‘TRIVENI’
HAS SHED LIGHT ON MY PATH.
BLESSED BE HER NAME!
India
is preparing for the General Election–the second after the inauguration of the
Republic. During the first election held five years ago, the country
demonstrated its fitness for democracy by conducting the campaign in a peaceful
manner. Millions of voters, most of them illiterate, went to the polls and
exercised their new-won right of franchise. The percentage of votes polled was
very high. This indicated the lively interest which the average citizen took in
the affairs of the nation. The alignment of political parties was uncertain and
the presence of several independent candidates caused some confusion. But the
Congress could form stable administrations at the Centre and in most of the
States.
There
has been a marked change in the ideology of the Congress Party, as reflected in
its manifesto. Socialism is in greater favour and a Socialist Commonwealth is
the ideal aimed at. While this has had the effect of cutting the ground from
under the feet of the Leftist parties, certain elements in the population,
notably the landlords and industrialists representing middle class interests,
have expressed grave doubts about the Socialist programmes of the Congress.
According to them, the field for private enterprise is shrinking, and the
weightage in favour of the tenant is causing a disturbance to our agricultural
economy. The emergence of some type of State Socialism will, it is feared,
cripple our freedom by concentrating economic power, in the Administration and
obliging most workers, intellectual as well as manual, to look to the State for
the satisfaction of their primary needs. The State becomes a party to disputes
instead of playing its proper role as arbiter and peace-maker. It is too soon
to assess the strength of these elements which have hitherto stood by the
Congress. But so far as the forthcoming elections are concerned, the Congress
will be returned to power for the reason that at present it is the
only party which can guarantee peaceful progress. It is just possible that
sometime later, and before the succeeding general election, powerful groups
within the Congress will break away from the parent organisation and form the nucleus
of an Opposition capable of taking over power in the normal manner of the
Parliamentary system of democracy.
It
is being proclaimed that Pandit Nehru’s unrivalled leadership and the enormous
prestige he has built up for India will ensure a victory for the Congress.
While this is undeniable, it is not right to lose sight of the fact that a huge
majority of our people continue to cherish a high regard for the Congress as an
institution and evince faith in its policies and programmes. It is not a healthy
attitude of mind which constantly indulges the belief that the moment Pandit
Nehru’s leadership is not available the Congress will go to pieces. A great
Democracy like ours must throw up a succession of leaders capable of
maintaining the Gandhi-Nehru tradition.
Another
matter to which attention is now being directed is the personal worth and
integrity of the candidates. It is always proper to expect our representatives
in the Legislatures to be persons of character. And if any political party errs
grievously in its selection and sets up an individual who is quite unacceptable
to several of its own partymen, the voters can legitimately refuse to vote for
a disreputable person, in spite of a party directive. But such cases cannot be
many. Normally, a voter has to choose between candidates representing different
parties, and his choice depends on his view of the programmes of the parties.
Since, ultimately, the party returned in a majority has to shoulder the
responsibility of forming a Government and implementing the party’s programme,
the main consideration is the party complexion of the candidate. A refusal to
bear this aspect in mind must lead to, (1) the emergence of a number of
amorphous groups in the new Legislatures, and (2) their coalition for the purpose
of taking up office. That way lies instability of administration. The party
system has to be accepted and candidates have to be returned because they
undertake to support certain programmes.
The
Western powers, on the, initiative of the U. K., are seeking to place India in
a difficult position in regard to Kashmir. The resolution sponsored by them
before the Security Council ignores the basic facts of the situation. These
are: the original accession of Kashmir to India; the aggression of Pakistan;
the continued violation of what is legally the territory of the Indian Union by
the Pakistan forces in so-called ‘Azad Kashmir’. These and other relevant
considerations were urged in vain by the Indian delegate. The sponsors of the
resolution went about their task with closed minds and they are sure of an easy
victory. The insistent demand for a plebiscite under U. N. auspices is without
meaning when the initial condition laid down for a plebiscite several years
ago, namely, the withdrawal of the Pakistani army, from every part of Kashmir,
has not been fulfilled. Pakistan has since strengthened the forces on its side
of the border and improved its military equipment with American aid. Now
Pakistan demands demilitarisation and the sending of a U. N. force. India has
very properly rejected the resolution, because it puts India on a level with
the aggressor and concedes certain rights to that aggressor without insisting
on the fulfillment of obligations.
It
is clear that the Western powers wish to punish India for the part it played at
the time of the Suez crisis. There is now an orderly and progressive Government
in Kashmir which has the enthusiastic support of the people. A freely elected
Constituent Assembly has adopted a Constitution, and the integration of Kashmir
with India is complete. But Pakistan’s friends in the Security Council seem to
have the discredited two-nation theory at the back of their minds and imagine
that Kashmir naturally belongs to Pakistan because a majority of Kashmiris are
Muslims.
Ostensibly,
a great deal of anxiety is being displayed for a peaceful solution of the
Kashmir problem. But the steps contemplated in the resolution before the
Security Council are likely to promote strife and disorder in a region which
now enjoys comparative calm. It is well-known that at one stage India, in its
anxiety for peace, proposed a division of the State, with the present
cease-fire line as the boundary. Even this was not acceptable to Pakistan, for
it claims the entire territory of a State into which it effected an illegal
entry and from the main portion of which it was promptly expelled.
President
Jarring’s mission to India and Pakistan for the purpose of negotiating an
understanding Between the two countries can lead to some measure of success,
only when the legal right of the present Government of all Jammu and Kashmir to
the entire area of the State is recognised. There have been no elections in
‘Azad Kasamir’, no Constituent Assembly summoned for
the purpose of framing a Constitution, and no effort to meet the wishes of the people
in the administration of their affairs. There is thus a glaring contrast
between the conditions obtaining on either side of the border. The present
proposal to demilitarise Kashmir and invite a U. N. force ignores the
significance of the history of Kashmir during the last decade.
There
is a suggestion that India might refer to the International Court of Justice
some of the legal points involved in the accession of Kashmir and its
integration with India. The legal and the political aspects of the Kashmir
problem are often mixed up, and it will be to the advantage of all the parties
to the dispute to get an authoritative opinion from the highest tribunal. On
future occasions, the U. N. can concentrate attention on the political issues
alone. India’s case may then get a fairer hearing.
It
is now a hundred years since the Universities of Madras, Bombay and Calcutta
came into being. The number of Universities has grown considerably and the
influence they are exerting on the cultural life of the country is of the
highest importance. But one’s memory always goes back to the oldest of our
Universities, from which the others branched off from time to time. With the
consolidation of British rule in India, the need arose for the establishment of
educational institutions for the training of the administrative personnel and
for the promotion of scientific and literary studies on the model of certain
Universities of the West. The centenary of the foundation of those institutions
was celebrated with great pomp and ceremony.
For
over half a century, our old Universities functioned as replicas of the London
University. They conducted examinations and awarded degrees, while the actual
teaching was through affiliated institutions scattered over a wide area. A
little before the first world war, Honours courses were instituted but the
teaching was not taken over directly by the Universities until post-graduate
and research sections were formed. Every Indian University is now equipped with
an efficient staff of Professors and Lecturers, and with libraries and
laboratories of high quality. The affiliating type of University continues but
the emphasis is on the formation of more Universities of the unitary,
residential type.
Training
for leadership is the main function of a modern University, as Pandit Nehru
pointed out in his speech at Madras when the University conferred on him an
honorary Doctorate. Learning and scholarship are important, but with these must
be combined vision. In an era of over-specialisation, the learned man
is apt to become a mere segment of a man, with his interests narrowed down to
his particular field of study. In addition, Science and Technology receive much
greater attention than the Humanities. In several Universities, these latter
continue to exist on sufferance, as some kind of poor relations. In the
maintenance of a proper balance and harmony between the many spheres of human
endeavour, the Universities can play an important role.
The
University of Madras claims, with reason, that amongst its alumni are
some of the foremost scientists, philosophers and statesmen of modern India.
Its standards have been high, and even rigorous. For thoroughness and accuracy
of scholarship, particularly in the acquisition of languages, Madras has a fine
record. But the annual turn-over of thousands of graduates for whom no suitable
careers can be provided is a phenomenon which is common to all our
Universities. So in Madras, as elsewhere, an effort is being made to limit the
numbers and to ensure a high Quality.
In
the coming years, our Universities ought to bestow increasing attention on the
things of the mind and the spirit, so that ultimate values may prevail and the
souls of men freed from the fears engendered by the many conflicts between
individuals and nations. The wise man, the enlightened man who illumines the
darkness around him, is indeed a hero. It is such wise men that our seats of
learning should send forth.
The
twenty-seventh of January this year was a red-letter day in the cultural
history of South India, for it witnessed the celebration of the Golden Jubilee
of the Madras Sanskrit College founded by the late V. Krishnaswami Aiyar,
scholar, dreamer and philanthropist. At a time when the traditional learning of
India was held in derision by men in high places–and Lord Cuzon was the most
notable of them–Sri Krishnaswami Aiyar had a prophetic faith in the renaissance
of Indian Culture, through are-affirmation of the ancient ideals enshrined in
the Sanskrit epics. He gave a concrete expression to that faith through the
College which he reared with loving care and left as a precious legacy to the
members of his family and to those devoted friends and colleagues who shared
his vision. For fifty years, this institution has laboured in the cause of
learning, and, under a succession of distinguished Principals; beginning with
the late Prof. Kuppuswami sastri, built up a great reputation for advanced
scholarship and research.
That
the College may eventually be the nucleus of a Sanskrit University for South
India was the hope expressed by those who participated in the function. Dr.
Radhakrishnan, who presided, Dr. C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar, Sri Patanjali Sastri,
Sri P. V. Rajamannar and Sri C. D. Deshmukh paid tributes to the memory of the
founder and emphasised the importance of Sanskrit and the tradition it
represents.
A
sumptuously produced Souvenir volume gave a detailed history of the
institution. Along with literary contributions of great value the Souvenir
reprinted extracts from Sri V. Krishnaswami Aiyar’s epoch-making address to the
graduates of the Madras University in 1911. Dr. Radhakrishnan recalled that he
took his M.A. degree that year and felt elated by that Convocation address.
Sri
K. Balasubrahmania Aiyar and Sri K. Chandrasekharan, sons of the founder, are
actively associated with the management of the College. It was
significant that, towards the close of the function, a portrait of Sri
Balasubrahmania Aiyar was unveiled by Dr. Radhakrishnan,
and that Sri Balasubrahmania Aiyar announced a donation of twenty-thousand
rupees to the College by his sister Savitri Ammal. Over the entire
celebrations, the spirit of the founder seemed to hover and shed blessings.