A life-long romance with Nehru

My romance with Nehru began on a day in 1963, when as a thirteen—year-old, I eyed Discovery of Indiaamong my nanaji's medical books. I would occasionally pick up the book, look intently at the reflective profile of Panditji on the inside of its cover page and keep it back safely at its place, unable to understand much that was written therein.

I would also look with interest at a photograph of one of my senior uncles, Late Narottam Lal Joshi, the first Speaker of Rajasthan Assembly, having a word with Nehru, as the state's then Chief Minister Jai Naraian Vyas looked on.

Having lived through the freedom struggle and the dawn of Independence, my grandfather understood and justifiably admired the role of Panditji in the National movement. He would ever remain an ardent admirer of Nehru.

I had an opportunity to have a personal glimpse of Panditji when he came to Jaipur on 5th November 1963 for the inauguration of the Police Shaheed Smarak, popularly known as Teen Murti. We reached the grounds of Ramniwas Bagh, where he was to address a public meeting in my uncle's car, a Ford Anglia, produced in the mid-forties that gave way twice during the three-kilometre run.

As the crowd waited restlessly to see Panditji, I strolled a little away from where we were sitting, along with my younger brother Amrit, then four years old. And lo, and behold, there was the great man, just four feet away from us, walking up the Western corridor of the iconic Albert Hall to address the public from its central balcony on the first floor.

About two months after this visit, rumours were reverberating across the globe about the state of Nehru's health. In an article entitled India's Big Question:Who after Nehru?published on 19 January 1964, The New York Times reflected on the implications to India, of Nehru's illness and his likely demise.

"The most dramatic aspect of Nehru's illness”, the paper said, "was his incapacity to meet the sudden challenge to his cardinal principle that India is a secular state with religious freedom and equality for all." The write up was referring to the Hindu-Muslim riots that had erupted in Calcutta a week before, the news of which was reported to have been kept from the stricken Prime Minister. The article further said, "But worst of all was the damage done to the image of India that Nehru created at enormous and painstaking effort over the years since the subcontinent was partitioned between Islamic Pakistan and secular, Hindu-dominated India.”

About the choice of the Prime Minister's successor, the reputed paper said that Nehru was "philosophically too much of a Democrat and politically too much of a party man to try to dictate an unpopular choice to his Congress followers." This appeared to be true, as Nehru told the famous TV host Arnold Machaelis in an interview that he was sure a country of four hundred million would be able to find his successor.

Barely, four months later Nehru died. The nation was in a shock. The gardener, who regularly replaced the signature red rose for Panditji's achkan was heard weeping on the All India Radio. The radio continuously relayed news and interviews about the beloved leader. When nanaji brought the news to us, he was visibly disturbed. "Nehruji has died", he revealed. Then he said, “Now it will be too difficult to settle the Kashmir issue.”

The opinion of nanaji did not register in my mind. Years later, when I pondered over it and was reading extensively about Nehru, I was surprised to find that Bertrand Russell had expressed a similar opinion. In a tributary essay, entitled, A Man of Rare Dedication, written shortly after the death of Nehru, at the request of K. Natwar Singh, the great philosopher said, "What is evident is that Nehru's death has removed serious hopes of negotiations with China and of settlement over Kashmir. Hopes of peace in Nagaland and of defeat for the right are also lessened. Nehru's absence will teach us how much we owe him. “(The Legacy of Nehru, edited by K. Natwar Singh, page, 103) that ominous prediction turned out to be true and remains so to this day.

It fills one with rage that a man about whom Bertrand Russell, one of the most eminent figures of the twentieth century had said, that his absence would teach the world how much it owed him is being reviled by far lesser men who are ruling us today!

Yet Nehru's legacy lives on. His place in history as the builder of a modern democratic India is indisputable. The world acknowledges it to this day. At the "Howdy Modi" show organised on 22 September 2019 in Houston, Texas with much fanfare, the tutored President avoided taking the name of Nehru. However, the House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer mentioned the name of Nehru twice, with an embarrassed Modi next to him looking alternately at his host and to the ground.

Hoyer said, “India, like America, is proud of its ancient traditions to secure a future according to Gandhi's teaching and Nehru's vision of India as a secular democracy, where respect for pluralism and human rights safeguard every individual." The US leader also recalled that Nehru on the event of Independence had spoken of Gandhi's ambition "to wipe every tear from every eye" and that "as long as there are tears and suffering, so long our work will not be over. "

As a young man and later as an adult, I devoured all of Nehru's books and countless books about him. The search for wisdom in his writings never ends. To our generation that grew up in the fifties and sixties, Nehru was an idol who could never go wrong.