Savarkar consistently swam against the popular currents. He had no fear of opposition, criticism, or sacrifice.Even as a teenager, he started the Abhinav Bharat Society to overthrow British rule at a time when British Raj was considered a boon. He established the Patit Pavan Mandir, a temple open to all, when orthodox Hindus opposed temple entry of the so-called lower castes. In the times of appeasement under the name of Hindu– Muslim unity, he stood for equal rights for all. Though dubbed as communalist, he did not stop fighting for Akhand Bharat. In the era of Panchsheel and non-violence as foreign and security policy of India, he advocated militarization of the youth and upgradation of the armed forces. Then, why should we be concerned about the criticism by modern-daycritics? During the launching ceremony of the book written by Shri Uday Mahurkar and me, Param Pujya Sarsanghchalak ji Dr Mohan Bhagwat rightly pointed out:  There had been a deliberate attempts to defame Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the real target wasn’t a person but India’s nationalism. The Savarkar critics have the same mindset as the Taliban, who destroyed the colossal, beautiful, and revered for centuries statue of Bamiyan Buddha.Any evidence or argument will not be enough to persuade the opponents. Once Savarkar’s defenders demonstrate the truth, they will frame new spurious charges. The Savarkar ‘mercy’ petition debate is a classical trap in which Savarkar’s supporters offer clarifications while failing to recognise his contribution to revolutionary movements in India and abroad, his endeavours to remove untouchability, language purification movement, ideas on national security and foreign policy and attempts to unite India.  Nationalist party spokespersons fall victim to this as well. They flash the mirror to opponents by referencing Indira Gandhi’s letter, but Savarkar is much more than that. One should also go into the history of Savarkar’s opponents. Their affinity for anti-India forces and hatred for Indic culture.From the literary assessment of these opponents, we can derive the following general ideological conclusions: Hindus are selfish and cowardly, always ruined by external invaders. Hindu nationalists have nothing to do with the struggle for freedom. Hindu movements are responsible for India’s divide. Nationalists should redirect the discourse. With our book “Veer Savarkar: The Man who Could Have Prevented Partition”, we have made an effort to establish that if there is a discussion on Savarkar, it should not be about his petitions but rather about his endeavours to prevent the partition of India.   Flag bearers of the “Two Nation Theory”: not Jinnah but Savarkar and Sardar Patel! “…India cannot be assumed today to be a Unitarian and homogenous state, but on the contrary, there are two nations in the main—the Hindus and [the] Muslims in India…”By citing a fragment from Savarkar’s first speech as president of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937, eminent historians (!) blame Savarkar for the partition of India.  There would be no confusion if they had taken littlepain to read some sentences before and after in the same paragraph. This paragraph reads as follows:  “It is safer to diagnose and treat a deep-seated disease than to ignore it. Let us face unpleasant facts as they are. India cannot be assumed today to be a Unitarian and homogenous state, but on the contrary, there  two nations in the main—the Hindus and [the] Muslims in India. And as it has happened in many countries in similar situation in the world, the utmost we can do under the circumstances is to form an Indian State in which none is allowed to have special weightage of representation and none is paid an extra price to buy his loyalty to the State. Mercenaries are paid and bought off, not the sons of the motherland to fight in its defence” Clearly, Savarkar treated the two-nation theory as a disease that had to be cured and not ignored. After studying to his entire speech, one may derive the following conclusions. ·       Hindus will adopt the common Indian state beyond any discrimination and favour. ·       The policy of the Hindu Mahasabha is more national than the appeasement policy of the Congress. ·       At the time of independence, separatist Muslim politics can become a threat to the integrity of the country.‘Let us work for harmony; let us hope for the best but let us be on guard.’ ·       Merely some organizations are not responsible for the Hindu-Muslim conflict, the rift in them since the middle ages, its reasons should also be discussed, it is the foundation of two-nation theory, it should be diagnosed by paying attention to that disease and not covered over. ·       It is wrong to appease Muslims to involve them in the freedom struggle. “It is possible to buy mercenaries to protect the motherland but not their sons”. There were compelling reasons for Savarkar to confront the subject of Islamic separatist politics.It is not correct, as is often believed, that the Muslim League’s “Pakistan” resolution of 1940 was the first attempt to establish a distinct Muslim nation.Sir Muhammad Iqbal, In his 1930 speech at the Allahabad session of the All India Muslim League, he had predicted Sindh as part of the future Muslim State in the north-west of India. The demand had also figured in Jinnah’s charter of 14 demands earlier in 1929. The name ‘Pakistan’ for the proposed Muslim homeland, coined by Choudhary Rahmat Ali at the time of the second Round Table Conference in London in 1932, had already been in public domain for almost five years, though less known. Significantly, Sindh was finally separated from Bombay Province in 1936, nearly a year before Savarkar became the Hindu Mahasabha president. This chronology had convinced Savarkar that Muslim politics in India would henceforth go in the direction of demanding a separate nation in the name of Islam and a feeble Congress would cave in before the Muslim League’s strategy. It is also interesting to see how the nationalist Muslims see the Pakistan problem. Maulana Azad was a supporter of the Pan-Islamic brotherhood and so opposed the concept of a … Continue reading 100th Anniversary of Savarkar’s Release From Prison: Know the motives and methods of vilification against him