Question Box and Mahatma Gandhi- XIX

[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

 

 

Question Box and Mahatma Gandhi- XIX

 

 

Q. You must know that arrests after arrests are being made under the defence of India Act. Now your favourite Dr. Lohia is taken up. I suppose you still see no reason for civil disobedience even as a protest against these arrests. Or maybe you think that these arrests are legitimate.

A. The question is apposite. Dr. Lohia is no more my favourite than any other Congressman. True he has come nearer to me than he was. Every arrest evokes my mental protest. But I am not in the habit of reducing all my thoughts to writing. I believe that our thoughts too produce effects, though not known to us or to the world. I felt that any public protest by me would be ineffective. All things are legitimate and illegitimate in war time. I regard war itself as illegitimate. Therefore all repression is bad from my standpoint. But I have as yet no effective remedy against war. Even, therefore, as I suffer war, I suffer these repressive acts of war makers. One strange thing about India is that, so far as I know, it is not the people who are likely to help the Nazis that are being put under restraint, but those who are patriots hungering for the freedom of the country. In a free country they will be fighting against designs upon their country. Here their chief fault is that they are lovers of their country and its freedom. If the authorities have anything else against them, they should publish it. Repression is on the increase. They know that the Congress is the most powerful instrument for preventing violence. The Congress has taken no step which might, in spite of its efforts to the contrary, result in violence. It is therefore difficult to understand these acts of repression. They seem to be part of a concerted plan, for they are prevalent in almost all provinces. One reflection I put before Congressmen for what it is worth. Imprisonment has no terror for them. Civil disobedience means certain imprisonment. The difference is that in the one case it is courted, in the other it comes uninvited. Therefore any step the Congress can take will be not to secure the discharge of the persons arrested but to take wind out of the Government sails by offering more victims than they can take. Therefore the question is whether the Congress should take that step or not.

Q. Recently you wrote: “The present is no atmosphere for influencing the Britishers in the right direction through civil disobedience.” And in the same article you said: “I would unhesitatingly declare civil disobedience if his country was demonstrably non-violent and disciplined.” Now the question is, if the country is demonstrably non-violent after some time, and the war continues for a long time, will you start civil disobedience? And if you start it, will it not embarrass the Britishers? Will you hesitate to start civil disobedience if the group outside the congress is not non-violent?

A. If you will fill in the sentences left to be understood in my article, you will not find any inconsistency. ‘The present atmosphere’ means English unreadiness to put up with anything when the safety of English homes is at stake. It also means our very incomplete nonviolence. If we were completely and therefore demonstrably nonviolent, it would mean that the British themselves would recognize our non-violence. Any purely non-violent step cannot embarrass them. As a matter of fact, if our non-violence was complete, we would have no internal differences, no friction in the Congress ranks, no friction with non-Congressmen. In that case there would be no occasion for civil disobedience at all. I have said as much only recently in these columns. I have put the same thing in another manner in the sentence quoted by you. For a non-violent step taken by a united nation will carry its own fruition without any bitterness. Therefore I should be ready for action the moment the non-violence of my dream is establish, no matter in what peril the British may find themselves. Indeed, if that non-violence comes, it will not only save India but also save Britain and France. But you will be on safe ground in saying that I wrote nonsense because I knew that the degree of non-violence required by me was not forthcoming in my time. I am an irrepressible optimist. No scientist starts his experiments with a faint heart. I belong to the tribe of Columbus and Stevenson who hoped against hope in the face of heaviest odds. The days of miracles are not gone. They will abide so long as God abides. Your second question is answered in the foregoing. Of course in the picture here presented non- Congress groups will also have accepted non-violence but first things first. Let the congress put its own house in order.

Q. I am a Bengali Brahmin widow. Since my widowhood - these 24 years- I have observed strict rules about my food. I have my separate widow’s kitchen and utensils even in my own family. I believe in your ideal of truth and non-violence, I am a habitual wearer of Khadi since 1930 and a regular spinner. Our Mahila Samaj has established a Harijan school in a Harijan village in Dacca. I go there and mix with the Harijans. I mix freely with my Muslim sisters towards whom I have nothing but goodwill. But I cannot interline with Harijans or any other non-Brahmin caste. Now can’t orthodox widows like me enlist as satyagrahis, passive and active?

A. According to the congress constitution you have a perfect right to be enlisted. You can even enforce your right. But since you ask me, I would dissuade you from being enlisted. I know the punctilious way in which Bengali widows observe the rules custom has prescribed for them. But widows who dedicate themselves to the country’s cause, and that in a non-violent way, should have no scruples in dining with anybody. I do not believe that dining with people, no matter whom they are, hinders spiritual progress. It is the motive which is the deciding factor. If a widow approaches every task in a spirit of service, it is well with her. A widow may observe all the dining and other rules with meticulous care and yet not be a true widow if she is not of a pure heart. You know as well as I do that outward observance of rules governing a society often covers hypocrites. I would, therefore, advise you to disregard the restriction on inter-dining and the like as a hindrance to spiritual and national progress and concentrate on cultivation of the heart. In the Satyagraha dal I should like to have not self-satisfied persons but those who have used their reason and chosen a way of life that has commended itself to both head and heart.

 

Reference:

 

Harijan, 15-6-1940