cruel import. All stood or sat in their places. What was Sri Rama after all ? He was not the Emperor of India at that time ; he was no great sage as we count sages. Why, why did no one, monkey or man, murmur a word of protest ? Perfectly clear, not one approved. Everybody thought that he was doing something that they could not explain, that they could not justify to themselves. But not a voice was heard, not a hand raised in disapprobation. The man had imposed himself so irrevocably on all that came near him that what he said was law unto everyone, what he decreed was to be obeyed in every particular without question and with• out demur. If he said something they could not approve, it was the doom of Fate that descended on them all. To it they must submit. They durst not protest. Now I want you to realise, ladies and gentlemen, how great must have been the man who could become so unquestionably 10 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI supreme in his kind. That Sri Rama was and he could not be that unless he were what he professed often to be, the guardian and the embodiment in himself of Dharma. Time after time, under the most difficult circumstances, when all about him pulled him down, gave him advice which was of a worldly nature, when everything pointed to what we might call ordinary conduct, he adopted courses of action which astonished people by their complete rectitude, by the high altitude of moral excellence that they rose to. Not to mention the ordinary things like renun• ciation of power and the abandonment of kingdom, which must occur to you all, let us come to the crowning episodes in the Yuddhakanda itself. Take the occasion when Vibhishana sought asylum with him. He held, as you know, a great council of war. he had eminent counsellors. But excepting Hanuman who seemed rather weak in the advice that he gave, excepting him. every one including his own brother, Lakshmana, would have had him reject Vibhishana. while one or two would have him order his killing ; almost alone therefore, alone, in spite of the advice of everybody, rejecting it all as beneath him, he rose to his own topmost level and said the famous words : " No man shall seek my protection in vain. He may be wicked, he may be undeserving, he may even be my bitterest enemy. Ravana himself. But if he comes to me in a friendly and submissive spirit, I will not turn him back." Fancy, ladies and gentlemen, what a tremendous consciousness of his own moral power he must have had when he announced these great sentiments and carried them out without any qualification or reservation. Take again the moment when, locked in mortal battle with Ravana himself, he gained some advantage and Ravana was driven to come down from his chariot — it was destroyed and he lost his great bow — Sri Rama drew himself up to full dignity and told his enemy whom he had made so many arrange• ments not only to vanquish but to kill, instead of seizing that moment to press his advantage and remove him altogether, he tells hini, " Now, Ravana. you are at a great disadvantage. Today J have seen you at your best. You have fought bravely ; you have fought nobly ; you have accounted for many a warrior on my side. Still you are tired. You are obliged to come down and stand like me on your feet, you've lost your great bow, T give you Time. Go home now. Come to-morrow, refreshed and Lectures on the Ramayunti 11 strong in your chariot and with a new bow and new arrows. You shall then see how I can give you battle." Whoever heard of such a thing? Which hero ever did such a thing? Yet again, when having killed Ravana, he listened to Vibhishana who was struggling between two sentiments and finally Vibhishana came to him with tears and said, " True he was my elder bro• ther ; true he was my king ; true he protected me often ; but he was wicked. He ruined many women. He made light of life. He made unjust wars. Altogether I do not think I shall perform his obsequies. It may not be right of me to do so." 1 say, it was quite easy for an ordinary man to say, " Yes, throw his body into the sea and be done with him." But we are dealing with Sri Rama. He said to Vibhishana at that supreme moment — you have heard of people who exhumed bodies that have been buried under the ground and threw them subsequently into the water or into the fire — what did Sri Rama do at that moment when even Vibhishana would not do the last rites by his brother. He said, " No, Vibhishana, you are wrong. T did not kill an ignoble man in battle. Ravana was a great warrior; he was a great man ; he was a great king and greatly he died. Perform his obsequies according to the pres• cribed Sastra." And, " You will attain merit," he added. Well, ladies and gentlemen, if there was a human being who could reach those unimaginable heights of moral purity and grandeur, is it any wonder that all the world bowed to him. accepted his smallest wish as the decree of Heaven ? That he was. And yet, thanks be to human nature which we all have, as the poets say, as the world says, one nature is common to us all. Full of dread and awe as we are, as we contemplate Sri Rama, it fills us now and then with pride that he too, he too thought very much as we should have thought. Trouble depressed him ; sorrow struck him hard ; he had his moments of anguish. Alas, the poet says he cried and wept bitter tears now and then ! He grew angry sometimes, he was in despair sometimes ; he was about to commit suicide now and then. He said harsh things of people. He suspected just as you and 1 would suspect. He did everything that we with flesh and blood do. Don't think that we bring him down from his high level ; we raise ourselves to kinship with him as we notice these inci• dents. If being like us with flesh and blood, actuated by our 12 RT. HONBLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI motives now and then, feeling angry, feeling depressed, feeling sorry, if being like us, it was still possible for him to rise to those great altitudes, though we may not soar so high, may we not rise half an inch above ourselves ? May we not subdue our nature to some extent ? It won't turn all to gold, this base lead of which we are made. No, it won't. Nevertheless we could clean that lead, make it shine according to its own nature and then, ladies and gentlemen, we shall have read of Sri Rama to some purpose. We shall have heard the Ramayana with some advantage, and upon our lives and our character some influence of a very exalted and almost divine nature will have been exerted so that we shall all be somewhat the better for having come under the influence of this great epic of Valmiki. Now then, to my task today. I have brought together here certain incidents and episodes in which Sri Rama shows his human qualities, not his super• human virtue but his human qualities. First, I think it best to go along in some order as I hope, after I have spoken, some amongst you, I hope with all my heart, some amongst you will go back to the poem itself and see whether I have given you trustworthy guidance or whether I have been trying to mislead you. First of all, when Dasaratha and having sat toge• ther, or rather she having sat with him in order to deflect the course upon which the king had previously determined, when under her bidding he sent for Sri Rama to announce the dread news what was Sri Rama doing ? He was then in his own place with Sita. As on the last occasion when he saw his father, he had been told he was going to be crowned Yuvaraja, he says to her in full expectation of the coming honour, says to her as you or I would have said in similar circumstances contemplat• ing the advance in life that is going to come to us through the blessing of God. He said to her, that is, to Sita :

II. 16. 15.

His mind was pure, his heart was unsuspicious. So he says to her, " Doubtless my father and Kaikeyi are planning some nice Lectures on the Ramayana 13 things by way of preparation. Great things are in store for me and therefore for you."

3$fac3r gjftaiq fitowH gsffcoii |

II. 16. 16. you remember how Kaikeyi and he were great friends. He says, " No doubt, Kaikeyi being so fond of me and hearing the great intention he has towards me, wants the king to be quick about it and nice about it."

ei uw nsmw ilasim^i&ft |

II. 16. 17. " Quite certain. I am being summoned to be put in the second place in the kingdom," he says to Sita,

S;ei sitafacTt nm\ ^ifa *r n^hian i

II. 16. 20.

" While I go and have the great ceremony performed, you rest awhile here in happiness with your own people and spend the time in happy contemplation of the prospect." Well, the poet puts these sentiments into the mouth of the great person whom we are studying. And it appears to me that that shows above all things how very human Sri Rama was. It was a great thing that was happening to him and he looked forward not only to his father but to his step-mother who had shown him such marked affection, he looked forward to their plans together for his prosperity. Then when the worst was known and he came back, he goes to tell his mother of the reverse, for the mother was also rising aloft on hope. She had to be told. When he goes to her, the poet gives a touch which is quite contrary to what he has been saying before. Before that, as soon as Rama heard that he was to renounce the kingdom, that his brother was to take it, 14 RT. HON BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI that he was to go to the forest for fourteen years, the poet has said, " Not a muscle moved on the noble countenance. It shone in full lustre as it always did. Nobody could see that a lightning stroke had fallen. For all that, Rama appeared, as if he was still on the high tide of prosperity and power. He did not show the slightest unhappiness or disappointment." That was what the poet had said. When Rama went to his mother to tell her what had happened, this is what the poet says :

II. 19. 35.

" Controlling his unhappiness within his own heart.'' That shows you that there was unhappiness and that he merely con• quered it. It was not as if there was no trouble in his mind, no grief or thought. Having to break bad news he went dejected to her :

11. 19. 35. Now that shows again that Rama, great as he was, sublime, as his development had been on the ethical side, could not help the depressing character of the circumstances. Then when he went before Sita, it was still worse. Natural. We like to feel that Rama behaved as you and I would have behaved in similar circumstances. Probably we should have wept and rolled on the floor. Rama too was susceptible to some extent :

: sT|g3Re*I?i %qi ft ra^fjss I' II. 26. 5. It had all been decreed for the great event —

All people were eagerly looking forward for the great news to come. As he went in, there was a little grief in his face and he put his head down. Lectures on the Ramayana 15

are *frm ggwq WRI ^ a qmn |

II. 26. 6.

Instead of coming back rejoicing and jumping, he wore a sad and thoughtful countenance, and Sita was struck with grief to see him. Till now he had subdued his feelings and did not allow them to interfere with his speech or to appear in his face. But when he went to her who was so full of expectation and expect• ed to receive him in quite another style, he was unable to control his grief.

II. 26. 7-8.

His face had changed. The colour on his face had become a little pale. He was perspiring. There was some feeling which he could not control :

What is this ? What has happened ? Why all this excitement and stir ? Now 1 come to another passage in which the poet makes Rama speak to Lakshmana. Lakshmana wants to accompany him and for one brief moment Rama tries to keep him back. You know for what reason. That shows his human weakness better than anything else.

fw*t wai *R AFT* fwa: l fqq: STIOiaqr «uru ^[fa g

He says this to Lakshmana, " You are all this to me." AH this is preparation for leaving him, for asking him to remain behind. II—2 16 RT. HON BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

£1 ufaqfa §m\ =11 qsi&tfta 11 II. 31. 11. When Sila and I are away in the forest who is there to look after my mother and your mother ?

3*f>ta*tfcT ^Rq: q^q: gftsfifa 1 6 *rc

Our father is infatuated and as to our step-mother who has won this round, she is not likely to relent towards her rivals :

*?[ \k imm aicq gq^i^: gar 1

II. 31. 13.

and will not do them any good. At this particular moment Rama's grief almost overpowers him. He says, " Kaikeyi will not take care of them and may be too much under his mother's influence."

II. 31. 17.

He means both of them. " Neither my mother nor your mother without us to protect them can be happy." Now you will see how later on when anybody else speaks of Kaikeyi, Rama springs to her side and says : " Do not abuse her." He may suspect her ; he may not think very well of her. Perhaps his belief is that knowing her weakness he will be able to make full allowance for it. He will be able to realise how she is not acting for herself but for her dear son under pardonable circumstances and how perhaps she too is in the hands of Fate, working out Fate's cruel decrees. These allowances he would make even when he censures her conduct, but other people may Lectures on the Ramayana 17 not be able to do so. So when Lakshmana at any time tells him, " Ah, how 1 hate Kaikeyj," he would say, " No, no, not that thing, Lakshmana, never say such a thing." So too when anybody- accuses Bharata in his hearing he would speak in the highest terms of him. But when he talks to himself as it were — for Lakshmana is not different from him — when he talks to himself, his real feelings find vent to some extent and he gives expression to the deepest emotions at the moment. Then 1 shall mention one other thing and stop for the day. We see now how under a stroke of adversity he felt more or less like a human being, as other human beings would have felt. He suspected people ; he suspected Kaikeyi and he sus• pected Bharata too to some extent. That was like us. Here we see him in this particular incident that I am now going to relate, here we see him trying to enjoy a little innocent fun at other people's expense. Just a little innocent fun. You remem• ber that poor Brahmin named who, as Rama was giving away his property right and left to his people, was, like Kuchela in the other story, under pressure from his wife, making a pilgrimage to Sri Rama to ask for his help. He says to Rama, "You are giving away so much. 1 am a very poor man with many children and one of the means of subsistence that I have is to pick the grains of paddy left behind by the reaper. This is my way of life. 1 find it very hard to get along. I have a large family. Will you look with pity on me ?" And then you remember how Sri Rama asks him, " That stick of yours, take it; stand there and throw it as far as you can with your strength. My cows stand all between. All the cows that are between this spot and the spot which your stick reaches shall be yours." And then Rama was amused to see how this Brahmin, suddenly seized with a little bit of greed as it were, exerted all his strength, waved the stick twice or thrice round his head and threw it. It went to the other bank of the Sarayu. So he had an immense wealth of cattle at once at his disposal. Rama gave it all to him. And then he says, " I was perhaps rather unfeeling to you. I should have done this thing perhaps in another way but I wanted to know how a Brahmin like you could use the strength that he had in order to get something. I wanted to know that you could use all your strength. That was not quite proper. I should have relieved you without this 18 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI trouble. Just excuse me. I wanted to have a little amuse• ment."

^ aai *IR*a ii*qnfasi^q^ I ^ ^q: qfenjl ^q" «R U |5 it H^cf^ qq; ^{cqq &rf liegifl^ai qqi |

II. 32. 40-41. " I only wanted to know your strength and how far you would exert it, whether it was always at your disposal. Now having done so, I am so pleased. Will you ask me if you want to have anything more ? I shall be happy to give you." But Trijata was of the family of Garga. He was like a Brahmin, contented and he had this immense wealth all at once. He did not ask for anything more. He said, " 1 am pleased for the time." Well, let me handle one more point. We now saw that Rama was not above a little merriment. Now we come to a quality of a slightly different nature. He was leaving the palace. There was great mourning, as you know, within the palace and out• side. He and Lakshmana and Sita had got into the chariot. Sumantra was driving. They were going at some distance and Dasaratha, and other people had come out of the palace to see them, to have a last look at them. And the old man cried out to Sumantra. " Stop, stop." But Rama said :

hYgia ^q?l^r qif? qigncT IW* I §Hot*q ^*jqie*Tr ^sftfiR* ^f'cW |i II. 40. 46. " Go on. drive on." Not knowing what to do. the poet bays, Sumantra was like a man caught between the front and back wheels of a chariot. He did not know what to do and looked up to Rama, " I am asked by your father to do one thing and you ask me to do just the opposite thing." Then says Rama, " Perhaps you are afraid that when you go back after leaving me in the forest, the old man will be angry with you for not having obeyed him. Lectures on the Ramayana 19

U. 50. 5. If my father on your return should take you to task for dis• obedience, you know what to do. Just say that in the bustle and noise you did not hear him." And Sri Rama says in defence of this departure from truth :

" The justification for telling this white lie is that it is foolish to prolong the wail. It is absolutely foolish and disastrous to prolong the waiJ of grief. So go on," he says. Apparently Sri Rama was a little fond of this thought :

for, a lew sargas later we find him saying the same thing when he found that the people of the rural parts were following him in great numbers and would not be stayed. He says to Sumantra again, " Run on " and as they cry out, he says :

putting the comparative degree instead of the superlative. Then again there are things, little peccadillos which we have got to remember in order to see that Rama was just like us when in trouble, apt to choose the easiest way out. There were a num• ber of Brahmins of great sanctity following him obstinately. They went as far as river Tamasa. When he crossed over to the other side, these people slept on this side. As they were asleep. Rama says to Sumantra, " Now, you had better take this chariot and drive northward as if you were trying to return to Ayodhya. And when they are off their guard as it were, come back from that side by another way. I'll come and join you and then we can drive away without their knowing any• thing." So he adopts this ruse in order to throw them off the scent, these people whom it was difficult to shake off, who in their loyalty and adoration were determined to follow him until he yielded to their request and returned. That was their hope. 20 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Simple people ! Their whole lives were wrapped up in him. Hoping to keep him back, they followed him obstinately. So it was necessary to get rid of them by some little trick. This was what he taught Sumantra. Ill

THE VALI EPISODE

BEFORE I take leave of the character of Sri Rama T must deal with two points of absorbing interest which have engaged not only the attention but the warm feelings of disputants for many many centuries. Two episodes have given rise to controversy. Authorities which cannot be questioned are found on either side of the dispute and will not do for me to lay down any precise judgment as though it were beyond question. But it would be helpful to students of the Ramayana if I brought together the issues raised over these problems. Today I will deal only with the Vali episode, leaving the other great bone of contention, the conduct of Sri Rama with regard to Sita at the end of the Yuddhakanda to another occa• sion. Perhaps it would be well to state at the outset what the main points are which will engage our attention. It is brought up by critics against Sri Rama that he killed Vali from a con• cealed position. That he killed him at all is also brought up against him as something against the course of natural justice. Incidentally, questions of smaller importance are mixed up with the main issues. I will first mention them. 1 know some of my friends who are imbued with the modern spirit, as we should say, in internationalism, regard imperialism of any kind as a vice among kings and those invested with kingly authority. We are a subject people and, therefore to us every form of control by another people is odious, especially in these days when as a result of this great war, great expectations of liberty and free• dom and self-expression all over the world among nations, great and small, have been raised. At a time like this it is no wonder that the claim of one people to dominate over a whole conti• nent or the claim of one king to tribute and homage from all kings over a large area is regarded with no sympathy. We think it a vulgar form of self-assertion. Among kings especially wc scarcely distinguish it from inordinate ambition and a desire to tyrannise over weaker peoples. Sri Rama in defending himself asserts this imperialism in strong terms, almost without any 22 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI qualification. To us therefore of the modern day the claim appears a little out of the character of Sri Rama. I am how• ever bound to point out to you who are studying an ancient poem and the character of a great king who functioned cen• turies ago, I am bound to point out to you that we have no right to judge of Sri Rama's ideas by the light of modern aspi• ration. Let us especially remember that contentment was a virtue of the Brahmin caste. In Kshatriyas it was not regarded as a virtue. It was often held up as a sign of weakness. That Kshatriya was worthy of honour of all who night and day strove to extend the limits of his kingdom, who desired to extend his sway over the whole continent. Yagnas were performed for the purpose of extending the area over which a king's authority was acknowledged. It was not a virtue in those days for a king to be contented with what he inherited. But he was considered unworthy of the throne if he did not increase its glory, if he did not add to its dominion, if in fact, he did not bring alien peoples under his own umbrella. If therefore Sri Rama assert• ed this principle in somewhat unequivocal terms, we are not justified in judging him by other standards. That then must be taken out of the indictment against Sri Rama. Then he asserted that in killing Vali he was acting as a deputy or delegate of his brother, Bharata. Bharata was king of Ayodhya and therefore had the whole of Bharatavarsha under him and if in the king misbehaved, it was right of Bharata to punish him, and if Bharata was not available on the spot, it was the right of Bharata's brother, of any one of his kinsmen, in fact, who claimed that he belonged to the royal family, it was the right of such a person to inflict the deserved punishment. That was the extension of the imperialistic doctrine which Sri Rama enunciated without reserve. Then the question is — another point that brings in modern notions — if Sri Rama had jurisdiction to take up Vali's mis• deeds and to inflict proper penalties upon him, was the juris• prudence of the times such that the penalty of death could be inflicted upon a person who had been guilty of appropriating his younger brother's wife ? You may be reminded of a pas• sage in Indian history where Nuncornar^who forged a document was punished with death. Historians have regarded that this was essentially unjust as the Indian Penal Code did not include Lectures on the Ramayana 23 forgery among the capital crimes. But in those days the East India Company and its representatives in Calcutta were not restrained by any such notions. If a man was inconvenient and had been caught and it was necessary to dispose of him so that he may be of no more trouble, they were not very scrupulous as to what they did with him. I am afraid that in punishing Vali with death Sri Rama was guilty of some such extension. I shall point that out later. Then the question is raised thus. The main object of Rama was that his wife should be recovered. Why did he not choose Vali as his ally, who could have done it for him in a trice ? For, it was generally acknowledged that Vali was a monkey of immense prowess and that he had already conquered Ravana and almost treated him with contumely. Why was not Vali taken as an ally instead of his weaker brother ? Another small ques• tion that is raised is, why did Sri Rama not kill Vali at the first encounter 7 Why did he at that time let him go and ask Sugriva to come again and summon him to a single combat? 'Ihe reason given by Sri Rama is generally believed to be unsatisfactory and commentators and readers of the Ramayana generally have been at pains to discover why Sri Rama did this apparently improper thing. Another question that I shall raise, but which to my knowledge has not been raised before, is whether Sri Rama was consistent with his own action when he regarded the capture of Ruma, Sugriva's wife, by the brother as a crime that deserved extreme punishment. Now these several questions I will attempt to deal with. But let me explain as before in previous discussions that 1 shall confine myself as far as possible to the text of Valmiki, that 1 shall not travel beyond his words, that I shall not calf to my aid the authority of any other Purana or any other version of the Ramayana that may be current amongst us. It is necessary for us to fix our eyes exclusively on what Valmiki has said and to ground ourselves on his words. It will not do to travel out• side and get into trouble with questions of sastra or sastraic exegesis. There are those who in defiance of the express words of the poet himself claim that Sri Rama was not concealed when he aimed his arrow at Vali. They allow that Vali did not know that there was somebody aiming at him. Vali was not aware 24 RT. HON HLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI of it. But though he was not aware, they are not disposed to think ill of Rama's action in killing him ; for they contend that he did so openly and not from any covert position. That how• ever is against the express text. The words in the text are :

IV. 12. 14. * Hiding their bodies behind the trees' ; ' stayed in a dark forest'. Now the words ^ft... can have no other meaning. And when Vali accuses Rama of having been hidden when he aimed his arrow, it is conclusive that Rama makes no answer to it. He does not deny it. On the other hand, he admits it and defends his action. He only says. " Yes, I did so. But who are you ? You are only a monkey, an object of the chase. Kings like me, kingly people like me, are entitled to hunt you and the chase allows the huntsman to be hidden or to prepare traps or to do anything of the kind which may be called ' kuta '. I am not bound to fight you as though you were a worthy combatant. I am not bound to give you notice or to call you to measure your prowess against mine." That is Sri Rama's defence. Obviously, therefore, it was a fact that he killed Vali not in open fight, not face to face in a straight encounter, but in a fashion which as between ordinary warriors would be considered highly improper or dishonourable. To throw some light upon this I will read to you two of the com• ments of the greater exegetists. Govindaraja himself — no man can claim to be a greater Ramabhakta than he — does not mince his words over the question. He says :

S*R!Sft 3113^: fa: I

Vali was killed by Rama although by a fraud just because he had made a promise to Sugriva. Then, exercising a little free• dom with the matter of the text, in another place he says :

" qft qffo5!: yafefel " that is. if Rama had stood in front of Vali : Lectures on the Ramayana 25

tKl figacrftasWWIT Hf»

IV. 18. 45. that is, Vali, knowing the great skill in battle of his antagonist, might have made his submission and when submission is made Rama was not the man to go forward with a battle. He must at once grant protection to the saranagata. In that case the promise that he had made would be frustrated. Also, Ravana, who was the sworn friend of Vali would also come and say, " I will fall at your feet. Excuse me." Then his mission would not be fulfilled. It was therefore necessary for Sri Rama to lie hidden when he aimed his arrow. Now was this right, was this in accordance with the law of chivalry as it was acknowledged at the time ? Even in those days, as is obvious from the difficulty that these people feel, such a fight was not considered proper. No true warrior would attack another when he was not aware of the combatant. I will give you an extraordinary illustration of it from the Ramayana itself. Now, let me ask your minds for a while to dwell on a very dramatic incident in the great battle. In one of the inci• dents of the battle several of the most eminent persons on both sides are engaged. Rama is on the scene ; Lakshmana is on the scene ; Hanuman, Sugriva and Neela and everybody on the one side, and on the other you have got Ravana himself besides others. Now the battle is about to open and as the great war• riors face each other, Ravana knowing his old antagonist, Hanu• man. by face, gives him a blow on the chest with his palm. Hanuman reels under the blow but quickly recovering, lands a blow himself on the chest of Ravana with the palm. Ravana in turn swayed this way and that but he said, " Now, look here. You are a strong person. You have given me a blow which has caused me to be unsteady." Well, that is a noble warrior's characteristic, to praise the strength and skill of the enemy. But do you know what Hanuman says in reply ? He says, " Well, it is all very well for you to praise me. But I am ashamed, I am ashamed that even after that blow you should be alive to compliment me." This infuriated Ravana and then instead of 26 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI a straight blow with the palm, he clenches his right fist and strikes with that as hard as he could at Hanuman's chest. Hanuman could not stand it. His eyes became dim and he was not aware of what was happening. For the moment he was put out of action. Then Ravana thinking that for the moment Hanuman was disabled, turned to Neela who was the Com• mander-in-Chief on the spot and he was engaged with him. Meantime, Hanuman recovered and wishing to pay back what he had got, if possible, with interest, came to where Ravana stood. But finding that he was engaged with Neela. he did not like to take advantage of it but told Ravana :

3i?q^ gwmrfreq * garaftqiqsTq ||

" When a man is engaged with another, it is not honourable to attack him." So said Hanuman and kept back. He nursed his vengeance and went for Ravana when Ravana was all alone and could pay him full attention. Now that incident in which Hanuman enunciated this chival• rous doctrine that you must not take advantage of a foe when he is otherwise engaged, when he could not deal directly with you, is of particular application when we review Sri Rama's conduct. It is not alone that Vali was not able to deal with Sri Rama. He was not aware of Rama's existence on the spot. So it is a greatly aggravated form of unworthy combat. Now I will postpone for a little while the consideration of why Sri Rama did this. It is necessary now to follow the text of Valmiki through some sargas in order to find out what might have been at the bottom of Sri Rama's action, what could have made him think of this. The text seems to help us a little — I will not say it does, I dare not make that assertion. But as we read the passages and dwell on the individual words here and there something like a dim light is thrown upon the subject. In the first place, I want to ask your attention to a matter not ger• mane to our issue now but which will become important later. Sugriva had two grievances against Vah ; one of them was real, the other fanciful. Sugriva told Hanuman and Hanuman in turn Lectures on the Ramayana 21 told Sri Rama and Lakshmana that Vali had done two wrongs to his brother. One wrong of course was that he had appro• priated his wife, Ruma. The other wrong, represented as wrong curiously enough, was that he drove Sugriva out of his king• dom. The fact was that it was Vali's kingdom and he merely took it back when Sugriva had unknowingly become king. He only took it back but Sugriva represents it and Hanuman repre• sents it as though he had been unlawfully deprived of what was his :

IV. 4. 27.

He has been driven out of the kingdom, his kingdom, and he has been deprived of his wife and the brother, has betrayed him. Now Sugriva is very careful. Sugriva says to Sri Rama :

siiiejn ftt^i *rar W% |

" I am afraid of my brother. He is much stronger than I. He has driven me out and he has humiliated me. I want you to give me protection from him so that 1 need not fear him." That is all he says ; there is no suggestion of Vali's being killed but Sri Rama is replying and in giving him encouragement says :

IV. 5. 27.

He mentions it first himself. " I will kill your brother because he has taken away your wife."

3T«rai: sijmwri *wz rcreim: sun II IV. 5. 27.

Notice that he now used the plural number. Obviously he intends to use many arrows in killing Vali. They will never 28 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI fail of action. smTem ^l^niT: ftf^RTT: They are keen arrows that will never fail of effect. Now notice once more.

aflg qiRs* w #«i^n>?iqfl: II sftftfaia ^fli [qqCioifaq qla* i IV. 5. 29-30. I will fell him down with my arrows, with my keen arrows, with my well-directed arrows and I will do it today," says Sri Rama. grr^tf^cftq-JT; As keen as serpents. Now it appears therefore that at this point Rama was think• ing only of a straight encounter, of an open battle with Vali, for otherwise why should he think of many arrows ? Then Rama says to Sugriva once more :

3itfa a CR«qrft aq mqiq^iKOR II IV. 8. 21.

Once again he swears, " I will kill him and that too today." Sugriva then enunciates his demand.

g*ist qriwi w imww&iim: n q^iior Bstsq ft^aisftq $£mw n gai nw\ ^ q a^ aifaqirfq i*iqsi l IV. 8. 32-33.

He has deprived me of my kingdom and he says, " Ruma is dearer to me than my own life ; her he has made his own." In another place Rama repeats what he had stated about his "arrows" (plural) and says:

amrais q^rcpfiiflr qqa ftRiar: SKIS I afa^ qifefl %%n ftqfacq£a qftai: i a ^n^qtiR aq «?iqfqirn?,ir*i I aisa; s affqeqiqiew qi# ^ifo^r*;: n IV. 10. 32-33. Lectures on the Ramayana 29 " That Vali of yours, your enemy who has done you harm, will be alive only so long as my eye does not fall upon him. When my eye falls upon him, when he comes within the range of my vision, he dies." You see how Rama looks upon it. I want your attention to be concentrated on this point. Rama thinks that he should slay Vali at once, that very day. There should be no doubt about it. Then he thinks at the moment no doubt, of having a straight fight and of having to use therefore many of his arrows. Then when we come to the twelfth sarga Sugriva who misdoubts the personal strength of Sri Rama, who fancies that Vali was a giant in comparison with this human being, just asks him for some proof or test by which he could be sure in his own mind that his ally, Sri Rama, would really be a helpful ally, an efficient ally. So he proposes to him two tests with one of which we are not concerned at the moment. The other was this. There were seven sola trees standing in a row. Sugriva says, " My brother Vali is so strong that if he shook one of the trees, the whole tree would be bare at once. All the leaves would fall and he could do it with all the other trees as well, so strong is he personally." Sri Rama was somewhat piqued that this should be mentioned as something against which he must prove and measure his own strength. So, as if care• lessly, he took an arrow and directed it at the sala trees, ft pierced all of them. Then it went on to the earth beyond, pierced the earth, came back to its resting place. Sugriva was taken aback. I suppose he half regretted he had proposed the test to such a man. Then he actually falls at his feet and says to him, " How strong you are ! I never dreamt of this. So you can kill all the Devas if you will. You are extraordinary. 1 am proud of you. I am glad I have got you for my ally in this contest."

" Who is the man that can stand in front of you and fight you ? There is no man who can do it, because you have done all this, destroyed so many things with a single arrow." The single arrow idea comes in now, as between them in conversation. I want you just to lay hold of these little points. They are not little 30 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI because we are puzzled to find out the mentality of Sri Rama and we cannot go and ascribe to him all sorts of dishonourable motives. Let us therefore remember that now for the first time the idea of a single arrow comes in, the idea of how much can be done by one arrow, how much might can be exercised by a single arrow when it is directed properly by Sri Rama :

IV. 12. 11.

"I bow to you in reverence. You are the greatest and mightiest warrior I have seen. Oblige me by liquidating my brother today." Then they went to Kishkindha, and you know Sugriva challenges Vali to a single combat. Lakshmana and Sri Rama and Hanuman stand hidden in a thick grove behind trees. Vali being much the stronger of the brothers beats him almost to a pulp. And Sugriva looks round to where Rama could be seen. In the meantime, the poet says, Rama, seeing his ally in serious danger, took out his arrow and knowing that he was in great danger of life, desired to aim at Vali. But apparently Vali and Sugriva when locked together in single combat, were so alike in size, in complexion, in movement and quickness and so on, that he was unable to distinguish which was Vali and which was Sugriva. He therefore shrank from taking the fatal aim. He would not send his arrow lest he should kill the wrong person and bring his own mission into serious risk.

As he was not able to say which was Vali and which was Sugriva :

am * f^qi^ ifaaR-af* sun i\ IV. 12. 20. and as that one arrow was going to prove fatal, it would take away life and therefore he could not aim it. Then Sugriva flees for life ; he goes to his own place, Rishyamuka, where quickly the brothers join him with Hanuman. Then Sugriva gently up- Lectures on the Ramayana 31 braids Sri Rama, " My dear friend, if you had told me before that you would not kill Vali, I would never have gone out to challenge Vali to a combat. Look at me, in what condition he has left me. I am ashamed of myself, Why didn't you tell me before that you were not willing to kill Vali ? " Then Rama pleads. " I was confounded."

IV. 12. 32.

" With the terrible arrow I had in my hand I could have dis• posed of one of you. But suppose you had been struck, what would have happened to me, what would have happened to Lakshmana. to Sita in ? Think of that. By killing you who is my ally, I should be practically destroying the whole of my life and my life's mission.

IV. 12. 33.

That was my thought and therefore I refrained from killing Vali. Now you had better put on something to show that you are Sugriva, something to distinguish you from your brother and then go and challenge him again to combat. I will fulfil my promise."

IV. 12. 36.

" No more doubt about me."

IV. 12. 37.

" If you go and draw him out, challenge him to fight, then I will with a single arrow kill him at once." That was his promise. II—3 32 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Then

IV. 14. 1 the same thing the poet repeats. In a dense grove they stood hidden behind trees. Then Rama assures Sugriva once more :

are qifesgeq ft m %i =q m\ i

IV. 14. 10-11. " I will release you at once from the dread that your brother has caused, by one arrow, with one arrow and today." See how the idea of having a straight fight and the necessity of using many arrows has gone from Sri Rama's mind. He had repeatedly made a promise to Sugriva that as soon as he saw Vali he should be disposed of and with one arrow. This one arrow idea got hold of him apparently. It possessed him. Not to use more than one arrow to kill Vali. And repeatedly in the poem as we go on, we find the poet mentioning this fact that he killed Vali with a single arrow as a great proof of Rama's might. Now, ladies and gentlemen, whatever we may think, we are not entitled to assume that that was a mere oversight or acci• dent. It was something deliberate and it could not have been undertaken if it was incompatible with notions of honour. Let us go on a little. Of course you know that before Vali accepts the second challenge, his able wife, , tries to dissuade him. Tara uses all her rhetoric upon him. From her own son, , who was in touch with some spies she has heard that Sugriva has come a second time because he has secured the assistance of some mighty person, of some irresistible man. She has heard all that and Angada has told her everything about Sri Rama. So among other things, she tells him, finding that he was not willing to be easily dissuaded, she tells him everything she knows. She asks him : " Do you know whom you are going to fight with ? Not Sugriva. That fellow is only the combatant to be put forward. But you will have to fight Sri Rama, Lectures on the Ramayana 33

IV, 15. 19. a good gentleman willing to help the poor and distressed, the friend of all those who need help. He however is like the Fire at the Yuga's end. You cannot go and resist him."

ara^rwrew ft^tr mm; fig: (I sis?nlfa tt%-^i gqwwi^Jl RSFI i cT^ SRI =i ^ flClcRJf: II IV. 15. 20-21.

"You shall not go and tight him. Don't make an enemy of this Sri Rama. He has this, that and a third thing." I read these slokas only to show in what light Sri Rama appeared even to a person like Tara who had never seen him or heard of him except perhaps now. So she advises her husband to make peace with his brother. " Don't go and punish Sugriva ; make peace with him." And then she says : " Appoint him Yuvaraja." Apparently therefore he has not been Yuvaraja before though he had been king himself in the supposed absence of Vali. He has not been Yuvaraja. She says for the first time: "You appoint him Yuvaraja." But there is one thing she does not advise him. I want to ask your attention to that. You remem• ber how when Ravana consults Vibhishana, and other people, they advise him to give back Sita to her proper husband. Tara, who was advising Vali, in a similar situation, might have added, " Give back to Sugriva Ruma also because he makes a great grievance of it. The kingdom is one source of vexation to him. But this Ruma business is also a great trouble. If you want to pacify Sugriva fully, you must not only instal him as Yuvaraja but you must also restore his wife to him." The last one was one of the grounds of quarrel between the brothers. Why didn't Tara, so wise, so circumspect, why didn't she advise him then to do so? I cannot make it out. Now in this fight also Sugriva soon loses ground. Then seeing that he 34 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI was reduced to extremities, Sri Rama killed Vali with a single arrow :

Ifaiftsm qi$i ftqqici H^CTS II IV. 16. 33-36.

Now in that way Vali is disposed of. I have tried to show you that some extraordinary importance was attached to this idea of killing Vali by a single arrow. Also extraordinary importance was attached to his being killed that very day. Sugriva was getting impatient and felt many misgivings as to what was going to happen and when on the first occasion Rama did not aim the arrow, he went back somewhat reassured by Rama's solemn assurances but I suppose with a little doubt also still. So the thing had got to be done. It was not as if Rama could postpone the end or draw the struggle out that Sugriva may be filled with dismay, vexation and doubt. That was, it seems to me, perhaps the direction in which we should look for the reason. I would not be too sure of anything at this distance of time but it appears to me that some little light might be obtained if we paid attention to these considerations. Now who was this Vali ? Let us think about that a little. I do not say for a moment that Rama was diffident. As regards the relative strength of Vali and Rama, I do not wish to sug• gest for a moment that Rama was afraid of meeting Vali in single combat. Far be it from me to make such a suggestion. But the point is that Rama was not able as we know later on. to kill even Ravana very easily. It appears that at the last stage of the struggle things were so evenly balanced that the issue was really in doubt. The gods and the Maharishis who came to witness the battle were in serious dismay as to what was going to happen. They actually told , " You see the unequal combat between the two. Ravana fights seated in his chariot. Poor Rama stands on his feet on the ground. So you had better give him your chariot." And Indra did so. Lectures on the Ramayana 35 Matali himself brought it and he was the charioteer. Rama was given not only a chariot but a shield and a bow and new arrows — all these were supplied anew. Then, as you know, still the struggle was not even and it was not certain that Rama would win. So once more the Maharishts and others inspired to go to Rama's help. He came and in the ear of Sri Rama taught Adityahridaya. That had to be taught to him. Moreover at the last moment it was still doubtful and Matali once more told him. " I don't want to tell you much, but believe me, this is the moment for you to use the extreme, the most powerful weapon. Don't hesitate. Use the ." You see, ladies and gentlemen, however in fighting with Ravana. Rama often found his full strength tested to breaking point as it came to his receiving miraculous help. Now Vali was so much stronger than Ravana that in the Uttarakanda it is related how when Ravana was about to go and challenge him to com• bat, he discovered him in the southern ocean doing part of his xandhyn rites. Then it would appear that Vali knowing that somebody was behind him and not with a friendly intention, kept as it were the back of his eye upon him and as soon as he came sufficiently near with wicked intent he caught hold of him and put him in his arm-pit and so carried him to all the other oceans and finally took him to his own home and depo• sited him on the ground a thoroughly humbled and broken-down chap. Then Ravana burst out in admiration of Vali's strength.

VII. 34. 37.

sromra* ^aitf TS^I e33fffl I *raisfrs§q

" Hitherto I have known only three people who could do this mighty thing that you have done, namely, the Mind, and Garuda. Now I have had a fourth and that is yourself, to be added to this category." 36 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Hereafter Hanuman has also to be added : W*\ =9? I%* gR^nt qiqsfil?IcT: I

VII. 34. 40-41. " Come, let us go to the sacred fire and before that fire let us affirm eternal friendship to each other. Between us let all these things be shared alike. Now let us be such friends that we shall have no difference in all these matters. Let us be one for all practical purposes." The extraordinary thing is that he puts in there: a^n: ^T.\ That shows how in those days the wife was only considered an important item of the property. Then on that occasion Ravana lived in the house of Vali as though he was another Sugriva.

VII. 34. 44. That is, he was treated by Vali as a younger brother, fondled and taken care of. Now what do you think would have been Rama's fate if he had actually entered upon a straight face to face fight with Vali ? I do not say that he would have lost. No. That is not my point. But let us remember that the fight between Ravana and Sri Rama is described by the poet as having lasted for seven days, that there was no remission or relaxation of the struggle, that it continued to be of the same intensity all those days and nights, that there was no moment when either com• batant failed in his vigilance or in the exercise of his greatest strength.

VI. 110. 37. The battle lasted seven days when all these people were spectators.

%q w *T fax si^ =T ^ suns I VRT^nq»g« fawgqiw ll VI. 110. 38, Lectures on the Ramayana 37 Now if that was the case later on with Ravana, with Vali the fight would have lasted at least for seven or eight days. Sugriva's patience would have been lost. He would have been stricken with fear and Rama's promise to dispose of Vali that day would not have been carried out. And you know in the style of the battles of those days, when you have a straight fight, you do not kill your enemy straightaway. The first arrow never suc• ceeds. Your arrow is resisted by the other man's arrows and you try a second time, a third time, a fourth time. etc. It is only after the enemy is exhausted and you too are getting nearly exhausted, that the issue is finally decided. That would have been the result of a straight encounter between Vali and Rama. Never doubting for a moment that Rama would have come out victorious, it is at the same time clear that he would have to be carrying on for many days this well-maintained struggle and that perhaps by that time Sugriva would have lost his patience completely. Then our commentators go beyond the text a little and bring in other stories. I do not know whether I am justified in referring to them but one of much importance I must mention because there is some foundation for it in Valmiki's text. You know Indra gave a gold garland to be worn by Vali always, especially when he went to meet the enemy in battle This was believed to have some mystic power to make Vali strong and to assure him of victory. But whether it had anything more than that is not mentioned by our poet. But somewhere else it is narrated and Govindaraja brings it up.

3W 3® fl* fT33 ¥TI§*qffn% R|%OT ^lff*fwp5: II IV. 11. 39 (Commentary) " You will acquire all the strength of your enemy if he comes in front for battle." 1 do not know what truth there was in this or whether Sri Rama knew about it. But it is mentioned there as perhaps one of the reasons why it was necessary to adopt a manifest trick or fraud in this battle. Then the question is asked, as I said, why instead of making a compact with Vali, Rama should have chosen the weaker of the brothers. As a matter of fact, ladies and gentlemen, you 38 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI know how before Sri Rama met and disposed of him, he knew nothing about Sugriva. It was this Kabandha who for the first time informed him that if he went to Sugriva in Risyamuka, he would help him. Kabandha said. " There is no one who knows the entire world, its geography and topo• graphy and other things so well as Sugriva. He knows all about this Ravana. You had better ask him." And he further said. " Sugriva is a straight chap. He has been in trouble like you. He also has lost his wife. Therefore he would sympathise with you. You need his help; he needs your help. You are proper allies of each other. Go and strike a pact with him." That is why Sri Rama came in search of Sugriva. Between people in similar circumstances there is a subtle bond of sympathy. The fact that he had lost his wife endeared him to Sugriva. Rama thought, " That is the proper man who will understand my trouble." So each promised to help the other. What was Vali ? He was in the very height of his power, in supreme strength. There was no occasion for him therefore to sympa• thise with Sri Rama. I do not suppose that is a serious ques• tion though Vali puts it to him after his fall. He asks Rama. " Why did you not apply to me ? I could have asked Ravana to bring your wife here. That fellow would have run up here." But as I just now read to you he and Ravana had made such a close alliance, they held so many things in common, that it is very doubtful if Vali would have done it then. Now when everything was over it was very easy for him to say so. Why did not Sri Rama kill Vali at once, the first time they met ? I told you of Sri Rama's difficulty. But you see nobody is willing to believe that Sri Rama was really in doubt as to how to distinguish between brothers. As a matter of fact, no commentator believes it. Both the commentators say, " Oh, no, no ! Sri Rama could cerainly have drawn a distinction bet• ween the two." For one thing, when the fight was over and Sugriva was returning a humbled and defeated individual, he could easily have seen which was Vali. Besides Hanuman was there and why not ask him ? He would have told him easily. And besides, do you suppose for a moment that Rama could not distinguish his enemy ? So you go and find all sorts of other reasons. One man says in his ingenuity. " You see there is such a thing as a man's life fixed beforehand. Vali had a Lectures on the Ramayana 39 few more hours to live and so Rama kept quiet at that time and did not aim that fatal arrow.'' Then I told you how Govindaraja explains it. Govindaraja really says that Rama certainly could have known who was Vali and who was Sugriva but he did not care for the moment to do so.

Tilaka. IV. 12. 32.

So says a great commentator. Rama had some other thing in his mind. We do not know exactly what. We arc unable to define it. But he gave this excuse, that he was unable to dis• tinguish the brothers. It was a false excuse. So say both the commentators and it was an extraordinary thing that that should be done. As a matter of fact, to ascribe to Sri Rama this inability to distinguish the two brothers one of whom was so much stronger that he atways beat the other hard is difficult no doubt. But at the same time, ladies and gentlemen, 1 have a suggestion to make. It is bold of me to make it but I believe it is supported by the words of the poet. When the brothers were first locked in combat. Rama had not finally made up his mind whether he would go out and have a straight fight with Vali or whether he would from his place of covert position attack. Perhaps he hesitated at the last moment. " Am I going to do this wrong thing, this unchivalrous thing ?'' He might have hesitated thus. But he then quickly made up his mind remembering that he had made a promise to kill him at once, that he should not have the fight prolonged for seven or eight days and leave everything in doubt. For here is a famous passage which is of some importance, in probing the mind of Sri Rama. Sri Rama himself, you remember, says to Vibhi• shana at the last moment from his greater experience, " When you go to a battle with another, don't suppose that either party is sure of victory. Always a battle is a doubtful thing. You never know which party will be successful.

VI. 112. 18. 40 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI One side has not always won till now. May be your warrior is stricken by his enemies. It is only to be expected that he would come out victorious. In a battle victory cannot be pre• dicted as certain for either party." Sri Rama himself made this great enunciation. Why not ascribe to him a moment's doubt ? There is no harm in it. I should think therefore that on the first occasion when he did not aim his arrow at Vali. he hesi• tated for a moment as to whether he would not go forward and challenge Vali himself. But then probably he thought that that was not the proper time. May be therefore that there was a moment of indecision. Not at all unlikely. Well. 1 should say, ladies and gentlemen, while 1 have sug• gested a possible explanation. I myself do not see why we should not believe that Sri Rama did not at that time distinguish bet• ween the brothers. His word we have no right to doubt. But if we must doubt it and run after some explanation, perhaps mine is as worthy of your thought as any other. I told you of the naked imperialism of Sri Rama's doctrine. This is how he enunciates it:

*$qi^

frf qisqfa *?*?W TO: fleqqrgg: I s&fiffliqWs! ftfliigfl! ten n aw ^$$m?3i[ ^ qivfai: i iim ?*wf sfa*erwra^: II

IV. 18. 6, 7. 9, 11.

This whole earth belongs to the Ikshvakus. He calls himself a Parthiva not in the sense that he was ruling king but that he was a kinsman of a ruling king, and therefore entitled, he says, to constitute himself deputy whenever occasion arose and whenever some wrong was done. " As I belong to the Royal House of Ayodhya. I have jurisdiction everywhere and I may myself inflict the penalty on the wrong-doer." That you will Lectures on the Ramayana 41 say, is an assumption of power and authority which nothing can justify. Bharata did not appoint Rama as his deputy. But this is the comment that Govindaraja makes :

*Kfi* sri&r: eroisft ^IGWII We must not call this a lie.

cftpfowi fl?II55c3 fasffilcT I

It follows, he says, from the very fact that Bharata has assum• ed sovereignty that all his kinsmen had a share of that sove• reignty. They could and should go and do in his absence what he would have done if he had been on the spot. The comment in Tilaka is a little more clever. He antici• pates some of the points that we would make. He says as follows : First of all, Sri Rama says that he has got power from Bharata to do this. Therefore, although to our know• ledge Bharata did not give such authority, we may infer from it the existence of such a commission. Secondly, he says, " When Bharata was king, some of the power of the king also spread out to all his relations. So Rama had a share of it and he could have done it." Thirdly, he says what I pointed out before on one occasion, viz., that Rama had appointed Bharata Regent, and therefore might take power. As a matter of fact, when Bharata and Rama concluded their debate it was arranged that Rama should, in reality, that is in law. be king and that Bharata should only be regent. Therefore. Bharata held delegated authority and the man who delegated it certainly could act for him. You cannot dispute his right. Rama being himself the delegating authority could on occasion resume it whenever he liked. Now I will come to my last point, about Ruma.

*m «im m\ %q $m I IV. 18. 13.

Rama says to Vali, "Your brother, Sugriva, is junior to you. You must regard him as your son. When you appropriated his 42 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI wife, therefore, you were really doing the wrong thing with your own daughter-in-law.''

IV. 18. 22.

I mention this prominently in the last part of my talk today because there is a point really in this. You remember, ladies and gentlemen. — not that 1 told you — but you remember in the story of the Ramayana, later on when Sita has to be taken back, Rama assumes a terrible mien, sends for her in the presence of the world and then solemnly addresses to her words of repudiation, all because the world may think and say something bad of her. He says to her, " Who will say that you are pure, having been under the control of that wicked, remorseless man for one whole year, who will believe it if I lold it ? No, I cannot therefore accept you as my wife, to be queen when I am king, 1o be accepted as the head of your sex." He had the most abundant, clear and sacred evidence from Hanuman himself as to the condition in which she was, how she struggled against Ravana. He had all that evidence in his possession. Nevertheless, he mistrusted her for a minute and on the strength of that thin, indistinct twilight suspicion he had the hard-heartedness to reject her and tell her cruelly, " Go anywhere over the world. I have no more use for you. Do what you like with yourself." Now remember he tells Vali repeatedly that he is a WT^wrnfaiETT^: " You have taken away your brother's wife ; you have taken away your daughter- in-law ; you are living in unlawful union with her. You are a wicked man. 1 must punish you and death is the punishment for you." Well, what must Sugriva have had in his mind as to the honour of his wife, when having known that she was living with Vali, willingly or unwillingly, having known that she was living with him as his wife, he begged Rama to kill his brother and give his wife back to him ? What do you think of that wife and what do you think of that husband ? Rama himself, mind you, says this to Vali, " You are living with her." So there is no doubt that her purity had been destroyed. But what did Sugriva actually do ? He did not make her go through the fire ordeal ; he did not wait a day or two. No prayasehiita, Lectures on the Ramayana 43 nothing. He simply took her back and when Lakshmana goes laden with a terrible message from Sri Rama, he finds that Sugriva was locked up with Ruma. This was what he saw.

3 €\a qi&wr nit nw*n$i mitmw: \ Slwlsmfitogw fan®**! QWSU^^ li IV. 33. 66.

He was in that condition. He was embracing Ruma tight. Then Lakshmana enters and sees him in that edifying posture ! Here the poet draws the following contrast with his great sense of humour. Both were visalanetra. Only Lakshmana's eyes were wide open because he saw this extraordinary sight, something thoroughly unfamiliar to him. And the other fellow also open• ed his eyes wide because Lakshmana discovered him. Sugriva therefore was not very scrupulous about this matter. A wife who had gone from him and lived with the brother in concubi• nage is brought back to him and he takes her back. 1 do not say such things do not happen. They do happen, alas. But no one who has so lost his wife would go and make such a terrible complaint of it to another person and ask him to kill the other fellow in order to give the wife back to him. Was it merely a jewel, was it merely some article that another man had taken away for the moment? It was a wife, dearer than one's own life. I do not mind Sugriva's conduct so very much. I want to draw your attention to Rama's apparent inconsistency. For him to have restored Ruma, who had lived with Vali, to her original husband and known that that husband took her back and lived with her again as her husband, for a man who knows that and killed Vali in the process, what was his own attitude to his wife and when, in fact, all that he knew was that she had been helpless as a captive in the control of a most wicked man. who one was known all over the world for the way he had raped other women, for the cruel manner in which he had behaved to others. Rama was so considerate to Ruma and to Sugriva but he had not an iota of compassion when he came to consider his own wife whose innocence was blazoned forth to all the world. IV REPUDIATION OF SITA

Wt have to consider today the episode of Rama's repudiation of Sita after the war with Ravana ended. Like the Vali epi• sode this particular part or. the Ramayana is also the subject of keen controversy. Some authorities hold that Rama need not have repudiated Sita as he did. Others believing that Rama could do no wrong try to make out that his conduct in this matter as in others was above reproach. It is difficult at this distance of time for us to decide this question and nobody will have the presumption to believe that any remarks that he offers will be considered to conclude a matter which ages have dis• puted. Still, as intelligent persons studying the Ramayana with reverence and with attention we may traverse the familiar ground, not in any hope of receiving new enlightenment but with the idea that we may know what could be said on both sides. Let me at the outset dispose of two points raised by students entitled to reverence. One is somewhat extraordinary, not justified by Valmiki's text at all but based on other works of lesser authority, claiming however to interpret the incidents of the Ramayana faithfully. The story according to them is that when Ravana appeared in Janasthana to carry away Sita, the real Sita disappeared entering Agni and the Sita who figures in the subsequent kanda?, right up to this repudiation by Sri Rama and the ordeal by fire, was a . This has been vouched for by great authorities and there are larger numbers of people among us who like to believe this story. But it dep• rives the epic of all interest. We cannot be interested seriously in the adventures of a mere Maya Sita. I think it is very diffi• cult for us to persuade ourselves that when Rama and Laksh- mana bemoan their separation from Sita, when they threaten Sugriva with death for not carrying out his promise to search for Sita, and when subsequently, not finding her. they weep and weep, all the time it is only Maya Sita that they are bothering about. I think it is extraordinary that any people should Lectures on the Ramayana 45 believe that the Sita of the greater part of the tragedy was a counterfeit Sita and should still interest themselves deeply in her fortunes, elated when she rejoices and grieved when she suffers. That, I think, is an impossible position. 1 therefore discard the Maya Sita story as entirely unfounded and calcu• lated to take away our interest in the whole of this drama. There is another little point also worth mentioning in the beginning in order that we may follow the text without being diverted. That is perhaps a point upon which I may not com• mand your assent even to the extent that I perhaps do over this Maya Sita story. But whatever it is, 1 had better clearly indicate my preference. 1 do not think I shall read the actual words but the point is that there is a certain set of orthodox people among us, who venture to think that the disparity bet• ween the sexes in respect of character and title to human sym• pathy, that the disparity between the sexes in these respects and similar respects is very very great indeed, and that to a woman however exalted and pure, separate protest is not allow• ed, courageous speech is not allowed, independence of judg• ment is not allowed. They go so far as to think that even Sita being after all a woman, must be treated as subordinate to man and not entitled to take her own ground upon matters of importance. She may be right or she may be wrong in particular spheres. But wrong or right is not the question that people would consider. They will say, " She is not entitled to independent judgment.'' They point out that when seduced Rama away and Lakshmana hesitated to go after him even after the most pitiable counterfeit cries were heard, Sita forgot herself to such an extent that she ventured to use harsh language to Lakshmana. ascribed very very bad motives to him. assailed his character, began to beat her breast and so com• pelled him to forsake his duty to watch over her and go after Rama, abandoning the person who required protection and going to the protection of a man who certainly did not need any protection. To that extent Sita drove Lakshmana and our great supporters of the theory that one sex is so much superior to the other, go to the length of saying that by disrespect, by improper ascription of motive to Lakshmana, Sita incurred such a heavy sin that all the misfortunes that came to her subse• quently were punishments for this npachchara. Well. I think. 46 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI ladies and gentlemen, that theory is not entitled to much res• pect at our hands. When I deal with the character of Sita upon a later occasion, I shall venture to say a word or two in defence of her in this particular context and in other contexts as well where her conduct has been criticised. For the moment, how• ever, we may dismiss this story too. that the poet intended the woes of Sita to be read by students as so many different ways in which she was punished for the extravagance of her behaviour. Now we shall follow the text a bit, not quite to the extent that we did on previous occasions but just enough to indicate the state of mind of Rama and Sita during this scene of tragic distress. Even before Sita appears before him, the trouble in Rama's mind seems to have begun. In telling Vibhi• shana to go and bring Sita, Rama expressly says, " Ask her to bathe and perfume herself. Let her put on scents and come to me bedecked with all the jewels she has." Vibhishana tells her this message. Sita is perplexed. She says, " I would rather see him at first as I am, soiled, grief-stricken, tear-bedewed, miserable. Don't ask me to bathe and put on my jewels and appear as though I have been leading a gay life. Let me see him as 1 am, that is, as I have been here." Vibhishana per• haps thinking that he had already seen signs of trouble on Rama's face, tells her, " I think you had better follow your husband's order." Perhaps admonished, Sita does as she was bidden and when she appears before Rama, she is carried in a palanquin. You know the usual noises of people on such occasions. — some armed with clubs and sticks going before and asking people to move this side and that and perhaps letting the clubs fall on one or two persons' shoulders, thus raising a hue and cry. Somehow or other that displeased Rama. Says he. " Don't molest these people. They are my people. Let them see Sita. There is no harm. A woman is protected by her conduct and by her character. These things, the signs of royalty, the pomp and circumstance of a royal household, they won't help. Screens do not help ; enclosures do not help. The best protection of a woman is her conduct and here now when there is distress and misery and the end of a cruel war, let her come. There is no harm. After all she appears where I am. That is certainly not blameworthy." So saying Rama shows great agitation. Though Lectures on the Ramayana 47 he speaks sternly, his head is bent and turned in one direction. And as he speaks apparently against the institution of purdah but irritated that Sita should be hidden at all from people, every• body there including the allies, Sugriva and Vibhishana, and Lakshmana himself — all are seized with fear. They think that there is electricity in the air, as they say. Rama is not easy in his mind. There apparently is some trouble. Sita approaches him. She is taken down from the palanquin and at Rama's bidding walks a few steps and approaches him. Standing as she was just in front, you can well conceive her eagerness to look at his face and read her fate. As she looks at his face, some• thing alarms her as it has already alarmed all the people there. She sees that she is not coming back to the warm bosom of a loving husband from whom she has been separated for a long time. But she is apparently moving into a court of high judg• ment in order to hear sentence against a criminal. The speech with which Rama opens the interview, if you may so call it, is not calculated to compose her agitation. The speech divides into two parts. In the first part he makes it out that he has done his duty, that he has vindicated the honour of the Ikshvaku family, that he has established his prowess, that he has destroyed the man with his followers who ventured to insult him by carry• ing away his wife. The disgrace is wiped out. " But," he says to her. " remember. 1 didn't do all this for your sake. No." When he comes to that passage Sita at once sees that a tragic fate awaits her. So the poet says she looked up and her eyes seemed to indicate the kind of mortal dread which a stag or hind shows when the huntsman has sent his fatal arrow. Then Rama intensifies his hostile attitude. He knits his brows with the severity of a magistrate

awtfta tfrat w *mxm\*i 11 IV. 118. 12. and then his heart burst in twain.

gpiswwwfii fff^r n (The Bombay Edition) n—4 50 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI might go and reside under the protection of one of these people. " That is what Rama meant,"' says the commentator. Ladies and gentlemen, my opinion is that there is no need to soften the language here. Rama meant harsh things. He was angry. He was dissatisfied. There was trouble in his breast. He suspected her fidelity without a doubt and he therefore says to her, " You come to me with a stain. How can I take you ? I give you perfect freedom. You are no good to me." And when a man speaks in anger, he says anything. We have all known angry people say absurd things. Haven't we seen how even a fond mother who combs the hair of her daughter every morning with the greatest pain, using the best oil she could get and the softest comb, dwelling with pride on the way the hair grows from day to day and speaking with pride of it and its regular growth to her neighbours, haven't we heard a woman of that kind when she is in anger saying, " When am 1 going to see this lock of hair on fire ? " Such things are not foreign to our experience. When a father is angry, when a mother is angry, when a husband is angry, there is no limit, there is no limit to the language used. You may say, " Can we ascribe such things to Sri Rama ? But my whole point, if you have followed me these days, is that Sri Rama was just a human being and when he was angry he said foolish things. When he was sorry he wept bitter tears. There is no doubt about it. There is no need to soften the language, for see what follows. This is the final word he says :

*T If ftf l\m\ €|t l^q^qf q*IWl |

VI. 118. 24.

" You know what an angel you are, the most beautiful woman on earth, the most captivating. Ravana is a fellow without any restraint whatever. He is just a beast. Do you mean to say you could have lived in his house for a year under his protection and at his mercy without his having defiled you ? Is there a possibility of it ? " He puts her this sharp question ^ f|

Lectures on the Ramayana 51 own trusted messenger, Hanuman, had seen her and brought him reports how she resisted Ravana and his advances, how she defied him and how she always took his (Rama's) name in reverence and begged Hanuman to tell him of her. " Tell him," she says, " tell him of me. 1 am constantly thinking of him. I have no other thought. 1 am living just for his sake. Tell him I have taken a promise from Ravana that he should not touch me for a year and I hope that before the year is out, 1 shall be rescued." Therefore, there is no reason for believing that Ravana could have touched her. He has given her a year's respite. Even supposing that Rama has not heard that Ravana lay under a curse that if he attempts to rape a woman against her will, his head would burst to pieces, he certainly heard from Hanuman what sort of life she lived surrounded by those Rakshasis, living only in the hope of being rescued by Rama nd living in the hope that the rescue would come before the ^ar of respite was out. He had all this testimony before him and still he chose to employ that language. Later on, when fter the fire ordeal was over and in the presence of the great ods Agni himself handed her over to him saying, " Here, take Dack your wife. She is pure, pure in every sense of the word. She has not sinned ; she has done nothing which could be called infidelity to you. Take her, Rama," and he takes her, then amongst other hings he says. " I didn't suspect her. I never had a doubt about her conduct. Do I not know that by the fire of her own conduct she could have burnt that chap if he had attempted violence ? Do I not know that Ravana would have risked his very life if he had attempted to do wrong to her ?" He says all these brave things afterwards when she has been handed back to him on the highest possible authority. If you give hundred per cent value to these subsequent pro• testations, you must convict him of some insincerity and pre• tended harshness in this speech when he actually repudiated her. The two things are certainly inconsistent, that is to say, on first appearance. But, believe me, ladies and gentlemen, the true way of interpreting is that Rama swayed this way and that. Examine your own hearts and suppose you were in similar cir• cumstances. You would have hesitated too. On the one side he felt that all was right and that he was not behaving properly when he accused her. But. on the other side, as he thought 52 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI of the possibilities, as he thought of the unscrupulous wicked• ness of Ravana whose harem was full of these women taken from all the world over, as he thought of that and as he thought of the beautiful woman that stood there before him, his anger over• powered him. He swayed between these two feelings and at first the worse feeling prevailed. He lent himself entirely to these sinister thoughts and under their influence insulted Sita beyond endurance and repudiated her in the presence of the world. That repudiation was sincere. There is no doubt about it. The subsequent repentance was also sincere. Now once more examine your own hearts. When you have been wronged and are in doubt, when subsequently everything turns out well and all people smile round about you and you are inclined also to pat yourself on the back for having been a fine fellow, would you not say. " I knew this from the beginning, didn't 1 ? There was something in me that told me that she was all right and that I had no business to suspect her." That is to say, one feeling prevailed at first. The contrary feeling prevailed when the sun shone bright and the world was again all right. There is no reason to suppose that when he first spoke he was insincere or that when he spoke afterwards he was insincere. Both times he was sincere. Only at one time one feeling prevailed and at another time the other feeling prevailed. Perfectly natural. That is the only way of interpreting it and I have practically no doubt in my mind that the poet intended to show us that Rama was just like other people in such terrible and trying times. The worse feeling prevails for a time. But subsequently when the evidence is overwhelming and the whole world turns upon you and says, " What a grand fool you have been," you begin to say, " I never was a fool, I knew this from the beginning." Let us also remember that in Rama's first speech to Sita there were these harsh sentiments piled one upon another but there was not an order that she was to undergo any test or give any proof. The proof he had already constructed for himself and he acted upon it. He condemned her and asked her to go wherever she liked. He said, "I have no use for you," as good as saying. " If you die, I am not going to care. Whatever may happen to you, I do not care." Having said that, he left it to Sita entirely to defend herself. She says after protesting that that was not the language to be used by a noble husband to a noble wife. Lectures on the Ramayana 53 after protesting that she was not her own mistress when Ravana touched her,

VI. 119. 8.

" It was not because I wanted to touch him and see how he felt, that I came into contact with him. It was forced upon me. Don't you see ? And yet you say these things to me as if I was a common woman and you were a common husband." She upbraids him in strong language and then this is how she begins :

VI. 119. 6.

She does not use the language of an unfaithful wife.

^ *5ftoif fr^|<07 3T||rl ftf I

VI. 119. 7.

Well, all her pleadings did not avail with Rama. Then finding that on his face there was no relaxation, no abatement of seve• rity, she turns to Lakshmana and says, " Now there is no course other than the ordeal by fire. Go on, let Agni blaze. I will find refuge in him. That is the only remedy for this kind of misery."

wsito^araffen Tiff sftwasw ll VT. 119. 18.

" Set up a pyre, let it blaze. That is the only remedy." Then says the poet, although a hush of the deepest misery and the greatest awe fell upon the whole audience, Lakshmana and Vibhishana and Sugriva and Hanuman and , the old bear of eternal wisdom, not a voice was raised in protest. No- 54 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

body dared to say a word against Rama's conduct. This is what the poet says :

Everybody turned his face in another direction. They did not even look at his face. Even to look at his face they were so afraid. Everybody quaked. I told you this before as proof that Sri Rama had established his moral supremacy over the whole world to such an extent that he could do anything he pleased. Even against the most wrong thing nobody dared to say a word. This kind of thing happens again in the Uttarakanda which I shall presently refer to. As if to show that after the whole tragic drama had been gone through, everybody's heart relented and all persons were anxious for a reconciliation, the poet says that at the end of it all, amongst the gods, the old father Dasaratha himself appears and he speaks to Rama and afterwards he turns his attention to Sita and then — he calls her daughter, not daughter-in-law — he calls her daughter and says to her. as if this plea was required.

Don't you be displeased, don't you be angry with Sri Rama because he abandoned you.

IV. 122. 34.

Rama was anxious to do you good, to clear your character before the eyes of the world and therefore he abandoned you and he was made to say, " Go your way, you are no good to me. Don't take it literally and don't be displeased with Rama on that account." That again only follows Sri Rama's change. This too is all after the event. When the tragedy had been gone through when Sita's heart had been wrung once with despair and all things have turned out well, then of course each person is anxious to put the best face upon it and to say all things have turned out well, "Don't entertain any more ill-feeling this way Lectures on the Ramayana 55 or that. All persons must have meant well.'' Well, upon this occasion Rama's conduct has to be explained by his suspicion of infidelity. Unfounded as it was, it was still there rankling in his bosom. In the later incident there was no such heavy justification. It was all because of certain slanderous tongues that were busy in the streets of Ayodhya. Reports came to Sri Rama that his subjects were discussing his conduct pretty freely and that they were saying things like this to each other.

533 U^i qqi qui: EFflqftl 3JHig*I*i I

VII. 43. 13.

These sons and daughters of purity venturing to discuss Rama and Sita say to themselves — little tongues wag, don't they ? — they say to themselves, " What sort of happiness can he have sleeping with that woman who has lived for a time in Ravuna's house ? How can he enjoy ?

sfcsi a*q ffimswm^ §

VII. 43. 17.

How does he not shrink from a woman who has been taken to Lanka by a and who has lived among Rakshasis ? " And then this is the way the poet shows his consummate know• ledge of human nature in this passage.

3TCqffiRiq" Vi% fl^fiq *?iq*qft I " Tomorrow or the day after when our women misbehave, we must also put up with it."

311 1% *RI 5J3TI ?l»?33e7fT || VIT. 43. 19. v$ srgrVii 3p*rr q

3i?cTficm ^ a q|% eiaf gsf q?TfaifiH li VII. 45. 10.

My heart tells me that she is pure. There is such a thing as a good name and a bad name.

frciqqts: gusitfTir *,*q^q =q i 31^li$W *fiq

This is extraordinary, difficult to believe. It would appear, according to Sri Rama, that if only certain persons made up their minds that one individual was behaving disgracefully and spoke ill of him, such a man is damned in the other world also, whether justly or unjustly, the poet does not say. You have only to be slandered by a certain number of people who may be persistently spreading infamy against you, that is quite enough apparently.

qfl5q3|i*iJi@ta|:i qrq'^5^: qqfifqa I

So long as that ill-fame lasts,

VII. 45. 13.

A man who has lost his fame on earth is abandoned by the gods. They also slander him. All people exert themselves in order to get kirti" Lectures on the Ramayana 57

VII. 45. 14.

This is spoken by Rama to his three brothers. He has sum• moned them as soon as he heard these slanders. " I shall abandon my own life, take my life " *JGJTT«I 3T

ft g*

See the place assigned to Sita in the gradation. " I should kill you, I should kill myself in order to rescue my name from infamy. " What about Sita ? Sacrificing her is not so big as sacrificing "the brothers because as I told you. the theory was in the old days that any woman was only the private property of the husband, completely at his disposal. The thing goes to this extent. If she is treated roughly by a fellow like Ravana. if her character is spoiled, it is not she who is hurt, it is not she whose name is damaged, it is her husband's. His name is marred, his reputation is gone, his family is traduced. So he is bound to take revenge. That is the old theory. You and I must recognise it when we deal with these old stories, these heroic fables, where under the influence of jealousy crimes of a very black type are perpetrated. In judging of these people you must remember that the independent existence of a woman was not recognised. Now in order to show you that that is the proper way of interpreting Rama's conduct towards Sita upon this occasion, I will give you the testimony of another great poet, Kalidasa, not that I place Kalidasa above Valmiki in these respects but that we are on safe ground in interpreting Valmiki as proved by the fact that such a great interpreter also as Kali• dasa himself says :

Having found that this stain on his reputation could not be removed by any other means. 9T*»l'tT3,% irremovable 58 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI by other means except by abandoning his wife, Rama desires to re-establish himself and his great name by abandoning his wife. Then follow some words of the poet.

Raghuvamsa, 14. 35.

These Kshatriyas. whose sense of honour is fantastic, carry it to a romantic extent, dwelling in regions where it is difficult even to breathe for ordinary human beings ; for the Kshatriya's sense of honour is extraordinarily drawn out to fine length until it becomes so tenuous that you and 1 cannot appreciate it. That is their way. Ladies and gentlemen, I have been speaking to you today of a violent human passion. Of all feelings that agitate our mind, of all feelings that make them forget themselves and become beasts in carrying out its dictates, jealousy is the worst, jealousy where your wife's honour is concerned and you suspect that something wrong has happened. Then you forget all decency. No notion of any kind can deter you from taking the last step of vengeance. Jealousy is one of the worst pas• sions known to men and it is the worst of all when a man has genuine greatness, when he comes of a high family, when he cares for his honour, when he thinks that his wife is handsome and, though faithful, might be coveted by others. Then it is that a true and noble nature descends to the most violent action. Sri Rama, therefore, under the influence of this jealousy, decreed the complete abandonment of Sita and told her. " 1 have no more use for you. What happens to you I do not care. Your conduct I will not examine ; I will not be responsible for you. The ends of the earth are open to you. You may go anywhere you like." When he said these words he meant them. It is the noblest man, it is the man who cares most for his honour, it is the man whose personal dignity is of the highest kind, it is he who. when he is torn by these feelings and suspicions against his wife, is capable of doing the worst things. V SUGRIVA, THE TRUSTED FRIEND

SUGRIVA'S career portrayed in the Ramayana divides itsell into two halves, a greater and a lesser. The earlier is the lessor half. During this period Sugriva has to attain his position. He has lost what was his, and he was always overshadowed and ever over• awed by an elder brother who was his superior by far. He has to find his way cautiously. He distrusted people, he had no confi• dence in himself, and having to seek allies, he was. generally speaking, in a position of disadvantage. When he had got over his difficulties and come into his own, his tone, as it were, became stronger, and we find him both speaking and acting more firmly and more like his own self. It is strange that at first when he saw Rama and Lakshmana, he feared they were the agents of Vali, sent to compass his ruin. He expresses his misgivings to Hanuman. Hanuman does not share them, and he chides him almost in language which seems surprising to one who was only a trusted minister. Hanuman was the most distinguished of them all. but the others also were very considerably able, Nalu. and Tara. I want to read a sloka in which Hanuman expresses his astonish• ment at Sugriva's distress in order that we may draw from it a useful lesson.

3I?[ 5TH3ISmq sq^JR^ gq^R | sgRmaqifnw * wwm qr *^i n IV. 2. 17 " By showing this weakness you have really shown that you are a monkey. " We have to remember that Sugriva and Hanuman were two of the greatest members of their tribe. Ordinarily they would not account themselves as greatly inferior to men. At any rate, when they talk to each other, they will not speak disparag• ingly of their own tribe. Kapitva should not be to them a term of reproach, though it might be amongst men. It is surprising that Hanuman should say that, as though he were deriding the very stock from which he came and of which he was so distinguished 60 rt. HON'BLE v. s. srinivasa sastri a specimen. Thai it was a man that wrote the poem is the secret that we should learn from it. He ascribes to the speaker, forget• ting for the moment that he was a monkey, sentiments not likely to have been uttered by Hanuman and Sugriva. Rama and Sugriva. as soon as they made up their alliance, began to repose complete confidence in each other. At any rate in the beginning, complete confidence was expressed in each by the other :

wsisffl R s£r §s *r #i II IV 5. 16-18

Having gone round the fire, held each other's hands and sworn mutual fidelity, they looked at each other steadily for a while, and were satisfied, each thinking that he had chosen the proper ally. They said, " We share our sorrows and our joys alike.Please remember what Ravana said to Vali when they became friends. If you have forgotten it. let mc remind you. Ravana says.

VII 34. 41

Some of you may think that this, from the Uttarakanda, is not of the same degree of authority. But our commentators have a way of quoting the Uttarakanda when it suits them and not mind• ing it when it does not go in their favour. But it strikes me as strange that Ravana should include 5ftr\ * suppose this is only an extravagance of language, perhaps, showing us in what regard Ravana held the numerous members of the harem. Then we find a simple thing which has led to a strange com• ment in some enlightened circles. You will see that as they enter - Lectures on the Ramayana 61 upon their friendship, Sugriva puts searching questions to Rama, and Rama does not answer them himself, but bids his brother Lakshmana to answer them. This is in observance of a regular rule of etiquette in palaces. A king should address only kings of his degree of importance, and ministers should address ministers. This is somewhat disconcerting, and so it has led people to think that Sugriva really offered an affront to the greatness of Rama, and that some of the misfortunes that came to him later, were the result of this disrespect on his part. There is no reason for thinking in this way at all, for we find Sugriva plucking the branch of a tree in order that he and Rama may sit together, while immediately after. Hanuman does the same and bids Lakshmana take his seat with him. There is nothing to show that that was intended as any disrespect to the majesty of Rama, and I am not willing to believe that this natural pairing off should have led any• body to suppose that Sugriva was at the very beginning of his friendship guilty of a piece of insult, either deliberate or uninten• ded. Then. Sugriva is considered guilty of a piece of concealment when, being asked to say where Ravana could be found and what sort of strength he had. he says :

ST srft ft*5q 33*11 qiKSjg: 1 Hlfleq i3s?iR q(fq sVjaqtq 31 §®H ||

IV. 7. 2.

Sugriva says that he is not in full possession of details regarding Ravana. He puts the statement rather widely and it is not suffi• cient to convict him of anything like wilful concealment. I myselt think that the terms are a little too wide, for Sugriva could not have been so ignorant as these words seem to him. He certainly knew much, but not sufficient to induce confidence at the moment in Rama's mind. Of course, if the Uttarakanda be taken into account, this is a very clear violation of conscience. There it is distinctly stated that Ravana stayed for one whole month in Vali's palace, just like Sugriva. as a member of the family. Then it would be incredibly wrong. But I would hesitate a lot before I brought a charge against Sugriva of infidelity at the beginning of his contract, because in the very passage he says 62 RT. HON BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

IV. 7. 1

Sugriva is unable to talk clearly. So he is not likely to launch at once into a piece of falsehood, and Rama had no suspicion what• ever that anything had been kept from him.

IV. 7. 15

Rama wept, it seems, and look his upper garment and by the end of it wiped his tears.

IV. 7. 18

This is clear proof that there was not on the part of Sugriva any subterfuge and that there was complete understanding between Sugriva and Rama, and that each had perfect confidence in the other. No reserve of any kind could be traced. Then, you remember my pointing out, perhaps contrary to the current belief of superficial readers, how from the text it is clear that Sugriva gave orders in good time for the search to be started. He wanted his monkey forces to be summoned in good time. Then f did not point out, as it was not necessary at that time, what he had actually done. Not only did he give orders that the monkeys should be assembled in a fortnight, but, furthermore, he bade Hanuman. or Nila, Commander-in-Chief, or perhaps both together, to attend to the rest of the business without intermis• sion ; and there was no need to refer anything to him again. I think that clears him of all charges of neglect ; and I did mention before how Lakshmana, having learnt the truth from the lips of Tara herself, apologises in full measure for having used rough language and for having been discourteous. Lectures on the Ramayana 63

ifcT sqq^qf gRjffq^

Believing that in this business everything would be proceeded with all right, Sugriva retired into his palace. Of course, his mistake was that he lived his riotous life a little too ostentatiously for the comfort of Rama, which he should not have done. If he was a considerate person, he would have realised that his benefactor was most unhappy yet, and that therefore his enjoyment of his new-found happiness should be a little less noisy. Sugriva was a person, therefore, in the first part of his career, of great caution and would not praise people readily. This appears also a little later, when, along with Lakshmana, he expresses his desire that Vibhishana should not be taken into the confederacy. He did not like that a man coming straight from the arms of Ravana should, without further trial of a very stringent character, be treated with confidence, thereby showing the utter contrast between his nature and Rama's. In fact, Rama had the good fortune to be surrounded by extremely good people ; great chara• cters were all around him. Nevertheless, in many respects they served as foils for his own character to shine even more splen• didly. We must remember that perhaps Valmiki did it on set pur• pose, to show how no man is great, but there is a greater, and there is a far greater. You can have a Sugriva, you can have a Vibhishana, a Bharata or a Lakshmana, and yet, over and above them all and without their deficiencies, you can have a character which reaches very perfection. It is just to show that that the poet has brought round Rama these great characters. It is a part of the poet's design. This is how Rama enunciates his doctrine which none of these people were able to understand at all.

sf^q srqsnq m\v%m ^ m^li ll 3TOq g|^*qi i^l*qc?^H ^^ I VI. 18. 33-34

Here is a man who has lost his kingdom and is going to a strange country with monkeys, and he says, " I am going to offer protec• tion without reserve to anyone who just comes and says ' please

TT—5 64 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI I do not want anything more. From all dangers, from all enemies, I grant such persons full protection ". It is the height of bene• volence, almost unimaginable. Then as if that was not enough, he implements it in this sloka.

9n=nW ^iwm«i *w\ u \kmm 31 §£[3 3i? 31

fifij^ ]ki £[3tfm §3T3£ I!

VI. 18. 36-37 " Is this a wonder ? You are, of all princes, the ideal, the strongest and the best. If you should speak thus, it is no wonder. " Then he proceeds, — here the good nature of Sugriva comes out:

W 31% FTTFTAOW. H

wtimi Rfrmsr: sfe-i =31*3% T: II VI. 18. 37-38 " My own inner feeling says that Vibhishana is all right. So recommended, we are not going to resist him. Let him join us, and you will find that we treat him exactly like one of us. " No more difference, no more distrust, no more lack of willingness to help or be helped. Lectures on the Ramayand 65 When all this about his excessive caution has been stated, please remember Sugriva's greatness of soul. So soon as they came to the sea-side, before yet the bridge was constructed, he says.

vi. 2. 10-11

He gives a promise to Rama. Being a great chieftain conscious of his own prowess and with full trust in his own strength, he assures Rama. " Now that we have come to this place, wait till we see Lanka. Let us only see that man Ravana and I will bring his corpse to you. The moment he becomes visible to us, remember he is a dead man. " That was the confidence with which Sugriva spoke. Then a little later, Ravana sends the messenger Suka to perform the third of the four expedients. Ravana bade Suka to draw Sugriva away from Rama's side. So Suka comes and says something to Sugriva by way of inducing him. Even the poet does not refer to what passed. Sugriva sends a spirited answer. He would not be turned aside from his duty by a friendly, but wicked person.

3iR^ irow asi-js^: * flsfe w\k n

3f f =3 flgcH WSlfa 6^c*q flfH I) VI. 20. 23-24

" You have been no good. You are Rama's enemy and therefore my attitude to you is that you ought to be sent to destruction even as Vali was. You deserve no better. I am going to kill you. I will make a bonfire of this Lanka and reduce it entirely to ashes. " J will now take you to a consideration of a remarkable exploit by Sugriva. While yet the general battle was not joined, when they had gone only to Suvela and could see Lanka and all its defences, when the moon shone full in the sky, all went up and from there took a survey of Lanka. Strangely enough, Ravana 66 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRIN1VASA SASTRt appeared there, giving orders, perfectly at ease, but, in his turn, surveying the hostile army that had established itself. Suddenly it struck Sugriva that he must redeem the promise that he had made. Being a hero of true mettle, without further thought of taking leave of people, up he jumped to where Ravana was and challen• ged him to single combat. Compared to this, all the boxing matches that we see pale into insignificance. In fact, throughout the Yuddhakanda we see how Valmiki — for he must have been a warrior perhaps in spirit — is able to describe innumerable bat• tles in innumerable different ways. There is no doubt a family likeness, but the variety of combats on the one side and the way he matches strength with strength is astonishing. Here the battle between Sugriva and Ravana is described through a long sarga in very fine and spirited language. Sugriva says,

VI. 40. 10. " You know who I am. Rama and I are allies. 1 have come here to assist him in his cause. He regards me as an ally, as if I were a co-ordinate part. Really I am his dasa. Though in his judgment an ally, I am truly at heart his dasa. " When they came together in Kishkindha. they embraced each other, and between them there was only equality. Sugriva himself tested Rama more than once. See what time has effected. He has seen Rama, his character, his prowess, and has sunk relatively to a position of attendance. He no longer regards himself as an ally. In the combat he plucked Ravana's diadem. Ravana became angry and not being able to overcome Sugriva, he adopted his maya tactics. Sugriva knew that Rama deprecated that kind of trickery, and so he must not meet maya by maya. Thinking that he had done enough to humble Ravana, he jumped back to where Rama was and took his posi• tion on Rama's side. The commentator takes advantage of ^TUq^H VI- 40- 29, and says, "he was ashamed to come and stand in front of Rama, but went to his side. " Clever, but by no means convincing. Then Rama remonstrates with him. " How reckless you are ! You are second in command. After me you are the chief. You go and risk your life like this for just a little scrap. You have done wrong to do this without taking counsel of any of your colleagues. You have exposed us all to Lectures on the Ramayana 67 serious danger. When you were there still struggling and had not returned and everything was in doubt and no one knew what would happen, while I looked on, this was the conclusion that I was coming to. " Supposing the worst happened to Sugriva, I am not going to retreat from here. I am going to do my mission here. I will kill Ravana, recover Sita, make Vibhishana king in Ravana's stead. And then I will go back and instead of anoint• ing myself king of Ayodhya, I will anoint Bharata king and end my career'. " Sugriva utterly confused, could only say in defence m mw%m mum. \

VI. 41. 9 " When I saw the person who took your wife away by force, how could I keep quiet ? A strong fighter like me, I could not help it. " Then we come to another scene in which Sugriva figures, I do not know whether to say in glory or in a dubious light. Kumbha- karna had come into the field of battle, almost like a hill in appearance, rugged like a hill too, by no means an easy customer even for Hanuman or Sugriva. When he came, what he did was to open his mouth, catch hold of monkeys and put them in. There are two or three sargas in which Kumbhakarna and his extra• ordinary size and strength are spoken of, and his deeds almost crude in conception, are given in very interesting detail. But somehow or other, nothing surprises these warriors. The ordi• nary captain comes and matches himself against the renowned warrior. When Kumbhakarna came into the field, Sugriva marched against him. Though Sugriva was himself a big monkey he was nothing by the side of Kumbhakarna. Kumbhakarna simply put him in his arm-pit and, knowing that he was Sugriva, the commander-in-chief, he said, " I have finished this host. I may go back and proclaim my triumph." And walking back in comparative ease and security, he just pressed his arm and was crushing Sugriva. Hanuman who was much the stronger of the two. saw this from a distance. For a moment he struggled within himself. " Here is my master caught. Am I to look on and not help him ? That would be wrong. But Sugriva is a mighty monkey, he knows how to escape, some expedient will occur to him. If I go and rescue him, he will never forgive me after- 68 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRr wards. This will also be published abroad that Hanuman had to get him out of some scrape." And as Hanuman had predict• ed, Sugriva knew how to escape. What he did was to struggle hard and just reach the nose of Kumbhakarna. He bit it off, and having done this, as he had sharp nails, tore off his ears so hard that Kumbhakarna had to drop him in sheer annoyance. Up he jumped and came back to where Rama was. Sugriva had many exploits to his credit. He killed three of the biggest giants of the other side. The poet gives three Rakshasas to Hanuman, three to Sugriva and three to Angada. The Rakshasas whom Sugriva brought down were Kumbha, Virupaksha and Mahodara. Hanuman had better heroes. The poet himself is in a joyous mood in describing the slaying of Mahodara. Instead of saying harsha, he says harusha (VI. 98. 38). It is not alone the metre that compelled it. but some spirit of enjoyment in describing this hilarious scene. Now, I come to point out one of Sugriva's greatest characte• ristics. From the very beginning they had all ascribed to him great severity, cruelty of punishment. The smallest fault will be visited with capital punishment. Curiously enough, in the whole of Ramayana, Sugriva is not mentioned as having remov• ed anybody in this way. But everybody was afraid of him. There was a case when he might have lost his temper and ordered the destruction of hundreds of monkeys, when they all went to the Madhuvana and destroyed it. When Hanuman had returned in triumph and narrated his story, the monkeys lost their heads, went into the Madhuvana where Sugriva had appointed expert gardeners, ate all the fruits, destroyed the trees and drank all the honey away. The warden of the park who was at the head of the guards, Dadhimukha, seeing that Hanuman and the host of monkeys let themselves loose, remonstrated with them, but they had no ears to hear. The poet says that in order to show their utter contempt for these guardians, they exhibited their back to them. It was reported to Sugriva, but hearing the extent of the damage and the participators in the work of hooliganism, he said to Rama and Lakshmana, " Please be easy. These monkeys would not have let themselves loose like this unless they had seen Sita. Though they may be guilty, I am not going to punish them, for they have done a great deed which it was our desire that they should do," Lectures on the Ramayana 69 Now I come to describe one of the shadows, as it were, in so brilliant a character as Sugriva's. Here I am going to point out how in spite of his great qualities, there was something in Sugriva calculated to show that he was at one time a somewhat weak character, apt to give way to weakness. Before Hanuman jumped across the sea, before even the monkeys had come across and he had given them a hint as to where Sita was to be found, when they had just come out of Svayamprabha's cave garden, the monkeys, not being able yet to know how to get to Lanka, not being sure that Sita was there, found that they had exceeded the time limit, and imagining that their heads would all be off. made up their minds that they would enter on a fast unto death. And Angada was the one who recommended this course of self immolation as the most honourable. Then it occurs to Tara, maternal uncle of the young prince, that they need not do so, and he suggests that they may all go back to the cave. Angada seemed to lend an ear. But Hanuman. who was the minister of Sugriva, took alarm at this state of things, and wishing to dissuade Angada from such a course, holds out all sorts of inducements to him. So he says to Angada, " Sug• riva has done so many things to you. After him you are going to be king. He will do you no harm. Therefore let us all go back." Angada remonstrates.

*qq mi w:?fa«?i35rwTO!3ra*i I mefjq&q w ^ $m*ih 11 jsngtsq^q si *n*)t war flight faqm | sqor JHCTC q*g tfiwifa igfaer: (I Era H t-rn suafer q* wiar neimm I SSWTimiigffi* ftfH %m u IV. 55. 2-4.

" Is he a hero and dutiful brother, who knowing that his brother was inside the cave, closes the cave by means of a huge rock and walks away to become king and the husband of his wife ? " No doubt Sugriva thought at the time that it was not Mayavi that had been killed by Vali, but that it was Vali that had been killed by Mayavi, What grounds he had to think so, the poet 70 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI does not say ; nor does Sugriva himself say. He saw blood come out after one year of waiting. It might be the Asura's blood or not. Sugriva imagined that it was Vali's and hoping to shut the evil Rakshasa in, he put a huge rock. But we cannot forget that people might ask, " If he was not sure, why not make sure by walking in ? Why did he not take his mon• keys ? " People must have put that question and come to their own conclusion. Only we know that the poet does not make an open censure of Sugriva's conduct, but gives a charitable construction and says that he was by no means anxious to become king, but that his ministers forced him to do so. He allowed himself to be hustled into the kingship. I want to tell you that at this stage of his career he was a little weak, and undeveloped yet. When two courses are open, each plausible, each capable of being presented in an agreeable way, the tendency is to choose the easier and more advantageous course. Sugriva fell into that tendency. Angada, a dayada and the son of a man who had been killed, took the more sinister view. How can we blame him ? Sugriva was certainly hasty and chose the easier course always which gave him advantage. Angada denounced Sugriva not only for base treachery to his brother Vali, but for black ingratitude to his sworn ally Rama.

IV. 55. 5. Here, Angada was wrong, as we have seen. Rama and Laksh• mana came to know the truth about what Sugriva had done to assemble the monkey hosts and apologised to Sugriva. But Angada was not willing so to excuse him and he was quite wrong. The facts were within his knowledge ; nevertheless he accuses Sugriva of having forgotten Rama and what was due to Rama. Again, Angada asks : " Was it the fear that he would be ungrateful and unrighteous if he did not send an army, or was it the fear of Lakshmana's arrow ? "

enftsfTiffin tfm? w *H II IV. 55. 6 Lectures on the Ramayana 71 " Fear dictated this course, nor dharma" says Angada. Even here he was unjust to Sugriva. Angada adds,

IV. 53. 30-31.

" I do not believe that Sugriva made me yuvaraja. It was Sii Rama." That was true. Angada is justified once more in this statement that it was Rama who made him yuvaraja. " I have also done a wrong," says Angada and

e 15 flf *isrr TOST sqia^Rri II qrafq*q(a 5°s=T cfte'fa $afaw I IV. 53. 31-32.

" If I go back, Sugriva will remember that I am his dayada, that I am waiting to become king after him. So he will give me the severest punishment." Then the poet says something very significant. When Angada says all these things to Hanu• man and the other monkeys, he tells them, " You are free to choose. Though, for my part, I think I must enter on this fast unto death, I am willing to abide by your decision." He places himself at the disposal of his men, of their more mature deci• sion. This readiness to own immaturity of thought pleased them so much that the monkeys took his side.

aw ^rarata* ^5at qiawi: n

§£(q %q «3Tflfa«j snssrc. n IV. 55. 17-18. They all said Sugriva was a usurper, and Vali was a good king. I am inclined to think that in saying this the monkeys gave expression to some story that must have been fairly believed in at that time. 72 RT, HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Then is given an estimate of Sugriva's great might, of the enormous forces he enjoyed and brought into the field for the help of Rama. It is most amusing. Having killed Vali, Rama bestowed all this on Sugriva. He became mighty at once through the help of Rama. He who commands such forces cannot be defeated in battle. VI

VIBHISHANA VINDICATED

I WISH today, talking to an audience in sympathy with Valmiki and his general ideas, in sympathy with our great traditions, that Vibhishana should be possibly saved from his detractors, and presented to you in what I consider to be a correct light. I hold that Vibhishana was a good man according to the standards of his time and is a good man according to the standards of our time too. Let me make my meaning clear by devoting a part of the time this evening to an illustration of the chief elements of Vibhishana's nature. The first question that occurs to me is, who is a traitor? In common parlance today, a traitor would be one who betrays his country or his nation to the enemy who has invaded the country and makes war upon it. If Vibhishana, seeing Rama, knowing his nature, knowing how he was the exemplar of human virtue in the world and how he was there to save humanity, and realising the majesty of such a character, was drawn to the service of that super• lative person and took himself away from his narrow and crude and wicked surroundings, is that to be regarded as a sign of human depravity ? I really fail to understand. That was what Vibhishana did, no less. That is the point I wish to impress upon you. Unlike other people who thought that Rama was only a good man, Vibhishana thought that he was an ideal man, the best man of his time, the greatest hero from whom he should not only take an example, but whom he should serve and obey. If, listening to that divine voice, you do not feel drawn to it, if, confronting such a great man before you, you do not feel impelled to bow down before him, a man whom you ought to follow to the ends of the earth, for God's sake do not blame the man who does that. Deplore your own weakness, bewail your backwardness, but do not blame the man who rises far above the feeling of his time. I am perhaps stressing this point much too much. You may ask me, "Did Vibhishana reallv think of this world patriotism, this citizenship of the entire earth 74 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI you are thinking of ? " No, I do not claim that. What I say is that while Vibhishana perhaps did not understand this uni• versal patriotism as we do, did not envisage even Lanka as the very goal of his efforts, he watched Rama and Ravana, found the one to be base metal though a kinsman and a brother, who attracted him with good food and clothing and an honourable place in the royalty of the land. But what was all that beside Rama ? Ravana combines all the wickedness of the worst kind with actions that degrade mankind utterly. There are some who say, " If Vibhishana thought that Ravana was not a good man to serve and live with, let him get out of Lanka and live somewhere else in India and be a quiet person. Why should he help Rama ? " That is what said to his uncle. This question has been answered already. A man must be either good or bad. One has no right to be neutral, unless one thinks that both sides are equally good. But the whole difference is between good and bad, between Dharma and Adharma. A man who hesitates when a supreme crisis is upon him, when the forces of good are contending against the forces of evil, when the world's fate is hanging in the balance, when he can serve the cause of the good, can he instead of choosing the right place and the right sphere of action, simply fold his hands and give up his claim to individual life ? I have not known many people act in that way. And that could not have been Vibhishana's attitude as between Rama and Ravana. I think it is not right to suggest that neutrality might have been the best attitude of Vibhishana, As I said, neutrality is under• standable if it serves the purpose of the time and the place itself. If the forces of good and evil are about equally balanced and you are unable to decide on which side you should throw your weight in order to make the good prevail against the evil, you must decide. Join the fray you must ; keeping out of things is impossible. I have never known, even in fiction, if a great character has been that of a neutral. In one of Lytton's novels, there is in one of the closing chapters reference to a great figure of the time, a nobleman who might have played an honourable part in the affairs of the day, who, however, not feeling that he was drawn decisively to one side or the other, remained neutral. Perhaps that is the only instance which even the writer of stories has imagined. Those who say therefore that when Lectures on the Ramayana 75 he decided to abandon Ravana, Vibhishana should at least have tied up his things and remained neutral, do not understand the dignity of human nature, do not understand the purpose for which mankind lives on this planet. There are those who say, "Let him join Rama, but why did he make himself so active and stand by the side of Rama and point out Kumbhakarna, Indrajit, , etc., and expose all the secrets of Lanka and its defences at critical moments of the war, and give his highly valued advice and assistance to Rama ? That is only a question which sounds well in the asking. Join• ing Rama, he was quite right in doing his best on that side. He was there to ensure the victory of Dharma over Adharma, of virtue over wickedness, the triumph to the side into which he threw himself. Then another question is put. Here too my answer is straight. People say, " Let him throw all his energies and abilities to bring about success of that enemy and the destruc• tion of his own brother. But why should he make himself king ? Could he not say that he did not want to be king ? " Because in the text of the poem there are references to the rajya as having inspired the efforts of Vibhishana, and Vibhi• shana himself is made to say once or twice that the fortunes of the war were on the side of Ravana. I shall make only one large observation now, in the light of which we may study the text. How could Vibhishana renounce the kingdom ? He was the sole man alive. In that island of Lanka besides the young people and the very old people and widows and orphans, all the fighting men had been killed, and there was no member of the royal family except himself, and the four ministers with him. And what was Lanka ? Would it have attracted anyone as a kingdom to rule over ? After that terrible war in which everything of value would have been destroyed, what was there to make a mart desire to be king? When all the monkeys who had been luckily on the side of victory went in the Pushpaka Vimana to see Rama and Sita crowned, from Lanka only Vibhi• shana went; there was nobody else to go. What can be a more vivid proof of the utter desolation that had come to that land ? To say that Vibhishana was a very ambitious, grasping man to take Lanka greedily is wrong. If he took Lanka, it was in the highest sense of duty and service, it was because a stricken 76 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI land wanted a wise, honest, and straightforward ruler. This is how I prefer to understand it. It may have been a desire to rule over Lanka, but he desired it only because there was no other fortune for that island except to come under the influ• ence of a man who knew how to distinguish between good and evil and desired to further the interests of his people. Even that desire to take the kingdom was a proof of the unselfishness of Vibhishana, not of his selfishness. That is the character to which I shall draw your attention in my next address. I shall read the relevant portions of the text, so that you may see that what I have said here was entirely in illustration of the text. You will probably see that I have not been very wide of the mark, that I have not whitewashed his character more than 1 should have done or that I have depicted his character as one of transcendent quality. I really believe that I shall invite you to do justice to Vibhishana's character and nothing more. For that great character to be called a traitor, a betrayer of his country, an ambitious, greedy man who was prepared to sacrifice his kinsmen and the brother to whom he owed everything is to misunderstand it. He did not betray his kingdom so that it might become the property of the enemy. Rama was going to leave it in the hands of a Lanka man, so that there was not the idea of a betrayal of one's own country in order that it might be the slave of another country, subject to the political ills of foreign domination. VII RAVANA, GREATNESS WITHOUT GOODNESS WE have come to the second great character in the poem. Ravana stands contrasted with the hero. He is well matched. Greatness and goodness are different things. They do not always co-exist. In some characters they mix in good propor• tion. They are the salt of the earth. By example, by achieve• ment, and by influence on history, these rare men who combine greatness and goodness are our saviours and prophets. But they are a few. Ravana belonged to the class in whom great• ness does not co-exist with goodness. But greatness has its own attraction. In fact it has a fascination for the mind of humanity which is in many ways a danger. Those who read lurid novels and accounts of crime in America on a colossal scale will have experienced the thrill that accompanies the perusal of a great criminal's doings. Even crime, if performed on a grand scale, attracts the human mind and holds it in thrall. In fact, this is considered one of the great evils of the spread of the cinema. Novels and stories of misdeeds that lead to terrific consequences, murders, burglaries, abductions, kidnap• pings done on a great scale with ingenuity and careful planning beforehand so as to baffle the police and leave them always in the lurch, stories of these great crimes exercise upon our minds and imagination what is called fascination. However much our conscience may disapprove, the eye refuses to close itself to the spectacle. The mind is held down, and even pure minded people do not close these books of lurid crime, while they go on cursing the authors. Well, Ravana was a criminal of this abnormal type. But when we say criminal, we do not deny to him qualities of a rare kind which contribute to make for greatness. No man can be a criminal without having qualities of mind and brain of an extraordinary type. We shall study Ravana's character therefore with great interest, although morally speaking it is reprehensible, and then perhaps we shall discover, wherein what we specifically distinguish as his greatness lay. One more pre- 78 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI fatory remark. Ravana and Rama constitute a contrast of a very sharp kind. Rama was a rare type of greatness and good• ness combined. Ravana had greatness without goodness. But that is not all. Ravana had reached the peak of his power before Rama came into existence at all. In fact it was after many tens of thousands of years of his career that the gods and sages, unable to bear the violence of his crimes, called upon to rescue them from him. It was then that the incar• nation took place, the four-fold incarnation, so that you see how Rama was a mere baby when compared with Ravana in point of age. By the most generous reckoning for which the poet gives data, Rama must have been between thirty-nine and forty, when the great battle between him and Ravana took place in Lanka. Ravana had by that time performed his penances and wrung from the gratified deities enormous powers which he used for mischief and made himself such an abhorred criminal that he had to be hunted down. Moreover, another peculiar thing worth noticing is that in our poem, Ravana plays a part only for twelve months. Within that period a great deal of his activity is comprised, and the story hurries forward from crime to crime until the culmination is reached. If Rama was a child in comparison with Ravana, what should Sita have been ? She was a tiny tot, nothing more. Yet, it was Ravana's senti• ment towards her which constitutes the substance of the poem and makes the whole of the tragedy. A man over fifteen or twenty thousand years of age falls in love with a little girl of about twenty or twenty-five and then the plot begins. What an extraordinary thing! Few people have perhaps thought of the oddity of the crime, and yet we find that when Rama and Sita deal with Ravana, they deal with him almost on an equal footing as though they were people of the same age and of the same calibre. Yes, it is a curious thing. It was perhaps inevi• table for the plot that Ravana's misdeeds and cruelties should have reached their climax before his enemy was due to come into existence. But it certainly is worth noticing that the plot turns upon a love which an old man, or if you like, a mature man, conceived for a little girl. Now we shall see on what a grand scale Ravana's character is drawn by the poet. First, I shall deal with the long and arduous penance which Ravana performed to obtain his great Lectures on the Ramayana 79 powers, which do not seem to have been confined to human beings or to divine , but seems to have extended to the Devas and subdued nature herself. Here is a reference which might be called funny made by when he tried to strike a blow for Sita. Jatayu says to Ravana, " I am an old man, but you are still a youth. (That is strange, but we must remem• ber that Jatayu says that he was sixty thousand years old at the time. If Ravana was only twenty thousand years old, Jatayu might well call him a young man in comparison.)

fq^mut

ciqitq^rq fitful *\ qiqtq|% || jf %m

" I have been reigning over this world of birds for the last sixty thousand years, and the kingdom has come to me through gene• rations. I am old. No doubt you have age ; the strength of youth is in your favour. You can use the bow and arrow. You are seated in a grand car. I am without these advantages. Nevertheless, I won't let you go with impunity, carrying away Sita. So long as I am alive and look on, this crime shall not be perpetrated without due punishment." Now, a word about Ravana's penances. It was out of the common, even for these mythical stories. He was born with ten heads, and it would appear that at the end of every thousandth year of penance he sacrificed into the holy fire one of his heads. In this way he sacrificed nine, when nine thou• sand years were gone. When the ten thousandth year was gone, he was about to cut off his tenth head and put it into the fire, when was gratified and asked what it was that he want• ed. Ravana asked for Amaratva. Brahma said; "I could not grant you that. Immortality is not for you, but you may ask for invulnerability by sections." And then Ravana asked that nobody should be able to kill him who belonged to the Devas, Asuras, Rakshasas, Yakshas, Kinnaras, Gandharvas. Pannagas II-6 RT. HONBLL V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI and so on. He mentioned a lot of these tribes. Then the story is that he did not mention men. as he thought that men were too contemptible, and it was not necessary even to conceive of them as being capable of killing him. Jt is not clear, the accounts vary. There is one account given in the , and another in the Uttarakanda, but the difference is very inte• resting. Whether Ravana mentioned men and said, " 1 do not want protection as against them " and excluded them that way, or whether he mentioned the other categories omitting, men, is not clear. This is from the Uttarakanda.

wqisi AANSQSJ ^RRRAF =q u

rWJfll (I rf SltfWl Rl^l^q: 11 VII. 10. 19-20.

" From these 1 ask for safety. I do not at all think of other categories, men and others of the sort. (You must pay a little attention to udayaha.) They appear to me to be so worthless that I do not think I should ask to be free from danger from them." In the Balakanda the story is somewhat differently told :

q*r gBisw^srai ai^fgi^si: n

fTR[[q$*qr i$*q> *q *TFW fll^S II

I. 16. 4-6.

Omitting men only, Brahma gives him abhuya from the rest. Ravana treated them with contempt, and therefore did not include them in his vara. So when they spoke to Vishnu, the gods said, " He could be killed only by a man, not by any other being." Then the question arises : in the Uttarakanda the word used is tTT^TCq: If Ravana did not think of men at all. Lectures on the Ramayana 81 is it likely that he would have thought of ? He must have treated them with still greater contempt and omitted them from the scope of the vara. There is a little clue ; it is full of interest and is worth pursuing. When the battle was well on and the rival armies were ranged against each other for a decisive combat, Hanuman stood before Ravana and challenged him. In challenging him Hanuman used the strange words,

ancqcq eqqi 5T[^ q[*ft*q*g % || VI. 59. 55.

" You have obtained safety from all these sections. But you are still in peril from my race. So I can kill you." So begins Hanuman. The question is, could Ravana have asked Brahma about vanaras at all. for according to a sarga in the Balakanda. the race was created only in order to assist Rama in the great war. They must have come into existence only later on. They must be younger than Ravana, so that if Ravana did not men• tion them, it is no wonder. But then the poet leaves us in a kind of insoluble puzzle, as he always does. Vali must have been perhaps much older. So must have been Sugriva, . Nila, Mainda. Dvivida. having drunk amrita with the Devas. It is impossible to suppose that all the monkeys were after Ravana. The dates get confused, as all figures do in the Ramayana. Now. that some monkeys were in existence and had become even famous is clear from a certain statement made by Ravana in the Sundarakanda. His messengers bring him news of the terrible havoc that Hanuman did to the city after he had seen Sita. When Ravana hears this strange news, this is what the poet makes him say :

ssi ut &m «p qqr fagsfofim: I

sftSS ^RWmW q =qi?q fetq^q: | V2 RT. HON BLE V. ii. SRlNlVASA &ASTR1

* STOICS |t ?r ^qqR^Tsri I

V. 46. 10-12. " I have myself seen many powerful monkeys. The accounts that you give of this new monkey are so extraordinary that they seem to transcend these. I have not heard of this monkey. This Hanuman that you speak of is a powerful creature, more powerful than 1 have heard of any belonging to the monkey race.'" So the monkey race was in existence at the time appa• rently, and certainly Ravana had heard of them. However that was so, is it right for Ravana to say that he had not heard of Hanuman ? Hanuman must have been quite a strong youth when he came to Lanka in search of Sita ; and when he was quite a baby, he ran after Surya when he was in eclipse, and then Indra had to come to save the sun and the chayagralia also. At that time he struck Hanuman on the left cheek, and Vayu became very angry because of the mischief done to his little baby, and he held his breath so that the world came into a position of suffocation ; no movement was possible and there was great consternation ; a big council was held, they all went to the chief of the gods, and Vayu was pacified. Hanuman became at that time the recipient of a great many boons. Now this story of a little baby running after the sun and causing tremendous fright to all the gods, Vayu holding everybody down without breath and the gods assembling to confer on little Hanu• man so many boons is an event of such colossal importance in nature that Ravana must have heard of it, because Ravana was a man that dealt with these gods. The poet says that Ravana was of such greatness that when he came out, all the gods were terrified ; the sun moderated his heat, Vayu would not move about violently, the sea stilled its noise, rivers ran slow, moun• tains forgot to be hard, and so on. Nature was hushed and in a state of mortal terror when Ravana was about. If that was the case and all these gods had been in peril on account of Hanuman, this story must have reached Ravana's ears. For him therefore to say that he had heard of Nala, Nila, etc., but not of Hanuman is something which it is difficult to square with other parts of the story. But there are such incompatibilities in the poem — even worse ones than this. Lectures on the Ramayana 83 Now Rama was a mere man, it is true, but early enough in his life he had given great proofs of his superhuman qualities. He had made his mark upon earth, and the entire inhabited part of the earth must have been aware of his greatness, his marvellous skill as a rival, his power even over nature, and his ability to stand strong and unruffled against the embattled world. Still, although there were many who thought Rama even at that time to be an avatara and spoke of him habitually in that way. it is curious that throughout the poem Ravana never once recog• nised that he was anything more than a mere man, and that even among men, he was anything very considerable. Proof after proof came to him ; still he would not be convinced that there was anything out of the common in this Rama. viu

RAVANA. THE MIGHTY DURING our last meeting 1 described how Ravana began with despising Rama as a mere man, but after several reverses at his hands, changed his opinion and ended by admitting that Rama was not merely his equal, but his superior. That, how• ever, does not do justice to the great ability of Ravana, and that will be my theme today. At first Lanka belonged to Kubera, half-brother of Ravana, while Ravana and his associates lived somewhere in patala. After Ravana had achieved merit and became powerful, he was induced to recapture Lanka. He drove out his own brother and obtained from him the great chariot called pushpaku. Thereafter he established himself in Lanka as his capital, and from that place as centre, conducted a series of campaigns in the three worlds (Trilokavijaya). Nobody of note escaped him. Among his great conquests were the great gods and Rishis. His greatness was not confined in that way. Under him and always at his side were Rakshasas nearly as powerful as he, who had to their credit the conquest of many gods and powerful people on earth. His brother Kumbhakarna was almost his equal in physical strength, and but for the fact that he handicapped him• self by prolonged sleep, would have probably been such a power by the side of Ravana that to destroy him even greater efforts might have been required than were actually put out. Ravana's son Meghanada was so skilled in the arts of magic that he was the prince of kutayodhis, warriors by craft. He was a great man at throwing oblations into the fire in order to get them to those from whom he expected great boons and periodically great assistance. In that way he became so great that in one of his engagements he captured Indra himself and brought him away as captive to Lanka, from which it was on the earnest solicitations of Brahma that he was released. In consequence he obtained the great name of Indrajit and at the same time other boons as well; so that when we think of Ravana's great• ness we have to think of it as vastly multiplied by the greatness. Lectures on the Ranutyunu 85 on u slightly smaller scale, of people about him. He had a son named Atikaya who was also a very great warrior. It is difficult to believe that a kingdom could have been brought to such a high pitch of prosperity without Ravana intro• ducing a system of ordered administration. He must have been not only great and powerful, but he must have had conspicuous merits as a ruler. The description that the poet gives of the city, the way it was ordered, how it was a city famous for its learning as well as tor its splendour, the way in which Ravana was followed and obeyed implicitly, how he held his councils of war and so on, all these were not merely brute strength, but a great deal of what wc must call Rajyatantra, skill in manag• ing great kingdoms, men and their resources. Then too. we must remember that the poet represents him as having been next only to Sri Rama in strength and skill in war. Lakshmana was twice beaten by him with the weapon called sakti and brought to death's door, from which both times he was rescued by the oshadhi. It is therefore fitting that Ravana should be regarded as next after Rama the greatest and most skilful warrior of the time. While among the vanaras, Sugriva and Hanuman were quite equal to having a scrap with him occa• sionally, they could scarcely be regarded as having been strong enough either to beat or destroy him. That was left only to Sri Rama, and even he found it by no means easy. He had to be assisted in the last stage by the great Aditya-hridaya, taught to him at a critical moment by Agastya. that moment synchronising, if you remember, with that very moment when Ravana was moved away in his chariot by his driver. The two protagonists seem to have come to the end of their tether at about the same time. Also Indra had lent Rama his own chariot and his charioteer, his shield and a marvellous bow and arrows, so that we are to regard Ravana as having been nearly equal to Rama until overthrown in the end because of the divinity that was in this warrior. We have not got to go to the text and see how the poet gives us an idea, sometimes himself and sometimes through the lips of his great heroes, of Ravana's greatness. In the Balakanda we have the gods complaining to Mahavishnu of how Ravana had grown rapidly in power and how he did mischief to high and low without distinction and without intermission. 86 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRJ

sgqui qsn^ OT^R^M siswfaaqT I eiftsimin |£q1 q^i^r mrsa: II

qq: JTfiqffT qii 3im *T fll^a: | •q^iKfli^ a ?sr eg^isfq =r q^qar || a* ?q qigqr ^fqi aft 31^02*1 II 9jqsq |qefR«oTl 3Tlt *IWl I I. 15. 8-10; 20-21. " His ambition is grown so great that he desires frequently to knock Indra himself on the head. He alienates and throws into enmity all the three worlds, and nobody can rise above a cer• tain level but Ravana grows jealous of him immediately and tries to destroy him. Intoxicated with the boons conferred on him by the gods, he is oppressing everybody. The great gods who are ruling the universe, keeping it in order, are afraid of him. Surya dare not warm him ; if Vayu goes near him, he shrinks within himself ; even Samudra stills his restless waves if Ravana is near. You must go and assume the form of a man, for if as a God you go to fight him, you cannot prevail against him. We have come to implore you to take man's form and go down and kill him. He has become uncontrollable, and nobody can restrain him. His wickedness and his cruelty exceed description." When he comes to Sita, he comes in the form of a mild Sanyasi. Notwithstanding that, nature seems to have recognised him even through his disguise, I suppose, because there was something in him of super-human strength which he could not himself suppress or conceal. For when he came near,

agq>3r:^nioT arqwiswr ?*n: 11 emsfq sr ffs»q% *r n*\m ^ msai I

sfiwiRi* a

srrq |?fq?r W «riwn: I Cioit sro fgKrpn^nwa g*g*i

Mahanataka.

" This is not the time for reciting the Vedas here, stand out and stand mum. You, Brihaspati. who are fond of showing eloquence, you must talk very modestly. This is not Indra's court. Narada, do not use your Vina, put it up today. Ravana is not himself today, so you must not disturb him. He has been struck by an arrow of unusual shrewdness. That arrow is the parting line of Sita's hair. From the moment he saw her, he is not at ease with himself." That was the Ravana to kill whom Vishnu had to take birth amongst men. Now how did Ravana strike those who saw him, those com• petent to judge him. men who belonged more or less to his class ? The poet gives us a description of how he impressed Hanuman when he first met him in his own court. Seeing him. he exclaims in wonder ; 88 Rl. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

^w£\ flWnil §icT: I

qqqiif q q^qj^ *qi3jq TOSW I

3iw a^Hta q^fasfaf faa: i FIR ftwjfa «a?qwgiq;i: HIWIRqi: II 3fq ir^ifT sis: ^gq^iorq I Rr-at ^giq^iqqi^'RiaqR q;fq: n €B?qi w«6?i5rw sroiqRiRaisw II V. 49. 17-20.

Hanuman moralises a little. " This king of the Rakshasas has got all the elements of greatness combined in him. For a per• son who is so great as Ravana, he ought to be a protector of heaven itself. Indra and other people must be at his feet. What keeps him down to some extent and prevents him from attain• ing the fullness of power is his adharma. He does not employ all his power to push righteous causes to fruition. He knows no restraint, perpetrates all kinds of impropriety. If in this world adharma were not a source of weakness, this man would be the master of everybody up and below. By his continued career of cruelty and unscrupulous use of power, he has made everybody his enemy, and all the good people arc against him." Hanuman who could judge of real greatness had all this thought passing through his mind when he first cast his glance at Ravana. It would be interesting to know what Ravana thought when he saw Hanuman. He does not keep us waiting long. Hanu• man had been reported to Ravana as having destroyed a part of the town, and as having killed a great many Rakshasas. amongst them his own son. So when he looked at Hanuman he understood the greatness of the person. He says, "At one time when I went to Kailasa. I saw Nandi and laughed at him. Has that Nandi come here in the shape of Hanuman ? " Or it may be, he is Banasura come here in this shape." That is how the two great beings looked at each other for the first time. Lectures on the Rumayana Then when Ravana had gathered together his vast forces and come to the first encounter with Rama and his army, Vibhi• shana stands forth pointing out to Rama who was who. At the end he came to Ravana himself.

3f%* wjiisfaqffRticm §qi3*nfa n

3?#i frtfiSi ^ssfo^rcqi ^is^««fiqfl»fiq*w: I

VI. 59. 24-25.

I want to draw your careful attention to this point. The poet wishes us to regard Ravana as a truly great person, not des• picable, not hateful, nor worthy of our contempt as it were ; and that comes out strongly in his comparisons and similes. He compares Ravana in this sloka to Rudra himself. He compares him to Surya also. When Vibhishana fully pointed out Ravana. Rama took in at a glance the nature of the enemy he had to kill. What did he think ?

vi\ siffi wmm tratw?: 11 aflfeq & c^sji ^HlWlRT *!30T: I §3q« c5$rc §rw ^q rtotefliferi n

VI. 59. 26-28.

" You are unable to see the man just as you are unable to see the sun. The eye shrinks. I am not able to see him clearly. It is so surrounded by splendour. Even to the great gods such a resplendent beauty is not vouchsafed." If a man by mere sight could impress Hanuman and Rama in that way. then there is no measure within our poor minds by which we can really have an estimate of the man. After he had been killed. Vibhi• shana speaks of him, 90 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

foq Rugg * sn^S: §h eim: qi^* I

tRlft IH^3 flqiqfllft qdOqfH^a ^ ^INcTlf^ ||

^llfcafilW flglfiqm q?l'cW: ^IJW^q: |

<^*q qg; aancitq f»?q aa; q.Sfcsim aq »gr?ia II VI. 112. 22-24.

" This person who is now dead had no equal hitherto. Wher• ever he went, whomsoever he engaged in battle, he conquered and killed. Just as the samudra rolling the waters stops only when he comes to the shore, so Ravana having met you and encountered you, has been checked and there he lies. This person has done things in his life which mark real greatness. He has given with both hands bounteously to beggars. He was a man of very generous disposition. There is nothing that he has not enjoyed in his time. He has protected all those who worked for him, so that he was a good'master too. And when he had gathered wealth together, he shared it generously with his friends. All the hatred and power to do harm that he had. he directed against his foes. He was a loyal friend, a good master" and so on. If Vibhishana, who was himself a man of dharma and knew all the austerities, speaks of his brother as an ahitagni, you must see how holy he was. " He knew the Vedanta very well. In the performance of the prescribed aus• terities there was nobody like him. To this brother of mine, who was himself a master of all the prescribed duties to him, now he is no more, I wish to do the last rites. Will you please allow me ? " Then a second thought comes to him and it is Rama's turn to speak well of Ravana and ask Vibhishana not to neglect his last duties to his brother.

ar^mgrTflgm: SIR m HSTTO: ll

asreqr srssqis^: Hps ^ i%?q?T: l

sraa^aw: arca * qwsrer: I

VI. 114. 99-100. Lectures on the Ramayana 91 " I do not know if all these things were done by him, but I have heard so much of him. When the great gods met him in battle, it was not he who had to run or to own defeat." Now I have got here a passage in the original Sanskrit which seems to be of surpassing interest. It is a description of the last battle between Sri Rama and Ravana. It is worth read• ing. I have forborne from translating it as I might have done, but I shall read the original itself and here and there explain a word or two and leave the rest to produce its impression. This battle between Rama and Ravana is really the climax of this war, and the poet wants us to believe that it was a battle between people who were almost equal, and therefore every device known to the war of that time was employed by both people.

srciit 3f ii^«3 gmii; qh gmti: II §p*Rf ewioii ^ qmi^cT33ii%!r: | sqfam: qsrnrcsff ?R3t^ II =W*J ill^f ftWI fltl3=Hf;i;T5T[ | wrc^tl HBan*arei9i ^ifq II

fa;m*jiqf& aftwsUn: n wRa tfwsifaqisss 3taiRaB;g srwtn: I srqcif im: b& wsraw^ ll ^ ^q^is^qw s*n*ym

<0 ^gw^35 W^QR ti 92 RT. HON BLK V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

cTrf: f^i riiqig *^

q^fo*ra ftrcef ^qq^si^ li * ^q wqqwifffi S^RCT sfifqersiq i m: eqWRq; qlc ^i^qR^qqa: n Rin^fRf^f^^qtRig *iqq: \ VI. 1 10. 17-31.

The battle was so fierce that the seven oceans were all agi• tated. Thousands of the denizens of the lower world, the whole of the earth shook. The sun was hidden in clouds. They began to be anxious, and it did not seem as if Ravana would go down, so strong and equal was he to Rama. So they all began to pray, " May Rama win and Ravana go down ! The one was similar to the other, and the other was similar to the one. No third could be mentioned." Then Rama bethought himself of an arrow of great power, and sent it straight at Ravana's neck. It put down one of the ten heads. The poet now wants you to see how all the gods and the Yakshas, Kin- naras and Gandharvas saw the head fall down. In that very place where that head had been, another head rose. By two or three arrows he destroyed that head again, and no sooner was it thrown down than another came and stuck on his neck. That head too was thrown out by Rama's arrows, but another sprang up. In that way a hundred times the head was put down, but was quickly replaced, and there was no prospect of Ravana being killed. He began to think, Lectures on the Ramayana 93

mCr^i faim

q: sissr (rot *?fli 3i^i =3 gl*fcfis*3fa: ||

cT fll^K A3 3% fllcqfq^l TO |

VI. 110. 31-33.

'" Arrows which enabled me to do ail these great exploits, to destroy so many powerful people, those same arrows are all manda when they approach Ravana. Their edge is blunted when they reach him." Rama rained arrows, Ravana too caused some distress to Rama by arrows, but threw gadas and musaias. Neither relaxed his efforts for a minute either during the night or during the day for seven days. Then Rama's charioteer Matali, who had been trained under Indra, seeing how Rama was unable to make headway against Ravana, told him quietly in the ear, " Employ the Brahmastra." Rama was so engrossed in the light that all his wits were not gathered toge• ther. He had no time to think what was best for the occasion. Matali bethought himself of that sovereign remedy and sug• gested it to Rama. So the battle ends and the great enemy of the worlds is destroyed. Now that concludes the section on Ravana's greatness, the extent of his power and the great heights to which as a warrior he rose. Now I wish to say a word about the way in which he was able to obtain the unreserved and loyal assistance of all his men. That requires great qualities. One must be a generous master in measuring one's words when one wants to appreciate the skilful assistance of one's followers. If you are miserly in your praise, they won't give of their best to you. Ravana knew all these arts. When Kumbhakarna had been roused with superhuman efforts and with strange devices, the first thing he did was to ask Ravana to surrender to Rama. Ravana got very angry and reproached him. Kumbhakarna says, " If you want to go to hell. I cannot prevent you. But I am going to fight on your side. Though 1 do not approve of what you have done, I am not going to keep back, and I will use all my power, skill and strength on your side." When 94 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI he heard this encouraging word from his brother, Ravana, in order to make him do the very best that he could, took out one of his haras and put it round his neck.

areraTia sg?q

arffsi'qg^ei^ qwrnWR ^ II

fk**\$ =er gq*tfn% u:?q?mTW tfqoi: || «rft ^m^qi^re sfacfi =q*q f0^ I ^re*rffO^'ftaWflW*T^: 11 f*qqioR flt^OT: SfitSlflfaiqq'l I

frifaflsaVaiSi «iKW

anaisRn m ^t&q m^\k TOI ift: (1 III. 36. 1.

" I am in sore distress, and whom am I to seek in distress but you ? You are my only resource." Maricha dissuades him. " There is somebody near you who is envious of your prosperity, whom you trust, who however wishes to compass your ruin. Listen to me and reject that advice."

ga*u: 3?qr isramK*: |

III. 37. 2. II—7 96 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI " Kings are very unfortunate. They pay their followers and ministers, but when kings are in trouble and want real advice, these men, instead of speaking bravely what would be of benefit to their master, tell him what would please him. Sincere advice is not given. People who always speak what is pleasing to the ear, such there are by the thousand. The man is rare who will speak the beneficial thing though it is not pleasing. Even if you get a man who will say an unpleasant truth, the man to listen to it is rarer still." Then Maricha tells Ravana his own experience. " I have felt the strength of Rama's arm when he was a mere boy of fifteen. Visvamitra trained Rama in the art of fighting. He went to Dasaratha and persuaded him to send his son to help him in yaga, and gave him all the astras. I was the person against whom Rama was brought, and on me his first arrows were directed." In the whole of that description, Lakshmana is not mentioned at all. Then he says what impres• sion Rama produced upon him, how he quakes even when he thinks of Rama.

SWnq HIct*Tl(eT H I

im? ft q^qifa tfia *iyeifaq n

3Niq qiejqiq qj qq^qitq flft^q || 9?BH g qxfi^q flIWT [qqfocTI I ssmisri^i (f#[ q ^Jftirmsj: if qiwwfa^e g fea u*^ i sq^ftm =q qa»sqi sgtn&q: n stfit g qs^q fliCi^ \

III. 40. 8-11. " I am not asking you to tell me what is good and what is bad. I am oniy asking you to do me a certain piece of ser• vice. I have not come here to receive judgment at your hands. If a minister is wise, he will keep his tongue in his head unless asked to give advice. No king who has the least bit of pride in him will listen to such advice as you give to me." We have to remember in the course of the talk with Maricha, Ravana shows his extraordinary skill and his fine perception. He first suggests a plan to him, that Maricha should parade before Sita as a golden deer finely bedecked. Then Rama will be asked to follow him. But in a few minutes Ravana improved upon the plan. When Maricha came before Sita, captured her heart, made her yearn to possess him, he had better run away. Rama would follow him, and having run away, he should set up a cry of " Lakshmana, Sita," simulating the voice of Rama. It shows you how quick he is in revolving his plans. Then, find• ing that Ravana was deep in his own meditations, Maricha tries to abuse him. " In this world this happens time and again. One man is wicked, does wrong, and a thousand people have to suffer on his account. It is not the wicked man alone that suffers."

qwqPMqfcr W%\ W\ !| 98 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

qfaiqq

" Just as when in a very big tank where there are cobras and the men want to kill the cobras, a great many poor matsyas have also to die in the act, good people by mere contact with wicked people have to suffer." In the Yuddhakanda Rama says :

ft §v% qiq sRtsqisra^ qq: i sfl^lcHiq^fal $3 a* fqqSqiS II VI. 38. 7.

" By his wicked act his whole family, his whole race, has to perish." Because a man is placed in great power and many people follow him and look up to him and do his behests, they have to suffer. When there is a man placed in high authority, morally or physically, it is not only for his wicked deeds that other people have to suffer ; it is also for his mistakes, errors of policy or judgment that thousands of other people have got to suffer. We know it daily. You remember my reading Vibhishana's warning as he left Ravana. Exactly the same words are spoken by Maricha. " When a man's fate is near, when his doom is sealed, his best friends may dissuade him, but he turns a deaf ear. Such is the potency of fate."

^q $eqi \hi qaq" qqs q«$ kwq I ^3q*qjq q^rcqifa Rlfl^ c*q §qei || qf=q tfiamg^ qsfaeqi g

Q,CT^ q»iqRq?q q swfq ^fcqfa n i\m ft Ria^qi *r srrg \\ III. 40. 23, 25-26. Lectures on the Ramayana 99 " Having done this for me and having cried ' Lakshana, Sita ' and drawn away Lakshmana from Sita and left the field open for me, you can come away. I will give you half my kingdom. If you will not do this service, I will throttle you now. I will make you do this, even if I have to employ force. You cannot defy me and yet escape." Maricha makes up his mind to go. " I must die anyhow, but I shall get killed by Rama's arrow." Ravana was pleased.

III. 42. 5-6.

He embraced Maricha heartily and said, " Now you are really Maricha. Till now you were some other Rakshasa." IX RAVANA'S INFATUATION FOR SITA LAST time we were concerned with the infatuation of Ravana for Sita. It was unlike his feeling for other women in that he could not control it in any way. On the contrary it over• mastered him and led him into many troubles and finally destroyed him.

V. 20. 15.

Ravana was saying this to Sita in one of his frequent visits. This one takes place in the Asokavana. " Whichever part of your lovely body I see, O moon-faced one, in that very part my eye is fastened, fixed, and cannot take itself away."

^iwa iftzfa Rren%i% I 5*1% tf? Sjqoi: q*ri W\ \\ V. 20. 29.

" You smile so sweetly ; your teeth are so attractive ; your eyes are so winsome ; you captivate me utterly, as Garuda does when he meets serpents." Then he makes his final appeal to her, throws wide his net of temptation.

m fas* mm flini^ srarw^ 5T?5TIW ?rfe=ff ^ i

cqft ^ mm 3T«*qrca it V. 20. 35.

" Come, let us drink together, let us sport together, let us enjoy each other's company. I will give you any quantity of Lectures on the Ramayana 101 wealth ; and all this earth too thou shalt rule with me. Only take delight in me, and when you are happy, bring all your relations, old too, and let them all enjoy themselves at my expense." The poet uses specially a frisky metre to show the temper in which Ravana was at the time he spoke. All this was gall and wormwood to Sita. On the other hand it annoyed and provoked her extremely. She scorned him, but in her reply she threw in a mixture of threat, flattery and advice to see whether any of these modes could conquer his wickedness. This is her advice to him, pitched in the highest possible key.

Wl fm a«T!%f IW\ || 3w*Hgqnf %m\ im wain i V. 21. 7-8.

" You do not understand the sanctity of marriage. When you have got another man's wife in your keeping, you must protect her as you would have your own wife protected from others. Think of yourself; think of everybody like you, and then delight in the company of your own wedded wives." In her surprise she says :

?5 mil *T 31 flfcl sai 31 Zl^B II

V. 21. 9-10.

" Are there no good people in Lanka, are there no honest men who care for righteous conduct, and would you not be guided by them ? It cannot be. Lanka is a big place, the Vedas are chanted here, our religion is followed faithfully. There must be many good people. I suspect that you do not follow them. You do not care for the good people that are here. Seeing that your mind is bent upon evil courses, I gather that although there are good people to give you proper guid• ance, you do not listen to them." Here is one stage further. Ravana is still trying to seduce Sita. He talks very sweetly to her, flatters her beauty, praises her wisdom and dispraises her husband proportionately. 102 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI

qqi qqr er^i^riT ^q: sfrof

qiR: q^im q^qioif qfa^ fa® ftqsqci I

aft cfitq^qg^t^r: £r5«J snqer n

HeTCRI^ 5RK<>il*l fqf ^IcTqifq ^isft |

q^mmqqi^ri^i iRsqrwiSft

q^qioftf q^qift qfa qfa stfiiq RI^ I

%3 ^3 3«W3 Rmi% II

Ii RTEI ii^ersqi R qis^cr qqi $ET: I

cTcTJ 5TqRRRIf RR <4 q*q(qf% ||

RR eqf aicW^iqRI^RT RIIR& 11 V. 22. 2-6; 8-9. " In this world when a man goes out of his way to flatter women, tells them nice things and tries to steal their hearts, he becomes more and more dear to them. That is the way of the world. When a big man comes and says nice things to a little girl, she is flattered and thinks, ' I seem to be lucky in the world.' She is rightly drawn to him. But my luck is very different. In proportion as I try to flatter you and win your heart, in that proportion do you repulse me. I get very angry with you. I am the ten-headed Ravana, the terror of the three worlds. There is nothing that I cannot get. Nature herself is afraid of me. The sun, the moon, the stars and Vayu and Agni, all wait on my pleasure. Still I come and fall at your feet ; my ten heads roll at your feet; and still you do not yield. I am between two strong emotions, love to you, infatuation for you and at the same time, anger, displeasure that there should be a tiny little thing of the other sex defying and insulting me. Every time my anger rises, my love says, ' No, do not punish Lectures on the Ramayana 103 her. Try your arts upon her still more.' Even as a clever driver will rein in the horses when they get out of control and tend to gallop, so too my love controls my anger. Kama is a wicked thing, love is not a thing to encourage. (But it does not need encouragement when it amounts to infatuation. It is already your master.) Towards the party in whom the love rests, instead of getting angry when anger is proper, tenderness and pity both come and take hold of you. You who deserve death at my hands, you escape because of this. Love conquers anger and prevails over the other feelings. You speak such harsh things to me, that for every one of them you deserve cruel death at my hand, not ordinary death. But this cannot last very long ; only two months remain of the twelve months I gave you when I first brought you here. After the two months are over, you must get into my bed. If, by the end of the two months, you do not accept me as your husband, then my cooks will drag you into the kitchen and there cut you and mince you to pieces for my breakfast." Despite this threat, she did not yield ; she grew a little more insolent and said harsh things to him.

gqi^ mw* eiaf gaff m fti*^ II

V. 22. 30-31.

Getting very angry and hissing like a cobra, he said, " As the sun disposes of darkness in the morning, so shall I dispose of you." Then he turned towards the Rakshasis who guarded her. These Rakshasis were different from the ladies of the harem, who were queens and princesses brought away from palaces, whom Ravana had won over by his extraordinary skill in all the arts of love. But these Rakshasis were cruel, heart• less and slave-minded, whose very look frightened Sita. Now the poet gets into one of his humorous moods and describes how these Rakshasis looked ; J 04 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

lifooff IRaqjOit ^ ^^onqqsfoT^IH: II

t itaqi^qigi =q I'TK'I qi^fefiii I ^iWT.qi^I ^ gajqwftaqifcfiii ii

3i^n%^f (Ssgor nig^i qjnfigqfi* I

qqr HSOT tfiai m *^qfa STR^I U aqt f$a *iy*q: sql; faq wq =q i aiasrcirj^iqsj 6watisr!i^qg[%: n auq^qa' %X€\ zpzwwffcw =q | sia aiagqifoq *IW5C: 3a: g?r: 11 ^iwgqfiaicRf qqa^qg; 1 v. 22. 33-39.

To them Ravana says, " So prevail upon her, so talk to her, so work upon her feelings, describe me in such wise to her, that her heart may turn towards me. Do it severally, individually or collectively." Having said this, he roared at her again and approached her as if to strike her. Then one of his queens, by name Dhanyamalini, who was the mother of the famous son Atikaya, threw herself upon him and drew him off and calmed his ill-temper. Amongst other things she said one thing which I wish to indicate.

3i^mf sFi[nqia*q srtagqcTOcr 11

S^al ^IUIRW suaHqia wwi 1 V. 22. 42-43.

This is one of the secrets of love. She says, " In dealing with women, happiness is multiplied a hundred-fold if the other party is a willing partner. If it is otherwise, then the man is bound to burn, burn, burn," Lectures on the Ramayana 105 In the Yuddhakanda Ravana summons a council of war and pretends to take their advice as to what he should do. Seeking advice, on his part, contrasts sharply with the methods of Sri Rama. Rama propounds the question to his friends in neutral style. When Vibhishana appeared, he asked all the people about him to tell him what he should do. Though Rama determined to accept him, he did not put it to them and does not say so. Ravana tells his ministers how he got hold of Sita and also how he got cursed over other women. " Tell me," he says, " what I am to do, but do not say that I should yield up Sita. I have not put myself to all this trouble, disgraced all my character and lost my reputation, in order to give her back. Advise me so that I may retain her." That is the advice he wanted, an advice subject to that very hard condition.

VI. 12. 12.

Here is a point that you should note, if you are particular about reading the text at any time. Ravana says something which comes out of the legal side of his mind. He has gone and caught hold of Sita. His advisers may ask him whether he trespassed. If he did so, he was bound to yield her up. In order appa• rently to anticipate that point, he says, " I have brought her from a place tenanted by our own people, from Janasthana, which is our out-post. The Rakshasas haunt that place and it is there that she was found. She is therefore my lawful prey." Then he declares his infatuation for Sita in express terms to his own people. Did you ever hear in private life, in the kind of life that we live, anybody go and publish his amours in that fashion ? Here is a man who, having done a wicked deed to another man's wife, goes and publishes that fact without shame and says that he has abducted a woman for his enjoyment, and asks them to tell him how to compass his end. It is the business of the ministers to see that his nefarious designs go through. " Appa• rently she is a sluggish-minded girl. I do not think there is another like her." It is on Sita's feet that his eyes dwell most. He says, 106 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

am*nir awr etoci q srfiw: ll VI. 12. 15.

"When I see her feet, it is on them alone my eyes dwell. They are so fashioned that they charm me most. My love is inflamed when I see her feet." Now a word about feet. Many of you who have observed these things will know that the feet of women are not always in accord with their general frame. God makes something or other defective. Usually feet are defective. Either they have too big a gap between the fingers, or one side is higher than the other, or the fingers join together most awkwardly, or they are too far separated. Ravana was a very skilful person is observing the feet of Sita and pronounced that they were of the regular type.

q?fj fig® I

^rcqn q?reiqqi^ II

fctagqgSWT ^wiq ^Tl ^iSKFaroftw mm* q^tfrfer: II er g mm HWRCT flifajfr I freftwm wrrc ORRtq^i^i n

cT?qqi =qi^5Tiqr. vmm q=q: i VI. 12. 17-20.

" The tip of the nose is slightly raised. The feeling that I have is krodha and harsha. It entirely disfigures and discolours me. She asked of me one year's respite, and I was pleased to give it to her." The commentators take exception to it. Sita did not ask for any time at all. It was he that volunteered twelve months' respite to her. They stress that point because they think it unworthy of Sita to ask for any respite, and she would not have asked for it. The condition that Ravana imposed on the ministers whose advice he sought is that he would not give her up. Lectures on the Ramayana 107

VI. 12. 25-26.

He wants Rama and Lakshmana killed. The ministers should tell him, when they had made up their minds, how these two ends were to be compassed. This infatuation was known to everybody. He himself was at no pains to conceal it. You remember how when Indrajit made a counterfeit figure of Sita and killed it before the eyes of Hanuman, Hanuman ran up to Rama and reported it to him. At that time Rama believed the story and fell into a swoon, and it was with difficulty that he could be brought to consciousness. Vibhishana comes in a little later and, finding how affairs stood, said that it was that scoundrel nephew of his that must have made a maya figure of Sita and killed it before Hanuman. Then he assures Rama that Ravana would never kill Sita.

aifflura 5 STRIR y&vm I dtaf aft nsraifi *i =q snrT qsfcqici 11

^$3^*3/3 *i ^ fi^ f»aqi^ Ii *\ 1 *^ f si 3^1 I b\ sgift ^T^qcT q^Rra; (I VI. 84. 10-12.

" I know my brother's mind ; he will not kill her. How often have I told him that he should give up Sita ! I have warned him that her being there would be the destruction of everybody in Lanka. He won't do it because he won't lose hope. His infatuation has gone to that extent. He will not let anybody see her. He has not brought her here for killing her." (Per• haps the inner meaning is that she will kill him in the end.) In this, however, Vibhishana was slightly over-drawing the pic• ture, for as I told you last time, when Indrajit having fallen, Ravana's worst feelings were uppermost, he became ten times the beast that ever he was and made up his mind to kill Sita 108 RT. HON BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI who was at the bottom of all this trouble. Then it was that Sita told herself, " What a wicked fool I was not to have avail• ed of Hanuman's magnanimous offer! I then stood upon a nice point." Ravana did wish to kill Sita then. In saying therefore that Ravana would never wish to kill Sita, Vibhishana was slightly overshooting bis point. But he was also right. Vibhishana's instinct was true, for in the end, even though Ravana tried to kill Sita, he could not. Suparsva came and dissuaded him by saying that he must kill Rama the husband. That roused Ravana's soldierly qualities. Even when Ravana made up his mind definitely to finish Sita, any little thing was good enough to upset his plan.

X

SITA, THE UNAPPROACHABLE

ONLY one word of general introduction; though I have said it before, it is worth repeating. No woman that I have read of, certainly no woman that I have seen, comes near Valmiki's conception of Sita. She is unapproachable. He has conferred on her all the attractions that woman could conceivably have. Beauty, tenderness of heart, compassion of the extreme type, fidelity, wisdom of the truest type, courage of the heart, endur• ance (what has not Sita endured), all these qualities find in her a harmonious abode. She is a piece of nature like which there was and can be none. Let us dwell a little on the happy period of her life. Then we shall soon have to deal with her as a sorrowing woman with no one around her to comfort her. All that she looked upon was hateful, all that she heard from Ravana was murderous in the extreme. That we shall come to. But we can dwell a little fondly, if a little Hngeringly, over the time when she was still happy, happy not in Ayodhya, but happy in the forest, awav from the kingdom. For what was the kingdom to her ? To her Rama was everything. Where he was that was her swarga. If he was not with her, that was the opposite to her. But there is something in Ayodhya too, to which we Lectures on the Ramayana 109 must pay attention, because there too her great qualities shine in their fullness. But there is a preliminary point concerning more the poet than her, to which 1 shall draw your attention. It is one of the sad experiences of people who have girls to marry off. Sita was a jewel among brides. No man need have suffered any anxiety as to how to get her married. And why should Janaka have been anxious about her ? Nevertheless when we first meet Janaka, the poet docs not tell us anything about his troubles. But when Sita recounts the story of her marriage, describing it as a svayamvara, to Anasuya in the forest, she says she was just six years of age. She was so wise that she was

qftgqiq§^4 ^qi s'zqi § *t fam i f%*atR*qnfl^

ar ^qoiiR^qf wqi ^i

eq ft a§g<*iiq*ai sfc awaii^ %m n errqiiqfXcq gut ft WW RR^lf f^iqi^ I f ST %m ^ *fiqf wRfa n Rig: f£ NcXf^ ^ *n a£w i ^r^\ m\ mm iasia (I VII. 9. 7-10.

" You are so beautiful, so handsome, so able and so learned. And yet I am not able to find you a suitable husband. If people have any regard for their self-respect, the daughter is sure to ruin it." Then when Maya had a daughter to marry, Mando- dari, he walked about in the gardens with her, trying to see if any fish would rise out of the water. Ravana happened to pass that way. He asks him, "Who are you?", and Maya replies, " She is my daughter. I have come to this place to find a suitable husband for her," Evidently the poet is fond of that sentiment and he puts it into the mouth of every father of a bride. As soon as he mentioned it, Ravana jumped and said, "I will take the girl." He took her and relieved the father; and the father, out of gratitude, gave him a handsome dowry. Lectures on the Ramayana Ul One of the items of the dowry was that famous spear which Ravana used so effectively against Lakshmana twice during the war and hit him hard. In the Ayodhyakanda when Rama goes and tells his wife that he is going to the forest she says, " I am going too." He pre• vents her and frightens her. But she says no, and Rama says a thousand things to please her. Then Rama describes the horrors of the forest in slokas, eighteen in number, ending with tfWTX Ul- 28. 11), and expressions similar to it. Eighteen times he repeats the warning, and also imparts to her a great deal of worldly wisdom, advises her how to behave towards his father, mother, and towards Bharata. Especially on this he is keen. I will read to you that famous verse in which Rama says how Sita should behave to Bharata. It is natural and human for a person in the position of Sita to be angry with Bharata, to be envious of him and to wish him ill, and whenever she met him, to say how different he was from her husband, how happy Ayodhya and the whole kingdom would have been if Rama had been in his place. Rama foresaw it. So he tells Sita, " Do not commit the folly which women would ordinarily commit in such situations."

mm* r» goji: *$qi matqiqm RR It II. 26. 25.

One of the most beautiful truths in life if we are going to be happy and wise. When a man has reached a high position, holds authority, wields influence, dispenses patronage, and makes himself the mark of his time, if that is the case with regard to any man, then he is likely to have one serious defect, which we must all take note of. People that go to him must remember that he cannot bear good said of any other person. " Those that have arrived at that stage will not endure the praise of another person. So, if you will be wise when I am gone, do not praise me to Bharata." Fancy how Rama, having got hold of a shrewd bit of wisdom, exercises it even against his own brother, knowing him, and not having the slightest reason to think ill of him ! It is human nature. Sita has no ear for n—8 112 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI all this and she does not listen to it. She says, " You speak of the horrors of the forest, of the wild beasts there. Do you tell me that where you are, the wild beasts will come, or if they come, they will be a source of fear? With you near me I am going to be afraid of nothing. What a strong man you are ! When I was a little girl in my father's house, the sooth• sayers used to come and say, " This little girl is destined to live in the forest! " From that time I have developed a kind of love for the forest, and I am keen to go to the forest. The good, pious men who can see the future have told the same thing about me. I have myself fixed my heart upon it. I have told you more than once that I want to go to the forest and live there, and you have given me permission to do so. Now a good opportunity has come and let us go cheerfully. Then come certain sentiments of the noblest kind from the lips of this paragon of her sex.

?5 *r {q^faqft tft «iw R5i*ra i

^w?r^ wsif 5Ti

R! ?;(%mRq & $g *T i fwflffl «r« qi5fllWI<5 R/SWWa. II II. 29. 18-21.

This is true. " A woman given by her father with holy water into the hands of the bridegroom belongs to him and cannot be separated from him in this world or in the other. I am not going to leave you, knowing this Dharma. Even after death, she is his. Tell me what is the reason if, when I am bound to you in this fashion, you do not wish to take me with you. 1 am yours, to share your joys and your sorrows alike. If you do not wish to take me, I have no reason to live after that. I may take poison, I may enter the fire, or I will throw myself into the water." Remember that Sita is driven to the last Lectures on the Ramayana 113 extremity and therefore says this extreme thing too. No doubt women are fond of these excesses a little sooner than we are. Our capacity to bear adversity is slightly stronger. That is because we go about and can manage it. To them we are the only people available. Upon us they must exercise the whole of their influence. They generally say, " Very well then, if you want to go, you can go, but do not expect to see me after that." That is their last argument. It comes readily to them, and some women will do it. Even after that Rama was not moved. Then it was that Sita began to use taunts where she had only used entreaties.

cqR'qci mi R (qiqsr&q: i

*m STWTCW RR foq q^qiq*^ H II. 30. 2-3.

" I think of my father. He sought all the world for a bride• groom, and at last he got you. If he thought he got hold of the best man for me, he was a fool. What he had got was a woman, a cowardly woman, dressed like a man." These words are usually brought against Sita as a tremendous transgression of duty on her part, as a violation of the limits that a woman should observe even in the expression of her most profound grief. I do not agree at all. I tell you most definitely that this proves to me beyond all doubt that Sita was a good, true, brave, Rajput woman.

3T^CT st^fsqqr^ ife i

asn 5Tir«T q* *m aqefa feqi3$ n f% fe $MT fqqooif^ qi *rqnfcr IT I qg; qfeq?3^f*mq flr«m-qqfiqoir^ it

* cq| Wfllc^q SSiRq rcs>STO |

*qq g Wi ^iRifr iwsgrN flcftq; | ti^q RF m qVq"i 5igiR*3ia n 114 Rl. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

q*q qeq ^ wfltq q*q ^NS^qfl (

?^ cuq qq q?q«l Rqq*9 «?Hq II II. 30. 4-5, 1-9. " What are you afraid of ? What are the things which you dread that you should reject me who have no other person to rely on earth? I am yours entirely, utterly, and yet you discard me. Where is your moral courage gone ? You must have been the doer of some terrible deed in order that you should lose your heart so utterly. I am not going to look at another person. Do not throw me on Bharata.She puts a severe, harsh, interpreta• tion on Rama's words. When Rama said, " You dwell with Bharata instead of understanding him in the proper sense to which it ought to be limited, she twists the words slightly. " Having brought me up from the time that I was a little creature, and having drawn me to yourself in so many ways, why do you hand me to other people like a Sailusha, like a man who lives upon the earnings of a woman ? When I am with you, I do not want good food ; plain fare will be like delicious viands for me. The dust of the forest on which you have trodden will be the sandal after my heart; and grass will be the most luxurious couch. No unseemly sight would offend my eye. Do not be anxious on my account. I shall not be burdensome to you. That place where I can be with you, whatever its name be, and wherever it be, is heaven to me. If you are not there, whatever place it may be, it will be Niraya to me. Know this for certain. Take me, and I promise you, you will be most happy. I am a kshatriya girl and I will not go under the control of other people, of Kaikeyi or Bharata. When you have abandoned me, I do not want life. If I cannot live without you for a minute, how do you ask me to live that long time ? " I wish to show you the very high quality of Sita's sentiments, the altitude to which she could rise in her sublimes! moments. Upon these remonstrances of Sita, the poet has shown his utmost skill; threat, persuasion, entreaty, preaching of duty, exposition of the sanctity of marriage, all these things are brought together in one sarga and put into the mouth of Sita. It passes my under• standing how any but an arrogant male could take objection to this. These words, harshly spoken, were spoken at a time of great mental anxiety. A proud woman, born in and married into a Lectures on the Ramayana U5 kshatriya family and owning for her husband the greatest man on earth, was she to be told that she was a coward and could not live in the forest with her husband ? When she found that he still repeated the same tale, she could not help it. It does her honour that she said those things, for a woman is entitled to say these things boldly to her husband. Her husband and she are one. Why should the husband resent the bold talk of the wife ? This is a wicked thought that enters the mind of narrow-minded little- hearted men. I cannot forgive the people who speak ill of Sita. The best test of it all is how Rama took it. Rama certainly knew what a wife should be. Was he displeased or annoyed ? If he did not say so, who are we, the contemptible little creatures, that we are, to say so ? The taunts he bore, Rama the great, Rama the invincible, Rama the embodiment of Dharma ! He took them quietly. Let us hear what Rama said :

elf qfte^Sq ^\%^\ fa^lfaq Tlfecfl*! I 3q|=q q=q^ VM\ qfiiq*nflqW5I II *f £fq rTq gfqqqcqfi|?|^ |

•r it RSRCT m fafoq; wmRq n crq eqRiflaiqfli^niq \ qis * h^wsvfo srRRRiRiq H qci Qgim Rqi em q^iaiq i R m\§ *\m ?if qr diSiuwaj qqr n II. 30 26-29.

He would not have done that if her words pained him. Restor• ing her confidence, he said to her, " You need not say that put• ting you to any trouble, I am going to Swarga and be happy there, When I described the horrors of the forest, I was not afraid of them. I knew I was competent to protect you, I had the strength, the skill, the vigilance. Nevertheless, you wonder, why I said " No " at first. I did not know what a courageous woman you really were. I thought you might be like ordinary women. Now I see who you are, what you are, and I will obey your instructions. How can I leave you behind ? You have been made by Brahma for that purpose. Just as a good man who has conquered all his 116 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI passions and thinks the whole his family, cannot put aside his tenderness which become an inseparable part of his nature, so are you to me. I go to the forest because Dasaratha and Kaikeyi are bent upon it. I have made up my mind to take you with me. And be with me my partner in all that I have to do in the forest. " This is the Sloka which I want you all to remember.

II. 30. 41.

At the end of this altercation, Rama was brought round so thoroughly and says this. " My family is honoured by you. Your family is also honoured by you. You have done a thing, you have made me do a thing, which is worthy alike of your house and my house. " Then he tells her, " As you and I have agreed hear• tily that we should go together to the forest, I have given away all my wealth and possession to the Brahmins, and you may also do the same.

eTer: STSSI qlfynqraar qsrfwfi *rg?qw WTRCW I sRift *wrc =q srgq^rt sresft *w?af HJTiWf II

II. 30. 47.

She began to give away all. She had to strip herself as bare as possible of all pomp and the burden of pomp when she went to the forest, so that she might be as light as possible, as little of an anxiety to her husband as possible, and as serviceable to him as possible XI THE ABHISHEKA CEREMONY OF RAMA AND SITA IN conformity with custom, this last talk will be about the great coronation ceremony of Rama and Sita. Four times in the poem is a coronation ceremony mentioned. The first time is in the Ayodhyakanda, when the ceremony does not take place. The next time we hear of Sugriva being crowned king of Kishkindha. The next important ceremony is the coronation of Vibhishana. This really takes places in two stages as it were, once before the war commenced, on the mainland of India when Sri Rama directs that he should be symbolically crowned, and then the real coro• nation which takes place, of course, when the throne of Lanka becomes vacant. Then comes the great ceremony in Ayodhya, to which we shall pay particular attention today. But before we go on to the actual ceremony, let us pay some little attention to a little point. In this Sarga 131 there are a number of Slokas in the beginning which are almost the same, word for word, as some Slokas in the Ayodhyakanda, 105th Sarga. Therefore, for the poet to repeat the same Slokas in two places, there must have been a wonderful parallelism of circum• stances. What was it ? In the Ayodhyakanda, Bharata, with the whole of the palace and the army and the important citizens of Ayodhya, came to visit Sri Rama and persuade him to return. Then he makes a speech to Sri Rama inviting him to take the kingdom and the crown. He then explains why he holds himself unfitted to be king and why Sri Rama should take the kingdom. In exactly the same way, when Rama has returned after his great triumph, Bharata offers the kingdom again to him. " I have so far managed it as your representative. Now you are here, I deliver the kingdom back to you. " So that you see Bharata offered the kingdom once more as he did it before. And the poet, thinking of the similarity in the condition, uses the same Slokas again. T shall read the Slokas first and then my translation.

qfsHi mm^r mm ^ wimi R*MI ssim *w afflssr Ri II RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

frsnfiq m * qi§Rfgfflt II qifi^T Rfrll ft^: Sjjfiq 8J{^ i

{[Sp^RIA^ R?q flSqf^Rflf VI || NIRT nwfq ^ qiqe: i RI'*ggtq| OR

°;qiqRi RGIQRLI mih Q^IIH I q^RI?l RgST^ cq R^ft. T STlfa ft II 3fR?«rnfliq« ^mgq^qg i smq^iRqifoq R«Q:| Clad^ER, n

^firTRqiq; q^l^g*fa:W: I

VI. 131. Q\$im RIlR^r RIcH ^ ?pqffl? RR | ci^ S^IIR aqquf gf$* O^R^S* II

R5AQI*gq»H ftst: Sg^IRR I

r^qJT ^q^OSIR^ R|^ || lid *$H ?q[?T?q fl!$q*qq qafqoi; I srg'Fg *i ?rfeq *M aq flfrca || gsffq frcqsKcKq q: qfoqsfjsqa i OR ETC g q: qogqsfiqft n qqr g iwm isr: g$q

b qqi gfam q;sift * (SreSftg; i « ai 5Hg«£g; sfifcl q*q a

SOiqff^f J?5W13f q^qflm gq$T: | aaqsaffiqiSw

aqi^qft ?if^ *mi srs-g fSKI: I ai'cTigrai fiiql R'^g I) II. 105. 4-12.

All the words and sentiments fit the two contexts. " As you handed the kingdom over to me, I shall hand the kingdom over to you. After all, my mother who was so anxious has been gratified. My mother has been treated with proper reverence, and her great wish has been gratified. This kingdom has been given to me, and as you gave it to me, so I give it back to you. For I cannot carry this crushing burden, being but a puny calf where a mighty bull must bear the yoke. I shrink from the perils of a large State, for once disorders break out, they are not easily quelled, any more than a swift torrent can be brought under control after it has burst its dam. How can I hope to follow where you have gone with your inimitable tread ? How can a donkey go through the paces of a horse or a crow show the graceful movements of a swan ? Another comparison strikes me as suitable. I shall barely suggest it, you alone can comprehend all its implications. If you disap• point the eager people and do not undertake their protection just when they need and expect it, you will be like a tree grown to gigantic size, striking awe into the breatsts of men dwarfed beside it, with enormous branches and imposing foliage, but bearing no fruit at all. Think of the sense of frustration and wasted effort of many long years in the heart of the man who planted and tended it with extraordinary care as he watches its luxuriance and rich promise wither away in barrenness. I pray you let no such cala• mity befall us. Let the expectant people" see you anointed king and wearing the lustrous crown of Ayodhya, as they might be- 120 HT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI hold the sun risen to full meridian resplendence. Assume the dignity and pomp of this high station. Every day henceforth, whenever you rise jo the day's labours or retire to seek repose at night, your ears shall be regaled by the sound of drums and the music of melodious instruments and the sweeter music of girdles and anklets as fair damsels trip it gaily for your amusement and relaxation. ' (VI. (31. 2-10). You see how the sentiments fit in on both occasions. These are Bharata's words making a most impressive and undeniable invitation to take the crown. Rama has come into Nandigrama and there he is seated. Then he is prepared for the great ceremony. The first thing to do is for him to put on civilisation after fourteen years of forest life. The hair has grown all over his head and face and so he has to be relieved of all this burden. Satrughna orders a number of barbers to appear on the scene.

VI. 131. 13. How all of them could have worked on his head, I cannot imagine. 1 suppose a selection was to be made. Each might have asked for a minute's turn. All these persons were then bathed. Here it is worth mentioning that all the three brothers are men• tioned, and Sugriva and Vibhishana also as having bathed. But poor Satrughna is not mentioned. Once before, when all the brothers were seated to hold the famous conversation in Chitra- kuta. Satrughna was not mentioned at all. The commentators say we have to assume that Satrughna was also seated. Apparently, as having been the master of the ceremony and ordered the people about, he did it last and in double quick time. Sita was also de• corated for the occasion. Dasaratha's queens decorated Sita them• selves. Usually the decoration is performed by professional maids. This time they wanted to have the honour themselves. The poet expressly says that the monkeys who started the procession from Nandigrama to Ayodhya all assumed human form, perhaps to make themselves a little more presentable. In the Yuddhakanda we are specially told that Rama issued an order on the day before the War began. He told the monkey's, " I know you can all take human form- But remember in this fight T do not want yon af all Lectures on the Ramayana 121 to do so. Remain monkeys. Only seven people on our side should assume human form. " Now, however, there was no such neces• sity. Then, water was brought for the occasion by the monkeys. What happened to the waters that were brought by Dasaratha and were not used at all, I do not know.

afStow mm sfTRistm*? swr n

3R>^iqf T?3<7N ^3<| 331^ I

5n««te §qcw >n?5i1 ^ wixt i

lMf*^sr R^rTI Sflrl I 3TKI^ 513 s?m n$3ii%$5nNw.' (I

Vr. Ul. 48-57

Bharata told Sugriva to order the monkeys to bring water from the four oceans early in the morning, and also from five hundred rivers. I wonder what the northern ocean was which is referred to. Hanuman of course did wonders. He has often gone north to bring the Sanjivam. But what ocean it was I do not see. unless it 122 rt. hon'ble v. 5. srinivasa sastri was Manasasarovar. This is the first occasion when we see the queen crowned along with the king. Neither in Sugriva's nor in Vibhishana's case do we find it. All the rishis took the lead in pouring water on Rama's head, as the Vasus bathed Indra. Next came the Ritvigs. The gods who stood in mid air poured waters. Then there was a crown brought. This crown was the one that had been used for Manu, the first progenitor of the family. put the crown on Rama's head, and the other Ritvigs came round and put all the ornaments on the head. Presents were given and received. Indra sent by Vayu a garland of pre• cious stones. Rama gave away a lot; a lakh of horses, bulls and cows, a hundred magnificent bulls and thirty crores of gold coins. The distribution must have taken place in a thousand places all over the town. You remember that Sita got a beautiful garland, which with Rama's permission she gave away to Hanuman. Then the poet comes to the end. He says all the guests were given leave and they took farewell of Sri Rama. Laden with costly presents, the monkeys were sent back to their home. Vibhi• shana departed, having obtained his Kuladhana —

®aqr qjqi^ fq*Cm: 11 VI. 131. 90. meaning that Lanka that was given to him was the Kuladhana. One commentator says Kula means Ikshvakukula ; if we are to believe the story prevalent, a great image of Ranganatha was in Sri Rama's palace at the time and was given away to Vibhishana. Some people say so. There is no authority at all in the text for it. There is a slight discrepancy between this account in the Yuddhakanda at the end and the account in the Uttarakanda. As a matter of fact in the Uttarakanda the story is that Vibhishana stayed in Ayodhya either six months by one account or a whole year after the Abhisheku with Sri Rama, hearing all sorts of stories from Agastya. But one commentator says ingeniously that the farewell that is described in the Yuddhakanda is merely to bring the Kanda to a decent end, and that this is the real farewell. It changes the story, according to the Yuddhakanda in one particular, and it is not at all a change for the better, as you will see. Lectures- on the Ramayana 123

VII. 40. 24.

It is said here that Rama took a hara from his own neck and placed it round Hanuman's neck. But our own story is that Sri Rama gave it to Sita and Sita with his express permission gave it to Hanuman as the person most fitted for the present. Rama himself says, " You had better choose the person in whom all these qualities are united, " and he mentions some very superb qualities. Of course there is no second choice to be made. Then there is one expression that I want to draw your atten• tion to. It is from the Uttarakanda.

VII. 40. 29. "Each went to his several home." As usual, there is a simile. This simile is full of significance. Each person, when he took leave of Rama and Sita and those excellent men, was really sad at having to go, just as a body is sorry to part. Very few people are glad to die. Our grief chokes us even if we are conscious at the time. Therefore the poet says, when each person took leave of Sri Rama, he was like a Dehi leaving his body.

ENTHRONE RAMA AND SITA IN YOUR HEARTS

Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is the account we see of the Abhisheka ceremony. We are all very happy indeed that this series of talks has ended in the Abhisheka. But I should be false to myself if I close at this point without saying what is uppermost in my heart, that the real coronation is in our hearts. Rama and Sita should be crowned in our hearts, enthroned in our hearts. Let them govern your thoughts and regulate your lives. At all important times remember them and then you cannot go wrong. This is not a sentimental closing, but I really feel that having studied the Ramayana together these months, we must make up our minds that the study will have its beneficial effect upon our 124 Rl. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI lives and upon our nature. We have not studied this poem as a mere poem. We have studied it as a means of purifying our lives. Rama and Sita, not to speak of the others, are often spoken of as the hero and heroine crowned with the perfection of human quality. It is a beautiful sentiment, but in understanding it, there is a qualification we have got to make. The perfection was not there from the beginning ; it grew from stage to stage. We began to know of Rama before he was born, and from the time he was born, we follow him in his career. The great incidents and episodes in his life, his trials and tribulations, the adversities he went through, the great changes of fortune that came over him, is it natural to suppose that all these things had no effect on his character, that he was that at the end, which he was at the beginn• ing ? Life is not that sort of thing. All humanity learns at every step. Every episode in our life, everything that happens to us, has its effect upon us. Adversity teaches us one set of lessons. Prosperity teaches us another set of lessons. Nothing happens to us but leaves its mark on our nature. So let us think of Sri Rama as having marched forward to his perfection step by step. For so shall we profit most by his life and by his advance, and by Sita's life and her advance, if we dwell on each incident and each episode with the desire to see how it affected them and how they reacted to it. Otherwise we shall not learn much from the poem. It is essentially a human document. Valmiki is a master of human nature. He knew it through and through. That is why he takes us step by step, records all the conversations at length. It is only when we contemplate the hero and heroine as undergoing the trials of life and enjoying all the good things that happened to them, it is only as we watch them through the vicissitudes of their life and make note of the way they profit by these things, that we shall get from the study of the Ramayana the utmost advan• tage that it is capable of giving. So once more I ask you most devoutly, most earnestly, never to let these, Rama and Sita, be far from your heart. We must make an honest and earnest endea• vour always to regard Rama and Sita as a model to follow. Then we shall have spent these Wednesday evenings to good purpose and the eight months that we have spent together on Wednesdays will have given us a great deal of spiritual as well as intellectual benefit. LETTERS 1. To GOPAL KRISHNA GOKHALE

Dharmasala, Benares,1 December 27, 1905 Dear Sir, Some six months ago I came across a little pamphlet marked Private and containing a prospectus of the ' Servants of India Society '. Since then I have had thoughts of joining it as a member. But I knew you would like before taking me to see me if possible and to make inquiries of trustworthy persons regarding my charac• ter. The opportunity has come now and I desire to offer my ser• vices. You may ask Madras delegates generally about me ; but I would mention in particular Messrs V. Krishnaswami Aiyar and G. A. Natesan, through whose kindness I had the pleasure of being introduced to you at Madras. 1 am a schoolmaster in Triplicane with about 17 years' service. 1 graduated B.A. in 1888 and am now 37 years old. My age, I fear, may be against me, as I may not have many years more to give to the service of my country. Nor have 1 the confidence that I can do very much in the few years that lie before me. Such as I am, however, I offer myself and hope to be accepted. I don't write Ihis letter under an impulse of the moment; but the idea has been long in my mind, and it was for this purpose chiefly that I made up my mind to come here as delegate. I know how busy you are and shall not expect an early answer. But I request you to make your inquiries while the Madras men arc within your call. The result I shall wait for till you have leisure. If you decide to take me, I shall require at least six months' time to settle my affairs, as 1 have some people depending on me, and my affairs are not particularly prosperous. My Madras address is — Head Master, Hindu High School, Triplicane. Believe mc, dear Sir, Yours, with love and admiration, V. S. SRINIVASAN

1 Mr. Sastri was a delegate to the Twentyfust session of the Indian National Congress, held in Dec. 1905, at Benares of which Gokhale was president. II—9 128 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

2. To V. KRISHNASWAMI AIYAR

Servants of India Home, Poona City, May 20, 1907 My dear Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar, My former students have written to mc in glowing terms of Mr. Pal's1 propagandist work in Madras, and asked me how it is possible for a genuine patriot like Mr. Gokhale or Mr. V. K. Aiyar, to differ from him. Though I agree that it is necessary to combat his doctrines, I cannot persuade myself that their spread will do unmixed harm. Grimness is one of the elements that our patriotism needs now, and I believe that Mr. Pal's lectures arc calculated to develop that quality. We have had some troubles so far; but what are these to the miseries that the people must go through before any considerable progress can be made ? Patrio• tism has been much too cheap with us. To some it has brought profit, to many it has been the means of social distinction and honour, to the great crowds it has afforded generous excitement, now few have really suffered in body and in mind — loss of life, liberty, wealth, etc. ! There has practically been no political per• secution at all in India. I confess I was not quite pleased to read that Lajpat Rai seemed greatly depressed and crestfallen. If he could not have sincerely rejoiced to have been enabled to suffer for the country, he ought to show by his manly bearing and digni• fied self-possession that Indians know, and are prepared to meet with resolution and grimness, the fate that awaits the first patriots that lift up their voice, pen, or sword against tyranny. But I recognize at the same time the different parts that men have to play in this bewildering drama. For instance, my sympa-

i •'Babu Bipin Chunder Pal burst into full fume in Madras as a preacher of the new political creed. For several days on the sands of ihe beach he spoke words hot with emotion and subtly logical, which were wafted by the soft evening breeze to tens of thousands of listeners, invad• ing their whole souls and setting them aflame with the fever of a wild consuming desire. Oratory had never dreamed of such triumphs in India ; the power of the spoken word had never been demonstrated on such a scale. The immediate effect was to deepen and strengthen the discon• tent already in existence, and to embitter a hundredfold the controversies that divided the two political schools. " (From Mr. Sastri's introduction to the first edition of Mr. Natesan's collection of Gokhale's Speeches, unit Writings). Letters 129 thy goes out even now to Mr. Morley. I wonder if you or I would have done any better. Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

3. To His SON V. S. SANKARAN

Chequers, July 10, 1921 My dear Sankaran, It is after lunch now, and we have been photographed by enterprising cinema people. There is no safety for great people even in a country seat! All have retired to their rooms; it is so hot. Why, I thought this morning as I was returning from a long walk I might have been in one of the exposed parts of Ooty on a hot May day. It is lovely country all round, hilly, well- wooded, rich in historical interest. Burke had a seat about 6 miles from here, and is buried in the local churchyard. Beacons- field sleeps near about, and the famous William Penn, whom Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler,1 who is of the party, speaks of admiringly. A neighbouring village has the glory of owning Mil• ton. Down below this house, about a mile and a half away, is the h'ttlc church — a pretty place it is -— where Hampden collected his parishioners and harangued them on the iniquity of shipmoney — his share was 13s. 6d., as the document, still preserved, shows. In this house, there once lived the daughter of Cromwell, and they recently discovered a cast of the Protector, hidden within a wall, huge nose, vest and all. A letter of his written on the field of Marston is on view. Stoke Pogis, where Gray wrote his Elegy, is about half an hour by motor. I didn't realise before why he wrote, as examples of unrealised greatness, of a village Hampden, a mute Milton and a guiltless Cromwell. The nation owns this fine house now, a gift by Lord Lee of Fareham, used by the Prime Minister when in office as his week-end residence. No one in India understands the need of a frequent holiday to men whose brains are continually occupied with problems of anxiety. Lloyd

1DT. Nicholas Murray Butler (1862-1947); President of Columbia Uni• versity, and a well-known publicist and internationalist- 130 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI George is made of iron, else he would have gone to pieces long ago. Last week he conferred with the coal people and settled the strike. Next week he is to confer with Dc Valera and may settle the Irish question. Meantime he has been sitting with us continually and discussing world affairs. Now and again he rushes to the House to answer questions and be bullied by Lord Cecil or some big man of that sort, and make a great speech. Inter• views and despatches, correspondence of sorts, and dinners and luncheons, talks to the King, etc. — any one of these things by itself is enough to overwhelm one of our men. Here he is, laughing and jesting and enjoying keenly every one of Dr. Butler's anecdotes, which seem to be inexhaustible, putting in a story of his own now and then, kissing his daughter and making sundry enquiries of his guests, while between the pauses one of his secre• taries,— there are four of them kept right at work. — comes showing urgent telegrams and drafts and taking orders. They are all famous men, C.M.G.'s and K.C.V.O.'s and what not. The Sunday Times this morning has short biographies of three of them as men who made the peace at Paris. A fourth is son of one of our former D.P.I.'s, Sir Edward Grigg, born in Ooty. He loves India, and befriends me. The senior secretary, right-hand man of his chief and his conscience-keeper, Sir Maurice Hankey, courted by Cabinet Ministers, looks for all the world as if he were just twenty-five, smiling, affable, and without a care on his smooth brow. He is lost in admiration of my English and says he envies my faculty of getting the right word in the right place. Where did I learn English? Who taught me ? And so on. He just now said my speech on Friday in moving the resolution on the status of Indians was most eloquent. Hughes called it great. Meighen pronounced it a moving plea. Balfour declared it very brilliant. The Prime Minister came up in the afternoon to where I stood and said, ' It was a fine speech, careful and guarded, therefore the more effective.' Montagu says he looks for happy results. At dinner last night, Mrs. Hughes looked at me and observed to the P.M., ' That is a very good face '. He added, ' Yes, he is a fine speaker'. Not meant for me ; I looked away and benl down earnestly to say something to Mrs. Massey, who sat next to me. ' Did you observe,' she asked, 1 the by-play that was going on all the time you were speaking and the notes that went amongst us' ? ' No,' I said, (not altogether truthfully, for Montagu had told me Letters 131 confidentially) and Dr. Butler was curious to know what it was. Then the P.M. said my speech gladdened the hearts of the British Cabinet Ministers, for I arraigned General Smuts, who used on every occasion to preach the Sermon on the Mount with a sancti• monious air. They were very sore about it, and told each other : ' Serve him right. Where is his justice now and equality and tenderness to oppressed nationalities ? ' Hughes remarked that he was very angry with Lloyd George for postponing the discussion, for he was eager to declare on my side and down Smuts. Polak, who read the confidential verbatim report of my speech, calls it ' magnificent'. For the moment it looks as though the prospect was bright. Let us see. Has Reuter wired the news that the Corporation of London have resolved to confer on Maharao and me the Freedom of the City ? It is due to Montagu, who wrote an eulogistic letter about me unofficially and recommended the step.

Your loving father, V. S. SRINIVASAN

4. To A. V. PATWARDHAN London, August 21, 1921 My dear Vaman Rao,1 Winston Churchill is still hesitating over Kenya Colony. The European representatives have frightened him out of his wits. But though he will try to please them, he must conform his deci• sion to the equality principle. Some ingenuity may be required to reconcile the principle and the decision and he has no lack of ingenuity. Still we shall have got four-fifths of what wc want ; the one-fifth will be camouflaged. The future is safe ; that is to say, in the hands of our own people. But they are a poor backward lot and cannot help themselves. Jeewanjec and Varma2 are good in their way ; but their education is slight and their outlook limited. 1 shall be sworn of the Privy Council when 1 have returned from Geneva, i.e., about the third week of October. I am glad

'A foundation-member of the Servants of India Society. 2 Leaders of the Kenya Indian delegation. 132 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

and relieved to hear my long coat and turban will pass; otherwise the lowest estimate for the prescribed robe would be £ 350. For two days I was on tenterhooks. The Belgian Government did us well indeed. 1 saw, besides Brussels, Ypres, Ostend, Antwerp and Liege. One must see these places to understand the horrors of war. The most vivid imagina• tion can't picture the havoc. But the Belgians are a plucky, resourceful people and are recovering fast. His Majesty was good enough to receive us, the Maharao and me. He is a very simple man, dressed in Khaki, full of courtesy and kindly inquiries. He is exceptionally tall and bends down gracefully. The withdrawal of the Munitions case has created a tremendous uproar here. The general impression in high circles is that Holland will have to go. Members of the Cabinet are taking keen interest in the matter. I am going to Paris the day after tomorrow—Thursday. On the 1st of September I shall be in Geneva. The Fiji people seem to be in a great hurry. But nothing is decided yet as to my voyage. There is possibility of my going to Australia, etc. first and finish• ing up with Canada. In this case I shall have to go through the Canal and past Aden, and may therefore have a week or fortnight in India on the way. But this is a faint hope so far.

Affectionately yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

5. To A. V. PATWARDHAN

London, March, 1922 My dear Vaman Rao, The impressions of a teetotaller on the efficacy of prohibition in the United States are not good for much. But one heard so much on the subject during the Conference on the Limitation of Armaments1 that it might conceivably be of interest to our readers2 in India, where so many eager minds are directed to the

1 Mr. Sastri was India's representative at the Washington Conference. 1922. 2 These impressions were published in The Servant of India. 1922. Letters 133 total prevention of drink. Controversy is still bitter in the United States, as is to be expected where vested interests and habits have acquired great intensity. Opinion therefore on the spot is varied and even contradictory. One even heard of an early repeal of the Prohibition Law—and of the attempts made in several parts of the continent to stir up an agitation with that view. Others like the workers of the Y.M.C.A. and other enthusiasts were sanguine that prohibition was striking root in the moral sentiments of the people and that the shrinking of facilities for drunkenness would complete the good work. One odd feature of the situation, which illustrates perhaps the perversity of human nature, was that every now and then one came across an earnest man or woman who declared that he or she had been a teetotaller before the Pro• hibition Law, but had subsequently taken to drink as a protest against the interference of that Law with the freedom of the individual. The reformer cites the abolition of the saloon as a gain of inestimable value to the cause of sobriety. The factory owner and the farmer reap immense advantage from the dis• appearance of this institution, and they may be trusted to resist to the utmost its revival in any shape or form. The contemptuous view of prohibition which one hears so often in certain circles of Europe is derived from a limited observation of the conditions obtaining in the large towns on the eastern sea board. Here the enormous wealth of the population and the facilities for smuggl• ing combine to make drink available to those that ardently seek it in hotels and restaurants. At private parties too people draw on the hoards of wealthy citizens which are supposed to be immense. In the west and middle west, however, which are often represented as the real America, these opportunities for the maintenance of the old habit do not exist and prohibition seems to be fairly effective. On a large view of the matter the prospects of the Dry Law even on the East Coast are not gloomy. The very fact that drink except in private houses has to be indulged in secretly constitutes a great hindrance and must tend to the disappearance of the evil in the long run. Then at all public and semi-public functions in which the great officials take part no wine is served, its place being taken by a medicinal beverage which is called Whiterock. To the students of human affairs this fact would constitute a second big hindrance. The greatest hope of the reformer remains to be mentioned. It resides in the pro- 134 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI bability that the new generation of Americans, uncorrupted by the habits of their fathers and grandfathers, will grow up in an atmosphere of respect for the Prohibition Law and the present defects in its working will be made up for by the willing acquiescence of the citizens of the future. Of the various triumphs of the Conference on the Limitation of Armaments at Washington the one that caused the greatest wonderment to the outside world as well as to those that took part at the fateful gathering, was the agreement as to the restric• tion on the strength of the naval forces, absolutely and relatively, of the various Powers of the world. The manner in which the agreement came about was no less remarkable than its sub• stance. On the opening day no sooner had the chairman of the Conference, Mr. Hughes,1 been appointed, than he delivered a speech which contained precise and detailed proposals for the limitation of naval armaments. These proposals dealing with the navies of several countries must have occupied Mr. Hughes and the American naval experts for many weeks previously. Yet, when the delegation assembled in the metropolis of the United States, not a whisper was audible in any circle and even the omniscient American press did not know that a great surprise was in store. When the full nature of the proposals was disclosed, some persons, seemingly wise, told each other with confidence that the previous consent of the heads of the principal delegations must have been taken before so momentous a plan could be announced to the world challenging the Powers as it were to say yes or no, and be approved or condemned by the judgement of an eager and expectant world. When Mr. Balfour a little later protested earnestly that he had been taken unawares as much as anybody else though he had met Mr. Hughes in private a few hours before the latter's opening speech, it was realised for the first time how wonderfully the secret had been kept. People re• membered the ways of the old diplomacy, its euphemisms and concealments, its periphrasis and indirectness, its mystifications and long-drawn delays and prognosticated a point-blank refusal from the Powers startled and irritated by the bluntness of a Government which had kept ostentatiously aloof from the courte• sies as well as the entanglements of the old world. The atmosphere at Washington, however, was fully charged with the

1 Secretary General of the U.S.A. Letters 135 spirit of the new diplomacy. The delegations did not not take long to realise that the world had become tired of the traditional hypo• crisy of European Chancellories and that the hour had struck for a striking manifestation of the new international morality. The deafening applause that greeted the announcement by Balfour and Kato of the consents of their Governments was only the outward symbol of the rejoicings of the earth's peoples. The old diplo• macy is dead, long live the new.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

6. To HOPE SIMPSON, M. P.

(Camp) Cawnpore, April 10, 1924 Dear Mr. Hope Simpson, I duly received your kind cable in reply to mine regarding Kenya.1 Your letter arrived yesterday. I am grateful for both. Reuter tells us that the Colonies Committee have begun con• versation at the India Office and that an early interview with the Colonial Secretary has been fixed up. It is a pity the Aga Khan should have fallen ill just now, but I trust by the time this letter reaches you he will have returned from Paris, and you will have till the end of the negotiations the uninterrupted benefit of his wide knowledge and shrewd diplomacy. You will have received a copy of a pamphlet, published by the Servants of India Society, containing a small collection of what I have said and written regarding Kenya. If you happen to have time, may I ask you to read in particular my speech on ' Africa or India 7 ' delivered at the St. Stephen's College and the one I made in the Council of

1 To Mi. Hope Simpson and Sir Benjamin Robertson who were on The Crown Colonics Committee, Mr. Saslri cabled: 'India prayerfully trusts you will preserve her self-respect and Britain's honour. The Empire cannot long survive the extension of the colour bar beyond South Africa.' Mr. Hope Simpson cabled back to say that he would do his best. Mr. Hope Simpson was also Chairman of the Liberal Party Committee on Indian Affairs. 136 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI State on the subject of Kenya ? Lord OJivier's insistence on a clear case being made out by the Kenya Government for the necessity for controlling Indian immigration gives hope that the obnoxious bill may yet be dropped, for I do not believe that the facts on the spot or the figures of Indian immigration will enable a case to be made out. But Lord Delamere 1 and company are both determined and reckless. To propose the adoption of the automatically impartial principle of the United States of a quota or percentage on the existing population and fight for it without flinching would perhaps be excellent tactics of negotiation, besides being justifiable on its own merits. It will no doubt be a bitter pill for Englishmen to swallow, but the bare truth is that in the more important and ultimate respects, the white man is the enemy of the African native. A matter in which the Indian claim will not be bitterly resented is the increase of representation on the Legislative Council. Lord OHvier's point that under Crown Colony Government the exact numerical strength of a community in the legislature is comparatively unimportant is no doubt just on abstract grounds, but this consideration should be recom• mended to the whites as well as to the Indians. Why do they, with the official majority at their beck and call, insist on having a clear majority even in the non-official part of the legislature ? The obvious implication is that the colony is theirs and that everybody else is there only on sufferance. This implication is intolerable. It does not matter one whit to them if the Indian claim to equality is conceded ; the equality would at best be theoretical and the whites will remain in reality the undisputed masters of the situation. Apparently the motive behind their un• yielding attitude is horror of the equality idea. It is true on our side we are pursuing a mere abstraction, for it will be impossible for our Indians there for a very, very, long time yet to convert this paper equality into anything like real equality for the purposes of material or political advantage. Still, paradoxical as it may appear, the sentiment is a vital issue with us, as it sometimes reconciles us to the Empire. That is why no compromise is possible on it. No mere numerical increase in the representation, no mere approach to equality, will satisfy. If they have eleven,

1 Though an Executive Councillor in Kenya, Lord Delamere led the white settlers who threatened to rebe] against British authority. Letters 137 we must have eleven and no less. In all these negotiations, the equality test must always be in the mind. During my last stay in England I had a vivid perception, such as 1 had not had before, of the strength of certain forces and modes of thought inconsistent with the higher ideals of the Empire and the continuance of India within the Britannic fold. Of course, one feels their overpowering strength in India every day, but one had hopes that among the chastening influences of the war. was a progressive diminution of that strength in the home of Parlia• mentary institutions. This hope was rudely shaken out of me during the recent Kenya dispute in London. I will take the liberty of choosing two out of many experiences of a disillusioning nature. They are both connected with Sir James Masterton Smith. I conceived great respect for his knowledge, ability and earnest• ness. But he is typical of the tenacious, hard-headed, immovable, British official, whose qualities have been invaluable in the build• ing up of this great Empire, but have become positively harmful to its conservation and maintenance in the new era of the peace of the world and the brotherhood of nations. In justification of the Kenya decision he said once that India might carry equal weight in the counsels of the Empire with the Dominions a few years hence, but that now she cannot expect her point of view to prevail in any big dispute. Another time, in the presence of the Duke of Devonshire, who listened in an attitude of mute re• verence and wonder which was a study in itself, he depicted, in the hard, cold, pseudo-scientific language characteristic of the Round Table the struggle going on at present between two rival ideals of the British Empire—the one tending towards the equality of races and communities, the other insisting on the maintenance of white supremacy. The latter ideal, till recently undisputed, even now is in practice dominant, and prevails in most matters of importance. The former ideal, young and growing, prevails only occasionally. It is not right to state (as I had done before he began to speak) that it is the only or the prevailing ideal of Empire and that the present controversy must be settled in accordance with it. On the other hand, a practical politician must be prepared, not only for the older ideal prevailing in any parti• cular matter, but for its eventually vanquishing its younger rival and re-estaWishing itself in an incontestable position. You will understand, of course, that the language is mine while the thought 138 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI is Sir James's. Nothing would be new to you in what I have narrated except the candid admission that, where India is con• cerned, British policy moves often on the lower, and not on the higher plane. Public controversy is handicapped and to some extent vitiated by the assumption that Parliament and British statesmen are invariably guided by the nobler ideal; attempts to justify British action as fulfilling this high test must appear to the aggrieved Indian mind not only far-fetched but hypocritical. Believe me, thoughts of this kind have driven me, more than anything else, to the conclusion that it is necessary immediately to bring practice into conformity with theory and confer on India and Indians real equality and partnership. A decade more or a decade less should not matter to a nation, if reason and good faith guided our mutual relations. But we cannot allord a pro• longation of the struggle described by Sir James Masterton Smith between an old, established and dominant ideal on the one hand and a new, incipient and puny ideal on the other. King and Parliament are alike pledged to the new ideal. Delay, though desirable on some grounds, is prolific of miscarriage, breeds dis• trust not, alas, without justification, and exacerbates ill-feeling. Full preparedness, perfect fitness, ripe maturity, these arc counsels of perfection. Nothing in this imperfect world comes exactly at the moment fixed for it by idealists. In the rough school of life peoples are often fitted for institutions by the practice of them. The time required for Indianisation of the Civil Services and the much longer time required for the Indianisation of the Army, assuming that a genuine and energetic policy for the latter was in operation, are themselves guarantees that the process of consummation, even if it suffered no check, would not be marked by undue haste or precipitation. Good policy requires that the demand made recently in the Assembly, with the concurrence of the moderate as well as the advanced school of politics, be met in a spirit of sympathy and hearty response. To complete the case on the practical side, powerful argu• ments could be adduced, drawn from the experiences of the transitional system. In the provinces Ministers have done much only where Governors loyally carried out the recommendation of the Joint Select Committee of 1919 and worked diarchy without emphasising its harsher features. In other cases the machinery generated too much friction and, if the outspoken evidence of Letters 139 Ministers was taken, it would point to the need as well as the safety of establishing complete provincial autonomy. In the Centre you should have seen, as I did, the daily work of the Assembly to realise the utter impossibility of the situation. Government were defeated whenever the Swarajist majority cared. Their character, efficiency and motive were impugned without mercy. They stood denuded of the last vestige of authority or reputation. It was a pity to watch the members of Government keeping up a hopeless fight. It would not be appropriate of me to say that I com• miserated them, but I will venture this observation : no Govern• ment has the right to subject its highest represenatives for any continued length of time to the cares and humiliations, which were the daily lot of Sir Malcolm Hailey and his colleagues in the last session. Thanks to the narrow policy of the last two years, the Viceroy and his council have now to reckon with Pandit Motilal Nehru, Mr. Patel and Mr. Chamanlal in the place of Sir Sivaswami Aiyar, Mr. Samarth and Sir Devaprasad Sarvadhikary. With Montagu out of office and Gandhi in jail, reaction pulled itself together and began to govern in the old spirit of isolation, treating friend and foe alike, boasting in season and out of season of its exclusive responsibility to the Imperial Parliament and setting at naught even the expressions of united Indian sentiment. No wonder moderates hung down their heads and were scattered. Did you realise that in the new Assembly, out of six liberal members, as many as four have come in by nomination ? The only two elected liberals were inevitably drawn into the nationalist party and voted for refusal of supplies. No one would have thought this possible in 1921. It may be comforting to the official mind, but it is neither truthful nor just, to attribute the whole of his change to the untrained electorate, the feeble moderate or the accursed Swarajist or all put together. The general policy and attitude of Government has made undoubtedly the largest contribution. Official excesses when non-co-operation had to be repressed, the certified salt duty, the Kenya wrong, the omission, still continuing, to make rules under the Act, for transfer of political power and the nullification of the principle of non• intervention when legislature and executive in India should agree — these are prominent symptoms of the spirit injurious to the growth of confidence and goodwill between the races. You may feel difficulty in realising this. We breathe it in the air here. Even 140 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI the Swarajist in his anguish cries out occasionally ' Oh, for some magnanimous gesture, some proof of a changed heart, some hope of real citizenship of the Empire !' The desire to stand aloof from all parties in this country, to keep everybody at arm's length, and to govern in isolation, how• ever intelligible before the Reforms, is now inexpedient and fraught with danger, because we now have a direct electorate in all parts of the country which elects members to fairly large popular houses of legislature. The difficulty of governing in isola• tion is brought out strikingly by the recent action of Lord Lytton in Bengal. He has found it necessary, in order to withstand the unreasoning opposition of the Swarajist party, to call together under his own roof those members of the legislature who are inclined to be friendly and endeavour to consolidate them into a regular party. He has been fiercely attacked for this step, which is described as not befitting a constitutional Governor, and I have defended him in an article which will appear today in the Servant of India of which, 1 hope, you are regularly receiving a copy. The logical consequence of consolidating a Government party is perhaps only dimly perceptible today. But if the non- official members of that party know their business at all, they can bring the general policy of Government in the reserved as well as in the transferred departments into greater or less conformity with their own wishes, and the arrangement will then become com• patible with representative institutions. To some extent respon• sible government would be anticipated in a sort of convention, and transition to the final stage will be facilitated in consequence. Perhaps in course of time, if one may conceive Lord Lytton's experiment to be followed up, the leader of the house would summon the party meeting instead of the Governor, who may pro• gressively recede into his constitutional position. At one time my personal faith in the method of forming conventions was so great that I actually thought it possible to anticipate the responsible government at the Centre by getting the non-official Indian mem• bers of the Viceroy's Executive Council, though appointed by the Crown, to regard themselves in actual practice as responsible to the Assembly and resign office whenever they would resign if in reality they were responsible. This hope has come to nothing for reasons which I cannot explain fully within the compass of this letter. In one of my interesting conversations with an Executive Letters 141 Councillor of the Viceroy on the eve of the Reforms, we were both trying to picture the future. He then confided to me his anticipation that the transition would be intolerably irksome to all parties and that his one anxiety was that the first officials under the new regime should so contrive things that, when they trans• ferred responsibility, they should transfer it in the first instance to the party friendly to the British connection, so that the beginnings of responsible government would be laid in a solid foundation of loyal attachment to the suzerain power. Well, I wonder what he thinks now. His successors have so contrived things that the liberal party is nowhere, and when the transfer does happen, it will happen in circumstances by no means pro• pitious to the growth of friendly feeling between the peoples who have been long held together in mutual political association. You may remember I said to a meeting of members under the auspices of the Empire Parliamentary Association that a great authority in India had told me, ' We have given you all that the act actually prescribes. We will do no more.' Perhaps I annoyed a section of my audience at the time. That, however, sums up the attitude of those who have the ordering of affairs here ; to live exclusively for the present so as to avoid the reproach of disobeying the Act, but to do nothing by way of preparing for the future although the Act itself distinctly looks forward to a great future. But here the attitude is one of hesitancy and doubt as to whether the future is actually to be realised. Another mighty effort must be put for• ward by interested parties and Parliament must be persuaded to enact a further stage in the reforms before the men on the spot will awake to the situation and then adjust themselves—still to the extent absolutely required and no further ! This seems to me a necessary condition of progress in democracy—a never-ending tug of war, the combatants constantly on the strain and now and then more on the strain, that is all. I have occasionally dreamed that after Ireland and Egypt the political progress of India might be laid on smooth rails; but apparently I was mistaken. All re• form in the story of man must be paid for still in the good old way—by conflict and travail, by bitterness and tears. It is now definitely settled that 1 should go over to England as a member of a political deputation on behalf of the National Convention and likewise on behalf of the Liberal Federation. I am sailing by s.s. Macedonia on the 26th of this month along with 142 RT. HON'BLE V. S, SRJNJVASA SASTRI Dr. Annie Besant. Looking forward to an early interview on our arrival about the middle of May.

I remain, with all kind regards, Yours sincerely, V. S. SRINIVASAN

P.S. Since this letter was finished, a cable has appeared in the daily press containing a forecast of the cabinet committee on India by a writer in the Observer, He says nothing dramatic will be done and the India Government's guidance will be mostly accepted. The concluding sentence of the cable is : 'The absence of dis• turbances in India has tended to dissipate some doubts which certain labour ministers may have entertained with regard to the wisdom of the Government of India's general policy towards Indian political aspirations.' That last sentiment conveys a lesson not altogether new to India, but daily more widely assimilated by the people. Kenya has taught it to us in a way we connot forget. It is idle to talk of our quietly working the reforms and thereby showing our fitness for further reforms. We may show our fitness for further reforms. We may show our fitness in that way ten times over, but the British nation will not know, Parliament will not care, and the Cabinet will not stir, till there is trouble in India. You may wish that trouble was not necessary for progress ; you may say that occasionally trouble has not been necessary for progress ; but you cannot assert with confidence that trouble will not be necessary for the progress of India. Just let me add an observation which will put the point in another light. Those who ask for proofs of India's fitness for Swaraj may be thinking of two very different sorts of fitness ; fitness for winning Swaraj is proved by the capacity to make trouble on a formidable scale. Fitness for using Swaraj is proved by measures conducing to the public good and showing the qualities of public spirit, national, as distinguished from parochial or sectarian outlook and courage to execute large and beneficent policies in the face of difficulty. If people in England will not actually confound the two, they are likely to measure the second by the first. The criterion is not, however, so applicable to India as to England. Their histories have been so different. The left Letters 143 wing in India have made up their minds that what Englishmen look for is only the first sort of fitness. It means a tragedy to both countries. Far-seeing statesmanship which, in the words of one of your poets, knows how to take occasion by the hand, can alone undeceive them. It cannot be had in India ; there is no scope for its display here. That is why in all political crises we look to England for the vision, the idealism and the driving power. Yours sincerely, V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

7. To SAROJINI NAIDU

April 30, 1924 Dear Mrs. Naidu, To my grief I cannot accept1 the invitation to attend the meeting of men of all parties called at Sabarmati. It was exceed• ingly kind of you to include me in the list of those invited. May I send you a short statement of views ? 1 have not attended any of these All-India meetings for some time, and it is possible that I look at these matters under discussion from a somewhat detached standpoint. First, as to the wearing of khaddar. The full believers in the efficacy of khaddar are admittedly few in number. The great majority of Congressmen, I understand, wear it casually and unwillingly, partly out of reverence to Gandhiji and partly out of constrained loyalty to the compromise agreed upon by their various leaders. Among Liberals and Independents the doctrine of khaddar is regarded as an extravagance of the old Swadeshi faith, unwarranted by theory or experience and unfitted by its apparent irrelevance to the programme of the Congress to be erected into a condition precedent for admission to that body. While the pres• cription of a badge of a particular material or colour could not be reasonably objected to, the requirement that a Congressman's entire dress should be made of a certain stuff, produced in a certain way, must act as a bar of exclusion against many sincere patriots well-deserving of a place in the premier political organi• sation of the country, but who have been taught to believe that a

1 Beins away on his trip to England. II—10 144 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI sartorial regulation based upon inadequate data and unproven assumptions does violence to the fundamental liberty of the indi• vidual. Many persons, a few for whom I entertain respect, are inclined to submit to it as the innocent fad of a great man which it is not necessary for them to examine or understand. I confess I am unable to take this view. It strikes me, even after these many months of thought, as an illegitimate imposition in an organisation purporting to comprehend all progressive politicians. The second difficulty I feel is in connection with the next general election. Would the Liberals and Independents, who might now come in, be allowed to stand as candidates even against the Swarajists and the Responsivists ? So far these two sections have come to a mutual understanding and are entitled, as I under• stand the situation, to call themselves regular official candidates of the Indian National Congress. Liberal and Independent candi• dates, wherever they stand, would naturally be denounced as disloyal Congressmen. What would then become of the com• prehensive unity which it is the sole aim of the Sabarmati meet• ing to attain ? People in Britain would be the last in the world to be deceived by a reconciliation of which almost the first visible fruit was the exchange between contending Congress factions of the terms usurper and traitor. The Sabarmati meeting would therefore have to effect a compromise on this question of election, a difficult enough task where only two factions are concerned but nearly impossible when a third comes in with an indefinable claim. Acceptance of office is with us a door to the honourable service of the public. We do not accept the judgement recently pronounced by an influential leader that we value it only for the power and pelf it brings while others would value it on higher and more patriotic grounds. From the year 1918 we have stood for working the reforms for what they are worth. In fact our severance from the Congress was for this express purpose. It would be asking too much of us to expect that we should acquiesce in a compromise which regarded acceptance of office as a step to be explained and apologised for or to depend for sanction on the arbitrary decision of two or three eminent individuals. The question of civil disobedience is neither so easy nor so simple in my judgement as it appears to most speakers and writers on the problem. I am willing, however, for the moment to repress my misgiving for the sake of general harmony and place full faith Letters 145 in the all but universal admission that the country is not fit for any drastic measures of the kind and will not be fit for many years yet. But the three difficulties I have raised above are serious. I am desirous like others of a common understanding among political parties and of a reunion under the wings of trie National Congress. But I wish that our reconciliation should be based on simple and intelligible agreements ; and, being a man of peace, I am not attracted to the idea of re-entering the Congress as a disaffected minority with the prospect of conducting an internecine struggle of indefinite duration for the purpose of becoming the majority.

Yours sincerely, V. S. SRINIVASAN

8. To R. SADASIVA AIYAR

Mylapore, December 9, 1925 My dear Sadasiva Aiyar,1 Did you not say that Morgan's book2 disappointed you ? So have told me many others :—among them Chintamani. This im• posed character is a handicap to many professions—the actor, the college don, the politician, etc. Some individuals too go through life with such disability. The most striking instance now is Gandhi. I know one or two people who can make disclosures, showing him to be a human being with human qualities. But eight out of ten readers would say that they had been robbed of a pleasant illusion. Of dead men Gokhale suffered much from indiscriminate attribution of impossibly stilted morals and severity of thought. I much wonder whether a biographer would be considered prud• ent who ignored the imposed character of his subject, and pre• sented him as he was—warts and all. Your affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

1A professor friend of Mr. Sastri. noted for his scholarship in English Literature. 2 On Morley. 146 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

9. To SIR P. S. SIVASWAMI AIYAR

Delhi, February 27, 1927 Dear Friend, I read your fine speech on the Gokhale day with appreciation and gratitude. Your good taste and coirectitude give your utter• ances a quality of satisfyingness, excuse the harsh coinage, which one rarely meets with in these days. The resolution on South Africa, which Lajpatrai had tabled, has been withdrawn. S. Srinivasa Aiyangar threatened opposi• tion and the Lalaji funked. Jinnah, whose mind was not made up as to the character of the settlement,1 suggested the course of negation, and the suggestion prevailed. So I am like one who need not have been. Bhore tells me some Swarajist chaps shelter themselves under your example. 1 If even he has so many doubts and misgivings, how can we be expected to bless the thing ? ' The Railway Budget has met some rough weather. But it is nothing to the fierce storm which is about to burst over the ratio question. I shall watch it from Basavangudi—not with indiffer• ence, but with complete dispassion. My presidentship of the Currency League, believe me, leaves me without prepossession. The Homeric combat, however, between Blackett and Purusho- tamdas, excites me to a degree. P. is not without hope. He says events are telling in his favour. I don't know. It is curious I don't try to know, for I have a feeling that I can't hereafter acquire enough knowledge to form an independent opinion. One can only lean on the side where one's previous experience leads one to believe the soundest knowldge and patriotism lie. I have no doubt Blackett knows more, but does he put India's interest above Britain's ? I can't trust. Ignorance and prejudice are not guides to judgement. So I don't presume to judge. Looking into my mind, however, I can't be blind to a bias. And let me confess it is pretty strong. I am being candid with you and expect pity, not ridicule. Yours affectionately as ever, V. S. SRINIVASAN

1 The Capetown Agreement. Letters 147

10. To SIR P. S. SIVASWAMI AIYAR

Bangalore City, March 16, 1927

Dear Friend, This is the fourth public penegyric1 that you have pronounced on me. Shall I confess it ? I shall do well to die today—that is my feeling. How can I live up to the character that you have given me ?

Utterly and irredeemably yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

1 Sir P. S. Sivaswami Aiyar made a speech on March 15, 1927 requesting His Excellency Lord Goschen to unveil the portrait of the Rt. Hon'ble Mr. Sastri at the Senate House, Madras. We quote below some passages from his speech : " It is said that a prophet is not honoured in his own country but it would be perhaps truer to say that a prophet is finally honoured in his own country. Mr. Sastri had acquired a world-wide fame before we decided upon this memorial. What is the secret of this world-wide fame and what are his claims and distinctions ? Claims to admiration and gratitude on the part of one's countrymen are not built up by natural gif's alone or by character alone or by achievements alone. It is the combination of these that constitutes a genuine title to greatness and remembrance. Disinterested public service and self-sacrifice have always appealed to the people. Mr. Sastri has recently related the story of his admission to the Servants of India Society. Every member of that Society is bound to take seven vows and no one has fulfilled those vows in the letter and in the spirit more than Mr. Sastri. India has always been first in his thoughts ; he has given to her service the best in him ; he has sought no personal advantage and has worked for the advancement of the whole nation without distinction of caste and creed. In founding the Servants of India Society, it was the aim of Gokhale to spiritualise public life. The members of the Society have to fill their hearts with the love of the country, so that all else shall appear as of lit"le moment by its side. They have to be animated by fervent patriotism which rejoices at every opportunity of sacrifice for the Motherland and they have to possess a dauntless heart, which refuses to be turned from its object by difficulty or danger. Try him by any of these tests and you will find that Mr. Saslri has wholeheartedly and joyfully fulfilled these conditions of his order. As a member of the Provincial Council, as a member of the old Imperial Council, as a member of the Reformed Legislature, as a platform speaker and as a politician, Mr. Sastri has always striven to elevate the tone of public discussion. He has never been a politician in the vulgar sense of the term, but a politician versed in the science of politics and in constitutional history, ready to appreciate facts in their full significance and realize the responsibility of a legislator. His judgment of men has always been generous and just and his opinions are generally the result of mature reflection and well-balanced judgment. It is not necessary for me to dwell on the purity and simplicity of his 148 RT, HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

11. From Mahatma Gandhi

Sabarmati, January 11, 1928 My dear Brother, I have your sweet letter. It reminded me of the Head• master in Tiruppur who, having been your pupil, told me that you were as much master of Sanskrit as of English. I did not know this. I have read Valmiki only in translation and that in• differently. It is Tulsidas I swear by. But I admit all you say and would yet hold that Sita did go to the forest in spite of Rama's wish to the contrary. And in doing so, she excelled herself. Similarly did Rama excel himself in carrying out the promise of Dasaratha. But I am arguing to no purpose. For we are alone in the homage we owe to Rama and Sita. I am watching your movements1 and prize copies of your letters to Sir Muhammad Habibullah.

private life, his capacity for friendship, his sweetness of disposition, charming manner and dignity of temper and conduct which have endeared him to all who have had the privilege of friendship or even contact. It might perhaps be more pertinent to refer to his gifts of chaste and mellifluous oratory, which have been unsurpassed in this generation in India and perhaps equalled by not more than a few even in the wider English-speaking world and which have been the envy of many a cultured Englishman. It has been his good fortune and his privilege to plead the cause of India in the Imperial Conference, in the League of Nations and in -he International Conference at Washington. It has been his privilege ic plead the cause of India in all the Dominions of the Commonwealth. His voice may be truly said to have been raised on behalf of India in the parliament of man and the federation of the world. To whichever country he has been sent on a mission, he has succeeded in inspiring the people with high respect and admiration for the capacity and culture of Indians and in winning sympathy for the Indian point of view. Vf I were asked to specify the most valuable service among many, which Mr. Sastri has rendered during his public life I should unhesitat• ingly refer to the service he has conferred upon us by raising the esteem in which the educated Indian is held in the civilised world. . . . Let us hope that this memorial to one of our worthiest and most enlightened patriots may serve to place before future generations of young men the example of an unselfish life devoted to noble aims and service of the country, and ideals of sincerity and purity in private and public relations of the high culture and scholarship and models of oratory fit to take their place with the best specimens in the English language.' 1 In South Africa. The following extract from a letter of Mr. Sastri to Jagadisan (1940) throws lieht on Gandhiji's letter : ' Gandhiji's letter to me on the Ramayana ques'ion is really in his best style. I was tn South Africa a» the time. In a sneech to women in Travancore State he had told them that Sita disobeyed her husband Letters 149 You will have to prolong your stay if you are to put your great work on a sure foundation. Please do. With love, M. K. Gandhi

12. To Sir Muhammad Habibullah Durban, November 30, 1928 CABLE SECRET Your secret letter of October 22nd came only yesterday. Trust the delay causes no serious inconvenience. Words fail me to express how flattered and gratified I feel by your offer1 and by the most affectionate terms in which you make it. Believe me the approbation of friends, especially the Viceroy and yourself, is ample reward for such service as I have been privileged to do. I recognise the very high distinction proposed for me ; but I cannot overcome the feeling that it is somewhat out of the range of one who occupies a humble station in life. In communicating my wish to remain undistinguished may I beg respectfully that my motive be not misunderstood ? Sastri

13. To Mahatma Gandhi Sitalerya, Basavangudi, Bangalore, July 27, 1929 Dear Brother, 1 have of course reported fully on Kenya to the India Govern• ment. They have abstained from giving any news to the public lest further negotiations should be embarrassed. in following him to the forest, and that a husband's order could there• fore be set aside when there was sufficient cause. I wrote protesting against the obvious misreading of Valmiki. [ had no objection to the teaching of disobedience, but to the citation of Sita as an authority fot it. Sita pleaded with Rama for leave to accompany him, and went so far as to say, " How foolish was my father to give me to you—who are but a woman in man's garb ?" This spirited exclamation, so entirely natural and honourable to a Kshatriya maiden, is seized upon by our Panditry as an indictment against Sita's perversity of spirit. Anyway, Rama in the end yielded to her entreaty and gave her leave lo share the trials of the forest.' 1 To recommend Sastri for the award of K.C.S.l. 150 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI When I left in May last, it was on the understanding that 1 should be free to work for the Common Roll. If Col. Amery had already instructed his Agent Sir Samuel Wilson to announce his decision against it, he should have cancelled the instruction. Appa• rently he did not. Wilson communicated the abandonment of the Common Roll in confidence to the Europeans before he did so to the Indians. Probably he wished to put the former in good humour for his negotiations with them. But the Indian community felt they had been allowed to flounder in the dark as regards their dearest ambition. 1 may impart it as a secret to you that as soon as the Govern• ment of India knew of this from me, they drew the attention of the India Office to the false position in which Amery's action (or failure) had placed them. The establishment of a Common Roll, and (as a preparation) of a civilisation franchise was to be conditional on the consent of the European Community. When you remember the Europeans in Kenya have already a communal register for themselves, you will see the analogy of the Muhammedan community in India. Anyway, nobody expects the British Cabinet to impose a Common Roll on East Africa. Apart from the academic issue whether the consent of a section could be regarded as a necessary condition for a measure concerning it, I understand part of my real business was to persuade the Europeans to accept a Common Roll. From this I was however precluded by the attitude of both communities. I. The Europeans had imde up their minds (1) the fran• chise must be Communal, (2) a beginning should be made towards their responsible Government. II. The Indians had made up their minds that the Com• mon Roll was the only thing worth fighting for and till they got it, they wouldn't look at anything else. As if to make a difficult task impossible, the Indian community from the beginning suspected me. Several times I dispelled their misgivings and got their confidence. But my success was apparent only. Grounds of suspicion. I was a moderate and a Servant of India. I was an emissary of the Government of India. Col. Amery and Sir Edward Grigg thought well of me. My success in South Africa was the result of my giving away the rights of Indians. I was paid a huge salary (£700 a month !) for betraying my countrymen. These suspicions were confirmed when 1 spoke of Letters 151 a ' give and take' policy and advised entry into the legislature and local bodies. Give and take ! they asked what was there to give ? Everything had been given that could be given. No more concession or compromise ! As to entering the legislature, etc. they had resolved to do so only on a common franchise. Till then their only policy was NCO. More offence was discovered in my speeches. But I won't trouble you with the smaller counts. Both in Nairobi and in Mombassa I was put on my defence. It was humiliating. But thanks to my patience and disposition, 1 ended in both places by gaining acquittal. This was a negative benefit, though I never enjoyed the confidence or the backing of our countrymen. 1 felt this much and suffered inwardly. This is my confession to you. Not much would have been observed in my behaviour. The Europeans were nice and courteous and respectful per• sonally. Their talk was pleasant and on the whole frank. But no actual negotiations could be undertaken. Lord Delamere was typical. He said in effect ' You and I may settle the dispute in half an hour. But what good would it be ? The wretched Colo• nial Office will change it all. Till the authority of that office is destroyed, we should be fools to come to grips with the question here.' Still I made many friendships among them. They will be of use in future. Sir Mohamed Habibullah desires very much that I should go with him now to London. But I judge it will be wise to wait till negotiations actually begin and I am sent for. It is one thing to hang about ; it is another thing to be wanted. Believe me I have no ill feeling against our people in Kenya. 1 am quite willing and glad to serve them whenever occasion should arise. * * * * I am going up to Bombay to see Habibullah off. He sails on 3rd August.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

P.S. My health has improved greatly under the climate and agree• able surroundings of Bangalore. 152 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

14. To SIR P. S. SIVASWAMI AIYAR

Basavangudi, September 19, 1929 Dear Friend, I am agreeable to your suggestion that I should spend a few days in Madras before I finally leave this side. In no conceivable circumstances shall I join N.C.O., become a law-breaker, wear khoddar or assume membership of the Con• gress. Should the revised Constitution be no real advance with Assembly powers curtailed, Dominion Status disavowed, or the British hold tightened, I may denounce it and seek the retirement which you once before recommended to me. Leading an agita• tion or waving red flags and shout war-cries — is not in my line. Martyrdom must come to me, if at all, in other forms. It is easy to ask for constructive proposals. One idea I have — not perhaps constructive — neither the Hindu-Moslem problem nor the States trouble is ever going to be solved now. Only a partial adjustment is feasible, some makeshift to which the parties give half-hearted (but newspaper-boomed) assent. Even this par• tial adjustment is possible only with the consent (half-hearted and quarter-hearted) of the Government. It is the merest pre• tence and the nakedest charlatanry to talk of self-determination or spontaneous concordats. Let us all sit round a table, as round as you can get. But at some stage or other, when issues are decided, let the Government man be there. Affectionately yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

15. FROM EDWARD THOMPSON

Scar Top, Boars Hill, Oxford, November 17, 1930 Dear Mr. Sastri, I am not coming in today, after all. I do not think I shall bother to attend the press conferences. Since I cannot attend Letters 153 the Conference itself, there is nothing worth bothering about, except private talks. As I say, I do badly want to see you ; and, some time, the Maharaja of Bikaner, and perhaps Colonel Haksar. Jinnah I would like to see, but he struck me as so arrogant; there is nothing to be got from a talk with him. The position is this : chance has given me a weekly platform in the Spectator — also one in the Christian Science Monitor, one of the few American papers that are not screaming : ' Get out and let Gandhi take over' (and it has a 1,300,000 circulation). And I am doing some speaking, and have some influence on this Indian matter, because even Tories trust me as reasonably fair-minded. I want to do what I can to help. You men are faced with the possible break• up of your civilisation. The settlement of your political quarrel with us, though pressing, is not your worst problem. If you come to a settlement with us, some of you may even have to pay your lives, and all of you will have to pay your reputations. Well — when can you see me ? I am coming in to London this Wednesday afternoon, and shall stay until Thursday afternoon. Do not bother about a meal — I know you are booked for these. Can you fit in a half-hour any time ? I have a great admiration for men like you and Sapru. You need more courage and wisdom than any men for a great while. Washington had an easy job, compared with yours. I have some• thing to suggest, that I believe would swing opinion your way. But I am not going to print it. Yours sincerely, EDWARD THOMPSON

16. T o D. V. G u N D A p P A Delhi, February 23, 1931 My dear Gundappa, Do you remember ' Tulya ninda stutir mauni V etc. Very difficult ; why, impossible. But 1 have always thought that one should aim at it. The human heart yearns for praise

ilndifferent to blame and to praise ; without speech, etc. 154 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI and dreads blame. One has to fight nature. Any success you get is impermanent. A change of place or circumstance brings up the frailty and aggravates it. To one in public life, especially in Indian public life, the discipline is essential. Praise and blame are the merest distractions. They make you lose sight of the real thing you seek. My London experience this time has taught me much in this line. I haven't become callous ; I am too human for that. But I believe the verdict I hear all round makes no longer the old appeal. Distinct gain, though it comes rather late in the day. I haven't long to profit by it or improve upon it. There then I have been sermonising. But you have drawn it on yourself. Mirza did well. He wasn't cowed down by Bikaner. He never lost sight of his own viewpoints. He maintained his equanimity. His speeches were clear, brief, emphatic and believe me, sound and patriotic. I love him more than ever. But what is it to him ? Gandhi seems in conciliatory mood. Irwin has touched his heart. I prepared each for the other and feel rewarded. They say his influence over the Congress Working Committee is supreme and will prevail over Jawaharlal and others. It looks so. Events make it necessary for him to seek peace. True he lays down difficult conditions. For a wonder, Irwin is willing patiently to discuss every single point, allow for the natural weaknesses of Congressmen and meet the demand as far as pos• sible. In some cases his response far exceeds my expectation. So there is hope. Abhyankar is here. He reports Gandhi as partially willing to press the subjects' case before the Princes. From him it will be taken as well-meant advice, not as insolent intrusion.

Yours very affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

17. To D. V. GUNDAPPA My la pore, April 11, 1931 My dear Gundappa, You must have realised with painful vividity the warping pressure of politics on our intimate personal attitudes, i.e., on A group at the Round Table Conference in London, 1931. Sastri is standing fourth from left. Among others are Sir V. T. Krishnamachari, A. Rangaswamy Iyengar, The Gaekwar of Baroda and Sir Akbar Hydari. Letters 155 our souls. I have rebelled, and thank God I have not ceased to rebel against it, though I am conscious and take shame that I have now and then partially succumbed. My retirement, if I live to achieve it, is not distant. I am anxious and, so far as an old man has a will, am determined, not to allow the public distemper, however strong, to infect my soul. Don't dear G., allow life's values, arrived at naturally and in detachment, to be altered, especially to the disadvantage of parties, by extraneous influences, however seductively garbed in the guise of patriotism. In the eye of God, humanity is one and knows no division of sex, race or political boundary. What a platitude I have lighted on, but how unavoidably ! Give my love to friends, and remember Kensington Palace Mansions W. 8. Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

18. To T. R. VENKATARAMA SASTRI

Kensington Palace Mansions, London, W. 8, August 20, 1931

My dear Venkataraman, I have just come back from the India Office. When I last saw Benn, five days ago, he was inclined to be lachrymose about Gandhi's refusal to come.1 Apparently comfort has come to him in the interval. We can do this, we can do that, we can do a third thing. The flag will fly still. So he talked today. When the worst comes to the worst, Princes and Mussalmans and minorities and loyal Hindus can run the show in a way. After an hour and a half, we agreed on three items : (1) The Government of India ought not to publish their sheet of charges against Congress workers. They may be on the

1 Lord Irwin retired in April 1931 and Lord Willingdon succeeded him as Viceroy. Differences arose between Government and Mahatma Gandhi as regards the in'erpretation of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. In consequence Gandhi declared he would not go to the Round Table Conference. How• ever, as a result of further negotiations Gandhi sailed for London on August 29, 1931. 156 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI defensive but not yet, do tit for tat. Being the more powerful and responsible party they should show greater restraint and forbearance. (2) The proposal of Gandhi that a High Court Judge should examine alleged breaches of the pact should be sympathetically explored and adopted if possible. (3) CP. should be specially commissioned to inquire in secrecy whether the Bombay Chamber of Commerce could be conciliated by the inclusion of Birla and possibly Jamal Maho• med in the R.T.C. For the folly of their non-inclusion Benn takes the blame and is prepared to make amends, if CP. reports that the addition will have the desired effect, viz., of getting the Chamber to join the Conference. A further and more important result will be the Chamber's exerting their undoubted influence with the Congress in the direction of peace. How far Willingdon and his Cabinet will fall in with these ideas and loyally carry them out one can't say. Benn will tele• graph at once. I don't know the inwardness of the Congress resolution. But it is to my mind a clear proof of the utter incapacity of that body and of Gandhi for real constructive work. The ostensible ground of refusal is unconvincing because so inadequate. I half suspect Gandhi is diffident of the issue of the R.T.C. as the Moslems have definitely repudiated him, and may be for other reasons as well. Polak is angry with him, Andrews is distressed and feebly apologetic. Irwin feels let down badly. Anyway here is another Himalayan blunder. I am fully hoping you will have accepted Bhore's offer. It is an important body. I see the Railwaymen's Union are threaten• ing to boycott the Board. Never mind. Once you are there, your industry, conscientiousness, patience and courtesy will ensure you being called upon again. I am truly happy. The bloom of health has returned to Ramamurti's face. Being occupied he is cheerful. Polak is away on a holiday though he comes back for a night now and then. The weather is terrible still. Nothing but stories of floods and washings away and deaths. All that can afford it have fires throughout the day. The French doctor's treatment is benefiting me. For the last fortnight the heart trouble hasn't appeared, except faintly on Letters 157 two occasions — once after a bath and once while walking. For food I still go out. Kodanda Rao and the Kottlers are taking all possible care of me. Mrs. K. tells me they have used up all their money and must return home in October. But the Micawber spirit triumphs in husband and wife, they are cheer• ful and hope to stay on till December, when we can all go together to Capetown like a happy migrating family. Ramamurti comes occasionally to their studio for a meal or tea, and we have played bridge three or four times. Do you see my family ? You will go to them now, won't you ?

Affectionately yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

19. To RAMSAY MACDONALD

Madras, April 15, 1932

My dear Prime Minister, I avail myself for the first time of the privilege you gave me to write to you with freedom upon the state of things in India. Not being on any of the Committees, I am in a comparatively detached position, and my survey may be free from pre-posses- sions. In November last, your Government acceded, though some• what reluctantly, to the request made by a large section of the R.T.C., that the idea of giving autonomy to the provinces as a first step in reconstruction should be abandoned. We were re• assured and flattered ourselves that the danger was past. When, however, in your final declaration on behalf of Government you read the sentence : ' It may be that opinion and circumstances will change and it is not necessary here and now to take any irrevoc• able decision' (P. 292, Report of the Plenary Session), a shiver passed through me ; and when a few days later Sir John Simon enlarged upon it in the House of Commons I felt that the mischief had been done. What you meant as a way of escape in case of 158 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI an unforeseen eventuality has been seized upon as a desirable turn of affairs which should be brought about. Opinion and cir• cumstances are being made to change. It may not be an exaggera• tion to say today that in India the two contrasted views are about equally influential. Every day of delay tells in favour of the smaller step. We must remember, however, that this result is only apparent. The National Congress is temporarily put out of action so far as the circulation of opinion is concerned. There can be no doubt that body will be almost to a man opposed to a scheme which postpones central responsibility and exposes it to the risks involved in postponement. You will not find it difficult to understand why the Mussalman community are as a whole indifferent to central responsibility, which, it' it should include the Indian States, would leave them in a pronounced minority. For your private ear I may add that a powerful section of the British official element is throwing its weight on the side of provincial autonomy, and you know as well as anybody that official views have many ways of spreading themselves which are secret and can be neither checked nor countered. It would be a mistake to rely much on such an expedient as a declaration in the statute that central responsibility will follow when arrange• ments have been completed. Those that do not desire central responsibility will find or create a dozen reasons for not complet• ing the necessary arrangements, and those who wish to imple• ment the declaration will find it hard to surmount the active opposition of provincial leaders on whom autonomy has just been conferred. In my talks with high officials, I came frequently upon the idea that the interval between the smaller and the larger step must be sufficient to enable the provinces to find their feet and prove themselves fit to create and sustain a federal centre. This doubtless means that, so far as it lies in their power, they will not take the second step simply as a deferred part of a whole scheme of reform, but make it contingent upon their own tests of fitness. I am convinced that to bring one part of the scheme into operation in advance of the other is to endanger the whole. The followers of the Congress, who cannot be kept out of action indefinitely, will be strong enough to obstruct effectively the working of provincial autonomy ; and if the Government of His Majesty is to be carried on it will have to be through the nearly exclusive agency of those minor communities whose claims Letters 159 are fully conceded. Expressions like Anglo-Muslim Raj were heard even while we were in England, and they seem now to be louder here. It is probable that some important sections of British opinion will not shrink from such a development. But you will be a sad man when you discover that your lifelong labours for the welfare of India have ended in the setting up of class against class and an application on a colossal scale of the principle of divide and rule. The delay in the remoulding of political institutions is having another harmful effect. All interests and communities are stiffen• ing their demands, and the Princes are no exception. In fact to reconcile the dissidents among them hopes are being given which it will be impossible to fulfil. As yet this danger has not become formidable, but in the uncertainties of the situation today any sinister turn may, not improbably, result in the ruling out of an All-India Federation. It would be by no means easy to destroy the work of the R.T.C. of the last two years and fall back upon a scheme of reforms for British India. Enemies of progress will have cause to rejoice that the Princes of India, by their dramatic entry into the political stage and their equally dramatic exit from it, have darkened counsel and covered the whole movement with confusion. You will be surprised to hear that some men in high authority express themselves as no friends of the Federation of All-India. You need not be unduly alarmed. I merely mention it to forewarn you. You remember at a critical moment in the proceedings of the Minorities Sub-Committee in 1930 and at another equally critical moment in 1931, I implored you to make up your mind and im• pose a decision on us. On both occasions you agreed that there seemed no alternative. How I wish that you had acted accordingly ! The Consultative Committee have no doubt placed the matter in your hands of their own accord. But I know the disposition among the various parties and do not envy you. Your decision is not going to be accepted as final. I hope such protests as may be made will not incommode the administration. But it is easy to be over-confident. You will not consider me presumptuous if I offer the suggestion that it might be well to instruct the Gover• nors in some provinces like the Punjab that they must not be caught unawares when the communal decision is carried out. In another sphere difficulties are thickening. The severities II—II 160 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI attending the measures that the various Governments take to put down the disruptive activities of the Congress have assumed grave proportions. You have enough experience of Indian execu• tive methods to judge the actual incidence upon the people of all restrictive and repressive action. The Police in India, ill-educated, ill-paid, and drawn from low strata of society and accustomed to rough modes, when actually authorised and encouraged to strike persons in the streets, irrespective of station, age or sex, cannot be expected to restrain themselves. Stories of inhuman and bar• barous chastisement go about, creating bitterness and racial and communal rancour. Believe me, there will be the very devil to pay for another generation. The world is learning to drop corporal punishment everywhere. Gaols, schools and even homes have less and less of it. The dignity of the human being as a human being, instead of being merely the Christian ideal, is getting to be realised as a fact in all relations of daily life. We may soon witness the complete abandonment of bodily violence as a means of disci• pline or even of revenge in the civilised world. What will then be said of a Government under whose explicit orders respectable men and women, performing what they consider to be duties of citizenship, could be dragged along the streets and beaten merci• lessly ? Is it any wonder that Government find themselves every now and then compelled to condone barbarities and to deny notorious facts ? If a fiat went forth from Whitehall or Delhi that these things should stop, it would be long before the police really changed their ways and law and order came to be respected, and it would be very long indeed before the people forgot their sufferings and forgave the authors. What do I wish done, you may well ask. 1 wish I could give you clear guidance. One thing I will venture to say, ' Speed up, speed up'. The slowest machinery in the world is the Government of India reforming itself. Ordinances and lathis can only have a short day. During that short day, the new order must be brought into being. I am not blind to your limitations. If all your asso• ciates and colleagues were friends of freedom and lovers of humanity like yourself, your task would still be far from easy. But among them there are many whose sympathies are narrow, whose political principles are harsh, and who wish, now the Con• gress has been brought under to some extent, to revive in full vigour the old imperial policy of domination and exploitation. In Letters 161 these conditions I turn round and round and see no friend except you. I wish God's grace to be poured on you in abundance to sustain you in the task which is as difficult as it is noble.

Yours very truly, V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

20. FROM LORD WILLINGDON

Viceregal Lodge, Simla, October 11, 1932 My dear Sastri, I am writing to make you an offer which I much hope you will be able to accept though I am fully aware that your health may prevent you from saying ' yes '. I write to ask you if you would take up the post of President of the Council of State when Sir Henry Moncrieff Smith retires next month. As you well know, the duties are not heavy and consist of about three months' duty in the year in all. The conditions would be that you would be paid Rs. 4,000 a month for the time you are presiding and for a fortnight before and a week after each session. I know that the height of Simla may militate against your saying ' yes ', but please remember that the session there is only as a rule for a month in all. Do send me a line as to this. I should much like to get an affirmative reply, for I would like to feel that a great public servant like yourself had got this important post. Yours sincerely, WILLINGDON

21. To LORD WILLINGDON Mylapore, October 19, 1932 Dear Lord Willingdon, I have taken three full days to consider Your Excellency's kind offer of the post of President of the Council of State. The more I think of it the more I appreciate the warm personal feeling 162 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI that prompts it. Indeed my gratitude is so great that I cannot adequately express it. To office under the Crown 1 have no aversion. As Servant of India I should feel it my duty to accept a position which, by reason of the nature of the work or the opportunities it cave, might enable me to render real service to the people of India. Acting on this principle, I went to South Africa, as Your Excellency may remember, for a year and a half to occupy the then new post of Agent of the Government of India. The Manag• ing Council of my Society would have no hesitation in allowing a member, so to speak, to suspend his membership, provided circumstances warranted such an unusual course. After the fullest thought 1 am not persuaded that I can make out a case for extra• ordinary action where the main attractions of the office, in the eye of the common man, are the ease, comfort and dignity of the occupant. It is with great regret and humility that I convey to Your Excellency my inability to avail myself of your very kind offer.

Yours very truly. V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

PERSONAL

Dear Lord Willingdon, I have not lost sight of the probability that, in offering me this post, you meant to enable me to stay in these anxious days within call, as it were, for the purpose of the consultation men• tioned in your first letter. If this is your object, may 1 suggest that I should be far more useful if I retained my freedom as a private citizen ? I am willing, if you wish it, to come up and stay in Delhi as long as it may be necessary. It is not necessary to make an official of me ; indeed it may be a disadvantage.

Yours very truly, V. S. SRINIVASAN Letters 163

22. FROM LORD WILLINGDON

The Retreat, Mashobra, November 2, 1932

My dear Sastri, I am writing to you on two mailers today which at the moment are much on my mind. The first has to do with tho representation of British Indians at the forthcoming Round Table Conference as to which Hoare and I have been corresponding of late. I want to ask you quite frankly what are your feelings about going over next month. Hoare and I both feel that owing to your health we should not press you to go over ; further than that, I feel that I must have some influential people over here to help me with their advice on the many points on which we shad be asked our opinion during the discussion in London. I should feel happy if I could have the advantage of your and C.P.'s advice during the weeks that are before us. We can influence the people at home. That I know, but I want all the backing I can get and I should like to feel that you were here to help me. Send me a line please and tell me exactly what you feel on the matter. The next thing I want to give you my inmost feelings about is ' Gandhi '. 1 want peace and co-operation in this country. He can give this if he wishes. While I don't like his methods, he has secured a great advance for the depressed classes which is all to his credit. Why can't he give up his wretched Civil Disobedi• ence Campaign ? So long as, through this agitation by his followers, the law is continually broken, so long 1 have to adopt measures to secure liberty to the law-abiding citizen. If he gave up Civil Disobedience, he would be at liberty to carry on his great work for the depressed classes, but until he does, I can never trust him not to restart the whole trouble again.

It is a deplorable situation. Can nothing be done by those who know him best to get him to reconsider his position ? - I am writing to you as a very old friend on whom I can absolutely rely. I am a Liberal, I want peace, but as an adminis- 164 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI trator, I can't permit Civil Disobedience which is a policy of breaking the law. Do help me in this matter.

Yours very sincerely, WILLINGDON

23. FROM MAHATMA GANDHI

Yeravada Central Prison, November 24, 1932 Dear Brother, I had your precious letters.1 Your criticism soothes. Your silence makes me nervous. Time only deepens my love for you. Our differences appear to me to be superficial. Deep down I feel and touch the meeting ground, and that is precious. I do wish I never spoke of God or the Inner Voice or Con• science. But, like Ramnam, however much it may be abused, it has got to be repeated when it is relevant, and almost becomes imperative. Truth will receive a deep cut if, for fear of being misunderstood or even being called a fraud, I did not say boldly what I felt to be true. I carefully read the typed notes you sent me. The reasoning failed to make any appeal to me. The implications of the Agamas are stretched too far by the writer. I hope you are keeping well. With love, Yours, M. K. GANDHI

i From other letters of the period we learn that among other paints Mr. Sastri had raised these two : (1) 'I took occasion to pick a bone with him. In several places in his writings, he seems to dethrone non-violence from its place of honour, and crown the pinch-beck god of physical courage instead. He actually prefers courageous violence to cowardly non-violence. This inconsistency in 'he apostle of ahimsa amounts to inconstancy. Like Arjuna in the Gita, having sent home my dart of criticism, I folded my hands and prayed ; " Enlighten me, for my soul is cast in doubt and you know all ".* (2) "I have written objecting to his too frequent references to the Inner Voice.' Letters 165

24. FROM MAHATMA GANDHI May 2, 1933 My dear Brother, Dare I ask for your blessings for the coming Yajna ? 1 It is now nearing 2 a.m. 1 have left my bed among other things to write this begging letter. If the fast does not meet with your approval, I know you are too true a brother to grant my request merely to please me. With love, Yours, M. K. GANDHI

25. To MAHATMA GANDHI Mylapore, May 7, 1933 PRIVATE

Dearest Brother, After much thought and destruction of several drafts, I have decided that the best reply to your ' begging ' and most touching letter of the 2nd instant is the enclosed extract. I trust it will sustain you ever so little in the ordeal which will have begun when it reaches Yeravada. It would have been useless and, as you said in your first statement, embarrassing for me to try to dissuade. What remains for your friends and associates is to wish that you may come out of the ordeal not merely unscathed, but armed afresh with the strength of lapas for the struggle that seems without end. I will not pretend for a moment that I approve of your fast. To one like me, born in Hinduism and bred up in it for long years, the arguments pro and con are thoroughly familiar. From sacred texts one might confute most of the reasoning in your statements. But beyond texts and mere authority is reason and humanity, on which you habitually fall back. Even in that ultimate court I fear we shall not be found on the same side.

1 The twenty-one days' fast that Gandhiji kept from the 8th lo 29th May 1933. Of the fast, Gandhiji said, 'It is particularly against myself. It is a heart prayer for the purification of self and my associates. I want more workers of unassailable purity." 166 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI Our values are different fundamentally. The difference is radi• cal, no sophistry can abolish it. In spite of what you have said in the last revelation of your heart, I believe that too much self-communion and internal debate have undermined your judgement. The state of ecstasy when values are reversed, when day becomes night and night day, when pleasure becomes pain and pain pleasure, is rare even in the experience of mystics. The attempt to make it habitual and to adopt the language appropriate to that state as the language of everyday speech is, if I may use the expression, to walk on moral stilts. On occasions you appear to me, in strange con• trast to your realism, to impose that mode of movement on the common men and women around you. The atmosphere in such circumstances is apt to be thick with disappointment and grievous failure. And if the only correction possible were self- correction, the master must needs find himself doomed to the cell of penitence, which is next door to suicide. You have enough philosophy to understand that to claim divine sanction for a course of conduct is to withdraw it from the field of dis• cussion and deprive it of direct validity to other minds. When• ever I come across the claim in your writing I cannot help quoting to myself the famous line of Kalidasa :

You appear to me to be confounded by anxious thought. I cannot tell you how much I deplore the publication of the story of Nila Nagini Devi. If it were merely a confession, I might understand it, though it would still repel me as the ex• posure of one's sores. But why should you rub it in ? The moral proclaims itself. Here again it is a deep-going disparity of taste. I am still in the grip of the world's idea of decorum. You have gone beyond, and would repudiate our standards. With great effort I remind myself that hagiology is full of such records and I must somehow get reconciled. I did not mean to write at length, but the stuff inside has forced itself on your attention. Don't mind it. Treat the letter as if it were nothing but the expression of my unchanged love and of my fervent wish that you should live long and serve the great causes you cherish. For, contrary to your teaching, I hold Letters 167

that you are more potent than your memory can be.1 With affectionate thoughts, Yours always, V. S. SRINIVASAN

ENCLOSURE ' Revolution and Religion' is a review by John Middleton Murry of a book called Moral Man and Immoral Society by Reinhold Niebuhr. The review appears in the Aryan Path of this month. Below are transcribed the concluding paragraphs in which reference is made to Gandhi. ' What then are those who are convinced alike of the material and spiritual necessity .... for the social struggle in the Western World ? There is our tragedy. It is a most significant tribute to Gandhi that he should be the figure in whom the rigorous yet imaginative arguments of Niebuhr's book inevitably culminate. Of the book itself. I can only say that it seems to be of an altogether higher order than any other examination of the menacing problem of Western civilisation with which I am acquainted. It is a prophetic book : and I do not believe I shall be found the victim of romantic illusionism when I say that I believe it will prove to be the forerunner of a new and enduring political movement in the English-speaking world.'

26. To SIR SAMUEL HOARE Servants of India Society, Poona-A, India, June 22, 1933 PRIVATE Dear Sir Samuel, I am perhaps bold to address you. but the occasion seems to me to justify it.

1 Prior to the commencement of the fast Gandhiji said in a statement : 'God's ways are inscrutable. And who knows He may not want my death during the fast to be more fruitful of beneficent results than my life? . . . Who doubts that the spirits of Ramakrishna and Dayanand, Vivekananda and Ramatirtha are working to-day amongst our midst'? It may be that they are more potent today than when they were in our midst in flesh.' 168 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI I have had some talks with Mahatma Gandhi. As soon as he is strong enough, he intends to write to the Viceroy and ask for an interview. There is some ground for fearing that the reply may be a refusal or so qualified as to amount to it. This would be most unfortunate. No one can be confident that the interview, if granted, would be attended with happy results. But from my knowledge of the Mahatma's present mind and of the complexion of things in general, I have a strong hope that, if the Viceroy and he talked together fully and freely, a more or less satisfactory settlement might be reached. With kind regards, Yours sincerely, V. S. SRINIVASAN

27. FROM LORD IRWIN

88, Eaton Sq., S.W.I,, July 14, 1933 My dear Sastri, I got your letter a few days ago, and, as you may suppose, have had the subject with which it dealt very upper-most in my mind. I greatly hope that out of the present happenings we may find the way of peace we all seek. You may feel sure that I shall do my utmost at this end. How are you yourself in health ? I hope pretty well, and taking care of yourself. Lady Irwin and I both send you many messages. Yours sincerely, IRWIN

28. To MAHATMA GANDHI Coimbatore, August 27, 1933 Dearest Brother, Government might well have given you the old facilities.1 A curse has disabled them from generous or timely action.

iThis letter has reference to the ' Harijan facilities fast' of August 1933. On the first of August the Mahatma and his chosen band of indi• vidual resisters were arrested at Sabarmati. Gandhiji was released on 4th Letters 169

But they haven't conferred a right on you or made you a promise. What they conceded to you at one time and in one set of conditions they are not bound to concede to you at another time and in another set of conditions. The Order made after the Poona Pact, from which you quote, does not amount to an irrevocable or unconditional promise. You indulge in special pleading of a bad type when you charge them with a breach of promise. The addition of the words ' made to a prisoner in their custody ' loses the point it might have had otherwise. It might be said by an observer who wasn't prejudiced against Government that, while Harijan uplift was dear to you, putting blame on Government was dearer. It has been said in

August, and immediately after served with an order restricting his move• ments. On disobeying the order, he was re-arrested. Release and re• arrest happened also to his followers. Soon after his arrest Gandhiji wrote to the Government seeking permission for facilities for Harijan work which he had enjoyed as prisoner in 1932. On the 14th instant, after Gandhi had sent four reminders and announced his intention to fast, the Government gave him certain facilities. He was, however, to give no interviews for publication in the press. Gandhiji considered the facilities 'far short of the original orders of the Government of India and of my requirements'. It was clear Government gave the facilities grudgingly. They had, moreover, passed an unfair criticism that when the Mahatma was free he devoted more time to political work than to Harijan work. Gandhiji went on his fast on the 16th of August. He was released on the 23rd instant. Sastri's view of the order made after the Poona Pact will be clear from the view expressed by the Servant of India (August 24, 1933). "He (Gandhiji) went further and said, 'as I have made it clear in my pre• vious correspondence and as the Government of India have admitted, permission to render that service (to the Harijans) is implied in the Yeravada Pact, to which the British Government is a consenting party in so far as its consent was necessary'. The full implication of the Maha'ma's assertion will perhaps be apparent when the correspondence to which he referred is published and we trust that it will immediately be released. But there is nothing in the Poona Pact or in the British Government's acceptance thereof, as far as we can make out. which com• mitted Government to admitting any special right of the Mahatma to carry on Harijan service from the jail. It is true that the Government permitted him to carry on Harijan propaganda '• without let or hindrance ", as the Mahatma acknowledged. In doing so, they did well and all social reformers and humanitarians are grateful to them for it. But that con• cession did not create a vested right, which they may not take away now." To this must be added Sjt. Mahadev Desai's nofe :—This letter has refe• rence to what is called the " Harijan Facilities Fast" which resulted in Gandhiji's release on the seventh day and transfer to Parnakuti where he broke the fast. Sastriar had evidently no access to the lone correspon• dence that had taken Dlace between Government and Gandhiji. All he was insisting on was the privileges he had enjoyed as prisoner during »he year 1932, and the conditions of which he had scrupulously observed. M.D. 170 RT, HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI my-hearing by well-disposed persons that you would love noth• ing so much as to die in goal and leave Government burdened with the responsibility. Behind and beyond your present tussle with Government lies the future of the country. How can Congress best secure that future ? Your answer is clear. But another answer is taking shape in people's minds. It is that Civil Disobedience, both mass and individual, must be given up. A new policy, aiming at constructive national good in legislation, finance and administra• tion all round has long been overdue and must be tried, over and above what is now called the constructive programme of Congress. I believe this feeling is common outside Congress, and is gaining ground inside Congress. How can this orientation be brought about ? It is so different from your present policy, in look so opposed to it, that one doubts whether you can undertake it. Perhaps your whole preparation and equipment lie in a different direc• tion. It is no disparagement to any one that he is not fitted to lead the nation in all contingencies and in all directions. Un• fortunately no man, however big, can be always trusted to know his limitations and make room when the cause to which he is devoted requires it. His very greatness stands in the way of change. And as I have told you more than once, you have out- topped all other leaders so long and so decisively that there is no man in sight to take your place at once. What a blessing it would be if you could be transformed and re-made, as it were, for the fresh era ! But you are too good, too true to yourself to pretend you are the same teacher when the creed is no longer yours and the ritual is something you have never conducted. In this sore strait, the country looks to you to play a greater part than you have ever played. (Pardon me : what I mean is the greater part of the country as I figure out the parties.) Save your individual conscience, pursue civil disobedience, seek the goal and embarrass Government as you like ; — but leave Con• gress free to evolve a new programme. It simply cannot do so, while it has to give authority and countenance to individual dis• obedience. You remember I begged you to adopt this course when I was last with you at Parnakuti. You told me you put it to the Working Committee, but they would have none of it. Naturally and in a way properly too. The Committee couldn't Letters 171 face the odium of abandoning you. I don't wonder the thought was abhorrent to them. The moment is come — in my opinion it came long ago — for you to say. ' I set Congress free to try other methods. I have plenty of God's work to do, for the nation's welfare, with Harijans'. There, then, 1 have told you the truth as it seems to me. May one hope that you will see the problem from a new angle ? I know one thing. There is no self-effacement to which you are not equal. The only thing is, it must seem to you to be called for. All that a friend and brother can do is to give an indication.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

29. FROM MAHATMA GANDHI

August 30, 1933 Dear Brother, I treasure your letter. I do not mind anything you have said. On the contrary I appreciate all you have said. Having said this, I must say that 1 utterly dissent from your interpretation of Government orders. If you saw all the correspondence, perhaps you will revise your judgement. I am not given to special pleading consciously. You may not have noticed that the Government have themselves dropped the idea of ' another set of conditions'. On the contrary, they said that they made a mistake in making what you call 'concession in the first instance', and the mistake made was not one on merits but had reference to their own convenience. However, I shall not strive with you in connection with your pronouncement upon my statement, but if you will care to study the whole question I would gladly send you the whole of the correspondence. I hope that you yourself do not consider me to be capable of desiring to blame the government for the sake of doing so or that that performance would be dearer to me than Harijan uplift. I consider myself capable of a just dis• crimination and therefore of knowing when the Government is in the right. But this is all beside the point. I have taken so much space with what is now immaterial, in order to tell you 172 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI that I do not plead guilty to the charge you have made against me. Now for the central point of your letter. I quite agree with you that I am wholly unfit for the constitution building at the present stage. In my opinion that time is not yet. it will come only when the nation has developed a sanction for itself. I would therefore gladly retire from the Congress and devote myself to the development of civil disobedience outside the Congress and to Harijan work. The difficulty is how to do it ? Can I do it by seceding from the Congress ? That was the ques• tion that troubled me at the time of the informal conference and that is the question that confronts me again. I am seeking light. As soon as I have regained sufficient strength 1 shall again sound the mind of Congressmen and if I can possibly re• tire from the Congress I shall gladly do so. My impression, however, is that the Congress mentality has not changed. Whilst it is true that a large number of Congressmen have got tired, very few would care to subscribe to the While Paper or work for securing certain improvements in it. They want a radical change. But I am in no hurry to come to any final decision. I can give you this assurance that nothing will deter me from taking any steps that might be in the best interests of the nation. There is no question even of self-effacement. Performance of duty I have held always to be a thing of beauty and a joy for ever. The awful fact, however, has often been to know where duty lies. You won't give me up, but continue to guide me and you will not hesitate to come if you felt like coming. I am not going to hesitate to ask you to come when I feel that I need your personal contact and a constant exchange of thoughts. Love, M. K. GANDHI

30. To MAHATMA GANDHI Coimbatore. September 4, 1933 Dear Brother, I was touched by your reply. It was full and reasoned. Neither of us forms an opinion in a hurry or drops it in a hurry. Letters 173 But there is a satisfaction in knowing the other side. In all circumstances, we shall carefully understand and make allow• ances for each other. So let us dismiss the past. I plead for Congress being freed from your rule. If you wait for its consent to the course, a very long delay is inevitable. Grant the freedom immediately. Must you, like the British Raj, put off the consummation till it becomes inevitable ? Certainly Congress are not going to bother about improving on the White Paper. With the Tories in power and our minori• ties clamouring for alms, that is an impossible dream. Few pro• gressive politicians in India indulge in it any more. You write- in your letter of forging a national sanction. Let me assume for a moment that yours is the only way of doing it, still must it be in point of time continuous, absolutely with• out intermission or respite to the nation? May it not be, in certain conditions, another way can be tried with advantage ? The belief is widespread that such conditions are now in being. I will name two of these. (1) The ascendancy of the Tories which looks likely to last long. (2) The danger to Indian Nationalism from the passing of the political power into the hands of minorities backed by and dependent on the British people. If the ill effects of these conditions should be kept at a minimum, the national forces must combine effectively and must make themselves felt in all directions and all the time. ' Victory or Nothing' is a rousing cry on the battlefield. When the day is lost, it has no meaning. Where legislatures exist, even such manacled legislatures as ours, much may be done, were it only to prevent evil by vigilant opposition. It is first rate to be the Government. If you can't be that, the next best thing is to be a strong united opposition. Bacon said we must have our hands constantly in affairs, and he was a man of the world. I know you have no faith in this method. But do not forget it takes all sorts to make a world. ' God fulfils Himself in many ways Jest one good custom should corrupt the world.' You seemed to think, when we last talked of this matter, that one wing of Congress might apply this method while another wing went on with individual Civil Disobedience. I am clear the two methods are utterly incompatible. Congress must 174 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI choose one. Nor can the liberal and progressive schools be trusted to employ their methods on the necessary scale or with appreciable effect. I am a liberal, but not so partisan as not to see the nation's good except through liberal spectacles. It is my heart's wish that Congress and liberals and others similarly devoted to the cause of the future nation should merge together and form one large party. But the idea is too good for the moment. We must be content to have these parties, with their several labels but co-operating for common purposes, as clearly defined as possible. If there is sense in this plan, pray give it a chance. Two con• ditions are necessary. Civil Disobedience must go. Dictatorship must go. Yours lovingly, V. S. SRINIVASAN

31. To A. V. RAMASWAMI1 Coimbatore, April 16, 1934 My dear Ramaswami, Sapru is not a Liberal. He was one till some weeks after the first R.T.C, when he fell foul of us savagely and swore he would never again belong to us. The reason at the time seemed to me utterly inadequate. Jayakar never was a Liberal. Nor is he likely to become one. No great gain if he joins! C.P.R. is steady and strong. But he has migrated from Madras practically and is a semi-official. For love of country we are neither better nor worse than, say, the Swarajists. For efficiency and knowledge we are de• cidedly better. But the taint of office and avoidance of the gaol is serious in a land where popularity is everything and political courage very much to seek. The immediate future before us is by no means bright. But those that have faith in liberalism must have infinite patience and hold on desperately in the face of odds. Their day is sure though far off. Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN 1 One of Sastri's younger friends. Letters 175

32. To SIR P. S. SIVASWAMI AIYAR

108, North Road, Basavangudi, Bangalore City, May 9, 1936 Dear Friend, I have read your draft reply to Jawaharlal Nehru. It seems to me censorious in tone and unless revised with care, will bring odium on the signatories. Is it necessary to condemn Congress policy and methods in our answer ? It would be on the assumption that you obviously make that Nehru wishes an association of public organizations. A sentence in the beginning of his circular points that way ; but lower down and particularly towards the end he makes it clear that he wants the new body to be composed of individuals. He addresses us not as liberals but as freedom-loving citizens. Criticism of Congress policy and methods does not appear to be called for. But it may well come in if our determined purpose is to give a negative reply. For I agree with you that as soon as, on any important occasion, definite action has to be taken, the members of the new body, of whom a considerable majority will be Congressmen, will adopt methods which we have consistently condemned, and we shall be compelled to come out. But I am not clear by any means that our reply should be negative. The juster as well as more prudent course is to con• centrate on the aim which is irreproachable, and receive pro• posals and examine them with earnestness. A forecast of the probable course of events, however convincing it may appear to us, is but a forecast, and it is, on an occasion like the present one, not wise or prudent to act upon it as though it were a certainty. When it does become a fact, it will be time enough to point out how things make it impossible for us to remain in and then come out. Only so shall we prove that the cry of co-opera• tion on our lips is not a convention or mockery as it seems to be in the case of others. Nor can we ignore the circumstance that English liberals have always regarded the protection of civil liberties as their special privilege. Our own steps in the direction 11—12 176 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI having been rather feeble and ineffectual, we had best prove our earnestness by joining an organization or rather by seriously considering proposals for starting an organization which may function both wisely and efficiently. Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

33. To His GRAND-DAUGHTER

The Palace, Gajner, Bikaner, Rajputana, March, 1938 Ambulu darling, Yesterday morning, the Maharajah and I drove through the city in his grand car, which it was a job to turn into the smaller streets. Everywhere people lined up in crowds several rows deep, and shouted, khana, khana with their hands together in anjalis over their heads or in front of their chests. H.H. explained the cry to me. It means kshama or mercy! Occasionally different cries were heard which meant ' May you live a crore of Divalis! ' This word, as you may guess, is the same as Dipavali. H.H. drew my attention to the expression on the faces of his subjects. ' I could compel them to come out and throng the streets, but what power could force them to smile and look happy ? And yet your newspapers call us tyrants and wicked monsters.' The Maharajah is popular, being kind and affable and constantly showing himself before his people. In some quarters the houses on both sides were magnificent, and I asked whether the owners were the famous multimillionaires of Bikaner. ' Yes' he said ; and to my further inquiry whether some of them were worth ten crores, answered that was an exaggeration. The richest among them had seven crores, and the British Government had made him a K.C.I.E. (You must find out what this is if you don't know). Bikaner had the greatest number in India of such Kotiprabhus ; but the recent depression has reduced the total strength as well as their individual wealth. During the recent Jubilee festival of the Maharajah one of the fat Marwaris had an arch studded with sovereigns and bordered with silver rupees — Letters 111 the number being estimated at 5,000. Another man's arch was plated all over with silver and gold. These and other decorations were on view for three months and guarded night and day by armed sepoys. H.H. mentioned these extraordinary incidents with pride, but added quickly as if slighting them : ' But, what use is all this wealth to these fellows ? 1 wish I had it. There are a hundred big things for which I want money, but can't find it. ' Parenthetically, these Marwaris, even the fattest of them, live in extreme simplicity and even miserliness. One was notorious in this way. I must tell you a story which the Private Secretary told of him. H.H. could not vouch for it, but admitted it was likely. Pandit Malaviya, who went about collecting monies for his gigantic Hindu University in Benares, at one time visited this town and tackled this prince of misers. His friends had warned him of the extreme difficulty of his task, but the Pandit had invincible faith in the sacredness of his cause and his own power of melting the stoniest of hearts. In vain, however, was his sweet voice and even his marvellous eloquence ; he paraded his unequalled knowledge of scripture for nothing. Failing with the old man, he tried his arts on a reprobate son, who had rebelled against his father and was incurring debts right and left against his prospective fortune. From this spendthrift the Pandit secured a promise of ten thousand rupees, for which he was requested to return later in the day. When he reappeared, the donor was not to be found anywhere in the house nor could any one give news of him. The father himself ran all over the house and was disconsolate with grief at the disappearance of his beloved though wayward child. The Pandit went away, a sadder and wiser man. The fact was that the crafty miser, coming to know of his son's folly, had lured him into an underground cellar which contained the family hoards and locked the idiot in. To return to the main narrative. The Maharaja took me to his favourite temple, the presiding deity being Lakshmi Narayanji. It was small, compared to our temples, but infinitely cleaner and better kept. You saw pure white marble almost everywhere and beautifully carved red stone. We were relieved at the gate of our shoes and socks. The Maharajah made Sashtanga Pranamas in two or three places, gave three rupees and withdrew from the inner sanctuary without turning his back on the image. Me he begged not to do the prostrations or make offerings. Thousands- of RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI worshippers stood about, more women than men ; and though they cried khana, khana, none importuned the ruler or me for alms. What a contrast to our temples ! This morning brought me a wonderful experience. H.H. introduced to me a regular giant. He was an American gentleman, an engineer by profession, whom H.H. had brought out for a special job. He was six foot nine, dwarfing his master as they stood talking. He was stout in proportion, and as he had a clear complexion and an engaging countenance, you thought him a friendly visitor from another planet. There was a dinner at night in my honour. Among the ladies to whom I was introduced was a Mrs. Mackenzie.' Are you,' I queried, ' the wife of the engineer whom I saw this morning ? ' ' Yes, Sir.' ' You can't lose your husband ever.' Whereat the company laughed aloud, but not uproariously. She enjoyed the joke hugely. Do you guess what she said ? ' My husband is too tall, too tall.' ' You mean, for you ? ', I asked running my eye over her shapely but small person. ' No, not that' she replied, laughing still more. ' He can't squeeze himself into these berths in trains or cabins in ships. ' As she spoke those words, the whole company turned their eyes, as if by agreement, to where he stood majestic, head and shoulders above those around. I strode towards him and ventured, ' Have you encountered your superior yet ?' ' Yes, once ', he replied. More he was prevented from communicating by someone giving to the talk a needless and insipid turn. I could have wrung the neck of that prattler, I was so annoyed. I write now in a pretty palace, situated on a small lake, some twenty miles from the capital. It is a delightful change ; for you see some cultivation and tall trees, and the air is palpably cooler and less suffocating. Breakfast was served for me at my regular hour of ten. H.H., who doesn't eat till noon, sat narrating the annals of his state and the thrilling exploits of his ancestors. I listened with open mouth and glistening eyes ; for H.H. is a great story-teller and spices his account with frequent references to present-day circumstances, from which all romance and poetry have been emptied. Now and then, noticing my absorption, he would say, ' But please get on with your meal. ' ' Let me not interrupt your breakfast.' I was lost as I was told of the family feuds of five centuries between Jodhpur and Bikaner (now happily reconciled) among the wondrous exploits and silly quarrels of Letters 179 Rajput heroes and heroines recorded in Tod's gilded pages. And I admitted to him a strange mood of penitence that was stealing over me. At the Round Table Conference, my colleagues of British India had been scandalized by the brag and boast of the princes and had become impatient of their references to their solar and lunar ancestry and to their 1 sovereignty ' which existed only in their imagination. Now I glimpsed the background of the mentality of the princely order. I confessed I saw things in better perspective and with more sympathy and understanding. His Highness Singh of Bikaner has a clearer title to our admira• tion than other Rajahs. No part of his story is more interesting or shows his natural gifts to better advantage than the skill, persistence and diplomacy with which he has brought the re• dundant waters of the Sutlej into his territory and reclaimed many thousands of acres in the northern part of his desert kingdom. It reminds me of Bhagiratha of old. What more need I say ? Here is a small measure of the improvement which stands to his credit. In about 300 of his parched villages, even to-day the water is brackish and poisonous to such a degree that cattle cannot be allowed to drink their fill but are forcibly driven away from the ponds when they are still half thirsty. The Private Secretary, himself a Rajput noble, owning several hundred head of cattle, once had nearly all of them dead before his eyes be• cause his herdsman had been a little careless and omitted to beat back the animals in time ; they had drawn in more mouthfuls than were good for them and drunk themselves to death. Affectionately yours, V. S. SRVNIVASAN

34. To RAJAH SIR ANNAMALAI CHETTIAR

Annamalai University, May 1, 1938 Dearest friend, Three years have nearly passed since you gave the University into my hands. My term is run out all but two months.1

1 This letter was written at the end of Mr. Sastri's first term as Vice- Chancellor. He resigned after two years of his second term, pleading age and infirmity. ISO RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI No man, however high, should be allowed to judge himself. Whether the institution is on the whole better or worse now than in July 1935, I ought not to say. But I believe it is not worse. My friends claim it is better, Your romantic affection will perhaps cause you to grant the claim. Knowingly or by design I have not injured the University even in the smallest matter. I have, waking or asleep, cherished it as a friend's trust. For your part you gave me the fullest confidence. You upheld my decisions, you endorsed my judgments, you accepted my re• commendations in the most unhesitating manner. Such treatment, suggesting no trace of superiority or inferiority of status, but based on mutual co-operation, and support, I enjoyed as Agent in South Africa at the hands of Lord Irwin and Sir Muhammad Habibullah. On any other terms I should have felt office an intolerable and humiliating yoke. You are one of the few people who can, when they choose, treat their agent as though he were, not a receiver, but a conferrer, of favour. In saying this, believe me I am not flattering you. Nor am I stating the experience of all that work with or under you. It is my personal feeling towards you which I record. To thank you for unbounded trust is not the whole of the story. My conveniences and comforts have been your study from the beginning, and I have been receiving, without break or hesitation, an allowance worthy of a prince. Above all, in your personal behaviour, you have shown a deference of manner and solicitude for my susceptibilities which have left me speechless with gratitude and frequently caused me embarrassment. Is it a wonder that I lay down the Vice-Chancellor's rank and office with regret ? The duties and responsibilities, the buildings, the staff and the students, these have in their several ways be• come a part of my life, and I shall miss them sorely in my isolation. From my heart I wish that things would be so shaped for them that they would not miss me at all. Lest you should feel the slightest delicacy in the matter of my succession, I beg you in all sincerity to feel absolutely free in your choice. Of course you are absolutely free without my saying so. What I mean is, you need not be under any con• straint as to my personal feelings, you may be sure that I am anxious only for the well-being of the University and that you Letters 181 will please me most to think first, second and last, of its interests to the exclusion of every smaller consideration. So then I return your trust into your hands.

With a brother's love as ever, Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

35. To D. V. GUNDAPPA

Mylapore, October 4, 1938 My dear Gundappa, Born in 1869, I am only 69 now. That is, I have completed 69 years. When September 22 comes round in 1939, I should be a septuagenarian, if .... The world is going mad, 1 never was so perplexed in my life as now. Do J want peace or war ? Peace. Then why am I not pleased? Because of the extinction (it will be that soon) of Czechoslovakia. Did I expect peace in a Hitler-ridden world without some iniquity ? If I did, I was a fool. Much as I disliked Halifax when he said : ' Peace is at this juncture greater to the world than justice ', I don't dislike him nearly so much now. Peace is something more tangible, at least in its negative aspects, than justice, far more clearly discernible. Who would sacrifice a clear tangible end for a mere abstraction which means different things to different nalions and different individuals ? This peace, how• ever, cannot last long. Some people would ask : ' Since we must fight some day, why not now ? It may be better now than tomorrow.' The answer is that of the doctor in the case of the dying man. He can't say : ' Since the patient is sure to die in three days, why not finish him now ? So much bother is saved.' The idea is, God's ways are inscrutable. Nothing is certain. If we gain time, who knows ? Mankind may change its ways, the nations may learn the wisdom of peace, and all quarrels will yield to reason. Let Chamberlain have the peace prize, and give a share of it to Daladier and Mussolini and Hitler himself. Benes is to have nothing but the world's pity and scorn. 182 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINtVASA SASTRI

My brain is now feeble and fitful in its work, and I daren't trust its verdict. But there will be a few more wars before the reign of peace begins. Then the earth and its people will be very different from what they are to-day.

Affectionately yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

36. To DlNABANDHU C. F. ANDREWS

Annamalainagar, August 3, 1939 My dear Charlie, A friend has just sent me a cutting of an article by you giving me great, too great praise. Your generosity is in inverse pro• portion to my desert. I wish I had words in which to convey my gratitude. You dwell at length on what unfortunately is an error of fact. 1 can't erase it, however often I contradict it. Now it has been attested on high authority, I fear its eternal life is guaran• teed ! Gokhale never mentioned me for the headship of the Society.1 Dr. Deva in fact asked him when the end was approaching. He

1 In a speech on the Gokhale Day (19th February) of 1923, Mr. Sastii alluded to the 1 statement now and again made thai on his death-bed Mr. Gokhale nominated him as successor', and said : 'Though reminded of ihe Society and entreated to state his wishes in regard to it he said nothing. Perhaps he retained to the last a mis• giving that he had always had about me, that I had marked leanings to the other school of politics and was only an extremist in disguise Perhaps, too, he remembered that Mr. Gandhi was back in India and they had anxious talks about his joining the Society. But I feel sure, as sure as if he had told me, that his reticence on the subject was due to a deeper motive. He was aware how institutions like property often suffered from having to follow courses prescribed by dead men. He loved the Society like his own child and cherished it above all things. Its future was for long his greatest concern in life. Any other man would have given minute instructions as to its conduct after him. But he had greater wisdom and greater faith than most men ; and left it to the judgment of his pupils, unhampered by the wishes of a dying master. He had done all he could for it and now he must part from it with complete resignation as he had parted a little while ago from his family. It was a moment of supreme Sanyasa such as crowns the lives of a few elect ones in this holy land, the final detachment from all that one held dear, the withdrawal of the soul of set purpose from its earthly attachments before the last release.' Letters 183 refused to tie the hands of the members. In this, I venture to think, he showed rare practical wisdom. To tetter the discretion of one's followers in such a vital matter is to imperil the institu• tion that one hands over to them. Did you observe — so little escapes your eyes — that Gunther in his new book describes me as an old friend of Gandhi ? He says nothing more. Why need he ? I am content.

Affectionately yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

37. To MAHATMA GANDHI

CONFIDENTIAL

Svagatam, Mylapore, Madras, July 16, 1940

Dear Brother, Answering a Punjabi's question, you write in the Harijan of the 13th instant : 'But I am quite sure that those who do not believe in non-violence cannot belong to the Congress. ' True. But see what follows. Those who ought by this test to be in the Congress are out — you, Frontier Gandhi and others of like fibre. Those who ought by this test to be out of it are in. Strange result after about twenty years of undisputed sway. The saddest part of this sad story is that among the dubious Congressmen there are many that still believe they practise non-violence. Little do they see that in the high altitude of truth partial rectitude is no rectitude. Those that place ethical values above all other values must have great satisfaction to see you at last disentangling yourself from this Serbonian bog. It is a noble enterprise, when one comes to think of it calmly, to make divinity out of human clay. Failure in it is noble too. In arithmetic zero is zero. In human affairs, on the contrary, transactions of immense magni• tude may end in zero, but have not been fruitless. Experience, wisdom, proved strength are enormous gains, though for the 184 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI moment we seem like Sisyphus, doomed to roll up the stone again from the bottom. Go on, brave soul, your faith is inextin• guishable, it is not of this earth. Yet, the question keeps on vexing me : how, after the hollowness of the Congress creed has been exposed as by the touch of Ithuriel's spear, you continue to champion its resolution and commend it to the acceptance of Britain, No doubt you have made the Congress, and you love India as few of her children do. These facts go far to explain it. But they cannot justify it from the philosophical standpoint. When you perform these feats, you remind me of our Advaitic disputants, who jump with marvellous agility from the Paramaf^ thika plane to the Vyavaharika plane, and while proclaiming to the skies the One and Only One, can with the same breath belaud the trinity and the thirty-three crores of gods and uphold all the superstitions, absurd practices and cruel wrongs that they find around them. They have a valid plea, however, which is denied to you. To them there are two degrees of truth, one Absolute and one Seeming, interdependent in a mysterious way, but distinct for purposes of reasoning. You have no such double standard, what is not truth is untruth. Non-violence is the highest dharma, it is synonymous with Universal Love, which is a long name for God. Violence is its stark negation, it is blasphemy, sin. Partial abandonment of non-violence is abandon• ment. How can you have truck with it ? Don't complain that 1 hold you rigidly to the letter of a particularly hard rule of conduct, sharp as a sword's edge. Some friends defend you on the footing — rather beneath you — that you are a politician, above other politicians in aim and method and achievement, but still a politician limited by the very nature of politics. I judge you as a saint who has the gift of seeing truth and the courage to experiment with it — and in the ex• periment has had more success than most saints so called. That is why I rejoiced in your enunciation and proclamation of the non-violence doctrine, unadulterated and pure, though the philistine world jeered. Nor can you put me off by an outburst of your humility and confession of inconsistency, weakness, corruption of the soul and so on. This only exalts you the more in my hero-worshipping mind, making your merits the more lustrous and your blemishes, alas, the more glaring. I place you alongside the philosophers and ethicjsts of fame. The pursuit of Letters 185 abstract thought and the practice of austerities belong to us in India by heredity. To see you descend on occasions from the heights, I feel bereft of my natural garment, disrobed of my national pride.

II

Let us take our stand for a while on the plane of Vyavaharika, that is to say, practical politics. You are a new convert to the idea of independence for India and have the zeal of a new con• vert. How shall I dare to perform Suddhi on you and reconvert you to the wholesome aim of Congress tradition, viz., Dominion Status ? When your method of preserving independence is taken account of. you will be found the sole occupant of your platform. Is there another like you who says : ' Remove all temptation to the foreign invader. Strip yourselves bare, bare of wealth and of the means of wealth. Let him take your bodies, if he will; keep your souls to yourselves. He will soon tire of his conquest and leave you in peace ' ? It is neither the thought nor the language of other advocates of independence. You don't belong where you are. When you ask Britain to admit that India is free or declare that India shall be free from a certain date, you ask for the impossible. South Africa and Eire have not asked for it. The right to secede at will is equivalent to independence. This right has been openly claimed by both Dominions, and no one in authority has raised a voice of protest from the British side. No one will venture to do so. It is a very different thing to demand a resolution or Act of Parliament declaring or granting in express terms the right of secession. Why shall we not be realists for once and rest content with Dominion Status, of which we now know the implicit significance ? You recently said that Dominion Status will go after the war or change beyond recognition. Let it. We shall be no worse than the other Dominions. The declara• tion of Independence which is famous in history was made by the United States of America after a victorious war ; Britain, so far from granting it, would not even acknowledge it for many years afterwards. George Washington was a rebel for a long time in the purblind pages of British diplomacy. His statue was 186 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI allowed to be erected in London only in 1923, when 1 saw Lord Curzon, the prime embodiment of imperialism, unveil it.1 The Congress and you believed, or allowed to be persuaded, when the war began in earnest, that your demand of independence would be complied with. As the war grows more grim, you are con• firmed in that belief. True, Britain could be squeezed today, if things were normal in India. I mean you would obtain your desire if Britain could be sure that she would gain more than she would lose by compliance. She calculates that she would be worse off in the result. Who can gainsay it with confidence ? My own opinion, I am so ignorant it isn't worth much, is that Muslim displeasure is a greater minus than Congress adhesion is a plus. Nobody can gauge the precise extent of Jinnah's influence. As a man and as a politician he has developed unexpectedly .... Nevertheless Congress is unable to ignore or neglect him ; how can the British Government do so ? The risk is great. It profits little now to blame the Hindu-Muslim tension on Britain. I saw and heard too much in 1930 and 1931 in London to dispute the fact. Whatever else I may forget, I shall never forget the utter humiliation and shame of the Indian party at the R.T.C. The British press and the average British politician — there were honourable exceptions — did not care to conceal their glee at every exhibition of unreason and obstinacy on the part of the Aga Khan, Shafi and Jinnah. Like the victims of Circe's witchery, we assumed brutish forms and degraded ourselves ; alas, some of us were proud of our fate, while the others were the more miserable for consciousness of our shame. Why bewail it now ? We can't abolish Jinnah, any more than we can abolish Britons. Your sovereign remedy of overwhelming generosity is impotent here. Perhaps, if left to yourself, you would still out-Quixote Quixote. Savarkar, however, is wide awake and won't let you. Pray do not one fine morning advise us to try the expedient, for five short years only, of dividing India and the political power in India fifty-fifty between our brothers and ourselves. Even I shall reject the advice out of hand. To sum up, Independence at Britain's hand is out of the

i Attempts to verify this incident have not proved quite successful. A bust of Washington was unveiled on the 30th May 1921 by the American Ambassador at St. Paul's Cathedral. If Mr. Sastri refers to this event, memory has played a strange trick on him. Letters 187 question. Independence of Britain, the fortune of war may thrust upon us (God forbid it).

Ill

Rajaji's resolution in my judgement is foredoomed by being coupled with the independence demand. Consistency and prestige perhaps require it, but neither of these is an all-important con• sideration. You have never allowed the paramountcy of either. Given proper cause, you will sacrifice both. I shall now try to show proper cause. I know neither Rajaji nor you are too ready to defer to other people's judgement; but that shan't deter me. Let me paraphrase the W.C.C's offer to Britain. Grant our independence and in earnest thereof nationalise the Central Government. We shall abandon non-violence and harness all India's resources in your aid. This would have been adequate, when India was involved only as a part of the British Empire. Now India is directly endangered, her ruin is more than a possibility, even if she escaped foreign aggression — not likely in my view — she is certain to suffer long from acute internal dis• order, the horrors of which stagger the imagination. It is the clear duty now of the strongest and the most patriotic party to grasp at every opportunity of acquiring power and using it for the protection of the people, subordinating and postponing for the moment all other considerations, including independence, Instead, Rajaji's position stated briefly, is : ' Congress can't do its best, till India is independent or declared so. Because you don't enable us to do our best, we won't do even what we can, though for our own people's primary needs. * 1 do not personally know the conditions elsewhere in the country. . . . We are scared to think of the severe exactions and tyrannies to which the general population will be subjected. Any Madrassi will tell you my fears are not fanciful. Not content with boycotting the War Committees and the Civic Guards, the Congress party has set about organising its own corps for internal defence. A more disastrous step it is difficult to conceive. The Muslims are busy arming themselves. So are and will soon be many other aggres• sive communities. What will be the plight of the unhappy people with these rival bands of crudely armed and undisciplined men ? Will they be defenders of the public or scourges of the public ? 188 RT. HON'BLE V. S- SRlNlVASA SASTRI Suppose now, on the contrary, the W.C.C. directed the men who were Ministers in the Provinces to resume office and take into their hands the expansion of the regular Police and other measures necessary for the protection of the people. Will it not immediately restore the confidence of the public and dispel the fear of anarchy, which is now widespread and may soon demo• ralise the inhabitants of the villages ? Power carries responsi• bility ; Congressmen may not say now to the harassed citizen ; ' You must suffer till the Britisher yields'. Will you not shake off your prepossessions and obsessions and order the provincial parliamentarians back to their posts of duty ? Tell them that peaceful existence is prior to independence, and that Britishers and Muslims may be disposed of later. Those who itch for Sinn Fein methods may well wait. Those who trust in negative methods like walk-outs, abstinence and non-co-operation will do well to remember that Nature has evolved a variety of forms and plans and that, when necessity compels, there is no im• propriety or loss of honour in changing the strategy or venue of a campaign. So soon after your emphatic witness to the sanctity of non• violence, it seems rather bold of me to ask you, not merely to tolerate, but to inculcate and enjoin the increased employment of the police and auxiliary agencies of violence. But we have by common consent descended to the level of Vyavatidra. Though the W.C.C. have made a major deviation from the path pre• scribed by you, they seem to look to you for guidance in all other matters, and it is not unusual for you to interpose your matchless authority in conditions made for you rather than by you. Finally, I ask forgiveness for the freedom with which I have set forth my views. Like a teacher I have no doubt laboured the obvious. Like an irresponsible critic I have alternately found fault and exhorted. Like an anxious son of India I have perhaps painted a lurid picture and alarmed you unnecessarily. Put down these lapses partly to ignorance and partly to over-wrought nerves. You have access to knowledge which is beyond my reach. While you are at the centre and hear the authentic voices, I am far away and hear only faint and distorted echoes. Don't trouble to reply. Only in these days of active espionage and censorship I should like to be sure that this letter has reached Letters 189 you. Let Mahadev Desai send me a line to say so. I long to see his beautiful hand again and taste once more his unruffled urbanity and gentle strength. With love as ever, Yours, V. S. SRINIVASAN

38. FROM MAHATMA GANDHI

Sevagram, July 20, 1940 My dear Brother, I have your long letter—but not long enough for me. You do me less than justice when you say neither R.1 nor I am too ready to defer to others' judgment. This can never be true of you. But there are some differences between us which our mutual love and regard cannot get over. I have much to say about the letter, but I know you don't want me to argue. Please believe me ; no word of yours to me is without its effect. I fancy I am in God's good hands. Mahadev Desai will write. Love, Yours, M. K. GANDHI

39. To T. N. JAGDISAN

Svagatam, Mylapore, August 14, 1940 My dear Jagadisan, I am attracted by Sapru but have never felt at home with Chintamani. He isn't my sort. Nature fashioned Sapru in one of her lavish moods. She put into his blood several elements of nobility — generous susceptibilities, scorn of meanness, large ideas, command of men. With them go some glaring weaknesses, changeableness, love of flattery, pronounced moodiness. His intellect too has marked merits and demerits. It dwells easily

1 Rajaji. 190 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI among the large ideas and fundamentals, and can acquire and impart with zest. Minutiae might escape Sapru's mind, and he is capable of great inaccuracies and inconsistencies. But he is always interesting, lively, human. His conversation is lull of anecdotes but they have a touch of humorous exaggeration and (are) utterly devoid of malice. He loves to speak of the great ones of the land, of the lions of the law, of striking things said and done in his time. He has had bitter quarrels and tender reconciliations but when he narrates them, you half suspect they were not nearly so Homeric as he makes out. His evenings he enjoys most, lounging in loose night-apparel, imbibing tobacco in every form except as snuff, and surrounded by cronies, who lay it on, as Disraeli did to Victoria, with a trowel. Though descended of Dewans, he hadn't much money to start with, and it is incredible but true he hasn't much money even now. But he has the income of a prince but spends and gives like a prince too without counting the rupees. I don't know who keeps his accounts, but he must be the soul of honesty if he hasn't a fortune by this time. Doctors have a puzzle in him, for he takes absolutely no exercise, sleeps soundly, and eats three square meals a day, can't do without meat even once, and loves chillies as few Andhras do. Is that enough for one sketch ?

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

40. To T. N. JAGADISAN

Coimbatore, June 26, 1941 My dear Jagadisan, I have not touched an English book since coming here. The Ramayana is my only study. On that immortal epic one wants to say nothing which is not one's ripest thought. My ideas show yet no sign of having ripened. Not that my mind changes fre• quently or my appreciation waxes and wanes. But 1 seem to shrink from final judgement, like a man who beholds a vast panorama and is dazed, being unable to seize the ensemble in one view, where each detail holds him under a spell. If I said one thing Letters 191 to-day, ten to one I should have to unsay it before a month is over. When I am full of confidence, I can give in vague words the headings of chapters of my grand critique. The assembling of points worthy of note should, I fancy, be the first task. But it will take a life with my measure of work. Curious sense one has of propriety. On other topics one is not held back by such notions of perfection. But on the Ramayana, a tentative opinion is blasphemy.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

41. To T. N. JAGADISAN

Poona, February, 1942 My dear jagadisan, * * * * Sir Ali Imam and his brother Hasan Imam came into politi• cal prominence early in life. Both were barristers and married non-Moslem wives. They kept open house, talked admirably, and endeared themselves as nationalists who raised the reputation of Bihar and kept it beyond the touch of Muslim separation. Both had more than a flavour of the theatrical in behaviour ; Sir Ali was the more astute and skilful ; Hasan was no doubt the more sincere and more patriotic. When the senior was made member of the Viceroy's Executive Council, he made a sensation by avowing himself a nationalist. The country went mad over him but when he laid down office after 5(or 6 ?) years, there was not much to his credit. Government, loth to see so young a man idle, translated him to the Patna bench ; from there he jumped to the Bihar Executive Council. In the Muslim world his position was so high the Nizam wished to appropriate him. Unprece- dentedly generous terms were offered, and Sir Ali took over the charge of Hyderabad to the boom of the press. Ability in that State has about the same chance as marbles in mud. Beyond the outline of a constitution which was published for general infor• mation, we knew nothing particular. All of a sudden, the Nizam put forward a claim for the rendition of Bihar and appointed TT 11 192 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Sir Ali Imam as his plenipotentiary for negotiating this first class political transaction with the authorities at Westminster. It was openly asserted that Sir Ali had the spending of 30 lakhs for the purpose, besides salary, perquisites and establishment on an unheard of scale. Anyhow during 1922 and 1923 Sir Ali lived in the house that had been occupied by the Ambassador of the U.S.A., and they said with scarcely Jess pomp. His European wife had died by the time and when I dined at his table, I was occasionally transported to heaven by the company and conver• sation of a Mussalman lady of striking beauty and charm. Indian dishes, Indian servants, Indian costume, but all in the niost luxu• rious style ; about 30 vegetarian preparations, host and hostess having graciously turned baishnab for the nonce. You heard nothing but the three voices and the inevitable clank of china. The waiters and secretaries moved about like automata, prompt but unobtrusive, understanding but dumb. You might have been at the table of royalty in ancient Egypt or medieval Arabia. In such surroundings another person's enjoyment would have been unclouded. But I had Kenya weighing me down and a sickly conscience would stare every now and then into my face, as who should ask, 1 Is this a fit place for you ? ' whereupon a sense of guilty intrusion would overpower me and I felt like one who had just ignited the pyre of his beloved parent and imme• diately sat down to a feast of milk and honey. One day, pressed thereto by earnest questioning, I narrated my woes to Sir Ali and Lady Imam. More attentive and more sympathetic hearing I could not wish for. In a few minutes I was the interested listener and Sir Ali poured into my ears the story of his costly but fruitless mission. He had entertained lavishly, he had interviewed, and been interviewed, he had argued in per• son and by memorials, he had proved his case to the satisfaction of all who had ears to hear and the wit to understand ; but he was up against the dead wall of political grab and hold-fast. He had spent more than 10 lakhs ; the Nizam, known to be exces• sively careful in expenditure, was beginning to ask questions, which boded a not-distant recall. What was he to do ? He had lost patience and with it all diplomatic courtesy. There was his Parthian shot! He gave me a copy of his last appeal; it was a remonstrance in language not known to the decorous ears of the political department. Letters 193 To cut a long story short. He was winding up when my Kenya bubble burst. I swore I must give tongue to my grief and must be heard by as many influential people as possible. Here was an excellent opportunity for him. ' We shall be revenged jointly ' he said. ' I shall be host, you will be my guest. I'll ask a thousand people to tea. I'll request you at the end to say a jew words. But let them be many, charge them with your anger and feeling of outraged empire citizenship, let them bite and sting and burn.' You know the rest. Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

42. To T. R. VENKATARAMA SASTRI

Servants of India Society, Poona 4, (India), March 27, 1942 My dear Venkataraman, * * * * Knowing that I am a moderate and that the hearing that I get in certain quarters is entirely due to my moderation, non-mode• rates ask me now and then to come out with my views and speak out. As soon as I do so, they cry that I have not echoed their views and given them my backing. When Congress views agree with mine, I don't hesitate to stand by Congressmen. When we differ, 1 prefer (by temperament) to be silent. If, however, I am pressed to speak, I speak for myself and not for others. If it doesn't please them, it doesn't please ihem. I regret the fact but I can't help it. Since the war began I have been for unconditional co-opera• tion with Britain. Not that I didn't demand this and that. But whether my demands were met or not, 1 didn't think of with• holding my help. You know how a year or so ago, I wrote both to Gandhiji and Rajaji that the situation required us to co-operate, not for Britain's but for our benefit. Even then our demands stood. Now when India is about to be knocked on the head, how can anybody expect to change ? The greater the danger, the more I would cry out for what can be done being 194 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI done. Rajaji also wishes to co-operate with Britain but stands out till his demand is met. That he camouflages it by using periphrasis is only a sign of his cleverness, not of his wisdom. You may ask, what is the good of your demanding a thing and not threatening sanction ? Well, that brings us to the dear old controversy. I won't pursue it. Negotiations with sanctions there have been galore. Churchill & Co. are not impressed. Cripps, who is Nehru's own man, comes with an offer which, since he brings it, must be an advance on the present position. In this extremity, I say ' Close with it and tackle the war.' Must we still haggle ? Good God ! If some people want to chop terms with their last breath, let'em. Why do they ask me to join ? Here you may ask, ' Why don't you keep your mouth shut ? Clever men are in the field and will make the most of the situa• tion for the country.' Well, then I really am angry. Men are cleverer, shrewder, luckier. Still India is my country. In my own way I love it. I think I have the right to serve it too. It is cruel to be told to shut up. I won't shut up.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

43. To K. NATARAJAN

R. S. Puram, October 23, 1942 My dear Natarajan, I have been putting off writing to you, though a letter is due. As to G. B. Shaw, my interview can't well go into print, as you will see when I put it into words. I meant it only for the infor• mation of you and your family. I've grown awfully nervous about publicity, and dread reading my name in the papers. Why I ever get on a platform these days is a puzzle even to me. t suppose it is the tyranny of habit. Events too are daily assum• ing more bewildering form, and my senile brain is not able to sort them and give a meaning to them. Perhaps because of my seclusion, what people say and write appeals less and less to me, and I find myself somewhat out of touch with men and things, even those that have been long familiar. Venkalarama Sastri Letters 195 and you, whom I should understand like a berry on the pain?, now and then make me sit up and rub my eyes. I don't com• plain, please don't misunderstand ; I am at least as much to blame as you, may be far more than you. 1 only record the fact. Mind you, the amount of agreement between us is vastly more than the disagreement. Yet this little quantum distresses me. Am I exaggerating trifles ? Or are you contracting your vision ? Let me be concrete. Your eulogy of Ahimsa as Hindu doctrine gratifies me. I have myself enlarged on the point on occasion. Your appraisal of Gandhiji is equally proper. His position is unique among the teachers and exemplars of our kind and one is bound to take up the gage when he is assailed or his greatness doubted. So far it is common ground. Beyond the point, I feel hesitant. Hasn't Gandhiji compro• mised his Ahimsa too much ? I could quote you three passages from his very recent writing, which make a frightful dent into this paramount creed. It is a discovery, we all claim, a new application of a principle hitherto held too far above the mun• dane plane. Is it not necessary to keep it as pure and as un• sullied as circumstances permit ? You may say the world is tyrannous and bends everybody and everything out of the straight line. True, too true. But that doesn't alter the unfortu• nate fact that a godly image is broken. After this, assertions of non-violence as our guide seem not only unfounded but dis• honest. If I judge by impossible standards, I do so only because impossible claims are made. When made to the foe of our pro• gress in another hemisphere, is it a wonder that he turns away ? That he doesn't deny and deride is a proof oE his self-restraint and observance of decorum. The Congress Dretence of non• violence for 24 years is sheer bunkum. Gandhi has himself undone this plea. To be nonviolent to one set of people and violent to another set of people is to be just like you and me, ordinary folk who follow the rule of expediency. Congress was always non-violent in the ordinary sense. The claim is one of the lies of Indian politics, not known in its real nature on account of its many-throated audacity and our partiality for ourselves, but a lie nevertheless, which we should see vividly in others and denounce mercilessly. Here allow me a refinement in the reasoning. Till two or three years ago, I had been believ- 196 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI ing that Congress's claim was to all-round and universal Ahimsa. Gandhiji was under the same delusion. When the Working Committee first defined its attitude towards this war, the limita• tion of the policy (no more a creed) emerged for the first time, at least so far as my perception went. On Gandhiji too it came as a shock, but by one of his characteristic strokes of adapta• bility, he came soon to realise that it had been always there and as a necessary part of Congressmen's mentality. 1 confess to an acute feeling of indignation that he did not at once denounce the incongruity and forswear it for ever. The com• promise, acceptable on the ordinary Vyavahara plane and hailed as the acme of practical good sense by the Indian public, was to me a definite breach of the empire of truth, utterly indefen• sible in Philosophy or Ethics. I may, dear Natarajan, seem to you excessively sensitive and quixotically scrupulous in these matters. But I desire a great thing to be great, a pure doctrine to be untarnished, a unique claim to be placed on unassailable ground. Congress has failed lamentably and dragged down Gandhiji, who was near the peak of glory for a life of severe self-discipline and unflinching devotion to an ideal.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

44, To MAHATMA GANDHI

Svagatam, Mylapore, June 2, 1944 My dear Brother, It was only this noon that a Gujarati girl from Adyar brought the parcel designed for me with a covering letter signed by you. It has taken long to make the journey. The Hindu has, during the last three days, been publishing important parts of the correspondence. So now I have an idea how the land lies generally. Political literature seldom makes new converts. Readers find confirmation of preformed opinions and don't read with fresh minds. Many new facts have no doubt come to light but guilt Letters 197 and innocence, responsibility and irresponsibility are matters of judgment, which depend on affinity and allegiance. Pursue this controversy, if you will. You can't afford to sit still under undeserved charges. The public must know what can be said on behalf of Congress and its leaders. At the same time the future cannot be ignored. All things have been held up for you. The Peace Conference is of the greatest significance for the world, for India and for your spe• cial mission in life. Make your way to if. Your name as a lover of peace will go down that way more surely than otherwise. You are much more than the head of the Congress movement in India. The press, alas! even the Congress press, cannot see beyond the present quarrel with Government and will hold you down to it. Rise, I pray, to your own height and get a proper perspective of the world ; for you are a citizen of the world, eagerly looked for when mighty issues are settled. India can• not lose, she can only gain, by your sailing beyond her narrow waters into mid-ocean.

Your loving brother, V. S. SRINIVASAN

45. To MAHATMA GANDHI

Svagatam, Mylapore, June 17, 1944 My dear Brother, I haven't been able to go to Poona this time for our Society's session. If I had known early enough I could combine it with a visit to you. I might have taken the risk. Hope you are in the Clinic.1 I know discipline there is strict. Such talks as may be allowed by the gaoler there won't be satis• fying. Still if the idea occurs to you, let nothing deter you from telling me. It shall be my duty to gratify your wish. I fear that the doctors are the people from whom you need to be rescued. What a trial to be turned over, tapped in twenty places, required to sigh deep and constricted in the arm. A con-

1 Nature Cure Clinic, Poona. 198 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI siderate and kindly profession, they would be glad to give you a holiday, if you petition them. I should sign here, but even a non-violent fighter may be allowed a Parthian shot. You have had great wrongs, and they cry aloud for redress. But at this moment the future is more important than the past. While I don't venture to say that you shouldn't seek to re-establish yourself, I would beseech you earnestly to attend to the demands of the world's peace. India's cause and yours may — who knows — be best served that way.

With love as ever and for ever, V. S. SRINIVASAN

46. To MAHATMA GANDHI

Svagatam, Mylapore, August 4, 1944 My dear Brother, It is only to be expected that Congressmen will mostly gather round your banner, whatever their views might have been till you declared your mind. I am not surprised either that public workers outside the Congress fold, tired of the deadlock and anxious for a move on should either bless the formula which Rajaji and you join to put forward or watch events in the hope that the sacrifice of unity will be rewarded with independence for the divided Indias. You may, by one chance out of ten, bring it off. The country may acclaim the result. I shall not. The price is too big, the purchase will be a bogus article. But the odds are you will fail. The British Government won't budge. Their spokesmen are resourceful and can argue that the unity they had in mind was different, that much more is necessary, and that during the war a national government of the type you want cannot be set up. This is certain, I see it clearly. You may say that will expose British pretensions. Only to those to whom they need not be exposed. American and other opinion, that part of it which can influence the course of affairs, cannot be mobilised for some years. But your formula will stand Letters 199 and Muslims won't let India go back on it. That will be a loss which we can never repair, counter-balanced by no advantage. I can't support you. If I were strong enough I would take the field against you. The most I can do is to make a speech, trusting that the press will give me some space, or issue a state• ment to the public. The indignation I feel is so great that I must do something. I am sorry to oppose you now. But I have done so time and again. It is you that have changed in the matter. And Rajaji has declared in terms you may go farther to meet Jinnah's demands, if that be necessary. Too too bad.

Yours affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN

47. To G. D. BIRLA

Svagatam, Mylapore, September 12, 1944 My dear Mr. Birla, The greatest Indian of our time, whom we are privileged to call friend, must be enabled, before being called away, to do his greatest service. Mahatma Gandhi is one of the few persons now living whose plea for permanent peace in the world and brotherhood among nations will be heard with respect at the forthcoming world conference. It would be to India's everlasting honour if his was one of the powerful voices raised in support of the most sacred cause of this or any previous generation. History will record the event in letters of gold. It is not likely that a national government will be erected in India in time to depute him as leader of the representatives of the Indian people. It is a sad thought. But it will not do for us to bewail this and do no more. There will be several unofficial missions trying to influence the proceedings of the conference. Believe me, their work, though not invested with formal authority, will help the all- important cause of pacifism in a sensible degree. Speech at the regular sittings is not the only means of reaching the mind of the members. Private talks, social parties, pamphlets, public meetings, press interviews — these are some of the channels 200 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI through which the thought and purpose of earnest persons may travel to the heart of the conference and leave their impress on its final outcome. You will agree in my belief that Gandhiji will be sought by wise men and women who can be efficient messengers of his mission. You are the one of his disciples who combines the know• ledge, zeal, and capacity required to see that he is on the spot with associates of his choice to make the fullest, use of the opportunity. Pray arrange betimes for him and his party to get to the place of meeting by air or by boat. I trust with all my heart you will find it possible to accompany him. He will then have all that money, watchful care and personal devotion can provide. You know I have set my heart on this noble and fruitful activity shedding lustre on our friend's closing days. Nothing to which he has set his hands till now will compare with this supreme service. It should not be necessary, but I think it prudent, to add that with your usual kindness to me you will not allow a whisper to reach your ear that I wish to be included in this notable deputation. I have neither the ambition nor the strength for such a big part.

Affectionately yeurs, V. S. SRINWASA SASTRI Letters 201

48. To His DAUGHTER RUKMINI SUNDARAM

Agra, October 12, 1916 My dear Rukmini, You have doubtless heard that I am now here, the guest of our Hirday Nath Kunzru. They are a large family of five bro• thers and children, all handsome, fair and intellectual, a fine type of the virtues and graces of the old Aryan race from which we are sprung. Dina Nath Kunzru, junior to Hariji, took me to the Taj Mahal last evening. It is the finest building in India, some say in the world. Its situation is wonderful, being on the Jumna outside the city in a spacious well-laid-out park. I cannot describe its beauty or the delicacy of the marble-work, of which it is full without seeing to be excessively full. I had read many excellent descriptions, but the reality far exceeded the idea I had been able to form. By good luck it was full moon yesterday. We went again after ten o'clock and it was a glorious heavenly sight, bathed in the moonlight. We gazed on it from near, admiring the blend of the many-coloured stones and their marvellous brilliance as they playfully threw back the moon's beams. Then we withdrew to a distance and tried each in his own way to realise the perfection of art which harmonized into one divine whole so many varied charms. Long we stayed on the grounds. When we went, there was a thick mist and we had great mis• givings, but the moon in her meridian power seemed to conquer all obstacles and shone proudly on the Taj which smiled and glowed in answering triumph. You must see it once. I'll show it you, I promise.

Yours very affectionately, V. S. SRINIVASAN 7* St. '

t^_-*^ k~*-tyy fc^rU**.

t-^-<4< 1^-^^ eAM-rJ^l . X^ U**M. . *J\fa *-«_^ ^rvv^ ^KMZ*

DAUGHTER Sastri College at Durban, South Africa. EDUCATION THE SCHOOLMASTER'S TEST

" The Schoolmaster's Test", written by V. S. Srinivasa Sastri and published in the Educational Review, Madras, in two instal• ments in its issues of February and March of 1896 will be read with ioterest even today. Mr. Sastri was then the English Assistant in Pachaiyappa's High School in Madras.

THE question " What is the test by which a schoolmaster is com• monly tried ? " is one of considerable importance. Its answer wilt practically be a measure of the function that the public expects the schoolmaster to discharge ; and according to the nature of that function will the status of the schoolmaster in society be regulated, respected and maintained at a high level of efficiency if the function be high, disregarded and allowed to deteriorate if it be low. And speaking broadly it may be asserted that the measure of esteem that the public in general accords to the profession of teaching is a fair test of its own stage of progress and capacity for progress. For no self-conscious society can ever progress unless it creates those conditions that will not only secure whatever has been achieved in previous generations and is being achieved in the current generation, but also ensure the achieve• ment of further social good in the appropriate manner and in the appropriate directions by coming generations. In adjusting social arrangements therefore the leaders of every community should, so far as social arrangements lie within their power, see that the rising generation is so brought up and carry on the work of advancing the community with effect and without blundering. Every community, having its own particular constitution and its own particular atmosphere of beliefs, customs, memories, hopes and struggles, and handing down to its successors that constitution and that atmosphere, does in large measure supply this bringing- up. But this bringing-up being undesigned and unregulated, must necessarily be haphazard, uncertain and of various degrees of efficacy. A more thorough, systematic, and, as far as possible, uniform agency for the rearing-up of youth is quite essential. Such an agency is to be found in the profession to which we belong. Thus regarded, the schoolmaster is a factor, by no means 206 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI unimportant, of the progress of his community, a colleague, there• fore of all those that may be engaged in the work of social, political and other reform. In the vast army of people marching forward, he is no mere camp-follower, but the very mainstay and support of the whole, supplying competent and well trained soldiers in the place of those that must necessarily succumb in the struggle, and thus giving at every stage in a truer sense than even the doctor or surgeon, fresh life and fresh strength. The above consideration, which sound mere platitudes in the saying, are, however, so grossly neglected in practice even by the men of light and leading that I have considered it well to preface my paper with them. For it is only when the high calling of the schoolmaster is clearly and earnestly recognised that the public will insist upon a high standard of efficiency and a severe test of fitness for the profession of teaching. Now what is the test by which we are commonly tried by our public ?

" SUCCESSFUL TEACHER "

The manager of an institution, when he wants a master, inquires whether the candidate has' been a " successful teacher " before, the expression " successful teacher" meaning only one that has produced a certain standard percentage of passes in the subjects that he has taught. When a teacher applies for a place or for promotion, he lays some stress upon his University honours, if he has any, and more stress upon the length of his experience as teacher : but the circumstance of which he is most proud, and which he puts forward as his best claim to recognition, is the results of public examinations for which year after year he has been responsible. To carry conviction home to the mind of the manager, the applicant often appends a formidable tabular state• ment showing the year, the subjects taught by him, the number sent up, the number of passes, the number of passes in the first class, etc., etc. The inspector, who finds it impossible to devote more than a few hours to the inspection of every school, and who is therefore hard put to it to find some tangible measure of the efficiency of the school and its staff, fastens upon the results upon the public examinations and writes 1 up ' or writes ' down ' accor• ding as he considers them creditable or discreditable. The director, who can look only through the eyes, and hear only Education 207 through the ears, of his inspectors, reviews the work of each school in the same terms. As for the public, we have only to remember that boys flock in the largest numbers to the schools that have produced the best results in the recent examinations to convince ourselves that its notion of a successful school master is not far different. To conclude, nearly all people interested in education, — the manager, the teacher himself, the inspector, the director, the pupil and the parent — are agreed in regarding examination results as the only suitable test of a schoolmaster. I shall presently urge that this test is by no means consonant with the high calling previously mentioned. Before doing so, I desire to make it clear that, even so far as it goes, it is an extre• mely inaccurate and untrustworthy test. The great fallacy under• lying it is that the teacher is considered solely responsible for the results of public examinations, and must exclusively enjoy the credit and exclusively suffer the discredit, of them. Now there are at least three factors concerned in the production of these results, the teacher, the pupils and the examiners. Taking the last factor first, it is readily seen that they introduce into the calculation of the final product a very uncertain element consisting in a more or less sudden and considerable variation of the standard of the questions, and in greater or less strictness in the valuation of the answers. One is tempted to add in this connection that professors in First-Grade colleges, who mostly draw up our question- papers, being absolutely ignorant of the actual, average attain• ments of high school classes, seldom hit off the right standard, but err considerably one way or the other, thus causing an amount of fluctuation in the results, which only the teacher fully realises, as he is compelled to watch with anxious minuteness the rise and fall of the examination-standard year after year, because all the same he is made responsible. The force of this remark is amply attested by the alarmingly large number of failures in the single subject of science in the Matriculation examination during the last two years. Coming now to pupils, it is self-evident that, being the direct agents engaged in the examination, they are far the most potent of the causes that determine the nature of the results. How liable to fluctuations of greater or less intensity their influence must be, can be easily realised by remembering that the general attainments of pupils presented for examinations vary considerably from year to year according to the class or 11—14 208 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI community from which they are mostly drawn, their average fitness for the studies they entered upon at the beginning of the year, the discipline to which they may have been accustomed, their earnestness, and general teachableness. If a certain number of pupils pass in the first class, it does not follow of necessity that the teacher has taught them admirably. Without doubt much depends on the teacher. The average student can no more pass his examination without help from the teacher than the teacher can turn out good results with a lot of numskulls. The point here insisted on is that it will be unsafe to argue in every case that good results indicate great capacity in the teacher, or bad results, his deficiency therein. Other evidence has to be taken before a just verdict can be pronounced. Nobody knows this better than the teacher. If he is young and has yet to make reputation, he welcomes nothing so much as a ' good set' of pupils and dreads nothing so much as a ' bad set'. He knows that the one will bring him credit as surely as the other will bring discredit, though in his heart he fully believes that, as he himself undergoes no change, he is not justly entitled to either. Why then does every master in recounting his qualifications lay stress upon the excellent results he has turned out for such-and- such a number of years ? For my own part this can do nothing more than create a general presumption in his favour ; but if it is offered as a piece of conclusive evidence, I must put down the teacher either for a very ignorant man or for a sort of hypocrite who takes more than he knows to be his due. Such hypocrisy would be altogether without palliation were it not that he often receives unjust condemnation for bad results. Having thus argued that this examination-results test is by itself insufficient, inaccurate, and untrustworthy even with res• pect to mere teaching power, I shall next proceed to consider how singularly inadequate it is for the high calling of the school master. And first let me consider him as a mere instructor. Every teacher that has not allowed the monotonous routine of his life to swallow up his sense of utility and proportion will acknowledge that he is under an irresistable temptation to impart, not such knowledge and in such manner, as will be truly useful and edu• cative, but such knowledge and in such manner as will make most show and tell best in public examinations. Take for instance the subject of English in High schools. Those that teach English to Education 209 F. A. Classes must know how ill-equipped with sound knowledge of English most pupils are when entering college. This is not to be wondered at considering that in the Matriculation class no text book written in good English is taught earnestly and examined upon along with other subjects. Miklejohn's Grammar and Shep- pard's General English are now the main study of pupils. If they want any extra books they go to K. Subrahmanya Aiyar's Hand• book of English, Murison and Adam's Composition, and Walton's Synthesis. No questions are asked at the Matriculation that cannot be answered by one that has worked at a fair proportion of the exercises given in these books. So it happens that to some extent in the fourth and in the fifth forms, and to a very large extent in the sixth, pupils are kept occupied with any amount of ingenious manipulation of forms of sentences, changing the Active into the Passive, the Simple into the Complex kind of sentence, the Direct to the Indirect form of narration etc., etc. Now every one that has had experience of this will grant how fatally easy such exer• cises become after a certain amount of drilling, how in fact they can be performed mechanically even upon sentences whose mean• ing the candidate does not at all understand. Thus the sense of a passage is rarely thought of by the pupil who confines himself to its external form, and is absorbed in finding out what mecha• nical rules he has to apply in particular cases. But supposing this divorce of sense and form did not come about, and the teacher took care always to make the meaning plain before beginning to teach tricks to the form, even then the separate passages selected for these exercises will be haphazard, discontinuous, and absolu• tely valueless as a means of creating ideas or stimulating thought. Nothing like teaching a large quantity of good prose and good poetry. It is quite easy to teach all the grammatical involutions and evolutions in the world in reference to that prose and poetry ; and it is a wellknown fact that, other things being equal, greater reading means greater knowledge, greater command of language, and greater culture. But the University having abolished text books, pupils and, I grieve to say, too many teachers neglect it. It was only the other day that a certain student asked me in open class, " why do you bother us with this text book, Sir, while we have none for the Examination ? " and I dare say there was many another that thought like him but had not the pluck to second him. It is no doubt with difficulty that students can be 210 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI driven to the study of any books other than General English Manuals and Handbooks ; and most teachers shrink from that difficulty, partly because they fear to stretch their discipline too far, partly also because text book teaching is so much more taxing to themselves than General English work. Again, several most important branches of English teaching are absolutely neglected, because they are such as the University cannot possibly examine : speaking, reading and recitation. Reading particularly suffers to a most shameful extent in the High school classes, and when in the senior college classes, the scholar discovers that his pronun• ciation is outrageous, he finds it too late to begin to learn and resigns himself to the most irritating sing-song monotone, which in all probability he has modelled on that of some one of his junior masters. English, however, is not the only subject to the teaching of which this University-Examination test is disastrous; History and Geography, Science, the Optional Languages, all are affected by it in the same manner. But though this topic is so tempting, I must now hasten to the consideration of the greatest evil wrought by this test.

FALLING OFF FROM IDEAL

This is the great falling off of the average teacher from his ideal. Extremely few masters are now capable of performing their high function, fashioning men, by the influence of example no less than by precept and guidance, fitted to take their place in their time as useful members of a progressive community. Extremely few indeed are able to bring their personal influence to bear upon their pupils, to mould their character, guide their temper, or direct their conduct. This aspect of the teacher's function is forgotten, he is not expected to do anything in that line. He is regarded and trusted as a mere supplier of information ; no, even that requires a modification, as a supplier of such information as will bear the greatest quantity of fruit in the University Examination. For, be it remembered this information seed is not sown by the teacher in the pupil's mind to root there and grow into his nature and bear good fruit in the fulness of time : but the pupils receive it and hold it in a sort of mechanical suspension on the surface of their memory until the proper examination-season arrives, when Education 211 they transmit it more or less disfigured by means of a steel imple• ment on to a white paper soil, and water it plentifully with a dirty black liquid, and then await the ' result' with feverish anxiety, and lo ! in about a couple of months comes out the fruit in the shape of another white paper dotted over with the same black liquid, and bearing like-wise a black ring to give it the taste of authority, and these earnest young folk hug it to their bosoms, and thank God for the priceless treasure. This is the kind of work we are doing year in and year out in our schools and we have time for nothing else. Our personality and the pupils' have thus no intimate intercourse ; they have only a single point of contact, and, as if jealous of the single point of contact, the University comes in there to restrict all freedom of movement and interac• tion. Off that single point, we diverge hopelessly, never to meet again through the ends of the world. Thus it has come about that no manager of a school, when he is about to appoint a master to his school, inquires, " What is the character of this man ? Will he set a good example to my boys ? Will he lead them aright ? " On the contrary, I have heard it said by people who ought to know better, "Where is the harm in appointing Mr. So-and-So? True, he is not always sober or steady ; once or twice he has nearly got put into prison ; but what does it matter ? He will teach none the worse for that, and his results at the examinations will be far better than those of the saintlicst teacher you may men• tion ". I generally have no reply for such reasoning, it fills my mind with despair. The difference seems to be too much at the very root to be easily settled by argument. Besides 1 am by no means sure that I am not in a hopeless minority ; for are there not at present too many in the ranks of our profession that have no business there ? In the opinion of the great majority of mana• gers of schools, and in the opinion likewise of many worthy people who do not manage schools, character in a schoolmaster is of no moment. With your leave and. I hope, with your full assent I pro• test against such a notion. What then shall be a schoolmaster's test ? I shall now proceed to answer this question. But first a few introductory remarks. I do not intend to enlarge upon all the virtues and all the vices of mankind, or upon the numerous qualifications of a teacher which arc duly catalogued and appropriately recommended in Method-books. Not all of 212 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI these are equally important at all times. Certain times require cer• tain qualities in men. Society changes from time to time ; and though all virtues and all vices are found in it at all times, there are some that are peculiar to every age, and give it its characteris• tic tone. To sustain and purify those virtues, to diminish and soften those vices, to strengthen those forces that make for pro gress, and weaken those that make against it — this is the func• tion of the schoolmaster no less than it is the function of the moralist, the legislator, or the man of letters. And just as different ages require different types of statesmen, so also in a far less measure perhaps, but no less peremptorily, schoolmasters must alter with the times. In other words, there are certain attributes which require to be very strongly developed by the teacher in each varying age. My purpose in the remaining part of this paper is to point out a few characteristics in which it seems to me need• ful that schoolmasters of this day should be strong ; and I must, therefore, refer briefly to what I consider grave defects of chara• cter among us. One of these is an unreasonable conservatism of the mind that takes hold of us all at too early an age. Our minds like our bodies seem to lose elasticity and pliability all too soon, and refuse to receive new improvements, A horror of all new ideas, a disposition to avoid and shirk even an unprejudiced discussion of new modes of thought and new courses of life, a tendency to fall in contentedly and cheerfully with the accustomed routine of life, and look upon every suggestion of departure therefrom with sus• picion and alarm, a habit of saying on every occasion, great or small; " We have never had it before, why need we have it now ? At all events, let me be, I leave it to those behind," these are some of the most irritatingly repulsive forms that this mental conservatism assumes in a large majority of cases. It is never understood, rather it is always lazily forgotten, that intelligent and unrestricted discussion is the necessary antecedent of all sure and wise action in great matters, that therefore there is no harm but much good in entertaining and fairly considering all proposals of change made in an earnest spirit, and that it will be time enough to slam the door and retreat precipitately to the inward security of the mind when any proposal threatens to translate itself violen• tly into action. The superstition of fatalism is not dead, it survives in the more degraded though more plausible form of the supersti- Education 213 tion of ' Time ' and serves as a uniform plea not for refusing to act, (there is much reason in that), but for refusing to speak and think as reason may guide. How often have I not heard it said by people that are not without a certain kind and measure of wisdom, " Time will cure all; what is the use of you and I troubling about it ? " as though time were a personal being whose occasional interposition in the affairs of men was absolutely independent of, and obviated the necessity for. human preparation and human effort. This mental conservatism has another side to it. All conser• vatism, striving to make the best of the present, is at bottom a love of ease and security, and will therefore set its face against all thoughts and aspirations that, not being immediately grati• fied, are apt to rouse a sense of dissatisfaction, and thus entail the necessity for earnest effort, serious sacrifice, or sustained enthusiasm. It thus becomes another name for apathy in res• pect of all such matters as the self is not concerned in imme• diately and in a tangible manner. Now there is no surer sign of mental death, no more signal proof of a complete cessation of real usefulness than that a man should cease to take interest in, and feel enthusiasm for, some large and generous cause outside his self. Special endowments and special facilities of circum• stance apart, I should esteem a man just in proportion to the amount of such disinterested enthusiasm he displays ; and judged by that standard, I fear the largest majority of us will fail ignominiously. And have I not known a large number of educated gentlemen whose cold calculation and self-seeking are so fortified with a love of ease and an eye to consequences that they are proof against all warm emotion, all generous indignation, all outrushing of the whole soul to active sympathy with a wrong• ed colleague, an illtreated brother, or an outraged community though it be their own. Thus it is that as a community we are powerless for purposes even of common defence ; ' each for himself' seems to be the motto of most of us. Many evidences there are which make it indisputable that even our religious feelings which are supposed to be the strongest of our feelings are too weak for any effective self-defence, and that, if nothing be done, they must continue to grow weaker under the joint attacks of the enemy without and the enemy within. Worse than all this, however, is the spirit of cynicism that is 214 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI now so rampant. Every man has to efface his individuality, and approximate to a pattern of unnoticed mediocrity. No liberty of thought or action is allowed. There is a dead level above which no one shall rise on pain of being marked and pointed at for an eccentric man. 'Enthusiast', 'faddist', 'hobby-driver', are the opprobrious epithets which are applied to those daring men that think and possess ideas. It is wrong to think feelingly of any subject and have views of your own not acceptable to Mrs. Grundy ; it is a sin to express them and try to give them currency ; and if you venture to translate them into action even though it relate only to the minutest detail of your dress, you will be put out of the rule of associability, respectability, and decency ; you will be called a dangerous innovator ; you will be railed at, pitied, suspected of lunacy. It is this potent cause that has brought about the total extinction of individuality and originality among us, the poverty of ideas, the scarcity of enthusiasts, the profound apathy, and the refined self-seeking that are so lamentably per• ceptible in our society. Where there is some activity seen, it will be found to be the result of the efforts of a few philanthropic Europeans. Within our own society there is but little cohesive power, little solicitude for general welfare.

AVERSION TO SPORT

Another blot on our national character is an almost instinctive aversion to athletic sports. This is a national disgrace, nothing less. It is at the root of all our weakness, and until we wipe it off, there is no hope for us. Young and old, educated and unedu• cated, schoolmasters and vakils, landlords and officials, we have all yet to realise the supreme exhilaration of spirits that awaits those that unharness themselves, so to speak, of evenings after the day's work, and for getting the cares, conventionalities, and distinctions of life, yield themselves upto the excitement of the playground. Some have a lurking feeling that it is not quite dignified to be found actively engaged in sports ; and it must be admitted that the teaching profession is not in general above this lofty contempt for physical exercise. Private tuition, news• paper reading, paying visits to friends and relations, shopping, correspondence, gossiping, lounging fixedly in an easy chair, these are the healthy occupations to which we consecrate the Education 215 evenings. I sometimes think whether it will not be desirable to get up a memorial to the Government of India praying for the enactment of a law closing all shops, offices, reading-rooms, and libraries, and prohibiting all meetings whatsoever between the hours of five and six ; there are moods when I consider " State interference " quite justifiable in this matter, as otherwise we are not likely to move of our own accord any more than in matters of social reform. Things arc not half so bad in Madras as they are in the moffusil ; even Madras, however, leaves a very great deal to be desired. Half our conservatism, half our apathy, half our lack of public spirit and patriotism, half our cowardice, are the direct results of our physical degradation. Activity, ntmbleness, vigour of body does mean in some measure activity, nimbleness, vigour of mind ; and increased physical strength and increased power of endurance will not fail to be accompanied by increased self-confidence, greater respect for self, and a livelier sense of personal dignity. Now in respect of all these and similar defects of character, all the hope rests with the coming generations. Very little can be done by the elders of our community ; indeed we ought rather to expect of them much discouragement, much repression of spirit, much unwholesome snubbing. Youthful warmth is apt to be called rashness ; independence will always be mistaken for insolence and insubordination ; and fearless reasoning, however just, must bring down upon itself the charges of irreverence and irreligion. And truly, if I mistake not. one of the most alarmine signs of the times is the growing jealousy and distrust with which the older generation as a whole looks upon the younger, and what is only to be expected from such want of sympathy, the growing disinclination and unfitness of the former to lead the latter in matters of national importance like social reforms, for example. Of course T make liberal allowance for exceptions, mv own small circle of acquaintance furnishing a greater number of them. But, I hope, if rightly viewed, it will not be regarded as much of a disparagement to say that it is impossible in the nature of things for the older generation to effect as much in this direction as may be effected by the younger. To make the latter realise the responsibilities of their position and to fit them by example, precept, and training for the discharge of those res• ponsibilities, is the duty of the schoolmaster, and in the extent to 216 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI which he fulfils that duty lies his test. I will not take up space in detailing what he should be and what he should do. I trust I have indicated it sufficiently. I shall therefore conclude with a few hints in the shape of directions to masters which arise naturally out of the foregoing considerations :—

HINTS TO TEACHERS

1. Let not your discipline in class check oddities and eccen• tricities, unless they are outrageous and prejudicial to class-work. 2. Do not crush out spirit and pluck. Encourage the more spirited boys, and keep them in hand by the force of sympathy rather than by repression. 3. Encourage Societies and Associations in the Senior classes, and keep an eye over them without actually interfering with their management. 4. Strive to get free expression of all ideas whatsoever with• out overmuch regard to their wisdom or practicalness. 5. Levy punctually and systematically subscriptions, however small. 6. Encourage and take part in sports and games. Let not any notion of false dignity keep you from them. Remember this is not the least important, though the most neglected, of your duties. I am conscious I have covered only a narrow portion of the subject of my paper, but it is my conviction that it is the portion which is at present most ignored, and which has therefore to be thrust persistently upon the attention of the public. It is impossi• ble to over-estimate the injury done to the cause of sound edu• cation in the widest sense of the word by this examination- results test. The profession of teaching in particular has suffer• ed most grievously. It has fallen from its high ideal. It has lost dignity. It no longer commands respect. It does not reward merit, and does not attract capacity. We are unable to hold our own among the other noble professions. All this augurs very ill indeed for the future, and cries loudly for earnest and resolute effort on the part both of the leaders of the community in general and of ourselves of the teaching profession in particular. The profound ignorance and neslect of educational matters that pre• vails among the men of light and leading, the contemptuous and Education 217 condescending manner they adopt towards their pedagogic brethren, and the all-too-common but most erroneous and perni• cious notion that teaching is a work that requires no brains and no special training, — these are responsible for our degradation. If only the first men of every town took more genuine interest in the education of their children, if as far as possible they took into their own hands the management of local education, and if they regarded school-management as an art that like every other art requires serious study and experience, and not as a simple thing that comes to men unbidden, a plaything that might serve as a good-natured recreation in the leisure of life, I have no doubt that educational progress would be a great deal more sound and satisfactory. Signs are not altogether wanting that of late our leading men have begun here and there to realise that this is one of their duties. But let us remember also that a great deal depends on ourselves. We are playing to the gallery too much. We are the willing and cheerful instruments of our own downfall. If the public has a low test for us, that is no reason why we should forget our higher functions. Let us deserve well of our community by manfully striving towards our ideal and resisting every downward pull that the stress and ignoble worry of our profession inevitably exerts. Whoever does not do so, is an enemy alike to the community and to his profession.

— The Educational Review, February and March 1896. CONVOCATION ADDRESS AT ANNA MALA I UNIVERSITY

The following is the Convocation Address delivered by the Rt. Hon. V. S. Srinivasa Sastri at Annamalai University on December 4, 1937 :

. Pro-Chancellor, Recipients of Degrees, Titles and Diplomas, Ladies and Gentlemen; WE live under democratic institutions of the British type, which are now discredited in various parts of the civilized world. Even among us, who belong to the British Commonwealth, large sections of the people, perhaps growing steadily in number, are of the opinion that democracy is played out, and that in clinging to it we run the risk of being left behind in the international race. This may or may not be true. I am inclined to think that the day of democracy is not yet done, and that, if its champions would only take pains to remove its weaknesses and reinforce its strong points, it might still maintain its ground as the most bene• ficent form of human government yet evolved. Unfortunately, democracy's friends do not stop to discriminate; they take always the easy path to success and forget that, in certain high aspects of political action, the means are as important as the ends. It thus happens that in this country, with every widening of the franchise and of the sphere of popular control, the corrup• tions of western democracy obtain a foothold sooner than its virtues. Criticism of the methods adopted by our leaders is not necessarily to be suspected as proceeding from a believer in autocracy, but ought rather to be welcomed as the attempt of a patriot who cherishes with affection the political institutions of his country and would fain see them cleansed of imperfections and brought to a higher pitch of purity and public serviceable- ness. In this spirit and not in that of cavil on the one hand or of fervid other-worldliness on the other, I propose to point out one of the dangers which threaten to strangle our public life. The malady I shall deal with is the hypertrophy of the party system. It is established beyond question that parliamentary government postulates the existence of well-organized and Education 219 coherent parties. The conditions for their proper functioning must be secured beyond all hazard. Politicians who wish to do their bit for the community must submit to a certain amount of control and restriction of the free exercise of their judgment. This being premised, 1 am concerned here to dwell at some length on the other side of the picture. There are great evils attendant on the system ; some of them apparent, but others insidious in their nature and demanding the utmost vigilance on the part of leaders lest they choke the atmosphere of purity and regard for the welfare of the whole which is so essential to the success of popular institutions. Writers on political subjects usually point out that the great antinomy is between the freedom of the individual and the exaltation of the State, whether the individual exists only as an instrument of the welfare of the State, or the State is in the last resort to be judged by the degree in which it secures the freedom and the welfare of the individual. It is by no means easy to decide between these alternatives, but as one who is always on the quest of the golden mean, 1 should like to believe that except in very rare situations it is possible for the State and the individual to sustain and subserve each other. The actual antinomy, however, that faces us is, the party or the individual citizen ? One can understand the nation demanding the entire surrender of the citizen, his prospect, his freedom and his life. Can a party push its claims against its members quite so far ? Perhaps the claim is not made in set formulae or stated nakedly in any treatise on public institutions ; but in actual prac• tice, the tendency of party executives is to aggrandize themselves and make continual inroads on the freedom of action and of speech of their members. As in other cases, the evil example of one party spreads among all. The reins of party discipline tend to be held with increasing rigour, and men and women are told that non-compliance with the fiats of party leaders will be noted in black ink in their records. In the hurry of life we do not remember that by merely joining a party we give up a consider• able slice of liberty. With the vast range of activity now assumed by Government and semi-governmental organisations, there is little in the normal life of a citizen which may not at one time or another become the subject of regulation ; and a political party therefore, in the search for means, of extending its power and prestige, is almost omnivorous. It soon acquires a body of 220 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVALA SASTRI crystallised views upon all subjects under the sun, and a mem• ber may be called upon at any time to support them by advocacy and by vote. It is inconceivable that the party views on all or most of these subjects could be his own personal views. Such genuine conformity is not possible in more than a few subjects. The theoretical distinction between fundamentals and details, between principles and their particular applications, is apt to be lost sight of; and in the fervour of propaganda and the excite• ment of combat the word of the party leader must be obeyed, and the tyranny of military discipline tends to be established. In a system of ins and outs the whole power and authority of Gov• ernment are the stake for which the parties contend with one another, and the prospect of such a prize magnifies all trifling details in the campaign and makes the maintenance of discipline in all ranks a paramount consideration. The Opposition, whose business ought to be to expose the flaws of Government measures, but, when that task is done, to examine the measures on their merits and support them where they are worthy of support, opposes for the sake of opposition and gets into the habit of seeing nothing right in the operations of Government and never saying a good word of their adversaries. This may be good "strategy", but it affords no exercise in the art of political judg• ment, which after all consists in the ability to sift public issues, separate the good and bad in them and advance the one while checking the other. How can a tyro in political science educate himself by a study of the speeches and actions of those who have hopelessly narrowed their vision and made up their minds to view all matters only as they affect themselves ? Speaking to the alumni of a University, I may not forget the needs of beginners and the duty of elders so to conduct themselves in the political sphere as well as in other spheres that their thought, speech and deed may accord with one another and teach the lesson that all life is one and must be lived in close conformity with one's nature and inmost convictions. It is impossible to be a bondsman in politics and a free man in other departments of life. It is amazing how the men who sit at the headquarters of; political organsations claim the right to control and guide our private friendships and social relations. The barriers that divide parties one from another are held inviolable as though they were ordained of heaven and could only be crossed under penalty of Education 221 excommunication. You are admonished which socials you may attend with impunity and which you must avoid. Deep differ• ences of views on public affairs and the habit of meeting on different platforms naturally part people into groups, and each person may be trusted to avoid contacts which may expose him to misunderstanding or impair his reputation for fidelity. Why need we add to these natural restraints special prohibitions direct• ed against individuals or classes ? It is no good reminding us that, in periods of abnormal excitement like that which saw the Irish Home Rule bills of Gladstone, social intercourse between members of the opposed parties is apt to be at a minimum and even friendships may suffer suspension as during a civil war. This is an aberration not to be cited as a precedent for normal times. I have never been able to perceive sufficient justification in India for the boycott of social functions at which officials arc present, whether as hosts or as guests. It arises from morbid political animosity, to which I have ever been a stranger. One would think, on the contrary, that men and women were meant to mix easily and naturally with one another and that, where differing political tendencies might keep them apart, special occa• sions of social intercourse should be created for the purpose of bringing them together and thus bearing witness to their common nature. How true it is that the appetite for power grows by what it feeds on ! Put a man at a tabic with some stationery and call him the secretary of a bureau. He will start by making enquiries which will soon become inquisitions, by making suggestions which will rapidly assume the character of orders, and by formu• lating principles which will steadily harden into a creed. He sends out whips on all occasions and sundry, and you have to make a speech or hold your tongue, to attend or stay away, and to walk to the right or to the left as you may be bidden. One may readily grant that members of a party must submit to cer• tain regulations in order that concerted action may be calculable. What is objectionable and must be resisted is the ceaseless encroachment of the executive upon the freedom of the indivi• dual until he becomes a mere unit in a well-drilled regiment. Not long ago official members in a legislative house nominated to represent departments or provincial governments were the object of derision amongst non-official as automata whose votes could 222 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI as weli be taken into the reckoning without requiring their bodily presence, — thus saving them many hours of ennui and Govern• ment some sorely needed rupees. Seeing how attenuated the liberty of Congressmen, for instance, is in these days, one is tempted to ask whether the gibe is less applicable to them. It is believed that they enjoy a certain measure of free speech at party meetings ; but we all know how, where there is no publicity, there cannot be much freedom of utterance. If it be contended that, while the outward freedom to speak and to vote is reduced within narrow limits, the truest form of freedom, namely, the freedom of the mind, is not curtailed, even this proposition is only partially true, for thought can flourish and produce its full effect only when it can find an outlet in speech and action. Long disuse of the latter cannot but lead to enfeeblement and paralysis of the former. Professor Graham Wallas quotes in one of his books from a speech made in the House of Commons in 1911, when the question of women's franchise was under discussion. It was agreed that the party whips should be called off and mem• bers could speak and vote in accordance with their personal views. One member complained that, as he and his colleagues had not enjoyed such freedom for many years, they found their mental faculties benumbed and did not know how to form an opinion. An exaggerated statement without doubt: but it contains a certain measure of truth; it is against human nature to exercise independent thought in vacuo. We are grown callous; otherwise we should feel the mockery of a system which draws scores of members from various committee rooms at the sound of the divi• sion bell and compels them to ask " Which lobby is mine ? " The unreality of proceedings in which men and women do not care to form their own opinions or, when they have them, do not care to express them, is so great that one hesitates to accept the deci• sions arrived at in such conditions as expressions of the national will entitled to respect and obedience. T. H. Huxley was once asked why he did not care to enter the House of Commons : his answer was that he had dedicated his life to the discovery and elucidation of truth and not to its obscuration, and therefore he avoided the pursuit of politics. I do not think that Huxley overstated his case. Party politics, which forbids independent judgment and compels one to speak and vote at another's bidding, is systematized violence done to truth. This confession must Education 223 sound strange, coming from one who a few moments ago granted the proposition that the party system and therefore party disci• pline are essential to the success of democratic institutions, and who is himself a lifelong practitioner of the game. Knowing how commonly one is misunderstood, let me at this point repeat my faith in democracy. However bad a legislative chamber may be, as Cavour said, it can never be so bad as the antechamber of an autocrat or, one may add, of a modern dictator. But does it follow that I should join in the apotheosis of party and kneel down before a caucus which regards its slogans as mantras at a ritual and shouts hosannas at every paltry success as though the hosts of heaven had routed the hordes of hell ? It has been pointed out that the function of political parties is akin to that of lawyers who argue a case before the jury from opposite sides, the general public being the final deciding autho• rity. Avowedly then a party is only one of two or more similar agencies meant to check and complement one another for the discovery of the line of best advantage to the community. For any one of these to claim the monopoly of power or influence and to demand the entire allegiance of the people is in the nature of a usurpation. It ought to be clearly understood that in a legislature, for instance, the party in power will only then be doing its duty when it pays due regard to the views of the other elements that compose the House, appropriates the best thoughts and suggestions put forward by them and enacts into law the combined wisdom of the people's representatives. If it were possible to rid our minds of the competitive aspect of the labours of the various parties, they would seem to be co-ordinate and co-operating agencies employed on the common task of ascer• taining and promoting the good of the whole community. A party is subordinate to the nation, must be ready to sacrifice its interests for those of the nation, and ought not to claim of the citizen that complete abnegation that only the nation can claim in sore need. On this view how grievously at fault we are in carrying on a ceaseless mutual warfare, on the look-out for ambushes, feints and fights to the finish ! If the great religions are to practise the virtues of charity, tolerance and even appre• ciation towards one another, if races and nations are bidden, in the name of mankind, to pull down all tariff and political barriers, how paltry and childlike seem the squabbles and truceless hosti- II—15 224 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI lities of our parties, often with no intelligible distinction and revolving round personalities ! I am under command to exhort you. the graduates ot the year, to conduct yourselves suitably unto the position to which, by the degrees conferred upon you to-day. you have attained. Your position is that of those who are entering on the rights and duties of citizenship. I advise you to be faithful to party, but always to put the nation above it. I advise you, when you become leaders, to circumscribe within well-defined limits the jurisdic• tion of your party, to demand of your followers due respect for this jurisdiction, but scrupulously to allow them full discretion outside that jurisdiction. I advise you not to look upon mem• bers of other parties as enemies to be avoided, denounced and injured, but as fellow-travellers choosing different routes to reach the same goal, viz., the common good. 1 advise you above all, to cherish your personal freedom as a birthright and guard it jealously except in a limited sphere, so that in your public acti• vities you may be true to yourselves. The ideal to be aimed at is the one enunciated in our ancient saying :

j^$f> g^£)$ ngi^^iq; 1

" One and the same in thought, word and act." To propagate others' opinions as your own, to make speeches against your convictions and to vote habitually at the bidding of a whip, is to do violence to truth. In this land men have been bidden from ancient days to speak the truth and to perform the dharma. 35 I qjj TTT; I Truth has been declared to be the foundation and the support of all things. rjftf&^q; I In an immortal legend Harischandra sold his wife and son to slavery and himself watched corpses burning on Ganga's bank, to avoid framing a falsehood between his lips. To keep the plighted word of his father Rama gave up a kingdom and dwelt in the forest for years with his wife. The empire of Truth has no limits and knows no relaxations. Modern life, however, has made numerous and extensive inroads upon it. In the dealings of nations, whether in war or peace or ordinary diplomatic inter• course ; in the flattery that pervades palaces ; in the large sphere allotted to propaganda and advertisement ; in the region of sex ; in commerce and business ; in testimonials ; in postprandial Education 225 utterances ; in obituary orations and epitaphs ; in dealings with invalids and children ; in the promises made by lovers and by candidates at election time ; in the writings of the partisan press ; in the one-sided pleadings before judges; in the chronicles of courts and kings and queens ; in the defence of superstition and error as a necessary basis for ethical conduct ; in these and seve• ral other departments we recognise and allow for a large mea• sure of concealment and distortion of the truth. Shall we knowingly and deliberately add the enormous domain of politics to this formidable list ? Happily we are not left without some shining examples for our guidance. One that will be universally admitted is Mahatma Gandhi. It is not for nothing that he observes silence on one day of each week, for all speech involves a certain impairment of the truth. He employs the fewest words and the simplest to express his thoughts, for does not the poet say that those must be frugal in their words who wish to be truthful ? I know of none who is so pretematurally careful to avoid situations that might compromise or weaken his adherence to the truth. With a will that no bribe can buy and no threat can bend, he upholds the supremacy of his conscience. Dedicated body and soul to the service of mankind, he will seek no good, however great or glitter• ing, except by methods wholly consonant with his own conception of right or truth. Daridranarayana, as he proclaims himself, four annas is not beyond his means ; if still he stands outside the Congress organisation, it is because its atmosphere irks his extremely sensitive and truthful soul. He protests against people following him blindly and accepting his decisions without endea• vouring to make them their own. Yet, so weak is human nature that in the wide circle of his influence people too readily sup- render their individual freedom and so palter with truth. If one of the phases of truth be non-violence, another is the integrity of the human soul. The Mahatma's supreme merit is his unflinching devotion to the goddess of Truth in her various phases. Let us be his co-worshippers, not his worshippers. BIOGRAPHICAL ESSAYS AND SKETCHES MY FIRST MEETING WITH GOKHALE1 (192?)

IT happened in the Easter of 1906. Gokhale had summoned me for a personal interview in connection with my application for membership of the Servants of India Society. He then lived in Shanwarpet, Poona, in the house now called, after its owner, Gandhi-wada. I think 1 stayed four days as his guest. Messrs. Dravid and Barve took charge of me. Though they were all attention, he would make frequent enquiries as to how T was getting on, so that I felt now and then I was taking away his mind from more important subjects. My Madras habit of taking coffee in the morning instead of tea was, I am afraid, a source of trouble ; for to this day the Deccani cook of cither sex has not learnt how to prepare this beverage without a touch of cardamom and a week's allowance of sugar. After a trial or two I pro• fessed a partiality for tea, but my host discovered the real origin of my new taste and fretted himself and asked Dravid several times what good it was his being a Madrassi if he could not make good enough coffee. Would he at least arrange for a conveyance and drive me to the railway station, where I could have my fill of as black coffee as I cared for ? Another Madrassi friend came in likewise for Gokhale's banter. Tt was a medical man whom they called Dr. Iyengar. His name was Ramaswami : he was Gokhale's intimate friend at the time and came nearly every day to dinner. He had nearly forgotten his Tamil and spoke it with great deliberation, with many drawls and pauses, much like a foreigner learning his first lessons. For reasons not hard to imagine Tamil is in special disfavour among those not born to it, and Gokhale shared to the full the prejudice of the scoffing world. He used to say it consisted only of consonants, chiefly guttural. So poor Tyen.car and I had to perform our duets in clicks and dissonances, while he called all the establishment to hear our performance. He would himself laugh aloud and clap his hands in sheer childlike enjoyment. Tn fact he never lost this faculty of simple pleasure and used, whenever he was tickled.

1 From trie Servant of India. 230 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI

to strike the table or bench where he sat with one hand if the other was noi free. My partner did his best, but 1 soon tired of the game and denounced him. 1 do not know where he is now. The last I heard was that he w;is lecturing on Indian philosophy in America and had sent Gokhale a nice volume containing his discourses. My food too distressed the Poona household exceed• ingly, though even in those untravelled days of mine my palate had much adaptability and I would not have famished in any part of India. Of the Madras dishes the best known and most widely appreciated outside the peninsula is the sar, which Gokhale, to show off his knowledge of Tamil, always called aaram. After Gopal. his cook even then, had essayed it unsuccess• fully once or twice, I was transferred for a meal to the house of Dravid, whose former wife was a Madrassi and was supposed, therefore, to be good at South Indian dishes. She was, however, a perfect stranger to them, and after an evening of great cordia• lity and vain attempts to remember Tamil expressions deep down in the family consciousness. I returned to the Chtippati and A mbii. I remember a warm debate over names. Gokhale did not approve of the Madras style of calling each man by his proper name ; he could not undeistand why the Dravidian folk seemed to disown their families, while the rest of the world were proud to designate themselves by their family titles. I tried to have mv laugh at what I stigmatized as an imitation from the West. In this, however. I was mistaken so far as the Deccan was concerned, for in the Mahratta chronicles people are known by their family names. Gokhale itself occurring with a fair degree of frequency. Even now I cannot think, why when a man is asked his name, he must mention that of some unkown ancestor or obscure village and keeD his own for a small circle of familiar friends and rela• tions. But to my discomfiture ( find the younger generation of Madras sometimes abondonine the dear old sensible style. It tries your temper to read M. L. Kshirasagar on a visitor's card, and. when vou have buttoned up your coat and put on the turban for a great interview, to find your old pupi). Madhava Rao, walking in with a timid step and asking with a familiar smile, " Don't you remember me. Sir?" Will anybody tell me why Subramanya Iyer should conceal his identity under the name of Karpur ? 1 Confess I am not fully reconciled to Mr. Natarajan's son being Biographical Essays and Sketches 23I

also a Natarajan,1 That day, however, the odds were against me. Natesa Dikshita, who ought to have stood by me for the honour of Madras, had already joined the undistinguished crowd of Dravids,2 and Dr. Ramaswami Iyengar put his provincial pride into his pocket and capitulated. One of the men I met during this visit was Mr. Vjsvesvarayya, who had not been knighted and who, by the way. in spite of his irreproachable modernity, has not chosen to call himself Moksha- . He was then in charge of a water works scheme for Poona and came to see Gokhale who was President of the Municipality. After he left, Gokhale spoke of him in high terms and added, surveying me up and down with compassionate dis• approval, " You see, how correctly he is dressed ; he is equally precise in his work and in his engagements. If I had such men to deal with in all my business, I could wish tor nothing better." My inclination after this was to keep at a respectful distance from him ; but what was my surprise when, on Gokhale taking me to the Hira Bagh Club and leaving me in the hands of Mr. Vis• vesvarayya. he actually took me round the place and presented me to his friends just as he would have presented any respectable1 visitor! I have met him several times since then and every time I have thought of Gokhale also, to whom, in spite of strik• ing superficial differences, he bore a deep similarity in scrupu• lous observance of the courtesies of social life, in strict regard for duty, in catholic outlook and in passion for work. In seeking admission to the Society which he had founded the previous year. I was doubtless moved as much by admiration of his public work and character as by the ideuls which underlay its constitution. One does not like to write with fulness or freedom on what is cherished reverently in one's inmost heart. Among the minor traits of character which then impressed themselves on my mind, I should like to mention, besides the faculty of child• like pleasure already noted, an earnestness in talk which held you in thrall and an eagerness of look which seemed anxious to carry you alone. His ideals quickly possessed you, you found yourself overwhelmed by his ardour. He conducted me over the site that he had selected for the Society, mostly jungle and rock

1 K. Natarajan, the editor of The itulioti Soda/ •Reformer, whose sorts and daughters are also Natarajam. 2 1 Dravftf' means ' one from the south '. 232 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI at the time ; he roughly sketched his building plan ; then he showed me, high on the neighbouring ridge, the spot where he had sworn in the first members — Dravid. Devadhar and Pat- wardhan. All the time some subtle element in his personality filled me with the conviction that Poona was the proper ground for all selfless work, that the Society was the first chosen instru• ment for the uplift of the motherland and that he was the leader best fitted to allure the youth of India to brighter worlds. I felt the answering glow in me. but what with my inexpressive face, what with the sudden paralysis that overtook my tongue, he might have thought me a mere clod of earth. The words were miles away when I needed them most. Another time too during this visit they played me n trick, but of a different sort. The moon was shining bright and we stepped out into the open space in front and occupied the seats which had been thoughtfully placed there. Gokhale had wound himself fully up on the subject of Poona and her primacy among the cities of India. Had not his master, Ranade, called her the metropolis of India and Bombay her suburb ? Was she not the Punya Bhwni on which he had performed the continuous sacri• fice of a life filled with pure thought and noble purpose ? Then he touched on the Deccan Education Society and Karve's magni• ficent work and went on to recall the glory of the Peshwas, uni• formly obscured in the history of India as written by English• men. As if to clinch the whole matter he looked up at this point and burst out, " Did you ever see a sky like this ? Poona alone can boast of it." I had followed him in his flight with glad and wondering spirit, but somehow my wing broke just then. A sudden impulse to contradict seized me. I was not going to be enslaved. Was I not a pedagogue, commissioned to curb the wanderings of fancy and prune all extravagances of thought and expression ? So I said half protestingly. " I have seen such clear nights in Madras as well." He turned to look at mc and then it occurred to me that: I must further elucidate the truth of my remark and add something inane about the serene sky of tropical regions. The spell broke and the magician became dumb. I am sure Gokhale forgave me. but I haven't yet. One day when we were alone he asked whether I would mind a little personal talk. Of course I said how greedy I was for it. " Quite sure ?" he demanded by way of fixing mc absolutely. Biographical Essays and Sketches 233 Then he referred to a little comment I had made in a biographi• cal article about him in the Indian Review* After narrating the incident that led up to his apology to the Government of Bom• bay and the European soldiery employed in the plague operations of Poona, I had deprecated the rancour of public criticism of him at the time and summed up by stating that the episode was an instance where public opinion was more in the wrong than the unfortunate victim of it. The grammatical implication that the unfortunate victim was also in the wrong hurt him deeply. He was anxious, he said, that I should understand the matter in its full bearing on the proprieties of public life. .He had not made the apology without consulting the best and wisest men of the time. It behoved a critic of other men's conduct to hold their honour as his own. When one had aspersed another's character in public and found himself unable to substantiate the charges, the proper course was to own up manfully, To leave a sting behind in the apology was neither righteous nor sports• manlike. I felt edified and expressed my gratitude. A feeling of relief seemed to come over him as he said, ' I don't as a rule talk to people on this subject and I promise not again to refer to ii in our conversation." And he kept his word to the end.

* The passage in the Indian Review ran : " By dint of quiet, unspar• ing exertions he not only recovered the lest ground, but soon made fresh conquests, until now most people regret the rancour of their former criti• cism, and the unfortunate episode is remembered as a proof not so much of Mr. Gokhale's weakness as of the hasty judgment of the public," THE STORY OF MY ADMISSION 1 (1926)

TWENTY years ago 1 was a happy man. My health was excellent. The blessing of domestic love I had in abundance. In the school where 1 taught 1 had won the attachment of my pupils and the confidence and respect of my colleagues. In the middle of 1905. however, my contentment was upset by a small pamphlet marked ' confidential'. which Mr. G. A. Natesan sent me. It was the Prospectus and Rules of the Servants of India Society, which had been just started. The language and sentiments, no less ihan the ideals set forth in it, made a special appeal to me. When noble thoughts are united to noble words, they have a way of seeming to simple minds as their own. Again and again I would ask myself, have I not been reaching out for something like this, though 1 could never have given it clear expression ? So I took a copy of the pamphlet when I went to Benares in the December of that year to attend ihe Indian National Congress. My companions were Professors Rama- nathan and Lakshminarasu of Pachaiyappa\s College, with whom I had a great deal in common and whose judgment I had learned to trust. To Mr. Ramanathan I had always looked up for advice in difficult matters. He closely approaches the ideal of dis- passion and impartiality which we associate with the true scholar. He is the last person to disavow his responsibility, but he has never abetted me in any evil, while he has aided mc in much good. They both read the pamphlet, praised it warmly and said what a fine thing it would be if Madras could send a fit member to the Servants of India Society. I did not declare my intention to them, but felt th:it it had stiffened into a resolution. During the Congress session I wrote my application. The important passage ran : " 1 am a schoolmaster in Triplicane with about 37 years' ser• vice. 1 graduated B.A. in 1888 and am now 37 years old. My age, 1 fear, may be against me, as I may not have many years more to give to the service of my country. Nor have 1 the confi• dence that I can do very much in the few years that lie before me.

' 1 From The Hindu Annua}. 192fi, Biographical Essays and Sketches 235 Such as 1 am, however, I oiler myself and hope to be accepted. 1 don't write this letter under an impulse of the moment; but the idea has been long in my mind, and it was for this purpose chiefly that I made up my mind to come here as delegate." Within a Lew days of returning to Madias 1 asked for the good offices of Mr. V. Krishnaswami Aiyar, who wrote to his friend Mr. Gokhale, " A friend of mine, a man of deep earnest• ness, high character and marked ability, author ot your life in Natesan's Indian Review, offers himself for enrolment among your Servants ol India. It seems he wrote to you while at Benares and has had no reply. 1 can confidently recommend him. for he is sure to prove one of your trusted lieutenants." In the second week of February, I received a letter from Mr. Gokhale. A good half of it was devoted to explaining the delay in acknowledging my application. This. I discovered later, was habitual with him. He invited me to go to Poona and stay with him a lew days so thai 1 might learn the nature and full conse• quences of the step that I proposed to take. Accordingly I went in the first week of March. Of this visit I have once before given an account. Suffice it to say now that Gokhale made an easy conquest, and 1 promised definitely to join the Society. The following note was made at the time by Mr. Dravid : " Mr. Srinivasa Sastri. Headmaster of the Hindu High School. Madras, had come here to sec our First Member and I am glad to announce that he has finally given his word to join us in the month of September, when our First Member returns from England. As we are at present constituted. I think wc may well congratulate ourselves on the new recruit we have secured to our ranks." In the event, the Managers of my school would not let me leave in the middle of a term, and I had to postpone my resig• nation till the end of the year. From my experience of these months. I would not advise any one to remain long in the status of '• mortgaged member". to use Mr. Dravid's expressive phrase. Friends and relations know that time is a valuable ally in the work of wearing your resolution away, and without at any moment betraying an anxiety to bring the matter to an issue, quietly take it for granted in a hundred ways that you cannot be serious as to the contemplated change and that you arc not going to be such a heartless person as to frustrate the expectations 236 RT. HOBBLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI uniformly entertained on all sides. It was from students that I got some approbation, but it was mostly of the silent kind. One political leader wondered why, while he and others were at hand. I should go to Poona for guidance in public matters. Another reminded me that 37 was not the age prescribed in our books for becoming a vanaprastha. A third admonished me that one who left a large family unprovided for was not likely to do much good to the community. " Was not teaching noble enough service to the public ? " asked another and went on to point out that my salary was so small in proportion to my ability as to make it a self-sacrifice, if that was the glory I sought, to continue in the teaching profession. Others drew the future in the sombre colours of uncertainty and probable failure and even danger. I cannot remember that I received active sympathy or positive incitement from any friend. If some applauded my action, they took care not to let me know of it. My friend Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar was in this class. The story that it was on his persuasion that I changed from schoolmaster to Servant of India is entirely baseless. Long afterwards he told me of alter• cations with his wife during which she had blamed him for bid• ding others do that which he was unwilling to do himself. When she desired him to use his influence and save me for my family, he said in self-defence. " It is more than I can do. It is hard enough, when a noble deed is done, not to cry shabash ; to try to dissuade the doer is a crime of which I will not be guilty ". Some one started the fable that, when Mr. Gokhale's call came, I was slow to respond on account of my poverty, and that, to overcome my scruples, Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar paid me a sum of ten thousand rupees. In the then state of Madras the fable gained some currency. If it was denied and denounced with earnestness, the calumniator was not silenced, he only said, " Wait and see. Mr. K.'s will contains a provision to that effect. " He had been dead ten years when this yarn was revived and published in the press on the eve of my departure to London for the Imperial Conference of 1921. If a prompt repudiation could have esta• blished the truth, it should not have proceeded from me or from any one intimately connected with me. At this distance of time I confess to a feeling of mild surprise and sorrow that so many should have been willing to credit a story so obviously meant to besmirch a fraternity of three men. one of whom was ready to Biographical Essays and Sketches 237 sell himself, another to buy him up, and the third to take unto his bosom an article so sold and bought. 1 am proud to say that my mother and my wife made no scenes and took the separation in a resigned spirit. They knew that my resolve was fixed and had no hope of breaking it. The worst they feared was that I was going to become a sort of ascetic and renounce all association with the family. To satisfy them that such was not the case I undertook to take my wife to Poona and live with her there. This softened the edge of their grief. The farewell demonstration in the school was touching in the extreme. I was moved as I never had been before, and for a moment doubted the wisdom of forsaking the pupils and friends whose love was so deep and so unaffected. I faltered in my speech and can now recall only two circumstances vividly. Referring to the unfavourable criticism which had been made in certain quarters of my action, I described my supposed malady as a hypertrophy of the patriotic conscience. At this an influential editor in the audience nodded significantly, as if to say, " Exactly, them's my sentiments. " That threw me out completely, and it was after much hesitation that I picked myself up again. I then alluded to the novelty of political sanyas and the trials and tribulations which it might bring. Against these my only shield was my faith in the righteousness of the cause. Here I quoted the famous verse from Valmiki in which Kausalya pronounces a parting benedic• tion on her son : Yam patayasi dharmam ivam dhritya elm niyamena cha Sa vai Raghava sardula dharma stvam ubhirakshatu (Let dharma keep thee from harm, the same dharma that thou followest with such steadfastness and self-denial), Many are the occasions since then on which I have invoked this sloka for the comfort of my soul. When the world fails and doubt lays siege to the heart, there is nothing for it but to fall back on your conscience, if you have been true to it. Mr. Gokhale desired me to attend the famous Dadabhai Naoroji Congress of Calcutta in December 1906. I wrote back, " I shall certainly attend the next session of Congress .... if only to look on our G.O.M. It would be the greatest misfortune of one's life to have missed a sight of him when he was so near". I not only saw and heard him in Congress, but had the exceeding 238 RI. HON'BLL V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI good fortune of being presented by Gokhale to him along with others as belonging to the Servants of India Society. This was immediately after the close of the Congress, but it was not till the 15th of January of the new year that I was actually admitted member. The place was the upper storey of >\ house in Rowland Road, Ballygunge, and the time early morning. I had been en• joined to bathe and not to break my fast till the ceremony was over. I remember being in a highly chastened mood, although there had been no vigil or prayer the preceding night. Gokhale's deportment was solemn and inspired me with something like awe. As I pronounced the phrases of each vow after him. I was seized with terrible misgiving as to my being able to keep them in a tolerable degree. But the trial was quickly over. Next day I started on my travels in East Bengal, which was then only beginning to recover from the effects of the first partition agitntion. The politi• cal interest, profound as it was, did not affect my young and un- travelled heart so much as the varied charms of that fascinating country. I long to revisit those scenes again. Who could forget the warm welcome and the hot food of Bengali homes, the broad and limitless waters of the Podda so liable to heavy mists, the sweet and attractive personality of Asvini Kumar Dutt, who had not yet ceased to be the ' king ' of Barisal, the undulating streets and glorious sunsets of Chittagong, the buxom beauty of Mani- puri women who sang and danced even as the gopis of Vraja did to the magic flute of Sri Krishna, the odoriferous gardens of Tcjpur and the seven holy lakes where lovely Usha laved of old, and the romantic traditions that hang like gossamer over the Hill of the Weary Horse across the Brahmaputra near Gauhati ? R1SHI RANADE1

(1842-1901)

SPEAKING once about Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ranade expressed the view that in the case of gods and saints or rishis we celebrate their birthdays, while in the case of men we celebrate the anniver• saries of their death. He proceeded to justify this distinction on the ground that men's greatness is not fully proven until the last moment. The time of passing away therefore acquires supreme significance and needs commemoration. Till last year the anniver• sary of Ranade's death was celebrated in Maharashtra. This year, when the day came round, you decided to let it pass in order that two days later you may celebrate the centenary of his birth with solemnity. By this change Ranade takes rank hereafter with Sankara, Ramanuja and teachers of like calibre, whom popular acclaim has enrolled among those to whom Jayanthis are appro• priate but not Sraddhas. This elevation to sanctity of a dead per• son is attended in the Roman Catholic Church with formalities calculated to examine and publish the grounds on which it is based. The world is thus furnished with the credentials of the new saint. The proposal is registered before a Congregation of Cardinals, and in the manner of judges trying an important suit, they proceed to hear arguments on both sides. The objections to the proposal are first stated by an offier called Advocatus Diaboli or Devil's Advocate, who tries to make out that the person on whose behalf the honours of sainthood are solicited is not worthy of them. The Congregation of Rites next hears the Advocatus Dei or God's Advocate, who answers the objections and main• tains that the proposed elevation or canonization, as it is called, is fully deserved by the character and pious acts of the candidate, if a dead person can be so called. Ranade's life has been scruti• nized over and over again these forty years. Its lights and shadows are known to the last point of minuteness. No fresh evidence or consideration need be waited for. The public, though not assem• bled in solemn congregation or invested with Papal authority,

1 Address delivered on January 18, 1942, at Bombay on the occasion of the centenary of Ranade's birthday. II—16 240 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI may well proceed to affirm that Ranade will be gathered unto the brotherhood of saints and prophets of Maharashtra, whose names and deeds he has made immortal. Shall we at this gathering imagine ourselves clothed for a brief hour with the dignity of a Court of Cardinals ? Application having been made to Our Eminences that henceforth the 18th of January every year be consecrated as a day of Ranade Jayanthi, let us give audience now to the opposing pleader. There he stands in his sable gown, with voice and accent befitting its dignity and betraying no pre• monition of coming defeat. " The man whom your Eminences are requested to canonize is no ordinary man. I am not concerned to deny him some good qualities and some good deeds. It is enough for my purpose to show that his character is disfigured by some serious defects and that certain of his deeds fall short greatly of the standard that should be reached by a brave and unselfish servant of God. For many years he advocated the remarriage of girl widows in his community ; but when his wife died and he had an opportunity of acting up to his precept, he took a maid of tender years and sheltered himself behind the command of his father. Having taken tea at the table of European missionaries along with other Hindu reformers, he bowed his head to orthodoxy and underwent prayascitta or penance, leaving his companions in the lurch. Pro• fessing to hate idolatry, he would visit temples and discourse to casual crowds on the comparatively refined theism of which he was an avowed adherent, thus proving himself a latitudinarian. He had the dirty habit of taking snuff and was, besides, so shabbily dressed that he shocked European observers by the fra• yed shirt that peeped through his sleeves and the shortness of his trousers. Though endowed with a fine physique, he never kept it up to the mark by regular exercise, but allowed his health to deteriorate ; and, as he at the same time worked hard and inces• santly, he is believed to have shortened his life. He presented to friends and visitors a stern and gloomy aspect and, being devoid of light or amusing talk, was by no means a pleasant companion. Even at dinner he would start serious topics and ply his guests with hard questions about social and economic conditions in their neighbourhood. While walking, he would fall into moods of medi• tation and take no note of his companions or surroundings. When he wished to be rid of an unwelcome visitor, he resorted Biographical Essays and Sketches 241 to the harsh expedient of setting him a literary task, such as summarizing a dry Government report, and the unfortunate party could not appear again before him. " These counts may appear slight in an indictment on this occasion, but they are evidences of an unso• ciable temper, which must have prevented Ranade from being a centre of cheerfulness and fellowship. In fact, his sensi• bility seems to have been below par. Seldom moved to an out• burst of anger even under provocation, or indulging in a fit of righteous or generous indignation, he seemed almost a pachyderm, and those that approached him scarcely felt the warmth of sym• pathy or intimate fellow-feeling. In his attitude to money he made no attempt to reach the ideal of indifference prescribed by the requirements of scripture,^jJ^i^raji^T^^which means "regard• ing gold and rubbish alike," but he was known to measure his charities and gifts with excessive nicety of calculation. Another ethical precept too he practised with an odd inversion of em• phasis, g^rfq^T^f^: instead of remaining unaffected by praise or blame he would be impatient when praise was sounded in his ear, but greedily listen to blame, saying he must profit by it to the extent that it was just. An admiring friend once used this quaint phraseology in putting a favourable gloss on Ranade's inability to enter readily into the feelings of fellow-creatures : " He loved humanity at large, and men in units did not interest him so largely. " How could a man with so many oddities and crudities win the affection of those around him ? To be admitted into the blessed fraternity of saints, one must have had more attractive qualities and more lively sympathies than Ranade ever had. If we added together the comfort he gave to widows and orphans, the sympathy and help he extended to suffering neigh• bours and the tendance he bestowed on the sick and the afflicted, the sum would be small indeed, considering the opportunities and the facilities with which he had been liberally endowed. " * * * I now take the field as God's advocate. I am upheld by the overwhelming strength of my case. My learned friend has made the most of a bad case. If this is all he can say, my task is easy. Ranade was not a perfect man. What man is perfect? If a man's nature were fully rounded and smooth, other people could scarcely get hold of him at any point, 242 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRJN1VASA SASTRI and every time they try to make contact with him they must turn back baffled, as from the touch of a freezing object. Don't we want our heroes to have a few human weaknesses to ensure our kinship to them ? If they always did the right thing at the right time in the right way, we should suspect that they were not real, but creatures without blood belonging to the realm of pure fancy. Ranade, I admit without hesitation, had his foibles. I am surprised my learned friend did not mention to the Court that Ranade lost one of his eyes largely through excessive reading in insufficient light and was in later years afflicted with a slight deafness. He generously forbore all allusion to the nickname of Baby Elephant, which his unusual size and awkward bearing earned him among his fellow-students. In the early days he did not join freely in sports and games but was engrossed in his studies, which had an uncommon range and make him an object of awe and wonder. Once his principal, Sir Alexander Grant, caught him reading aloud from Alison's History of Europe, bareheaded and with legs sprawled on the table before him. Ranade should certainly have disposed of his lower limbs in less barbarous fashion and other• wise also remembered that he was not in his own private place. But if Sir Alexander himself took no notice, why need we ? Certain of the shortcomings ascribed to Ranade are only see• mingly such, they are really good points for which he must be given credit. For instance, it takes a really big man to recognize that even a rustic has some knowledge and experience which might be of use to the student of village life and village economy, and Ranade was too big a man to miss an opportunity of learning something. Some play was made with his setting tasks to people in order to drive them away. Each one of us knows of one or two fussy friends who have nothing to do and just come into our working room for a chat and will take no hint that you would prefer to be alone. Ranade might make enquiries about the average rainfall of Mahabaleshwar, the number of girls* schools in the Thana district, how Sri Rama disposed of the thousand odd astras that he acquired in his travels, the arguments against the laissez faire theory brought forward by the German economists or the exact doctrinal differences between the various branches of the Brahmo Samaj. If the visitor had nothing to say on these subjects, what was Ranade to do but to take up the latest Govern• ment report on the Police Department and ask him to come back Biographical Essays and Sketches 243 two days later with a summary under five heads ? Each was sure of a long holiday from the other. It is true Ranade showed no mercy to his body and when people spoke of his habit of industry he would say, " Habit! it has become a vice with me. " We all wish he had known how to relax now and then, but surely un• willingness to lose even an hour of our brief waking life is not a sin deserving to be punished. He was accused of imperfect sym• pathy with the wants or sufferings of individuals. It may be true of him as of many others that he loved and cared for man rather than men, but we have Gokhale's unimpeachable testimony that he was by nature kind and sympathetic. Here are his words : " One more great quality of his I would like to mention on this occasion, and that was his readiness to help all who sought his help and especially those who were weak and oppressed. He was accessible to all — even the humblest — at all hours of the day. No one ever wrote to him without receiving a reply. He listened patiently to everyone, whether he was able to help him or not. This indeed was to him a part of his practical religion." If his heart were difficult to touch, how could it be said of him : " There is not one man of whom our departed brother was ever heard or known to have said an unkind word?" He readily forgave, harboured no resentment and made no enemies, if he could help it. By his teachings from the pulpit of the Prarthana Samaj and by his incessant social reform activities he incurred the open and unrestrained wrath of the orthodox party, but he was never known to lose his temper and return abuse for abuse. Even during the violent controversy of 1895 over the venue of the Social Reform Conference his forbearance and equanimity were exem• plary. When he made his accustomed speech as President, he mentioned no names, recalled no ugly incidents, avoided all per• sonalities and ascribed the unfortunate turn of events to the fact that in Poona, unlike other places, a variety of methods were adopted instead of one sole method. Of these different methods the one that he most approved was that of persuasion, and the one that he most discountenanced was that of rebellion. To many ardent spirits what they called progress was God's own work, and those that obstructed it were like rakshasas whom it was a merit to condemn and destroy. They delichted in war a^airtst ortho• doxy and thought nothing of separating themselves and forming 244 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI a distinct group of their own. Social affinities and family ties were consumed by the fire of conviction, and many a young man fan• cied that, by disregarding parental authority when he heard the call, he was testifying to the sovereign power of social reform. Ranade pointed out that the Brahmo Samaj in Bengal and the Arya Samaj in the Punjab, which chose this heroic path, had come to a standstill when the first momentum was exhausted. His own method was to reason, to expostulate and to allure to brighter worlds. The movement would necessarily be slow, but it would be sure and carry forward the whole community. He never forgot, and would never let others forget, that reform was for all and not merely for a few. When compelled by adverse circumstances to halt, he was content to do so, hoping that the next step would be firmer and longer. At bottom Ranade's heart was gentle and peace- loving. His father was apparently a tyrant and made no attempt to understand Ranade's progressive spirit or his zeal for reform. Occasionally he appears to have adopted questionable tactics to keep Ranade from moving forward. Ranade no doubt struggled and struggled hard, but would not break up his home and go his own way. Many of his friends lamented his failure as an apostasy. But enough has been said to convince those who can judge with charity that Ranade's principle of carrying the community along was the mainspring of his action, and not merely the fear of his father's extreme displeasure. Sir Narayan Chandavarkar, who was close to Ranade in the work of reform, said of him : " The idea of displeasing anybody was too much for him, and he wanted all to unite and work together. He erred because his soul was gentle, his heart charitable. " My learned friend on the other side adopted without reserve or quali• fication the verdict which the prejudice and passion of the time delivered against Ranade. I have not the hardihood to assert that Ranade was wholly right. But it is safe to assume that, where a complicated question of principle was involved, a man of the moral stature of Ranade struck the balance true and fair and did not allow mere expediency or cowardice to determine his conduct. Ranade was cast in a big mould in body and in mind. He was a giant. His studies had amplitude and depth far beyond the common. History, politics, economics, blue books, Sanskrit lite• rature and Marathi literature, — these and similar subjects made Biographical Essays and Sketches 245 up his gargantuan fare. His knowledge and experience in the official and non-official sphere were at the service of a patriotism, fervent and sleepless, which comprehended all the sections and elements of our population. Like a true rishi he had toleration and mercy for all and planned and laboured for all alike. His Marathi sermons are considered by competent judges to consti• tute a valuable and inspiring course in the doctrine and practice of theism. He rehabilitated the character of Sivaji and the empire that he founded. Of Indian economics he laid the ground-work, showing how the maxims and principles of English writers would not apply to the conditions of our country unless corrected in great part by the writings of German authorities on the subject. He took a leading part in the growth of the Indian Economic Conference, studied the conditions of agriculture and the peasan• try in their various phases and became an unequalled authority on questions of land revenue, land tenure and land improvement. On Indian Finance his views commanded equal attention and equal respect with those of Dadabhai Naoroji. His close study of constitutional and administrative problems of India and other countries was laid under contribution by the organizers and leaders of the Indian National Congress, and it is well known that his advice and guidance were at the disposal of the Subjects Com• mittee wherever it met year after year. The Indian Social Con• ference was founded by him in 1887, and at every subsequent meeting of that body during the next thirteen years he presided and delivered addresses replete with wisdom, comprehension and insight. His mind was also devoted to problems of Indian educa• tion, and his membership of the University governing bodies was signalized by unremitting efforts on behalf of the Marathi language and literature and of the health and longevity of Bombay graduates. In all departments of national endeavour and uplift he was a pioneer, and it would be the bare truth to say of him that he was the most considerable and influential among the builders of Modern India. He himself once enumerated the elements that go to the making of a great man — " earnestness of purpose, sin• cerity in action, originality, imagination and above all, the power of magnetism—we might call it vital or spiritual magnetism". These he possessed in rich measure. Add to them the achieve• ments catalogued above, and you have a record of greatness so 246 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI imposing that a teacher or rishi of old may be proud to call it his own. The name rishi was in his judgement so exalted in import that, when he desired to pay anyone the highest honour for character, he applied the name to him. More than once in his speeches we see Mr. N. M. Parmanand described as " our political rishi". Why, Ranade himself was deserving of the title in the eyes of many of his contemporaries. It was surely nothing uncommon in his life as well as afterwards for his admirers to speak of him as the modern rishi. A scene vividly comes to my mind when this happened in my hearing. Some time after I joined the Servants of India Society, Principal F. W. Bain lectured in the Small Hall of Poona, and Sir Pherozeshah Mehta took the chair for him. Mr. Bain, the crusted Tory that he was, made some remark deprecatory of the general character of our people or of some particular movement of the time, I forget which. Sir Phero• zeshah at the end of the meeting castigated him in vigorous phrases and with emphatic gestures, which were greeted with rounds of applause. But the applause rang louder than ever when he cited for authority " the late Mr. G. Ranade, the modern rishi The order of rishis exercised a powerful fascination over Ranade's mind. In the hierarchy of homage he would accord them the throne of eminence. In the address called Vasishtha and Visvamitra, the last in the great series (which Gokhale had to read for him in Lahore), the concluding passage is a paean to the glory of these semi-divine teachers and a devout wish that their line may be continued without end. It is my proud office to-day to plead that Ranade be admitted to this Holy Order and that this celebration be the first of a succession in future which will redound to the benefit of posterity as well as to the fame of the man who came into the world a hundred years ago to-day. My task is not complete. I have yet to make out that, if our latest Acharya had wisdom pure and undefiled, he had also a tongue, eloquent and commanding, with which to proclaim it. There must be a good few here who have sat at his feet more than once and heard his discourses. That good fortune came to me only once. The scene was in Anderson Hall, Madras, and the time was an evening in December, 1898. A great crowd waited expectantly to hear Ranade on " Southern India a hundred years ago". We feh surprise without a touch of admiration, as a big Biographical Essays and Sketches 247 figure moved forward with slow deliberate steps. As the linea• ments became clear, a faint feeling of disappointment rose in our breasts., but we kept it under as somewhat premature. But in a few seconds the figure pulled a kerchief, coloured as I remember, and applied it to the nose which was running and made strange noises. The opening words did nothing to reassure us, and as the handkerchief and the nose persisted in their joint activities, our spirits sank within us. Whispers of dissatisfaction and poutings of lips went round, but scarcely relieved our feelings. Soon, how• ever, things seemed to change. One good remark caught our at• tention, we strained our ears. Lo, and behold ! the handkerchief went back to the pocket, the voice gained distinctness, the senti• ments captured our fancy, and as if by magic the face became bright with intelligence. Half a dozen sentences, and our eyes were fixed on the speaker. Thereafter, all through the speech he held us as in a spell. I thought I was listening to a superior being, all aglow with wisdom which seemed a part of him, — so easily, so naturally, so unostentatiously did it keep flowing into me. There was pindrop silence in the hall, I don't think the audience laughed or cheered once. If they did, I didn't hear it. The published speeches have solidity and mental nutriment which are astonishing. One may go again and again to them with profit. Sir Narayan Chandavarkar's eulogy is not overdone. " Those weighty and eloquent annual addresses, wise with the wisdom of the heart, powerful with all the power of his great intellect, majestic with the majesty of his lofty and commanding personality. " There is no art either in the sentences or in their grouping. You don't come across a light, humorous remark ; no passing allusion to the trivialities of thought or gossip. The nearest he comes to a joke is when he asks : " Shall we revive the old habits of our people when the most sacred of our caste indulged in all the abominations, as we now understand them, of animal food and drink which exhausted every section of our country's Zoology and Botany ? " The nearest he come to im• patience or indignation is in this passage : " If we were stronger and more manly, more prudent, more abstemious and more thoughtful, millions would not live and breed as if they were members of the brute creation, and not men and women made in the image of God for a higher purpose than to live and die like the butterflies. " 248 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI The joke and the indignation are alike grim and meant to sting, not to amuse and improve. As you read through, you seem to see Ranade slowly assembling the details from one quarter and from another, inviting your gaze to the accumulation, and slowly and patiently leading you to a realization of your duties and prospects. The style is by no means varied, picturesque or pleasing. But it is weighty without being ponderous ; profound without being mystic ; edifying without being homiletic. One rea• der complains that Ranade has no partiality for Anglo-Saxon. Another grumbles that grammar and idiom do not get the respect due to them. A third is saddened by the frequent inelegances and solecisms. But all are subdued to attention by the dignity of the diction and the high level on which the argument moves without once declining on a false or discordant note. When you are lifted above the small and the grovelling, when you are freshened by the gentle breezes of the upper air, you forget the unsightly objects you have left behind and the inconveniences through which you have ascended. Or maybe you feel like a tourist that has been dragged through mean lanes and pebbly tracks, and suddenly finds himself entering a stately edifice with imposing corridors and noble columns and spacious halls, the ensemble harmonizing in every part and ravishing his inner soul with a beauty of proportion and symmetry of which he had never dream• ed. Criticism is hushed, judgment is awed, and the only feel• ing left is one of joy and complete satisfaction. To prove that I have not been indulging my imagination, I pray you to listen patiently while I read a certain passage which concludes one of his addresses. It is not the most familiar of the Ranade quotations, but it appears to have flowed without effort from the body of the discourse. The chief point, however, that is to be considered in this connection is, who should be these Gurus of the future ? It is with this view that I have endeavoured to place before you a brief account of the true Gurus of the past, namely the Rishis who were both Brahmarishis and Rajarishis, only distinguished from one another by the individual inclinations and abilities. We must keep that ideal before us, if we mean to prove ourselves the worthy descendants of our earliest ancestors. Of course the teach• ings and the methods and the subjects taueht in these davs must be made to suit our new exigencies and environments, but the Biographical Essays and Sketches 249 spirit animating the teachings must be the same as that which led the first settlers to cross the Vindhya Range, and establish their colonies in the South. By reviving our ancient traditions in this matter we may hope in the near future to instil into the minds of our young generations lessons of devotion to learning, diversities of studies and personal loyalty to the teacher, without which no system of school or college education can ever bear any fruit. This, however, is not all. In addition to these lessons, our new teachers must know how to introduce their pupils to a correct appreciation of the forces which are at work in the wider world outside, and which, in spite of temporary checks or seeming re• verses, represent all that is best in human efforts for the elevation and happiness of man. Our teachers must enable their pupils to realize the dignity of man as man, and to apply the necessary correctives to tendencies towards exclusiveness, which have grown in us with the growth of ages. They must see that our thoughts, our speech, our actions are inspired by a deep love of humanity, and that our conduct and our worship are freed where necessary from the bondage of custom and made to conform as far as possible to the surer standard of our conscience. We must at the same time be careful that this class of teachers does not form a new order of monks. Much good, I am free to admit, has been done in the past and is being done in these days, in this as well as other countries by those who take the vow of long celibacy and who consecrate their lives to the service of man and the greater glory of our Maker. But it may be doubted how far such men are able to realize life in all its fulness and in all its varied relations, and I think our best examples in this respect are furni• shed by Agastya with his wife Lopamudra, Atri with his wife Anasuya, and Vasishta with his wife among the ancient Rishis, and in our own times by men like Dr. Bhandarkar on our side, Diwan Bahadur Raghunatha Row in Madras, the late Keshab Chander Sen and Babu Pratap Chandra Mozumdar and Pandit Shivanath Shastri in Bengal, and Lala Hans Raj and Lala Munshi Ram in your own province. A race that can ensure a continuance of such teachers can, in my opinion, never fail, and with the teachings of such men to guide and instruct and inspire us, I. for one, am confident that the time will be hastened when we may be vouchsafed a sight of the Promised Land. 250 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Ever since I gave Ranade a definite place among my heroes, my heart's adoration has gone to him in fuller measure every day. Which one among his qualities grips me most ? His elevation and detachment. Wordsworth's immortal line occurs to me whenever I think of him. " His soul was like a star and dwelt apart. " True, he mingled in men's affairs and strove with all his matchless strength to improve them. His life was one long and unbroken sacrifice. In a pre-eminent sense he was.

Type of the wise who soar but never roam, True to the kindred points of heaven and home.

Nevertheless, after his duties to the world were fully done, there remained a part of him above attachment and clear of taint. There his bhakti reigned alone and he kept converse with his God in his triple nature as sat, chit and ananda. Where the air is serene and rare, gross beings cannot follow him. The simple but noble words of Goldsmith are the aptest I know.

As some tall cliff that lifts its awful form, Swells from the vale and midway leaves the storm. Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, Eternal sunshine settles on its head. SIR P. S. SIVASWAM1 AIYAR

(1864-1946)

CHANCE drew me first to the virile and magnetic personality of V. Krishnaswami Aiyar, and for several years 1 was one of the satellites that circled round and took warmth from that radiant luminary. When envious death quenched his fire, 1 was thrown, as by an instinct of nature, into a neighbouring system, of which the central sun was Mr. Sivaswami Aiyar. Here perhaps I am less like a planet with a well-ascertained orbit than like a comet with an erratic path. The early intimacy and parallel growth of the pair I had not known well till 1 read Venkatarama Sastri's1 account.1 What a revealing touch it is that, while one of the twins plodded with a dictionary, the other took the correct English accent from his lips without an effort! When I began to visit the " Asram, " a barrier of reserve had risen between them which it would not be too much to describe as rivalry. One often heard unfriendly remarks passing from each to the other. There were marked differences of nature and temperament. Krishnaswami Aiyar was eager, quick, bubbling, brilliant ; Sivaswami Aiyar was phlegmatic, slow, difficult to move, without sparkle. Krishna• swami made friends and enemies with equal ease ; Sivaswami seemed frigid, but seldom hurt your pride or overbore you. The one was ever in the public eye ; the other, reserved and cautious, had to be dragged out. The one was eloquent and occasionally impetuous ; the other was hesitant, unemphatic and unable to grip his audience. Both gave and were discriminate in giving ; but while Krishnaswami had greater readiness and more lively sym• pathy with the causes that he helped, Sivaswami enquired more minutely, showed less alacrity and earned tepid praise. Krishna• swami cared little for forms and conventions and was often rude and harsh ; Sivaswami was fastidious to a degree in dress and speech and cultivated a refinement of manners and conversation far above the common. Perhaps the contrast was not so sharp as it appears when one puts it into words. No doubt the tittle-tattle

1 In the Satabishekam Souvenir Volume. Mr. Sastri's essay appeared in the same volume. 252 RT. HONBLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI ot the groups around the two widened the gulf between them ; but it could not obliterate their mutual solicitude and love, which now and again burst forth in refreshing and beautiful form. 1 am not conscious of any malice now, and only recall a social picture of an earlier day. Much interest and profit are derived from a study of two personalities of like origin and age and apparently brought up on the same mental fare, diverging under the stress of life and standing in what looked like opposition to each other. No doubt each obeyed the law of his own being. But what a substra• tum of similarity there always was ! It was not the antithesis of good and evil, but of good and good, of one order of excellences and another order of excellences. Coruscations of light on the one side and steady illumination on the other ; rest• lessness over against solidity ; emotionalism juxtaposed with de• pendability. You may not capture Sivaswami Aiyar's heart, nor he yours ; but you recognize and appreciate his purity of motive, and feel that you can carry your troubles to him and obtain both advice and relief. What if he beats around the bush some• what and tells you a story not remembering that he has told it before ? It gives you time to recover your breath, look about and adjust your tie ; for he has a horror of haste and no sole• cism of language, apparel or deportment escapes his eye. You must go to him only when you have plenty of time on hand. There is a leisureliness about him which is engaging, but apt to discompose you when you have business awaiting you. Gokhale once told me of the impatience of the members of the Madras Government and his own profound concern when, at a conference with the members of the Public Services Commission of 1912, Sir Sivaswami conducted them step by step through the entire length of the controversy from beginning to end, taking nothing for granted and oblivious of the diminishing attention of his audience. " Krishnaswami," he added sorrowfully, " would have plucked the heart out of the subject and made his points in fifteen minutes." But Gokhale and Krishnaswami were cast in similar moulds and their souls always sprang to each other in joyful recognition. Sivaswami Aiyar might have lost his labour at the moment; but there comes a time when documents are read with care in the closet and exert their full influence on the minds of responsible men. Sir C. P. Rama• swami Aiyar and other officials of consequence who had subse- Biographical Essays and Sketches 253 quent access to his office notes have borne ungrudging witness to their thoroughness, grasp and clarity of expression. Siva• swami Aiyar's talents, like his virtues, are not calculated to achieve ebullient success. Their subdued display obscures their power. Venkatarama Sastri complains that virtue is often accounted a weakness and blatant self-advertisement is neces• sary for success in this world. His words sound like an echo of Sri Rama's outburst of indignation when he found that the ocean-god was not to be moved by fast and prayer. I quote from the Yuddha Kanda, Sarga 21 : " Equanimity, forbearance, straightforwardness, sweet speech, — these virtues, displayed towards bad persons, result in prov• ing one's impotence. But the world honours him who brags, does wrong, is perverse, takes to crooked courses, and lays about him without discrimination." Few, they are, alas, who are held back by the thought : " This man trusts me, I must not betray him." Sivaswami Aiyar must have frequently observed that in this imperfect world the man of gentle and unoffending spirit is taken advantage of by the unscrupulous. 1 can testify how unwilling he is to pass final judgments on people if they are unfavourable. Teachers who had proved unworthy of their calling he would tolerate in his school just because some link was wanting in the chain of evi• dence against them ; his conscience is so exacting. He once sent me on an errand of investigation to Tirukkattuppalli, and when I reported decisively against the teacher concerned, went over the whole ground again and again before taking the irre• vocable step. Sivaswami Aiyar is every inch a scholar. He hails from those spacious days when no man had a claim to culture unless he knew something of everything and everything of something. This description would be as true of him as of any person of my acquaintance. His distress was unaffected when he could make nothing of that book on Cosmic Rayr, which Venkatarama Sastri mentions. He is a belletrist, as distinguished as enthusiastic. Once he invited Venkataruman and me to his study and read to us a long passage from an American author, whose name my failing memory is unable to recall. The passage was of high quality and loaded to saturation point and beyond with allu• sions to contemporary as well as classical literature. Not all 254 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI of these were known to us. But Sivaswami Aiyar's reading showed appreciation and enjoyment to such a degree that we caught them from him and by sheer sympathy became temporary admirers of a style which, without his inspiring guidance, might have repelled us by its ostentatious parade of recondite minutkc. Of books he is a great buyer as well as a great lover. He knows all about the art of preserving them from the ravages of insects. Most of them are as fresh on his shelves to-day as when they first came there. For such a large collection as he has, I fancy the losses by theft and unreturned loan are not many. You must see his delicate handling of books and the frequent wiping of the open page with his palm as he reads, on the alert against specks of dust unseen by the eye, but not to be allowed to soil the dwelling-spots of learning. I have seldom seen him hold a book with one irreverent hand or unfeelingly open it wider than necessary. If anyone doubled a book in his presence he would writhe as though a baby was being strangled. The library is the one orphan he will leave behind, and its fate after him is a perennial topic of speculation to the gossips of the locality, whom the affairs of other people vex as much as their own. It is a common mistake to suppose that men sob and shed tears only when they read sacred literature. I am glad Siva• swami Aiyar's great pupil testifies to the power of English writ• ings to dim his eyes and choke his throat. Some people's lach• rymal glands are agitated more easily than those of others, and age appears to weaken them rapidly. I remember my father's reading of Ramayana being impeded by this infirmity and my imagining that my robuster heart would never melt. A second- rate English novel can now overpower me with its pathos ; and about this time last year I held myself together with the greatest difficulty as I was reading to an audience the tender tribute of a friend to Gokhale. The essential integrity of Sivaswami Aiyar's mind is seen in its continued receptivity. New knowledge and new experience can still shift him from his moorings. His political views are not cast in an iron mould. If a chart could be made showing their trend fifty years ago and their trend at the present day, the progress would be little short of a revolution. Time in its onward march has dragged the liberals along with others. " The extremist is only the moderate in a hurry " is meant as a sar Biographical Essays and Sketches 255 casm, but it has a core of truth. We are patriots ali and serve the common mother. What profound kinship it signifies ! We forget it in the wrangles of the moment. No philosopher can analyse into elements the complex of tradition, heredity, culture and environment that accounts for our attitude towards religion. Being a clear thinker and not deceived by words, Sivaswami Aiyar admits in a letter to me that he believes because he wishes to believe, not because he is convinced by scientific proof. Perhaps he will agree that the wish to believe, though a part of human nature, is not a satis• factory substitute for proof. On the other hand reason con• fesses inability to solve many riddles of nature which vex the mind of man. Few have the intrepidity to abandon the one guide that has come down from ancient times, and that seems to invest life with a meaning and a purpose. Sivaswami Aiyar's religion, one is glad to see, does not narrow his sympathies or cramp his humanity in the least degree. A man of wide cul• ture, amiable disposition and innate courtesy, with an inflexible love of justice and a keen sense of honour, having large and enlightened benefactions to his credit, able to look back on many years devoted to the pursuit of high aims and the doing of things that are clean and of good repute, Sir P. S. Sivaswami Aiyar is a man to admire, cherish and present to the young as a shining example. V. KRISHNASWAMI AIYAR 1

(1863-1911)

Ladies and Gentlemen, AFTER all the details have laded out of one's memory, what endures in the case of Mr. V. Krishnaswami Aiyar is a feeling of power. He was a man pre-eminently endowed with the power of personality. You could not imagine his being in any com• pany without everybody being aware of him. All eyes were drawn in his direction, and everybody expected that if there was a discussion or the consideration of any subject, he would be able to illuminate it from one side or another. When one was with him, one felt that he was one of nature's human forces. Other people felt somehow a sense of being diminished in his presence. The extraordinary thing about it was that somehow he seemed in later years to be quite conscious of it himself. He used often to say that he was unable to repress himself if there was anything to say or do. Once, ladies and gentlemen, it was nearly 40 years ago, and there is no harm in my mentioning it now — he sits safe beyond the reach of cavil or malice, and I shall do him no harm by recalling this incident — he and I were driving along this road. We had just passed the place where I think now Mr. K. Bashyam's house is — just making a turn. I was saying how he had made his mark so that it could never be effaced upon all things in Madras and a great many things in India, and how the impressions that he left on his contemporaries would all be communicated from uncle to nephew or father to son for some generations. He was in one of his self-revelatory moods. He turned full face on me : " Sastri, I feel sometimes that Bhishma is in me." I was at that time somewhat taken aback ; but as he proceeded to make an explanation, I could see that he was true, that anyhow the spirit of Bishma animated him ; — not the Bhishma of old age,

i A speech made on the occasion of his unveiling the portrait of V. Krishnaswami Aiyar in the premises of the Young Men's Indian Asso• ciation, ILitz. Mylapore Branch, on the 30th September 1944. Biographical Essays and Sketches 257 ripe with wisdom and awaiting the final call, but the Bhishma of youth ; he who made a terrible vow to himself and kept it in the face of all odds through a long life. Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar had what you may call a ' perso• nality ' that always manifested itself. When he joined any meeting or a discussion of a subject, it would not be long before he made his voice heard ; and what he had to say certainty was something worth saying. And the manner in which he said it was always striking. There was emphasis, there was the vigour of conviction, and there was the desire to sec that his view pre• vailed, — qualities which nobody can miss when one sees them, but which it is not often that it is one's good fortune to see among one's friends. He was not a timid man by any means ; he was not shy ; he was not the shrinking sort. He was not one of those people whom they call in the House of Commons " back-benchers " whom occasionally people have to push for• ward into prominence. Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar took his place in the front rank anywhere by right of his qualities ; and although small people always murmured or had something petty to say, 1 must say that I seldom noticed any man of mark resenting the way in which he came forward. In fact, his prominence in any society was so marked that Europeans who seldom are jealous in a small personal way once discovered that he was making his way rapidly in Government House, and one of the men high up said or wrote privately : " This is a man whose wings must be clipped,'' (Laughter) " or we shall all have to rue it one day." Well, they tried hard. They could not clip his wings. His way to eminence was clear. I do not know exactly how he got the notice of Sir Arthur Lawley ; but I believe it was on the occasion when the great Estates Land Bill was debated. It was a very contentious and intricate piece of legislation and few people could take any useful part in it who were not well-versed in law and knew all about Land Revenue and so forth. Mr. Krishnaswami soon made his mark as one of those who were going to shape the Bill. I remember his saying to me : " One day I heard a Member of the Executive Council quote from a confidential record which he held in his hands; when his speech was over and my turn came, I asked him for it. He declined. When I asked why, he said it was confidential. That was an occasion which somehow or other 258 Rl. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SAStRI called me out. 1 said : Sir, in this Council 1 recognise no one superior to me unless he be occupying the Chair ; no Member of the Executive Council has a right to say that he can have exclusive possession of a document. It he wants to read it to us here, he must be willing to put it on the table.'' Whether it was right or wrong on the merits, the keen• ness with which he slated his case and the emphasis that he put into his utterance, pleased Sir Arthur Lawley so much that it would appear he sent for him at the end of the meeting and then began a friendship which, as you all know, resulted in his being offered the post of an Executive Councillor. To that, however, I will come a little later, as there is a point in it worth discussing. But the important point I am now concerned to point out is that there is a certain human quality which we call, for want of a better word, " power " which imposes itself upon others, which challenges recognition and which, even at the age of 75 now, I cannot say I have often seen as I have seen it in Krishnaswami. Let me at once go to what in those days made him somewhat unpopular. He was a man of quick temper and somewhat rough speech. He would show temper in places where you would not expect it. I think it was the result, as it was in the case of his friend Mr. Gokhale. of that fell disease diabetes, from which both suffered. It often affected the nerves and enfeebled nerves make one fly into temper. He took it from his father and his brother too had it. I pointed out once, speaking of this family before, that Gokhale's family and this family resembled each other in some strong characteristics, but in none more than in this. A father and two brothers, all had diabetes, all had vio• lent bursts of temper. Yes, it was a somewhat remarkable coincidence. And it was noticeable how his temper made him almost a terror to the small people who had to go to him. I have sometimes heard even prominent men say that they avoided occasions of meeting him. They were almost always certain that even when the sky was very fair, there would be electricity in his speech any how. It was, it seemed to me, an unfortunate thing, though I cannot say even at this distance of time that I could have wished him otherwise. For, I loved him and admired him for his strong qualities, even for his outbursts of temper, though I was seldom myself a victim ! Biographical Essays and Sketches 259 And here let me permit myself to a somewhat trite observa• tion about human nature ; especially as I have a number of young faces that I look at and that look at me now, it may not be wholly useless. When you meet with an angry person, a person liable to fits of temper, don't you at once make up your mind to avoid him or to say, " this is not a person to associate with." My experience points the other way. I think mostly these strong-tempered people are also strong-minded and strong generally. They have qualities worth studying and it would be an advantage if you got over this first feeling of repulsion and cultivated the friendship of people in whom strength and power of some kind are manifested. Anyhow, it is wrong to think that the man of sweet temper who can always force on his lips sweet words, who has unguentary vocabulary at his command, who says sweet things in which he does not believe — it is very wrong to go through life thinking that such men are the cream of society or that they confer the greatest advantage on their friends. Very often it is the other way ; and if you school your• self into a little patience while still you are to know and learn to respect a man's character, where it is strong and forceful, not• withstanding it may be disagreeable on occasions, you will find that you are cultivating a quality that stood you in good stead, that brought you into contact with real loving natures around you. and that in the long run reacted favourably upon your own development. Do not be too hasty to keep away from a man merely because he is sometimes disagreeable. On the other hand, 1 have known people who could stand Krishnaswami's temper and knew him intimately, say that they would have given a lot in their lives not to have missed his friendship. He was a man altogether of rare qualities and even now I pity those of his contemporaries who were repelled by his outbursts and did not know what great qualities were in him. Notwithstanding his exterior roughness, there was in the man a readiness to admit merit where it really was to be found, a readiness to do service where really it was deserved ; and a readiness, if I may put it in that extreme form, to appreciate character like his own and as often as was possible, to reward it either by praise or in some more material way. I never knew a man so generous when he acknowledged merit, so ungrudging in his praise of really hieh qualities. Tt was a pleasure to hear him, for instance, speak 260 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI about Justice Mani Ayyar or about Gokhale or about the strong qualities of Sir V. Bashyam Ayyangar. 1 have heard him speak about these people with a zeal, with an admiration, with an appreciation that you would have thought was natural only to young men ; but even when he was comparatively ripe, he was capable of these magnificent displays of high personal attach• ment. Among the characters that one reads of in fiction or in our sacred literature, it is very common certainly to find the so-called perfect characters in whom strength co-existed with tenderness, compassion and softness in dealing with others. In life, however, these qualities seldom co-exist. It is true I have often wished that we could say of Krishnaswami Aiyar, as we read of Sri Rama, that he was a mrithu bashi or that he was a smithapurva bashi; if only he had taken pains to cultivate one of these graces that would smooth the wheels of life, what a great man he would have been \ He was great, but he would have been a great man whose greatness was gladly acknowledged by all people. As it was, there were a good many who stood out critically far from him and would not acknowledge even the good that exhibited itself so prominently in his nature and in his achievements. In literature, you often hear of this combi• nation of rare qualities — strength in deed and softness or gentleness in speech — Suaviter in modo: fortiter in re. I am afraid Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar had a good deal of fortiter in re and very little of the other quality — suavi'er in modo. But the very fact that we often quote this outlandish expression to signify a combination of qualities, shows that it is somewhat rare and it is not o^y ungenerous but silly on our part and almost suicidal to go about life judging people by the severest standards and refusing to recognise merit and to appreciate it wherever it may be found, provided that the merit is of proper standard, as it always was in the case of Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar. His strength and his strong fiehting qualities, all came out in great prominence in the year 1908, when, almost single-handed, he had to run a session of the Indian National Congress under exceptional difficulties. It was my good fortune to be associat• ed with him as a small lieutenant in thst army of combatants on the political field. Mr. Krishnaswami was like a practised general in the field seldom going to bed till late, watching every part of the field, saying a word of encouragement where the Biographical Essays and Sketches 261 privates were apt to sink into difficulties, calling out, by his very experience of them, the best there was in his assistants, fore• seeing difficulties and always ready to fight, and not merely to fight with words, but, gentlemen, believe me, to put down money without consideration. If money was required for any purpose, and if it was not there or if the treasurer was not available, Mr. Krishnaswami would advance it without any thought. In his case, money was no doubt acquired in abundance, but it was also spent liberally. It was used for the purpose of serving the causes he espoused. Money he valued no doubt very highly; but he valued it as a means to getting things done. He did not think money must be locked up and worshipped as a god. Well, about the 1908 Congress, a good deal has been written and said, and I would like, if possible, to recall the vivid ins• tance of that story. It was a story of heroic effort on his part; but I remember most prominently that in the early days of 1908. he had to struggle hard against the direct and indirect opposition of the very people who were supposed to be his colleagues and who either by indifference or by back-bitinc or by over-hostility, made his work extremely difficult. Well, if he had done nothing else in his life, but pulled that Congress through and enabled the convention of 1907 to fulfil itself, he would be entitled to our loving and grateful remembrance. With regard to money, I have heard him say one thing, which I always remember, although I knew it before ; but coming from him as it did on a particular occasion when no wise man would have said anvthing else, it appeared to mc remarkable, and it got itself imprinted in my memory. Once, he made a big dona• tion. I was there. He drew out his drawer and wrote out the cheque immediately. It was a bit surprising ; T was amnzed. I knew people who would hesitate at the mere mention of the amount. I know how even when the amount was announced they would consider it five times over and discover causes or excuses for delavinc payment, or saying they had made a mis• take, or something like that ; but he wrote out the cheque in his vigorous jerky manner. T asked him why he wis in such a hurry to make the payment. Not having seen a similar thing, I asked him. You know what he told me, it stuck in my memory, as I said. " Well, if you make a promise to a eood cause, you must pay it at once. It is. in the nature of it. a 262 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI debt, and that debt must be paid immediately, it is wrong to have it hanging on the head." And the wonder of it all was. he would not think about it afterwards. Having paid the money, he would not say anything about it to any person, such as for instance, when another payment has to be made, " No, I have made a big payment just now, I won't think of another for some time." Now. a man who dealt with money in that most enlightened of ways was a person whom it was worth knowing on those occasions. When he was almost dying, he told me a thing about him• self. " If there is anything that my life can teach, it is this : that to come to the top. knee-crooking is not necessary." He came to the top as you all know, but never performed this igno• minious operation. Perfectly true — what he said. It is not necessary ; but how many of us can act on that belief ? Some of us would crook our knees with great delight. Some of us would perform the degrading ceremony even knowing that it was not necessary. But in your experience, whatever it is, most of you would have seen that in this unfortunate world, knee- crooking has become necessary in the case of some people. Office is a thing which has its attractions for all. In those days when Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyar was prominent in public life, it could be said, ladies and gentlemen, that high office sought its occu• pant. Men who had the patronage were very anxious to choose the best available persons, and if the best available persons were slow to offer themselves, the appointing authority would go out of his way to invite that person to accept that office and serve the Crown. That used at one time to be the case. How one wishes that it was always the case ! I see before me one gentleman who, with that particular idea of choosing the occupant of an office, was approached in very recent times. I will not offend his modesty by men• tioning his name ; but if you omit him, there has not been, in the last fifteen years, a case of a man who was sent for by the Governor and requested to serve the Crown in such and such a capacity. The moment a high office is vacant, twenty men are about the place — Government House (Laughter). with certificates old and new, written by all kinds of people. It is a disgraceful thing, this job-hunting ; and I think it is one of the marks of the degradation into which public life has fallen. Biographical Essays and Sketches 263 ibat even for the highest offices the reverse process is established as a general rule. If you went and told the Governor in these days : " Why don't you ask so and so to take office ? 1 he would simply turn round and say : " 1 say, why should I go and ask him to take up office, when 1 see twenty people in for it, most of them qualified too, qualified in the sense in which a graduate is qualified for any office under the Crown ? " But you want in these highest offices, courage ; you want independence ; you want ability of a high order; you want, above all, the reputation that you will not sell your office or degrade it or bring it into any sort of disrepute. Not everybody has that quality. One or two people have it no doubl, and they, in my judgment, ought always to be asked to take office. I do not think it is possible for us to expect that that good state of things will ever revive. When communities struggle hard for a certain proportion of appointment, when the Muhammadan occupant of a certain post must be succeeded by a Muhammadan — if he is a History Pro• fessor, it does not matter if the newcomer is a Professor of Mathematics (Laughter) — it is not possible. When Mr. Krishna• swami Aiyar took office as a Judge, we were al! taken by sur• prise, people did not know that there was any negotiation going on. I think the bargain was struck quickly ; we did not know, some of us felt a little disappointed. 1 remember even Mr. Gokhale wrote wishing that Mr. Krishnaswami had not accepted office but had remained in public life as a worker of efficiency and character. I remember the conversation I had with him in that place where he used to sit in the evenings, in an easy chair. And one other chair was there for a casual visitor who might drop in. I went, and the conversation natu• rally turned on why he had accepted office. I said even Gokhale had objected to it. But he said : " You do not know ; the truth of the matter is. Mr. Sastri. this : I do not feel that I am fitted for non-official public work. In non-official public life, there is so much ignoble competition, there is so much rivalry of a pettv kind. There is so much back-biting, there is so much desire to by-pass or sneer and to become famous without qualification.'' Besides, it was then that he acknowledged in fullness : " I lack the necessary qualities ; I am a man of temper ; I may be nice to friends, but I can't say sweet things to chance visitors. 1 can't sit an hour listening to mummeries. I have not cultivated the^e 264 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI graces necessary for a public worker. L must therefore choose a line of work where my qualities can have the greatest scope, and I believe it is in office. Outside office where other qualities are so much required, I think I am not fitted ;that, I believe, was the reason why when really public life in Madras was com• paratively denuded of men, he left it. There were of course other reasons which he mentioned to me, but this was the most prominent. And, ladies and gentlemen, the way he put it, the sincerity with which he uttered the words and the open acknowledgment he made of his own defects of temper — all that convinced mc that perhaps he had acted in the best man• ner. But he soon ceased to be Judge; he became a Member of the Executive Council, and as before, he could not be unknown as an Executive Council Member. His portfolios sprang suddenly into unusual prominence ; what he said and did was watched with minute eyes by the Press and the public. Of course they were critical and they were abundant too. Once he got into hot water and he was not long out of it. There was what was called the Palghat muddle. Well, it was a long story, though full of inte• rest to me even at this day. But I may tell you this : that he came in for very severe criticism even at the hands of those who appreciated his high qualities. His action, generally speak• ing, was condemned as being too arbitrary and regardless of the dignity of a municipal council. Well, to make the long matter short, the papers were merciless to him, public meetings were held at which his conduct was severely censured, and some wise people said that Mr. Krishnaswami was digging the grave of his own reputation. I was one of those who were full of distress at the turn things were taking. I certainly did not approve of Mr. Krishnaswami's order ; and when I mentioned it to him, he defended it warmly and I also criticised him warmly. We both raised our voices to such an extent that the younger people in the family came out to see what the matter was and whether really I was falling out with Mr. Krishnaswami. His defence was this : and I was absolutely convinced that he was in the right; and as it contains a moral or truth for those who hold high offices and may have to discharge very unpleasant duties in that capa• city, I venture to spend a few minutes over this matter. What he told mc was : " Mr. Sastri, you do not know. The proposal at first was a very drastic one : T brought it down by two or Biographical Essays and Sketches 265 three stages to where it now is. I had a stiff fight with my col• leagues before 1 could give the present shape to the order. I could not do more, and having done the very best that I could. I realised that I was a Government servant, that the honour of Government was in my hands, that at the Legislative Council and elsewhere when the conduct of Government was impugned, as the portfolio was mine, it was my job to get up and defend the action of the Government. Whether I believed fully in my case or not, it was my job." That indeed, gentlemen, is the honest truth of the matter. Having got his colleagues to agree to a certain proposal in the direction of leniency or moderation, he was bound subsequently to accept it in all respects as his own order and to defend it as strongly and sincerely as he could. It was his nature to put vehemence in his speech. As I told you, he would use strong words. So, when he defended himself, he used somewhat unguarded expressions of which his critics took advan• tage— but in my judgment wholly improper advantage. When he explained to me fully the stages through which the order had to pass and then said " Was it not my duty to defend it waijmly and with the full strength of conviction ? " I could not but say ' yes', and J could not but say to myself " I am a non-official, I am accustomed to play the role of a critic. I seldom put myself in the position of an official and look at things from the unfor• tunate official's point of view. There is Mr. Krishnaswami who has, instead of being on my side, gone over to the other side. He has a new part to play, and I cannot judge him by the old stan• dard that I should apply to myself. " Well, gentlemen. I wish you all learn this principle, that when you accept office under Gov• ernment and become responsible as a Member of the Govern• ment, responsible for the actions of Government — not other• wise in small offices — when you stand forward as the spokes• man of Government and as the official defender of the Govern• ment's attitude, you cannot have any reserve or qualifications. You cannot get up and say " Well, gentlemen, I did not like this order (Laughter). Left to myself, I would not have passed it, but you see I am a member of an unfortunately clogced machi• nery ; I have got to do this ; and I did it very unwillinely and I hope you will treat me with leniency ". Well, a man who spoke like that or a man'who believed that his line of defence lav along that line, would at once show that he was not worthy of the con- 266 RT. HON'BLE V. S, SRlNlVASA SASTRI fidence of Government, that he was not worthy of being entrusted with the portfolio and that the honour and credit and prestige of Government were not safe in his hands. Mr. Krishnaswami realised it in the Palghat muddle affair. 1 learned this truth for the first time from his eloquent lips. He was a very good judge of men. Often, I have seen when a man rises to a certain level of prominence, his relations, his depen• dents and the people about him fancy they are so much wiser than he ; they say ; " that fellow comes and tells him like that, he deceives him, and he believes all that ". So. they fancy that because he knows nothing about a little thing which is hidden from him, they are better judges of men than he. Well, ladies and gentlemen, to be a good judge of men, you must have a high soul ; you must have charity ; you must have abundant sympathy with human nature ; you must have good knowledge of human nature, in all its ramifications, and then if you judge, you judge wisely and you judge tolerantly, Krishnaswami was perhaps not a good judge where he was out of sympathy with a person ; but where a person commanded his confidence or drew out his respect, his judgment was invariably sound. I have not known cases where he was wide of the mark. Ladies and gentlemen, 1 canr.ot give a better illustration, a more convincing illustration than my own. He judged me very well, I must say. I say that to you because it is a kind of confession that T make, and there is no harm in making it, because I am saying what is very well- known about Krishnaswami. Mr. Krishnaswami was under no delusions as to my capacity and my ability. Gokhale knew about me vnd gave the best judgment of me ; and 1 bowed to that judgment most loyally. As a matter of fact, it was perfectly true. Krishnaswami discovered me in no time. He said : " Sastri lacks strength of will and purpose. He lacks the quality of leadership". " You cannot put him at the head of a movement where he must continually change his plans or entrust tasks to worthy hands or be able to take them away and entrust them to other hands ". Krishnaswami used to say that of me. I know it was perfectly true. Why should 1 take offence? Other people might have done, when told the limitations to their qualities. There are others who. when asked why they said so, would say " I never said any• thing " or if you refer to particular things, they would sinjplv disown them. I must say. gentlemen, Krishnaswami was ..very Biographical Essays and Sketches 261 fond of me. He respected my sentiment, he respected mv feel• ings ; and I never hesitated to approach him. He was a eood friend. Fortunately, I never felt for a single moment that he had judged unfairly or narrowly or without giving me opportunities of showing what a splendid fellow I was (Laughter). I say this just to show that when he came into contact with a man, he could size him up exactly, and 1 think he did so in the case of all the friends whom I remember to have found frequently in his house. He made no mistakes, at all events of a serious character, and it is wrong now, at the end of 33 years after h\< death — it is wrong now or at any time to say — that either in what he said or what he did, he was guided blindly by any person about him. Some of us bear the opprobrium of having misled him or having compelled him to do wrong ; but it was never the ease. He would listen to you. he would quarrel with you, he would fight it out with you, but in the end. the judgment was his and not taken on from another. Well, ladies and gentlemen, 1 wish 1 could detain you. You will have a few words about the friends he made ; how he kept them and how he treated them and how they treated hhr in turn ; what impression he made on those friends. It is a very inviting subject which will keep me too long ; and even at this distance of time, speaking so near where he lived, I will make no invi• dious distinctions which I had best avoid, but I would say this, ladies and gentlemen, that he was one of those people who were very selective in their friendships. He cared for character ; sham men, men that pretended what they were not — he had no use for them. A man had to be very good and should have some solid qualities before he could call himself Krishnaswarm's friend. I could name several, but as I have said, it is unfair even at this distance of time, to be particular. But I remember very well after he died, Bishop Whitehead, speaking of him as a man, one of whose most prominent qualities was his capacity to make and keep friendships. Well, I will not say he has made friends all over the place ; as I said, he was very careful. Few people could dare to approach him sufficiently to be rewarded with his intimacy. But when you got into that select circle, when you were one in his circle of personal friends, you felt that you had got into a place of rich associations. It was worth while to become his friend ; I have known Mr. Gokhale speaking of Mr. Krishna- 268 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTkl swami as one of his friends who had the combination of high qualities that made human nature attractive and lovable. Well, it was not only Gokhale but there were others too that had made similar remarks; but one thing above all I should mention is that Mr. Krishnaswami kept these friends to the end. He had this rare quality, that when he really esteemed a man highly, he thought of him or said to himself " How shall I push this man up ? ; how shall I bring him forward ? ; he has suffered injustice in such and such a case, I must rectify it". That was his quality. He felt that if he was anybody's friend, it must be to the advan• tage of that friend ; and he would constantly say " I must do this for him ". He has given me once the instance of Mani Ayyar himself. Mani Ayyar was a man of rare qualities. He would say : " I must do something to that fellow, Krishnaswami. He is a good fellow ". I got into trouble once with the Mysore Government — a political trouble, undeservedly ; but the man who exerted him• self most to get me out of it with honour was Mr. Krishnaswami. 1 myself did not take so much pains over it as he did. He planned the whole thing for me. He went and saw the Mysore Dewan, the Mysore Maharajah, called me up to Ootacamund, sent me to this man and that man and did all that. Hn used to say : " You shall not go in a rickshaw or a jatka, you must go in my car ; those fellows must know you are staying with me ". That is how he would plan and do things for the sake of his friends. One of the rarest qualities that you found in him was this. Often when a man gets into trouble, you will find his friends sleeping over it, or making the most remote allusion to it; one would criticise and another would say " Why, it might be compromised ". Krishnaswami was one who would rush completely into the thick of the matter and see that his friend was brought out — of course, he must be deserving — with honour and respect. Now, one last word on a subject which I have not touched. Having said so much about Krishnaswami, I ought to say some• thing about his attitude towards religion. What kind of person was he in that department of life by which most persons are judged ? What was he ? Well, I am not qualified to speak on that subject; for that side of Krishnaswami was not most clear to me. Still, I would say this, generally speaking, he was, at the core of his being, a very good religious man. He had a fear of God and he walked in perpetual remembrance that he was under the eyes Biographical Essays and Sketches 269 of a superior person who saw everything, judged everything and would hold him to account for everything. I cannot say that his religion was obtrusive or that he cared to exhibit it for other peo• ple to notice. I do not think he fasted very much ; I do not think he kept vigil ; I do not think he performed very many severe austerities. I do not remember that he ran about to places of pilgrimage or to places held in holy regard. But he thought of God. He felt God all about him, and when he did anything of any consequence, he was, I am sure, actuated by the desire that it would be acceptable to God. I have seen him too, ladies and gentlemen, performing his daily japams with regularity. He would sit in his shed, all by himself, and it would be amusing to see him take his fingers from the nose to the ear — with a very jerky movement. Sometimes, he would talk to you ; if I went to him at that time, he would say : " Sastri, please sit here,'' (ffireiv^jfl, e_L.«/T(ff)) or he would just nod his head. But he was very careful about it; I have often noticed him do that. U means that he was one of those people who believed that regular and constant prayer at stated hours was part of the religious exercise, which was binding on all. Anyhow in life, in all the great transactions with which he was connected, he was weighed down by a sense of what was right and proper conduct. I cannot remember a sin• gle instance when, notwithstanding his supposed ill-temper and haste, he acted rashly or without due consideration. At all times, the question of right or wrong, proper or improper, was pro• minently before him, and inevitably he would choose the former and rule the latter out without any compunction. His was one of those natures which knew how to judge and »ake the decision and stand by it. It has been said of him — I know more than one person has told it to me — that he never felt anything like regret at a thing done, never had a feeling lhat he had done wrong, that he intended to do something else. That was one of the rare things about him. Most people generally would go about life hesitantly and most often would say, when it was too late : " I wish I did this and did not do that" ; but Mr. Krishnaswami seldom stopped to express regret of that character. It was not because he did not occasionally feel that he had made errors. He would ; and he was speaking of them too now and again ; but the habit of sitting down and saying " What a fool I was to have done this ! " or " Why did you not come and tell me this at the right time ? " — 270 Rl. HON'BLt V. S. SRlNlVASA SAS1R1 that habit was not in him. Having done a thing, he left it, to go to other things. Weil, gentlemen, I think 1 have done my best to bring before your minds a strong forceful nature which grounded itself, in all that it did, on the basis of right. He was a man who had a clear judgment of things, and having come to a judgment, stood by it throughout. Such a person is comparatively rare to see, a person who comes up to the highest to which his nature can reach. A man who never fell below a certain level ; Krishnaswami was a character whom to have known, is to be unable ever to forget. 1 cannot say that I have at any time incurred his displeasure to a serious extent. 1 love to recall the warm friend — a friend who wished you well always and thought of you, even when you were not there, and who when you were in trouble, without your asking him, was willing to put forth his might in all potency in order to save you. Gentlemen, I have, in my judgment, tried to picture to you a strong man, a powerful man, a man who was great and at the same time a man who had the essence of good• ness in him ; for, to the poor, to the deserving, to the really needy, he always extended his hand of help. Those that have the honour of belonging to his family — 1 see them here to-day — are indeed to be envied for having inherited a great name, and with that great name a great tradition. It is very pleasing, to me it is almost a joy, to be able to say that in them these good qualities seem to be visible even to the naked eye. I must say that Mylapore ought to be proud of his memory and of those who, in humbler stations, are trying to sustain that memory for all time to come (Loud applause). SIR C. P. RAMASWAMI AIYAR1

(1879-1966)

I HAVE performed the ceremonies ascribed to me. I have opened the Satram and unveiled both the portrait and bust; and it is now my pleasure to declare the Satram open and to express the wish that it will be as useful to tourists and pilgrims of all sorts and castes as the organisers wish it to be. It has been to me a matter of the utmost pleasure to come here and assist in the celebrations that are going on. Amongst other reasons there is this one that I have been connected with the politics of the land for a great many years ; and 1 always welcome an opportunity of expressing my gratification at anything of imp'ortance or consequence in the domain of politics. This is the Birthday, the sixty-second, as I prefer to call it, of the Sachi- vottama. It is the day after the birthday of H.H. the Maharaja of Travancore. It may not be an exact coincidence ; but it is a by-incidence. And it is not altogether without some note. They have been associated together, as the papers read before you today witness, they have been associated together in many acts of great beneficence to this State. I may not forget to mention in the first instance the Temple Entry Proclamation to which reference was made in the last of the statements that were read. Ladies and Gentlemen, that is a subject which, in this land of castes and creeds and various communities, is apt to create a difference of thought and a difference of outlook. But, I do hope that when things have taken place there is enough toleration in this land to look upon the achievement as having marked a mile• stone in the history of the land and as being entitled to the res• pectful acquiescence of all parties, even those who may happen to be dissentient from the particular matter. I make an appeal on this occasion, if I may, to the orthodox communities of the land to recognise this step as having been ordained in the wisdom

1A speech delivered on the opening of the Sachivottama Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar Shashtiabdapurti Memorial Satram on October 31 1940. 11—18 272 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI of Providence, as having been placed above dispute and cavil and as therefore demanding from all an amount of passive acquies• cence, if not of active approbation. In my own judgment, it is an act of the greatest philanthropy. It takes rank amongst the noblest accomplishments of reform activity; (Cheers) and if there is nothing else to mark the association of the Ruler of the land with the subject of our respect today than this act of amelioration of the lower classes of the land, if there were nothing else to mark their association, it seems to me that there still would be enough to make it a historic event. Ladies and gentlemen, in recom• mending this act to your hearty acceptance I have only to remind you that it has the homage of the noblest in this land as of well- wishers of humanity on the rest of the globe. You may remember that the Mahatma makes it a very special object of his care to advance in every possible way the interests of the classes hitherto held down in social subjection. The Temple Entry Proclamation is to him a symbol, not the crown by any means, but the symbol of the process of liberation which has begun and begun surely. To him nothing is a greater reward in life than to be recognised by the Harijan community as one of their own. He wishes to be recognised as living their life, as performing their humble duties, as weighed down by the same disabilities but as much the crea• ture of God as any other. He has set his heart on the removal of untouchability and other disabilities resting on this community. I have heard him say often, and I have read his writing frequently to the effect that, in his judgment, untouchability has already become a thing of the past, a mere memory of a time that has vanished, a spirit of the dominion of man that has been banished from India for ever. I say ' Amen' ! with all my heart. May we never know again words like ' untouchabiliy ' or ' unapproacha- bility' May we never know again in this land how man can, not merely in material but in immaterial and subtle ways, exer• cise tyranny over his brother ! May we once for all recognise that we are of one family, brothers in spirit as well as in blood, bound therefore in the bonds of mutual love and co-operation, perhaps bound to part on political lines if we must, but certainly not to know again differences either of birth or anything similar to birth. That the Sachivottama has borne a part with his Ruler and no mean part in the accomplishment of this great reform is certainly a feather in his cap, and I take leave to doubt, believer as I am Biographical Essays and Sketches 273 in his great qualities, whether he is going to add to it a more shining or brilliant feather (Cheers). But the story does not end there. The catalogue of his achieve• ments, to which we have listened, referred to him more than once as a statesman of the front rank. The Sachivottama is some• what junior to me in age, and unless my memory fails me, as it does very often unfortunately, I believe he came later than I did to the field of politics. I well remember the time when he was sowing his political wild oats (Laughter). I was then, ladies and gentlemen, always on the side of the angels (Laughter), although as a suspicious Government, they often put two policemen after me. I have been more or less closely associated with Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar. I have always admired his dazzling abilities. I have admired his abounding energy. T have admired the daunt• less courage with which he faces difficulties. I have not always agreed in his judgment of men or things or of the particular measures appropriate to the occasion. But that scarcely matters except in the private relations between him and me. What is of real consequence is that he is a power of great force and potency, that he is capable of great deeds. Amongst men and women, I think also, there is a small weakness which I may mention. I hope you will all see that I am only touching a spot in your own hearts. Those of us who can see sometimes inside ourselves and recognise our weaknesses are apt to view with extraordinary admiration the presence in others, and the active efficiency in them of qualities in which we are ourselves lacking. I may tell you something as a matter of confession which I hope the reporters will not take down (Laughter). For I do not want to be witness against myself to posterity. I may make a general confession that I am particularly weakminded. I cannot come to strong and decided resolutions. I am in the habit of looking round and round, of weighing things in the scales of right and wrong ; and as you know a man who thinks too much of right and wrong is apt to land himself in utter confusion. The moment for action is gone ; the time for deci• sion is left behind ; and then all too late you tell yourself ' 1 must be up and doing something ' and you come to a resolu• tion ; and the first encounter which you meet in the pursuit of that resolution lays you flat (Laughter). You are overcome with a sense of defeatism, You say ' Apparently T ought to 274 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI have come to the opposite resolution ', not knowing that if you had done that you would not have met with any less opposition. For, this world has always different views upon the same sub• ject. It always has opposed platforms. It always has contrary courses of action. You call aloud for the worker. There is no unanimity possible. Where a thousand wills have to unite, there must be division, and the man who is afraid of division, I am afraid, proclaims himself unfit for the active jobs that await a citizen in this somewhat involved world of ours. A man there• fore like the Sachivottama who sees things clearly in front of him. who knows exactly what his aims are, and who marches straight towards them, not minding whom he pushes aside, not minding the bruises he leaves on the bodies of prostrate people, that kind of man is marked out as amongst the efficient forces of this world ; and all we have to wish when we see such a force, such a centre of magnetic power, all that we have to wish is that that body must be charged with the benevolent kind of electricity (Laughter) so that the active man who bustles and cries aloud for this thing and that thing being done may be also a good man with good aims in front of him, is actuated by a good heart and means well by his fellows. If we are generally assured then of the good qualities of an active and powerful man, I tell you, my friends, ladies and gentlemen, young and old, take your hats off to him (Applause), make way for him, let him lead the way, march behind, do his behests and become true and valiant soldiers in the work of progress for mankind. That is the testimony that I was anxious to pay to my friend, the Sachivottama. I am glad he is not here ; I am not offending his modesty, though T know that like other persons whose hearts are in their work he will be delighted to appreciate the fact that he does not labour in vain, that the seeds that he scatters fall on receptive and fruitful grounds, and that, if not he others after him may see the fruit of the harvest for which he now labours. Ladies and gentlemen, I rank the Sachivottama amongst the great workers which India has produced (Cheers). A long time ago, when the Indian National Congress was still young and had not become the boisterous institution that it now is, when our politics was smooth, our resolutions were politely worded, and we spoke in accents of respect to the wielders of authority, in those early and forgotten days, T quite well remem- Biographical Essays and Sketches 275 ber that we were animated by feelings of the greatest friendli• ness towards Indian States in general. The first Presidents of our Congress organisation, the most eminent of our spokesmen, the writers of our authorised pamphlets, the exponents of our accepted views all over the world, made it clearly known that they regarded the existence of Indian States as a great asset to Indian politics. They were very friendly in their spirit to the rulers of the States. Many of them were personal friends of these rulers. I have known occasionally a ruler come and sit amongst us, not as a delegate but as a very interested spectator. I have known them make contributions to our funds. In their welfare we, the elder Congressmen, now superseded and pushed aside, we took active part, for, we regarded those States as nur• series of that statesmanship to which we have heard references made to-day. Remember, please, those of you that are very young, that I am talking of the old time when Indians could not rise even to the rank of Collectors of districts, when they had never become High Court Judges, when they had not become Members of the Executive Council, when a bar sinister was placed definitely against the promotion of Indians to posts of high responsibility. If you read the earlier reports you would be amused at the tiny little things which we asked for and which year after year were denied to us (Laughter). Naturally there• fore when Indians could be appointed to be Dewans in large States, when they could handle the affairs of millions of people, when they could manipulate crores of public revenue, when they could devote their talents to the promotion of public welfare of all sorts, when they could build schools, dig tanks, open canals, when they could do things for which the people would bless them, was it a wonder that we looked with a friendly eye upon these States ? We had given a great many statesmen of the first rank to these States. Many Dewans wrote their names large on contemporary annals. They did great things for which they are still blessed by the people amongst whom they laboured. This Province of Madras has had its share, some envious critics from other provinces might say that we have had more than our fair share (Laughter) — of the Dewanships that went about in the land. Our best men reaped in these States a harvest of renown, a harvest of benevolent activity which British India in those days denied to them. Yes, Madras can boast of a galaxy 276 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI of Dewans of first-rate ability, of statesmen who if they only had fair play in British India would have risen to the highest rank. But they dwelt and laboured in times when Indian talent was still repressed. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I have said all this in order to lead up to this point, that the Sachivottama whose birthday we are celebrating to-day by opening of a Satram in his name and by the unveiling of a portrait and a bust that commemorate his features, to whom we are paying our meed of homage is one who belongs to the long line of able statesmen who have made the Indian States what they are. True ! Our particular friend of this morning has played a part on the larger stage both of all-India and provincial activity ; but somewhat narrowed though his beat may be, you will admit that his work now knows con• centration and intensity which it did not know before, and that he is now crowning a brilliant career with a record of activity which, when he lays down his office — I hope that day will be distant — which when, he lays down his office, will redound to his name, and to the name, if I may say so with pride, of the statesmanship of Madras (Loud and continued cheers). MAIN EVENTS IN SASTRI'S LIFE

1869 22nd September : Born at Valangaiman, near Kumba- konam in Tanjore District. 1883 Passes Matriculation with high distinction. (Educated at Native High School, Kumbakonam under the famous headmaster, Appu Sastri.) Marriage with Parvathi. 1885 Passes F.A. in the 1 Class at the Government College, Kumbakonam. 1887 Passes B.A. in the I Class. 1888 Joins Law College but gives it up, and becomes teacher in the Municipal High School, Mayavaram. 1891 Undergoes training in the Teachers' College, Saidapet. 1892 Rejoins Municipal High School, Mayavaram. 1893 Becomes lecturer in English, Municipal College, Salem. 1895 Joins Pachaiyappa's College High School. 1896 Wife Parvathi's death. 1897 Second marriage with Lakshmi. 1899 Becomes Headmaster, Hindu High School, Triplicanc, Madras. 1906 First meeting with Gokhale. 1907 Admission to the Servants of India Society. 1908 Works for the formation of District Congress Committees in Madras. 1910 Elected as a Fellow of the Madras University. 1911 Secretary, Madras Provincial Congress Committee. 1913 Nominated to the Madras Legislative Council. Introduces a bill to accord legal sanction for marriage of girls after puberty. 1914 Gives evidence before the Royal Commission on Public Services. 1915 February 19, Gokhale passes away. Sastri succeeds him as President of the Servants of India Society. Helps in the reunion of Congress Parties. 278 RT. HON'BLE V, S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI 1916 Elected to the Imperial Legislative Council. Publishes a pamphlet entitled Self-Government for India under the British Flag, Publishes a pamphlet on the Congress-League Scheme — an Exposition. 1917 Presides over the Bombay Provincial Conference held at Nasik. 1918 Delivers his famous speech opposing the Rowlatt Bill in the Imperial Legislative Council. Montagu-Chelmsford Reform proposals. Conflict in the Congress over the acceptance of the proposals. Sastri and the Servants of India Society decide to secede from the Congress, which rejected the proposals, and join the Con• ference of the Moderates. Member, Franchise Committee headed by Lord South- borough. 1919 Visit to England as a member of the moderate delegation. Gave evidence before the British Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Reform proposals. 1920 Sastri not happy over secession from Congress. Attended the Delhi Congress with a view to persuade Congress to accept Reform proposals. Member of the Railways Committee with Acworth as Chairman. Elected to the Council of State under the Montagu- Chelmsford Reforms. 1921 A delegate to the Imperial Conference in London. A delegate of the India Government to the League of Nations. Made a Privy Councillor. Member of the British Empire delegation to the Confer• ence of Naval Disarmament at Washington. 1922 Presides over the Provincial Liberal Conference in Bombay. Tours Australia, Canada and New Zealand in response to the invitation of the Premiers of these dominions. The primary object of the mission to the dominions was to induce the respective Governments to give practical effect to the resolution of the Imperial Conference of 1921 Main Events in Sastri's Life 279 which affirmed the rights of Indians in the dominions to full citizenship. 1923 Presides over the National Liberal Federation at Nagpur. Presents on behalf of the Government of India to the Colonial Office in London the case for full citizenship and racial equality in Kenya. Deep disappointment with the refusal of the British cabi• net to accept Indian claims, followed by illness and rest at Bangalore. Proposes that the Empire exhibition in London should be boycotted by India. 1924 Goes on a mission to England along with Mrs. Besant to present to the British public the case for further political reforms in India. 1925 Delivers the Kamala Lectures at the Calcutta University on the 'Rights and Duties of Citizenship'. 1926 Goes to South Africa as a member of the Habibullah deputation to attend the Indo-South African Conference at Capetown. 1927 Agent-General of the Government of India in South Africa. Conquers the hostility of the Whites against the Indians and establishes better relations between the Indians and the Whites. Founds the Sastri College, Durban, for the higher educa• tion of Indians in South Africa. 1928 Declines the offer of K.C.S.l. Member, Royal Commission on Labour. Member of the delegation of the India Government to give evidence before the Hilton-Young Royal Commission on the closer union of East African territories. 1929 Made a Companion of Honour. 1930 Member of the First Round Table Conference in London. His conversion to Federation. 1931 Helps in the mediation which resulted in the Gandhi- Irwin Pact. Member, Second Round Table Conference. Receives the Freedom of the City of Edinburgh. 1932 Attends the Second Round Table Conference on Indo- African affairs at Capetown. 280 RT. HON'BLE V. S. SRlNlVASA SASTRI 1934 Mrs. Sastri passes away. 1935 Delivers the Mysore University Extension Lectures on Gokhale. Appointed Vice-Chancellor of the Annaraalai University. Invited to form a Ministry in Madras when Congress refused to take up office ; declines the invitation. 1936 Goes to Malaya as a delegate of the Government of India to inquire into the conditions of Indian labour. 1937 Nominated to the Madras Legislative Council. 1940 Delivers the Dr. Abayambal Memorial Lectures on the status of women at the Mysore University. 1941 Writes autobiographical sketches in Tamil to the Swadesa- mitran Weekly. 1943 Delivers lectures on Sir Pherozeshah Mehta. 1944 Publication of Letters of Srinivasa Sastri. Delivers lectures on the Ramayana. 1945 Publication of The Other Harmony. Opposes Jinnah's demand for the partition of India. 1946 Publication of Thumbnail Sketches and My Master Gokhale. Declining health — Gandhiji visits him in Madras. Passes away on Wednesday, April 17. Speeches and Writings of THE RIGHT HONOURABLE V. S. SRINIVASA SASTRI Volume 2 INDEX A Bain. F. W., 246 Balakanda, 81, 85 Abhaya, 64 Balfour, Arthur, 130, 134 Abhayankar, G. R., 154 Ballygunge, Rowland Road, 238 Abhisheka (of Rama), 9, 117; (of Banasura, 88 Sita), 123 Bangalore, 147. 149, 151, 165 Abolition of text books, 209 Barisal, 238 Acceptance of Office, 144 Barve, 229 Activity assumed by government, Basavangudi, 146, 152, 175 219 Bashyam, K., 256 Address, Convocation, 218 Bashyam Iyengar, Sir V,, 250 Adharma, 88 Beaconsfield, 129 Adityahridaya, 35, 85 Belgian Government, 132 Advocatus Diaboli, 239 Advocatus Dei, 239 Bcnes, 181 Africa, East, 150; South, 146, J48, Bengal, Bengali homes, 238, 249 162 Benn, 155, 156 Africa or India, 135 Bhakthi, 250 Agastya, 35, 85, 122, 249 Bhadarkar, Dr. R. G., 249 Agha Khan, the, 135, 186 Bhishma, 256 Agni, 44, 51, 53, 94, 102 Bharata Varsha, 22 Agra, 200 Bharatha, 16, 22, 41, 63, 67, 111, Aiyer, V. K., 129 117, 120, 121 Alison's History of Europe. 242 Bhore, Sir Joseph, 146 America, 77 Bhore's offer, 156 Amery, Colonel, 150 Bias. 146 Anasuya, 109, 249 Bihar, 191 ; Executive Council, Anderson Hall, Madras, 246 191 ; rendition of, 191 Andrews, 156, 182 Bikaner, Maharajah of, 153 ; the Angada, 32, 69, 70, 71 palace of, 176 Annamalai Chettiar, Rajah Sir, 179 Bombay, 151, 239 Annamalai University, 182 Brahma, 79, 81, 87, 110, 115 Annamalainagar, 182 Brahmaputra, 238 Appetite for power, 221 Brahmo Samaj, 242, 244 Arjuna, 164 Brahmasutra, 35 Arya Samaj, 244 Brahmin, 17, 18, 19, 22, 116 Aryan Path, 167 Brihaspathi, 87 Aryan race, 200 Britain, 144, 146, 185, 186, 193 Arundhathi, 249 British Cabinet. 198 ; Common• Assembly, powers of, 152 wealth, 218; Empire, 137; Aswini Kumar Datt, 238 democratic institutions, 186 ; Australia, 132 diplomacy, 173; Government, Autonomy of provinces, 157 186; hold, 185 ; India, 150; Avatar, the theory of, 3 official, 179; opinion, 159; Ayodhya, 19, 22, 55, 108, 111, 117, politician, 158; press, 152; 119, 120; Royal House, 40 pretensions, 159 Ayodhyakanda, 9, 110, 117 Britisher, 186, 188 Brussels, 132 B Budget, Railway, 146 Burke, Edmund, 129 Back benchers, 257 Butler, Dr. Nicholas Murray, 129, Bacon, Francis, 173 130, 131 282 INDEX

Council of war, Ravana summons a, 105 C. P. (C. P. R-), 156, 163, 174 Count of Cardinals, 240 Calcutta, 23 Convocation Address, 218 Canada, 132 Cosmic rays, 253 Cavour, 223 Cripps, Sir Stafford, 194 Cawnpore, 135 Cromwell, Oliver, 129 Cecil, Lord Hugh, 130 Crown, 140, 162, 262, 263 ; Colony Central Prison, Yerrawada, 164 Central responsibility, 150 Government, 136 Centre, 139, 140 Currency League, 146 Chamberlain, Lord, 181 1> Chandavarkar, Sir Narayan, 244 247 Dadhabai Naoroji, 237, 245 DaJadier, 181 Character of teacher, 211 Dasa, 64 Charlie (C. F. Andrews), 182 Dasaratha, 12, 18, 49, 54, 96, J15, Chequers, 129 120 Chimanlal Setalwad, 139 Dayada, 70, 71 Chintamani, C. Y., 145, 189 Dayananda, 167 Chitrakuta, 120 Chittagong, 238 Deccan Education Society, 232 Christian Science Monitor, 153 Declaration of independence, 185 Churchill & Co., 194 Decorum, world's idea of, 166 Circe's witchery, 186 Defects of character, 215 Citizen, life of, 219 Democracy, corruption of, 218; Citizenship, rights and duties of, faith in, 223 ; played out, 218 ; 224 Western, 218 Delhi, 123, 153, 160 Civil Disobedience, 144, 163, 164, Delegated power, 41 170, 173, 174; liberties, pro• Deva, Dr. 182 tection of, 175 Devas, 29, 79, 81 Cohesive power, 214 De Valera, 130 Coimbatore, 168, 172, 174, 190, Devonshire, Duke of, 137 194 Dewans, 190, 275 Colonial Secretary, 135 Dhadhimuka, 68 Colonies Committee, 135 Dhanyamalini, 104 Commentators on Ramayana, 37, Dharma, and adharma, 74; over 38, 39, 60 adharma, victory of, 75 ; the Common roll, 150 guardian of, 10, 90, 112, 115,' Communal franchise, 150 224 Condition precedent, 143 Dictatorship, 174 Conference on the limitation of Dinanath Kunzru (see Kunzru), armaments, 132, 134 200 Congregation of cardinals, 239 Dipawali, 176 Congress, 143, 144, 158, 160, 170, Diplomacy, new, success for, 135 171, 172, 173, 174; policy, Disraeli, 190 175, 183, 185, 186, 193, 195, Distortion of truth, list of areas, 196, 197, 198, 238; (1908), 225 260, 261; resolution, 156; Divorce of sense and form, 209 working committee, 154 Dominion, 137, 185 Congressmen, 143, 144, 172, 175, Dravid, N. A., 229, 231, 235 188, 189, 193, 196, 198 ; liberty of, 22, 275 E Conservatism of life, 212 ; mental, •Each for himself, 213 213 East Bengal, 238 Constitution, 152 East India Company, reference to, Co-operation, unconditioned, 193 23 Consultative committee, 159 Easterners, 7 Council of State speech on Kenya, Educational Review, 205 136; president, 161 Edward Thompson, 152, 153 INDEX 283 Effective self-defence, 213 Gokhale, 127, 128, 145, 146, 182, Egypt, 141, 192 230, 231, 232, 233, 235-8. 243, Eire, 185 246, 252. 254, 258, 260, 266, Elegy, 129 268 ; and Krishnaswami, simi• Empire, 136, 137, 140 ; Parliamen• larity between, 259, 263 tary Association, 141 ; of truth, Goldsmith, Oliver, 250 224 Good judge of men, to be a, 266 England. 141, 144, 159, 235 Governor, 138, 140. 262, 263 English in high schools. 208 Government, 139, 140, 273 ; ser• Epic, Ramayana, instructive value vant, 264, 265; of Bombay, of, 1 ; poem, 4, 6 233 ; of His Majesty, 158 ; of Episodes in the poem, 8; repudia• India, 144. 150, 155, 160, 215 tion of Sita, Vali, 44 Gopal, 230 Equality, 136, 137 Gopis, 238 Estate Land Bill, 257 Govindaraja, 24, 37, 39, 41 European Chancellories. 135 ; mis• Grant. Sir Alexander, 242 sionaries, 240 ; philanthropists, Gray, 129 214 ; soldiery, 233 Great man, 6 Evolution of souls, 4 Grigy. Sir Edward, 130 Exaltation of State, 219 Gundappa, D. V., 153, 154. 181 Executive Council, member of the, Gunther, 183 257, 258 Guzarati girl, 196 Extremist, 254 II F Habibullah. Sir Mohamad, 148, 149, Factors producing results. 207 151 Faddist, 214 Hagiology, 166 Fatalism, 212 Hailey. Sir Malcolm, 139 Federation. All India. 159 Haksar, Colonel. 153 Fiji, people of, 132 Halifax, 181 Fire. 33 Hampden, 129 First difficulty, 143 Hansraj, Lala, 249 First Member. 235 Hankey. Sir Maurice, 130 Franchise. 150; every widening of. Hanuman, 10, 25, 26, 27, 30, 36, 218 38, 42, 51, 53. 59-62, 67-9, 81, Freedom of the City of London. 82. 87-9, 107, 108, 121-3 131 ; of individual, 219, 221 ffariian, 183 Fundamental liberty, 144 Harijans. 168. 171. 172 Fundamen'als of the poem. 3 ; and Harischandra. 224 details, distinction between, 220 Harsh a, 68 G Harusha. 68, 106 Hassan, Imam, 191 Gadas. 93 Higher functions of schoolmaster, Gandharvas, 79, 92 217 Gandhi, Mahatma, 145, 148, 149, Himalayan blunder, 156 154, 155, 156, 163, 164, 165, Hindu, The. 196 167, 168, 171, 172, 183. 189, Hindu High School, the, 127 197, 199, 225 Hinduism, 165 Gandhiji, 143, 193, 195, 196, 200 Hindu-Muslim problem, the, 152, Gandhiwada, 229 185 Garuda, 35, 100 Hints to teachers, 216 Gauhali. 238 Hirabach Club, 231 Geography, 210 Holland. 132 George Washinelon, 185 Hope, Simpson, 135 Geneva, 131, 132 Honour of the wife, 42 Gita, 164 Horror of new ideas. 212 ; of war, God, 12 132 God's advocate, 241 House of Commons, 157. 222, 257 Godavari, 87 Hridayanath Kunzru, 200 284 INDEX

Hughes, 130, 131, 143 ; diplomacy, Joint family, 5 135 Joint Select Committee (1919), 138 Human government, 218 ; nature, 2 Jumna, 200

Huxley, T. H.( 222 Hyderabad, 191 K

I Kabandha, 38 Kaikasi, 110 Ikshvaku, 40, 47 ; kula, 22 Kaikeyi, 12, 13, 16, 17, 114, 115 Imam, Ali, 191 ; Hassan, 191 Kailasa, 88 Imperialism, 40 Kalidasa, 57, 166 Imposed elements, 145 Kama, 103 Imperial Conference (1921). 236 Kapitva, 59 Inconsistency, 164 Kato, 135 Inconstancy, 164 Kausalya, 18, 237 Independence, 186 Keerthi, 56 Independent thought, 222 Kenya, 135, 137, 139, 144, 149, India, 141, 157, 167, 194, 199; 150, 151, 192, 193, 251, 252, Government, 149 ; House, 257 ; 256 et seq. ; Colony, Govern• Office, 150, 155 ment, 131, 136; decision, 137 Indian community, 150; economics, Keshav Chandra Sen, 249 " 245 ; education, 245 ; finance, Khaddar, 143 245 ; Economic Conference, King, 130 245 ; National Congress, the, Kingdom, abandonment of 10 127, 144, 234, 245, 260, 274 ; Kinnaras, 79, 92 Penal Code, 22 ; politics, his• Kishkinda kanda, 9. 22, 30, 66, 115 tory of, 195 Kodanda Rao, 157 Indian Review, The, 233 Kottlers, 157 Indian Social Reformer, The, 231 Krishnaswami Aiyer. V., 127, 128, Indianisation of civil services, 137, 235, 236 138 ; of the army, 138 Kshama (meaning of), 176 Indra, 34, 86, 87, 88, 121, 122 Kshatriya, 22, 58, 114 Indrajit, 74, 75, 84, 94, 107 Kubhera, 84 Infatuation of Ravana for Sita, 101, Kuchela, 17 102, 105 Kula dhana, 122 Information root, in pupil, 210 Kumbha, 68 Inner voice, 164 Kumbhakarna, 33, 67, 68, 75, 84, Internal debate, 166 93, 94 International morality, 135 Kutoyodhis, 84 Ireland, 141 Irish, 130, 144, 234. 245; Home L Rule Bill, 221 Lahore, 246 Irwin, Lord, 154, 168 Lajpat Rai, Lala, 128, 146 Iyengar, Dr. 229 Lakshmana, 9, 10, 15, 17, 18, 25, 40, 43, 45, 47, 53, 59, 61, 62, J 63, 85, 96, 97, 99, 110; Sri Jambarvan, 53 Rama and Hanuman, 30 lames, Sir, 138 Lakshmi, 3 Janaka, 101, 109 Lakshminarasu, Prof. P., 234 Janasthana, 44, 105 Lala Hansraj, 249 Jatayu, age of, 79 Lala Munshiram, 249 Jawaharlal, 154, 175 Landlords, 214 Jayakar, M. R., 174 Land revenue, 257 Jayanthi, 239, 240 Lanka, 55, 65, 69, 74, 75, 76, 84, Jean Val Jean, 4 95, 101 Jeewanjee, 131 Lawley, Sir Arthur, 257 Jinnah, M. A., 146, 186, 199 Lee, Lord, 129 Job hunting, disgraceful, 262 Legislative Council, representation Jodhpur and Bikanir, 178 in, 136 INDEX 285 Libera], 163, 254; English, 175 ; Maya, 110 ; Sita, 44, 45 Federation, 141 Mayavi, 69 Liberalism. 174 Meighen, 130 Liberals and independents, 143, 144 Mehta, Sir Pherozeshah, 246 Liege, 132 Memory, surface of, 210 Lloyd George, 129, 130, 131 Method books, 211 Lobby, 222 MicJdejohn's grammar, 209 Lopamudra, 249 Milkwater, 157 London, 131, 132, 137, 151. 154. Milton, 129 155, 163, 185, 186, 236 Mind, 35 Love, conquest, anger, 103 Ministers, 137, 138 Lylton, Lord, 140 Minorities Sub-committee (1930), Lytton's novels, 74 159 Mirza, 154 M Modern India, builders of, 245 Mokshagundam, 231 Macedonia, S.S-. 141 Mombasa, 151 Macdonald, Ramsay. 157 Monkeys, 71, 87, 88, 120; (An• Mackenzie, an American engineer. gada), 71 178 ; Mrs., 178 Montagu, 130, 131, 139 Madhava Rao, 230 Moral man and immoral society, Madhuvana, 68 167 Madras, 127, 152, 157, 159, 174, Morgan's book, 121, 145 229, 230, 232, 234. 249, 252 Morley, 129, 145 Madrassi, 187, 229, 230, 275, 277 Muhammadan community, 150 Magistrate, 47 Mundane plane. 195 Maha Vishnu, 85 Munition's case, 132 Mahabhaleswar, 242 Munshiram Lala, 249 Mahabharata, ihe, 5 Murison and Adams, 209 Mahadev Desai, 187 Murray. Sir lohn MiddJeton, 167 Mahadodkare, 110 Muslim, 186, 187, 188, 191. 199, Mahanataka, 87 213 Maharaja, 176 Mimalas, 93 Maharao, 131, 132 Mussalmans. 155, 156; community, Maharashtra, 239, 240 158 Maharishis, 34, 35 Mussolini, 181 Mahatma Gandhi, J48, 149, 164, Mvlapore, 154, (65, 181. 183, 189. 168, 171, 183, 189, 196, 197, 196, 197, 199 198, 199. 225, 271 Mysore Dewan, 268 ; Maharaja. Mahendra (agni), 56 268 Mahodara, 68 Mahodesa. 94. 95 N Mainda, 88 Nairobi, 151 Malaviya, Pandit, 177 Nala, 59. 81, 82 Manasarovar, 122 Nandi, 88 Manda, 93 Nandigrama, 120 Mani Iyer, Justice, 260, 268 Narada, 87 Mankind, 181 Natarajan, K., 194, 231 Manu, 182 Natesa Dikshitar, 232 Many throated audacity, 195 Natesan, G. A., 127, 234 Marathi language and literature, National Congress, 158; Conven• 245 tion, 14 f Maricha. 45, 95, 96, 97. 98. 99 Nature, 102 Marston, 129 Nature Cure Clinic, Poona, 197 Marwaris, 176, 177 Neela, 25, 26, 59. 81, 82; the com• Massey, Mrs., 130 mander-in-chief, 26, 62 Mastermen Smith. Sir James, 137, Neglect of English, 210 138 Nehru, Jawaharlal, 175 ; MolilaK Matah', 35, 93 139 286 INDEX Nicholas Murray Butler. Dr., 129 Nila Nagini Devi, 166 pratap Chandra Muzumdar. 249 Niraya, 14 Prayaschitta, 42. 240 Preacher of political creed, 128 Non-violence, cowardly, 164 Precept, 210 Numskulls, 208 Prime Minister, 129, 130, 131 Princes, the, 154. 155, 159 • O Privy Councillor, 131 Observer. 144 Pro-Chancellor, 218 Officials, 214 Profession of teaching, the, 206 Olivier, Lord. 136 Prohibition in U.S.A., 132; repeal One parly, evil effects of, 219 of law. 133 Ooty. 129, 268 Promised land, 249 Opposition, 220, habit of, 220 Proposals, keeping secret of, 134 Optional languages, 210 Proprieties of public life, 233 Ordinances. 160 Prospectus and Rules of the Ser• Ostend, 132 vants of India Society. 234 Oxford, 152 Providence, wisdom of, 271 Provincial autonomy. 158 P Public school, 207 Public Services Commission. 252 Pal's lecture. 122 Punjab, the, 159 Palghat Muddle, 264 et xeq. Punya Bhumi, 232 Pandit Malaviya. 177 Pupil, 207; class or community, Pandit Shivnath Sastri, 249 208 Pannagas, 79 Pitrdha, 46 Papal authority, 239 Purshottamdas, T., 146 Paper equality, 136 Puskpaka Vimana, 75, 84 Parallelism of circumstances, 117 Paramarthika, 183 Q Paramanand, N. M., 246 Parnakuti, 170 Qualifications of a teacher, 211 Parthiva, 40 Queen crowned with King, (22 Party politics, 222 Quixote, 186 Party system, typography of, 218; Quota system, immigration. 136 and private friendship, 220 Patel, 139 R Patwardhan. A. V., 131. 132 Raghu. the race of, 49 Peace, 181 Raghunatha Rao, Dewan Bahadur, Penances, Ravana's. 79, 80 249 Personal freedom, birthright, 224 Raghuvamsa, 58 Personality of teacher and pupil, Railway budget, 146 211 Rajagopalachari, C, see Rajaji Peshwas, 232 Rajaji, 187, 195, 196, 199 Plenary session, R.T.C.. 157, 292 Rajput, 113 ; heroes and heroines, Pogga, the, 238 179 Poem, Ramayana as a, 4 : as shap• Rakshasas, 9, 49, 55, 68. 70, 79, ing India's history, 4 84, 87. 94, 99, 105, 243 Poet, 46, 69 Rakshasis, 51, 55, 103 Poets and novelists, Iheir function, Rama, assurance given to Sugriva, 4: design in characterisation. 32 ; character of, 5, 7, 8 ; con• 63 duct reviewed, 26, 54 ; general, Polak, Henry S. L., 131, 156 110, 111, 114-7, 122, 123, 224; Police in India, the. 160 human, 52; killing Va/i, 32; Policy. British, 138; of eive and the ideal man, 73 fake, 151 Rama and Lakshmana, 27, 44, 68, Political parfy, omnivorous. 219 70, 107 ; bhakthi, 24 ; Sita and Poona, 167, 191, 193 ; Nature Cure Hanuman, 3, 5 . Clinic, 196, 231. 232, 235. 246 Ramakrishna. 167 Prahastha, 75 Ramamurthi, T. V„ 174, 229 INDEX 287 Ramaswami Aiyar, Sir C. P., 253, Sevagram, 189 271 et seq. Severity of thought, 145 Ramayana, age of, 8, 78 ; reading Settlement, Cape Town, 146 of the, 6 ; what it stands for, 8 Shaft, Sir Mian Mohamad, 186 Ramatirtha, Swami, 167 Shastri, Pundit Shivanath, 249 Ramsay Macdonald, 157, 167 Shaw, George Bernard, 194 Ranade, M. G., 232; Rishi, 239, Shepperd's General English, 209 2-40. 241, 242; baby elephant, Simon, Sir John, 157 242, 243 Sita, 108, 111, 112, 114; and Ranganatha image given to Vibhi• Rama, 2; conduct of, 48 ; shana, 122 counterfeit, 44, recovery of, Ravana, 78; criminal of abnormal 67; taunts, 62, 63, 65 ; the type, 77 ; his greatness, 84, 85 ; unapproachable, 105 his infatuation, 78 ; his mis• Siva, 109, 245 deeds and cruelties, 78 ; his Sivaji, 109 penances, 79 Sivaswami Aiyar, Sir P. S-, 139, Reconciliation, 145 146, 147 ; on Sastri, 151, 175, Reforms, 141 251 Reinfold Niebuhr, 167 Smith, Sir Henry Moucrieff, 161 Responsible Government, 150 Smuts, General, 131 Responsivists, 144 Social reform, 243 ; conferences, Revolution and religion, 167 243 Round Table, the, 137 Society, changes of and in, 212 Round Table Conference, the, 157, South Africa, 146, 148, 162, 185 159, 163, 174, 179, 186 Sovereignty, 179 Rukmini Sundaram, 200 Spectator, 153 S Srinivasan, V. S., 127, 129, 131, 135, 142, 145, 146, 152, 154, Sachivottama, 271, 273. 274, 275, 155, 157 277 Srinivasa Iyengar, S., 146 Sacrifices, 9 St. Paul's Cathedra!, 186 Sadasiva Iyer, R., 145 Status of Indians, resolution on the, Sampathi, 69 130 Samarth, N. M., 139 Stilted morals, 145, 146 Samudra, 86, 90 Stoke Pogis, 129 Sanctity of marriage, 101 Story of My Admission, The, 234 Sanjivtni, 121 et seq. Sankara, 239 Sugriva, 68, 69 Sankaran, V. S., 129 Suka, 65 Sanyasa, 282 Sumantara, IS, 19, 20 Sapru, Sir Tej Bahadur, 153, 174, Sundarakandit, 81 189 Superhuman element, 3 Sar, 230 Superman, 6 Saranagata, 25 Surya, 84 Sarojini Naidu, Mrs., 143 Save la, 65 Sartorial regulation, 144 Svarga, 115 Sarvadhikari, Sir Devi Prasad, 139 Swadeshi, 143 Sastri, V. S. S., 147, 152, 161, 164. Swagatam, 183, 189, 193, 197-9 168 Swaraj, 144 Sastra or sastraic exegesis, 23 Satrugna, 120 Swarajists, 140, 144, 146, 159, 174 Savarkar, V. D., 186 Schoolmasters' Test, The, 205 et T seq. Tajmahal, 200, 201 Sen, Keshub Chandra, 249 Tapas, 5, 165 Sermon on the Mount, 131 Tara, 32, 33, 59 Servants of India Society, 127, 140, Tajmahal, 200, 201 169, 193, 229, 231, 232. 234, Teacher, mere supplier of informa• 235, 238 tion, 210; successful, 206, 207 288 INDEX

Teetotaller, 132 Vayu, 35, 82, 102, 122 Tejpur, 238 Vedas, 87 Temple entry proclamation, 271 Venkatarama Sastry, T. R-, 193, Theism, 245 194, 251, 253 Theory of women, old days, 57 Vibhishana, 9-11, 33, 39, 46, 47, Theory regarding interpretation of 53, 63, 67, 73, 75, 76, 89, 90, Maya Sita, 45 98, 107, 108, 117; Corona• Third difficulty, 144 tion, 120 Thompson, Edward, 152, 153 Viceroy, 139, 149, 168 ; Executive Tilaka, the comment in, 41 Council, 140, 191 Time, cure all, 213 ; plausible form, Victoria, 190 213 Vina, 87 Tod's Annals of Rajasthan, 179 Vindhya Range, the, 249 Tories, 153, 173, 246 Violence, courageous, 164 Travancore Maharajah, H.H., 271 Visalanetra, 43 Trickery, deprecated by Rama, 66 Visveswaraya, 231 Trijata, 18 Viswamitra, 5, 96, 246 Trilokavijaya, 84 Vivekananda, 167 Triplicane, 127, 234 Vraja, 238 Truth, 224 ; Mahatma's devotion to. Vvavahara, 188, 196 225 Vyavaharika, 184, 185 Tulsidas, 148 Tulya Ninda Stulir Mauni, 153 W Tyranny of military discipline, 220 Walton's synthesis, 209 U War, horrors of, 132 Washington, George, 134, 185 United Indians, 139 Western civilisation. 167 United States, 132, 133, 136, 185 Westerners, 7 Universal patriotism, 74 Westminster, 192 Universe, the, 3 White Paper, 172, 173 University, alurnni of, 220 ; exami• Wife, dearer than one's own life, nation test, disastrous effect of. 43 210 ; honours, 206 ; restricted William Penn, 129 freedom of movement and Willingdon, Lord, 156, 161, 162, interaction, 211 163, 164 Untouchability, 271 Wilson, Sir Samuel, 150 Usha, 238 Winston Churchill, 131 Usurper, Sugriva an, 71 Wisdom, treasure of, 6 Uttarakanda, 35, 54, 60, 61, 81, Wordsworth, 250 122, 123 Working Committee (W.C.C.), 170, 187, 188 V Women, of old ways, 57 ; subordi• Vali, 21-2, 27, 29, 30, 32-9, 41-3, nate to men theory, 45 59, 61, 66, 69, 71, 72 ; episode, 21 y Valmiki, 5, 14, 23, 26, 37, 57, 63, Yaga, 96 73, 81, 108, 109, 148, 237 ; Yagna, 5, 22, 165 text, 44 Yakshas, 79, 92 Value, education and spiritual, 4 Yama, 96 Vanaprasta, 236 Yeravada Central Prison, 164, 165 Vanaras, 81 Ypres, 132 Vara, 80 Yuddhakanda, 9, 21, 66, 98, 105, Variation in standards, 207 120, 253 Varma, 131 Yuga's end, 33 Vasishta, 122, 246, 249 Yuvaraja, 12, 33, 71