God’s Beloved Land 41was ready to make the sac ri fice which that example” demanded of him.
He was sure that Sarat would “respond favourably,” but that “hardly
anyone else” among his relatives would approve of his “eccentric plans.”
“My decision is final and unchangeable,” he wrote to his brother, “but
my destiny is at present in your hands. Can I not expect your blessings
in return and will you not wish me Godspeed in my new and adventur-
ous career?”^62
The doting elder brother was prepared to be indulgent, but in early
March their father, Janakinath, communicated his firm disapproval.
Subhas’s decision about the colonial bu reau cracy would now have to
be taken in de fi ance of his father’s express wishes. On April 6, 1921,
Subhas sat down in Oxford to compose a detailed rebuttal of their fa-
ther’s arguments to Sarat. He began by recounting his painful mental
struggle as he tried to reconcile his duty to his parents and his duty to
himself. He was aware that he had caused his parents grievous hurt,
especially in view of the loss of some close relatives, and was the pri-
mary source of discord in the family. His father believed that since the
constitutional reforms of 1919 had made some concessions at the pro-
vincial level, the position of an Indian civil servant would not be in-
compatible with a sense of self- respect. “Should we under the present
circumstances own allegiance to a foreign bu reau cracy,” Subhas re-
torted, “and sell ourselves for a mess of pottage?” In their father’s opin-
ion, Home Rule would come to India in ten years. Such an outcome
was possible, according to the skeptical son, only if Indians were pre-
pared to pay the price. “Only on the soil of sac ri fice and suf fering,”
Subhas declared, “can we raise our national edifice.” He was dismayed
that in the entire his tory of British rule in India, not a single Indian
had renounced the civil ser vice motivated by pa tri ot ism. “If the mem-
bers of the ser vices withdraw their allegiance or even show a desire to
do so,” he reckoned, “then and then only will the bureaucratic machine
collapse.”^63
While Subhas grappled with his own future, the nonviolent nonco-
operation movement led by Mahatma Gandhi raged in India. After two
de cades as an expatriate in South Africa, where he earned a reputation
as a prac ti tioner of passive resistance, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
had returned to India in 1915. During 1917 and 1918, he had led two