Freedom's Battle

and reader on the Hindu-Mos

AND THE M

id not rush about from place to place by means of railways such other maddening conveniences, much of the confusion that arises would be obviated. Our difficulties are of our own creation. God set a limit to a man's locomotive ambition in the construction of his body. Man immediately proceeded to discover means of overriding the limit. God gifted man with intellect that he might know his Maker. Man abused it, so that he might forget his Maker. I am so

answer to my question. Has the introduct

ever been such a country. In reality, there are as many religions as there are individuals, but those who are conscious of the spirit of nationality do not interfere with one another's religion. If they do, they are not fit to be considered a nation. If the Hindus believe that India should be peopled only by Hindus, the

the inborn enmity betwe

there be any inborn enmity? Pray remember this, too, that we did not cease to fight only after British occupation. The Hindus flourished under Moslem sovereigns, and Moslems under the Hindu. Each party recogn

tors, and the same blood runs through their veins? Do people become enemies because they change their religion? Is the God of the Mahomedan different from the God of the Hindu? Re

erent from Jainism, but the followers of the respective faiths are not different nations. The fact is that we have become enslaved, and, therefore, quarrel and like to have our quarrels decided by a thi

ike to know your view

is the protector of India, because, it being an agricultural country, is dependent on the cow's

n enemy as well of the cow as of the Mahomedan. Therefore, the only method I know of protecting the cow is that I should approach my Mahomedan brother and urge him for the sake of the country to join me in protecting her. If he would not list

e will do it much, more so, and if he does not, I shall not be considered to have done wrong in having bowed. When the Hindus became insistent, the killing of cows increased. In my opinion, co

ould adopt the latter course I must do the same to my Moslem brother. Who protects the cow from destruction by Hindus when they cruelly ill-treat her? Whoev

he duty of the former? It is not written that a follower of the religion of Ahimsa (non-killing) may kill a fellow-man. For

religion because we want to obtain freedom from liability to kill any kind of life. Generally speaking, we may observe that many Hindus partake of meat and are not, therefo

retend to study the manners and customs of all peoples, God has given us a limited mental capacity, but they usurp the function of the Godhead and indulge in no

there are passages in the Koran I do not understand or like? It takes two to make a quarrel. If I do not want to quarrel with a Mahomedan, the latter will be powerless to foist a quarrel on me, and, similarly, I should be powerless if a Mahomedan refuses hi

nglish ever allow the t

ame our folly rather than the English, if we allowed them to put asunder. A clay pot would break through impact; if not with one stone, thou with another. The way to save the pot is not to keep it away from the danger point, but to bake it so that no stone would break it. We have then to make our he

esisted, the English would notice it, the Mahomedans would gradually begin to trust the Hindus, and brotherliness would be the outcome. We should be ashamed to take our quarrels t

but all men are not equi-minded. When people are in a rage, they do many foolish things. These we have to put up with. But, when we do quarrel, we certainly do not want to engage counsel and t

AHOMEDA

r in marriage to a Mahomedan. This question has been asked again by some friends in another form. Is it necessary for Hindu Mahomedan Unity that there should he interdining and intermarryin

vital as the other sanitary necessities of life. And if mankind had not, much to its harm, made of eating a fetish and indulgence we would have performed the operation of eating in private even as one performs the other necessary functions of life in private. Indeed the highest culture in Hinduism regards ea

a religious standpoint. I should despair of ever cultivating amicable relations with the world, if I had to recognise the right or the propriety of any young man offering his hand in marriage to my daughter or to regard it as necessary for me to dine with anybody and everybody. I claim that I am living on terms of friendliness with the whole world. I have never quarrelled with a single Mahomedan or Christian but for

andavas and the Kauravas flew at one another's throats without compunction although they inter

indus and Mahomedans cannot be one unless they interdine or intermarry, we would be creating an artificial barrier between us which it might be almost impossible to remove. And it would seriously interfere with the flowing unity between Hindus and Mahomedans if, for example, Mahom

homedan Unity lies in each remaining true to his own religion and yet being true to each other. For, we are thinking of Hindus and Mahomedans even of t

r's sorrow and by mutual toleration. A common goal we have. We wish this great country of ours to be greater and self-governing.[4] We have enough sorrows to share and to-day seeing that the Mahomedans are deeply touched on the question of Khilafat and their case is j

mpatient of Hindu idolatory, cow-worship. It is not necessary for toleration that I must approve of what I tolerate. I heartily dislike drinking, meat eating and smoking, but I tolerate all these in Hindus, Mahomedans a

MUSLIM

u-Muslim Unity as on non-violence. Greatest strain will be put upon both in th

ar better man at hand. Hakimji Ajmal khan is a devout Muslim who commands the confidence and the respect of both the parties. He with his band of workers hastened to Agra, settled the d

el of peace. Nor can Maulana Shankat Ali or I go everywhere. And yet perfect peac

s or the punishment of the guilty ones. In every village and hamlet there must be at least one Hindu and one Muslim, whose primary business must be to prevent quarrels between the two. Some times however, even blood-brothers come to blows. In the initial stages we are bound to do so here and there. Unfortunately we who are public workers have made little attempt to understand

that Swaraj for India must be an impossible dream without an indissoluble union between the Hindus and the Muslims of India. It must not

enjoining upon the followers of Islam to treat Hindus as their natural enemies or if th

priests in both religions have set the one against the other. It is equally true that Muslim rulers like Christian rulers have used the sword for the propagation of their respective faiths. But in spite of many dark things of the modern times, the world's opinion to-day will as little tolerate forcible conversions as it will tolerate forcible slavery.

is silently but surely making progress towards a better age. And India by finding true independence and self-expression through an imperis