Page:Modern review 1921 v29.pdf/457

 — has played an abiding part in the national regeneration, while its work ends with its three-day’s session and is heard of no more during the rest of the year.

This eastern hospitality, which is of India’s very nature, is a source of great joy to her when it can be offered on a grand scale. The individual hospitality of the householder used to be expanded in the old days into a vast Yajna in order to find its completest realisation. That, however, was in the distant past. So when India got this recent opportunity of throwing open her guest-house once more, she was overjoyed, and India’s Goddess stepped in and took her long unused seat. And thus it happened that, even in the midst of the outrageously outlandish speechifying and clapping of hands in our Congress and Conferences, our Mother smiled on us once more, happy that she could serve out of her humble store to each one of her guests, albeit understanding but little else of what it was all about! She would have been happier still if, instead of this book-learned, this watch-and-chain-bedecked assembly, she had found rich and poor, cultured and rustic, invited and uninvited, gathered together as in the Yajnas of old, to join this festivity. May be, in such case, there would have been less of material to go round, but the Mother’s blessing would have fallen in richer abundance.

However that may be, what I was saying is, that India is unwilling to forego the sweetness of human relationship even in her work and business, and is ready to take on herself the extra burdens so arising. That is why, in the past, no outsider has had to be concerned with the succour of the helpless, the teaching of the young, the sheltering of wayfarers, or any other public good work. If to-day the old samajic bonds have ceased to hold, and if the giving of water and health and learning be no longer possible from within the broken-up Samaj, even that need not cause us to despair.

Hindu Dharma has always shown the way for each householder to transcend the narrowness of home or parish and relate himself to the universal. Each householder is still in the habit of making his daily offerings of Pancha-yajna to the Gods, the rishis, ancestors, humanity and all creatures. Why should it not be possible for him to maintain the same high relations with his country. Could we not set apart every day some offering, be it the smallest coin, be it half-a-handful of rice, in the name of our country? Would it be too much to ask of our Hinduism that it should unite us in concrete relations with this India of ours, the resort of our gods, the retreat of our rishis, the motherland of our ancestors? The relation of good works with our own land,—are we not to gain that for each one of ourselves, rather than leave it to others, and take our hearts off elsewhere?

We are ceaselessly bewailing the draining out of our money, but is it a thing of less moment that our heart should be enticed away? Does our patriotism, then, consist simply in urging others to do all good work, and is that what all our Congresses and Conferences are content to be busy with? No, that can never be! This state of things cannot last long in our country, for it is not of India’s nature. We who have uncomplainingly shared our hard-earned little with our destitute relations and connections without considering that to be any extraordinary sacrifice,— shall we say that we are unable to bear the burden of supporting our Mother? Is the foreigner to be for ever doling out alms and we crying ourselves hoarse because the doles are not generous to our liking? Never, never! Each one of us shall for every day of our lives, take up the burdens of our country. This shall be our glory, this is our Dharma. The time has come when each of us must know that he is not alone, that, insignificant though he be, he cannot be neglected, nor must he neglect the meanest.

If to-day we should say to one, “Go and work for your Swadeshi Samaj,” he would be utterly puzzled to make out how, where, on what and for whom he is to work. It is perhaps just as well that each individual should not be capable of deciding for himself his own programme of work. Therefore there must be a centre.