ranjitjat
October 5th, 2003, 03:00 PM
Gandhi more relevant today than ever
GANDHIJI continues to be the one name among the billion people of India, which is spelt out with respect in the many nations of the world. Men still wonder how a ‘half-naked fakir’ mobilised millions of Indians to fight successfully and non-violently for independence.
What is the relevance of Gandhi to the present generation? Among the several programmes arranged for television audience on Gandhi Jayanti day, the one on the Asianet channel anchored by a well-known film director, Balachandra Menon, was very thought provoking. Around him were a few schoolchildren, teenaged boys and girls, trying to figure out how he had impressed them.
‘Keeping the environment clean’—that is Gandhiji to some. A few others rated his love and sacrifice for the nation as inimitable. ‘Non-violence’ summed up the spirit of Gandhi to a few others. Quoting recent statements of some politicians that there are no permanent friends or enemies in politics, the film director attempted a contrast between the Mahatma’s great ideals and the sharp deterioration that had set in society.
At least initially, Rabindranath Tagore was not among his admirers. Yet, in an article written in January 1938, the poet had to admit this about the saintly nature of the Father of the Nation: “An ascetic himself, he does not frown on the joys of others, but works for the enlivening of their existence day and night. He exalts poverty in his own life, but no man in India has striven more assiduously for the material welfare of his people. A reformer with the zeal of a revolutionary, he imposes severe restraints on the very passions he provokes. Something of an idolater and also an iconoclast, he leaves the old gods in their dusty niches of sanctity and simply lures the old worship to better and more humane purposes. Professing his adherence to the caste system, he launches his firmest attack against it, where it keeps its strongest guards, and yet he has hardly suffered from popular disapprobation, as would have been the case with a lesser man who would have much less power to be effective in his efforts.”
He advises his followers to hate evil without hating the evil-doer. It sounds an impossible precept, but he has made it as true as it can be made in his own life. I had once occasion to be present at an interview he gave to a prominent politician who had been denounced by the official Congress party as a deserter. Any other Congress leader would have assumed a repelling attitude, but Gandhiji was all graciousness and listened to him with patience and sympathy, without once giving him an occasion to feel small.’’ Here, I said to myself, is a truly great man, for he is greater than the party he belongs to, greater even than the creed he professes.’’
It is this greatness of his as a man that still interests a vast ocean of humanity. Greatness is marked by all the qualities he displayed in his life.
He donned many roles—as a politician, as an organiser, as a leader of men, as a moral reformer, as a spiritual teacher and so on. But he was greater than all these as a man and had set the best example for the country of his birth in its attempt to solve its many problems..
We miss him today when the pluralistic nature of society plunges it into problems of intolerance, suspicion and mutual hatred. Though people still pay him only lip service, he has set the standards for best behaviour in societies as diverse as ours.
“Let me own this. If I could call myself, say, a Christian, or a Mussalman, with my own interpretation of the Bible or the Koran, I should not hesitate to call myself either. For then, Hindu, Christian and Mussalman would be synonymous terms. I do believe in the other world there are neither Hindus, nor Christians nor Mussalmans. They all are judged not according to their labels or professions but according to their actions irrespective of their professions. During our earthly existence there will always be these labels.
I therefore prefer to retain the label of my forefathers so long as it does not cramp my growth and does not debar me from assimilating all that is good anywhere else.’’
That is the example he has left us –in the matter of accepting one another disregarding all the differences. He maintained that his is not a religion of a prison house. “It has room for the least among God’s creations. But it is proof against insolence, pride of race religion or colour.’’
Gandhiji has believed too that the principal religions of the world constitute revelations of Truth, but they have been outlined by imperfect men; they have been affected by imperfections alloyed with untruth. “We must not be impatient with those we consider to be in error, but must be prepared if need be to suffer in our own person. One must therefore entertain the same respect for the religious faith of others as one accords to one’s own.’’
Another relevant lesson for us today from his life is his emphasis on the truth and the purity of the means. He insisted that men in their fight for claims must only so assert their rights, whether as individuals or as groups, as never to violate their fundamental obligation to humanity, which is to respect life.
All these principles have their root in his spirituality; his deep faith in God. “I am in the world feeling my way to light ‘amid the encircling gloom.’ I often err and miscalculate. My trust is solely in God. And I trust men only because I trust in God. If I had no God to rely upon, I should be, like Timon, a hater of my species.’’
“Have faith in God.” Is it what he meant when he said, “My life is my message!’’ There is reason to believe so.
GANDHIJI continues to be the one name among the billion people of India, which is spelt out with respect in the many nations of the world. Men still wonder how a ‘half-naked fakir’ mobilised millions of Indians to fight successfully and non-violently for independence.
What is the relevance of Gandhi to the present generation? Among the several programmes arranged for television audience on Gandhi Jayanti day, the one on the Asianet channel anchored by a well-known film director, Balachandra Menon, was very thought provoking. Around him were a few schoolchildren, teenaged boys and girls, trying to figure out how he had impressed them.
‘Keeping the environment clean’—that is Gandhiji to some. A few others rated his love and sacrifice for the nation as inimitable. ‘Non-violence’ summed up the spirit of Gandhi to a few others. Quoting recent statements of some politicians that there are no permanent friends or enemies in politics, the film director attempted a contrast between the Mahatma’s great ideals and the sharp deterioration that had set in society.
At least initially, Rabindranath Tagore was not among his admirers. Yet, in an article written in January 1938, the poet had to admit this about the saintly nature of the Father of the Nation: “An ascetic himself, he does not frown on the joys of others, but works for the enlivening of their existence day and night. He exalts poverty in his own life, but no man in India has striven more assiduously for the material welfare of his people. A reformer with the zeal of a revolutionary, he imposes severe restraints on the very passions he provokes. Something of an idolater and also an iconoclast, he leaves the old gods in their dusty niches of sanctity and simply lures the old worship to better and more humane purposes. Professing his adherence to the caste system, he launches his firmest attack against it, where it keeps its strongest guards, and yet he has hardly suffered from popular disapprobation, as would have been the case with a lesser man who would have much less power to be effective in his efforts.”
He advises his followers to hate evil without hating the evil-doer. It sounds an impossible precept, but he has made it as true as it can be made in his own life. I had once occasion to be present at an interview he gave to a prominent politician who had been denounced by the official Congress party as a deserter. Any other Congress leader would have assumed a repelling attitude, but Gandhiji was all graciousness and listened to him with patience and sympathy, without once giving him an occasion to feel small.’’ Here, I said to myself, is a truly great man, for he is greater than the party he belongs to, greater even than the creed he professes.’’
It is this greatness of his as a man that still interests a vast ocean of humanity. Greatness is marked by all the qualities he displayed in his life.
He donned many roles—as a politician, as an organiser, as a leader of men, as a moral reformer, as a spiritual teacher and so on. But he was greater than all these as a man and had set the best example for the country of his birth in its attempt to solve its many problems..
We miss him today when the pluralistic nature of society plunges it into problems of intolerance, suspicion and mutual hatred. Though people still pay him only lip service, he has set the standards for best behaviour in societies as diverse as ours.
“Let me own this. If I could call myself, say, a Christian, or a Mussalman, with my own interpretation of the Bible or the Koran, I should not hesitate to call myself either. For then, Hindu, Christian and Mussalman would be synonymous terms. I do believe in the other world there are neither Hindus, nor Christians nor Mussalmans. They all are judged not according to their labels or professions but according to their actions irrespective of their professions. During our earthly existence there will always be these labels.
I therefore prefer to retain the label of my forefathers so long as it does not cramp my growth and does not debar me from assimilating all that is good anywhere else.’’
That is the example he has left us –in the matter of accepting one another disregarding all the differences. He maintained that his is not a religion of a prison house. “It has room for the least among God’s creations. But it is proof against insolence, pride of race religion or colour.’’
Gandhiji has believed too that the principal religions of the world constitute revelations of Truth, but they have been outlined by imperfect men; they have been affected by imperfections alloyed with untruth. “We must not be impatient with those we consider to be in error, but must be prepared if need be to suffer in our own person. One must therefore entertain the same respect for the religious faith of others as one accords to one’s own.’’
Another relevant lesson for us today from his life is his emphasis on the truth and the purity of the means. He insisted that men in their fight for claims must only so assert their rights, whether as individuals or as groups, as never to violate their fundamental obligation to humanity, which is to respect life.
All these principles have their root in his spirituality; his deep faith in God. “I am in the world feeling my way to light ‘amid the encircling gloom.’ I often err and miscalculate. My trust is solely in God. And I trust men only because I trust in God. If I had no God to rely upon, I should be, like Timon, a hater of my species.’’
“Have faith in God.” Is it what he meant when he said, “My life is my message!’’ There is reason to believe so.