For Global Peace with Social Justice in a Sustainable Environment

Ahimsa and Mahatma Gandhi-IV

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net;

dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

Ahimsa and Mahatma Gandhi-IV

We should remain non-violent, unmindful of whether we succeed or fail in our undertaking. This is the only natural way of demonstrating the principle of non-violence. It would be more correct to say that the result of ahimsa is always good. Such being our firm faith, we are not concerned whether our efforts are crowned with success today or years later Those who were forcibly converted to Islam two hundred years ago cannot be a source of strength to it in so far as the policy of compulsion was resorted to in converting them. Similarly, if anyone is converted to Hinduism through force or fraud, that would be sowing the seeds of its destruction. We are as a rule misled by immediate results. In the history of a great community, two hundred years are a mere nothing. Making people give up their habits with the help of law does not by itself constitute brute force or violence to stop the sale of liquor by law and thereby force the addicts to give up the habit of drinking is not violence. If it were suggested that those given to drinking should be whipped, that would certainly be brute force. Selling liquor is no duty of the State. 1

When I have realized that Rama transcends even speech, I shall have no need to repeat the name. The spinning-wheel, the rosary and the Ramanama are all the same to me. They subserve the same end; they teach me the religion of service. I cannot practice ahimsa without practicing the religion of service, and I cannot find the truth without practicing the religion of ahimsa. And there is no religion other than Truth. Truth is Rama, Narayana, Ishwara, Khuda, Allah, and God. As Narasinha says, ‘The different shapes into which gold is beaten gives rise to different names and forms; but ultimately it is all gold.’ I believe that there is no religion greater than ahimsa, and yet I cannot escape the himsa which is inevitably involved in the processes of eating and drinking. The ideal of ahimsa is, however, ever before me; therefore, even in these processes, I do endeavour to restrain myself: I am striving every moment to reduce even those functions to a minimum. The ideal of ahimsa is, however, ever before me; therefore, even in these processes, I do endeavour to restrain myself: I am striving every moment to reduce even those functions to a minimum. 2

We must think of ourselves who are behind the man in the street and pulling the strings. Let us take care that we do nothing out of fear. I hate dueling, but it has a romantic side to it. I am engaged in bringing that side of it to the fore. I would love to engage in a duel with the Big Brother. When we are both satisfied that there is no chance of unity without bloodshed, and that even we two cannot agree to live in peace, I must then invite the Big Brother to a duel with me. I know that he can twist me round his thick fingers and dash me to pieces. That day Hinduism will be free. Or, if he lets me kill him in spite of the strength of a giant, Islam in India will be free. He will have atoned for all the bullying by the average Mussalman. What I detest is the match between goondas of both the parties. Any peace based upon such a trial of strength will turn to bitterness in the end. The way to get rid of the Hindu cowardice is for the educated portion to fight the goondas. We may use sticks and other clean weapons. My ahimsa will allow the use of them. We shall be killed in the fight. But that will chasten both the Hindus and the Mussalmans. That would remove the Hindu cowardice in a moment. As things are going, each party will be the slaves of their own goondas. That means dominance of the military power. 3

I am learning as well as teaching the lesson of ahimsa. Love abounds around me. I can therefore put up with resorting to a fast. I am very happy to know that Balkrishna has arrived there. My only woe is that I am not there. I do not know by heart Draupadi’s prayer “Krishna Govind” but it is very much in my heart. I have now earned enough merit to be able to say that prayer. At the time of trouble, devotion and worship is prayer. Without devotion, there is no worship and without worship, there is no devotion. 4

Even today I am asking them to practice ahimsa, to settle quarrels by dying but not by killing. And what do I find to be the result? How many temples have been desecrated? How many sisters come to me with complaints? As I was saying to Hakimji yesterday, Hindu women are in mortal terror of Mussalman goondas. In many places they fear to go out alone. I had a letter from . . . How can I bear the way in which his little children were molested? How can I now ask the Hindus to put up with everything patiently? I gave them the assurance that the friendship of Mussalmans was bound to bear good fruit. I asked them to befriend them, regardless of the result. It is not in my power today to make good that assurance, neither is it in the power of Mahomed Ali or Shaukat Ali. Who listens to me? And yet I must ask the Hindus even today to die and not to kill. I can only do so by laying down my own life. I can teach them the way to die by my own example. There is no other way. . . I launched no-co-operation. Today I find that people are non-co-operating against one another, without any regard for non-violence. What is the reason? Only this, that I myself am not completely non-violent. If I were practicing non-violence to perfection, I should not have seen the violence I see around me today. My fast is therefore a penance. I blame no one. I blame only myself. I have lost the power where-with to appeal to people. Defeated and helpless I must submit my petition in His Court. Only He will listen, no one else. 5

They teach the lesson of ahimsa and tapas, which everyone should learn. It no doubt involves my praise to some extent, but that is inevitable and so long as I have not resumed editorial responsibility, it may be condoned. However, your viewpoint also deserves to be considered and kept in mind. I should not allow myself to be affected by all that praise. 6 This reflects credit on both the Swarajists and the No-changers, but it is no encouraging atmosphere to work in, especially when much is expected from one. But this is just the occasion for putting my faith in ahimsa to the test. If I have equal love in me for No-changers, Swarajists, Liberals, National Home Rulers, and Independents and for that matter Englishmen, I know that it is well for me and well also for the cause. 7

The story of Ramakrishna Paramahansa’s life is a story of religion in practice. His life enables us to see God face to face. No one can read the story of his life without being convinced that God alone is real and that all else is an illusion. Ramakrishna was a living embodiment of godliness. His sayings are not those of a mere learned man but they are pages from the Book of Life. They are revelations of his experiences. They, therefore, leave on the reader an impression which he cannot resist. In this age of scepticism Ramakrishna presents an example of a bright and living faith which gives solace to thousands of men and women who would otherwise have remained without spiritual light. Ramakrishna’s life was an object-lesson in ahimsa. 8

I said it is a false notion. But it is dangerous to argue that the notion that I am right and others are wrong should also be done away with. So long as there are different minds in the world, there will also be different opinions. But we wish to embrace all, to promote tolerance—it is part of ahimsa. 9 Ahimsa or non-violence is the light that reveals that Truth to me. Swaraj for me is part of that Truth. This Satyagraha did not fail me in South Africa, Kheda or Champaran and in hosts of other cases I could mention. It excludes all violence or hate. Therefore, I cannot and will not hate Englishmen. Nor will I bear their yoke. I must fight unto death the unholy attempt to impose British methods and British institutions on India. But I combat the attempt with non-violence. I believe in the capacity of India to offer non-violent battle to the English rulers. The experiment has not failed. It has succeeded, but not to the extent we had hoped and desired. I do not despair. On the contrary I believe that India will come to her in the near future and that only through Satyagraha. The proposed suspension is part of the experiment. Non-co-operation need never be resumed if the programme sketched by me can be fulfilled Non-violent; non-co-operation in some form or other, whether through the Congress or without it, will be resumed if the programme fails. I have repeatedly stated that Satyagraha never fails and that one perfect satyagrahi is enough to vindicate Truth. Let us all strive to be perfect satyagrahis. The striving does not require any quality unattainable by the lowliest among us. For Satyagraha is an attribute of the spirit within. It is latent in every one of us. Like swaraj it is our birthright. Let us know it. 10

I have dwelt on this point at such great length, because I want to be absolutely plain with you (untouchables). I do not want to employ diplomacy in my dealings with you or for that matter with anyone. I do not want to keep you under any false illusion or win your support by holding out temptations. I want to remove untouchability because its removal is essential for swaraj and I want swaraj. But I would not exploit you for gaining any political ends of mine. The issue with me is bigger even than swaraj. I am anxious to see an end put to untouchability because for me it is expiation and a penance. It is not the untouchables whose shuddhi I effect the thing would be absurd but my own and that of the Hindu religion. Hinduism has committed a great sin in giving sanction to this evil and I am anxious if such a thing as vicarious penance is possible to purify it of that sin by expiating for it in my own person That being so, it follows that the only means open to me for my purpose are those of ahimsa and truth. 11

Then in India we have the system of pinjrapoles. The way in which most of these are managed is far from satisfactory. And yet, I am sorry to observe that the people who are mostly responsible for them are Jains, who are out and out believers in ahimsa. Well organized, these pinjrapoles ought to be flourishing dairies supplying pure good milk at a cheap rate to the poor. I am told however that even in a rich city like Ahmadabad there are cases of the wives of labourers feeding their babies on flour dissolved in water. There cannot be a sadder commentary on the way in which we protect the cow than that in a country which has such an extensive system of pinjrapoles, the poor should experience a famine of pure, good milk. That I hope will serve to explain to you how our failure to protect the cow at one end of the chain results in our skin and bone starvelings at the other. Cow-slaughter and man-slaughter are in my opinion the two sides of the same coin. And the remedy for both is identical, i.e., that we develop the ahimsa principle and endeavour to win over our opponents by love.

The test of love is tapasya and tapasya means suffering. I offered to share with the Mussalmans their suffering to the best of my capacity not merely because I wanted their co-operation for winning swaraj but also because I had in mind the object of saving the cow. The Koran, so far as I have been able to understand it, declares it to be a sin to take the life of any living being without cause. I want to develop the capacity to convince the Mussalmans that to kill the cow is practically to kill their fellow-countrymen and friends—the Hindus. The Koran says that there can be no heaven for one who sheds the blood of an innocent neighbour. Therefore I am anxious to establish the best neighborly relations with the Mussalmans. I scrupulously avoid doing anything that might hurt their feelings. I even try to respect their prejudices. But I do this not in a spirit of bargain, I ask them for no reward. For that I look to God only. My Gita tells me that evil can never result from a good action. Therefore I must help the Mussalmans from a pure sense of duty without making any terms with them. For more cows are killed today for the sake of Englishmen in India than for the Mussalmans. I want to convert the former also. I would like to convince them that whilst they are in our midst their duty lies in getting rid of their Western culture to the extent that it comes in conflict with ours.

You will thus see that even our self-interest requires us to observe ahimsa. By ahimsa we will be able to save the cow and also to win the friendship of the English. I want to purchase the friendship of all by sacrifice. But if I do not approach the English on bent knees, as I do the Mussalmans that is because the former are intoxicated with power. The Mussalman is a fellow-sufferer in slavery. We can therefore speak to him as a friend and a comrade. The Englishman on the contrary is unable to appreciate our friendly advances. He would spurn them. He does not care for our friendship, he wants to patronize us. We want neither his insults nor his patronage. We therefore let him alone. Our Shastras have lain down that charity should be given only to a deserving person, that knowledge should be imparted only to one who is desirous of having it. So we content ourselves with non-co-operating with our rulers—not out of hatred but in a spirit of love. It was because love was the motive force behind non-co- operation that I advised suspension of civil disobedience when violence broke out in Bombay and Chauri Chaura. I wanted to make it clear to Englishmen that I wanted to win swaraj not by shedding their blood but by making they feel absolutely at ease as regards the safety of their persons.

What profit would it be if I succeed in saving a few cows from death by using force against persons who do not regard cow-killing as sinful? Cow-protection then can only be secured by cultivating universal friendliness, i.e., ahimsa. Now you will understand why I regard the question of cow-protection as greater even than that of swaraj. The fact is that the capacity to achieve the former will suffice for the latter purpose as well. You will thus see that even our self-interest requires us to observe ahimsa. By ahimsa we will be able to save the cow and also to win the friendship of the English. I want to purchase the friendship of all by sacrifice. But if I do not approach the English on bent knees, as I do the Mussalmans, which is because the former are intoxicated with power. The Mussalman is a fellow-sufferer in slavery. We can therefore speak to him as a friend and a comrade. The Englishman on the contrary is unable to appreciate our friendly advances. He would spurn them. He does not care for our friendship, he wants to patronize us. We want neither his insults nor his patronage. We therefore let him alone. Our Shastras have lain down that charity should be given only to a deserving person, that knowledge should be imparted only to one who is desirous of having it. So we content ourselves with non-co-operating with our rulers—not out of hatred but in a spirit of love.

It was because love was the motive force behind non-co- operation that I advised suspension of civil disobedience when violence broke out in Bombay and Chauri Chaura. I wanted to make it clear to Englishmen that I wanted to win swaraj not by shedding their blood but by making they feel absolutely at ease as regards the safety of their persons. What profit would it be if I succeed in saving a few cows from death by using force against persons who do not regard cow-killing as sinful? Cow-protection then can only be secured by cultivating universal friendliness, i.e., ahimsa. Now you will understand why I regard the question of cow-protection as greater even than that of swaraj. The fact is that the capacity to achieve the former will suffice for the latter purpose as well. Cow-protection then can only be secured by cultivating universal friendliness, i.e., ahimsa. Now you will understand why I regard the question of cow-protection as greater even than that of swaraj. The fact is that the capacity to achieve the former will suffice for the latter purpose as well. So far I have confined myself to the grosser or material aspect of cow-protection, i.e., the aspect that refers to the animal cow only. In its finer or spiritual sense the term cow-protection means the protection of every living creature.

Today the world does not fully realize the force and possibilities that lie hidden in ahimsa. The scriptures of Christians, Mussalmans and Hindus are all replete with the teaching of ahimsa. But we do not know its full import. The rishis of old performed terrible penances and austerities to discover the right meaning of sacred texts. Today we have at least two interpretations of the Gayatri. Which one of them is correct, that of the sanatanist or that of the Arya Samajists? Who can say? But our rishis made the startling discovery (and every day I feel more and more convinced of its truth) that sacred texts and inspired writings yield their truth only in proportion as one has advanced in the practice of ahimsa and truth The greater the realization of truth and ahimsa, the greater the illumination. These same rishis declared that cow-protection was the supreme duty of a Hindu and that its performance brought one moksha, i.e., salvation.

Now I am not ready to believe that by merely protecting the animal cow, one can attain moksha. For moksha one must completely get rid of one’s lower feelings like attachment, hatred, anger, jealousy, etc. It follows, therefore, that the meaning of cow-protection in terms of moksha must be much wider and far more comprehensive than is commonly supposed. The cow-protection which can bring one moksha must, from its very nature, include the protection of everything that feels. Therefore in my opinion, every little breach of the ahimsa principle, like causing hurt by harsh speech to anyone, man, woman or child, to cause pain to the weakest and the most insignificant creature on earth would be a breach of the principle of cow-protection, would be tantamount to the sin of beef-eating differing from it in degree, if at all, rather than in kind That being so, I hold that with all our passions let loose we cannot today claim to be following the principle of cow-protection. 12

I know ahimsa alone can provide a remedy for our ills. In my view the path of non-violence is not the path of the timid or the unmanly. Ahimsa is the height of Kshatriyas dharma as it represents the climax of fearlessness. In it there is no scope for flight or for defeat. Being a quality of the soul it is not difficult of attainment. It comes easily to a person who feels the presence of the soul within. I believe that no other path but that of non-violence will suit India. The symbol of that dharma for India is the spinning-wheel as it alone is the friend of the distressed and the giver of plenty for the poor. The law of love knows no bounds of space or time. My swaraj, therefore, takes note of Bhangis, Dheds, Dublas and the weakest of the weak, and except the spinning-wheel I know no other thing which befriends all these. 13 The path of ahimsa is very difficult; it is sharper than the edge of a sword. There must be compassion in ahimsa. Tulsidas considered himself to be the most sinful person. “Who is there so crooked, so wicked and so sensual as I?” sings Bhakta Surdas. 14

The second is Ahimsa paramo dharmah and if ahimsa, meaning love, non-violence, is the law of life, is the greatest religion, is the only religion, then I suggest to you that untouchability is in direct conflict with that truth. The third is that God alone is Truth and everything else is transitory and illusory. If it is so, I suggest to you that it is impossible for us to reconcile untouchability and inapproachability with the grand doctrine. I have come, therefore, to reason with my orthodox friends. I have come to plead with them, and by their courtesy and goodwill. I was able to wait upon them this afternoon. They gave me a patient hearing and listened to me. We argued, I appealed to their reason, I appealed to their humanity, I appealed to the Hinduism in them. I am sorry to confess to you that I was not able to produce an impression that I had expected I would be able to do. But “despair” is a term which does not occur in my dictionary. I shall despair when I despair of myself, of God and humanity. But as I believe in God, as I believe in the fact that we are all met here together and as I believe also in humanity, because I see that in spite of all our differences, all our quarrels, humanity lives on, I believe also that the truth that I claim I represent for the time being, will impress itself upon my orthodox friends here. 15

We have to practice the dharma of ahimsa and love in another matter as well. We must free our country from the sin of keeping our own brothers away as untouchables. A caste Hindu approached me and told me that the Ezhavas to treat those who belong to lower castes as untouchables. This must stop. More- over, he also told me that if the Ezhavas and Pulayas gave up liquor, the problem of untouchability would be automatically solved. I do not regard this as a proper defence. However, the only way open to us is to profit from this advice and do whatever needs to be done. We cannot answer back that caste Hindus too drink secretly. It is sufficient for us to be aware of our own faults and get rid of them. I hope that, in this Sanskrit atmosphere, you will bear in mind whatever I have briefly told you and speedily advance towards the religious ideal which Shri Narayan Guru Swami is placing before you. 16

I would suggest to “A Brahmin” an examination of the doctrine of ahimsa apart from the incidents he quotes. Ahimsa paramo dharmah is one of the highest truths of life. Any fall from it must be regarded as a fall. Euclid’s straight line may not be capable of being drawn on a blackboard. But the impossibility of the task cannot be permitted to alter the definition. Judged by that test even the uprooting of a plant is an evil. And who does not feel a pang on plucking a beautiful rose? That we do not feel a pang on plucking a weed does not affect the doctrine. It shows that we do not know the place of weeds in nature. Therefore all injury is a violation of the doctrine of ahimsa. The fullest application of ahimsa does make life impossible. Then, let the truth remain though we may all perish. The teachers of old have carried the doctrine to its logical extent and lay down that the physical life is an evil, an embarrassment. Moksha is a bodiless super physical state in which there is neither drinking nor eating and therefore neither the milking of buffalo nor the plucking even of a weed. It may be difficult for us to grasp or appreciate the truth; it may be and is impossible fully to live up to it. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that it is the truth. And virtue lies in regulating our lives in accordance with it and to the best of our ability. A true perception is half the battle. Life becomes livable and lovable only to the extent that we apply the grand doctrine in actual practice. For then we hold the flesh in bondage rather than live in perpetual bondage to the flesh. 17

I venture to say that there is absolutely no warrant in our scriptures for such inhuman treatment of our fellow-beings. It is contrary to humanity, it is contrary to the religion we profess the religion of ahimsa—to say that caste Hindus may not serve an untouchable who is bitten by a snake or scorpion. On the contrary, my religion, the Hindu religion, teaches me that if I see my son and an untouchable side by side bit by a snake and I am given the option of saving first the untouchable or my son, it is my bounden duty to save the untouchable in preference to my son. God will never forgive me if I forsake that untouchable boy. There is no other way of self-realization, except the way of complete self-abandonment. I ask you, therefore, to shed this bad habit, no matter for how many years we have been practicing it. 18

References: