For Global Peace with Social Justice in a Sustainable Environment

Ahimsa and Mahatma Gandhi- XIX

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- XIX

my plea based on positive experience is that even as truth and ahimsa are not merely for the chosen few but for the whole of humanity to be practised in daily life, so exactly is self-control not merely for a few ‘mahatmas’ but for the whole of humanity. And even as because many people will be untruthful and violent, humanity may not lower its standard, so also though many, even the majority, may not respond to the message of self-control, we may not lower our standard. 1The essence of Hinduism is contained in its enunciation of one and only God as Truth and its bold acceptance of ahimsa as the law of the human family. 2 Morality includes truth, ahimsa and continence. Every virtue that mankind has ever practised is preferable to and derived from these three fundamental virtues. Non-violence and continence are again derivable from Truth, which for me is God. 3

I do not know that I need have suppressed the name of the college or the names of the signatories. The learned professor has sent me a stamped envelope for answer. This presumes a personal reply. But I have only limited time at my disposal especially when I am nursing two precious patients. I would not miss my weekly talk with the readers of Harijan. I am, therefore, with apologies to my correspondents, combining two purposes to save my time. The question raised in the letter is of very great importance and has always caused me the greatest difficulty, not much in deciding upon the action to be taken at a given moment but in justifying my conduct in terms of ahimsa. For the same action may outwardly be taken by the believer and the unbeliever. At these times the motive alone decides its quality. At the time of writing I have neither the text-book nor the original in Gujarati of which the text is a translation. But I have a recollection of what I wrote. What is more, so far as I am aware, my views on ahimsa, as I held them, remain the same today. The general proposition that I laid down in the quotation was derived from my conduct during the European War. I had thrown myself whole-heartedly into it at the peril of my life not because of the risks attendant upon serving at such times, but because at the time I was attending drills and camps I was suffering from pleurisy and general weakness as I had hardly regained the strength I had lost during an exhausting fourteen days’ fast I had undertaken two or three months or before the War. I believed then the British Empire to be on the whole a system beneficial to humanity. I had dreamt of one day converting it to methods of peace instead of war for the sake even of its own existence though in another form. But I was fully conscious of my limitations. I was an insignificant atom ineffective for resistance to its general policy whether I joined the War or not, I was helplessly party to it, inasmuch as I ate the food protected by the British fleet.

I was enjoying personal liberty too under its protection. If, therefore, I helped the War somehow or other, I felt that for me as a votary of ahimsa, it was better to take a direct part in it so as to enable me the sooner to end War. It is quite possible that all this was argument of the weak and that if I felt that war was an evil, I should have gone away from it even if it meant starvation or a rebel’s death. Anyway I did not think so then, nor do I now. It is wholly beside the argument what my attitude would now be, seeing that I no longer believe in the Empire as on the whole a beneficent power. To illustrate my answer, let me take another argument from my own life. Even when I was a little urchin my heart and intellect rebelled against untouchability. But being then an insignificant member of the family I acquiesced in their conduct towards Harijans which I should not do now. Needless to say, I could not then have argued out my conduct. My personal belief did not appear to me to be inconsistent with my living in the family. Indeed life is made of such compromises. Ahimsa, simply because it is purest, unselfish love, often demands such compromises.

The conditions are imperative. There should be no self in one’s action, no fear, no untruth, and it must be in furtherance of the cause of ahimsa. The compromise must be natural to oneself, not imposed from without. I should not at all wonder if my answer has given no satisfaction to the professor and his pupils. I must be pardoned for the constant reference to my own actions. The reason is obvious. I am not a well-read man in any sense of the term. All I know of ahimsa is in the first instance derived from my own experiences and experiments carried on in broad daylight in a humble scientific spirit and in the fear of God which is Truth. 4 Truth and ahimsa are truer than many so called scientific facts. Only they are difficult to put into practice. And then too, they are not so difficult as they seem if there is the proper previous preparation. But we do not care to give this most important thing in life more than a part of our leisure hours. Our valuations need revising. 5

If she is weak is striking, she is strong in suffering. I have described woman as the embodiment of sacrifice and ahimsa. She has to learn not to rely on man to protect her virtue or her honour. I do not know a single instance of a man having ever protected the virtue of a woman. He cannot even if he would. Rama certainly did not protect the virtue of Sita, nor the five Pandavas of Draupadi. Both these noble women protected their own virtue by the sheer force of their purity. No person loses honour or self-respect but by his consent. A woman no more loses her honour or virtue because a brute renders her senseless and ravishes her than a man loses his because a wicked woman administers to him a stupefying drug and makes him do what she likes. 6 You have to live down the hottest tempers if you are to express ahimsa in your life. It makes no difference whether the temper is directed towards you personally or towards your wards or dear friends. They, Balvantsinha and Munnalal, would not have been with me if they were perfect men or very nearly so. 7

I know the Jain belief. I knew the ideas of Raichandbhai, but I am convinced that they are not consistent with the ethics of ahimsa. From the point of view of ahimsa, uncooked things should be considered sufficient for the needs of the body. Drying, pickling and cooking are forms of violent possessiveness and should, therefore, be eschewed. I see no meaning in the distinction that is made between tubers and other vegetables. In Jain literature ahimsa has been confined only to a discussion of what should be eaten and what should not be eaten. This, in my view, is a travesty of ahimsa. I have seen non-vegetarians who are the very images of compassion and hence I consider them to be votaries of ahimsa in spite of their being non-vegetarians. I have also seen people who, although avoiding green vegetables, etc., gratify their palate in all sorts of ways and are full of cruelty. I believe that they are a disgrace to dharma. I also believe that had Raichandbhai not died prematurely, he would have fully endorsed what I am saying here now to say that a fast is broken by cleaning the teeth or by taking a bath is, in my opinion, sheer ignorance. Those who are completely free from passions and are living in uninhabited forests, wearing no clothes and eating only fruit, etc., yielded by the trees, who meditate on God and roam about, for them it might not matter if they did not clean the teeth or take bath because leaves of neem trees are both their food and their means of cleaning the teeth. Earth and sun rays are their bath. It would be sheer ignorance to apply this, during a fast, to persons who are full of evil emotions, hold all kinds of possessions and whose every pore emits foul smell. 8

In that case, the Muslim gentleman had introduced a new custom and consequently had to put up with the orthodoxy of his relations. In this case, people wish to give up their existing tradition and eat meat. A vegetarian Hindu is by no means bound to encourage them. It depends on each individual as to how far he is prepared to abandon existing tradition in such matters. Those who regard giving up meat as a part of religion are likely to find it intolerable if other members of the family eat meat. We should follow ahimsa dharma or the religion of love in all our conduct. There should be no anger towards those who give up their religion; they should be won over through love alone. How this may be done, is to be considered in each particular case. 9

It is very strange that you saw anger in my letter. Maybe mere admonition is considered anger, but if no admonition is given there is also the fear that a person may not wake up. There is certainly an art of merely expressing one’s opinion in pleasing language without admonition, but I have not been able to acquire that art. I know this also, that it is an aspect of ahimsa. If I saw the letter written to you I would certainly be able to know whether there was ahimsa or only himsa in it. I do not know Vinoba’s and Kishorelal’s views. I have certainly not met them. I do not remember to have sent a copy of my letter to them. Be that as it may, even after reading Raiji’s letter, I stick to my views. I believe that one should not yield to the temptation of solving a problem. Such external standards as cannot be followed by many had better be abandoned. 10 I do know that it is not an easy task to interpret ahimsa in mathematical language. I am trying to do that. And what is true of ahimsa is also true of all other things, e.g., spinning, village industries, etc. But perhaps you will understand all this on your own if you start reading the three journals. I am expecting from you work of that level. I have torn up your letter. Nothing from it will pass to Delhi. If you decide to go to Trivandrum, and if you do not take a ship and if you can free yourself from there, then why not join us in Madras? 11

Dharma lies in truth and ahimsa. Whatever we do while following it is proper. And what if, in doing it, we get daily something new to do or have to wander from place to place every day? What difference does it make whether we have a broom in our hand or a pen? We should be content with whatever comes to us unsought. We should bring credit to whatever work we do. Stay there as long as Father desires. Go to Sitab Diyara if you think it necessary and to Ahmadabad when Jayaprakash permits you to do so. 12

The correspondent who has written this letter is devoted to ahimsa. This question is pertinent. One who resists the oppressor is, to some extent, saved; but one who has no strength to resist gets beaten. What should a devotee of ahimsa do in such circumstances? Should the oppressed be advised to hit back or at least take the matter to the court? Both these proceedings are lawful. The law allows a person to defend himself if he is illegally assaulted. He of course has the right to go to the court. But a devotee of ahimsa will not give such advice. He believes that tit for tat is not the true way of ending oppression in the world. The world has hitherto followed this path; but it has not reduced oppression-only its forms may have changed as devotee of ahimsa will advise the oppressed to resort to non-co-operation. No one can be compelled to slave for another. Hence those Harijans who are oppressed should learn to quit the oppressors’ lands. The questions naturally arise: Where should they go after quitting these lands? It is the duty of a Harijan sevak to find some work or other for such helpless Harijans. This should not be difficult. The path of ahimsa is no doubt difficult, but its ultimate result is permanent and beneficial to both. The world has been returning blow for a blow, but it has neither enhanced happiness not removed injustice and oppression. My experience tells me that the only way to remove these is ahimsa. 13 I have no difficulty generally in following and often adopting this writer’s criticism. But I must confess that though I have read the letter three times, I have failed to understand the argument. Why is the proposed exemption against the spirit of ahimsa or truth? I fail to see even the bad logic the writer sees in it. In dealing with living entities, the dry syllogistic method leads not only to bad logic but sometimes to fatal logic. For if you miss even a tiny factor and you never have control over all the factors that enter into dealings with human beings—your conclusion is likely to be wrong. Therefore you never reach the final truth, you only reach an approximation, and that too if you are extra careful in your dealings. Indeed it was my regard for ahimsa and truth that made me think of exempting Europeans For I am unable to lay down a universal law for all human beings and for all climes that drink is an evil. I can well regard it as a necessity in the Frigid Zone. I would therefore be chary of imposing prohibition against Europeans who not only do not regard measured quantities of alcohol at each meal an evil but consider it a necessity. Drink is not regarded as a vice in European society as it is generally in India.

I would therefore, even from the point of view of courtesy (a phase of ahimsa), leave it to their honour to respect the usage of the country of their adoption. I would gladly accept the logic of allowing other nationals, if the necessity is proved, the modified freedom the Europeans will enjoy. Indeed it might be necessary to bring in a large number of Indians too under the medical certificate clause. For me the drink question is one of dealing with a growing social evil against which the State is bound to provide whilst it has got the opportunity. The aim is patent. We want to wean the labouring population and the Harijans from the curse. It is a gigantic problem, and the best resources of all social workers, especially women, will be taxed to the utmost before the drink habit goes. The prohibition I have adumbrated is but the beginning (undoubtedly indispensable) of the reform. We cannot reach the drinker so long as he has the drink shop near his door to tempt him. One might not as well prevent an ailing child, nay man, from touching sweets so long as he does not remove the open box in front of them. Whilst on this question, I would like to answer an argument advanced in one of the newspaper cuttings which good friends send me that Shri C. Rajagopalachari in his zeal for this reform has brushed aside the question of the unemployment of the tappers who will be thrown out of work. I do not know what he has in mind for them. Shri Gajanan, who is becoming an expert in making palm gur, tells me that in the Southern Presidency there are tappers engaged in the nefarious trade. He further suggests that the tapping need not stop at all. Only what they will tap under the prohibition regime will be sweet toddy which will be converted into gur instead of fiery liquid. Indeed I learn that in Andhradesh the tappers do not sell the palm juice they extract, but they convert it into gur which they sell to the arrack manufacturers who make arrack out of this gur. In such cases nothing needs be done except for the State to take over this gur at a reasonable agreed price. From what I know of the tappers, they are not likely to lose anything by the impending prohibition, and the poor will get a rich but cheap food in the shape of good pure gur instead of a liquid which harms both body and soul. 14 Your observations on the hospitals are true enough. No one is bothered about anyone else. True ahimsa is to regard those who are not related to us as our kinsmen and to serve them; this alone is true compassion. 15

If one person can, surely a nation can. No man or group of men can hold any other man or group of other men slaves against their will. The slave-driver will say ‘Do this’ and they will refuse. It is possible to imagine that someday all nations will become sufficiently intelligent to act, even in the mass, as individuals do today. Gandhiji then drew a vivid picture of the violent road for India, how she might murder and fight, and suffer reprisals, till out of 30 crores only one crore would be left. But I decided that that was not the road for me. I rehearsed all these things in my mind, but I said to myself, ‘This is the way of the Devil, not the way of God.’ The thought of those twenty-nine crores of lives sacrificed would ever haunt me. The fact of the one crore of giants, trained in violence, who would have the whole of India to spread themselves in, would give me no satisfaction. I said to myself, ‘I must take the way of non-violence, and take with me even the lepers and the lunatics.’ For, after all, are we not all more or less lepers and more or less mad? If we were all sane, we should be like gods. It is because we have a screw loose that we cannot succeed in being one with God. 16

In a nation with ahimsa for its national policy such a thing should be inconceivable. Our schools will be turned into workshops, but workshops where they will learn things that are necessary for healthy living in accordance with the national ideal. 17 Ahimsa a real khadi-wearer will not utter an untruth. I am not talking about the hypocrites who don khadi or about those who do it to fill their bellies. A real khadi-wearer will harbour no violence, no deceit, and no impurity. To those who will say, ‘If this is khadi, we will not wear it’, I will say, ‘You are welcome to do what you like, but then you must forget about winning swaraj by means of truth and non-violence. Nor would I compel you to observe truth and non-violence, nor even to win swaraj after my method’. 18

References: