The Gandhi Project by Nashid Fareed-Ma’at
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
31
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 100 - 101, excerpt from Harijan,
June 10, 1939.
271
can stand in the face of an army eager to attack and yet dissipate the tenacity and intensity of any
violence inflicted upon them. And for the most pure civil resisters, they can face such an army
and yet remain untouched by the virtue of the calming influence they emanate. It is within such
a calm atmosphere, even if transformed to be such by pure Satyagrahis, that civil resisters can
proceed to offer mass civil disobedience that will not lead to violent disorder.
In addition to cultivating the individual and collective strength that creates a calm
atmosphere, Gandhi sought to do other things to complement this strength building. For him,
courage had a direct connection to soul-based strength and, therefore, anything that developed
courage would supplement developing strength and its corresponding calmness. Below is an
example of what Gandhi suggested in one situation “to produce an atmosphere of non-violence
of the brave:”
“This depends on individual workers cultivating non-violence in
thought, word and deed, by means of a concentrated effort in the
fulfillment of the fourfold constructive programme. Maximum of
work and minimum of speech must be your motto. In the centre of
the programme is the spinning wheel... There is the programme of
literacy. ... There is prohibition of drink and intoxicating drugs and
of gambling. There is medical relief by means of the propagation
of simple rules of hygiene and sanitation and elementary
preventive measures, and of cheap home remedies and training
intelligent village folk in these.”
31
The above reflected many things addressed previously in the book: restraint and a commitment
to act; the spinning wheel as a component of Swaraj based in traditional Indian culture and
values; study based in the Satyagraha approach to education; attention to health and wellness. In
other situations Gandhi may have added other components of the Satyagraha path to this list, but
the point is: many of the elements used to prepare people to offer Satyagraha-guided civil
disobedience are things that can help create an atmosphere of calmness. It may be helpful to
focus on certain elements with a particular focus to maximize the cultivation of calmness, but
there is rarely (if ever) a need to go beyond the Satyagraha components that prepare us for civil
32
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 249, excerpt from Young India,
April 3, 1930.
33
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 240, excerpt from Young India,
March 27, 1930.
272
disobedience to create an atmosphere of calm. In fact, the absence of such calm may indicate
that we have not fully learned and applied some of these Satyagraha components -- perhaps a
sign that we should return to the basics to address any shortcomings in our preparation and
development process.
Once people were prepared to offer mass civil disobedience and an atmosphere of calm
was established, Gandhi would proceed to offering mass civil disobedience. But he wasn’t
content with merely having groups offers mass civil disobedience, he sought to move it to a point
where it became spontaneous. He wrote:
“Mass civil disobedience means spontaneous action. The workers
[or leaders] will merely guide the masses in the beginning stages.
Later the masses will regulate the movement themselves.”
32
Now we shouldn’t confuse spontaneous with meaning that mass civil disobedience should spring
out of nowhere in whatever direction met the present whim. Gandhi acknowledged that the early
stages of mass civil disobedience will often require the guidance and support of leaders and
those trained in the science of Satyagraha to be effective. He stated regarding mass civil
disobedience: “there certainly will be no mass response where the ground has not been
previously tilled, manured and watered.”
33
This preparation will include the tenets of Satyagraha
such as pursuit of Truth, ahimsa, humility, self-purification, the willingness to suffer and
sacrifice, discipline, order, patience, commitment, and more. With such grooming, spontaneous
mass civil disobedience will naturally exclude civil resisters breaking out into instances of
violence (words, thoughts, and actions) with reckless abandon. In fact, Webster’s Dictionary
defines spontaneous as:
“1) acting in accordance with or resulting from a natural feeling,
impulse, or tendency, without any constraint, effort, or
34
Webster’s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1994, p. 1296.
35
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 234 - 235, excerpt from Young
India, March 20, 1930.
273
premeditation; 2) having no apparent external cause or influence;
occurring or produced by its own energy, force, etc.”
34
In accord with the first definition, the “natural feeling, impulse, and tendency” of spontaneous
mass civil disobedience would be influenced by the Satyagraha preparation process. And if civil
resisters have been adequately prepared, they will be able to move beyond the premeditated
(planned) instructions of leaders to act in ways that are natural to the Satyagraha path without
being told to do so. Good Satyagraha leaders will have an understanding of what the full scope
of Satyagraha may call for in a specific situation and, thus, be able to inform civil resisters and
their opponents of such as well as the stages of how Satyagraha-guided civil disobedience may
progress. But once that framework is identified, the leaders are charged with the responsibility
to guide participants to a point where they will spontaneously carry out appropriate actions
without external cause (i.e., being instructed to do so by leaders), instead by their own energy,
strength, understanding, etc.
Once mass civil disobedience reaches a stage of spontaneous action, it becomes a
virtually unstoppable force. Note what Gandhi wrote about the potential of his arrest during the
Salt Satyagraha campaign:
“Let nobody assume that after I am arrested there will be no one
left to guide you. It is not I but Panditt Jawaharlal [another leader]
who is your guide. He has the capacity to lead. Though the fact
is that those who have learnt the lesson of fearlessness and self-
effacement need no leader. If we lack these virtues, not even
Jawaharlal will be able to produce them in us.”
35
(emphasis mine)
Once the people’s acts emanate from themselves (and not from their leaders), there is virtually
no way to stop mass civil disobedience. The masses will naturally carry out wise actions in
response to whatever situations they face, and not be dependent upon the guidance of leaders or
other external realities to carry out their civil disobedience. Once mass civil disobedience
reaches this stage, even the elimination of leaders -- a common target of unjust opponents -- will
36
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 215, excerpt from Young India,
July 19, 1928.
274
not stop mass civil disobedience from continuing. In fact, once mass civil disobedience reaches
this stage the only group capable of stopping it is the people themselves, if they abandon
Satyagraha or terminate their civil disobedience. Gandhi clearly acknowledged progression to
this stage as an explicit goal of offering mass civil disobedience. Yet, this clearly stated goal is
often abandoned by many in positions of leadership in the community organizing, peace, and
social justice fields. All shallow propaganda aside (such as claiming to work toward a day
where they are no longer needed), many organizations and leaders operate in ways that assume
their long-term (if not permanent) leadership positions over the masses who follow them. This is
accompanied by the cultural values of egocentric societies that glorify leadership as a beneficial
way to help others while remaining within egotism. But Gandhi strongly advocated that leaders
should serve with the clear intent to “till the ground” in a way that makes their roles unnecessary
as quickly as possible, that they may then become “ordinary” members of a spontaneous mass
that collectively regulates its own civil disobedience and actions guided toward Truth,
beneficence, and justice.
Lastly, for this section, Gandhi acknowledged that all Satyagraha-guided civil
disobedience (mass or individual) can be offered for the benefit of those who cooperate with
injustice. He stated:
“The personal creed of a non-co-operator does not preclude him
from representing the cause of those who are helplessly co-
operators.”
36
I mention this in regards to mass civil disobedience because offering civil disobedience (and
other acts for beneficent change) on behalf of those who helplessly cooperate with injustice can
have a transformative effect on them. To see others suffering for their benefit can be a starting
point for them to consider the possibility of not cooperating with injustice. And given the
transformative power of purity, pure civil resisters may influence such cooperators to embrace
the Satyagraha path and eventually become civil resisters themselves, or supporters of civil
resisters. At minimum, such cooperators with injustice may become willing cooperators with
justice once it is attained.
37
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 245, excerpt from Young India,
April 3, 1930.
275
Before proceeding to explore arrests, imprisonments, and tactics in the next chapter, let’s
examine Gandhi’s approach to money -- specifically in regards to engaging in mass civil
disobedience.
THE QUESTION OF MONEY
“This is not a battle to be conducted with money. It will be
impossible to sustain a mass movement with money.”
37
The above quote should not be taken out of context: in no way does it reject all use of
money in Satyagraha-guided civil disobedience. Particularly with mass civil disobedience, the
involvement of large numbers of people in a variety of activities will often include money in one
way or another, especially in modern money-based economies. And Gandhi, even in his
embrace of non-possession, did not reject the validity of money, although he was adamantly
against economic exploitation, greed, materialism, and other uses of money that fall outside the
domain of the pursuit of Truth. The fulfillment of Swaraj (home-rule) entails utilizing just and
traditionally-based means for people to participate in the economic system; and in a money-
based economy, this involves the use of money. But even within such a societal context, money
cannot be a foundation for Satyagraha-guided civil disobedience. Truth-based values, morality
and character, commitment to justice and beneficence, ahimsa, love, and other components of
Satyagraha are suitable foundations upon which to build civil disobedience campaigns. It is
within such foundations that money can be used in efforts to affect just and beneficent change, as
opposed to seeking to affect a desired change simply because one has money or using money to
virtually “buy” desired change. At times, there may be a thin line between appropriate and
inappropriate uses of money in Satyagraha-guided civil disobedience. And when in proximity to
such a line, Satyagrahis are challenged to stay on the appropriate side of that line. To this end,
let’s examine some of the lessons Gandhi applied to using money.
Gandhi’s approach to money was very much informed by his embrace of non-possession.
He described the ideal fulfillment of non-possession as follows:
38
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 46, excerpt from From Yeravda
Mandir, 1932, Chapter VI: Non-Possession Or Poverty.
276
“Perfect fulfillment of the ideal of Non-possession requires, that
man should, like the birds, have no roof over his head, no clothing
and no stock of food for the morrow. He will indeed need his daily
bread, but it will be God’s {Truth’s} business, and not his, to
provide it. Only the fewest possible, if any at all, can reach this
ideal. We ordinary seekers may not be repelled by the seeming
impossibility. But we must keep the ideal constantly in view,
and in the light thereof, critically examine our possessions, and
try to reduce them. Civilization, in the real sense of the term,
consists not in the multiplication, but in the deliberate and
voluntary reduction of wants. This alone promotes real happiness
and contentment, and increases the capacity for service.”
38
(emphasis mine)
After an initial reading of this statement some may reject Gandhi as a wacky idealist idyllic with
a questionable grip on reality: what are you talking about no roof over our heads?! But let’s
dissect this statement, especially since it was directed to members of his ashram who would be
better able to place it in a context of previously stated lessons that strengthen the validity of
Gandhi’s points.
The call to not have a roof over one’s head is not simply metaphor; instead, it speaks to a
human phenomenon that has proved itself beyond doubt over the course of the past millennia.
As has been shown throughout human history, especially in the modern era, for most humans the
acquisition of a permanent (or long-term) shelter has meant the further accumulation of material
things. This mass expansion of material possessions has exceeded far beyond the necessities of
life to result in an increasing proportion of material property being luxuries that cater to selfish
desires. This progression can be drawn in the lives of many whose early years may entail merely
having a room (i.e., a child’s bedroom) and the more limited accumulation of possessions one
has at this stage of life: for example, clothes, a bed, a dresser, and some toys. If such a person is
able to attain or inherit enough wealth as an adult, the personal expansion of possessions can
extend from a single room to an entire house filled with needless material things. And the
expanding sizes of houses has resulted in even more materialistic accumulation, some people
even buying things to fill empty space in their homes. To examine this dynamic in America,
277
consider how many people who own houses have garages, attics, basements, and closets (in
many rooms) filled with things they rarely or never use. Some even rent additional storage space
for these things, making the storage business a multi-billion dollar annual industry. If you ask
these persons why they are keeping these things, most would not be able to offer justifiable
reasons for the large majority of their possessions. The unessential quality of these possessions
would be quickly proven if these same persons were to “live like the birds,” without a roof over
their heads: the overwhelming majority would most likely abandon much of their possessions
just because of the sheer effort required to keep that much stuff without a roof. And many,
perhaps over time, would realize their lives to better off without too much stuff as long as they
got their “daily bread:” the necessities needed to live in reasonable means. In fact, the blatant
needlessness of these material possessions is proven by the fact that most people who
accumulate mass possessions do not use most of these possessions on a regular basis.
The impact of accumulating mass possessions goes beyond these just being unnecessary:
the pursuit of such materialism has resulted in the creation and sustenance of systems of wealth
concentration and exploitation that affect the mass of society. As any economist will admit,
there is a limited amount of resources in any society -- there may be an abundance of these
resources but there is a limit to them. So any society genuinely concerned about justice and
beneficence (aims in Satyagraha) must be concerned with an equitable distribution of wealth,
resources, and opportunities to acquire such -- especially since so much injustice (and
corresponding violence and suffering) emanates from inequalities. Justice and beneficence are
very rarely achieved in a system that concentrates mass amounts of wealth among some because,
inevitably, this mass accumulation will come at the expense of others being denied an equitable
share in a society’s resources. Consider how many millions of people struggle to eat and
maintain basic shelter while millions have attics, basements, garages, and closets filled with
needless material possessions (a form of wealth) they do not use. And these are not just the
storage spaces of the five percent elite rich, these include millions of middle and working class
people that virtually sustain millions of others remaining in poverty. This social reality is
furthered by a profit-driven economic system that seeks to manufacture and sell more material
possessions that will increase the amount of stuff that ends up in someone’s storage space:
whether being a new gadget that is thrown in a closet after it loses its “new toy” appeal or an
older gadget that gets thrown into the basement after being replaced by a new gadget. (Even this
cycle of consumerism further concentrates wealth in society by enriching a select group that
profits off the spending of mass consumerism.) This economic approach continues in place of an
economic system that can address societal inequalities while still achieving high yet reasonable
39
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 46, excerpt from From Yeravda
Mandir, 1932, Chapter VI: Non-Possession Or Poverty.
278
(more restrained) levels of profit. This economic approach also contributes directly to a range of
societal suffering, violence, and moral decay. One such consequence is that economic inequality
drives some to engage in criminal acts that often involve violence (whether words, thoughts, or
deeds). These acts are often done to survive in a state of inequality, but survival-based crime can
evolve into crime engaged for the sake of accumulating mass wealth and its needless material
possessions -- such as crime organizations popularized in American entertainment, like the
Mafia. Thus, economic inequality can begin and sustain endless cycles of crime among many
endless cycles of societal harm.
A careful analysis will reveal that the high majority of all resources in society are not
human-created: they come from nature, even if the final product is a manufactured form of
products derived from nature. From the perspective of non-possession, this makes the mass
accumulation of material things even more unjust since it results in the hoarding of things
humans take from other natural sources, not from their own creation. Therefore, the reference to
“living as the birds” -- who for the most part, live in nature -- is not accidental since humanity’s
existence is derived from and very much sustained by nature. If we honor this reality, we would
not only reject the mass accumulation of possessions but seek an equitable sharing of the natural
resources we receive, an approach that is easily attained by “living like the birds” who take their
daily bread day by day. This approach would also eliminate so much of the suffering that is a
direct consequence of materialistic economic systems. To deal again with crime, a robber
usually targets the accumulated resources other people have -- whether in their homes or wallets.
And since most people refuse to relinquish these things willingly, the robber often resorts to
forms of violence to take what she or he seeks. But in a society where everyone lives day to day,
taking only what they need, and not storing anything for tomorrow, the robber would be a
useless profession that garners much less fruit than the risks engaged in committing robbery. To
this point Gandhi stated:
“If each retained possession only of what he needed, no one would
be in want, and all would live in contentment.”
39
Now, living day to day doesn’t mean that humans must live as wandering gatherers.
Living like the birds who rely on God’s {Truth’s} providence to receive our daily bread can still
279
entail the formation of communities, nations, and civilizations. Gandhi’s embrace of this
principle is evidenced by his forming ashrams, or spiritual communities, that relied on Truth’s
providence. This wasn’t a passive reliance, but instead an active living of the lessons of Truth
and receiving from the benefits of such. Therefore, a Truth-based community could engage in
farming and other economic activities to receive their daily bread. Within such a community, all
that is acquired would be shared in equitable manners so that there is little to no need among
community members. Anything that is available after serving the needs of the community would
be freely offered to others. The power of such sharing has even been admired in materialistic
societies that acknowledge the transformative and healing benefits of giving charity -- although
Gandhi’s approach to charity went beyond serving others while leaving them in a state of
continued dependency and need. So the words about it being “God’s {Truth’s} business” to
provide our daily bread is by no means a call to passive acceptance, but instead a call to action
and deliberate design. This reliance on Truth’s providence carried out, in part, by the just and
beneficent actions of Truth-seekers can inform the construction of entire economic and social
systems that extend across large regions -- perhaps even the globe. Although modern history
minimizes such possibilities, there are histories of nature-based Truth-seeking people who not
only established such economic and social systems (as components of a Truth-based approach to
life), but these systems flourished for centuries prior to the violent establishment of modern
conquest and exploitation.
The previous paragraphs dealt with the ideal of non-possession, a reality Gandhi
acknowledged few (in this human age) are prepared to live. But he held Satyagrahis must keep
this ideal in the forefront of their awareness, particularly in regards to reducing personal
possessions. He does not rule out the necessity of some possessions -- particularly those that are
used for beneficent and just purposes, such as me using my personal computer to type this book.
But he would challenge each Satyagrahi to reflect on keeping any needless possessions,
particularly those kept for luxurious and selfish purposes. He would also concede there may be
some logic to maintaining some savings in a societal situation that is contrary to the ideal of non-
possession. But even as I write this, Gandhi was a living example of someone who practiced a
high level of non-possession in a society that was clearly counter to this approach to life. Yet,
the challenge remains for every Satyagrahi to examine her or his possessions and reduce them to
a reasonable level. Gandhi’s understanding and living of civilization, happiness, and the ability
to serve was very much based in the voluntary reduction -- not increase -- of material
possessions.
40
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 68 - 69, excerpt from Young India,
April 1, 1926.
280
Now what does this have to do with civil disobedience, and particularly mass civil
disobedience which will more often involve the use of money? One lesson is to maintain
awareness of the ideal of non-possession and the just and beneficent society that emanates from
progression toward this ideal. To the extent civil resisters and their supporters move themselves
and society closer to the ideal of non-possession, the more likely beneficence, justice, and
happiness will exist within the civil resisters, their supporters, and the larger society. Also,
keeping in line with the principle of being the change we seek, groups and organizations on the
Satyagraha path are challenged to be living examples of the progression to this ideal they wish to
see the larger society achieve. The following paragraphs will explore this point in more detail.
One of the best ways for civil resisters (and their supporters) to demonstrate to society
the power of progressing toward the ideal of non-possession is to engage in civil disobedience
campaigns that, although they may use money, do not require any money. To this point, Gandhi
wrote:
“But Civil Disobedience asks for and needs not a single farthing [a
quarter penny] for its support. It needs and asks for stout hearts
with a faith that will not flinch from any danger and will shine the
brightest in the face of severest trial.”
40
This was not meant to be a bold public declaration without merit, Gandhi designed and
organized civil disobedience campaigns that were able to function exceptionally well even if
they did not receive a penny. For him, this meant organizing campaigns for which the fuel of
their efforts was stout hearts, faith, courage, commitment, and other personal and group traits
cultivated on the Satyagraha path. With these, a penniless campaign will discover and attract
everything it needs to function, even money. Note Gandhi’s words about peasants considering
civil disobedience for better working conditions:
“All that is required is the proper education of the peasantry and
labour. They need to be informed that if they are properly