Roots: Remembering Sardar Vallabhai Patel (1875-1950)
Vallabhai Patel, was one of the towering figures of pre-Independence Indian politics. Given the appellation “Sardar” (leader), he also became known as the “Iron Man of Indian politics”.
He is correctly remembered as perhaps the only figure in the Indian National Congress, India’s main political party of the era, who didn’t flinch in the face of the aggression displayed by the colonial administration as well as Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s Muslim League. He is one of the architects of the India that we see today, being largely responsible for successfully negotiating the incorporation into Independent India of the hundreds of ‘princely states’ of British India.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Sardar Vallabhbhai - the one and only authentic leader of Bharat-will always be missed.He may have passed on in 1950 but his memory will live on for generations.Oh,if only he was declared PM and not Nehru…we would not be sitting with today’s burden-the so-called “Gandhi” dynasty and the pathetic foreigner (Sonya).
Jai Hind!!!
March 7th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
What a great man, this man would have changed the shape of India and in my opinion the current issues regarding Kashmir, harrassment of Hindus in bangladesh would not be happening. shame that a spoilt brat by the name of Nehru was given the all important title of Prime Minister.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I’m in agreement with the comments above, but what startled me the most was his father’s involvement in the Freedom Struggle. 1857 seems like such a long time ago, but in reality, there’s only a three generation gap.
What was not emphasized enough in the article was his resurrection of Somanath. When he went to rebuild it, there was a mosque on top, similar to the Ayodhya debacle - instead of destroying it, they simply moved it down the river and Somanath was restored to its ancient glory.
I think this is feasible plan for Ayodhya. It would appease both parties such that anyone who disagrees would certainly be revealed for having an agenda.
March 7th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Sir, Sardar Patel was a very clear headed person. he knew his onions well, so to speak. His firm handling of everything he did to unite India and his clear and decisive approach to other problems and timely advise and warnings to Nehru on possible pitfalls developing for India is sadly missed. I wish he was given a bigger responsibility to steer the country to a better future. He is deeply missed by all and sundry.in India. Devinder Thakur
March 7th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
The revered Sardar Ji may have gone, but his spirit lives on.
There are Indian men and women in the world who are as able our Sardar but alas, who will not step forward - it is time to invoke the spirit of the great warrior again and take up arms, politically speaking of course, and quell the insurgency from within decisively and finally if Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist India is to survive as our forefathers and our maharushi’s intended it to be.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
It should be remembered that Sardar ji voluntarily stepped down from the election for Congress Premier, thus giving the Prime Ministership to Nehru, despite the full knowledge that he would have won the election comprehensively. Remember, all that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Gandhi made mistakes, as did Nehru - for those, they are oft condemned. Was this not Sardar ji’s own huge mistake, for which arguably India still pays the price today? He may have had many qualities, but if blame is to be meted out, he too must accept his share of the responsibility for what went wrong.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
After congress took over india they dialuated all other leaders and made gandhi and Nehru only one as main leaders to remember.Its time India should rewrite the history and constitution before its becomes again an islamic state.
March 8th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Gandhiji took a wrong and devastating decision when he did not select Sardar Patel as first Prime minister of India. History of India would have been different. Muslims would have been put in correct context to promote Indian ness. Kashmir problem would not have gone to U.N., as it would have been dealt as internal matter, in the same manner as Hyderabad and Junagadh.
Gandhi ji stumbled..
Ramesh Jhalla
00000000000
March 8th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Agree completely Satya with your strong analysis.
Pursuing what you say, a question then for all Indians to search their souls: By not doing anything to right the mistakes this great yodha made in that era albeit out of loyalty, respect and namrata towards Gajdhiji and Nehruji, are we all here not making, and therefore permitting the continuance of the same mistakes he made ourselves?
The spirit of this great warrior is alive and well today in our hearts and minds.
If strong Hindu and Sikh Indian nationalist men and women were to gather, talk, organise and right his mistakes with strong political will and firm but fair diplomatic non-violent resolve, that this would be the biggest offering of prayer from Indians for his soul to rest in pace because, for sure, his spirit must shed tears of blood looking down from the heavens at what used to be the Congress party of his beloved India; That same party today which sells the very soul of Hindu India down the polluted rivers of an ill-conceived interpretation of secularism whereby the Hindu, the Sikh and the Buddhist is slowly but surely being submerged and drowned into the pollution of their policy towards us.
March 8th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Due to blunders of gandhi & nehru we lost a great leader Sardar Patel. Now
that we have another Sardar (Narendra Modi), lets not make same mistake & lose him too.
March 9th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Namaste All
This is a wonderful piece, a brave attempt to bring the life of Sardar to the attention of our younger generation.
Yes Gandhi and Nehru are responsible for many mistakes that still haunts Bharat. Gandhiji not only prevented Sardar from becoming the first PM of India but he even prevented Bose from becoming the President of All India Congress in 1936 when he was the choice of 90% of the deligates.
Subash was so disgusted that he disassociated himself from the
INC (Indian National Congress) and went to Germany, as the war was about to break out.
When Japan joined the second World war and captured Singapore, Bose moved there and raised an army from Indians
living in Malaya.
Unfortunately it was a poorly trained, badly armed outfit, no match to well trained British Indian Army. Japan was not interested in liberating Bharat. It only used Bose to gain foothold among the Indian community.
The Congress Party was so vindictive to Sardar that he was not
awarded Bharat Ratna under Nehru, Indira and Rajive. In fact all Nehru clan, even the minor figure got this honour well before Sardar who should have been the first to receive this honour.
It was Narsima Raw who awarded this honour posthumously when he became the PM of India. While Nehru’s residence was converted into a museum, with no expense spared, Sardar’s home was sold and allowed to rot.
Even BJP government did nothing to convert Sardar’s legasy and
give him the respect and honour he deserves.
Modi’s government has opened a musium but how successful it is no one knows.
It was Sardar who drew the blueprint for Narmada Dam but nothing was done for 50 years until BJP came to power in Gujarat.
Sardar was an unique personality, the greatest politician, thinker with foresight, since Chanakya (Vishnu Prasad) who established Gupta dynesty and gave Bharat Ashok, the greatest Emperor in the history of not only Bharat but the world.
Gandhiji regarded Chanakya as his Guru, his motivator, pity he did not recognize these qualities in sardar.
Bhupendra
March 9th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Indians should throw out the gandhis.
March 11th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
A nice review. As someone with limited knowledge of Indian history I greatly appreciated this.
As to blame for the failings of India, I am still surprised. Here a nation more populace than Africa, more diverse than any other region of the world, impoverished by 1000 years of war with muslims and christians, outcaste by economic and political forces in play over the last 50 years IS NOW a leader in world economics, intellect, engineering, innovation, military, culture, propagation of peaceful methods of conflict resolution and still people look back and talk about its problems. All of europe only was great because of the use of military might to increase fixed assets. Much of the US growth was by stealing resources from the native americans (prior to WWII). China’s expansionism is based on military power and periodic suicidal ethnic cleansing. It seems that India is doing quite well. More could be done for sure, but do a comparative around the world, what country would you like India to be like? Yes pieces of this or that, but overall?
hariaum
March 11th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Is it still possible for the government to award Sardar Patel the Bharat Ratna posthumously?
Bhupendra -
Chanakya was certainly not Gandhi’s guru. This is a quote from Chanakya -
“Do not be very upright in your dealings for you would see by going to the forest that straight trees are cut down while crooked ones are left standing.”
How does this describe Gandhi?
March 11th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Further to the above mention of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, thought the following may be of interest..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3684288.stm
March 14th, 2008 at 6:48 am
Satya’s attachment was very interesting.It is however wrong to assume that Bose is no longer a national hero simply because he befriended the Nazis.One has to understand the situation and take it in context.After Britain’s devastating and humiliating occupation of India and the theft and plunder of India that followed to fill the British coffers one can understand that “the enemy of my enemy can be my friend”. I doubt whether I would have done otherwise had I been Netaji.Netaji’s actions were selfless and patriotic and certainly not for self gain.He will always be one of India’s greatest statesmen and I place him shoulder to shoulder next to India’s greatest statesman,Sardarji….
Prem Namaste
Jai Hind!!!
March 14th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Namaste All
Sardar was indeed awarded Bharat Ratna posthumously by the late Narsima Rao when he became the PM.
Yes, the ideology of Gandhi and Chanakya was as different as chalk and cheese. But Gandhiji did mention in his various writings that he was inspired by Chanakya and he considered him as his Guru.
Bose would not have left Bharat if he was not so badly treayed
by Gandhi who asked him to hand over the presidency of INC
to Nehru.
But this is all water under the bridge now. But we should not make the same mistake by not supporting Modi who comes nearest to Sardar in stature.
Bhupendra
March 15th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
An interesting work on the life of Netaji, as well as his brother Sarat, is Leonard A Gordon’s “Brothers Against the Raj”, a thoroughly researched and well presented analysis of Netaji’s ideals, aspirations and motivations.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Here is an interesting site to learn about Netaji Subash Chandra Bose. We must read, propagate works of Netaji, Sardar Patel and other patriots, so that we come over the doses MK Gandhi and Nehru taught by the Congressi education system.
More we read, discuss, propagate Swami Vivekananda, Netaji Bose, Sardar Patel, more we shall built characters based upon their ideals.
Mission Netaji
www dot missionnetaji dot org/index_new.php
Bharat
====
March 17th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Some interesting Books by/on Netaji Bose.
www dot missionnetaji dot org/page/e_store.html
1. Blood Bath (English) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 70/
2. Taruner Ahbhan (Bengali) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 60/
3. Smaraniya Baraniya (Bengali) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 55/
4. Delhi Chalo (Bengali) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 55/
5. Bhabaisyat Bharat (Bengali) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 45/
6. Gandhi –Subhas Sanghat (Bengali) by Subhas Chandra Bose = Rs 55/
…and many more. Unfortunately, most are in Bangla language. Contact adress on webpage.
We need to read Books/papers written by good Bharatiya writers, so that we learn the true history. During British rule, english writers had the monopoly. As a result, most works, if not all, are biased against India/Indian. They did what colonial rulers needed to keep control on the colonies.
Bharat
====
March 18th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
It is certainly true that one ought to consider the motivations and inspirations for any author writing on any topic; this is as much true of Bharatiya writers as for English (or indeed any other) writers. Just because something is written by a white Englishman, that does not necessarily mean that it will be bad, wrong, negatively biased or inaccurate. Similarly, just because something is written by an Indian, that in itself does not necessarily make it superior in any way.
March 24th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Namaste,
Sri Patel made a critical contribution to the idea of India. At the time of independence, there were 564 princely states which had the option to join India or Pakistan. Nehru asked Patel to handle the responsibility of integrating 563 of these states into the Indian Union. The task of integrating the remaining State — Kashmir — he kept to himself.
While Patel completed his task within a remarkably short span of time, Nehru made a mess of Kashmir. He not only complained to the United Nations and internationalised the issue, but also took the fateful and unpardonable decision to prohibit the Indian Army from throwing out the Pakistani intruders who had occupied one-third of Jammu & Kashmir.
One shudders to think what political map, generations of post-independence Indians would be drawing in school but for the determination and patriotic zeal of Patel.
Bharat
April 28th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Total Lies about Patel. Patel has not unified India—Patel had no authority to do so.
Why do you lie so much? Read history first.
I have posted a lot but the Editors erased out as they are Gujarati, so Patel is their hero.
April 28th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
A.Moron what is it with you and criticising other Hindus just because they’re non-Vaishnavs or in this case Gujarati?
I’ve noticed that you harldly ever whimper in response to non-Hindus who have a pop at Hindus in this website but you’re happy to insult non-Vaishnavs.
Are you one of those typical Indian clowns who are meek and submisive in front of non-Hindus and act brave in front of Hindus?
April 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
A. Moron is simply as his name suggests.
He has a schizophrenic and continuously contradictory viewpoint on religion and history.
A few points for A. Moron to chew on:
1) Gujaratis are mostly Vaishnavas.
2) You condemn an over emphasis on temple worship in some of your posts, but Vaishnavas are very much into temple worship and rituals.
3) You like ISKCON and Caitanya - and talk down on the Puranas. However ISKCON and Caitanya are very much into the Puranas. They say that people in the modern age shouldn’t read and study the Vedas - they say that the Bhagavad Puran and other Puranas are more suitable for general use. You say the opposite.
4) You say that Sita Rama Goel is a supporter of the BJP and Jana Sangh. That is not true - he has extensively and continuously write against them on a number of grounds and has even said that their electoral success is
nothing to do with the fututre of Hinduism.
5) I am a Gujarati - Patel is not my hero. My heroes include Shivaji, Bankim Chandra Chatterji and Sri Aurobindo. The reason why we delete most of your messages is because you severely over post and make the message board unnappealing to most other users.
6) You denounce Tantra and Shaivism and being impure Hinduism. You are painting Vaisnavism and Shaivism as homogenous entities, and hence you are being an uneducated Moron. Some forms of Shaivism are very pure and scriptural. For example Kashmiri Shaivism is very ascetic and is one of the purest forms of Hinduism. At the same time, many Vaishnava sects exist which have indulged in immoral stuff, and still do, and have even incorporated it into their literature. I am not saying this to insult Vaishnavism - my favourite text is the Gita, and my favourite deity is Krishna. But I know the true spirit of Hinduism - I don’t denounce other forms of Hinduism to which I practice as being wrong or unholy.
7) You say that Shiva is not mentioned in the Vedas - but Rudra is a name of Shiva, used quite extensively in the Vedas.
Finally, A. Moron (Dipak Bose) if you dislike us and the way we do things so much - then start up your own project, and stop hassling us in doing what we feel is right. Thank you.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:33 am
You are discussing about Patel. It is a total lie to suggest that Patel has united all princely states. Patel had no authority to do so. It was Mountbatten, whose brother the King George had the agreement with the Maharajs, not Patel or Gandhi or any other person.
It was Mountbatten who persuated the Maharas and Nawabs to join either India or Pakistan. This is history
You the Editors are telling lies.
You are falsefying Hindu religion as well.
May 3rd, 2008 at 5:38 am
A.moron I’m just wondering have you got the balls to tell missioneries nd the editors of dalistan.org that they are falsifying Hindu religion? Or like a typical Indian you’re only man enough to accuse Hindus and not non-Hindus?
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
A. Moron - I’ve concentrated all my points opposing your general rhetoric into this thread to save me replying to all of your excessive rambling postings (most of which our moderator has thankfully deleted).
As for the point regarding Vallabhai Patel - you can believe what you want to believe - it is commonly accepted that the British Raj wanted as fractured an India as possible and hence were trying to promote seccesionism and ego in many rajas who wanted to be rulers of their own little nations. Patel was instrumental in convincing them to throw their lot in with India’s destiny by a decisive and convincing exposition of what was at stake in civilisational terms.
Finally, A. Moron - You are not engaged in any positive work involving Hinduism or promoting Hindu history, culture or anything. And you have the cheek to keep coming and trying to lecture us about what is right or wrong. Why don’t you just set up your own project promoting your own versions or interpretations of everything? (and stop hassling us who are involved in doing something positive).
Thank you.
Jai Durga.
May 5th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Dear Shri Moron,
You wrote:” … It is a total lie to suggest that Patel has united all princely states. Patel had no authority to do so. It was Mountbatten, whose brother the King George had the agreement with the Maharajs, not Patel or Gandhi or any other person. It was Mountbatten who persuated the Maharas and Nawabs to join either India or Pakistan. This is history”
Could you please give us some good references of History books and articles. Please please be specific. I am interested to see how far your points makes sense.
Bharat
====
May 6th, 2008 at 12:37 am
Anyone with even half a brain knows that the British would have never attempted any unification in India. Why do you think Pakistan was created A.Moron? If the British had their way there would have been even more Pakistans.
May 11th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Just a thought to say that, perhaps, this may not be happening today in Hindu and Sikh India if Sardar Ji had taken office in that era.
Here is the link.
It does “go on” a bit, but its the “relevant crux” of the matter which is of the essence.
I accept that my comment thereon will not go down well with some ultra-moderates on here and, I ask those who oppose such views to reflect deeper within their own sub-conscious thoughts and ask themselves if it not time now for the Indians to “toughen-out” and fight fire with fire.
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/4638.html
May 15th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Here are the references to prove that the editor is falsifying Indian history to glorify Patel, who has partitioned India but was not responsible for the unifications of the princely states:
The Transfer of Power, 1942-7: Constitutional Relations Between Britain and India: Volume X: The Mountbatten Viceroyalty-Formulation of a Plan, 22 March-30 May 1947. by Penderel Moon
The Transfer of Power, 1942-7: Constitutional Relations Between Britain and
India: Volume XI: The Mountbatten Viceroyalty-Announcement and Reception of the 3 June Plan, 31 May-7 July 1947. by Penderel Moon; David M. Blake; Stephen R. Ashton
Copland, Ian (1993), “Lord Mountbatten and the Integration of the Indian States: A Reappraisal”, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 21 (2): 385–408
Copland, Ian (1997), The Princes of India in the Endgame of Empire, 1917–1947, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-57179-0
Lumby, E.W.R. (1954), The Transfer of Power in India, 1945–1947, London: George Allen and Unwin
Wood, John (1985), “Dividing the Jewel: Mountbatten and the Transfer of Power to India and Pakistan”, Pacific Affairs 58 (4): 653–662
May 15th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
To R.PateL:
I am against your falsification of the Hindu religion and Indian history.
Most of your arguments are false. Rudra in the Rig Veda cannot be Shiva. Rudra according to Rig Veda was the father of Marut. Saraswati has nothing to do with Rudra. Rudra along with Aditya, Vasus, Agni are minor Devas not the Shiva as the God of the Gods. Rudra has the colour of red, as the name suggest.
Thus, you need to read Vedas.
I am not a member of ISKON, but I like some of their features, but also dislike some of these other features like Jagannath, which was not a Hindu deity. But mainly they are doing good works.
Sita Ram Goel’s version of Hinduism is in effect the same as the version suggested by the missionaries. This is not Hinduism at all, but most possibly a Sangha Parivar version of it.
Puranas are not authentic religious scriptures, as Purana can be written in modern times as well. There are Puranas written in 12th century.
Only the Vedas, Bhagwat Gita and 15 Vedic Upanishads ( according to Sankara only 11) are authentic religious texts of Hinduism.
Your version of the Hinduism does not correspond to that. That is the reason I say you spreading a false idea about Hinduism like many others.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:24 am
A. Moron - Your mindset with regards to Hinduism is too narrow. You want Hinduism to be like an Abrahamic religion - it isn’t. Since at times you like quoting Sri Aurobindo as a respectable authority, let me use his quote to show you what Hinduism really is:
————————————-
“The religious culture which now goes by the name of Hinduism … gave itself no name, because it set itself no sectarian limits; it claimed no universal adhesion, asserted no sole infallible dogma, set up no single narrow path or gate of salvation; it was less a creed or cult than a continuously enlarging tradition of the Godward endeavour of the human spirit. An immense many-sided and many-staged provision for a spiritual self-building and self-finding, it had some right to speak of itself by the only name it knew, the eternal religion, sanatana dharma….
Now just here is the first baffling difficulty over which the European mind stumbles; for it finds itself unable to make out what Hindu religion is…. How can there be a religion which has no rigid dogmas demanding belief on pain of eternal damnation, no theological postulates, even no fixed theology, no credo, distinguishing it from antagonistic or rival religions? How can there be a religion which has no papal head, no governing ecclesiastic body, no church, chapel or congregational system, no binding religious form of any kind obligatory on all its adherents, no one administration and discipline? For the Hindu priests are mere ceremonial officiants without any ecclesiastical authority or disciplinary powers and the Pundits are mere interpreters of the Shastra, not the law-givers of the religion or its rulers. How again can Hinduism be called a religion when it admits all beliefs, allowing even a kind of high-reaching atheism and agnosticism and permits all possible spiritual experiences, all kinds of religious adventures?…
To the Indian mind the least important part of religion is its dogma; the religious spirit matters, not the theological credo….”
———————————
You see, beliefs are just mental constructs of the limited mond of man. Hinduism has recognised that beliefs per se and not particularly beneficial in spiritual progress. That’s why Hinduism as a religion is nothing whatsoever like the Abrahamic religions.
Thank you.
May 27th, 2008 at 7:13 am
A good administrator and strong man of India. A good friend olf Nehru who was organser and patel was administrator . Due to him we inherited the system of administration realy unique in he world, his opinion about upsc is realy mindblowing .
May 27th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Gita ch 10 v 23: of the rudras I am shankara (shiva)
hariaum
May 27th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
there is a very strong adumbration that rudra is indeed shiva. see sri rudram chamakam from krishna yajurveda.