Formative Influence of Swami Vivekananda on Subhash Chandra Bose:
A Biographical Study
BY ABNISH SINGH
Department of English, Teerthanker Mahaveer University,Moradabad, U.P., India
Subhash Chandra Bose (1897-1945), the dominant figure, of course, next to Gandhi, better known as Netaji, was born in Cuttack, Orissa, on January 23, 1897, in a well known and well to Kayastha family. He was the sixty of the fourteen children of Janakinath Bose, an eminent lawyer by profession, and Prabhavati and descended from the Boses of Mahinagar. He was brought up at Cuttack where he had his school education. Subhash was admitted into the Bapist Mission School at Cuttack in 1902, and when he was in the fourth class, he joined the Ravenshaw Collegiate School, Cuttack and remained there up to 1913. Here he learnt Bengali and got the highest marks in the subject. He was an intelligent student and his command of English was superb. He was greatly influenced by his Head-Master, Beni Madhav Das from whom he learnt social, political an economical thoughts and ideas. It was during this period that Subhash was drawn towards the works of Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) as he accepted: "I was barely fifteen when Vivekananda entered my life, then there followed a revolution within and everything was turn upside down."1
As Subhash approached the end of his school career, the religious impulse began to grow in intensity. Due to his study, he could not devote himself fully towards spirituality. As the years rolled on, Subhash grew more and more into thoughts and education of Swami Vivekananda. Time came and he sat for the Matriculation examination in March, 1913 and got second in the whole university. His parents were delighted and he was packed off to Calcutta for further studies. Thereafter he joined the Presidency College, Calcatta. He appeared for the Intermediate examination in 1915 and was placed in the first division. Then he joined the Premiere College of the Calcutta University for his B.A. Honours in Philosophy. As taking Philosophy as his major subject, he was deeply influenced by Swami Vivekananda and by Aurobindo Ghose, the most popular leader of Bengal despite his voluntary exile and absence from politics since 1909, during his undergraduate days. In the College, he was active in students union and was a member of a group devoted mainly to social service and aiming at a synthesis between religion and nationalism, a sort of neo-Vivekananda group.
In January, 1916, Subhash organized a successful strike in the college against the misbehaviour of an English professor. He was expelled from the college. After losing academic years, he was finally permitted to study in the Scottish Church College in July 1917 and got first class in Philosophy but was placed second in order of merit in the B.A. examination in 1919. He decided to study experimental Psychology for his M.A. examination. He could not continue his studies as his father decided to send him to England to study for the Indian Civil Service. So, he set sail to England on 15th September, 1919 to study for the Civil Service. He was admitted for the course at Cambridge and passed the I.C.S. examination in Sep, 1920. But he was already an ardent nationalist and did not want to serve the British. An ardent patriotic spirit in Subhash Bose forced him ultimately to resign from the I.C.S. for the cause of the nation. Before resigning, he corresponded with his father, brother and also C.R. Das. The day, 22 April, 1921, on which he resigned from the I.C.S. was the day of destiny, a crucial turning point in his life. He hurried back to India with a view to take his place in the national struggle that was then in full swing. He reached Bombay on 16 July, 1921 and on the same afternoon had a long interview with Gandhiji at Mani Bhavan. The Mahatma received him with the characteristic hearty smile and the conversation started at once. Subhash desired to obtain a clear understanding of the details of his plans. He was not satisfied with the replies of Gandhiji. He felt that "there was a deplorable lack of clarity in the plan which the Mahatma had formulated and that he himself did not have a clear idea of the successive stages of campaign which would bring India to the cherished goal of freedom"2 Gandhiji advised him to meet Deshbandhu C.R. Das on reaching Calcutta. Subhash had already written to C.R. Das from Cambridge that he had resigned from the I.C.S. and decided to devote his whole time to political work. Subhash Bose met that man soon, had a hearty and long conversation with him and later C.R. Das became his political Guru. Subhash says:
During the course of our conversation I began to feel that here was a man who knew what he was about – who could give all that he had and who could demand from others all they could give - to whom youthfulness was not a short coming but a virtue. By the time our conversation came to an end my mind was made up. I felt that I had found a leader and I meant to follow him.3
Subhash Bose's return to Calcutta to join the freedom movement also meant a return to home and family. He had disclaimed any interest in marrying and having his own family. Here again he followed his spiritual mentor-Swami Vivekananda. He stayed with his elder brother Sarat and his family. Subhash was also very close to C.R.Das and his wife Basanti Devi who looked upon him as her own son. He did not enter politics as an unknown volunteer. He was a known figure since his college days up to his resigning from the I.C.S. So, he was given three assignments by C.R. Das. The first assignment of Bose in the Congress was the Office of the Principal of the National College, and along with it he was also made the Chief of the Publicity Congress Committee and the Head of the National Volunteer Corps. Das gave him also the responsibility of keeping contacts with the revolutionaries. Some of his fellowmen were, naturally, did not like to provide such important responsibilities to a new comer like Subhash Chandra Bose. But C.R.Das did not cared for them and expressed his firm conviction in Subhash, saying, "I can see through persons. Bose will never belie my expectations. He will be the right man to do justice to the work"4
Subhash was active in the non-co-operation activities of the Congress Party. These activities included boycotting of European goods and institutions, spinning with Charkha, writing, of the Punjab and Khilafat grievances, furthering of communal harmony between Hindus and Muslims. All these activities meant to bring Swaraj nearer. In the Hartal in Calcatta on 17 November, 1921, organized by the Congress in protest against the visit of the Prince of Wales, he proved his organizing capacity, and in the Civil Disobedience Movement started at that time he was nominated by C.R. Das as one of his successors for the leadership of the movement. This was the first taste of movement for Subhash Bose, he came out with flying colours and justified by his leadership the confidence and faith reposed on him. After the November Hartal, the government moved to suppress the non-co-operation movement. On December 20, 1921, Das and Subhash were both arrested and sentenced to six months in prison. Subhash started his first prison term side by side with C.R. Das.
The period of next few years was just like a hurricane for Bose, to say the least. He became the General Secretary of the Bengal Provincial Congress Committee and began to attend All India Congress Committee meetings in different parts of India. He was appointed Chief Executive Officer by the Mayor of Calcutta Corporation, C.R.Das in 1924. He was arrested in Oct., 1924, when he was a C.E.O. of Calcutta Corporation for his alleged involvement with the terrorists. He was put to Mandalay Jail in Barma and was kept detained there for years. During his personal experiments with politics and prison, he became bold throughout the whole period. This was the time when he was in prison in Burma, his political mentor C.R. Das passed away on June 16, 1925. After Das's death Subhash sought the guidance of Mrs. Das. He hailed her as Bengal's mother.
Subhash was released from the Burmese prison in May, 1927, and he carried out his political activities upto the beginning of 1932. Subhash was now an important leader of the Indian National Congress. He differed with the older leadership about the goal of dominion status. He stood for complete independence. During this period, he was made a member of the Motilal Nehru Committee to draw up the Swaraj Constitution. In the Calcutta Session of the Congress, in 1928, Bose, jointly with Jawaharlal Nehru, fought against the move for Dominion Status, as the goal of the Congress. Bose invited severe police assault on him when he was leading a procession of congressmen in Calcutta on October 26, 1913 against repeated government's warnings. He was the Mayor of Calcutta Corporation at that time. During Gandhiji's visit to England as the sole Congress delegate to Second Round Table Conference, Subhash resigned from the Presidency of the Bangal Congress Committee. After soma time, Subhash was again arrested on January 3, 1931. He was detained in the same Jail at Senoi in Central Provinces where his brother Sarat Chandra Bose was kept. Subhash had already suffered serious health problems during his provinces Mandalay imprisonment. Now again, tuberculosis symptoms get surfaced. Government made an offer to Subhash that he could go to Europe for treatment at his personal expenses. He sailed for Europe on February 23, 1933 from Bombay. On reaching Europe, Subhash Bose in one of his letters to his nephew Asoka Bose observed that "outside India, every Indian is India's unofficial ambassador."5 He was outside India for full three years from March, 1933 to March, 1936 and then again for two months in 1937-38. In Europe, he established centers in deferent European Capitals with a view to promote politico- cultural contacts between India and Europe.
Returning home, he found the Congress forming Government in the Provinces. He took part in it. The glorious day came in his life when he was elected as the President, fifty one in serial order, at the Haripura Congress Session in 19 February, 1938. He was re-elected the President of the Congress next year in the Tripuri Session defeating Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya, a nominee of Ghandhiji. This election was significant in the sense that it was an election of ideologies. Pattabhi represented the right wing of the Congress, whereas Subhash Bose represented the leftists who were also called extremists. Besides, he was convinced that war would break out within six months and demanded that the Congress should give an ultimatum to the British and if the ultimatum was rejected the entire country would be engaged in the struggle for Purna Swaraj. But the Congress did not adopt his suggestion and so he resigned from the Congress Presidentship and established Forward Bloc within the Congress. The Second World War broke out on 3 Sep., 1939 with Hitler invading Poland, true to the prophecy of Subhash Bose. On March 19, 1940, he convened Anti-Compromise Conference at Ramgarh under the joint auspices of Forward Bloc and Kisan Sabha which demanded a world wide struggle against the British. Bose was arrested on July 2, 1940. He was first kept in the Presidency Jail, and afterwards, in consideration of his health, he was kept in house, detention in his Elegin Road residence. From there, he left incognito to in the last week of January 1941. What he did thereafter in Europe and South-East Asia is now a recorded history.
After his escape from his residence, Subhash Bose, in his thesis entitled Forward Bloc – Its Justification, has explained the background and programme of the Forward Bloc, which is written during his sojourn in Kabul after his escape from India in January, 1941. He wrote: "when the main stream of a movement begins to stagnate, but there is still vitality in the movement as a whole – a left Wing invariably appears. The main function of the Left Wing is to stimulate progress when there is danger of its being arresyts."6
Besides, he put emphasis again and again on unity of action. Forward Bloc became the symbol of left unity for him. In the words of Bose, the Forward Block, and for that matter the Left "stands for uncompromising national struggle for the attainment of Independence, and for the post struggle period, it stands for socialist reconstruction."7
Subhash Bose reached Berlin during the first week of April, 1941. His aim was to get support from the outside for the independence of India. At that time, Germany, Italy and Japan formed a group called the Axis Powers. Among them, Germany was the most powerful nation and Hitler was the man whose help would be decisive for Bose. That was the reason; he had gone to Germany to supplement from outside the struggle going on at home. He negotiated alliance with both Germany and Japan, saying "our enemy's enemy is our friend." For proceeding his struggle at a large scale, on November 2, 1941, the Azad Hind Sangh held its first official meeting in Berlin. The eye of the needle before him was how to free his motherland from bondage. Suffice it to say that he was a dynamic personality possessing inexhaustible energy. He was also a gifted organizer, bold and blessed with the power of clear thinking. It is truly written by one of his associates that Bose "had a native power to lead, and he knew it"8. He was gifted with many colours of talents. He could take a decision in flash. He wanted that Hindus and Muslims should extend their sphere of co-operation to national politics. If better understanding would obtain between the two principal religious communities our battle for freedom would be won more decisively and more expeditiously. So, with the purpose of having a contact with the masses of India, he established ‘The Azad Hind Radio' in February 19, 1942. His regular broadcasts from Berlin aroused tremendous enthusiasms in India. In 1943, he founded Indian National Army with the ideal of liberating India by exerting pressure from outside and creating discontentment among the Indian armed personnel captivated and deserted during war.
Moreover, the works of Subhash Chandr Bose – The Indian Struggle and An Indian Pilgrim, also kindled the spirit of patriotism among the Indians. The Indian Struggle, first published in London on 17th January 1935, is the most important and comprehensive single volume of Netaji's work. The books is in two parts. The first is Netaji's narrative of the Indian struggle from 1920 to 1942. The second consists of a collection of writings, speeches and other documentary material covering the decade that ended with the Quit India Movement. In preparing this autobiography, Emilie Schenkl helped Subhas Bose. Later, Subhash married Schenkl and they had a daughter, Anita. An Indian Pilgrim is Netaji autobiography upto his Cambridge days in 1921. It also contains a collection of his letters of his boyhood, adolescence and youth ending with the one he wrote on the day he resigned from the Indian Civil Service. His works also inspired many for the betterment of India.
So was his spirit that moved the hearts and minds of Indians as well as the people of other nation as was done by Swami Vivekananda. He was tireless. He had the thought that ‘awake, arise and not stop till the goal is reached.' Following this ideology of Swamiji, he set forth to South East Asia. So, from Germany he made a perilous three month voyage in a submarine and reached Singapore on July 2, 1943. On landing in Japan, Subhash Bose was welcomed by the local government as well as by Rash Behari Bose. Two days later on 4 July he took over from Rash Behari Bose the leadership of Indian Independence Movement in East Asia and organized the Indian National Army and became its supreme commander. In his own speech Subhash Chandra Bose announced his intentions to organize Provisional Government of Free India. Bose gave the slogan-"Delhi Chalo – March to Delhi".9 The Japanese PM Tojo was invited to attend a special review of the INA. Bose renamed the I.N.A. as Azad Hind Fauj and urged for a total mobilization for a total war. He proclaimed the Provisional Government of Azad Hind on 21 October, 1943. He was hailed as Netaji by the army as well as by the Indian Civilian population in East Asia. Now there was the time for the Azad Hind Government to proclaim war against the British on the battle-field. So, battles were fought. The Andaman and Nicobar Islands were liberated in November, 1943 and renamed as ‘Shaheed and Swaraj Islands'. The Azad Hind Fauj crossed the Burma border and stood on native soil, that is India, on 18 March, 1944. How the brave army subsequently advanced up to Kohima and Imphal, how free India's banner was hoisted aloft there to the deafening cries of ‘Jai Hind' and ‘Netaji Zindabad' and how the atom bombs compelled Japan to surrender and the I.N.A., subsequently to retreat are all important events in the life of S.C.Bose as well as in history. Netaji was reportedly killed in an air-crash over Taipei. There is, however, no proof of it. Only Colonel Habibur Rahman had left an eye witness account of the crash. In August 20, 1945, the body of Netaji was taken to Taipei crematorium and was cremated. Ashes were kept in an urn in the shrine attached to the hospital. On September 5, 1945, Colonel Rahman and one Japanese Officer Colonel Saki travelled to Tokyo along with Netaji's ashes. The ashes were moved to a Buddhist temple - the Renkoji Temple. They have remained there since then. Moreover, the people of India did not believe that Subhash was actually dead. The stories about his reappearance continued to circulate. As a result of public pressure the Government of India had held two official inquiries - Shah Nawaj Committee in 1956 and the Khosla Commission in 1974, but they were in vain. The efforts of Netaji were not in vain. It was due to his efforts and sacrifice, India won freedom after some time. Truly, Netaji is immortal. He gave his life in defense of the honour and glory of his motherland and shall ever remains fully alive in the nation's heart becoming a never ending source of inspiration and courage to many a people all over the globe. And this was undoubtedly the outcome of the formative influence of Swami Vivekananda on him. .
REFERENCES:
[1] S.R.Bakshi. Subhash Chandra Bose : Founder of I.N.A. New Delhi: Anmol Publications. 1991. 2.
[2] Subhash Chandra Bose. The Indian Struggle 1920-42. Bombay: Asia Publishing House. 1964. 78.
[3] S.R.Bakshi. Subhash Chandra Bose : Founder of I.N.A. op.cit. 53.
[4] S.R.Bakshi Subhash Chandra Bose : Founder of I.N.A. op.cit. 6.
[5] Asoka Nath Bose. My Uncle Netaji, Calcutta : Esem Publications. 1977. 63.
[6] S.C.Bose. The Indian Struggle 1920 – 42. Op.cit. 395.
[7] S.C.Bose. The Indian Struggle 1920 – 4. Op.cit. 412.
[8] M. Shivram. The Road to Delhi, Tokyo: Charles Tuttle. 1967. pp. 123 – 24.
[9] Dilip Kumar Roy. The Subhash I Knew. Bombay: Nalanda Publications. 1946. 28.
Retrieved from "http://www.articlesbase.com/literature-articles/formative-influence-of-swami-vivekananda-on-subhash-chandra-bose-a-biographical-study-2157719.html"
(ArticlesBase SC #2157719) Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Interview with Ulrich Beck
S: Do you use the term diversity?
B: Yes, it appears in my texts in many places almost of its own accord. However, I’m usually employing it within a relatively specific context. For example, I would make it distinct from, on the one hand, difference, which contains relatively clear ideas of the boundaries between specific groups or identities, and on the other hand, let’s say, chaos, where everything is possible. To me, diversity in the sense of “superdiversity”, as Steve Vertovec has introduced the term, appears especially interesting. This term obviously has a potential to create public irritation, a provocation potential. And perhaps this stems from the fact that the more intense accent placed by this term undermines or questions an important prerequisite that is often considered to be obvious when dealing with plurality, with identity, etc. I am referring to the prerequisite that clear boundaries and boxes exist between Us and the Others: one is either this or that. Vertovec shows that equating origin and social position and that treating people from one country as a homogenous group no longer make sense in a situation where migration trajectories, legal status, and other factors are becoming ever more diverse. In a way, the term (super)diversity expresses the impossibility of making distinct categorizations, ascribing this or that identity, and essentializing the categories.
S: Isn’t that a problem for sociology, which is permanently engaged in classifying?
B: Yes, without a doubt; but we are living in a time of reflexive modernisation, which means, in a phase of radical modernisation, whose “side effects” question the institutional and cognitive foundations/basic categories of previous modernisations. As we are showing in Munich in the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) “Reflexive Modernization”, the classification according to “either or” is no longer valid in many cases, but rather, as a result of the successes of modernisation, this classification must be expanded by and replaced with a new logic of “Not only but also”.
Allow me to make this clear using a very different example. We have examined this problem within all areas of social life and all topics. To name just one: It is the differentiation between life and death. That almost seems to be an anthropological differentiation or seemed to be so for a long time. But medical progress does away with this differentiation simply in the sense that “better” medical practices create more indicators of death, that someone can be dead in terms of brain death or cardiac death. There are many different kinds of death. This means: medical progress is doing away with the boundaries between death and life through a pluralisation of indicators. When you apply all of these, then people are not only dead but also alive. This leads to restraints: Because no society can handle not having a clear differentiation between death and life, specific operationalisations must be carried out in light of the pluralisation of boundaries. These operationalisations can no longer claim the same degree of anthropological necessity because these sets always remain contingent, meaning that they can be revised through new research and are naturally morally controversial.
This is valid for many areas, also for the differentiation between society and nature, for example. In the case of the climate catastrophe, you can see that that is precisely a mixed relationship between society and nature. The idea that one can clearly distinguish between society and nature is totally outside of reality. And yet again, we must do it, despite that fact. You can experience this with all catastrophes, that we are attempting to ascribe something to nature or to the individuals involved. But we are almost constantly experiencing, this is also the theory of reflexive modernisation, that the hitherto existing dualisms are being undermined as a result of the radicalisation of modernisation processes and their effects.
S: But in the case of these two examples, there are clear connections to technological progress. In migration research, we tend to often think about belonging to a social group. The old finding that people have multiple identities at the same time already exists within research on nations and research on labour movements. Do you see new dimensions there as well?
B: Yes, that is the point. On the one hand, we can no longer easily uphold the difference between national and international. That which until now existed outside of the nation-state and of which the nation-state could divest itself outside its borders is suddenly part of nation-state processes in many regards. In light of global risks, the distant Other is within our middle. On the other hand, this is also true for the nation-state construction of Us and the Others at all levels of politics, but also at the level of the construction of identity and groups. I mean, all of transnationalism research shows that the idea that one can assume that territorial boundaries, the political boundaries, the cultural boundaries, and the social boundaries are congruent with one another, this situation simply no longer exists. The container model of nation-state spaces that can be locked – “methodological nationalism” – is useless for understanding Europe, for example, because here everything in these dimensions is getting mixed up. This means that the idea of “Us and the others” as a relatively clear categorization loses its reality-based content and persuasiveness, its empirical validity, which leads to great difficulties within statistics. One can practically forget the statistics on foreigners because they fit under only one aspect, that of national belonging, even though we know that there are domestic students and domestic social welfare recipients who simultaneously hold foreign passports. So, again here we have this falling apart of borders. I think that this irritation of the no longer clear assigning of identity, that is the irritation, the provocative potential of the term superdiversity, which takes on significance especially there where one hitherto thought of the world within the either-or framework. There are chief witnesses for this historic situation of the not-only-but-also: Nietzsche, who early on spoke of us living in an “era of comparison” in which cultural oppositions and symbols are present in every place on earth; and Georg Simmel, who said: “The stranger is he who arrives today and tomorrow stays”, so someone who is both native but also foreign.
S: Yes. Perhaps we’ll take a last question, the ideas that exist within the institute about comparing contemporary immigrant societies in Europe and multi-ethnic, multi-religious societies, such as in South Africa or India. Do you believe that the term diversity is a sensible foundation for such a comparison?
B: Well, I must admit that in my opinion, the term as such is not enough. I don’t think it makes sense to organise research simply based on one term. One can define it like this or like that, then you don’t have any firm ground to stand on. It would depend on how one enriches this term theoretically, how one located it within theory, but also making it usable for different development trajectories, contexts of experiences of the past and expectations of the future, making it “able to travel”, if you will. In my opinion one would have to move away from the idea of analyzing superdiversity in London, Stuttgart, Delhi, I don’t know, Singapore. That wouldn’t be enough for me. Because one would have to see how one could bind this term more tightly into middle-range constellations, for example that you put it into the context of a welfare state background, which is certainly a completely different way of dealing with it than post-colonial, post-communist constellations. We know that welfare states are all more homogenous and therefore have big problems because diversity is always regarded as a competition for resources. That is experienced very differently in America or especially in India or Africa, where social welfare doesn’t exist or isn’t a given. But that is only one point.
You would have to put it in relation to a series of concepts. The cosmopolitanisation or methodological cosmopolitanism could certainly be one of those. Perhaps I could quickly explain that: A week ago we had a workshop on Varieties of Second Modernity. And we had colleagues from Korea, from Japan, from China (partially located in China) partially in America, etc, and from many other parts of the world, who partially seized upon the basic thought of cosmopolitanisation, of individualisation, also of the definition of risk (these would be such middle-range conceptualisations) and simultaneously reinterpreted them within the realm of their experiences, simply produced other interpretations, which are then a challenge to the way we have seen and done it in Europe until now. For example, individualisation and with that also diversity in Europe require rule of law and the social welfare state as prerequisites. That is not the case in China, Japan, South Korea, respectively. This forces one to find variations of the path to individualisation and with that to revise the European trajectory as being one among many. So, a level of, I would call it methodological cosmopolitanism again, must be organized as an interaction between different realms of experience, which allows us to place different assumptions about diversity, that are anchored within different contexts, in relation to one another and in this way to develop a method of comparison. If all you do is go there and say: I am looking at superdiversity in different contexts, I am afraid that one will only “see” superdiversity. And that would not do justice to the social theory-based and political force of superdiversity research.
Conducted by Karen Schönwälder
Translated by Diana Aurisch
COURTESY: http://www.mmg.mpg.de/special-output/interviews/interview-with-ulrich-beck-muenchen/
B: Yes, it appears in my texts in many places almost of its own accord. However, I’m usually employing it within a relatively specific context. For example, I would make it distinct from, on the one hand, difference, which contains relatively clear ideas of the boundaries between specific groups or identities, and on the other hand, let’s say, chaos, where everything is possible. To me, diversity in the sense of “superdiversity”, as Steve Vertovec has introduced the term, appears especially interesting. This term obviously has a potential to create public irritation, a provocation potential. And perhaps this stems from the fact that the more intense accent placed by this term undermines or questions an important prerequisite that is often considered to be obvious when dealing with plurality, with identity, etc. I am referring to the prerequisite that clear boundaries and boxes exist between Us and the Others: one is either this or that. Vertovec shows that equating origin and social position and that treating people from one country as a homogenous group no longer make sense in a situation where migration trajectories, legal status, and other factors are becoming ever more diverse. In a way, the term (super)diversity expresses the impossibility of making distinct categorizations, ascribing this or that identity, and essentializing the categories.
S: Isn’t that a problem for sociology, which is permanently engaged in classifying?
B: Yes, without a doubt; but we are living in a time of reflexive modernisation, which means, in a phase of radical modernisation, whose “side effects” question the institutional and cognitive foundations/basic categories of previous modernisations. As we are showing in Munich in the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) “Reflexive Modernization”, the classification according to “either or” is no longer valid in many cases, but rather, as a result of the successes of modernisation, this classification must be expanded by and replaced with a new logic of “Not only but also”.
Allow me to make this clear using a very different example. We have examined this problem within all areas of social life and all topics. To name just one: It is the differentiation between life and death. That almost seems to be an anthropological differentiation or seemed to be so for a long time. But medical progress does away with this differentiation simply in the sense that “better” medical practices create more indicators of death, that someone can be dead in terms of brain death or cardiac death. There are many different kinds of death. This means: medical progress is doing away with the boundaries between death and life through a pluralisation of indicators. When you apply all of these, then people are not only dead but also alive. This leads to restraints: Because no society can handle not having a clear differentiation between death and life, specific operationalisations must be carried out in light of the pluralisation of boundaries. These operationalisations can no longer claim the same degree of anthropological necessity because these sets always remain contingent, meaning that they can be revised through new research and are naturally morally controversial.
This is valid for many areas, also for the differentiation between society and nature, for example. In the case of the climate catastrophe, you can see that that is precisely a mixed relationship between society and nature. The idea that one can clearly distinguish between society and nature is totally outside of reality. And yet again, we must do it, despite that fact. You can experience this with all catastrophes, that we are attempting to ascribe something to nature or to the individuals involved. But we are almost constantly experiencing, this is also the theory of reflexive modernisation, that the hitherto existing dualisms are being undermined as a result of the radicalisation of modernisation processes and their effects.
S: But in the case of these two examples, there are clear connections to technological progress. In migration research, we tend to often think about belonging to a social group. The old finding that people have multiple identities at the same time already exists within research on nations and research on labour movements. Do you see new dimensions there as well?
B: Yes, that is the point. On the one hand, we can no longer easily uphold the difference between national and international. That which until now existed outside of the nation-state and of which the nation-state could divest itself outside its borders is suddenly part of nation-state processes in many regards. In light of global risks, the distant Other is within our middle. On the other hand, this is also true for the nation-state construction of Us and the Others at all levels of politics, but also at the level of the construction of identity and groups. I mean, all of transnationalism research shows that the idea that one can assume that territorial boundaries, the political boundaries, the cultural boundaries, and the social boundaries are congruent with one another, this situation simply no longer exists. The container model of nation-state spaces that can be locked – “methodological nationalism” – is useless for understanding Europe, for example, because here everything in these dimensions is getting mixed up. This means that the idea of “Us and the others” as a relatively clear categorization loses its reality-based content and persuasiveness, its empirical validity, which leads to great difficulties within statistics. One can practically forget the statistics on foreigners because they fit under only one aspect, that of national belonging, even though we know that there are domestic students and domestic social welfare recipients who simultaneously hold foreign passports. So, again here we have this falling apart of borders. I think that this irritation of the no longer clear assigning of identity, that is the irritation, the provocative potential of the term superdiversity, which takes on significance especially there where one hitherto thought of the world within the either-or framework. There are chief witnesses for this historic situation of the not-only-but-also: Nietzsche, who early on spoke of us living in an “era of comparison” in which cultural oppositions and symbols are present in every place on earth; and Georg Simmel, who said: “The stranger is he who arrives today and tomorrow stays”, so someone who is both native but also foreign.
S: Yes. Perhaps we’ll take a last question, the ideas that exist within the institute about comparing contemporary immigrant societies in Europe and multi-ethnic, multi-religious societies, such as in South Africa or India. Do you believe that the term diversity is a sensible foundation for such a comparison?
B: Well, I must admit that in my opinion, the term as such is not enough. I don’t think it makes sense to organise research simply based on one term. One can define it like this or like that, then you don’t have any firm ground to stand on. It would depend on how one enriches this term theoretically, how one located it within theory, but also making it usable for different development trajectories, contexts of experiences of the past and expectations of the future, making it “able to travel”, if you will. In my opinion one would have to move away from the idea of analyzing superdiversity in London, Stuttgart, Delhi, I don’t know, Singapore. That wouldn’t be enough for me. Because one would have to see how one could bind this term more tightly into middle-range constellations, for example that you put it into the context of a welfare state background, which is certainly a completely different way of dealing with it than post-colonial, post-communist constellations. We know that welfare states are all more homogenous and therefore have big problems because diversity is always regarded as a competition for resources. That is experienced very differently in America or especially in India or Africa, where social welfare doesn’t exist or isn’t a given. But that is only one point.
You would have to put it in relation to a series of concepts. The cosmopolitanisation or methodological cosmopolitanism could certainly be one of those. Perhaps I could quickly explain that: A week ago we had a workshop on Varieties of Second Modernity. And we had colleagues from Korea, from Japan, from China (partially located in China) partially in America, etc, and from many other parts of the world, who partially seized upon the basic thought of cosmopolitanisation, of individualisation, also of the definition of risk (these would be such middle-range conceptualisations) and simultaneously reinterpreted them within the realm of their experiences, simply produced other interpretations, which are then a challenge to the way we have seen and done it in Europe until now. For example, individualisation and with that also diversity in Europe require rule of law and the social welfare state as prerequisites. That is not the case in China, Japan, South Korea, respectively. This forces one to find variations of the path to individualisation and with that to revise the European trajectory as being one among many. So, a level of, I would call it methodological cosmopolitanism again, must be organized as an interaction between different realms of experience, which allows us to place different assumptions about diversity, that are anchored within different contexts, in relation to one another and in this way to develop a method of comparison. If all you do is go there and say: I am looking at superdiversity in different contexts, I am afraid that one will only “see” superdiversity. And that would not do justice to the social theory-based and political force of superdiversity research.
Conducted by Karen Schönwälder
Translated by Diana Aurisch
COURTESY: http://www.mmg.mpg.de/special-output/interviews/interview-with-ulrich-beck-muenchen/
Lessons from Gandhi
Towards a non-violent, non-killing and peaceful world: Lessons from Gandhi
By Prof. Neelakanta Radhakrishnan
Chairman, Indian Council of Gandhian Studies
(Extract from Paper on Gandhi presented at the University of Dhaka on 2 October, 2010)
Perhaps never before in History has there been so much speculation and anxiety about the future of humanity as there is today. Will our world always remain a theater of violence? Will there always be poverty, starvation and misery? Are we going to have a firmer and wider belief in religion, or are we going to see a godless world? If there is to be a great transformation in society, how will that transformation be brought about? By War ,or Revolution? Or will it come about peacefully as Gandhi had wished?
What Jonathan Schell, the author of landmark books like The Fate of Earth; The Gift of Time; The Case of Nuclear Abolition Now points out could be of great use to us in our understanding of the present human predicament, that too on an occasion like October 2 which the United Nations thoughtfully declared International Day of Nonviolence in deference to the contribution Mahatma Gandhi made to humanity:
Two paths lie before us. One leads to death, the other to life. If we choose the first path - if we humbly refuse to acknowledge the nearness of extinction, all, while increasing our preparations to bring it about - then we in effect become allies of death, and in everything we do our attachment to life will weaken our vision blinded to the abyss that has opened at our feet, will dim and grow confused; our will, discouraged by the thought of trying to build on such a precarious foundation anything that is meant to last, will slacken, and we will sink into stupefaction, as though we were gradually leaning ourselves from life in preparation for the end. On the other hand, if we project our doom and bend our efforts towards survival - if we arouse ourselves to the peril and act to forestall it, making ourselves the allies of life- then, the anesthetic fog will lift: our vision, no longer straining not to see the obvious, will sharpen: our will, finding secure ground to build on, will be restored and we will take full and clear possession of life again. One day -and it is hard to believe that will not be soon - we will make our choice.
In spite of such hope and wishful thinking, there are dark clouds all over threatening a heavy downpour at any moment. It appears there is no respite for humanity. If anybody believed that the Cold War era has ended and humanity could live henceforth in peace, justice, and happiness, those hopes have been completely belied in the face of raging violence and senseless killings in various parts of the world. Notwithstanding all high-sounding assurances on arms reduction and cuts in military expenditure, we see only an alarming escalation in the production of lethal weapons. It is estimated that there is an annual worldwide expenditure of one trillion US dollars on arms alone. Even one sixth of this huge amount is sufficient to remove world hunger within the next six years.
________________________________________
Grinding poverty and frightening environmental Degradation
How can anyone forget the fact that over a billion human beings are now living on an average annual income of less than two hundred dollars! More frightening than this is the revelation that, by 2000 AD, the world population has already crossed the six billion mark. Ecological degradation and the callous manner in which precious non-renewable energy resources are being squandered in the name of progress have started sending shockwaves at least in some sensitive souls.
It is imperative to remember the warning given to humanity of the impending danger by Dr. Daisaku Ikeda (President of Soka Gakkai ) and Josef Derbolav in their dialogue, Search for a New Humanity. The authors argue that further technological progress should be undertaken only after a careful analysis of the present situation and humanity should not allow the condition to go out of its control.
The nagging question is "what is the contribution of the last century to the alleviation of human suffering?" Planners and administrators do not unemployment, absence of basic education facilities, large-scale infant seem to be worried about hunger and diseases, malnutrition, illiteracy, mortality, and dearth of safe drinking water, endured by millions of people who live in those veritable hells called urban slums or shanty towns. Most people do not realize that while the nations of the world spend two billion dollars per day on military preparations, thousands of people are daily starving to death and millions more living on the verge of starvation. Every second, some where in the world a child dies or is permanently scarred by the diseases incumbent on poverty. At the same second, mankind spends $23,000 on enhancing military strength.
The former US President Dwight D. Eisenhower had realized the enormity of the problem. When he addressed the American Society of "Newspaper Editors, on 16 April 1953, he stressed the following:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children ... This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the color of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
________________________________________
What we must know
Let us know, and constantly remember, the following facts:
• That enough classrooms could be constructed for 30,000 children for the price of only one military tank
• That one jet fighter costs as much as 40,000 village pharmacies
• That half a day's military expenditure would be enough to eliminate once and for all, one of humanity's greatest foes - Malaria
• That a half-percent of the military expenditure being incurred today would be enough to pay for all the machines and equipments required to help the Third World countries attain an adequate level of food production.
________________________________________
The hijacked humanity
Most of the nations are guided by greed, suspicion and intolerance even though faint noises are heard about laudable goals such as a global village, a warless century, and a world without boundaries. Noble sentiments apart, the one question that troubles all those who care for human survival and security is: Should we not envision alternative concepts of the future as against the violent structures that had an unprecedented growth, respectability and to some extent consolidation of its hold on the harassed, threatened and starving humanity?
The present century as a worthy successor to the 20 century continues to be an era of war and violence though the growth of science and technology has reached an all-time high.
The one and only silver lining on the otherwise dark horizon is the belated recognition by the humanity that violence can't be countered by violence and that the answers to the various questions and problems facing humanity could be found only through nonviolence.
Mahatma Gandhi's prophetic assertion in this regard seems to have created appreciative resonances all around:
"We have to make truth and nonviolence, not matters for mere individual practice, but for practice by groups and communities and nations. That at any rate is my dream. I shall live and die in trying to realize it. My faith helps me to discover new truth every day. Ahimsa is the attribute of the soul, and therefore to be practiced by everybody in all affairs of life."
This statement of Gandhi, read along with two other brief messages he gave, one to a journalist and the other to his disciples in the government, reveal the essential Gandhi. To the journalist he said, "My life is my message". To the new rulers of India he gave this unfailing advice:
"Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen, and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own destiny?
In other words, will it lead to Swaraj for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?"
________________________________________
Unpleasant but crucial facts
When ever we discuss peace, we don't forget to mention Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Holocaust, the World Wars and some of the major and minor conflict zones and killing fields in different parts of the world. But how many of us think even for a moment about the hunger and starvation endured by millions of human beings?
It is desirable that we constantly keep in mind the following unpleasant but crucial facts:
• More people have died from hunger in the past two years than were killed in World War I and World War II combined.
• Every year 13 to 18 million people die of hunger and starvation in this world.
• More than one billion people are always chronically hungry.
• Every 24 hours, 35,000 human beings die as a result of hunger and starvation - (24 every minute), 75% of whom are children under the age of five.
• No other disaster is comparable to the devastation of hunger.
• The number of people who die every 48 hours out of hunger and starvation is equivalent to the number of those who were instantly killed by the Hiroshima bomb.
• The worst earthquake in modern history - in China in 1976 - killed 24200 people. Hunger kills many more people every day.
________________________________________
The Shadow of September 11
The insane destruction of the World Trade Centre, New York on September 11, besides altering the course of human history, has also revealed how fragile our castles and glass houses of progress are. The deadly efficiency of genocidal weapons to inflict crushing defeat on enemies has also been unmistakably established. Nuclear weapons or war, though they still haunt humanity, are no longer the deadliest deterrents. In human hands any new toy of this scientific era could become deadly and fatal. Hence our perception of peace as the mere absence of war and violence–requires to be reviewed.
________________________________________
Gandhian assertion of Peace through peaceful means
Humanity has witnessed several wars and revolutions.
Occasionally it has also seen great changes being effected through gentle and peaceful means.
________________________________________
Nonviolence as an alternative to war and violence
Gandhi demonstrated the irresistible power of Ahimsa as a political weapon and instrument of liberation. He also emphasized and successfully demonstrated it in his various campaigns both in South Africa during the close of the nineteenth century, and later in India during the early decades of the twentieth century. Since then, it has made its mark on the world and has come to stay as an effective weapon and strategy in the hands of those who believe in the supremacy of soul-force and moral law.
While the general contemporary interest in nonviolence is largely due to Gandhi's relentless fight for the adoption of a nonviolent alternative. It cannot be said that Gandhi is the progenitor of all that goes along with the concept and practice of nonviolence. On the contrary, the history of the idea of nonviolence as a religious or philosophical doctrine can be traced to the ancient Upanishads, the hoary Indian pearls of philosophical insights and Intuition. The Chandogya Upanishad as well as the Chinese Tao- Te-Chim of the sixth century B.C. glorified nonviolence both as personal virtue and as a desirable societal goal. The New Testament of the Bible also upholds the virtue of nonviolence for the edification of mankind. Gauthama Buddha, who was a rebel against the gory and corrupt practices of religion, was an apostle of gentleness, nonviolence and compassion' and he laid the foundation for a modern outlook and emphasized the need for developing social awareness based on respect for all living beings.
________________________________________
Gandhi as a trend-setter
Plato had advocated truth and goodness; and he gave a vague sort of advice to overcome evil by good deeds. But with Gandhi (and later with Martin Luther King Jr.) nonviolence became a creative, challenging and eloquent force symbolizing man's inalienable right to live in peace and harmony and to help himself and his fellow beings to reach out towards their Maker.
The tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the rampant colonial exploitation which was no less dehumanizing than the reality of mass murder, and the capitalist injustice, prevalent all around, has now brought nonviolence to the center stage. Those who apparently control human destiny may still find it as an inconvenient irritant, that would go against their selfish worldly interests, particularly the economics of exploitation that they have developed.
The Gandhian perspectives on nonviolent human transformation is slowly but steadily receiving extensive attention in varying degrees in almost all parts of the world. A considerable number of social activists, freedom fighters, human rights activists, thinkers, political leaders and even to some extent, those to whom acceptance of nonviolence would hurt their national economics, which are based on military hardware, and those who encourage and engineer troubles and conflicts globally so that their armaments could be sold - have demonstrated their conviction that the nonviolent option as advocated by Gandhi needs serious attention. Thanks to this positive development, humanity is assured of a re-examination of the Bismarckian approach of treating war as a wholesome therapy that strengthens human nature, when civilization becomes too soft and frail.
The protagonists of the Bismarckian notion had propagated the obnoxious theory that aggressiveness is healthier than gentleness, waging war invigorates mankind, and it is genuinely positive to be vigorous, and offensive.
At one stroke, Gandhi demolished this myth - though the significance of the Gandhian initiative was not immediately understood all around. Let it be remembered that at first the industrialized West as well as the developing world did not take Gandhi seriously, though they were aware of what he was advocating. At that time, the difference in the cultural context in which Gandhi worked and the difficulty of many leaders to see beyond their noses were important factors which prevented the international community from realizing the supreme importance of the Gandhian strategy. But gradually the situation changed.
Humanity learnt a few lessons from the experience of the World Wars. Thereafter, Martin Luther King proclaimed the efficacy of the Gandhian strategy of nonviolent resistance in these words:
"... The Christian doctrine of Love, operating through the Gandhian method of nonviolence is perhaps, one of the most potent weapons available to the oppressed people in their struggle for freedom."
But, still, the international community took the Gandhian initiative as expounded by Martin Luther King only as a freak development for some more time.
________________________________________
Nonviolence as an effective strategy
A few major developments stand out as one thinks of nonviolence as an effective strategy not only to counter violence, but to bring about peace in human lives as we gradually glide into the twenty first century.
In all continents, and in almost all countries, several motivated groups of individuals who firmly believe in nonviolence have sprung up. However, it has not yet become as mainstream strategy.
The pace of non-violent collective action along Gandhian lines initiated by Martin Luther King, was continued with conviction and courage by various activists of civil liberty movements all over the world. Kenneth Kaunda, Albert Luthuli, Desmond Tutu, Julius Nyerere, Nelson Mandela, Ho Chi Min, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Maired Maguire are only a few of the most - illustrious names which come to mind in this context.
The acceptance of Gandhian tactics for nonviolent transformation by "the Greens", notably by Petra Kelly, has led to the propagation of a new dimension of ecological and sustainable developmental model as envisioned by Gandhi to various countries of Eastern Europe. 'The Quakers' then adopted Gandhian nonviolence as their ideology. This was another hopeful sign and it led to a resurgent collective action for justice and freedom in many western nations. The impact of their initiatives notably in the Latin American nations is quite substantial and extensive.
Several motivated scholars who developed strong faith in the efficacy of nonviolence in the service of mankind such as Prof. Glenn D.Paige, Gene Sharp and Johan Galtung through their dedicated efforts and sustained critical interest added new and valuable inputs to the concept and practice of non violence as a strategy for human survival.
Professor Glenn D Paige
Professor Glenn D Paige is one of those scholars, who have been instrumental in bringing into the scene a whole generation of young researchers and peace activists, by offering them, an appropriate framework to understand, scrutinize, and analyze the various aspects of nonviolence. The Herculean efforts of Professor Paige to develop a wholesome critique of Nonviolent Political Science is an important phase of modern history. Professor Paige hasalso made a significant contribution in enthusing several young scholars of international repute to adopt 'non-violent political action' as their area of specialization.
________________________________________
Ahimsa as a moral counterpart to wars
Can Ahimsa, and Sathyagraha be moral counterparts to wars and other violent conflicts that corrode human character and jeopardize human survival? It is claimed by both Western and Indian scholars that Ahimsa and Sathyagraha can be resorted to in any given situation involving injustice. In their view even in those situations where armed resistance is impossible, Sathyagraha and Ahimsa can be resorted to as ultimate instruments of justice. This assertion happens to be partially ambiguous. Horsbough has stated that the prospects of nonviolence in the sphere of international conflict are brighter than what is commonly supposed even though people still believe in the efficacy of Armed Force.
As Gandhi had advocated, and demonstrated, a conscientious effort to make Ahimsa a way of life, and not a curious creed, is the need of the hour. Gandhi says: "Man either progresses towards Ahimsa, or rushes to his Doom". Analyzed against the background of all that the great preachers and prophets of humanity, and votaries of Ahimsa have instructed throughout the centuries, Gandhi's contribution to the cause is most outstanding and crucial. Incredible optimist that he was, Gandhi believed in the essential goodness of all.
As in Gandhi's own time, his concept of nonviolence continues to be diversely understood, interpreted and discussed in different parts of the world. While to some it is an ideal that all men should cherish, to an overwhelming number of others it is a moral principle which can guide thought and action. Many people view it as a policy which can be adopted and made effective only in certain given circumstances. A large number of people all over the world find in it a practical tool which can be used in certain situations according to the capabilities of the user. Some others view it as a technique suggesting one range of actions which may at times be supplemented or even substituted by other techniques as and when the situation demands. Each one of these different interpretations is usually upheld with the support of quotations from Gandhi's own words and citing Gandhi's own actions.
Hubert Humphrey, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Senator Diakno, Johan Galtung, Gene Sharp, Erik Erikson and Prof. Richard Keyes, have found in Gandhi's concept of nonviolence a great opportunity for humanity which enables mankind to take a fresh look at the various problems man has created for man, disregarding the Laws of Nature. France Huthchins and several others find Gandhi's approach towards non-violence as absolutist. To them Gandhi's view of nonviolence explicitly or implicitly includes motive as well as action, so that ahimsa or nonviolence is both psychic and corporal.
Thomas Clark and several others also find great scope for the practical application of the principle of nonviolence. William Robert Miller, James E. Bristor, William Stuart Nelson, A.J. Maste, Ted Duncan, Willock Michael, W. Sonneleitner, and many other scholars and pacifists find in Gandhian non-violence, a force and a method of action that can well become the basis for the twenty-first century man to adopt and practice. Dr. Daisaku Ikeda, SGI President, and one of the most profound thinkers of our time regards Gandhian nonviolence as a potent force and an effective instrument to secure justice and peace.
________________________________________
Non-violent struggles after Gandhi
A cursory glance reveals that during the last six decades since the assassination of Gandhi, a considerable degree of intellectual efforts have gone into the appreciation and understanding of the concept of non-violence in different parts of the world. This ranges from deep sociological analysis of the dimension of the conflict to the policy implications of the Gandhian mode. Many see, in the Gandhian non-violence, clues to ways of dealing with national problems of tensions, conflict, arms race and war. What most of the analysts, critics, followers and admirers have seen in Gandhi, is a 'challenge rather than a stereotype'. It is natural that different levels of perception developed as the Gandhian approach expanded globally. Since Gandhi represented a model value system, it is quite natural that people viewed the Mahatma from different social, political and territorial perspectives. Klaus Scuts, Mayor of Berlin, was categorical in his assertion, "Nonviolence does not mean passivity or political vegetarianism". It is an active attitude, it permits fight for justice ,challenges the opponent to declare himself.
The Gandhian concept of nonviolence never visualized surrender to evil or injustice, but pitting of one's soul against the will of the tyrant. The philosophy of soul-force visualizes three kinds of persons. The first category is that of the coward who supinely submits to injustice in order to save his skin; while the second category is that of the brave man who is eager to redeem justice by person, the Sathyagrahi, the believer in and practitioner of nonviolence, who in the fullness of his strength using the Natural force method, forgives the evil doer and attempts to persuade one to adopt right doing through nonviolence and love.
________________________________________
Gandhi's early laboratory
South Africa was the laboratory of Gandhi. The Twenty one years that Gandhi spent in South Africa witnessed Great changes both in his private life and public life. Much of what Gandhi did later in India had been tempered by the South African experiments. Gandhi's ascetic ashram life had its beginning in the Phoenix Ashram in South Africa. Non-violent resistance, simple living, Charkha spinning, non-violent struggles, insistence on simplicity and moderation – all had their origin there. In fact Gandhi had already become a Mahatma in the making by the time he left South Africa for India. His was a heroc struggle, involving several millions of people over a long period.
________________________________________
Gandhi's influence on South Africa's fight against apartheid
The votaries of peace and nonviolence all over the world would find it inspiring to realize that the epoch-making changes in South Africa, signalling the extinction of apartheid owe their inspiration to Gandhi's heroic struggles in that country. Nelson Mandela openly acknowledges this truth.
Gandhi who proceeded to South Africa as a lawyer to fight a court case, found on his arrival, a situation highly mortifying and humiliating and too harsh for any human being to tolerate. He was already aware of the inhuman segregation known as untouchability which a section of Indians were enduring back home in his own country. But what Gandhi had to face in South Africa was beyond his understanding. The strange experience of man being segregated in the name of the colour of his skin and getting his basic rights denied came to him as a rude shock. In South Africa millions of the local black population and the Indian settlers (most of them indentured labourers) were languishing in inhuman conditions. Gandhi himself became a victim of this dehumanizing practice not once or twice but several times.
On June 7 of 1893, a few months after his arrival in South Africa, Gandhi while traveling by a train in a first class compartment was thrown out of the train at the Petermauritzburg station. The charge against Gandhi was only that he was black in colour. The Blacks of South Africa were not permitted to travel in the first class compartment. On another occasion Gandhi was denied travel in a coach along with white passengers. Once he was denied hotel accommodation because of his colour. Taking pity on him, a kind individual then offered him accommodation in the hotel on the specific condition that he would not come down to the dining hall, but remain closeted in his own room throughout his stay. On another occasion, he was pushed down by the guards for having walked along a road in the vicinity of the residence of a highly-placed White official. Later Gandhi came to know that the Blacks and the coolies were not allowed to walk along that road. Gandhi also found that the children of the Blacks were not allowed to study in schools along with the white children.
These were only some of the visible symptoms of the dreaded practice of Apartheid which had many more humiliating aspects, the foundations of which were too strongly entrenched and defied all attempts of uprooting. The fact that a satisfactory solution to this vexed issue was finally found in the year 1993 which marked the centenary of the beginning of Gandhi's struggle in South Africa, is a matter of rejoicing for all Gandhian peace activists all over the world.
It is interesting to note how the local Blacks responded to Gandhi. By and large, Gandhi was fighting against the inhuman and discriminatory laws enacted by the Pretoria regime. But he was equally opposing a system that was perpetuating racial discrimination in the name of colour and nationality. The general condition faced by the Blacks in South Africa was not much different from what the Indian settlers were confronting. It would be naive to believe that the Black population was insensitive to what was happening in South Africa under the leadership of Gandhi. Though he was concentrating on the Indian settlers there, the principle he was fighting for had importance far beyond what the Indians in South Africa were endeavouring to secure. But it cannot be claimed that Gandhi had great influence on them when the Gandhian struggle was actually taking place in Natal, Pretoria Mini other places.
The law of nature teaches us that the seeds of change always take time to sprout. In South Africa, the Gandhian variety of non-violent struggle had to wait until Nelson Mandela appeared on the scene. No one can deny that the ANC was considerably influenced by Gandhi. The ANC movement drew strength and vigour largely from the inspiration of Gandhi. The basic question that arises is whether it was the brute force of the white minority which kept the Blacks at bay or whether the Blacks themselves by their own quiet surrender were responsible for their plight.
The fact remains that from their own experiences, they have developed a different notion of non-violence as a creed and a strategy. It was conceived as creative and positive and in their own way the Black majority tried to give it a fair trial. The ANC leadership in general and Nelson Mandela in particular seemed to be familiar with and appreciative of Gandhi's work and the success of his campaign. Mandela's speech after two days of his release from jail on 11 February 1990 was significant, since apart from referring to his indebtedness to Gandhi, he said.
"Another strand in the struggle against oppression began with the formation, right here in Natal, of the Indian Congress founded in 1884, a tradition of extra parliamentary protest that continues with the present. The next decade saw the increasing radicalization of Indian politics under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi... In 1906 - when Bambatha led sections of Africans in a war to abolish the poll tax -our brothers who descended from India, led by Mahatma Gandhi, fought against the oppression of the British Government."
Mandela had quoted a passage from Jawahar Lal Nehru before his arrest :
"There is no easy walkover to freedom anywhere and many of us will have to pass through the shadow again and again before we reach the mountain tops of our desires".
This also indicates that Mandela studied the Gandhian option carefully. Though the release from jail of Mandela and the legalizing of ANC cannot be viewed as concessions, they gave definite indication of the superior wisdom and statesmanship of President De Clerk, which none of his predecessors had displayed. Of course, there were other ground realities which prompted De Clerk to adopt an attitude of reconciliation ignoring the stout opposition from the die-hard whites.
There was resurgence in the people's movement despite the imposition of emergency in 1985 and the banning of the UDF and other organizations. The upsurge of 1989 and the open defiance of the segregation laws, made it practically impossible for De Clark to govern South Africa which had almost become an untouchable among the comity of nations. Further the nation's economy was showing signs of a total collapse following the strikes by COATSU and the mine workers. The sanctions imposed by the international community also shattered the economy. The so-called military supremacy of South Africa proved to be a myth when Angola gave a hard knock; its military might. There were many hurdles to be crossed. Yet there was the silver lining as was revealed from the manner in which both the government and the ANC denounced criminality, and violence. Despite several setbacks, the ANC and the government moved closer. The lifting of emergency except in the Natal Province, also helped large number of refugees to return. The signing of the 'Pretoria Minutes' augured well for the future. "The repeal of discriminatory legislations, the release of political prisoners and the acceptance of the principle of 'one man one vote were very central to the transfer of power and the restoration of peace.
The deep scars of Apartheid and the legacy of distrust, the cynical attempts made by the apologists of Apartheid, the growing internecine war among the Blacks and the stridency of the Neo Nazi groups made the process of change painfully slow. But the final victory as reflected in the triumphal emergence of South Africa as a free democratic nation under Nelson Mandela recreated visions of nonviolence as a matchless life force.
________________________________________
Significance of Truth, Reconciliation Commission
As the dismantling of apartheid proclaimed the humanistic side of nonviolence in political arena, the wisdom shown by Nelson Mandela in the setting up of the Truth & Reconciliation Commission under the leadership of the much-revered Bishop Desmond Tutu revealed unparalleled creative non-violent leadership. Their adherence to nonviolence enabled the new leaders to proclaim firmly that 'there is no future without forgiveness."
________________________________________
Gandhi’s influence on Martin Luther King (Jr)
In his own way, Martin Luther King( Jr) added new dimensions to Gandhian nonviolence in the nineteen sixties in order to make it an effective instrument of his fight against evil. When the fight derives its strength from the moral and spiritual caliber of the victim and depends on the quality of his suffering, it takes quite a long time to effect what we call the 'change of heart' of the oppressor which is the goal of a non-violent struggle as opposed to 'victory. In an armed conflict, victory is not assured to either of the parties involved. The racial violence which broke out in Los Angeles and some other parts of the USA speaks volumes regarding how fragile our modern civilization is. It is actually an ominous portent and a disturbing reminder of what has been simmering underneath the surging welter of modernity and progress.
These events also reveal how skin-deep is our pretension of adherence to the equality of human beings. It is surprising to see that such racial disturbance should occur in the land of Abraham Lincoln, Thoreau, Emerson, Walt Whitman, Kennedy and Martin Luther King; and that too several decades after the eradication of the demon of racial discrimination. Gandhi warned humanity as early as 1909 when he published his book, "Hind Swaraj", that a civilization bereft of human considerations is 'Satanic'.
Even from his school days Martin Luther King was greatly influenced by the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. Therefore it was only natural that he adopted the Gandhian doctrine of nonviolence as the most effective weapon at his command to fight racial segregation in the US. He once said in explaining his philosophy: "I believe in a militant, non-violent approach in which the individual stands up against an unjust system, using sit-ins, legal action, boycotts, votes and everything except violence or hate".
Acknowledging his indebtedness to Gandhi, Dr. King said: "...from my background I gained Christian ideals; from Gandhi I learned my operational technique".
In another context Dr. King acknowledged his debt to Mahatma Gandhi, while explaining the Montgomery bus boycott programme as follows:
"This is a protest of passive resistance depending upon moral and spiritual forces. We will return good for evil. Christ showed us the way and Mahatma Gandhi showed us it could work".
He declared that the American Black will not resort to “more radical ways to gain civil rights", because he has full faith “that he can get justice within the frame work of the democratic set-up."
It is a fact that Gandhi continues to inspire a considerable section of American opinion even today. E. Stanly Jones, himself a renowned pacifist, had this to say about Jesus Christ and Mahatma Gandhi "1 bow to Mahatma Gandhi, but I kneel at the feet of Christ and give him my full and final allegiance." Referring to Mahatma Gandhi, Stanly Jones stated that he (Gandhi) "has taught me more of Christ than perhaps any other man in East or West.”
________________________________________
Global influence of Gandhi
There are quite a few among the liberal pacifists in the West who found in Gandhi the argument against the inevitability of the deterministic social order propagated by Darwin and Marx. Albert Einstein, Aldous Huxley, Oswald Garrison Villard, Roger Balwin and many others were able to see in Gandhi a reinstatement of the Renaissance faith of the perfectibility of man. In contrast to this school, there was the group of religious pacifists such as A.J.Maste, John Nevin, Haynes Holmens, Norman Thomas who found in Gandhi "a moral equivalent of war".
There may not be a Martin Luther King now in USA; but the number of true votaries of nonviolence both as a political strategy and as a creed has substantially increased. Several internationally famous pacifists such as Johan Galtung, Homer Jack, Dr. Glenn D. Paige, Gene Sharp, Dr. Lou Ann Guanson, Dr. Barnard Laffeyette, Vance Engleman, Dr. Richard Deats, Captain Charles Alphin and Richard N. Nagler are the ardent practitioners, exponents and champions of nonviolence today.
The spilling of blood in both the erstwhile Yugoslavia and former Czechoslovakia and the uncertainties created by the events following the dismemberment of the USSR should be viewed as the inescapable consequence of incongruities engendered by the die-hard communist philosophy which by and large did not care about purity of means in achieving laudable ends. The validity and relevance of the Gandhian insistence on purity of means -something which the communist blocks haalways scoffed at -became obvious now. The Gandhian concept of nonviolence thereafter began to attract the attention of the youth of Czechoslovakia. There arose a general belief that non-violence which is asold as the hills and which is based on the primordial instinct of man to live happily and to let others live comfortably would be an answer to the seething problems of the nation.
Four decades earlier, at the time of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, there was a Gandhian protest efficiently organized by the Czech youth. From the youth the message gradually spread to the elders also. The Czech people also organized extremely significant programmes during the Gandhi centenary. The Speaker of the National Assembly of Czechoslovakia specifically stated in a message that "Gandhi's thought is of special significance". In the crossfire of the dismemberment of the USSR and the vaulting ambition of the selfish political leaders of Czechoslovakia, the helpless people looked up to the Gandhian concept of non-violent social transformation more than ever before. In Yugoslavia also the total collapse of the monolithic communist structure encouraged the people to think of a Gandhian alternative. The USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia - the three main pillars of communism in Europe - faced very serious existential crisis, a crisis that called for a gentle humanitarian touch to get defused. Reports indicate that profound political thinkers and leaders seriously considered the Gandhian alternatives in these countries as means to prevent political extinction and to avoid internecine killings.
There is no doubt that the previous century was a glorious one in terms of man's continued conquest of nature including the outer space. Man has reached the very zenith of material achievements. The rapid technological strides that have changed the life style of man also induced in him a new sense of hope and also in insecurity. The hope lies in his ability to rise like the phoenix reconstruct life from its ruins and the indomitable spirit of 'never to yield'. The insecurity arises from the realization that unless worldly progress is tempered with the elixir of spiritual values humanity will land itself on the desert sands of crass materialism.
In former centuries, Europe had overawed the rest of humanity with its superior military might and an intelligent harnessing of the fruits of Science and Technology. Asia in the meanwhile, was enveloped in spiritual and philosophical pursuits. The appeal of the Buddha, despite the tidal wave of material progress, swept almost the whole of South East Asia while the Indian civilization and the Chinese civilization made feverish attempts to come to terms with the new challenges. The Asian nations were condescendingly described as 'developing' countries while the African region with its infinite natural resources and tremendous manpower was described to be the 'dark' and 'underdeveloped' continent. The fact was that it suited the colonial exploiters to keep it so. It did not escape the notice of the impartial observers that Africa is only a 'sleeping giant' who when awakened will be a formidable force to reckon with. In spite of the hangover of the centuries and the traditional old colonial exploitation which is still hampering the different countries, there is no doubt that the rejuvenated African continent which would be self confident of its inherent strength will tplay a crucial role in the 21 century. Brushing aside these seething problems, Africa and Asia - that have several common features in between -would boldly challenge the West and, as and when this happens, it would mark a new phase in human history.
________________________________________
Dr. Daisaku Ikeda's Contribution
As Johan Galtung points out Gandhi has become a part of the world political culture and Gandhian thought is bound to influence the progress of the twenty first Century. Even religious and cultural organizations and movements across the world emphasize conscientiously the relevance of Gandhi’s teachings in their strategies. The fast-spreading Soka Gakkai movement under the Presidentship of Dr. Daisaku Ikeda is a wonderful example. Dr. Daisaku Ikeda, an unbelievably energetic and creative leader, has always emphasized the supreme importance of the Gandhian method for achieving world peace. The SGI leadership has also shown remarkable awareness of the value of Gandhian nonviolence as is evident from the thrust the SGI President Dr Ikeda gives to the propagation of Ahimsa as enunciated by Shakyamuni Buddha. Dr Ikeda strongly advocates that a world without war which has become one of the cherished goals of humanity can no longer be treated as a distant dream. A spiritual awakening supported by strong cultural, educational and social movements is the need of the hour.
What kind of basic change, then, are we hoping for? It cannot be anything other than a non-violent, non-exploitative, nonkilling and a just society where no child, no woman, no man will die of hunger, where everyone's self-respect will get prime consideration and where no one will be segregated in the name of caste, class, colour or sex.
Are we just dreaming about an unattainable Utopia? Certainly not. Moreover even if it is a dream, only dreams like this give hope and strength to the human race. The tragedy of the present times is that a large segment of our fellowmen are still denied their dreams, hopes and opportunities of growth.
________________________________________
Denial of justice and the widening gap between the rich North and the poor South
There can never be peace and happiness on earth if humanity does not address the basic problems that perpetrate inequality. Let us look at the following staggering facts provided by the World Watch Institute (State of the World 2002 New York, 3)
• More than a billion people on earth today lack access to adequate clean water.
• Nearly three billion people do not have access to adequate sanitation facilities.
• Nations have long grappled with inequality; but never in history have the assets of the three ,richest individuals matched the combined national economies of the poorest 48 nations as is the case today.
• Inspite of a of unprecedented economic growth that has added over ten trillion U.S. dollars every year to the global economy, the number of people living in poverty (at the rate of one US dollar a day) remains more than one billion, without any change.
A billion people are being added to the human population every 15 years.
• The lack of democratic political representation and the concentration of economic and political power in a few hands have created a fundamental instability in many nations – an instability that has far reaching consequences in the form of large- scale human migration, illegal drug exports and increasing terrorism.
• The average American uses 19 times more paper than the average person in a developing country, and most of it ends up as trash.
• Some 27 per cent of the world's coral reefs have now been irredeemably lost (whereas it was only ten per cent in 1992). Coral reefs are second only to forests in biological wealth, and such an extensive loss of the reefs inevitably takes a great toll on many aquatic species of living beings. The goods and services obtained from reefs were valued at 375 billion U.S. dollars in 1997.
• Global emissions of carbon have grown by an additional 400 million
tones during the ten years it has taken to arrive at an agreement for a modest climate protocol.
• Twenty known communicable diseases - including tuberculosis (TB) malaria and cholera - which had been effectively controlled, reemerged virulently and spread widely in the last quarter of the twentieth century. At least thirty previously unknown deadly new diseases - including HIV, Hepatitis C and Ebola – have also surfaced in the same period.
• After sixty years of near-continuous decline in deaths from infectious diseases in the United States, the trend reversed in 1980 and death rates have nearly doubled since then.
• A pharmacological study made in 1999 reported that only 13 out of 1,223 medicines commercialized by multinational drug companies between 1975 and 1997 were designed to treat life-threatening tropical diseases.
• The market for drugs meant to cure minor ailments like toenail fungus, obesity, baldness, face wrinkles and impotence runs into billions of dollars.
• A third of all adults are overweight in Europe; the figure stands at 61 per cent in the United States. Obesity (the extreme condition of overweight) rose dramatically in the 1990s - by ten to forty per cent in most European countries and by fifty per cent in the United States.
________________________________________
Gandhi for social justice
Social justice and human rights have been the two key areas of Gandhi's concern both in South Africa, and India. Gandhi predicted that unless expeditious corrective measures are taken, humanity will see more mega-death weapons proliferating among nations and there will be population explosion, more pollution and poverty, reducing our planet's life-supporting capabilities.
Gandhi insisted that social justice, distributive justice, and community justice have to be woven into the matrix of social, political and community life.
Community justice is based on the dignity and equality of all persons while distributive justice guarantees the right of all men and women to have equal share of essential goods and services, material comforts and social security. Social justice should encourage citizens to engage themselves in the creation of just social and political structures which constitute genuine democracy. Truth will be the guiding principle in all of them.
In the Gandhian concept the way of peace is the way of truth.
What Jaime L Cardinal Sin pointed out in the annual lecture series in United Nations University (1985), aptly sums up the frightening scenario:
"Poverty in the third world or anywhere else is an indication of failure. But the subject and agent of this failure are not the poor themselves;rather, they are the victims of this failed human and technical enterprise.
The responsible agents of poverty are the rich and the powerful. The agents of poverty are the economic planners who choose to import capitalintensive technologies and whose victims are the jobless industrial workers. The technocrats of poverty are the educators who promoted school systems that are replicas of foreign universities. Their victims are the youth who became alienated from their own people and culture. The merchants of poverty are those unscrupulous industrialists who manipulate fragile economies and destroy their self-reliant foundations. The innumerable victims are the small farmers, fishermen and entrepreneurs whose labour and produce are brought cheaply and whose daily rice depend on market decisions made in Chicago or Geneva. The poor are poorer because they must contend not only with the exploitative powers of local groups, but with those of an international network as well.
________________________________________
Seven social sins
Paradoxically, the emerging scenario whose defining characteristics are a kind of mad frenzy and utter contempt to all values, will have only scant regard to what are known today as the seven social sins Gandhi had reproduced in his journal (one of his admirers had categorized and sent them to him) as follows:
1. Politics without principles
2. Wealth without work
3. Pleasure without conscience
4. Knowledge without character
5. Commerce without morality
6. Science without humanity
7. Worship without sacrifice
Can we afford to ignore these principles if we care for the future of humanity? Can there be peace on earth without the realization of these basic values?
________________________________________
The Pope's prayer
The prayer of Pope John Paul II during his visit to Hiroshima reflects the anguish and agony of present day humanity:
To the Creator of nature and humanity, of truth and beauty, I pray:
Hear my voice, for it is the voice of the victims of all wars and violence among individuals and nations;
Hear my voice, for it is the voice of all children who suffer and will suffer when people put their faith in weapons and war;
Hear my voice when I beg you to instill into the hearts of all human beings the wisdom of peace, the strength of justice, and the joy of fellowship;
Hear my voice, for I speak for the multitudes in every country and in every history who do not want war and are ready to walk the road of peace.
Hear my voice and grant insight and strength so that we may always respond to hatred with love, to injustice with total dedication to justice,
to need with the sharing of self to war with peace.
O God, hear my voice and grant unto the world your everlasting peace.
There is no doubt that in this universal prayer the Pope has summarized the philosophy of Peace, Love, and Nonviolence propounded by Mahatma Gandhi The great and indeed mind-boggling question which stares at humanity even after about six decades of the most diabolical crime perpetrated on the human race - namely the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is: Are the bombs hurled over Hiroshima and Nagasaki the last in human history?
There are other questions as well: How is humanity going to tackle the monsters of war, violence, injustice of various types, the grinding poverty widely prevalent in large segments of human populations and what is humanity going to do to arrest the all-time high and fiercely alarming environmental degradation and spread of violence?
When can humanity wake into a period where the killing instinct is kept under bay and our grandchildren will breathe the fresh air of a nonkilling world which will have to be a nonviolence and just world as well.
Gandhi demonstrated that change is possible provided we have the will.
COURTESY: Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal - Gandhi Book Centre, 299 Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk Mumbai 400 007 MH India
By Prof. Neelakanta Radhakrishnan
Chairman, Indian Council of Gandhian Studies
(Extract from Paper on Gandhi presented at the University of Dhaka on 2 October, 2010)
Perhaps never before in History has there been so much speculation and anxiety about the future of humanity as there is today. Will our world always remain a theater of violence? Will there always be poverty, starvation and misery? Are we going to have a firmer and wider belief in religion, or are we going to see a godless world? If there is to be a great transformation in society, how will that transformation be brought about? By War ,or Revolution? Or will it come about peacefully as Gandhi had wished?
What Jonathan Schell, the author of landmark books like The Fate of Earth; The Gift of Time; The Case of Nuclear Abolition Now points out could be of great use to us in our understanding of the present human predicament, that too on an occasion like October 2 which the United Nations thoughtfully declared International Day of Nonviolence in deference to the contribution Mahatma Gandhi made to humanity:
Two paths lie before us. One leads to death, the other to life. If we choose the first path - if we humbly refuse to acknowledge the nearness of extinction, all, while increasing our preparations to bring it about - then we in effect become allies of death, and in everything we do our attachment to life will weaken our vision blinded to the abyss that has opened at our feet, will dim and grow confused; our will, discouraged by the thought of trying to build on such a precarious foundation anything that is meant to last, will slacken, and we will sink into stupefaction, as though we were gradually leaning ourselves from life in preparation for the end. On the other hand, if we project our doom and bend our efforts towards survival - if we arouse ourselves to the peril and act to forestall it, making ourselves the allies of life- then, the anesthetic fog will lift: our vision, no longer straining not to see the obvious, will sharpen: our will, finding secure ground to build on, will be restored and we will take full and clear possession of life again. One day -and it is hard to believe that will not be soon - we will make our choice.
In spite of such hope and wishful thinking, there are dark clouds all over threatening a heavy downpour at any moment. It appears there is no respite for humanity. If anybody believed that the Cold War era has ended and humanity could live henceforth in peace, justice, and happiness, those hopes have been completely belied in the face of raging violence and senseless killings in various parts of the world. Notwithstanding all high-sounding assurances on arms reduction and cuts in military expenditure, we see only an alarming escalation in the production of lethal weapons. It is estimated that there is an annual worldwide expenditure of one trillion US dollars on arms alone. Even one sixth of this huge amount is sufficient to remove world hunger within the next six years.
________________________________________
Grinding poverty and frightening environmental Degradation
How can anyone forget the fact that over a billion human beings are now living on an average annual income of less than two hundred dollars! More frightening than this is the revelation that, by 2000 AD, the world population has already crossed the six billion mark. Ecological degradation and the callous manner in which precious non-renewable energy resources are being squandered in the name of progress have started sending shockwaves at least in some sensitive souls.
It is imperative to remember the warning given to humanity of the impending danger by Dr. Daisaku Ikeda (President of Soka Gakkai ) and Josef Derbolav in their dialogue, Search for a New Humanity. The authors argue that further technological progress should be undertaken only after a careful analysis of the present situation and humanity should not allow the condition to go out of its control.
The nagging question is "what is the contribution of the last century to the alleviation of human suffering?" Planners and administrators do not unemployment, absence of basic education facilities, large-scale infant seem to be worried about hunger and diseases, malnutrition, illiteracy, mortality, and dearth of safe drinking water, endured by millions of people who live in those veritable hells called urban slums or shanty towns. Most people do not realize that while the nations of the world spend two billion dollars per day on military preparations, thousands of people are daily starving to death and millions more living on the verge of starvation. Every second, some where in the world a child dies or is permanently scarred by the diseases incumbent on poverty. At the same second, mankind spends $23,000 on enhancing military strength.
The former US President Dwight D. Eisenhower had realized the enormity of the problem. When he addressed the American Society of "Newspaper Editors, on 16 April 1953, he stressed the following:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children ... This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the color of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
________________________________________
What we must know
Let us know, and constantly remember, the following facts:
• That enough classrooms could be constructed for 30,000 children for the price of only one military tank
• That one jet fighter costs as much as 40,000 village pharmacies
• That half a day's military expenditure would be enough to eliminate once and for all, one of humanity's greatest foes - Malaria
• That a half-percent of the military expenditure being incurred today would be enough to pay for all the machines and equipments required to help the Third World countries attain an adequate level of food production.
________________________________________
The hijacked humanity
Most of the nations are guided by greed, suspicion and intolerance even though faint noises are heard about laudable goals such as a global village, a warless century, and a world without boundaries. Noble sentiments apart, the one question that troubles all those who care for human survival and security is: Should we not envision alternative concepts of the future as against the violent structures that had an unprecedented growth, respectability and to some extent consolidation of its hold on the harassed, threatened and starving humanity?
The present century as a worthy successor to the 20 century continues to be an era of war and violence though the growth of science and technology has reached an all-time high.
The one and only silver lining on the otherwise dark horizon is the belated recognition by the humanity that violence can't be countered by violence and that the answers to the various questions and problems facing humanity could be found only through nonviolence.
Mahatma Gandhi's prophetic assertion in this regard seems to have created appreciative resonances all around:
"We have to make truth and nonviolence, not matters for mere individual practice, but for practice by groups and communities and nations. That at any rate is my dream. I shall live and die in trying to realize it. My faith helps me to discover new truth every day. Ahimsa is the attribute of the soul, and therefore to be practiced by everybody in all affairs of life."
This statement of Gandhi, read along with two other brief messages he gave, one to a journalist and the other to his disciples in the government, reveal the essential Gandhi. To the journalist he said, "My life is my message". To the new rulers of India he gave this unfailing advice:
"Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen, and ask yourself if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own destiny?
In other words, will it lead to Swaraj for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?"
________________________________________
Unpleasant but crucial facts
When ever we discuss peace, we don't forget to mention Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Holocaust, the World Wars and some of the major and minor conflict zones and killing fields in different parts of the world. But how many of us think even for a moment about the hunger and starvation endured by millions of human beings?
It is desirable that we constantly keep in mind the following unpleasant but crucial facts:
• More people have died from hunger in the past two years than were killed in World War I and World War II combined.
• Every year 13 to 18 million people die of hunger and starvation in this world.
• More than one billion people are always chronically hungry.
• Every 24 hours, 35,000 human beings die as a result of hunger and starvation - (24 every minute), 75% of whom are children under the age of five.
• No other disaster is comparable to the devastation of hunger.
• The number of people who die every 48 hours out of hunger and starvation is equivalent to the number of those who were instantly killed by the Hiroshima bomb.
• The worst earthquake in modern history - in China in 1976 - killed 24200 people. Hunger kills many more people every day.
________________________________________
The Shadow of September 11
The insane destruction of the World Trade Centre, New York on September 11, besides altering the course of human history, has also revealed how fragile our castles and glass houses of progress are. The deadly efficiency of genocidal weapons to inflict crushing defeat on enemies has also been unmistakably established. Nuclear weapons or war, though they still haunt humanity, are no longer the deadliest deterrents. In human hands any new toy of this scientific era could become deadly and fatal. Hence our perception of peace as the mere absence of war and violence–requires to be reviewed.
________________________________________
Gandhian assertion of Peace through peaceful means
Humanity has witnessed several wars and revolutions.
Occasionally it has also seen great changes being effected through gentle and peaceful means.
________________________________________
Nonviolence as an alternative to war and violence
Gandhi demonstrated the irresistible power of Ahimsa as a political weapon and instrument of liberation. He also emphasized and successfully demonstrated it in his various campaigns both in South Africa during the close of the nineteenth century, and later in India during the early decades of the twentieth century. Since then, it has made its mark on the world and has come to stay as an effective weapon and strategy in the hands of those who believe in the supremacy of soul-force and moral law.
While the general contemporary interest in nonviolence is largely due to Gandhi's relentless fight for the adoption of a nonviolent alternative. It cannot be said that Gandhi is the progenitor of all that goes along with the concept and practice of nonviolence. On the contrary, the history of the idea of nonviolence as a religious or philosophical doctrine can be traced to the ancient Upanishads, the hoary Indian pearls of philosophical insights and Intuition. The Chandogya Upanishad as well as the Chinese Tao- Te-Chim of the sixth century B.C. glorified nonviolence both as personal virtue and as a desirable societal goal. The New Testament of the Bible also upholds the virtue of nonviolence for the edification of mankind. Gauthama Buddha, who was a rebel against the gory and corrupt practices of religion, was an apostle of gentleness, nonviolence and compassion' and he laid the foundation for a modern outlook and emphasized the need for developing social awareness based on respect for all living beings.
________________________________________
Gandhi as a trend-setter
Plato had advocated truth and goodness; and he gave a vague sort of advice to overcome evil by good deeds. But with Gandhi (and later with Martin Luther King Jr.) nonviolence became a creative, challenging and eloquent force symbolizing man's inalienable right to live in peace and harmony and to help himself and his fellow beings to reach out towards their Maker.
The tragedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the rampant colonial exploitation which was no less dehumanizing than the reality of mass murder, and the capitalist injustice, prevalent all around, has now brought nonviolence to the center stage. Those who apparently control human destiny may still find it as an inconvenient irritant, that would go against their selfish worldly interests, particularly the economics of exploitation that they have developed.
The Gandhian perspectives on nonviolent human transformation is slowly but steadily receiving extensive attention in varying degrees in almost all parts of the world. A considerable number of social activists, freedom fighters, human rights activists, thinkers, political leaders and even to some extent, those to whom acceptance of nonviolence would hurt their national economics, which are based on military hardware, and those who encourage and engineer troubles and conflicts globally so that their armaments could be sold - have demonstrated their conviction that the nonviolent option as advocated by Gandhi needs serious attention. Thanks to this positive development, humanity is assured of a re-examination of the Bismarckian approach of treating war as a wholesome therapy that strengthens human nature, when civilization becomes too soft and frail.
The protagonists of the Bismarckian notion had propagated the obnoxious theory that aggressiveness is healthier than gentleness, waging war invigorates mankind, and it is genuinely positive to be vigorous, and offensive.
At one stroke, Gandhi demolished this myth - though the significance of the Gandhian initiative was not immediately understood all around. Let it be remembered that at first the industrialized West as well as the developing world did not take Gandhi seriously, though they were aware of what he was advocating. At that time, the difference in the cultural context in which Gandhi worked and the difficulty of many leaders to see beyond their noses were important factors which prevented the international community from realizing the supreme importance of the Gandhian strategy. But gradually the situation changed.
Humanity learnt a few lessons from the experience of the World Wars. Thereafter, Martin Luther King proclaimed the efficacy of the Gandhian strategy of nonviolent resistance in these words:
"... The Christian doctrine of Love, operating through the Gandhian method of nonviolence is perhaps, one of the most potent weapons available to the oppressed people in their struggle for freedom."
But, still, the international community took the Gandhian initiative as expounded by Martin Luther King only as a freak development for some more time.
________________________________________
Nonviolence as an effective strategy
A few major developments stand out as one thinks of nonviolence as an effective strategy not only to counter violence, but to bring about peace in human lives as we gradually glide into the twenty first century.
In all continents, and in almost all countries, several motivated groups of individuals who firmly believe in nonviolence have sprung up. However, it has not yet become as mainstream strategy.
The pace of non-violent collective action along Gandhian lines initiated by Martin Luther King, was continued with conviction and courage by various activists of civil liberty movements all over the world. Kenneth Kaunda, Albert Luthuli, Desmond Tutu, Julius Nyerere, Nelson Mandela, Ho Chi Min, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Maired Maguire are only a few of the most - illustrious names which come to mind in this context.
The acceptance of Gandhian tactics for nonviolent transformation by "the Greens", notably by Petra Kelly, has led to the propagation of a new dimension of ecological and sustainable developmental model as envisioned by Gandhi to various countries of Eastern Europe. 'The Quakers' then adopted Gandhian nonviolence as their ideology. This was another hopeful sign and it led to a resurgent collective action for justice and freedom in many western nations. The impact of their initiatives notably in the Latin American nations is quite substantial and extensive.
Several motivated scholars who developed strong faith in the efficacy of nonviolence in the service of mankind such as Prof. Glenn D.Paige, Gene Sharp and Johan Galtung through their dedicated efforts and sustained critical interest added new and valuable inputs to the concept and practice of non violence as a strategy for human survival.
Professor Glenn D Paige
Professor Glenn D Paige is one of those scholars, who have been instrumental in bringing into the scene a whole generation of young researchers and peace activists, by offering them, an appropriate framework to understand, scrutinize, and analyze the various aspects of nonviolence. The Herculean efforts of Professor Paige to develop a wholesome critique of Nonviolent Political Science is an important phase of modern history. Professor Paige hasalso made a significant contribution in enthusing several young scholars of international repute to adopt 'non-violent political action' as their area of specialization.
________________________________________
Ahimsa as a moral counterpart to wars
Can Ahimsa, and Sathyagraha be moral counterparts to wars and other violent conflicts that corrode human character and jeopardize human survival? It is claimed by both Western and Indian scholars that Ahimsa and Sathyagraha can be resorted to in any given situation involving injustice. In their view even in those situations where armed resistance is impossible, Sathyagraha and Ahimsa can be resorted to as ultimate instruments of justice. This assertion happens to be partially ambiguous. Horsbough has stated that the prospects of nonviolence in the sphere of international conflict are brighter than what is commonly supposed even though people still believe in the efficacy of Armed Force.
As Gandhi had advocated, and demonstrated, a conscientious effort to make Ahimsa a way of life, and not a curious creed, is the need of the hour. Gandhi says: "Man either progresses towards Ahimsa, or rushes to his Doom". Analyzed against the background of all that the great preachers and prophets of humanity, and votaries of Ahimsa have instructed throughout the centuries, Gandhi's contribution to the cause is most outstanding and crucial. Incredible optimist that he was, Gandhi believed in the essential goodness of all.
As in Gandhi's own time, his concept of nonviolence continues to be diversely understood, interpreted and discussed in different parts of the world. While to some it is an ideal that all men should cherish, to an overwhelming number of others it is a moral principle which can guide thought and action. Many people view it as a policy which can be adopted and made effective only in certain given circumstances. A large number of people all over the world find in it a practical tool which can be used in certain situations according to the capabilities of the user. Some others view it as a technique suggesting one range of actions which may at times be supplemented or even substituted by other techniques as and when the situation demands. Each one of these different interpretations is usually upheld with the support of quotations from Gandhi's own words and citing Gandhi's own actions.
Hubert Humphrey, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Senator Diakno, Johan Galtung, Gene Sharp, Erik Erikson and Prof. Richard Keyes, have found in Gandhi's concept of nonviolence a great opportunity for humanity which enables mankind to take a fresh look at the various problems man has created for man, disregarding the Laws of Nature. France Huthchins and several others find Gandhi's approach towards non-violence as absolutist. To them Gandhi's view of nonviolence explicitly or implicitly includes motive as well as action, so that ahimsa or nonviolence is both psychic and corporal.
Thomas Clark and several others also find great scope for the practical application of the principle of nonviolence. William Robert Miller, James E. Bristor, William Stuart Nelson, A.J. Maste, Ted Duncan, Willock Michael, W. Sonneleitner, and many other scholars and pacifists find in Gandhian non-violence, a force and a method of action that can well become the basis for the twenty-first century man to adopt and practice. Dr. Daisaku Ikeda, SGI President, and one of the most profound thinkers of our time regards Gandhian nonviolence as a potent force and an effective instrument to secure justice and peace.
________________________________________
Non-violent struggles after Gandhi
A cursory glance reveals that during the last six decades since the assassination of Gandhi, a considerable degree of intellectual efforts have gone into the appreciation and understanding of the concept of non-violence in different parts of the world. This ranges from deep sociological analysis of the dimension of the conflict to the policy implications of the Gandhian mode. Many see, in the Gandhian non-violence, clues to ways of dealing with national problems of tensions, conflict, arms race and war. What most of the analysts, critics, followers and admirers have seen in Gandhi, is a 'challenge rather than a stereotype'. It is natural that different levels of perception developed as the Gandhian approach expanded globally. Since Gandhi represented a model value system, it is quite natural that people viewed the Mahatma from different social, political and territorial perspectives. Klaus Scuts, Mayor of Berlin, was categorical in his assertion, "Nonviolence does not mean passivity or political vegetarianism". It is an active attitude, it permits fight for justice ,challenges the opponent to declare himself.
The Gandhian concept of nonviolence never visualized surrender to evil or injustice, but pitting of one's soul against the will of the tyrant. The philosophy of soul-force visualizes three kinds of persons. The first category is that of the coward who supinely submits to injustice in order to save his skin; while the second category is that of the brave man who is eager to redeem justice by person, the Sathyagrahi, the believer in and practitioner of nonviolence, who in the fullness of his strength using the Natural force method, forgives the evil doer and attempts to persuade one to adopt right doing through nonviolence and love.
________________________________________
Gandhi's early laboratory
South Africa was the laboratory of Gandhi. The Twenty one years that Gandhi spent in South Africa witnessed Great changes both in his private life and public life. Much of what Gandhi did later in India had been tempered by the South African experiments. Gandhi's ascetic ashram life had its beginning in the Phoenix Ashram in South Africa. Non-violent resistance, simple living, Charkha spinning, non-violent struggles, insistence on simplicity and moderation – all had their origin there. In fact Gandhi had already become a Mahatma in the making by the time he left South Africa for India. His was a heroc struggle, involving several millions of people over a long period.
________________________________________
Gandhi's influence on South Africa's fight against apartheid
The votaries of peace and nonviolence all over the world would find it inspiring to realize that the epoch-making changes in South Africa, signalling the extinction of apartheid owe their inspiration to Gandhi's heroic struggles in that country. Nelson Mandela openly acknowledges this truth.
Gandhi who proceeded to South Africa as a lawyer to fight a court case, found on his arrival, a situation highly mortifying and humiliating and too harsh for any human being to tolerate. He was already aware of the inhuman segregation known as untouchability which a section of Indians were enduring back home in his own country. But what Gandhi had to face in South Africa was beyond his understanding. The strange experience of man being segregated in the name of the colour of his skin and getting his basic rights denied came to him as a rude shock. In South Africa millions of the local black population and the Indian settlers (most of them indentured labourers) were languishing in inhuman conditions. Gandhi himself became a victim of this dehumanizing practice not once or twice but several times.
On June 7 of 1893, a few months after his arrival in South Africa, Gandhi while traveling by a train in a first class compartment was thrown out of the train at the Petermauritzburg station. The charge against Gandhi was only that he was black in colour. The Blacks of South Africa were not permitted to travel in the first class compartment. On another occasion Gandhi was denied travel in a coach along with white passengers. Once he was denied hotel accommodation because of his colour. Taking pity on him, a kind individual then offered him accommodation in the hotel on the specific condition that he would not come down to the dining hall, but remain closeted in his own room throughout his stay. On another occasion, he was pushed down by the guards for having walked along a road in the vicinity of the residence of a highly-placed White official. Later Gandhi came to know that the Blacks and the coolies were not allowed to walk along that road. Gandhi also found that the children of the Blacks were not allowed to study in schools along with the white children.
These were only some of the visible symptoms of the dreaded practice of Apartheid which had many more humiliating aspects, the foundations of which were too strongly entrenched and defied all attempts of uprooting. The fact that a satisfactory solution to this vexed issue was finally found in the year 1993 which marked the centenary of the beginning of Gandhi's struggle in South Africa, is a matter of rejoicing for all Gandhian peace activists all over the world.
It is interesting to note how the local Blacks responded to Gandhi. By and large, Gandhi was fighting against the inhuman and discriminatory laws enacted by the Pretoria regime. But he was equally opposing a system that was perpetuating racial discrimination in the name of colour and nationality. The general condition faced by the Blacks in South Africa was not much different from what the Indian settlers were confronting. It would be naive to believe that the Black population was insensitive to what was happening in South Africa under the leadership of Gandhi. Though he was concentrating on the Indian settlers there, the principle he was fighting for had importance far beyond what the Indians in South Africa were endeavouring to secure. But it cannot be claimed that Gandhi had great influence on them when the Gandhian struggle was actually taking place in Natal, Pretoria Mini other places.
The law of nature teaches us that the seeds of change always take time to sprout. In South Africa, the Gandhian variety of non-violent struggle had to wait until Nelson Mandela appeared on the scene. No one can deny that the ANC was considerably influenced by Gandhi. The ANC movement drew strength and vigour largely from the inspiration of Gandhi. The basic question that arises is whether it was the brute force of the white minority which kept the Blacks at bay or whether the Blacks themselves by their own quiet surrender were responsible for their plight.
The fact remains that from their own experiences, they have developed a different notion of non-violence as a creed and a strategy. It was conceived as creative and positive and in their own way the Black majority tried to give it a fair trial. The ANC leadership in general and Nelson Mandela in particular seemed to be familiar with and appreciative of Gandhi's work and the success of his campaign. Mandela's speech after two days of his release from jail on 11 February 1990 was significant, since apart from referring to his indebtedness to Gandhi, he said.
"Another strand in the struggle against oppression began with the formation, right here in Natal, of the Indian Congress founded in 1884, a tradition of extra parliamentary protest that continues with the present. The next decade saw the increasing radicalization of Indian politics under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi... In 1906 - when Bambatha led sections of Africans in a war to abolish the poll tax -our brothers who descended from India, led by Mahatma Gandhi, fought against the oppression of the British Government."
Mandela had quoted a passage from Jawahar Lal Nehru before his arrest :
"There is no easy walkover to freedom anywhere and many of us will have to pass through the shadow again and again before we reach the mountain tops of our desires".
This also indicates that Mandela studied the Gandhian option carefully. Though the release from jail of Mandela and the legalizing of ANC cannot be viewed as concessions, they gave definite indication of the superior wisdom and statesmanship of President De Clerk, which none of his predecessors had displayed. Of course, there were other ground realities which prompted De Clerk to adopt an attitude of reconciliation ignoring the stout opposition from the die-hard whites.
There was resurgence in the people's movement despite the imposition of emergency in 1985 and the banning of the UDF and other organizations. The upsurge of 1989 and the open defiance of the segregation laws, made it practically impossible for De Clark to govern South Africa which had almost become an untouchable among the comity of nations. Further the nation's economy was showing signs of a total collapse following the strikes by COATSU and the mine workers. The sanctions imposed by the international community also shattered the economy. The so-called military supremacy of South Africa proved to be a myth when Angola gave a hard knock; its military might. There were many hurdles to be crossed. Yet there was the silver lining as was revealed from the manner in which both the government and the ANC denounced criminality, and violence. Despite several setbacks, the ANC and the government moved closer. The lifting of emergency except in the Natal Province, also helped large number of refugees to return. The signing of the 'Pretoria Minutes' augured well for the future. "The repeal of discriminatory legislations, the release of political prisoners and the acceptance of the principle of 'one man one vote were very central to the transfer of power and the restoration of peace.
The deep scars of Apartheid and the legacy of distrust, the cynical attempts made by the apologists of Apartheid, the growing internecine war among the Blacks and the stridency of the Neo Nazi groups made the process of change painfully slow. But the final victory as reflected in the triumphal emergence of South Africa as a free democratic nation under Nelson Mandela recreated visions of nonviolence as a matchless life force.
________________________________________
Significance of Truth, Reconciliation Commission
As the dismantling of apartheid proclaimed the humanistic side of nonviolence in political arena, the wisdom shown by Nelson Mandela in the setting up of the Truth & Reconciliation Commission under the leadership of the much-revered Bishop Desmond Tutu revealed unparalleled creative non-violent leadership. Their adherence to nonviolence enabled the new leaders to proclaim firmly that 'there is no future without forgiveness."
________________________________________
Gandhi’s influence on Martin Luther King (Jr)
In his own way, Martin Luther King( Jr) added new dimensions to Gandhian nonviolence in the nineteen sixties in order to make it an effective instrument of his fight against evil. When the fight derives its strength from the moral and spiritual caliber of the victim and depends on the quality of his suffering, it takes quite a long time to effect what we call the 'change of heart' of the oppressor which is the goal of a non-violent struggle as opposed to 'victory. In an armed conflict, victory is not assured to either of the parties involved. The racial violence which broke out in Los Angeles and some other parts of the USA speaks volumes regarding how fragile our modern civilization is. It is actually an ominous portent and a disturbing reminder of what has been simmering underneath the surging welter of modernity and progress.
These events also reveal how skin-deep is our pretension of adherence to the equality of human beings. It is surprising to see that such racial disturbance should occur in the land of Abraham Lincoln, Thoreau, Emerson, Walt Whitman, Kennedy and Martin Luther King; and that too several decades after the eradication of the demon of racial discrimination. Gandhi warned humanity as early as 1909 when he published his book, "Hind Swaraj", that a civilization bereft of human considerations is 'Satanic'.
Even from his school days Martin Luther King was greatly influenced by the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. Therefore it was only natural that he adopted the Gandhian doctrine of nonviolence as the most effective weapon at his command to fight racial segregation in the US. He once said in explaining his philosophy: "I believe in a militant, non-violent approach in which the individual stands up against an unjust system, using sit-ins, legal action, boycotts, votes and everything except violence or hate".
Acknowledging his indebtedness to Gandhi, Dr. King said: "...from my background I gained Christian ideals; from Gandhi I learned my operational technique".
In another context Dr. King acknowledged his debt to Mahatma Gandhi, while explaining the Montgomery bus boycott programme as follows:
"This is a protest of passive resistance depending upon moral and spiritual forces. We will return good for evil. Christ showed us the way and Mahatma Gandhi showed us it could work".
He declared that the American Black will not resort to “more radical ways to gain civil rights", because he has full faith “that he can get justice within the frame work of the democratic set-up."
It is a fact that Gandhi continues to inspire a considerable section of American opinion even today. E. Stanly Jones, himself a renowned pacifist, had this to say about Jesus Christ and Mahatma Gandhi "1 bow to Mahatma Gandhi, but I kneel at the feet of Christ and give him my full and final allegiance." Referring to Mahatma Gandhi, Stanly Jones stated that he (Gandhi) "has taught me more of Christ than perhaps any other man in East or West.”
________________________________________
Global influence of Gandhi
There are quite a few among the liberal pacifists in the West who found in Gandhi the argument against the inevitability of the deterministic social order propagated by Darwin and Marx. Albert Einstein, Aldous Huxley, Oswald Garrison Villard, Roger Balwin and many others were able to see in Gandhi a reinstatement of the Renaissance faith of the perfectibility of man. In contrast to this school, there was the group of religious pacifists such as A.J.Maste, John Nevin, Haynes Holmens, Norman Thomas who found in Gandhi "a moral equivalent of war".
There may not be a Martin Luther King now in USA; but the number of true votaries of nonviolence both as a political strategy and as a creed has substantially increased. Several internationally famous pacifists such as Johan Galtung, Homer Jack, Dr. Glenn D. Paige, Gene Sharp, Dr. Lou Ann Guanson, Dr. Barnard Laffeyette, Vance Engleman, Dr. Richard Deats, Captain Charles Alphin and Richard N. Nagler are the ardent practitioners, exponents and champions of nonviolence today.
The spilling of blood in both the erstwhile Yugoslavia and former Czechoslovakia and the uncertainties created by the events following the dismemberment of the USSR should be viewed as the inescapable consequence of incongruities engendered by the die-hard communist philosophy which by and large did not care about purity of means in achieving laudable ends. The validity and relevance of the Gandhian insistence on purity of means -something which the communist blocks haalways scoffed at -became obvious now. The Gandhian concept of nonviolence thereafter began to attract the attention of the youth of Czechoslovakia. There arose a general belief that non-violence which is asold as the hills and which is based on the primordial instinct of man to live happily and to let others live comfortably would be an answer to the seething problems of the nation.
Four decades earlier, at the time of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, there was a Gandhian protest efficiently organized by the Czech youth. From the youth the message gradually spread to the elders also. The Czech people also organized extremely significant programmes during the Gandhi centenary. The Speaker of the National Assembly of Czechoslovakia specifically stated in a message that "Gandhi's thought is of special significance". In the crossfire of the dismemberment of the USSR and the vaulting ambition of the selfish political leaders of Czechoslovakia, the helpless people looked up to the Gandhian concept of non-violent social transformation more than ever before. In Yugoslavia also the total collapse of the monolithic communist structure encouraged the people to think of a Gandhian alternative. The USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia - the three main pillars of communism in Europe - faced very serious existential crisis, a crisis that called for a gentle humanitarian touch to get defused. Reports indicate that profound political thinkers and leaders seriously considered the Gandhian alternatives in these countries as means to prevent political extinction and to avoid internecine killings.
There is no doubt that the previous century was a glorious one in terms of man's continued conquest of nature including the outer space. Man has reached the very zenith of material achievements. The rapid technological strides that have changed the life style of man also induced in him a new sense of hope and also in insecurity. The hope lies in his ability to rise like the phoenix reconstruct life from its ruins and the indomitable spirit of 'never to yield'. The insecurity arises from the realization that unless worldly progress is tempered with the elixir of spiritual values humanity will land itself on the desert sands of crass materialism.
In former centuries, Europe had overawed the rest of humanity with its superior military might and an intelligent harnessing of the fruits of Science and Technology. Asia in the meanwhile, was enveloped in spiritual and philosophical pursuits. The appeal of the Buddha, despite the tidal wave of material progress, swept almost the whole of South East Asia while the Indian civilization and the Chinese civilization made feverish attempts to come to terms with the new challenges. The Asian nations were condescendingly described as 'developing' countries while the African region with its infinite natural resources and tremendous manpower was described to be the 'dark' and 'underdeveloped' continent. The fact was that it suited the colonial exploiters to keep it so. It did not escape the notice of the impartial observers that Africa is only a 'sleeping giant' who when awakened will be a formidable force to reckon with. In spite of the hangover of the centuries and the traditional old colonial exploitation which is still hampering the different countries, there is no doubt that the rejuvenated African continent which would be self confident of its inherent strength will tplay a crucial role in the 21 century. Brushing aside these seething problems, Africa and Asia - that have several common features in between -would boldly challenge the West and, as and when this happens, it would mark a new phase in human history.
________________________________________
Dr. Daisaku Ikeda's Contribution
As Johan Galtung points out Gandhi has become a part of the world political culture and Gandhian thought is bound to influence the progress of the twenty first Century. Even religious and cultural organizations and movements across the world emphasize conscientiously the relevance of Gandhi’s teachings in their strategies. The fast-spreading Soka Gakkai movement under the Presidentship of Dr. Daisaku Ikeda is a wonderful example. Dr. Daisaku Ikeda, an unbelievably energetic and creative leader, has always emphasized the supreme importance of the Gandhian method for achieving world peace. The SGI leadership has also shown remarkable awareness of the value of Gandhian nonviolence as is evident from the thrust the SGI President Dr Ikeda gives to the propagation of Ahimsa as enunciated by Shakyamuni Buddha. Dr Ikeda strongly advocates that a world without war which has become one of the cherished goals of humanity can no longer be treated as a distant dream. A spiritual awakening supported by strong cultural, educational and social movements is the need of the hour.
What kind of basic change, then, are we hoping for? It cannot be anything other than a non-violent, non-exploitative, nonkilling and a just society where no child, no woman, no man will die of hunger, where everyone's self-respect will get prime consideration and where no one will be segregated in the name of caste, class, colour or sex.
Are we just dreaming about an unattainable Utopia? Certainly not. Moreover even if it is a dream, only dreams like this give hope and strength to the human race. The tragedy of the present times is that a large segment of our fellowmen are still denied their dreams, hopes and opportunities of growth.
________________________________________
Denial of justice and the widening gap between the rich North and the poor South
There can never be peace and happiness on earth if humanity does not address the basic problems that perpetrate inequality. Let us look at the following staggering facts provided by the World Watch Institute (State of the World 2002 New York, 3)
• More than a billion people on earth today lack access to adequate clean water.
• Nearly three billion people do not have access to adequate sanitation facilities.
• Nations have long grappled with inequality; but never in history have the assets of the three ,richest individuals matched the combined national economies of the poorest 48 nations as is the case today.
• Inspite of a of unprecedented economic growth that has added over ten trillion U.S. dollars every year to the global economy, the number of people living in poverty (at the rate of one US dollar a day) remains more than one billion, without any change.
A billion people are being added to the human population every 15 years.
• The lack of democratic political representation and the concentration of economic and political power in a few hands have created a fundamental instability in many nations – an instability that has far reaching consequences in the form of large- scale human migration, illegal drug exports and increasing terrorism.
• The average American uses 19 times more paper than the average person in a developing country, and most of it ends up as trash.
• Some 27 per cent of the world's coral reefs have now been irredeemably lost (whereas it was only ten per cent in 1992). Coral reefs are second only to forests in biological wealth, and such an extensive loss of the reefs inevitably takes a great toll on many aquatic species of living beings. The goods and services obtained from reefs were valued at 375 billion U.S. dollars in 1997.
• Global emissions of carbon have grown by an additional 400 million
tones during the ten years it has taken to arrive at an agreement for a modest climate protocol.
• Twenty known communicable diseases - including tuberculosis (TB) malaria and cholera - which had been effectively controlled, reemerged virulently and spread widely in the last quarter of the twentieth century. At least thirty previously unknown deadly new diseases - including HIV, Hepatitis C and Ebola – have also surfaced in the same period.
• After sixty years of near-continuous decline in deaths from infectious diseases in the United States, the trend reversed in 1980 and death rates have nearly doubled since then.
• A pharmacological study made in 1999 reported that only 13 out of 1,223 medicines commercialized by multinational drug companies between 1975 and 1997 were designed to treat life-threatening tropical diseases.
• The market for drugs meant to cure minor ailments like toenail fungus, obesity, baldness, face wrinkles and impotence runs into billions of dollars.
• A third of all adults are overweight in Europe; the figure stands at 61 per cent in the United States. Obesity (the extreme condition of overweight) rose dramatically in the 1990s - by ten to forty per cent in most European countries and by fifty per cent in the United States.
________________________________________
Gandhi for social justice
Social justice and human rights have been the two key areas of Gandhi's concern both in South Africa, and India. Gandhi predicted that unless expeditious corrective measures are taken, humanity will see more mega-death weapons proliferating among nations and there will be population explosion, more pollution and poverty, reducing our planet's life-supporting capabilities.
Gandhi insisted that social justice, distributive justice, and community justice have to be woven into the matrix of social, political and community life.
Community justice is based on the dignity and equality of all persons while distributive justice guarantees the right of all men and women to have equal share of essential goods and services, material comforts and social security. Social justice should encourage citizens to engage themselves in the creation of just social and political structures which constitute genuine democracy. Truth will be the guiding principle in all of them.
In the Gandhian concept the way of peace is the way of truth.
What Jaime L Cardinal Sin pointed out in the annual lecture series in United Nations University (1985), aptly sums up the frightening scenario:
"Poverty in the third world or anywhere else is an indication of failure. But the subject and agent of this failure are not the poor themselves;rather, they are the victims of this failed human and technical enterprise.
The responsible agents of poverty are the rich and the powerful. The agents of poverty are the economic planners who choose to import capitalintensive technologies and whose victims are the jobless industrial workers. The technocrats of poverty are the educators who promoted school systems that are replicas of foreign universities. Their victims are the youth who became alienated from their own people and culture. The merchants of poverty are those unscrupulous industrialists who manipulate fragile economies and destroy their self-reliant foundations. The innumerable victims are the small farmers, fishermen and entrepreneurs whose labour and produce are brought cheaply and whose daily rice depend on market decisions made in Chicago or Geneva. The poor are poorer because they must contend not only with the exploitative powers of local groups, but with those of an international network as well.
________________________________________
Seven social sins
Paradoxically, the emerging scenario whose defining characteristics are a kind of mad frenzy and utter contempt to all values, will have only scant regard to what are known today as the seven social sins Gandhi had reproduced in his journal (one of his admirers had categorized and sent them to him) as follows:
1. Politics without principles
2. Wealth without work
3. Pleasure without conscience
4. Knowledge without character
5. Commerce without morality
6. Science without humanity
7. Worship without sacrifice
Can we afford to ignore these principles if we care for the future of humanity? Can there be peace on earth without the realization of these basic values?
________________________________________
The Pope's prayer
The prayer of Pope John Paul II during his visit to Hiroshima reflects the anguish and agony of present day humanity:
To the Creator of nature and humanity, of truth and beauty, I pray:
Hear my voice, for it is the voice of the victims of all wars and violence among individuals and nations;
Hear my voice, for it is the voice of all children who suffer and will suffer when people put their faith in weapons and war;
Hear my voice when I beg you to instill into the hearts of all human beings the wisdom of peace, the strength of justice, and the joy of fellowship;
Hear my voice, for I speak for the multitudes in every country and in every history who do not want war and are ready to walk the road of peace.
Hear my voice and grant insight and strength so that we may always respond to hatred with love, to injustice with total dedication to justice,
to need with the sharing of self to war with peace.
O God, hear my voice and grant unto the world your everlasting peace.
There is no doubt that in this universal prayer the Pope has summarized the philosophy of Peace, Love, and Nonviolence propounded by Mahatma Gandhi The great and indeed mind-boggling question which stares at humanity even after about six decades of the most diabolical crime perpetrated on the human race - namely the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is: Are the bombs hurled over Hiroshima and Nagasaki the last in human history?
There are other questions as well: How is humanity going to tackle the monsters of war, violence, injustice of various types, the grinding poverty widely prevalent in large segments of human populations and what is humanity going to do to arrest the all-time high and fiercely alarming environmental degradation and spread of violence?
When can humanity wake into a period where the killing instinct is kept under bay and our grandchildren will breathe the fresh air of a nonkilling world which will have to be a nonviolence and just world as well.
Gandhi demonstrated that change is possible provided we have the will.
COURTESY: Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal - Gandhi Book Centre, 299 Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk Mumbai 400 007 MH India
Imagined Dialogue between Gandhi and The Prophet
Gandhiji and The Prophet (PBUH)
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Note: This imaginary dialogue between Gandhiji and the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) is to clarify many misunderstandings which are being spread about Islam and Muslims. My mission in life is to promote peace and inter-religious understanding and to struggle against religious fanaticism and extremism. As I have deep conviction about teachings of Islam, I am also great admirer of Gandhiji and his philosophy of non-violence. (A.E.)
________________________________________
Gandhiji : I have drawn inspiration from Islam as much as from Christianity. Islam's emphasis on justice, equality and human dignity has always attracted me as love and forgiveness of Christianity. The Sermon on the Mount specially attracted my attention. As you know I am deeply committed to philosophy of non-violence and it is in this respect that I am approaching you to know more in depth about Islam's teachings about non-violence. It is necessary as Islam and terrorism are being equated by some anti Islamic forces and it is you who can help dispel these attacks on Islam. Who can be the better person than you, O Prophet of Islam.
Prophet : I am so much pained that Islam is under attack today whereas 21st century should have been the most appropriate period to appreciate its teachings. Yes, I admit there are all kinds of people in any religion and some may be motivated by their own selfish interests and indulge in violence or other misdeeds but a religion should be judged by its core teachings, not by what some followers do. I hope you will agree with me.
Gandhiji : Yes I do agree with you sir, the great Prophet of Islam.
Prophet: You would agree with me no religion can teach violence and be followed by millions of people. The very purpose of religion is to refine morals and guide its followers to a purposeful and meaningful life with inner peace and deep conviction. Islam is a religion of surrendering to Allah and Allah is Compassionate and Merciful (Rahman and Rahim) and in your devotional song you also mention Ram and Rahim. All Muslims are supposed to invoke Allah, the Compassionate and Merciful before they begin their work (bism Allah al-Rahman al-Rahim). It is very central to Islam. Also one of Allah's name in Quran, you must have noted, is Salam i.e. Peace.
Gandhiji : I understand true meaning of religion and its need for human beings in life. Inner convictions play important role in giving meaning and direction to human life. I have always relied on my own inner convictions before I took any decision. But I want to understand Islam in all its comprehensive way so that there is absolutely no confusion and it would certainly reinforce my own conviction in non-violence.
Prophet : Look when I was chosen by Allah to be His prophet the conditions in Mecca was extremely precarious. There was moral chaos in society, the tribal chiefs were growing wealthier and wealthier as they controlled international trade and were becoming arrogant and neglecting all their moral obligations towards weaker sections of society, the poor, the orphans, the widows, the needy and, in order to achieve greater grip over the minds of people, were promoting all sorts of superstitions and irrational beliefs. All this disturbed me deeply and I retired to the cave of Hira where I received revelation.
The Quranic revelation dealt with the situation on two levels: first, it promoted concept of one God - Allah- the creator of all and worship Him alone thus uniting entire human kind and on social level it strongly condemned accumulation of wealth and predicted it will turn into hell fire if the weaker sections of the society are neglected and injustice and oppression prevails. Thirdly, it gave equal rights to women who were denied all rights and treated as mere chattels. Fourthly, it stressed need for knowledge (ilm) and compared it with light (noor) and ignorance as darkness.
Gandhiji : How like Upanishads. Upanishad too compares gyan with light and one of its prayers says lead me from darkness to light.
Prophet : Yes indeed, this prayer exists in the Quran too. And one other prayer says rabbi zidni ilman (O Sustainer of this Universe increase me in knowledge). Indeed religions (not to be confused with customs, traditions and cultural institutions) do not contradict each other but compliment and stress same values.
Gandhiji : In Hindu tradition we maintain entire humanity is one family (Vasudhaiva kutumbakum).
Prophet : Yes I too have said in one of my hadith al-khalq-u-ayalullah (entire creation is Allah's family.)
Gandhiji : How similar are teachings of two of our great religions. But, Hindus often complain that Muslims call us kafirs. Sir, are we kafirs?
Prophet : No, no. there is great misunderstanding about kufr among Muslims and others. In Quran kafir is one who hides truth and actively opposes it. Every religion is embodiment of truth and in every religious tradition Allah or God or Ishwar's name is Truth, In Quran one of Allah's name is Haq (Truth). So those who hide truth and actively oppose it is a kafir, not one who believes in it and strongly affirms it.
Gandhiji : We Hindus do believe in truth and indeed I always said Truth is God.
Prophet : Yes, yes, how can you be kafir. All those who affirm truth, truth of values and right path cannot be kafirs. Quran teaches that every qaum (nation) was given truth through prophets and I have said that Allah has sent 1,24,000 prophets and Quran also says “We have sent prophet for every nation. And some of the Sufis in your country have said Allah must have sent prophets to Hind also to fulfill His promise in the Quran. However, I know some Muslims, either out of arrogance or ignorance, call others kafirs. Do not worry about them. Then even one Muslim sect in my ummah, unfortunately call followers of other sects as kafirs. It is nothing but false sense of superiority over others.
Gandhiji : May I request you sir to further throw some light on concept of kafir in Quran as there is so much confusion about it among people.
Prophet : When I began to invite people of Mecca to Islam, a religion of truth revealed by Allah to me and it invited the powerful leaders of Mecca too, to accept Islam, their ego as well as their powerful interests were deeply hurt and they began to actively oppose Islam. Firstly they felt how can an orphan, without any wealth and social status could tell us what is the right path and ask us to deviate from the path of our forefathers. Secondly, Quran, as I pointed out, attacked accumulation of wealth neglecting weaker sections of society.
This deeply disturbed them as wealth was their main power and there was no state machinery in Mecca to tax them so the Quran proposed a voluntary contribution and called it zakat which literally means to purify. The zakat is meant to be distributed among the weaker sections of society, the poor, orphans, widows, needy, travelers and liberating slaves and prisoners. Thus economic justice will prevail and their wealth will be purified. However, so far they had only accumulated wealth and never spared anything for the weaker sections of society. This also created strong resentment among the wealthy of Mecca and they began to actively oppose me and my followers and even using their power persecuted me and my followers, torturing them in most inhuman manner. They even did not allow us to enter Kaaba, our holy shrine for centuries.
The Quran condemned them as kafirs because they actively opposed the truth knowing fully well that I was bearer of truth from Allah. Their arrogance and their pride in their wealth blinded them. It indeed was not their ancestral religion but their arrogance and false pride in wealth which was the problem.
There were those Arabs who did not accept Islam but at the same time did not oppose Islam and hence Quran said for them that unbelievers for you is your religion and for me is mine. Thus you will see religion was indeed not the problem, power, wealth and arrogance was. Also, the Quran says la ikrah fi al-din (i.e. there is no compulsion in matters of religion). No one can be coerced into believing as religion is matter of conscience and deeper conviction. Even an idol worshipper cannot be coerced into abandoning his way of worship. If a kafir (which only means non-believer in Islam) desires to live in peace with Muslims his way of worship has to be respected and protected along with his life and property. Quran calls them dhimmis (i.e. those whose responsibility of life and property) is on Muslims and those who harm them amounts to harming me and those who harm me they harm Allah.
Gandhiji : This completely clarifies the meaning of kafir. It is indeed very humane and in keeping with the contemporary world which believes in freedom of worship and freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. Unto me is my religion and unto you is yours. What more one can expect from any religion.
So sir it is not in keeping with the teaching of Islam that one should use sword to preach Islam. This mis-concept is so widespread in the world today.
Prophet : This is sheer monstrosity. How can Quran which teaches freedom of conscience can teach such a thing. Quran says, on the other hand, call people to the path of Allah with wisdom and goodly words. Those who went out with swords were conqueror of territories, not conquerors of hearts for Allah.
Gandhiji : This clears many of my doubts and my countrymens doubts. I always thought Quran and Prophet of Islam can never allow such things. Religion is a moral force and can never permit coercion, let alone violence, for its acceptance. The conqueror may coerce some to convert but a religious person can never. Those conversions will be more for political than for religious conviction. In India most of the conquerors also hardly ever used coercion to convert Hindus though many of them supported various Muslim rulers militarily and politically. There may have been few instances but generally Hindus and Muslims lived in peace and harmony and evolved a composite culture.
Prophet : Yes indeed you are right and my mission (dawah) was generally accepted by weaker sections of the society. In Arabia too it is poor, slaves, women, orphans and widows who responded to my mission promptly. In your country also, it is low caste Hindus who suffered indignities who responded readily as Islam stands for social justice, equality and human dignity.
Gandhiji : Now it brings me to the question of non-violence which I have practiced in my life, even for liberation of my own country from the British rulers. Does Islam accept non-violence as a basic doctrine? Or it accepts it only tactically in certain circumstances as many Islamic theologians maintain?
Prophet : Truth, as you know is very basic to the Quran as I told you and it is also one of Allah's names. Another important names of Allah and Quran's fundamental values are compassion and mercy. Now put all of them (truth, compassion and mercy) together and tell me how violence can ever be part of Quranic teachings? It is not merely tactical but non-violence is most fundamental to Islam.
You evolved the concept of satyagraha (insistence on truth) for practicing non-violence for liberation of Hind. Truth and non-violence go together and can never be a sundered apart. One who insists on truth, as you tried to do, can never resort to violence. Truth reflects our deeper conviction and is mirror of our pure conscience and you would agree with me conviction and coercion are poles apart.
Also, truth needs certain virtues most of all patience (sabr) and control over ones anger, desire and greed without which one cannot practice it. Quran also lays great emphasis on these virtues, as you also do. In one of the chapters of Quran it has been said, By the time! Surely man is in loss, except those who believe and do good, and exhort one another to Truth, and exhort one another to patience.
Thus it will be seen that truth requires tremendous patience and patience, in turn, curbs anger and desire. Those who have patience cannot be provoked. To practice truth you need these qualities. And hence where there is truth, there will be no violence. Violence is result of impatience, anger, greed and desire.
Gandhiji : You are very right O Prophet of Islam. I also always emphasized truth, non-violence and simple living. Without non-violence truth is not possible and without simple living too, non-violence is not possible. It is greed and desire which leads to more and more violence. In the twentieth and twenty first century more and more consumerism has meant more and more raw materials and western powers in collaboration with the native ruling elite plunder third world countries and for that they have to suppress people and displace them from their ancestral properties resulting in great deal of violence. The naxalite violence in my country is because tribal are being displaced without any dignified rehabilitation in the hunt for minerals.
Prophet : Yes, you are absolutely right. In Mecca when I exhorted the rich and powerful not to neglect the poor and needy and leave life of luxury they turned against me and persecuted me. My emphasis was on simple life and I set a rigorous example of simplicity. I am also known to Islamic historians as kambliwala i.e. one who used rough blanket and often wore patched clothes and used pillows stuffed with just palm leaves.
We have all this in common. But the powerful merchants of Mecca had greed for profit and were used to high life style and accepting my teachings would have meant giving up all this. When finally I left Mecca and migrated to Madina they pursued me and attacked me and first battle of Badr took place. It was the first battle ought by Muslims. It is Meccan merchants who were aggressors. I had to defend.
Absolute non-violence is not possible in the world where injustices abide, inequality and human lust is widespread and powerful are ever ready to exploit and deprive people of their rights and dignity. Violence is not our choice, it is often inflicted on us without we ever desiring it. I, along with my followers left Mecca quietly and yet the Meccan merchants inflicted war on us.
It was in this condition that the Quran permitted us to defend ourselves. The permission was granted conditionally that we do not commit aggression. Thus the Quran said that fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you and do not be aggressors as Allah does not love aggressors. If we had not defended ourselves we would have been wiped out. Non-violence should essentially mean absence of violence of aggression. And for Quran it is matter of basic principle that Muslims should not be first resort to violence..
Gandhiji : I am in perfect agreement with you honourable Prophet. I would also like to know more about the concept of jihad. It is highly misunderstood both among Muslims and non-Muslims. I hope it does not mean war and violence but I want to hear from you.
Prophet : You are right jihad does not even remotely mean war or violence. It means struggle for truth and truth prevails, as we discussed earlier, if we suppress our unjust desires, anger and passion for possession. Thus real jihad means to struggle against ones own selfish desires and this is most difficult struggle. I call it jihad-e-akbar i.e. the greatest jihad. Then I also have said that most meritorious jihad is speaking truth in the face of a tyrant risking ones own life.
People cannot wage such jihad, such struggle as it entails great sacrifices, they wage wars for selfish desires, kill innocent people and exploit the poor and call it jihad to legitimize it. Wars of aggression and territorial possessions can never be called jihad. Some of my followers in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and some other places are killing even fellow Muslims through terrorist attacks and call it jihad. Terrorism is terrorism and most condemnable act of cruelty. How can it be called jihad which is very noble act of upholding truth even at the cost of ones life. It entails self sacrifice and not killing innocent people.
Islam opposes violence of aggression in every form and respects life of even enemy and that is why the Quran says with great emphasis that if you kill one person without justification it amounts to killing the whole humanity and if you save one life as if you have saved entire humanity. If this principle is universally accepted there will be peace on our earth.
Gandhiji : Indeed the concept of jihad is very noble as explained by you O Prophet. I wish all Muslims and non-Muslims follow this noble principle and instead of attacking others and launching wars of aggression fight against their own selfish desires and greed for consumption and more and more possession. I have always believed that real peace is inner peace, borne by giving rather than taking from others.
Prophet : Yes indeed Quran also says that give away what is more than what is left after your basic needs are met. Do not accumulate. It is desire to accumulate that leads to war and violence. Accumulation robs you of inner peace. Inner peace and satisfaction is real paradise as Quran says enter (paradise) with complete sense of peace and security. It is our desire for wealth which turns into hell.
Gandhiji : I also advised my followers to serve people and not run after power and self. I even advised Congressmen to turn themselves into an organization of serving people after independence rather than fight for crumbs of power. Serving people by sacrificing our own selfish desires is the highest goal of life. It gives you inner joy and makes your life meaningful.
Prophet : But the modern economy isn't need based but greed based and hence so much violence in modern world despite so much talk of human rights and dignity, peace and security. It will never be realized until we wage real jihad for these noble ideals of human equality, dignity and justice.
Gandhiji : O Prophet of Islam, it was indeed very ennobling to have the honour of having talked to you. In the end I would thank you profusely for enlightening me on all these issues which have been causing so much confusion in minds of several Muslims and non-Muslims. May Allah's peace be upon you. Your contribution to culture of justice, peace and human dignity has indeed been immense.
Source: Islam and Modern Age, August, 2010
COURTESY: Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal - Gandhi Book Centre, 299 Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk Mumbai 400 007 MH India
By Asghar Ali Engineer
Note: This imaginary dialogue between Gandhiji and the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) is to clarify many misunderstandings which are being spread about Islam and Muslims. My mission in life is to promote peace and inter-religious understanding and to struggle against religious fanaticism and extremism. As I have deep conviction about teachings of Islam, I am also great admirer of Gandhiji and his philosophy of non-violence. (A.E.)
________________________________________
Gandhiji : I have drawn inspiration from Islam as much as from Christianity. Islam's emphasis on justice, equality and human dignity has always attracted me as love and forgiveness of Christianity. The Sermon on the Mount specially attracted my attention. As you know I am deeply committed to philosophy of non-violence and it is in this respect that I am approaching you to know more in depth about Islam's teachings about non-violence. It is necessary as Islam and terrorism are being equated by some anti Islamic forces and it is you who can help dispel these attacks on Islam. Who can be the better person than you, O Prophet of Islam.
Prophet : I am so much pained that Islam is under attack today whereas 21st century should have been the most appropriate period to appreciate its teachings. Yes, I admit there are all kinds of people in any religion and some may be motivated by their own selfish interests and indulge in violence or other misdeeds but a religion should be judged by its core teachings, not by what some followers do. I hope you will agree with me.
Gandhiji : Yes I do agree with you sir, the great Prophet of Islam.
Prophet: You would agree with me no religion can teach violence and be followed by millions of people. The very purpose of religion is to refine morals and guide its followers to a purposeful and meaningful life with inner peace and deep conviction. Islam is a religion of surrendering to Allah and Allah is Compassionate and Merciful (Rahman and Rahim) and in your devotional song you also mention Ram and Rahim. All Muslims are supposed to invoke Allah, the Compassionate and Merciful before they begin their work (bism Allah al-Rahman al-Rahim). It is very central to Islam. Also one of Allah's name in Quran, you must have noted, is Salam i.e. Peace.
Gandhiji : I understand true meaning of religion and its need for human beings in life. Inner convictions play important role in giving meaning and direction to human life. I have always relied on my own inner convictions before I took any decision. But I want to understand Islam in all its comprehensive way so that there is absolutely no confusion and it would certainly reinforce my own conviction in non-violence.
Prophet : Look when I was chosen by Allah to be His prophet the conditions in Mecca was extremely precarious. There was moral chaos in society, the tribal chiefs were growing wealthier and wealthier as they controlled international trade and were becoming arrogant and neglecting all their moral obligations towards weaker sections of society, the poor, the orphans, the widows, the needy and, in order to achieve greater grip over the minds of people, were promoting all sorts of superstitions and irrational beliefs. All this disturbed me deeply and I retired to the cave of Hira where I received revelation.
The Quranic revelation dealt with the situation on two levels: first, it promoted concept of one God - Allah- the creator of all and worship Him alone thus uniting entire human kind and on social level it strongly condemned accumulation of wealth and predicted it will turn into hell fire if the weaker sections of the society are neglected and injustice and oppression prevails. Thirdly, it gave equal rights to women who were denied all rights and treated as mere chattels. Fourthly, it stressed need for knowledge (ilm) and compared it with light (noor) and ignorance as darkness.
Gandhiji : How like Upanishads. Upanishad too compares gyan with light and one of its prayers says lead me from darkness to light.
Prophet : Yes indeed, this prayer exists in the Quran too. And one other prayer says rabbi zidni ilman (O Sustainer of this Universe increase me in knowledge). Indeed religions (not to be confused with customs, traditions and cultural institutions) do not contradict each other but compliment and stress same values.
Gandhiji : In Hindu tradition we maintain entire humanity is one family (Vasudhaiva kutumbakum).
Prophet : Yes I too have said in one of my hadith al-khalq-u-ayalullah (entire creation is Allah's family.)
Gandhiji : How similar are teachings of two of our great religions. But, Hindus often complain that Muslims call us kafirs. Sir, are we kafirs?
Prophet : No, no. there is great misunderstanding about kufr among Muslims and others. In Quran kafir is one who hides truth and actively opposes it. Every religion is embodiment of truth and in every religious tradition Allah or God or Ishwar's name is Truth, In Quran one of Allah's name is Haq (Truth). So those who hide truth and actively oppose it is a kafir, not one who believes in it and strongly affirms it.
Gandhiji : We Hindus do believe in truth and indeed I always said Truth is God.
Prophet : Yes, yes, how can you be kafir. All those who affirm truth, truth of values and right path cannot be kafirs. Quran teaches that every qaum (nation) was given truth through prophets and I have said that Allah has sent 1,24,000 prophets and Quran also says “We have sent prophet for every nation. And some of the Sufis in your country have said Allah must have sent prophets to Hind also to fulfill His promise in the Quran. However, I know some Muslims, either out of arrogance or ignorance, call others kafirs. Do not worry about them. Then even one Muslim sect in my ummah, unfortunately call followers of other sects as kafirs. It is nothing but false sense of superiority over others.
Gandhiji : May I request you sir to further throw some light on concept of kafir in Quran as there is so much confusion about it among people.
Prophet : When I began to invite people of Mecca to Islam, a religion of truth revealed by Allah to me and it invited the powerful leaders of Mecca too, to accept Islam, their ego as well as their powerful interests were deeply hurt and they began to actively oppose Islam. Firstly they felt how can an orphan, without any wealth and social status could tell us what is the right path and ask us to deviate from the path of our forefathers. Secondly, Quran, as I pointed out, attacked accumulation of wealth neglecting weaker sections of society.
This deeply disturbed them as wealth was their main power and there was no state machinery in Mecca to tax them so the Quran proposed a voluntary contribution and called it zakat which literally means to purify. The zakat is meant to be distributed among the weaker sections of society, the poor, orphans, widows, needy, travelers and liberating slaves and prisoners. Thus economic justice will prevail and their wealth will be purified. However, so far they had only accumulated wealth and never spared anything for the weaker sections of society. This also created strong resentment among the wealthy of Mecca and they began to actively oppose me and my followers and even using their power persecuted me and my followers, torturing them in most inhuman manner. They even did not allow us to enter Kaaba, our holy shrine for centuries.
The Quran condemned them as kafirs because they actively opposed the truth knowing fully well that I was bearer of truth from Allah. Their arrogance and their pride in their wealth blinded them. It indeed was not their ancestral religion but their arrogance and false pride in wealth which was the problem.
There were those Arabs who did not accept Islam but at the same time did not oppose Islam and hence Quran said for them that unbelievers for you is your religion and for me is mine. Thus you will see religion was indeed not the problem, power, wealth and arrogance was. Also, the Quran says la ikrah fi al-din (i.e. there is no compulsion in matters of religion). No one can be coerced into believing as religion is matter of conscience and deeper conviction. Even an idol worshipper cannot be coerced into abandoning his way of worship. If a kafir (which only means non-believer in Islam) desires to live in peace with Muslims his way of worship has to be respected and protected along with his life and property. Quran calls them dhimmis (i.e. those whose responsibility of life and property) is on Muslims and those who harm them amounts to harming me and those who harm me they harm Allah.
Gandhiji : This completely clarifies the meaning of kafir. It is indeed very humane and in keeping with the contemporary world which believes in freedom of worship and freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. Unto me is my religion and unto you is yours. What more one can expect from any religion.
So sir it is not in keeping with the teaching of Islam that one should use sword to preach Islam. This mis-concept is so widespread in the world today.
Prophet : This is sheer monstrosity. How can Quran which teaches freedom of conscience can teach such a thing. Quran says, on the other hand, call people to the path of Allah with wisdom and goodly words. Those who went out with swords were conqueror of territories, not conquerors of hearts for Allah.
Gandhiji : This clears many of my doubts and my countrymens doubts. I always thought Quran and Prophet of Islam can never allow such things. Religion is a moral force and can never permit coercion, let alone violence, for its acceptance. The conqueror may coerce some to convert but a religious person can never. Those conversions will be more for political than for religious conviction. In India most of the conquerors also hardly ever used coercion to convert Hindus though many of them supported various Muslim rulers militarily and politically. There may have been few instances but generally Hindus and Muslims lived in peace and harmony and evolved a composite culture.
Prophet : Yes indeed you are right and my mission (dawah) was generally accepted by weaker sections of the society. In Arabia too it is poor, slaves, women, orphans and widows who responded to my mission promptly. In your country also, it is low caste Hindus who suffered indignities who responded readily as Islam stands for social justice, equality and human dignity.
Gandhiji : Now it brings me to the question of non-violence which I have practiced in my life, even for liberation of my own country from the British rulers. Does Islam accept non-violence as a basic doctrine? Or it accepts it only tactically in certain circumstances as many Islamic theologians maintain?
Prophet : Truth, as you know is very basic to the Quran as I told you and it is also one of Allah's names. Another important names of Allah and Quran's fundamental values are compassion and mercy. Now put all of them (truth, compassion and mercy) together and tell me how violence can ever be part of Quranic teachings? It is not merely tactical but non-violence is most fundamental to Islam.
You evolved the concept of satyagraha (insistence on truth) for practicing non-violence for liberation of Hind. Truth and non-violence go together and can never be a sundered apart. One who insists on truth, as you tried to do, can never resort to violence. Truth reflects our deeper conviction and is mirror of our pure conscience and you would agree with me conviction and coercion are poles apart.
Also, truth needs certain virtues most of all patience (sabr) and control over ones anger, desire and greed without which one cannot practice it. Quran also lays great emphasis on these virtues, as you also do. In one of the chapters of Quran it has been said, By the time! Surely man is in loss, except those who believe and do good, and exhort one another to Truth, and exhort one another to patience.
Thus it will be seen that truth requires tremendous patience and patience, in turn, curbs anger and desire. Those who have patience cannot be provoked. To practice truth you need these qualities. And hence where there is truth, there will be no violence. Violence is result of impatience, anger, greed and desire.
Gandhiji : You are very right O Prophet of Islam. I also always emphasized truth, non-violence and simple living. Without non-violence truth is not possible and without simple living too, non-violence is not possible. It is greed and desire which leads to more and more violence. In the twentieth and twenty first century more and more consumerism has meant more and more raw materials and western powers in collaboration with the native ruling elite plunder third world countries and for that they have to suppress people and displace them from their ancestral properties resulting in great deal of violence. The naxalite violence in my country is because tribal are being displaced without any dignified rehabilitation in the hunt for minerals.
Prophet : Yes, you are absolutely right. In Mecca when I exhorted the rich and powerful not to neglect the poor and needy and leave life of luxury they turned against me and persecuted me. My emphasis was on simple life and I set a rigorous example of simplicity. I am also known to Islamic historians as kambliwala i.e. one who used rough blanket and often wore patched clothes and used pillows stuffed with just palm leaves.
We have all this in common. But the powerful merchants of Mecca had greed for profit and were used to high life style and accepting my teachings would have meant giving up all this. When finally I left Mecca and migrated to Madina they pursued me and attacked me and first battle of Badr took place. It was the first battle ought by Muslims. It is Meccan merchants who were aggressors. I had to defend.
Absolute non-violence is not possible in the world where injustices abide, inequality and human lust is widespread and powerful are ever ready to exploit and deprive people of their rights and dignity. Violence is not our choice, it is often inflicted on us without we ever desiring it. I, along with my followers left Mecca quietly and yet the Meccan merchants inflicted war on us.
It was in this condition that the Quran permitted us to defend ourselves. The permission was granted conditionally that we do not commit aggression. Thus the Quran said that fight in the way of Allah against those who fight you and do not be aggressors as Allah does not love aggressors. If we had not defended ourselves we would have been wiped out. Non-violence should essentially mean absence of violence of aggression. And for Quran it is matter of basic principle that Muslims should not be first resort to violence..
Gandhiji : I am in perfect agreement with you honourable Prophet. I would also like to know more about the concept of jihad. It is highly misunderstood both among Muslims and non-Muslims. I hope it does not mean war and violence but I want to hear from you.
Prophet : You are right jihad does not even remotely mean war or violence. It means struggle for truth and truth prevails, as we discussed earlier, if we suppress our unjust desires, anger and passion for possession. Thus real jihad means to struggle against ones own selfish desires and this is most difficult struggle. I call it jihad-e-akbar i.e. the greatest jihad. Then I also have said that most meritorious jihad is speaking truth in the face of a tyrant risking ones own life.
People cannot wage such jihad, such struggle as it entails great sacrifices, they wage wars for selfish desires, kill innocent people and exploit the poor and call it jihad to legitimize it. Wars of aggression and territorial possessions can never be called jihad. Some of my followers in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and some other places are killing even fellow Muslims through terrorist attacks and call it jihad. Terrorism is terrorism and most condemnable act of cruelty. How can it be called jihad which is very noble act of upholding truth even at the cost of ones life. It entails self sacrifice and not killing innocent people.
Islam opposes violence of aggression in every form and respects life of even enemy and that is why the Quran says with great emphasis that if you kill one person without justification it amounts to killing the whole humanity and if you save one life as if you have saved entire humanity. If this principle is universally accepted there will be peace on our earth.
Gandhiji : Indeed the concept of jihad is very noble as explained by you O Prophet. I wish all Muslims and non-Muslims follow this noble principle and instead of attacking others and launching wars of aggression fight against their own selfish desires and greed for consumption and more and more possession. I have always believed that real peace is inner peace, borne by giving rather than taking from others.
Prophet : Yes indeed Quran also says that give away what is more than what is left after your basic needs are met. Do not accumulate. It is desire to accumulate that leads to war and violence. Accumulation robs you of inner peace. Inner peace and satisfaction is real paradise as Quran says enter (paradise) with complete sense of peace and security. It is our desire for wealth which turns into hell.
Gandhiji : I also advised my followers to serve people and not run after power and self. I even advised Congressmen to turn themselves into an organization of serving people after independence rather than fight for crumbs of power. Serving people by sacrificing our own selfish desires is the highest goal of life. It gives you inner joy and makes your life meaningful.
Prophet : But the modern economy isn't need based but greed based and hence so much violence in modern world despite so much talk of human rights and dignity, peace and security. It will never be realized until we wage real jihad for these noble ideals of human equality, dignity and justice.
Gandhiji : O Prophet of Islam, it was indeed very ennobling to have the honour of having talked to you. In the end I would thank you profusely for enlightening me on all these issues which have been causing so much confusion in minds of several Muslims and non-Muslims. May Allah's peace be upon you. Your contribution to culture of justice, peace and human dignity has indeed been immense.
Source: Islam and Modern Age, August, 2010
COURTESY: Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal - Gandhi Book Centre, 299 Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk Mumbai 400 007 MH India
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
