Gandhi vs Godse: Clash of Ideologies 

Nathuram Vinayak Godse

MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI

The assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948, by Nathuram Godse remains one of the most controversial and emotionally charged events in Indian history. It was more than just an act of violence; it was a dramatic manifestation of a deep ideological rift. On one side was Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the apostle of non-violence, secularism, and Hindu-Muslim unity. On the other was Nathuram Vinayak Godse, a Hindu nationalist who saw Gandhi’s policies as appeasement and a betrayal of Hindu interests. This blog seeks to explore their respective views on religion, particularly Hinduism and Islam, their ideological conflict, and evaluate whether Godse’s act of killing Gandhi had any moral or ideological justification.

Gandhi’s Views on Religion: Embracing Pluralism

Mahatma Gandhi was deeply religious, yet his religiosity was rooted in inclusivity and spiritual universalism. While born a Hindu, Gandhi was a proponent of equal respect for all religions.

In his autobiography, The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Gandhi wrote:

"My Hinduism teaches me to respect all religions. In fact, it teaches me to see the same God in every faith." (Part IV, Chapter XXIX)

Gandhi saw religion as a moral compass rather than a divisive identity. He advocated for communal harmony and was particularly sensitive to the rights and dignity of Muslims in a predominantly Hindu society. During the Khilafat Movement (1919–1924), he allied with Muslim leaders like the Ali brothers to strengthen Hindu-Muslim unity, even though the movement was religious in nature. His aim was not political gain but to forge solidarity among Indians against British colonialism.

In a prayer meeting on January 19, 1948, just eleven days before his assassination, Gandhi said:

"I am a proud Hindu. I claim to be a Sanatani Hindu. But I have equal regard for all other religions. That is the essence of Hinduism."

Gandhi’s secularism was not rooted in the Western idea of complete separation of religion and politics but rather in sarva dharma sambhava—the equal treatment of all religions.

Godse’s Views on Religion: Hindu Supremacy and Nationalism

In sharp contrast, Nathuram Godse adhered to a more exclusivist and militant vision of Hinduism. He was influenced by the ideologies of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), although both organizations later distanced themselves from him. Godse’s worldview saw India primarily as a Hindu Rashtra.

In his defense statement during his trial ("Why I Killed Gandhi," 1949), Godse stated:

"Gandhiji's inner voice, his spiritual power, his doctrine of non-violence and his fasts were always to influence the political course of the country and to secure benefits for the Muslims."

Godse believed that Gandhi’s repeated fasts and concessions to Muslims, especially during the Partition and post-independence violence, were detrimental to Hindus. He was particularly incensed by Gandhi’s insistence that the newly formed Indian government pay Rs. 55 crore to Pakistan, which he saw as a betrayal.

He further stated:

"I do say that my shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to lakhs of Hindus."

Godse viewed Islam with suspicion and perceived Muslims as historical aggressors. He criticized Gandhi for being what he called "pro-Muslim" and claimed that Gandhi’s policies led to the marginalization of Hindus.

Key Ideological Differences

Aspect	Mahatma Gandhi	Nathuram Godse
Religion	Inclusive Hinduism; respect for all faiths	Exclusive Hindu nationalism
Approach	Non-violence, satyagraha, unity	Militant nationalism, violence as a tool
Hindu-Muslim Relations	Advocated harmony and equal rights	Viewed Muslims with distrust, believed in Hindu dominance
Partition	Opposed it but accepted it to avoid bloodshed	Opposed Gandhi’s acceptance and concessions post-Partition

Evaluating the Justification of the Assassination

To assess whether Gandhi’s assassination was justifiable, one must first understand the nature of democracy and moral politics. Democracy provides space for dissent, protest, and ideological confrontation through dialogue and institutions—not murder.

Godse believed that Gandhi’s death was necessary to save the country from further "appeasement" of Muslims. However, by taking Gandhi’s life, Godse undermined the very democratic ethos he claimed to protect. Even if one disagrees with Gandhi’s policies, the assassination was not a legitimate or moral means of resolution.

As Ramachandra Guha notes in Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World (2018):

"Gandhi’s death was not merely the murder of a man but of a moral force. Godse’s bullet killed not just a person but an idea."

Gandhi’s idea of India was pluralistic, inclusive, and morally resilient. Godse’s idea was narrow, sectarian, and exclusionary. The former built a nation; the latter tried to fracture it.

Reactions to the Assassination

The shockwaves of Gandhi’s assassination were felt globally. Jawaharlal Nehru, in his radio address on January 30, 1948, stated:

"The light has gone out of our lives and there is darkness everywhere."

Even many who criticized Gandhi’s policies could not condone the method of his removal. Godse’s act was not just political but deeply anti-democratic.

Conclusion: Whose Ideology Endures?

In hindsight, the ideologies of Gandhi and Godse represent two divergent paths for India. Gandhi’s path, although fraught with idealism, envisioned a nation where unity in diversity could flourish. Godse’s vision, grounded in majoritarianism and intolerance, threatened to turn India into a theocratic state.

India, despite its flaws, continues to draw strength from Gandhi’s ideals of non-violence and pluralism. His face still adorns the currency, his teachings are quoted in courts and classrooms, and his birthday is a national holiday. Godse, on the other hand, remains a polarizing figure whose ideology continues to find pockets of support but fails to provide a sustainable vision for a diverse nation.

Thus, while one may debate Gandhi’s policies, his assassination was not just unjustifiable—it was a blow against the soul of India. History ultimately vindicates Gandhi not just as a political leader but as a moral beacon in a fractured world.

---

References:

• Gandhi, M.K., The Story of My Experiments with Truth

• Godse, Nathuram, Why I Killed Gandhi (Court Statement, 1949)

• Guha, Ramachandra, Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World, Penguin Random House, 2018

• Nehru, Jawaharlal, Radio Address on January 30, 1948

• Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi

• Rajmohan Gandhi, Mohandas: A True Story of a Man, His People and an Empire

#GandhiVsGodse
#IdeologicalClash
#MahatmaGandhi
#NathuramGodse
#HistoryDebate
#IndianPolitics
#NonViolenceVsViolence
#SecularismVsExtremism
#FreedomMovementIndia
#HindutvaDebate

• Gandhi vs Godse

• Clash of Ideologies

• Nathuram Godse Thoughts

• Mahatma Gandhi Philosophy

• Hindutva vs Non-violence

• Indian History Debate

• Gandhi Assassination

• Modern Indian Political History

• Ideological Conflict India

• Secularism vs Nationalism