In the essay on Death of Philosophy, there was a minor error: the three greatest philosophers named – Bertrand Russel, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and William James – were actually the greatest philosophers of the previous century, of the Western world. The greatest philosophers of the Indian subcontinent were Gandhiji, Rajaji, and P V Narasimha Rao. It is a widely accepted tradition in the west as well as in India that the greatest philosophers are persecuted (Socrates was given the hemlock, with the option of going on exile), Jesus was crucified, and more recently, Bertrant Russell was imprisoned for his pacifist activism during World War I.
Philosopher kings are the hypothetical rulers, or Guardians, of the Utopian Kallipolis (ideal city). If this ideal city-state is to ever come into being, "philosophers [must] become kings…or those now called kings [must]…genuinely and adequately philosophize" (Plato: The Republic).
None of the western philosophers ever made it to anywhere near being kings. But we have Gandhiji, who was almost king. In India, one of us – let us call him Nathuram Godse – shot Gandhiji point blank. But now Gandhiji is no more a philosopher nor a king: he is almost God.
Let us come back to Rajaji, and his theory of time as cyclic (as against the western notion of a linear progression of time) later. He was king too, in a manner of speaking. He was the first Governor-General of India. For some reason, he was neither glorified nor put down. Good for him.
But of the three great philosophers of the last century (in India) P V Narasimha Rao truly meets the requirements of the Socratic philosopher king. He was detached, he was humble, he had fortitude to face the ups and downs with equal composure. And he was king, truly.
Returning to active politics from semi-retirement, he ran a successful non-dynasty Congress government for four years. When his son tried to get into the Congress Working Committee (CWC) in the Tirupati AICC meet, he gave indications to everyone that he was not backing that. (Of P V Ranga Rao who tried to get into the CWC and how he failed, we will talk later.) None of his kith and kin were involved in any scandals and he was himself unblemished (except for the St Kitts allegation, behind which was the hand of Rajiv Gandhi himself). He opened up the economy and brought a career economist in as the finance minister (Dr Man Mohan Singh now finds it an anathema to speak out his name.)
And look what a shabby treatment was meted out to him after his death: the cremation, which should have taken place in New Delhi, with foreign dignitaries (including Sonia-ji) was moved to Hyderabad. There was talk that no one was there to see the cremation through, and that bits and pieces were left unburned: can there be anything more heinous? He is blamed for the Ayodhya fiasco, where as it was Rajiv Gandhi who opened the (flood) gates to the Ram Mandir and therefore the Ayodhya issue. He was pilloried for the St Kitts misadventure, whereas it was Rajiv Gandhi’s brain child.
Now he is being blamed for helping Arthur Anderson to leave the country (Arjun Singh was the CM and P V was the home minister but the big boss – Rajiv was at the helm of affairs. And why do I call him a philosopher in the first place. Here is why…
Walking the Talk with Sekhar Gupta, when asked about the Indo-Pak war averted by the intervention of the U.S. of A., he had the clarity to refuse to answer. He said that the truth will die with him: he is bound by the official secrets act, and he was not going to violate it. Nor did he reveal anything in his book, The Insider. The truth, sometimes, is best kept hidden.
Bottomline: Antony Flew said (in The Story of Philosophy) that Wittgenstein was a great philosopher, however, “some people think that a great deal of stuff is hidden in his philosophy; if so, it is well hidden.”
No comments:
Post a Comment