The Gandhi Project by Nashid Fareed-Ma’at
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
1
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 134, excerpt from Young India,
August 11, 1920.
2
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 186, excerpt from Young India, June
19, 1924.
3
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 81, excerpt from Young India, April
30, 1931.
121
CHAPTER SIX
The Satyagraha Approach to (Self-)Suffering
“Non-violence in its dynamic condition means conscious
suffering. It does not mean meek submission to the will of the
evil-doer, but it means the pitting of one’s whole soul against
the will of the tyrant. Working under this law of our being, it is
possible for a single individual to defy the whole might of an
unjust empire, to save his honour, his religion, his soul and lay
the foundation for that empire’s fall or its regeneration.”
1
“Whether it takes long or short to reach the goal, the way is the
way of peaceful conversion of the orthodox by self-suffering and
self-purification and no other.”
2
“As a Satyagrahi I believe in the absolute efficacy of full
surrender.”
3
Suffering, or self-suffering, is undoubtably a key aspect of Satyagraha. Gandhi used the
term in a way that differs from many contemporary understandings of suffering. Many see
suffering as a sign of weakness, whereas Gandhi embraced the art and science of suffering from
strength (soul-force). Others glorify the pain of suffering, even to the point of seeking
martyrdom; Gandhi’s approach to suffering did not glorify pain, especially needless suffering.
4
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 280, excerpt from Young India,
March 19, 1931.
122
He saw little to no meaning in the pain of suffering but instead saw it as a sometimes necessary
consequence to be endured to correct unjust conditions. He never encouraged Satyagrahis to
seek pain for the sake of seeking pain, or to derive some meaning from the endurance of pain in
a life otherwise lacking significant meaning. And he certainly did not suggest those not seeking
Truth to endure suffering, since without the guidance of Truth suffering can be confused in
misconceptions of delusion. If justice could be achieved by smiling and giving heartfelt hugs to
one’s opponents and friends, Gandhi would become a “hugging saint” and embrace this path
without hesitation. But unfortunately, in an age of violence, this is rarely an useful method to
affect beneficent change. And as cycles of violence are imbrued to harm, Satyagrahis embrace
bearing such harm to end or significantly reduce cycles of violence to eventually manifest a
situation without harm (ahimsa).
Given the variety of definitions and associations connected with suffering, I will use a
very basic definition of suffering for this chapter. Let’s accept suffering as the willingness to
endure hardship. This hardship can manifest in a multitude of ways, including: death, bodily
injury, mental strain and stress, loss of property, loss of relationships (family, friends, etc.), loss
of public reputation (i.e., being labeled as a menace or terrorist), loss of privileges (such as the
loss of physical freedom incurred in being arrested and jailed), loss of economic opportunities
(i.e. jobs, contracts), and other forms of loss. But for a Satyagrahi, hardship should never -- and
I do mean NEVER -- result in the loss of one’s morality, values (as influenced by Truth),
dignity, or strength (as based in one’s soul / spirit). These are non-negotiable virtues for any
Satyagrahi. Neither should a Satyagrahi seek to needlessly suffer for a cause. Satyagraha calls
for an affirmative commitment to live our values even to point of enduring suffering imposed on
us by our opponents. There is a thin line between this approach and seeking to suffer -- even if
under the facade of proclaimed values. To this point, Gandhi stated: “Whilst we must try always
to avoid occasions for needless suffering, we must ever be ready for them.”
4
Therefore, if a just
goal can be achieved without suffering, do so; and do not unnecessarily impose suffering on a
cause that can be achieved without such pain.
Also of immense importance is the purpose of a Satyagrahi’s willingness to suffer: the
willingness to suffer for Truth. Connected to Truth are the values Satyagrahis hold as informed
by their quests for Truth, and the political / social / spiritual stances they live as informed by
5
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 34, excerpt from Young India,
February 4, 1920.
6
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 213, excerpt from Young India, May
31, 1928.
7
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 280, excerpt from Young India,
March 19, 1931.
8
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 81, excerpt from Young India, April
30, 1931.
123
these values. To suffer for others things -- which if it is not Truth, it’s illusion -- is pointless.
Therefore, Gandhi held little to no admiration for those who suffered for material things,
egotistical aspirations and attachments. He had sympathy for those as he confessed, “It pains a
Satyagrahi to see others suffering.”
5
But he did not encourage others to follow the examples of
those who suffered for portents of illusion. He directed those seeking examples of suffering to
study those who suffered for Truth.
Gandhi was also blunt about what suffering involved. He warned, “Those who rely upon
self-suffering for redress of a grievance cannot afford to rate it higher than it actually is.”
6
He
also cautioned “it would be wrong to brood over the sufferings, to exaggerate them, or to be
puffed up with pride.”
7
Suffering can be hard. Satyagrahis must, through careful training,
develop the means to bear suffering of all types and the endurance needed to complete an
extended period of suffering without retaliating -- a requirement of Satyagraha. It can be hard to
bear physical injury, mental strain, loss of property, imprisonment, separation from loved ones,
an onslaught of insults, and social persecution and ostracization. It can be hard to watch our
colleagues bear such or even be killed. It requires resolute strength. And pursuit of a just goal
may require repeated instances of bearing very brutal violence to achieve a beneficent outcome.
It may even be that those who suffer will not see that outcome arrive, or be so damaged by
suffering such as to not to be able to enjoy its arrival. Do not forget Gandhi did not live a year
into India’s independence from Britain. But he willingly suffered for India to achieve its
independence, even if he was not able to enjoy the fruits of such suffering.
For Gandhi, the willingness to suffer must always be accompanied by the willingness to
sacrifice. As stated earlier, we can understand sacrifice to mean: what one is willing to surrender
on the path of Truth-guided suffering. And, as Gandhi stated in one of the quotes opening this
chapter, he believed “in the absolute efficacy of full surrender.”
8
Thus, Gandhi was willing to
9
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule), 1938 reprint from original publication in 1909, p.
58, Chapter XVII: Passive Resistance.
10
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule), 1938 reprint from original publication in 1909,
p. 58, Chapter XVII: Passive Resistance.
11
Webster’s New World Dictionary: Third College Edition, 1994, p. 995.
124
give up everything he had to attain justice and Swaraj. In fact, he did so “preemptively” when he
took a vow of poverty: of having very few possessions. He explained:
“After a great deal of experience it seems to me that those who
want to become passive resisters [Satyagrahis] for the service of
the country have to observe perfect chastity, adopt poverty, follow
truth, and cultivate fearlessness.”
9
“Pecuniary ambition and passive resistance [Satyagraha] cannot
well go together. Those who have money are not expected to
throw it away, but they are expected to be indifferent about it.
They must be prepared to lose every penny rather than give up
passive resistance.”
10
[**NOTE: Pecuniary means “of or involving money.”
11
]
In materialistic societies, the potential loss of money and other forms of material wealth can
often be one of the biggest barriers to embracing sacrifice, even in the face of moral or religious /
spiritual values that affirm sacrifice. Gandhi acknowledged not everyone is willing to take a
vow of poverty, but such is not required for Satyagraha: an indifference to money and wealth is
the requirement, which he at times described as embracing or adopting poverty. The Satyagraha
concept of poverty does not mean seeking or remaining in situations of economic and material
deprivation or dependence, extreme need, starvation, and other elements of how oppressors seek
to impose conditions of poverty and exploitation (via greed) on others. But whether we have
monetary or material wealth, Satyagraha dictates we must not be so attached to it that we are not
willing to sacrifice it.
Gandhi also held to a principle celebrated throughout history: that self-sacrifice is more
powerful than sacrificing others. He wrote:
12
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule), 1938 reprint from original publication in 1909,
p. 56, Chapter XVII: Passive Resistance.
13
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 262, excerpt from Young India,
April 24, 1930.
125
“Everybody admits that sacrifice of self is infinitely superior to
sacrifice of others. Moreover, if this kind of force is used in a
cause that is unjust, only the person using it suffers. He does not
make others suffer for his mistakes. Men have before now done
many things which were subsequently found to have been wrong.
No man can claim that he is absolutely in the right or that a
particular thing is wrong because he thinks so, but it is wrong for
him so long as that is his deliberate judgement. It is therefore meet
that he should not do that which he knows to be wrong, and suffer
the consequence whatever it may be. This is the key to the use of
soul-force.”
12
Gandhi also acknowledged another key aspect of the law of sacrifice: “To be effective it
demands the sacrifice of the bravest and the most spotless.”
13
In embracing this law, we should
not be troubled by the sacrificial loss of those who best embody purity and courage: it is to be
expected. We can be saddened by their loss, yes, and seek appropriate ways to memorialize their
sacrifice in ways that educate and inspire ourselves and others. But Satyagrahis should never be
thrown into despair or anger by the loss of any Satyagrahi engaged in sacrifice, including
someone who reaches or exceeds the moral caliber of Gandhi. Any Satyagrahis who are willing
to sacrifice themselves know that inherent in this choice is the possibility of incurring great
losses, perhaps even their lives. If the sacrificers accept this risk, others (even those who are not
Satyagrahis) are called to honor this acknowledged risk and not be troubled or moved to retaliate
for such loss.
Let me take a moment to distinguish between memorializing those who willingly
sacrifice from those who are unwilling victims of violence. From a Satyagraha perspective,
those who willingly sacrifice are examples for other Satyagrahis to follow, and the
memorialization of such persons must honor the lessons to be learned from their sacrifice. And
I emphasize the point of memorializing their sacrifice. Those who sincerely honor such
memorialization will embody the lessons of the sacrificers into their daily living. But those who
14
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 77, excerpt from Young India,
August 8, 1929.
126
are victims of harm in which they did not embrace a willingness to sacrifice may not behold such
lessons, and often the memorialization of such tragic events (or victims) is a veiled celebration of
suffering and violence which may be beyond the tenets of Satyagraha. I would caution those on
the Satyagraha path from celebrating things (such the anniversary of a war or tragic event) that
Satyagraha seeks to eliminate. Certainly unjust acts and practices should be addressed to be
corrected (even if in public demonstrations), but we should be cautious about admiring
(sometimes making heros of) persons who, if given the choice, would not embrace the harm that
befell them in the context of sacrifice. This would apply to a wide range of people: from
“innocent civilians” killed in acts of war to victims of police brutality.
ENGAGING ONE’S OPPONENTS
In the context of suffering and sacrifice, Gandhi was explicit in how Satyagrahis should
engage opponents, even in the midst of experiencing harm. He required a pious propriety of
behavior by all Satyagrahis:
“Satyagraha presupposes self-discipline, self-control, self-
purification, and a recognized social status in the person offering
it.”
14
I emphasize self-purification, since purity is an utmost essential for any Satyagrahi engaged in
suffering. It is also this purity, reflected in one’s behavior, that gives a person the “recognized
social status” mentioned in the above quote. Gandhi did not use this term to refer to a privileged
status, such as wealth or fame, since these mean little to anyone genuinely seeking Truth. For
Gandhi, the social recognition he sought and applauded was that of being an honorable, moral
person committed to and engaged in the quest for Truth. In a community setting, the behavior of
such a person would earn her or him the “recognized social status” Gandhi referred to. Such a
person could never be opponents to a Satyagrahi, even if they had strong disagreements. Only
those engaged in and supporting evil (destruction) would be regarded as an opponent to a
Satyagrahi.
15
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 77, excerpt from Young India,
August 8, 1929.
127
Gandhi warned about confusing those who perform or support evil with evil itself. To
continue the above quote:
“A Satyagrahi must never forget the distinction between evil and
the evil-doer. He must not harbour ill-will or bitterness against the
latter. He may not even employ needlessly offensive language
against the evil person, however unrelieved his evil might be. For
it should be an article of faith with every Satyagrahi that there is
none so fallen in this world but can be converted by love. A
Satyagrahi will always try to overcome evil by good, anger by
love, untruth by truth, himsa by ahimsa. There is no other way of
purging the world of evil. Therefore a person who claims to be a
Satyagrahi always tries by close and prayerful self-introspection
and self-analysis to find out whether he is himself completely free
from the taint of anger, ill-will and such other human infirmities,
whether he is not himself capable of those very evils against which
he is out to lead a crusade. In self-purification and penance lies
half the victory of a Satyagrahi.”
15
Embodied in the above quote are calls for purity, empathy, commitment to beneficial ways of
affecting change (goodness [morality], love, truth, ahimsa), and to be without hypocrisy. We
should also understand that Gandhi’s use of the word penance does not include a requirement to
confess one’s evils to others or self-punishment (although these are acceptable measures in
certain situations). Instead he emphasized self-introspection and self-correction to realize if we
hold components within that would enable us to commit the evils we stand against (i.e. repressed
anger, hatred, greed, lust, etc.) If so, these components must be addressed to be released, for one
element of the Satyagraha path is to become so committed to and embodying of Truth that we
are no longer capable of committing evil (destruction). And the lessons we learn in this journey
can be used to educate and assist others to abandon evil and embrace goodness (beneficence).
Gandhi held as part of his creed that:
16
Mohandas K. Gandhi, An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth, 1957, p. 276.
17
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 305, excerpt from Harijan, March
30, 1940.
18
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 6, excerpt from Young India,
January 14, 1920.
128
“Man and his deed are two distinct things. Whereas a good deed
should call forth approbation and a wicked deed disapprobation,
the doer of the deed, whether good or wicked, always deserves
respect or pity as the case may be. ‘Hate the sin and not the
sinner’ is a precept which, though easy enough to understand, is
rarely practised, and that is why the poison of hatred spreads in the
world.”
16
Gandhi held so strongly to distinguishing between evil and those who commit evil that he
wrote:
“And after all no one is wicked by nature. And if others are
wicked, are we the less so? That attitude is inherent in Satyagraha,
and if you do not subscribe to it, even then I would ask you to
leave me. For without a belief in my programme and without an
acceptance of my condition you will ruin me, ruin yourself and
ruin the cause.”
17
In realizing that we can evolve (or have evolved) from persons capable of committing evil
(destruction) to persons who are only capable of performing good (beneficence), we should
acknowledge this transformation is possible for others who engage in evil. Gandhi himself is a
testament of this principle, given his personal moral transformation. As mentioned earlier, this
transformation often requires patience and sympathy:
“In the application of Satyagraha I discovered in the earliest stages
that pursuit of truth did not admit of violence being inflicted on
one’s opponent, but that he must be weaned from error by patience
and sympathy.”
18
19
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 193, excerpt from Young India,
March 19, 1925.
20
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 32, excerpt from Young India,
February 4, 1920.
21
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 20, excerpt from Young India,
January 21, 1920.
22
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 188 - 189, excerpt from Young
India, September 18, 1924.
129
This same patience and sympathy would be extended to a fellow compatriot on the Satyagraha
path, so it is surely not beyond the reach of Satyagraha to also extend these to our opponents.
Guided by patience and sympathy, we must hold no bitterness toward our opponents: “Even
whilst you are suffering you may have no bitterness -- no trace of it -- against your opponents.”
19
We must also avoid embarrassing our opponents, for as Gandhi said: “A Satyagraha relies not
upon embarrassment but upon self-suffering for securing relief.”
20
Satyagraha acknowledges the right of our opponents to hold their positions, even if they
are wrong. But this doesn’t mean we must accept the wrong: Satyagrahis can confront this
wrong nonviolently. Gandhi explained: “a Satyagrahi gives his opponent the same right of
independence and feelings of liberty that he reserves to himself, and he will fight by inflicting
injuries on his own person.”
21
Neither do Satyagrahis seek to have their opponents punished:
“The Satyagrahi on the other hand does not seek to carry out his
reform by a system of punishments but by penance, self-
purification and suffering. Any resentment of the persecution,
therefore, would be an interruption of the course of discipline he
has imposed upon himself. It may be a prolonged course, it may
even seem to be never-ending. A little bullying or even moral
suasion or coercion may appear more expeditious. ... Indeed I have
often shown in these pages that Satyagraha is, as a matter of fact
and in the long run, the most expeditious course.”
22
That most expeditious course includes Satyagraha methods that don’t further or expand cycles of
violence but instead reduce, if not eliminate, such cycles -- in part through the willingness to
suffer and sacrifice for our cause.
23
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 111, excerpt from Young India,
May 12, 1920.
24
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 188, excerpt from Young India,
September 18, 1924.
130
This approach to opponents is not a new realization Gandhi discovered in his lifetime. It
has historical roots in a variety of religious and spiritual teachings. He gave an example of this
in the following quote about Jesus Christ (of Christianity and Islam) and the historical Buddha
(of Buddhism):
“Both were for intensely direct action. But even as Buddha and
Christ chastized they showed unmistakable gentleness and love
behind every act of theirs. They would not raise a finger against
their enemies, but would gladly surrender themselves rather than
the truth for which they lived.”
23
The example of Christ also points to another important factor in suffering:
“the Satyagrahi seeks to convert his opponent by sheer force of
character and suffering. The purer he is and the more he suffers,
the quicker the progress.”
24
Those familiar with the Christ story know that he was crucified with two other criminals, yet
most do not extend the same level of sympathy, care, and admiration to the criminals as they do
to Christ. Why? To be blunt: because they were criminals. Just as few people (in this age)
would have sympathy for a robber who gets robbed, more people will extend sympathy (and
sometimes concern) to a pure, moral person who is robbed. I have read many incidents in which
a religious institution or leader was robbed and people, some with no connection to that person
or religion, contributed to efforts to replace what was stolen. In studying the efficacy of
suffering, those who are pure and demonstrate their purity (with behavior and actions) often have
a greater impact with their suffering than those who lack purity. (This is also why Gandhi
encouraged Satyagrahis to perform constructive service as addressed in Chapter 4.) There is
another key benefit to embodying a pure character: “[Humans] of stainless character and self-