Gandhiji looked at the morale paucity in Indian community. He understood clearly that it was fall of dharma among Indian masses that caused invasions. These barries should be countered only by establishing dharma. Hence Gandhi advocated fighting with ahimsa. He thought as a typical sadhu and not as a political leader. Though he understood problems in muslim community and their inability and unwillingness to get along with Hindus,he supported them.
Even during Khilafat movement,he was successful in motivating Muslims leaders to fight in a non violent way. In fact, no one could have induced that feeling among muslims,but for Gandhiji. Ultimately, violence erupted in Khilafat movement. But a change was brought in muslim leaders thought. This encouraged Gandhi to think that he will be able to make changes in muslims thought.
On the contrary, Veer Savarkar was clear that Muslim mind cannot be ment. It was clearly agai st his logics for India to be a part of Khilafat movement. Because it was a religious demand by muslim community. He saw it as a move which does not go well with our freedom struggle.
Also, the soft corner of Gandhi towards muslim was a matter of concern for Veer Savarkar. Definitely it was against the welfare of Hindu community. But Gandhiji, was confident of his ability to influence mankind. He thought that his selfless way of working will change others heart.
Even now, Gandhiji is blamed for the appeasing policy followed by congress. It is definitely correct that Gandhiji was responsible. But, whatever Gan dhiji did was based on his Aaathma balam or his dharmic confidence.
While Veer Savarkar fought for Hindu unity, he did not accept all hindu customs. He questioned various rituals and also did not mind giving up the religious injunction of being a vegetarian in his London days. While he accepted cow should be protected as she feeds us, he did not think that cows needed to be worshipped.
Thus though he fought for Hindu people and despite his clear understanding that only a Hindu can be a nationalist,he could not be a good Hindu. Or that is what i think.
Similarly, overdose of ahimsa by Gandhiji too did not yield much result after some point t of time. That was why he was sidelined by his own party in later years.
In conclusion, a kshatria unguided by a guru or a saint without the practicality of a Kshatria cannot bring success. Only when they function together as a unit,complementing each other, can success be reaped. Like Chanakya and Chandragupta.
Study of Indian freedom movement clearly gives the idea about Hindu religion. If God permits, wil write more.
