Passive Resistance- Mahatma Gandhi
Passive Resistance- Mahatma Gandhi
Question 1 of Reader - Is there any historical evidence regarding the success of the soul-force or truth force? I still think that the evil-doers will not stop doing evil without physical punishment.
Answer of Editor (Gandhiji) - We have evidence of the working of soul-force at every step. The fact that there are so many men still alive in the world shows that it is based not on the force of arms but on the force of truth or love.
It is necessary to know the meaning of history. The Gujarati equivalent means " it so happened." If this is the meaning of history, it is possible to give copious evidence of the success of soul- force. But if history means a record of the doings of kings and emperors and thus a record of the wars of the world, there can be no evidence of the use of passive resistance in history. Two brothers quarrel; one of them repents and reawakens the love that was lying dormant in him.Nobody takes note of this. But if due to some reason, they take up arms or go to law, their doings would be immediately noticed in the press and would probably go down to history.
Question 2 of Reader : According to what you say, it is plain that instances of this kind of passive resistance are not to be found in history. It is necessary to understand passive resistance more fully. It will be better, therefore, if you enlarge upon it.
Answer Editor (Gandhiji) - Passive Resistance is a method of securing rights by personal suffering. For example, supposing the government of the day has passed a law which is applicable to me and I don't like it, then if I use violence and force the government to repeal the law, I use body- force or brute-force. But if I disobey the law and accept the penalty for its breach, I use soul- force. If soul-force is used for a cause which is unjust, only the person using it suffers. He does not make others to suffer. So, one should not do that which one knows to be wrong.
Question 3 of Reader- You would then disregard laws- this is rank disloyalty. We have always been considered a law abiding nation. You seem to be going even beyond the extremists. They say that we must obey the laws that have been passed, but if the laws be bad, we must drive out the law-givers even by force.
Answer of Editor (Gandhiji) - Whether I go beyond them or whether I do not is a matter of no consequence to either of us. We simply want to find out what is right and then act accordingly.
That we should obey laws whether good or bad is a new-fangled notion. There was no such thing in former days. The people disregarded those laws that they did not like and suffered the penalties for their breach.
It is contrary to our manhood if we obey laws repugnant to our conscience. Such teaching is opposed to religion and means slavery. If the Government were to ask us to go about without any clothing, should we do so? If I were a passive resister, I would say to them that I would have nothing to do with their law.
To use brute force, to use gunpowder, is contrary to passive resistance, for it means that we want our opponent to do by force that which we desire but he does not. And if such a use of force is justifiable, surely he is entitled to do likewise by us. And so we should never come to an agreement. We may simply fancy, like the blind horse moving in a circle round a mill, that we are making progress. Those who believe that they are not bound to obey laws which are repugnant to their conscience have only the remedy of passive resistance open to them. Any other must lead to disaster.
Question 4 of Reader - From what you say, I deduce that passive resistance is a splendid weapon of the weak but that when they are strong, they may take up arms.
Answer Gandhiji (Editor) - The consideration of passive resistance as a weapon of the weak is gross ignorance. Men who use physical force are strangers to the courage which is required in passive resistance.
He interrogates that where is courage required in blowing others to pieces from behind a cannon or in approaching the cannon with a smiling face. He says that a man devoid of courage and manhood can never be a passive resister.
Men, women and people weak in body - all can offer passive resistance. It does not require the training of an army. Control over the mind is alone required and when that is attained, man is free like the king of the forest and his very glance withers the enemy.
Passive resistance blesses both the one who uses it and the one against whom it is used.
Question 5 of Reader - You have said that passive resistance is a speciality of India? Have cannons never been used in India?
Answer of the Editor Gandhiji - To you, India means its few princes but to me, it means the millions of people upon whom depends the existence of its princes.
Kings will always use their kingly weapons. To use force is bred in them. They want to command but those who have to obey the commands have to learn either body-force or soul- force.
When they learn the former, the rulers and the ruled become like so many madmen, but when they learn soul- force, the commands of the rulers do not go beyond the point of their swords.
I remember an instance when, in a small principality, the villagers were offended by some command issued by the prince. The former immediately began vacating the village. The prince became nervous, apologized to his subjects and withdrew his command. Many such instances can be found in India. Real Home Rule is possible only where passive resistance is the guiding force of the people. Any other rule is foreign rule.
Question no 6 Reader: Then you will say that it is not at all necessary for us to train the body?
Answer of the Editor (Gandhiji): I will certainly not say any such thing. It is difficult to become a passive
resister unless the body is trained. As a rule, the mind, residing in a body that has become weakened by pampering, is also weak, and where there is no strength of mind there can be no strength of soul. We shall have to improve our physique by getting rid of infant marriages and luxurious living.
Question 7 of the Reader: From what you say, then, it would appear that it is not a small thing to become a passive resister, and, if that is so, I would like you to explain how a man may become one.
Answer of the Editor(Gandhi): To become a passive resister is easy enough but it is also equally difficult. After a great deal of experience it seems to me that those who want to become passive resisters for the service of the country have to observe perfect chastity, adopt poverty, follow truth, and cultivate fearlessness.
Elaboration given by Gandhiji:
Chastity is one of the greatest disciplines without which the mind cannot attain requisite firmness. He whose mind is given over to animal passions is not capable of any great effort. When a husband and wife gratify the passions, it is no less an animal indulgence on that account. Such an indulgence, except for perpetuating the race, is strictly prohibited. But a passive resister has to avoid even that very limited indulgence because he can have no desire for progeny.
Just as there is necessity for chastity, so is there for poverty. Pecuniary ambition and passive resistance cannot well go together. Those who have money are not expected to throw it away, but they are expected to be indifferent about it.
Passive resistance has been described in the course of our discussion as truth-force. Truth, therefore, has necessarily to be followed and that at any cost. In this connection, academic questions such as whether a man may not lie in order to save a life, etc., arise, but these questions occur only to those who wish to justify lying. Those who want to follow truth every time are not placed in such a quandary.
Passive resistance cannot proceed a step without fearlessness. Those alone can follow the path of passive resistance who are free from fear, whether as to their possessions, false honour, their relatives, the government, bodily injuries or death.
Whatever extra effort a swordsman needs is due to lack of fearlessness. If he is an embodiment of the latter, the sword will drop from his hand that very moment. He does not need its support.
A man with a stick suddenly came face to face with a lion and instinctively raised his weapon in self-defence. The man saw that he had only prated about fearlessness when there was none in him. That moment he dropped the stick and found himself free from all fear.
Comments
Post a Comment