The Gandhi Project by Nashid Fareed-Ma’at
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
11
Mainly using these sources, this book takes a progressive manner to examining Gandhi’s
approach to Satyagraha. Each chapter builds upon the previous ones, first exploring the roots of
Satyagraha. The next set of chapters then examines how the roots shape and define the
fundamentals of Satyagraha, that we may see how the roots are realized through the
fundamentals to become a way of life. The last set of chapters explores civil disobedience, a last
resort to be used only after all other reasonable means to affect just and beneficent change have
been appropriately tried and failed. Among these reasonable means is the personal
transformation Satyagrahis (those who follow Satyagraha) must attain that will sometimes
transcend the chains of injustice, allowing them to live and cultivate a reality of justice and
beneficence without evoking civil disobedience (and the risks involved in such). I encourage
readers to give this book a careful and patient read: some of Gandhi’s points can be confused
given the differing cultural and time contexts between now and when he lived. With such points,
I make precise efforts to explain Gandhi’s teachings in ways that capture the fullness of his
meaning that speak to contemporary understandings. If I have failed to fully convey any his of
points adequately, let the fault lay with me and not with Gandhi. But I trust, given the
carefulness of my writing, that the majority of his lessons are presented with a clarity that
supports understanding.
Just a few points about language. Gandhi lived under British colonialism and, thus, his
English has a late nineteenth century British style. (He was born in 1869 and his schooling
adhered to late 1800s norms although he lived and wrote until 1948.) For the most part, this
difference in style is not a barrier to contemporary readers, but there are some points where the
differences are more pronounced. At times he used a word that is rarely used today and utilized
British spellings of words. Also, some of his uses of punctuation differed from contemporary
grammar rules. But for the most part, I leave Gandhi’s quotes untouched that you may read them
as he wrote them. The only consistent change I make to some of his quotes is to replace male-
gender references with gender neutral words: for example, changing “man” (as it refers to all
humanity) to “human.” As this was a trait of the writing of his time, it belittled his intent in
using the word “man” to refer to men and women. This paternalistic approach to writing also
doesn’t reflect his endorsement of equality and respect for both genders. So when implanting
gender neutral words (in brackets) doesn’t confuse Gandhi’s statements, I do so. But a number
of quotes are unchanged with their male references; with these let the women not exclude
themselves from the quotes’ relevance to them. And in my commitment to shift contemporary
English from its continuing paternalistic tendencies, I use gender neutral terms when possible or
“she and / or he” when necessary.
12
I also want to apologize in advance for any typos and mistakes that may be in the book.
This project, for the most part, was embarked upon with little assistance from others -- and I take
time to acknowledge my wife previewing drafts of the first few chapters to ensure I was going in
the right direction. But this book did not undergo a professional editing process and, despite my
aspiring eagle eye for mistakes, I’m pretty sure I missed some miscues. Also, as this book is
read by others, I may realize from others’ comments ways to be more effective with the writing.
For this reason, I am approaching this book as an evolving project. Any major changes in
content will be updated as a new volume: with this being Volume 1, any major revisions will be
labeled as Volume 2, 3, 4, etc. But any set of minor changes, such as a bunch of corrected typos,
will be labeled as editions of the same volume: for example, Volume 1a will indicate I have
made a set of minor corrections to Volume 1 -- and Volume 1b, 1c, 1d, etc., will indicate
subsequent sets of minor corrections. So please excuse any typos on my part, I pray anything I
missed does not confuse Gandhi’s points. And any new editions of the book will be posted on
my website for free.
So with that, I’m done with the housekeeping stuff for this book. Proceed on, enjoy, and
read with a careful eye and open heart. Even today, Gandhi’s teachings remain abundant
treasures -- even if they challenge us to rip the delusional coverings from our eyes that we may
see for ourselves the indescribable beauty of Truth...
Nashid Fareed-Ma’at
April 2010
˜ ˜ ˜
1
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 307, excerpt from Harijan, June 1,
1940.
13
CHAPTER ONE
Transcending Historical Amnesia
“[Many] are playing at non-violence. They think in terms of civil
disobedience anyhow, meaning the filling of jails. This is a
childish interpretation of the great force that civil disobedience
is. I must continue to repeat, even though it may cause nausea,
that prison-going without the backing of honest constructive
effort and goodwill in the heart for the wrong-doer is violence
and therefore forbidden in Satyagraha.”
1
The room was full yet undercut with a tension. It was always ironic to me that “the
people’s house” (the U.S. Capitol) is more plush than many people’s homes. But they weren’t
there to admire the decor, they had a bolder mission. A gavel was banged to call the
congressional committee meeting to order, and even they quieted in anticipation of their
moment. After minutes of normal committee business discussing funding for the latest war, they
seized their moment. One of the protesters stood up in the guest seating area and began to
scream out loudly, “Stop the war! Stop funding the war! I’m here to demand a stop to the war!”
The committee chairperson banged the gavel and called for order. Other protesters joined in
exclaiming their dissent. Within moments, police officers approached and arrested the
protesters. They did not physically resist but continued to “let their voices be heard” as they
were escorted away, yelling as they disappeared behind the chamber doors. And within days,
they would post a link to video of the protest on their website for others to adore.
The atmosphere at the march was a stark contrast. A sense of comradery had been
inspired by the earlier speeches, some filled with as many insults as there were demands to end
the war. People laughed, danced, sang, and cheered in individual and collective demonstrations
14
of “speaking truth to power.” Signs and canvases displayed a range of symbols and slogans,
from peace signs to posters containing images of politicians under phrases such as “Wanted For
Mass Murder” or “So-and-so Is A War Monger.” There were even people costumed as human
bobble heads wearing large masks of certain politicians: the human puppets portraying mocking
impersonations of the faces they donned. But the adrenaline rose to another level as the
marching began: now there would be motion added to the vocalizations of protest. With the
vigor of a joyous parade, people chanted a barrage of slogans - short and sensational enough to
be exhibited on the nightly news as sound bites. The parade even passed a small group of
counter protesters who supported the war. They engaged numerous “peace protestors” in
passing arguments and flying insults from both sides. But the thing that caught my eye, and
caused me the greatest pain, was the parading of mock caskets through the street. As much as I
understand the intent in seeking to symbolize the mass amount of deaths caused by the latest
war, it hurt me to reduce the sacredness of a funeral rite to a public spectacle -- especially since
the intent of their symbolism could be fulfilled in ways that are more respectful of the dead.
I could go on and on with other examples of what has become acceptable forms of so-
called “peaceful protest.” There are mass rallies that have the feel of a pop music concert, where
the masses of people serve as spectators to a range of speeches and performances -- and
sometimes even a celebrity appearance. Protesters have selected the homes of high profile
persons (from politicians to corporate figures) as locations for protests -- a clear shift from the
decades’ old tradition of keeping protests in public spaces. Others have committed “die-ins,”
where protesters literally gather at a spot, lay on the ground, and pretend to be dead -- sometimes
with simulated blood painted on their bodies. Some have even tossed around dollar bills with
fake blood on them to symbolize the connections between war spending and profit with the
violence of war. And let me not forget the keen group of people who impersonate or present
themselves as corporate or government representatives to make false statements at official
meetings or to bid at auctions (such as for public land). These tactics and more have been done
in the name of non-violence, peace, and justice. Although their intentions may be good-spirited
and rousing in the eyes of some, are these truly non-violent, peaceful, and just? Are these
genuine manifestations of non-violence, peace, and justice?
Some will definitively say yes, and if so this book may be of little use to you. Even
Mohandas K. Gandhi acknowledged in his day that there were (at least) three distinct streams in
what we now call grassroots activism and organizing. During the course of his lifelong work, he
used some terms interchangeably but for the sake of discussion I will classify the terms into three
2
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 3, excerpt from Young India, March
23, 1921. Note, this statement does not mean that people are weak as an unchangeable characteristic, rather that they
are in a position of weakness. Gandhi, of all people, held in high regard the transformative abilities of human
beings, including that of being weak to become strong.
3
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 3 excerpt from Young India, March
23, 1921.
4
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 202, excerpt from Harijan, April
15, 1933.
15
categories. The first being that of Passive Resistance which Gandhi described as “a weapon of
the weak.”
2
This approach embodies a refusal to comply with dominant powers (government,
corporate, oppressive social groups, etc.) often in the form of protest, although sometimes what
the resisters are against completely overshadows what they are for. Much of their approach is
based on seeking power and confrontation, and less on a genuine morality and seeking Truth.
Gandhi cited the following criticism of this approach:
“Whilst it avoids violence, being not open to the weak, it does not
exclude its use if, in the opinion of a passive resister, the occasion
demands it.”
3
Be aware that for Gandhi violence goes beyond just physical acts but also includes “every form
of violence, direct or indirect, veiled or unveiled, and whether in thought, word or deed.”
4
Thus,
angry words and hateful thoughts fit in Gandhi’s definition of violence. In looking at many in
the passive resistance stream: if, in protesting war, passive resisters could kill the political and
military leaders orchestrating a war, they probably would. And many of them would consider
such murders a justifiable means to end war -- even in using tactics they condemn in protest.
The second stream is that of Civil Disobedience, which Gandhi attributed, in part, to the
teachings of Henry David Thoreau. Thoreau was active in efforts to abolish slavery in the
United States and called for those with moral objections to slavery and other social evils to
engage in civil disobedience: not being bound to an obedience of unjust laws. For him, this was
a stand based in conscience and essential to fulfilling what it means to be a human being. Thus,
it was a moral duty to not engage in acts that provide allegiance and support to evil laws and
positions. In keeping with this principle, Thoreau refused to pay taxes to a government that
supported the continuation of moral wrongs (such as slavery) and was even jailed for such. His
moral stand refrained from performing wrongful acts in protest to other wrongs, this would be
5
Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, essay originally titled Resistance to
Government, 1849.
6
Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, essay originally titled Resistance to
Government, 1849.
7
Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, essay originally titled Resistance to
Government, 1849.
8
Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, essay originally titled Resistance to
Government, 1849.
9
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p.3, excerpt from Young India, March
23, 1921.
16
hypocritical. Rudeness and untoward behavior was also ruled out since, as the name implies,
civil disobedience should be civil. Yet, Thoreau was sharp in his criticism of individuals who
conceded to the will of majorities who supported unjust practices. He argued that the “law never
made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are
daily made the agents of injustice.”
5
He chastised conscientious (statistical) minorities who
rendered themselves powerless by conforming to majorities, even if the minorities sought to
persuade or patiently wait for the majorities to see their wrongs. He proclaimed that “action
from principle, the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations...”
6
That “truth is stronger than error,”
7
even if embodied by only one honest person: that “any man
more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one already.”
8
As much as Gandhi
praised Thoreau, he saw this approach as only a branch (part) of the Truth-Force needed to
transform human societies.
The third stream is Satyagraha, which literally means “holding on to Truth”
9
or Truth-
Force. Satyagraha, often called non-violence in English, is a path of humility. This is the path
Gandhi devoted his life to, a life-long experiment with Truth. It goes beyond just withholding
cooperation from evil, it embraces the responsibility of making one’s life a vindication of Truth.
Gandhi held that since humans do not hold absolute truth, there is an onus upon our actions to
ensure that others are not harmed by our mistakes: even mistakes made in the form of our chosen
morality. Therefore, his path to address evil stands upon the pillars of self-purification, self-
suffering, and seeking to convert his opponents through these means. Self-purification allows us
to see more clearly the dictates of Truth, even a belated realization that what we held previously
to be right may be wrong. Those who walk this path rely more on Truth (and our ongoing
realization and understanding of it) than a fixed, unchanging morality. Self-suffering, in
10
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 313, excerpt from Young India,
September 30, 1926.
17
conjunction with self-purity, is embraced as a way of converting our opponents (and the larger
society): because to see a pure person suffering for a just cause can have a transformative impact
on those who hold to, support, and cooperate with wrong. This is often embraced after other
reasonable efforts at cooperation and negotiation have been pursued. The effectiveness of this
path of conversion is not based on a dramatic display of suffering or compulsion (forcing others
to do something): it is a path of patience that appeals to the hearts of others in which success is
derived, in part, from the purity of those who are willing to suffer; and if they do, how much they
suffer. (I will deal with suffering in much more depth in Chapter 6 because Gandhi’s
understanding of suffering differs from many contemporary concepts of suffering. But to give a
brief definition, suffering is the willingness to endure hardships, challenges, and loss -- and, in
fact, Gandhi would say to do so cheerfully and without malice or bitterness.) The path of self-
suffering also serves to protect others from being harmed by mistaken causes: for if a person
engaged in self-suffering is wrong the only person who suffers for that cause is that person. But
Satyagraha is not meant to be engaged for selfish reasons, Gandhi was adamant in declaring it
“cannot be resorted to for personal gain, but only for the good of others.”
10
And as much as it
can be embraced alone if necessary, genuine Satyagraha (through its transformative powers) will
often draw others to its cause. In this way, Satyagraha was developed to be as community-
oriented as it is individually focused. In fact, Gandhi used ashrams as places to develop devotees
to Satyagraha to become members of this Truth-abiding community.
And I would be remiss to not state what is probably obvious to many: Satyagraha
unequivocally renounces all violence in all its forms -- from thought, word, deed, and more.
Although brief, the above descriptions point out significant differences in approach. This
book is not here to serve judgement upon any of the approaches even as it clearly advocates in
favor of Satyagraha. Each approach has the opportunity to offer some benefit to those who
engage in the various streams. But I do declare the need for activists and organizers to be very
clear about what approach they embrace, and not to make misleading associations with other
streams. The examples of “peaceful” protest I opened this chapter with are clearly not
Satyagraha (non-violence) and, therefore, should not be linked with Gandhi or Satyagraha in any
way. Gandhi vehemently defended his stream from misconceptions and sometimes blatant
attempts to link his stream with activities that contradicted with his approach. If we respect
18
Gandhi and his contributions to humanity, we will avoid doing this. Thus, to spew angry or
hateful words at a “peace protest” under the banner of non-violence is something Gandhi would
take offense to. The same holds for interrupting a meeting (even of our opponents), trading
insults with others, demeaning others with mocking impersonations, carrying mock coffins
through the street, committing die-ins, and other uses of compulsory force. (And it is interesting
to note that many of the protesters who do such things would be angered if these were done to
them.) Even attending a protest as a spectator who will not carry the work of Truth-holding and
conversion (of self first, then possibly others) beyond rallies and marches falls short of the
Satyagraha path -- and is not rightly identified with non-violence.
This point is of utter importance because Satyagraha was not devised as a toolkit of
strategies from which protesters can pick this or that tool when they feel it is appropriate.
Satyagraha is a way of life: a comprehensive approach which must be embraced in fullness, as
determined by one’s present state of maturity, to be effective. (Note that effectiveness, in terms
of Satyagraha, is not reduced to social achievements and victories; rather it is the transformation
of devoted individuals and how their transformation beneficently impacts, if not transforms,
others.) The modern age has normalized the commercialization of many things, even reducing
ways of life to consumable entities. Even many activists and their supporters have reduced the
Satyagraha way of life to a product to be bought in the commerce of social action. Many, even if
with sincere intentions, have reduced non-violence to a brand name and Gandhi to a shallow
celebrity, ignoring his teachings. Both the brand name and rock star can be adorned on
movements without any due consideration, to sate the appetite for appearance over substance.
By such practices, the rich depth and transformative science of Satyagraha is rendered mute and
ineffective. And instead of looking at this approach as the problem to why the contemporary
community organizing, peace, and social justice fields have had such a limited impact, protesters
remain committed to the same ineffective approach, thinking more intense (and sometimes
extreme) tactics will render long overdue success.
There are clear reasons why Gandhi has such an appeal as a social celebrity. Given the
lessening importance of history and historical context in this present age, some may not fully
comprehend the importance of what many hold to be Gandhi’s greatest achievement: serving a
key role in India’s independence from Britain. He probably would not hold this to be his
greatest achievement, yet even he realized the significance of his role. For centuries Britain held
firm to the dictate that “the sun never sets on the British empire,” alluding to the large expanse to
which British colonization and oppression reached across the globe. And India was considered a
11
Much of Gandhi’s writings were written specifically to the people of India during the decades of
organizing that led to their independence from Britain.
19
top prize of the empire, because it was its most populous and profitable colony. Even as the
British hold on its empire was weakening throughout the world, many in Britain saw it of utter
importance to never relinquish India for reasons of economics and national pride. But due to
decades of community organizing throughout India and other historical factors, Britain
eventually conceded. Gandhi played a major role in overseeing, inspiring, and educating such
local organizing that eventually culminated into a national force. India’s independence ranks as
one of the most profound historical occurrences in modern history, if not all time. In fact, many
who lived in India and Britain prior to this independence thought it inconceivable that Britain
would willingly release its colonizing hold on India -- and even then, only on the brink of
extinction. Gandhi’s leadership and commitment to Swaraj (Indian Home Rule) made his face
synonymous with India’s independence. He became a symbol for liberation, anti-colonial, and
social justice movements throughout the world, even by some groups that embraced violence as
a tactic. Many regard Gandhi’s Satyagraha work as an essential factor in India attaining
independence.
Given Gandhi’s impact and notoriety on the international stage, he makes a convenient
icon for those seeking to attract attention to their cause, much like a good logo -- even if people
embrace this logo in ignorance of his teachings. Dead people make for easy trademarks because
they are not alive to demonstrate their resistance to how their likeness is misused. But if we
sincerely admire Gandhi’s contributions to world history, should not our admiration include an
in-depth study of his approach? Such study would go beyond merely memorizing some key
facts about Gandhi and then posting his name or non-violence on our activities the way a
corporation posts its logo on its products. An in-depth study would go deeper, to not learn just
the manner of his approach but the underlying values and principles that shaped it. We would
take advantage of the writings he left where we can read his words as he wrote them. We would
also need to accompany the reading of his words with studying the context in which he wrote
them, since the historical and cultural contexts of his life are different than what current times
present.
11
An in-depth study would also embrace the comprehensive scope of his approach, and
refuse the temptation to reduce Satyagraha into components that conveniently fit within our
ways. Such study does not require us to agree with or accept everything that Gandhi taught, nor
does it bind us to do things only as he did. But an in-depth study will put us in a wiser place to
decide if we wish to embrace Satyagraha as our approach. Then we may work through any
20
disagreements we have with Gandhi and make changes to his approach that meet the present
challenges in ways that still uphold the foundational values and principles of Satyagraha.
The above paragraph describes the approach of this book. An emphasis will be placed on
the values and principles that shape and form Satyagraha as a way of life. It will not be a
theoretically-based book that spews poetic scholarly jargon or philosophical fodder for café
discussions. Instead, it will focus on the practical building blocks of an everyday Satyagraha
approach. This book draws heavily from three of Gandhi’s books: Non-Violent Resistance
(Satyagraha); Gandhi’s autobiography, An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with
Truth; and Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule). I certainly encourage people to read these
carefully and with care, since there is much that might be lost with superficial or speed readings
of these books. I do not consider this work as a replacement for Gandhi’s books, but this work
takes on the task of placing some of his teachings in a contemporary context. (Plus it’s free.)
Note, much of Gandhi’s teachings transcend the particulars of his time. But certain things differ,
even if slightly, in contemporary times -- such as understandings of suffering, sacrifice, and
community. And some things have been interpreted through a scope that differs from Gandhi’s
since components of Satyagraha have been “rewritten” in the vein of movements inspired by him
that did not stay true to the Satyagraha path. These include things such as protests and political
activism which, for example, have been reinterpreted through the U.S. Civil Rights Movement of
the twentieth century but differ from the Satyagraha approach. (I know some may find the
previous sentence disturbing but if you read this book you will see why I say it.) Also, the
impact of some things has shifted due to the success of Satyagraha. Much of Gandhi’s writings
were written as the experiment of social Satyagraha was being carried out throughout the
national landscape of India (and to a lesser extent, during his stay in South Africa). The shift
from experimental to proven thus places some things in a different context, even if proven
approaches need to be proven effective again or sometimes adjusted to meet contemporary
challenges.
Although the scope of this book is expansive, let no one think that it is by any means
complete. Even Gandhi emphasized that whatever theoretical concepts may be derived, the most
sure proving ground is the lives we live. With that in mind, I do not hesitate to leave questions
in places often reserved for definitive answers. Ultimately, my wish is not to have readers
conform to a certain set of dictates, but instead let those who wish to continue the work of
Gandhi do so with a living knowledge of the foundations the house of Satyagraha stands upon.
As mentioned earlier, this is a path of self-purification and self-suffering -- one that may require