Six weeks after Gandhiji’s assassination a few men and women gathered at Sevagram to search their hearts. They spent five days together and introspected and interrogated each other. Vinoba, Nehru, Kripalani, Rajendra Prasad, Kumarappa, Kishorlal Mashruwala, JP, Azad, Kaka Saheb, Bibi Amtussalam, Pyarelal, Devadas Gandhi and Thakkar Bapa and others came together to ask of themselves and the nation a question. Do we have the faith to strive towards a society based on equality and justice through the means of Truth and ahimsa, they asked themselves and us. Bapu was gone, who could they turn to for guidance?

The Sevagram conference showed deep ambivalence towards both the political realm and the emerging forms of governance. Vinoba and Kumarappa argued for the constructive programmes. For them the societal realm was primary. Their suspicion of the political ran deep. Pyarelal reminded the conference of the last will and testament of Gandhiji, where he had argued for creation of a Lok Seva Sangh, a non-political body that would replace the Congress. It was left to a sad, lonely and tired Nehru to provide an eloquent defence of the political realm.

He argued for the necessity of the political. He argued that the Congress had helped create the political realm. Political life, he said, cannot be simply brought to an end. The role of the Congress, he argued, would be to expand the scope of this realm, through governance and organic linkages with civil society organisations.

He also issued a warning to the Congress. The Congress had to govern, but that could not be the fundamental reason for its existence. The government, he said, had its own unique ways of solving issues, it also had its limits and restraints. He warned that mere power of the government was not enough. The government cannot, by its very nature, raise fundamental issues facing a society and a nation. The role of the Congress was, he said, to remain within politics — not necessarily within government — and raise and confront fundamental issues. Because, in politics one looks to the advantage of the moment. But an action that was informed by deeper understanding of the political realm would be framed differently. The action must be right in itself, whether it leads to an immediate advantage or not.

... contd.