| Nehru's
intellectual background led him to take a synthetic (aggregationist)
view of Indian culture, though on a more careful reflection, t
should have been possible for him to recognize, on the one hand, its
integral unity founded on yoga, of which the Veda itself is a fruit,
and, on the other, its capaciousness on the strength of the same
boundless yogic foundation which placed no limit on the freedom of
the human spirit. Inevitably this synthetic view of Indian culture
led him - especially in view of the Persianized culture background
of his own forebears and of the Kashmiri Pandit community in the
plains and indeed, in the valley itself - to accept the theory of a
Hindu-Muslim cultural synthesis. The fact of partition must have
provoked some doubt in his mind. He was too sensitive and honest an
individual not to be shaken by so traumatic a development.
But, by then, it was too late for him
to review and restate his basic position, even if he were so
inclined. No political leader in his position could afford to do so.
And if it was too late before partition, it was certainly worse
after independence he was charged with the task of covering up the
wounds inflicted by the Muslim League in the hope that the cover-up
would allow the healing process to take over n course of time. All
that makes it truly remarkable that he allowed himself to say as
much as he did. Three of his speeches deserve attention in this
regard.
|
