The head of the Rashtriya Swayam-sevak Sangh also called upon Gandhiji. It was common knowledge that the R.S.S., as it was called for short, had been behind the bulk of the killings in the city as also in various other parts of India. This these friends denied. Their organisation was for protecting Hinduism - not for killing Muslims. It was not hostile to anyone. It stood for peace.
This was laying on a bit thick. But Gandhiji, with his boundless faith in human nature and in the redemptive power of truth, felt he must give everybody a chance to make good his bona fides. It was something that they did not glory in wrong doing. They should issue a public statement, he told them, repudiating the allegations against them and openly condemn the killing and harassment of the Muslims that had taken place and that still was going on in the city. They said Gandhiji could do that himself on their behalf on the strength of what that ha told him. Gandhiji answered that he would certainly do that but if what they were saying was sincerely meant, it was better that the public should have it from their own lips.
A member of Gandhiji's party interjected that the R.S.S. people had done a fine job of work at Wah refugee camp. They had shown discipline, courage and capacity for hard work. "But don't forget," answered Gandhiji, "even so had Hitler's Nazis and the Fascists under Mussolini." He characterised the R.S.S. as a "communal body with a totalitarian outlook."
A few days later, the RSS leaders took Gandhiji to attend one of the rallies they were holding at the sweepers' colony. He had seen some of their literature. The theory propounded therein was that the Hindus were the original inhabitants of India. The late Lokamanya Tilak was wrong in his thesis that the Arctic circle was the original home of the Vedas and the Aryans had migrated from there into India through the north-west. It was not the Aryans, they asserted, who had come in from outside. It was the Arctic that had shifted from India where it was originally situated when the Vedas were composed! "Quite long ago it (North Pole) was in the part of the world ... called Bihar and Orissa at present." India, therefore, belonged to the Hindus and all those who had not assimilated or been assimilated by Hindu religion and culture were aliens and could only claim the rights of minorities. Under the pernicious influence of the Congress "the idea was spread ... for the first time ... (that) the Nation ... was composed of all those who happened to reside therein ... We began to class ourselves with our old invaders and foes under the outlandish name - India - and tried to win them over to join hands with us
in our struggle ... (and) completely lost sight of our true Hindu Nationhood in our wild goose chase after the phantom of founding a 'really' democratic 'State'."
In welcoming Gandhiji to their rally, the RSS leader described him as "a great man that Hinduism has produced". Gandhiji replying observed that while he was certainly proud of being a Hindu, his Hinduism was neither intolerant nor exclusive. The beauty of Hinduism as he understood it was that it absorbed the best that was in all faiths. If Hindus believed that in India there was no place for non-Hindus on equal and honourable terms and Muslims, if they wanted to live in India, must be content with an inferior status, or if the Muslims thought that in Pakistan Hindus could live only as a subject race on the sufferance of the Muslims, it would mean an eclipse of Hinduism and an eclipse of Islam. He was glad, therefore, he said, to have their assurance that their policy was not of antagonism towards Islam. He warned them that if the charge against them that their organisation was behind the killing of the Muslims was correct, it would come to a bad end.
In the course of questions and answers that followed Gandhiji was asked whether Hinduism did not permit the killing of evil-doers. If not, how did he explain the exhortation by Lord Krishna in the second chapter of the Gita to destroy the Kauravas?
The reply to the first question, said Gandhiji, was both 'yes' and 'no'. One had to be an infallible judge as to who was the evil-doer before the question of killing could arise. In other words one had to be completely faultless before such a right could accrue to one . How could a sinner claim the right to judge or execute another sinner? As for the second question, granting that the right to punish the evil-doer was recognised by the Gita, it could be exercised properly by the constituted Government only. "Both the Sardar and Pandit Nehru will be rendered powerless if you become judge and executioner in one. They are tried servants of the nation. Give them a chance to serve you. Do not sabotage their efforts by taking the law into your own hands." (Extracts from Pyare Lal's Gandhi: The Last Phase).
