|
GANDHI SPEAKS AT THE BENARES
UNIVERSITY - 1916
Benares Hindu University Speech
Go here for more about
Mohandas Gandhi.
Go here for more about
Gandhi's Benares Hindu University
Speech.
It follows the full text transcript of
Mohandas Gandhi's Benares Hindu University speech, delivered at
Benares, India - February 4, 1916.
 |
I wish to tender
my humble apology for the long delay that took
place before I was able to reach this place. |
And you will
readily accept the apology when I tell you that
I am not responsible for the delay nor is any
human agency responsible for it. The fact is
that I am like animal on show, and my keepers in
their over kindness always manage to neglect a
necessary chapter in this life, and, that is,
pure accident. In this case, they did not
provide for the series of accidents that
happened to us-to me, keepers, and my carriers.
Hence this delay.
Friends, under the influence of the matchless
eloquence of Mrs. Besant who has just sat down,
pray, do not believe that our University has
become a finished product, and that all the
young men who are to come to the University,
that has yet to rise and come into existence,
have also come and returned from it finished
citizens of a great empire. Do not go away with
any such impression, and if you, the student
world to which my remarks are supposed to be
addressed this evening, consider for one moment
that the spiritual life, for which this country
is noted and for which this country has no
rival, can be transmitted through the lip, pray,
believe me, you are wrong. You will never be
able merely through the lip, to give the message
that India, I hope, will one day deliver to the
world. I myself have been fed up with speeches
and lectures. I except the lectures that have
been delivered here during the last two days
from this category, because they are necessary.
But I do venture to suggest to you that we have
now reached almost the end of our resources in
speech-making; it is not enough that our ears
are feasted, that our eyes are feasted, but it
is necessary that our hearts have got to be
touched and that out hands and feet have got to
be moved.
We have been told during the last two days how
necessary it is, if we are to retain our hold
upon the simplicity of Indian character, that
our hands and feet should move in unison with
our hearts. But this is only by way of preface.
I wanted to say it is a matter of deep
humiliation and shame for us that I am compelled
this evening under the shadow of this great
college, in this sacred city, to address my
countrymen in a language that is foreign to me.
I know that if I was appointed an examiner, to
examine all those who have been attending during
these two days this series of lectures, most of
those who might be examined upon these lectures
would fail. And why? Because they have not been
touched.
I was present at the sessions of the great
Congress in the month of December. There was a
much vaster audience, and will you believe me
when I tell you that the only speeches that
touched the huge audience in Bombay were the
speeches that were delivered in Hindustani? In
Bombay, mind you, not in Benaras where everybody
speaks Hindi. But between the vernaculars of the
Bombay Presidency on the one hand and Hindi on
the other, no such great dividing line exists as
there does between English and the sister
language of India; and the Congress audience was
better able to follow the speakers in Hindi. I
am hoping that this University will see to it
that the youths who come to it will receive
their instruction through the medium of their
vernaculars. Our languages the reflection of
ourselves, and if you tell me that our languages
are too poor to express the best thought, then
say that the sooner we are wiped out of
existence the better for us. Is there a man who
dreams that English can ever become the national
language of India? Why this handicap on the
nation? Just consider for one moment what an
equal race our lads have to run with every
English lad.
I had the privilege of a close conversation with
some Poona professors. They assured me that
every Indian youth, because he reached his
knowledge through the English language, lost at
least six precious years of life. Multiply that
by the numbers of students turned out by our
schools and colleges, and find out for
yourselves how many thousand years have been
lost to the nation. The charge against us is
that we have no initiative. How can we have any,
if we are to devote the precious years of our
life to the mastery of a foreign tongue? We fail
in this attempt also. Was it possible for any
speaker yesterday and today to impress his
audience as was possible for Mr. Higginbotham?
It was not the fault of the previous speakers
that they could not engage the audience. They
had more than substance enough for us in their
addresses. But their addresses could not go home
to us. I have heard it said that after all it is
English educated India which is leading and
which is leading and which is doing all the
things for the nation. It would be monstrous if
it were otherwise. The only education we receive
is English education. Surely we must show
something for it. But suppose that we had been
receiving during the past fifty years education
through our vernaculars, what should we have
today? We should have today a free India, we
should have our educated men, not as if they
were foreigners in their own land but speaking
to the heart of the nation; they would be
working amongst the poorest of the poor, and
whatever they would have gained during these
fifty years would be a heritage for the nation.
Today even our wives are not the sharers in our
best thought. Look at Professor Bose and
Professor Ray and their brilliant researches. Is
it not a shame that their researches are not the
common property of the masses?
Let us now turn to another subject.
The Congress has passed a resolution about
self-government, and I have no doubt that the
All-India Congress Committee and the Muslim
League will do their duty and come forward with
some tangible suggestions. But I, for one, must
frankly confess that I am not so much interested
in what they will be able to produce as I am
interested in anything that the student world is
going to produce or the masses are going to
produce. No paper contribution will ever give us
self-government. No amount of speeches will ever
make us fit for self-government. It is only our
conduct that will fit for us it. And how are we
trying to govern ourselves?
I want to think audibly this evening. I do not
want to make a speech and if you find me this
evening speaking without reserve, pray, consider
that you are only sharing the thoughts of a man
who allows himself to think audibly, and if you
think that I seem to transgress the limits that
courtesy imposes upon me, pardon me for the
liberty I may be taking. I visited the
Vishwanath temple last evening, and ad I was
walking through those lanes, these were the
thoughts that touched me. If a stranger dropped
from above on to this great temple, and he had
to consider what we as Hindus were, would he not
be justified in condemning us? Is not this great
temple a reflection of our own character? I
speak feelingly, as a Hindu. Is it right that
the lanes of our sacred temple should be as
dirty as they are? The houses round about are
built anyhow. The lanes are tortuous and narrow.
If even our temples are not models of roominess
and cleanliness, what can our self-government
be? Shall our temples be abodes of holiness,
cleanliness and peace as soon as the English
have retired from India, either of their own
pleasure or by compulsion, bag and baggage?
I entirely agree with the President of the
Congress that before we think of
self-government, we shall have to do the
necessary plodding. In every city there are two
divisions, the cantonment and the city proper.
The city mostly is a stinking den. But we are a
people unused to city life. But if we want city
life, we cannot reproduce the easy-going hamlet
life. It is not comforting to think that people
walk about the streets of Indian Bombay under
the perpetual fear of dwellers in the storied
building spitting upon them. I do a great deal
of railway traveling. I observe the difficulty
of third-class passengers. But the railway
administration is by no means to blame for all
their hard lot. We do not know the elementary
laws of cleanliness. We spit anywhere on the
carriage floor, irrespective of the thoughts
that it is often used as sleeping space. We do
not trouble ourselves as to how we use it; the
result is indescribable filth in the
compartment. The so-called better class
passengers overawe their less fortunate
brethren. Among them I have seen the student
world also; sometimes they behave no better.
They can speak English and they have worn
Norfolk jackets and, therefore, claim the right
to force their way in and command seating
accommodation.
I have turned the searchlight all over, and as
you have given me the privilege of speaking to
you, I am laying my heart bare. Surely we must
set these things right in our progress towards
self-government. I now introduce you to another
scene. His Highness the Maharaja who presided
yesterday over our deliberations spoke about the
poverty of India. Other speakers laid great
stress upon it. But what did we witness in the
great pandal in which the foundation ceremony
was performed by the Viceroy? Certainly a most
gorgeous show, an exhibition of jewelry, which
made a splendid feast for the eyes of the
greatest jeweler who chose to come from Paris. I
compare with the richly bedecked noble men the
millions of the poor. And I feel like saying to
these noble men, "There is no salvation for
India unless you strip yourselves of this
jewelry and hold it in trust for your countrymen
in India." I am sure it is not the desire of the
King-Emperor or Lord Hardinge that in order to
show the truest loyalty to our King-Emperor, it
is necessary for us to ransack our jewelry boxes
and to appear bedecked from top to toe. I would
undertake, at the peril of my life, to bring to
you a message from King George himself that he
excepts nothing of the kind.
Sir, whenever I hear of a great palace rising in
any great city of India, be it in British India
or be it in India which is ruled by our great
chiefs, I become jealous at once, and say, "Oh,
it is the money that has come from the
agriculturists." Over seventy-five per cent of
the population are agriculturists and Mr.
Higginbotham told us last night in his own
felicitous language, that they are the men who
grow two blades of grass in the place of one.
But there cannot be much spirit of
self-government about us, if we take away or
allow others to take away from them almost the
whole of the results of their labor. Our
salvation can only come through the farmer.
Neither the lawyers, nor the doctors, nor the
rich landlords are going to secure it.
Now, last but not the least, it is my bounden
duty to refer to what agitated our minds during
these two or three days. All of us have had many
anxious moments while the Viceroy was going
through the streets of Banaras. There were
detectives stationed in many places. We were
horrified. We asked ourselves, "Why this
distrust?" Is it not better that even Lord Hardinge should die than live a living death?
But a representative of a mighty sovereign may
not. He might find it necessary to impose these
detectives on us? We may foam, we may fret, we
may resent, but let us not forget that India of
today in her impatience has produced an army of
anarchists. I myself am an anarchist, but of
another type. But there is a class of anarchists
amongst us, and if I was able to reach this
class, I would say to them that their anarchism
has no room in India, if India is to conqueror.
It is a sign of fear. If we trust and fear God,
we shall have to fear no one, not the Maharajas,
not the Viceroys, not the detectives, not even
King George.
I honor the anarchist for his love of the
country. I honor him for his bravery in being
willing to die for his country; but I ask him-is
killing honorable? Is the dagger of an assassin
a fit precursor of an honorable death? I deny
it. There is no warrant for such methods in any
scriptures. If I found it necessary for the
salvation of India that the English should
retire, that they should be driven out, I would
not hesitate to declare that they would have to
go, and I hope I would be prepared to die in
defense of that belief. That would, in my
opinion, be an honorable death. The bomb-thrower
creates secret plots, is afraid to come out into
the open, and when caught pays the penalty of
misdirected zeal.
I have been told, "Had we not done this, had
some people not thrown bombs, we should never
have gained what we have got with reference to
the partition movement."
(Mrs. Besant :
"Please stop it.")
This was what I
said in Bengal when Mr. Lyon presided at the
meeting. I think what I am saying is necessary.
If I am told to stop I shall obey.
(Turning to the
Chairman)
I await your
orders. If you consider that by my speaking as I
am, I am not serving the country and the empire
I shall certainly stop.
(Cries of "Go
on.")
(The Chairman :
"Please, explain your object.")
I am simply. . .
(another
interruption)
My friends, please
do not resent this interruption. If Mrs. Besant
this evening suggests that I should stop, she
does so because she loves India so well, and she
considers that I am erring in thinking audibly
before you young men. But even so, I simply say
this, that I want to purge India of this
atmosphere of suspicion on either side, if we
are to reach our goal; we should have an empire
which is to be based upon mutual love and mutual
trust. Is it not better that we talk under the
shadow of this college than that we should be
talking irresponsibly in our homes? I consider
that it is much better that we talk these things
openly. I have done so with excellent results
before now. I know that there is nothing that
the students do not know. I am, therefore,
turning the searchlight towards ourselves. I
hold the name of my country so dear to me that I
exchange these thoughts with you, and submit to
you that there is no room for anarchism in
India. Let us frankly and openly say whatever we
want to say our rulers, and face the
consequences if what we have to say does not
please them. But let us not abuse.
I was talking the other day to a member of the
much-abused Civil Service. I have not very much
in common with the members of that Service, but
I could not help admiring the manner in which he
was speaking to me. He said : "Mr. Gandhi, do
you for one moment suppose that all we, Civil
Servants, are a bad lot, that we want to oppress
the people whom we have come to govern?" "No,"
I said. "Then if you get an opportunity put in a
word for the much-abused Civil Service." And I
am here to put in that word. Yes, many members
of the Indian Civil Service are most decidedly
overbearing; they are tyrannical, at times
thoughtless. Many other adjectives may be used.
I grant all these things and I grant also that
after having lived in India for a certain number
of years some of them become somewhat degraded.
But what does that signify? They were gentlemen
before they came here, and if they have lost
some of the moral fiber, it is a reflection upon
ourselves.
Just think out for yourselves, if a man who was
good yesterday has become bad after having come
in contact with me, is he responsible that he
has deteriorated or am I? The atmosphere of
sycophancy and falsity that surrounds them on
their coming to India demoralizes them, as it
would many of us. It is well to take the blame
sometimes. If we are to receive self-government,
we shall have to take it. We shall never be
granted self-government. Look at the history of
the British Empire and the British nation;
freedom loving as it is, it will not be a party
to give freedom to a people who will not take it
themselves. Learn your lesson if you wish to
from the Boer War. Those who were enemies of
that empire only a few years ago have now become
friends. . . .
[Gandhi was
interrupted and not able to finish his speech.]
More History
|
|
