Discussion of Mahatma Gandhi with John R. Mott

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]

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

 

 

Discussion of Mahatma Gandhi with John R. Mott

 

 

JOHN MOTT: You have been one that has given a great initiative to the movement, you have put your life-blood into it, you have suffered and triumphed, and I want you to help me to a profound understanding of what the issues are and tell me how I may help, for I do not want to hinder. What is happening in India is going to have a profound effect on the world. We are in front of forces the influence of which it would be difficult to prophesy or predict. Give me your own diagnosis of the problem.

GANDHIJI: So far as I am concerned with the untouchability question, it is one of life and death for Hinduism. As I have said repeatedly, if untouchability lives Hinduism perishes, and even India perishes; but if untouchability is eradicated from the Hindu heart root and branch, then Hinduism has a definite message for the world. I have said the first thing to hundreds of audiences, but not the latter part. Now that is the utterance of a man who accepts Truth as God. It is therefore no exaggeration. If untouchability is an integral part of Hinduism, the latter is a spent bullet. But untouchability is hideous untruth. My motive in launching the anti-untouchability campaign is clear. What I am aiming at is not every Hindu touching an untouchable, but every touchable Hindu driving untouchability from his heart, going through a complete change of heart. Inter-dining or intermarrying is not the point. I may not dine with you, but I ought not to harbour the feeling that if I dined with you I should be polluted. If I was a woman to be married, I should not say ‘I cannot marry a man because he is an untouchable.’ I am making this clear to you because in the programme of the Harijan Sevak Sangh we say we don’t ask the orthodox Hindus to inter-dine or intermarry with the ‘untouchables’. Many of us have no scruples about inter-dining or intermarriage. That untouchability is an ancient custom I admit, but there are many such things intertwined with Hinduism because it is an ancient religion, even a prehistoric religion. Instead of being the dead faith that it threatens to be, I want it to be a living faith, so that it may exist side by side with other religions of the world.

With this he explained, the genesis of the Harijan Sevak Sangh, and how he could not be a member of the Sangh, and yet that he had directed and guided the policy of the Sangh. “The world looks upon you,” said Dr. Mott, “as a front-line prophet, conscience, initiator and warrior, and we pray that you may be spared long for this most fateful period in the life of the world.” The conversation led to the genesis of the Yeravda Pact beginning with Gandhiji’s declaration, at the Round Table Conference, to lay down his life to stop the vivisection of Hinduism.

G. But I had no political axe to grind, I have none. Nor have the other Hindus a political motive. For instance, the Pact has been a kind of bombshell thrown in the midst of Bengalis. They have their own Hindu-Muslim problem which has been rendered difficult by the Yeravda Pact. The original Premier’s ‘Award’, as it was called, gave fewer seats to the Harijans than the Pact gives. It is almost an overwhelming number. But I said Hinduism loses nothing if all the seats were captured by the Harijans. I would not alter a comma in the Pact unless the Harijans themselves wanted it.

JOHN MOTT: Removal of untouchability is the business of your life-time. The importance of this movement lies beyond the frontiers of India, and yet there are few subjects on which there is more confusion of thought. Take for instance the missionaries and missionary societies. They are not of one mind. It is highly desirable that we become of one mind and find out how far we can help and not hinder. I am Chairman of the International Missionary Council which combines 300 missionary societies in the world. I have on my desk reports of these societies, and I can say that their interest in the untouchables is deepening. I should be interested if you would feel free to tell me where, if anywhere, the missionaries have gone along wrong lines. Their desire is to help and not to hinder. I cannot help saying that the activities of the missionaries in this connection have hurt me. They with the Mussalmans and the Sikhs came forward as soon as Dr. Ambedkar threw the bombshell, and they gave it an importance out of all proportion to the weight it carried, and then ensued a rivalry between these organizations. I could understand the Muslim organizations doing this, as Hindus and Muslims have been quarrelling. The Sikh intervention is an enigma.

But the Christian mission claims to be a purely spiritual effort. It hurt me to find Christian bodies vying with the Muslims and Sikhs in trying to add to the numbers of their fold. It seemed to me an ugly performance and a travesty of religion. They even proceeded to enter into secret conclaves with Dr. Ambedkar. I should have understood and appreciated your prayers for the Harijans, but instead you made an appeal to those who had not even the mind and intelligence to understand what you talked; they have certainly not the intelligence to distinguish between Jesus and Mohammed and Nanak and so on.

Dr. Mott referred to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s speech, and the talks he had with him, and other bishops and missionary leaders in England, and emphasized the fact that the Christians should in no way seem to be bidding with others for the souls of the Indian people. He said he had a reassurance from the Free as well as the State Church leaders, but in the secular papers it had got abroad that Dr. Ambedkar could hand over 50 million people to those who were prepared to accept them. He had sensed that it might mean a tremendous disservice. He said: “The most trustworthy leaders of Protestant missionary forces would give to what you have said great heed. They do believe increasingly in work for the untouchables. Tell us what we can wisely do and what we cannot wisely do.”

G. So far as this desire of Dr. Ambedkar is concerned, you can look at the whole movement with utter calmness and indifference. If there is any answer to Dr. Ambedkar’s appeal and if the Harijans and he take the final step and come to you, you can take such steps as your conscience suggests. But today it seems unseemly and precipitate to anticipate what Dr. Ambedkar and Harijans are going to do. Deenabandhu Andrews referred with condemnation to the Lucknow Conference and Dr. Mott said that what the Conference did was not authoritative.

G. It becomes authoritative owing to the silence of Christian bodies. If they had disowned all that happened it would have been well, but those who met at Lucknow perhaps felt that they were voicing the views of the missionary bodies that, in their opinion, were not moving fast enough.

J. M. But there was a disclaimer.

G. If there was, it did not travel beyond the English Channel.

J. M. But there is a deplorable confusion of thought and divided counsel even amongst friends. The Devil would like nothing better. My life has been mostly spent for the intellectual classes, and I feel very much conscience-moved to help in this movement. Gandhiji cited the example of good Christians helping by working under the Hindu banner. There was Mr. Keithahn who was trying hard to smooth the path of the untouchables. There were Miss Barr and Miss Madden who had thrown themselves into the rural reconstruction movement. He then adverted to the problem in Travancore where an indecent competition was going on for enticing away the Ezhavas from the Hindu fold.

G. The Ezhavas in Travancore want temple-entry. But it is no use you’re asking me whether they want temple-entry. Even if they do not want it, I must see that they enjoy the same rights as I enjoy, and so the reformers there are straining every nerve to open the temple doors.

J. M. But must we not serve them?

G. Of course you will, but not make conversion the price of your service.

J. M. I agree that we ought to serve them whether they become Christians or not. Christ offered no inducements. He offered service and sacrifice.

G. If Christians want to associate themselves with this reform movement they should do so without any idea of conversion.

J. M. Apart from this unseemly competition, should they not preach the Gospel with reference to its acceptance?

G. Would you, Dr. Mott, preach the Gospel to a cow? Well, some of the untouchables are worse than cows in understanding. I mean they can no more distinguish between the relative merits of Islam and Hinduism and Christianity than a cow. You can only preach through your life. The rose does not say: ‘Come and smell me.’

J. M. But Christ said: ‘Preach and Teach,’ and also that Faith cometh by Hearing, and hearing by the word of God. There was a day when I was an unbeliever. Then J. E. K. Studd of Cambridge, a famous cricketer, visited my University on an evangelistic mission and cleared the air for me. His life and splendid example alone would not have answered my question and met my deepest need, but I listened to him and was converted. First and foremost we must live the life; but then by wise and

Sympathetic unfolding of essential truth we must shed light on processes and actions and attitudes, and remove intellectual difficulties so that it may lead us into the freedom which is freedom indeed. You do not want the Christians to withdraw tomorrow?

G. No. But I do not want you to come in the way of our work, if you cannot help us.

J. M. The whole Christian religion is the religion of sharing our life, and how can we share without supplementing our lives with words?

G. Then what they are doing in Travancore is correct? There may be a difference of degree in what you say and what they are doing, but there is no difference of quality. If you must share it with the Harijans, why don’t you share it with Thakkarbapa and Mahadev? Why should you go to the untouchables and try to exploit this upheaval? Why not come to us instead?

J. M. The whole current discussion since the Ambedkar declaration has become badly mixed with other unworthy motives, which must be eliminated. Jesus said: ‘Ye shall be witnesses unto me’. A good Christian has to testify what he has experienced in his own life or as a result of his own observation. We are not true as His followers, if we are not true witnesses of Christ. He said: ‘Go and teach and help through the

mists and lead them out into larger light.’ Deenabandhu Andrews here asked to be permitted to put forward a concordat. He said: “There are fundamental differences between you and the missionaries, and yet you are the friend of missionaries. But you feel that they are not playing the game. You want the leaders of the Church to say: ‘We do not want to fish in troubled waters; we shall do nothing to imply that we are taking advantage of a peculiar situation that has arisen’.”

G. I do not think it is a matter which admits of any compromise at all. It is a deeply religious problem and each should do what he likes. If your conscience tells you that the present effort is your mission, you need not give any quarter to Hindu reformers. I can simply state my belief that what the missionaries are doing today does not show spirituality.

J. M. What are the governing ideals and aims of this Indian Village Industries movement? What is the object of your settling down in this little village?

G. The immediate object of my stay in Segaon is to remove to the best of my ability the appalling ignorance, poverty and the still more appalling insanitation of the Indian villages. All these really run into one another. We seek to remove ignorance not through imparting the knowledge of the alphabet by word of mouth, but by giving them object-lessons in sanitation, by telling them what is happening in the world, and so on.

J. M. What you are doing here has great industrial significance. Japan with about as high a rate of literacy as any country in the world is not exempt from the sins of industrialism.

G. But I am not seeking to industrialize the village. I want to revive the village after the ancient pattern, i. e., to revive hand spinning, hand- ginning, and its other vital handicrafts. The village uplift movement is an offshoot of the spinning movement. So great was my ignorance in 1908 that I mixed up the spinning-wheel with the loom in my small book on Indian Home Rule.

J. M. What is the cause of your greatest concern, your heaviest burden?

G. My greatest worry is the ignorance and poverty of the masses of India, and the way in which they have been neglected by the classes, especially the neglect of the Harijans by the Hindus. This criminal neglect is unwarranted by any of the scriptures. We are custodians of a great religion and yet we have been guilty of a crime which constitutes our greatest shame. Had I not been a believer in the inscrutable ways of Providence, a sensitive man like me would have been a raving maniac.

J. M. What affords you the greatest hope and satisfaction?

G. Faith in myself born of faith in God.

J. M. In moments when your heart may sink within you, you hark back to this faith in God?

G. Yes. That is why I have always described myself as an irrepressible optimist.

J. M. So am I. Our difficulties are our salvation. They make us hark back to the living God.

G. Yes. My difficulties have strengthened my faith which raises superior to every difficulty, and remains undimmed. My darkest hour was when I was in Bombay a few months ago. It was the hour of my temptation. Whilst I was asleep I suddenly felt as though I wanted to see a woman. Well a man who had tried to raise superior to the sex instinct for nearly 40 years was bound to be intensely pained when he had this frightful experience. I ultimately conquered the feeling, but I was face to face with the blackest moment of my life and if I had succumbed to it, it would have meant my absolute undoing. I was stirred to the depths because strength and peace come from a life of continence. Many Christian friends are jealous of the peace I possess. It comes from God who has blessed me with the strength to battle against temptation.

J. M. I agree. ‘Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.’ The talk now was switched on to subjects vastly different those of current politics and other subjects. But Gandhiji would not allow a discussion on current politics in the columns of Harijan. I am therefore reluctantly obliged to omit this very important part of the discussion.

J. M. If money is to be given to India, in what ways can it be wisely given without causing any harm? Will money be of any value?

G. No. When money is given it can only do harm. It has got to be earned when it is required. I am convinced that the American and British money which has been voted for missionary societies has done more harm than good. You cannot serve God and mammon both. And my fear is that mammon has been sent to serve India and God has remained behind, with the result that He will one day have His vengeance. When the American says, ‘I will serve you through money,’ I dread him. I simply say to him: ‘Send us your engineers not to earn money but to give us the benefit of their scientific knowledge.

J. M. But money is stored-up personality. It can be badly used as well as well used. Through money you can get the services of a good engineer. But far more dangerous than money is human personality. It makes possible the good as well as the bad use of money. Kagawa of Japan admits the use of money and machinery is attended with peril but insists, and I agree with him, that Christ is able to dominate both the money and the machine.

G. I have made the distinction between money given and money earned. If an American says he wants to serve India, and you packed him off here, I should say we had not earned his services. But take Pierre Ceresole who came at his own expense, but after our consent, to serve earthquake-stricken Bihar. We would love to have as many Ceresole as could possibly come to our help. No. It is my certain conviction based on experience that money plays the least part in matters of spirit.

J. M. If money is the root of evil, we are living in a time when there is more money than ever was before.

G. Which means that there is more evil in the world?

J. M. This makes it supremely important that we study more profoundly than ever how to dominate this power both among the rich and the poor with spiritual purpose, motive and passion. The greatest thing you have ever done is the observance of your Monday silence. You illustrate thereby the storing up and releasing of power when needed. What place has it continued to have in the preparation of your spiritual tasks?

G. It is not the greatest thing I have done, but it certainly means a great thing to me. I am now taking silence almost every day. If I could impose on myself silence for more days in the week than one I should love it. In Yeravda Jail I once observed a 15 days’ silence. I was in the seventh heaven during that period. But this silence is now being utilized to get through arrears of work. It is a superficial advantage after all. The real silence should not be interrupted even by writing notes to others and carrying on conversation through them. The notes interrupt the sacredness of the silence when you should listen to the music of the spheres. That is why I often say that my silence is a fraud.

 

 

Reference:

 

Harijan, 19-12-1936 and 26-12-1936