Savarkar

1. Savarkar's Conditional Release Marked a New Phase of Struggle.

Should I fail to fulfill those conditions or any portion of them . . . I may be arrested by any police officer without warrant, and remanded to undergo the unexpired portion of my original sentences.

Freedom came with chains. After nearly 14 years of brutal imprisonment, including a decade in the Cellular Jail, Vinayak Damarkar Savarkar was conditionally released in 1924. The conditions were stringent: confinement to Ratnagiri district and complete abstention from political activities for five years, renewable at the government's discretion. Failure meant serving the remaining 25 years of his life sentence.

Humiliation and hardship. The British government deliberately publicized a declaration Savarkar signed acknowledging a "fair trial and just sentence" to discredit him, though he later clarified it was a strategic compromise for freedom. Released without civilian clothes or means, his family faced acute financial crisis and social stigma, as association with the name Savarkar invited police suspicion and jeopardized livelihoods.

Public support emerged. Despite government attempts to isolate him and some moderate criticism, public admiration for his sacrifices led to the establishment of a "Savarkar Brothers Purse Fund." This provided much-needed financial relief and demonstrated that his revolutionary past, though controversial, still commanded significant respect and support among the people.

2. Ratnagiri Became a Laboratory for Radical Social Reforms.

When I die, I want Hindus from all caste—a Mahar, a Maratha, a Brahmin and a Mang—to shoulder my dead body.

Focus on Hindu unity. Confined to Ratnagiri, Savarkar channeled his energy into radical social reforms aimed at unifying Hindu society, which he saw as weakened by internal divisions. He focused on eradicating untouchability and caste barriers, promoting inter-caste dining and marriage, and advocating for reconversion (shuddhi).

Practical, bold actions. Savarkar didn't just preach; he led by example, often facing opposition from orthodox Hindus. His initiatives included:

• Visiting untouchable localities and participating in their activities.
• Organizing inter-caste dining events (sahabhojan).
• Campaigning for temple entry for all castes.
• Establishing the Patit Pavan Mandir, open to all Hindus.
• Promoting combined education for children of all castes.

Challenging deep prejudices. Savarkar recognized that discrimination existed not just between upper and lower castes, but also among the so-called untouchable communities themselves. His efforts aimed to dismantle these hierarchies from top to bottom, using persuasion, public pressure, and practical demonstrations to effect change.

3. Savarkar Critiqued Congress Appeasement Amidst Communal Strife.

If you come, with you; if you don’t, without you; and if you oppose, in spite of you—the Hindus will continue to fight for their National Freedom as best as they can!

Alarmed by communal violence. The 1920s saw a significant rise in communal tensions and riots across India, particularly after the collapse of the Khilafat movement. Events like the Moplah genocide and the Kohat riots deeply concerned Savarkar, who felt the Congress leadership, especially Gandhi, was not adequately addressing the security and rights of Hindus.

Critique of Gandhi's approach. Savarkar sharply criticized Gandhi's responses to communal incidents and his philosophy of non-violence, which he believed left Hindus vulnerable. He saw Gandhi's attempts to appease Muslim leadership as detrimental to Hindu interests and national unity, arguing that genuine unity could only be built on mutual respect and strength, not one-sided concessions.

Advocating Hindu self-assertion. Savarkar believed Hindus needed to organize and assert their rights politically and socially. His famous formula, "If you come, with you; if you don’t, without you; and if you oppose, in spite of you," encapsulated his view that Hindus should pursue independence and national consolidation regardless of Muslim cooperation, and resist any opposition.

4. The Hindu Mahasabha Emerged as a Distinct Political Voice.

The Hindu Mahasabha is not in the main a Hindu-Dharma-Sabha but it is pre-eminently a Hindu-Rashtra-Sabha and is a Pan-Hindu organization shaping the destiny of the Hindu Nation in all its social, political and cultural aspects.

Filling a political vacuum. Emerging from his confinement in 1937, Savarkar chose to lead the Hindu Mahasabha, transforming it from a loose social coalition into a more defined political entity. He believed the Congress had alienated Hindus through its appeasement policies and that Hindus needed a strong, independent political voice to safeguard their interests.

Defining Hindu Nationalism. Savarkar articulated a vision of Hindu nationalism based on shared culture, history, and territory, distinct from theological Hinduism. He defined a Hindu as anyone who considered India their fatherland and holy land, encompassing followers of various indigenous faiths. The Mahasabha aimed to represent this broad Hindu nation.

Contesting the political space. Under Savarkar, the Mahasabha actively contested elections and sought a place at the negotiating table with the British, challenging the dominance of the Congress and the Muslim League. While facing criticism for being communal, Savarkar argued that defending the rights of the majority Hindu community in their own land was inherently nationalistic.

5. Militarization and National Interest Guided Savarkar's War Policy.

Hinduize all politics and militarize Hindudom!!—and the resurrection of our Hindu Nation is bound to follow it as certainly as the Dawn follows the darkest hour of night.

Strategic response to war. With the outbreak of World War II, Savarkar advocated a policy of "responsive cooperation" with the British war effort, particularly focusing on the militarization and industrialization of India. He saw this as an opportunity for Hindus to gain military training, secure positions in the armed forces, and build industrial capacity, which would be crucial for India's future defense and independence.

Critique of Congress stance. Savarkar sharply criticized the Congress's initial non-cooperation stance during the war, viewing it as a missed opportunity for India to strengthen itself. He argued that national interest dictated taking advantage of the situation to acquire military power, regardless of ideological differences with the British or other nations.

Long-term vision. Savarkar's call to "Hinduize all politics and militarize Hindudom" was a core tenet of his later political philosophy. He believed that a strong, unified, and militarily capable Hindu nation was essential for India's security, sovereignty, and standing in the world, especially given the perceived threats from external powers and internal communal divisions.

6. The Hyderabad Satyagraha as a Test of Hindu Strength.

The Hindu Mahasabha, therefore refused to fight under lying colours of a common Hindu-Moslem movement and means to enter the list in defence of their Hindu brethren in the State under an unalloyed Hindu flag.

Defending Hindu rights. Savarkar and the Hindu Mahasabha took a leading role in the agitation against the oppressive rule of the Nizam of Hyderabad, where the Hindu majority faced severe discrimination and denial of civil liberties. This marked the Mahasabha's first major mass movement, distinct from the Congress's approach.

Civil resistance and sacrifice. The movement involved civil resistance, defying bans on assembly and expression, and facing brutal repression and imprisonment from the Nizam's government. Savarkar rallied support across India, highlighting the plight of Hyderabad's Hindus and criticizing the Congress for its perceived inaction and appeasement of the Nizam.

A limited victory. The sustained pressure from the Mahasabha and other Hindu organizations, coupled with international attention, eventually forced the Nizam to introduce some reforms. While not achieving full civil rights, this was seen as a significant step and demonstrated the potential of organized Hindu action, although the Mahasabha's role was later downplayed by the Congress.

7. Savarkar Championed Undivided India Against Partition Proposals.

Pakistan may come and Pakistans may go, but Hindustan goes on forever.

Staunch opposition to vivisection. Savarkar was an unwavering opponent of the idea of partitioning India on communal lines, viewing it as a betrayal of the nation's integrity and history. He vehemently criticized the Muslim League's demand for Pakistan and any political moves, including those by the Congress, that seemed to concede the principle of division.

Critique of Congress concessions. Savarkar particularly targeted Gandhi and the Congress for their evolving stance on Partition, from initial opposition to eventual acceptance of the principle of provincial self-determination. He saw this as a dangerous capitulation driven by a misguided pursuit of Hindu-Muslim unity at any cost.

Advocating a strong, unified state. Savarkar envisioned a united, indivisible India where all citizens, regardless of religion, enjoyed equal rights based on the principle of "one man, one vote." While acknowledging the existence of distinct communities, he insisted that India was one nation and that no minority should have the right to secede or dominate the majority.

8. The Gandhi Murder Trial and Savarkar's Acquittal.

The prosecution case against Vinayak D. Savarkar appears to rest just on the evidence of the approver and the approver alone.

Implication in the murder. Following the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi in 1948, Savarkar was arrested and charged as a co-conspirator, based largely on the testimony of the approver, Digambar Badge. This brought his life and political career under intense scrutiny and cast a long shadow over his legacy.

Honourable acquittal. Despite the prosecution's efforts, the court found insufficient evidence to link Savarkar directly to the conspiracy. The judge noted that the approver's testimony lacked independent corroboration and that the circumstantial evidence was not conclusive. Savarkar was honourably acquitted of all charges.

Lingering moral questions. While legally cleared, the accusation and trial deeply impacted Savarkar's public image and political standing. The "moral albatross" of the assassination continued to cloud his legacy, fueled by political opponents and later inquiries, despite the court's verdict.

9. Post-Independence: Continued Activism and Political Isolation.

The end of our revolution has come with the attainment of our freedom. Those of us who fought for the country’s liberty are naturally very happy to see it free and independent.

Retirement and re-emergence. After his acquittal, Savarkar initially maintained a low profile but gradually re-emerged into public life, though his political influence had waned significantly after the Hindu Mahasabha's electoral defeat. He continued to voice his opinions on national issues, advocating for a strong, militarized India and criticizing the policies of the Nehru government.

Focus on social and cultural issues. While political restrictions eased, Savarkar increasingly focused on social reforms, language purification, and historical narratives. He sought to consolidate Hindu society and promote a sense of cultural pride, often through public lectures and writings, though his radical views sometimes alienated even his supporters.

Isolation and disillusionment. Despite his past contributions and continued efforts, Savarkar found himself increasingly isolated in the post-independence political landscape. His relationship with former allies like the RSS became strained, and his criticisms of the dominant Congress narrative often went unheeded, leaving him a somewhat marginalized figure in his final years.

10. The Kapur Commission Reopened Old Wounds.

All these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group...

Revisiting the assassination. Years after Savarkar's death, the Indian government appointed the Justice Kapur Commission to re-examine the circumstances surrounding Gandhi's assassination. This inquiry, prompted by new claims and public interest, reopened the debate about the conspiracy and the potential involvement of individuals beyond those convicted.

Controversial findings. While the Commission's primary focus was on the police investigation and potential lapses, its report included observations that were interpreted as suggesting Savarkar's involvement in the conspiracy, despite his earlier acquittal. These findings, though not legally binding, reignited controversy and further complicated his legacy.

Fueling ongoing debate. The Kapur Commission's report became a significant point of reference in subsequent discussions and debates about Savarkar's role in the assassination. It provided ammunition for his detractors and ensured that the question of his culpability, though legally settled, remained a contentious issue in Indian political and historical discourse.

11. A Contentious Legacy Endures in Modern India.

His dauntless spirit will stir generations to come.

A figure of controversy. Even decades after his death, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar remains one of the most debated and controversial figures in modern Indian history. His legacy is fiercely contested, with supporters hailing him as a fearless patriot and visionary, while critics condemn him for his political ideology and alleged role in the Gandhi assassination.

Competing narratives. Savarkar's life and ideas are interpreted through vastly different lenses, often reflecting contemporary political divides. His contributions to the freedom struggle, social reform efforts, and political thought are either celebrated or dismissed depending on the perspective, making a neutral assessment challenging.

Enduring relevance. Despite attempts to marginalize him, Savarkar's name continues to surface in political discourse, academic debates, and public memory. His ideas on Hindutva, nationalism, and statecraft remain relevant to understanding certain currents in Indian politics, ensuring that his contentious legacy continues to shape discussions about India's past, present, and future.

Last updated: May 13, 2025