IN CROSS-CURRENT, IN CONFERENCE AND IN CONFLICT

I am sorry to say but this is the sad truth that many of the followers of Netaji would do better to first study his life and works before exhibiting undue emotion on his behalf. It would do the cause better justice. And, will sustained ignorance about everything he stood for help his cause? The detractors of Netaji seem to know more about him than the so-called protagonists of his cause. It is pertinent to recall what a kin of Netaji frequently harps on and what an eminent researcher on the leader, an erudite in Russian archival study on the hero, also says, that people should first study the works of Netaji like 'The Indian Struggle' and allied writings as also the scholarly works on the hero before passing facile judgement on him, posing to be either the sole custodians of his cause or the saviours of the nation from the so-called evil influence of fascism that would have been apparently injected by the patriot premier into the motherland in the event of his victorious enduring entry into her terrain. So far as Narayanan Gandhi is concerned, I rather enjoy the spice he lends to the conversation taking as always the opposite view to that of the, so to say, devotees of Netaji, and I do not at all any more take him seriously after being a witness to his sustained campaign against 'the choice and master spirit of the Age' which Netaji remains, and I think no one with a modicum of intelligence ought to take him seriously too. So, why bother?
The most important point to be noted is this, and this is addressed to all of us : When we speak, do we speak sense? If so, it is good to share it with others; if not, it is an exercise in futility and a step in the wrong direction. After all, we have a responsibility towards our fellow beings in the sense as to how we engage their attention towards a higher end and we ought not to unnecessarily waste our own time and energy nor that of theirs in fruitless deliberation. Another point to be noted is whether we do what we do from the standpoint of egotistical affirmation, to seek the attention of others and to win for ourselves accolades and the approbation of society, or whether we are actually impelled in this conversation by a higher impulse of freedom from pettiness of all kinds as also a sense of patriotism, even if in nostalgia about the glorious past of our freedom movement. My sense of horror is when I consistently witness this tending to self-aggrandisement by so many in the various fora --- intended originally to propagate the cause of the freedom fighters --- instead of the glorification of the heroes who bled for the motherland's freedom and the following in their footsteps by them who are the rightful inheritors of their charge and who are alive today to make significant changes in their lives and so serve society for the better. However much we may draw the attention of others to our own selves through flamboyance in writing or carping criticism of the great master of the freedom struggle that Netaji was, the effort will fail to fructify for the sake of our petty selves coming in-between its execution and its eventual fruition. It is, thus, pertinent to remember that humility of approach, truthfulness of intent and magnanimity of spirit are better modes to serve the nation than futile exercise in verbosity to which even the present writer has been squarely held culpable to by Narayanan Gandhi, although, this writer admits to his being unwittingly the offender thereof, for his style stems from his spontaneous self-expression and not from any motivated manufacturing or manufactured motivation.