Search e-Library

Khilafat agitation : Karandikar: The uprising of 1857 taught not a few lessons to the foreign rulers.... All martial races except the Sikhs & Gurkhās were excluded from the Army…; & Hindu-Muslim unity was set down as the most serious menace…. Heehs: “…the communal problem goes back… to a time when there was no political life as such in India…. The Gov.-Gen. Ellenborough wrote of the Muslims in 1843: “I cannot close my eyes to the belief that that race is hostile to us, & our true policy is to reconcile the Hindus. – But around 1875 there was a reversal of British policy…. One of the first steps the British took to rally the Muslims was to patronize Sayyid Ahmed Khan’s Anglo-Oriental College, Aligarh…. Mr Beck, its English principal, aroused Muslim fears by writing in 1893 that “the objective of the Congress is to transfer the political control of the country from the British to the Hindus. – Communal tensions fostered by this & other causes erupted in bloody rioting in eastern U.P. & Bihar in 1893 & 1894. – In 1889, Beck organized Muslim opposition to a Parliamentary bill that would have introduced representive institutions in India. – His successor, Mr Archbold, was behind the Muslim deputation of 1906 that resulted in the inclusion of separate electorates in the Councils Act of 1909. – The deputation, led by the Aga Khan, requested, among other things, that Muslims should be represented on Councils as a separate community. – After hearing them out, Lord Minto said, in a prepared statement: “You justly claim that your position should be estimated not merely on your numerical strength but in respect of the political importance of your community & the service it has rendered to the Empire.” … In December 1906, two months after the Muslim deputation the first meeting of the All-India Muslim League was held. Its stated aims were “to protect the cause & advance the interests of our co-religionists throughout the country & to controvert the growing influence of the so-called Indian National Congress”. This declaration marked the beginning of sectarian politics in India. [India’s Freedom Struggle…, p.154 + 74; Lives of Aurobindo, CUP, 1908, p.115] S. Bhattacharya: The League never made any demand for the political rights of Indians.... A divided & weak India is its gift to Indians. Nanda: Nearly three months before the Viceroy received the Muslim deputation, indeed even before Mohsin-ul-Mulk sought the assistance of Principal Archbold in arranging an interview with the Viceroy, Gokhale, in a speech in London, had hailed the awakening of the Muslims at Aligarh…. Gokhale’s tour of northern India at the beginning of 1907 was part of the Moderate offensive to rally the educated classes to the Congress. This tour was remarkable for the response he was able to evoke from the Muslim community, particularly among its youth. Muslims turned up in large numbers to attend his meetings at Lucknow, Aligarh, Meerut, Lahore & other places. At Lucknow he was entertained to breakfast by 20 Muslim leaders including Nawab Mohsin…, the prime mover of the Shimla deputation. The Raja of Mahmudabad, the most important landowner in the province, gave a dinner in Gokhale’s honour, & Syed Nabiullah, a leading barrister & a member of the Shimla deputation, took the chair at the public meeting addressed by Gokhale at Lucknow. At Aligarh, a thunderous welcome awaited him; the students unhorsed his carriage & pulled it through the streets to the College Hall amidst shouts of “Gokhale Zindabad”. Gokhale seems to have been deeply moved by the warmth of the reception. Dr. Syed Mahmud, then a student at Aligarh, later recalled that Gokhale had turned to Mohamed Ali, the future Khilafat leader, who had taken him to Aligarh, & said: “I shall now die a happy man. When I see young Musalmans with so much enthusiasm for me & for India, little doubt remains in my heart that India will get freedom soon.” Heehs: Indian [=Lal-Bal-Pal’s] nationalism had no ambitions outside its borders & no plan to eradicate its minorities; it failed, however, to solve the problem of communalism. Aurobindo regarded religious conflict as a purely social matter [see Social Reform] refusing to see it as a vital political issue. He tried, half-heartedly (sic), to bring Muslims into the movement, but never gave the problem the attention that hindsight shows that it deserved. But could anything said or done in 1907 have changed the outcome forty years later? Probably not. Still partition & its blood-letting that accompanied it were the movement’s principal (sic) failings, & Aurobindo & his colleagues have to take their share of the blame. Dec.1908: INC, Madras: Under the Creed adopted as its new constitution after the split at Surat (1907) 20% of the AICC members had to be Muslims. [Vide MVRR & SP] Dec.1910: INC, Allahabad, urged government to obliterate distinction between Hindus & Mahommedans & deal with all communities alike... President Nawab Sādiq Ali Khan appealed to fellow-Muslims to be united & patriotic... Dec.1913: INC, Karachi: President Nawab Syed Mahmud Bahadur pleaded that Hindus & Muslims “should clasp hands & work for the motherland”. All-India Muslim League proposed periodical Congress-League meetings “to find a modus operandi for joint & concerted action on questions of public good”. 1914-19: After 1st Afghan War (1833-42) Britain established its ‘influence’ over Kabul. The 2nd War led to establishment of Indo-Afghan boundary, but ‘border- incidents’ continued; the 1907 Anglo-Russian treaty ratified that ‘influence’. A pan-Islamic jihad is planned against British India with help from Germany & Middle East; provisional govt. set up in Kabul remains sympathetic to Turkey which, in 1914, joined the First World War on the side of the Axis powers (Germany &c) & against the Allies (Britain &c). The Allies won in 1918. Brothers Md. Ali & Shaukat Ali started a Mohammedan movement in 1918 to pressurise the British not to destroy the Caliphate. Gandhi joined them unequivocally. 1919: March: Vow for Gandhian Khilafatist-Satyagrahis: “With God as witness, we Hindus & Mahomedans declare...we shall behave...as children of the same parents.... We shall not stand in the way of our respective religious practices...always refrain from violence to each other in the name of religion.” Sri Aurobindo: We will use only soul-force & never destroy by war or any even defensive employment of physical violence? Good…you have set up an ideal which may some day, & at any rate, ought to lead up to better things. But even soul force, when it is effective, destroys. Only those who have used it with eyes open, know how much more terrible & destructive it is than the sword & the cannon; & only those who do not limit their view to the act & its immediate results, can see how tremendous are its after-effects, how much is eventually destroyed.... Evil cannot perish without the destruction of much that lives by evil, & it is no less destruction even if we personally are saved the pain of a sensational act of violence. 1919: Dec: The Amritsar Congress (q.v.). 1920: Jan 18: Gandhi places a detailed programme of Non-co-operation in a meeting of Hindu & Muslim leaders in Delhi. Jan-Mar: (i.e. before the fate of Turkey was definitely known & the reports of the Enquiry Committees on the Panjab disturbances were published) Gandhi elaborates the scheme of Non-co-operation movement in the Young India & issues a manifesto on March 10. April 20: Pan-Islamic lobbyists incite 3rd Anglo-Afghan war; British forces overwhelm Kabul. June 2: Conference of Hindus & Khilafatists. Some Hindus, reported Gandhi, spoke “of complications arising from Mahomedans welcoming an Afghan invasion of India. Mahomedan speakers gave the fullest & frankest assurances that they would fight to a man any invader who wanted to conquer India, but they were equally frank in asserting that any invasion from without undertaken with a view to uphold the prestige of Islam & to vindicate justice would have their full sympathy, if not their actual support.” – The Khilafat Committee decides to start Non-co-operation under the guidance of Gandhi. The Modern Review asked Gandhi “whether the upholding of the prestige of Islam required an invasion of India… & how justice can be vindicated by inflicting on the unoffending people of India the indignity & misery of an invasion, for an offence committed by the Allies. India, since Mahmud of Ghazni’s expeditions in 7th century, has not yet known the Afghans in the role of liberators... In any case, non-Islamic peoples may be excused if they prefer not to be molested for the sake of the prestige of Islam.” June 9: Gandhi: To prevent India from becoming the battle ground between the forces of Islam & the English, Hindus must make Non-co. a complete & immediate success. July: Gandhi: “I had the privilege of meeting the Lōkamānya scores of times…. When…I heard that he was lying grievously ill. I went in to pay my respects…. About Non-co-operation, he said, ‘I like the programme well enough, but I have my doubts as to the country being with us in the self-denying ordinance which Non-co-operation presents to the people. I will do nothing to hinder [its] progress...& if you gain the popular ear, you will find in me an enthusiastic supporter.’” Aug 1st: R.C. Majumdar: Gandhi formally inaugurates Non-cooperation movement by returning the three medals which the Government had awarded him for meritorious services, & addressing a letter to the Viceroy in which he declared that the attitude of the Government with regard to Khilafat & the Panjab, as demonstrated by ‘events that happened during past month,’, made it impossible for him to continue co-operation with a government that had acted so unscrupulously & for whom he could retain neither respect nor affection. It is interesting to note that in this letter to the Viceroy Gandhi seems to convey the impression that he had to resort to Non-co-operation because “events have happened during past month” i.e. in July 1920. Yet it will be quite clear from the chronology of events given above, that Gandhi had been not only thinking about Non-co-operation before the Amritsar Congress, in December, 1919, but also drew up a detailed programme, either almost immediately after it, on January 18, 1920, or in any case during the next three months. August 1st: Tilak’s death; Gandhi’s inaugurates his non-cooperation movement in support of Khilafat, starts a mass hijrat to Afghanistan from Sindh & spreads to N.W.F.P.; about 18,000 muhajirs trek to Afghanistan. Refused asylum, they return disillusioned & penniless. September 4, 1920: Majumdar: A Special Session of the Indian National Congress meets at Calcutta presided over by Lālā Lajpat Rai to discuss the policy of Non-co-operation. Moving his resolution Gandhi said: “The Mussulmans of India cannot remain as honourable men, & followers of the faith of their Prophet, if they do not vindicate its honour at any cost. The Punjab has been cruelly & barbarously treated & it is in order to remove these two wrongs that I have ventured to place before this country a scheme of Non-co-operation.” He did not, however, make it clear, why, in respect of the wrongs done to the Khilafat, the Musalmans of India should regard themselves on a special footing, as compared with their coreligionists in other countries. If the Muslims of Arabia & Persia, the homeland of Islam, did not feel perturbed, & even welcomed the terms offered to Turkey, why should the Musalmans of India, who derived their faith from those two countries, cease to be honourable men or followers of the faith of their Prophet (who belonged to Arabia), if they did not vindicate the honour of the Khilafat? But what is still more important, the Turks & their Caliph, themselves, did not want any domination over Arabia, demanded by the Indian Muslims; for the Turkish deputation in January-February, 1919, after the Armistice, only pressed for political & economic independence in the area of predominantly Turkish population.… Gandhi assembled the old Home Rulers, from whom Mrs Besant had virtually separated, under a common banner & changed the creed of the All-India Home Rule League into a form then adopted by his Congress at Nagpur, & clubbed their Leagues under his Swaraj Sabhā. Naturally, this Sabhā never had occasion to function, as Calcutta accepted the cult of N.C.O., & Nagpur confirmed it…henceforth the All-India Home Rule League or Swarājya Sabhā lost its separate identity & unconsciously merged itself into the Indian National Congress…. [The] fact that Gandhi carried his pro-British resolution in 1919 in spite of the opposition of prominent Indian leaders like Tilak, C.R. Das & Jinnah, & again, without more ado, carried the opposite resolution eight months later in 1920, again in the teeth of opposition by C.R. Das & other leaders, proves beyond doubt that he had already attained the position of spiritual guru in politics, whose word was law. This was further demonstrated by the Nagpur Congress of 1920 where leaders like C.R. Das ‘who came to scoff, remained to pray’. The Calcutta resolution was the first, but not the last, of Gandhi's political somersaults…. [The] third Para of the Non-co-operation resolution moved by Gandhi & accepted by the Congress…conveys the definite idea that Swaraj was demanded only to redress Panjab & Khilafat wrongs…. The inclusion of Khilafat wrongs as a ground for demanding Swaraj would perhaps appear to many as nothing short of grotesque. Even the Panjab wrongs, grievous though they were, should not have been put forward as the basis of demand for Swaraj. By adopting this Para, political India went back upon what had hitherto been regarded as the fundamental issue, so tersely put by Tilak: Swaraj is my birth-right & I shall have it…. When, after about a year, the Non-co-operation movement failed to redress the grievances of the Muslims, Gandhi wrote: “In their impatient anger, the Musalmans ask for more energetic & more prompt action by the Congress & Khilafat organisations. To the Musalmans, Swaraj means, as it must mean, India's ability to deal effectively with the Khilafat question. The Musalmans, therefore, decline to wait if the attainment of Swaraj means indefinite delay.... It is impossible not to sympathise with this attitude. – I would gladly ask for postponement of Swaraj activity if thereby we could advance the interest of the Khilafat….” Nov., 1920: Viceroy Reading warned that the Khilafat agitation was “visionary & chimerical” & “could only result in widespread disorder”. Dec, Nagpur Congress: The majority including C.R. Das & Motilal Nehru surrendered INC in Gandhi’s charge, disdaining president Vijayarāghavāchārya’s plea to give Montagu a chance. Jinnah was the lone strong voice against Gandhi’s pseudo-religious approach; is amazed Hindu leaders don’t realise that Khilafat would encourage the Pan-Islamic sentiment that the Caliph was trying to rouse to buttress his tottering Caliphate & dilute the nationalism of the Indian Muslim. When Gandhi asked for his co-operation, Jinnah replied as follows: “I thank you for your kind suggestion offering me to take my share in the new life that has opened up before the country. If by ‘new life’ you mean your methods & your programme, I am afraid I cannot accept them, for I am fully convinced that it must lead to disaster Your methods have already caused split & division in the public life of the country, not only amongst Hindus & Muslims, but between Hindus & Hindus & Muslims & Muslims, & even between fathers & sons; people generally are desperate all over the country & your extreme programme has for the moment struck the imagination mostly of the inexperienced youth & the ignorant & illiterate.” ― Nov-Dec: Saralādevi interviews Sri Aurobindo: Ques: Is it true that you are against the non-cooperation movement? Ans: I am not against it; the train has arrived, it must be allowed to run its course. The only thing I feel is that there is a great need of solidifying the national will for freedom into stern action. Ques: Non-cooperation has declared war against imperialism. Ans: Yes, it has, but I am afraid it is done without proper ammunition, mobilisation & organisation of the available forces. Ques: Why don’t you come out & try to run your own train? Ans: I must first prepare the rails & lay them down, then only can I get the train to arrive. Ques: But you must do something, should you not? Ans: As for myself, I have a personal programme. But if I was in politics, even then I would have taken a different stand. I would first be sure of my ground before I fought the government….. Until now only waves of emotion & a certain all-round awakening have come. But the force which could stand the strain when the government would put forth its force in full vigour is still not there. What is needed is more organisation of the national will. It is no use emotional waves rising & spreading, then going down. Our leaders need not go on lecturing. What we should do is to organise local committees of action throughout the country to carry out the mandate of the central organisation. These local leaders must stay among the people. Ques: But I find many people ridicule non-cooperation. What is you frank personal opinion? Ans: We have qualified sympathy with the movement; sympathy is there because we have the same objective; it is qualified because we feel the basis is not sound. The Punjab martial law & atrocities, the Khilafat are there, & non-cooperation is based on those wrongs. Some students from Madras came here the other day & told me they wanted to non-cooperate because the government was unjust. Asked whether they would put up with a just British government they could not reply. India must want freedom because of herself, because of her own Spirit. I would very much like India to find her own Swaraj & then to work out her salvation even with violence – preferably without violence. Our basis must be broader than that of mere opposition to the British government. All the time our eyes are turned to the British & their actions. We must look to ourselves irrespective of them & having found our own nationhood make it free. [Purani, Evening Talks…, 2007, 24-25] 1921: The 1907 Russo-Afghan treaty is superseded by an Anglo-Afghan treaty giving Afghanistan a fuller freedom. May: Gandhi: I would, in a sense, certainly assist the Amir of Afghanistan if he waged a war against the British Govt. That is to say, I would openly tell my countrymen that it would be a crime to help a govt. which had lost the confidence of the nation to remain in power. Rajagopalachari: The Khilafat has solved the problem of distrust of Asiatic neighbours out of our future. The Indian struggle for the freedom of Islam has brought about a more lasting entente & a more binding treaty between the people of India & the people of the Mussalman States around it than all the ententes & treaties among the Governments of Europe. No wars of aggression are possible where the common people on the two sides have become grateful friends. The faith of the Mussalman is a better sanction than the seal of the European diplomats & plenipotentiaries. Not only has this great friendship between India & the Mussalman States around it removed for all times the fear of Mussalman aggression from outside, but it has erected round India a solid wall of defence against all aggression from beyond, against all greed from Europe, Russia or elsewhere. The Indian support of the Khilafat has as if by a magic wand converted what was once the pan-Islamic terror for Europe into a solid wall of friendship & defence for India. Aug: The Moplahs in Malabar (q.v.) rise against the Govt. to establish an Islamic kingdom. Nov: The British Army finally subdues them. 1922: Tried & convicted on a charge of sedition, Gandhi was sentenced to 6 years’ imprisonment. In a final bid to retrieve the situation Malaviya met Viceroy Reading who agreed to release all if the agitation was withdrawn, for he felt that provincial autonomy could be introduced even within the ambit of the 1919 Act. ~Dec. INC, Gaya:~ Das & Azad were for calling off the Non-Coop & but Motilal was against it. Gandhi himself called it off called off, not for the horrendous countrywide jihadi mayhem but a comparatively petty mêlée at Chauri Chaura which was against his personal ideals – Jain ascetic’s Ahimsa & Christian self-flagellation! The Ali brothers began distancing themselves from Gandhi & the Congress. The Ali brothers criticised Gandhi's commitment to non-violence & severed their ties with them. Although holding talks with the British & continuing their activities, the Khilafat struggle weakened as Muslims were divided between working for the Congress, the Khilafat cause & the Muslim League. 1920-24: Govt. Report: Unabated ‘incidents’ in NWFP with Afghan tribes: outrages, kidnappings, murders, skirmishes, retributory expeditions, aerial bombardments etc. Tribals & guerrillas who had managed to smuggle in improved rifles, seem to be seeking warplanes from Russia. Mrs Besant: Since the Khilafat agitation, we have seen revived the old Muslim religion of the sword... heard Muslim leaders declare that if Afghans invaded India, they would join them & slay the Hindus who defended India... seen that their primary allegiance is to Islamic countries, not to our motherland; their dearest hope is to establish... the religion given to them by their prophet, obey his laws above the laws of the State. [They] would ally themselves with Afghanistan, Baluchistan, Persia, Iraq, Arabia, Turkey & Egypt with the tribes of Central Asia & try to place India under the rule of Islam. Malabar has taught us what Islamic rule means; & how much sympathy with the Moplahs is felt by the Muslims in the rest of India has been proved by the defence they raised for them; even Mr Gandhi called them brave God-fearing Moplahs. Lajpat Rai to C.R. Das: I have devoted most of my time during the last six months to study the Muslim history & Muslim Law & I am inclined to think Hindu-Muslim unity is neither possible nor practicable.... [Although] we can unite against the British we cannot do so to rule Hindustan on British lines, we cannot do so to rule Hindustan on democratic lines. What then is the remedy? I am not afraid of the seven-crore Muslims in Hindustan but I think [with] the armed hosts of Afghanistan, Central Asia, Arabia, Mesopotamia & Turkey they will be irresistible. I do honestly & sincerely believe in the necessity or desirability of Hindu-Muslim unity... but what about the injunctions of the Quran & the Hadis? The Muslim leaders cannot override them. Are we then doomed? I hope not. I hope you will find some way out of this difficulty. Dec.1922: The resolution passed at Ahmedabad INC Session: The Congress expresses its firm conviction that the Moplah disturbance was not due to the Non-Cooperation or the Khilāfat Movements, especially as preachers of these movements were denied access to the affected parts by the District authorities for six months before the disturbance, but is due to causes wholly unconnected with the two movements, & that the outbreak would not have occurred had the message of non-violence been allowed to reach them…. Nevertheless the Congress deplores the acts done by certain Moplahs by way of forcible conversions & destruction of life & property, & is of the opinion that prolongation of the disturbance in Malabar could have been prevented by the Govt. of Madras accepting the proffered assistance of Maulānā Yakub Hassan & allowing Gandhi to proceed to Malabar…. 1923: Dec. Bengal Pact; INC, Cocānada (q.v.) March 1924: Conversation with Sri Aurobindo on 7th: (The Khilafat had ended two days back) Disciple: The Khilafat is steam-rollered. Sri Aurobindo: It is quite right that it should be gone; the new republic seems thorough & solid in its working. – I doubt if the Turks were right in taking the step because now the opinion of other Muslim countries would go against them. – It was not by opinion that Kemal defeated the Greeks! – The allegiance of other Muslims to the Khilafat had all along been theoretical & the tie of sympathy very weak & had no hold on life. As a matter of fact, it was the Indian Muslims who fought against the Turks in Mesopotamia during the First World War. – The Emir of Afghanistan is the only external power to whom the Indian Muslims can look up to. – There are tendencies among the Muslims showing that fanaticism may disintegrate$. – That is not sufficient because it would not change their whole outlook. What is wanted is some new reli¬gious movement among the Mahomedans which would remodel their religion & change the stamp of their temperament. For in¬stance Baha’ism in Persia which has given quite a different stamp to their temperament. [Purani, Evening Talks, 2007: 267] 1924: 21-day fast by Gandhi under Md. Ali’s roof against communal riots; Atatürk (see Young Turks) declares Turkey a secular State; Non-cooperation movement collapses; Muslims drift away; internal dissensions rack the INC. 1925: Md. Ali: However pure Mr Gandhi’s character may be, he must appear to me from the point of view of religion inferior to any Mussalman, even though he is without character. – Yes, according to my religion & creed, I hold even an adulterous & a fallen Mussalman to be better than Mr Gandhi. Nehru: Md. Ali’s drifting away was an unfortunate result, which hurt many of us.... It was a misfortune for India that he left the country for Europe. 1922-27: Riots by Jihadis became rampant: of the 112 riots in this period, 31 took place in 1927; about 35,000 Hindu women were abducted in Bengal alone. 1930: Md. Ali at the All-India Muslim Conference held on April, attended by over 20,000 Muslims: We refuse to join Mr Gandhi, because his movement is not a movement for the complete independence of India but for making 70 million Indian Musalmans dependants of the Hindu Mahāsabhā. At the first Round Table Conference held in London, he told the members: We are not nationalists but super-nationalists. Durga Das: In 1942, when Cripps came to India with his plan, he was fully aware that it was the Britons & Anglo-Indians who represented the British Press who were to blame for poisoning Indo-British relations over the years by giving their reports an anti-Congress & anti-Hindu & pro-Muslim & pro-League slant. In July 1942, after a luncheon with Churchill, with whose stand he fully agreed with, King George noted in his diary: Cripps, the Press & the US public opinion have all contributed to make their minds up that our rule in India is wrong, & has always been wrong for India. I disagree & have always said India has got to be governed, & this will have to be our policy. June 1945: At the Shimla Conference called by Viceroy Wavell all Indian parties agreed on the proposal that the Central Cabinet would comprise 14 Indian Councillors, five each to be selected by the Congress & the League, a Sikh, two Harijans & the leader of the Unionist Party of Punjab. But behind Wavell’s back, Churchill & Co. had decided to offer ‘Pakistan on a platter’ to Jinnah to maintain a foothold in the sub-continent. 11th July 1945: Minutes before he met Wavell, Jinnah had received a message from British Civil Servants in Shimla conveying London’s hint: ‘Reject Wavell’s plan & get Pakistan’. Dec.: Wavell admits he knew the British ICS won’t allow an undivided India. Rajaram: Even so great a leader as Mahatma Gandhi failed when he tried to make the Khilafat a central issue in the 1921 Non-cooperation Movement. It led to the disastrous Moplah Rebellion & went on to sow the seeds of the Partition. [Based on: S.L. Karandikar, Lōkamānya B.G. Tilak..., 1957; P. Heehs, India’s Freedom Struggle 1857-1947 – A Short History, OUP, 1988; M.V. Ramana Rao, A Short History of the Indian National Congress, S. Chand & Co., 1959, Rs. 10/-. Foreword by Indira Gandhi; Preface by U.N. Dhebar.; Sitāramayyā: History of the I.N.C., 1935; CWSA vol.6: New Lamps for Old; B.R. Nanda: Gokhale: The Indian Moderates & the British Raj, OUP, Delhi, 1979; Rebellion 1857 - A Symposium, 1957, p.54-7; S.N. Sen: 1857, Govt. of India, 1957; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khilafat Movement; R.C. Majumdar: India’s Struggle for Independence; History of the Freedom Movement in India; B.R. Ambedkar, Pakistan or the Partition of India, Thacker & Co. Ltd, Bombay, 1940, 1945: 135-54; s/a Annie Besant, The Future of Indian Politics: A contribution to the Understanding of Present-Day Problems, Kissinger Publishing, LLC; Internet; Durga Das: India - From Curzon to Nehru & After, 1969; Govt. of India Year-Book 1923-24; The Modern Review, 1924; M.K. Gandhi’s Reminiscence in S.V. Bāpat’s The Reminiscences & Anecdotes of Lōk. Tilak, 1924; J. Nehru: An Autobiography; Bhattacharya: A Dictionary of Indian History, Calcutta Univ., 1972; Govt. of India: Makers of Modern India; Purani: Evening Talks with Sri Aurobindo, 2007; N.S. Rajaram: The Shadow War: Euro vs. Dollar, Open Page, The Hindu, 22 April 2003; P. Heehs, CUP, 2008: Lives of Aurobindo]