India Thinkers Net Archives Index | Subscribe | RSS
<< October07, 2003 - [India Thinkers Net] Dr Satinath demands investigative reporting on Godhra. October07, 2003 - [India Thinkers Net] Godhra victims demand shifting of enquiry . >>

Subject: [India Thinkers Net] The Mischievous advertisement . - October07, 2003




Mischievous advertisement issued by the
Department of Information and Broadcasting,
Government of India, on Gandhi Jayanti day
(2-10-2003).

Date: 4th Oct 2003

We were horrified to see the advertisement issued
by the Department of Information and
Broadcasting, Government of India, on Gandhi
Jayanti, quoting Gandhi on the need to take up
arms rather than suffer dishonour. The
mischievous intent of the advertisement is
obvious. Given its preoccupation with reinventing
histories to suit its agendas, and the discomfort
of living with the internationally-famed Gandhian
legacy of non-violence, it is no surprise that
the present government would choose to select a
line from Gandhis writings, totally removed from
its context, to prove that even the great Apostle
of Peace endorsed violence in the name of
nationalism.
The quote used in the advertisement is a line
from Gandhis article in Young India dated 11
August 1920, titled The Doctrine of the Sword.
The article was written by Gandhi in the wake of
country-wide violence following the passing of
the Rowlatt Bills and the Jallianwallah Baug
massacre in 1919, and centred on the call for
non-cooperation from 1st August 1920. It sought
to explain his concept of non-violent
non-cooperation, and the spirit of non-violence
itself. The article, unlike its misrepresentation
by the line used in the advertisement, is devoted
to the real possibility of non-violence as a
political strategy, and its moral significance.
The opening sentence of the article reads: In
this age of the rule of brute force, it is almost
impossible for anyone to believe that anyone else
could possibly reject the law of the final
supremacy of brute force.Gandhi goes on to
explain how violence can be resorted to where
there is only a choice between cowardice and
violence. However, the real intent of the article
is made clear in the sections following the line
quoted in the advertisement issued by the
Government on Gandhi Jayanti: But I believe that
non-violence is infinitely superior to violence.
Gandhi goes on to explain how violence is
resorted to by the helpless, whereas the people
of India should not see themselves as being
helpless. The advertisement could just as well
have quoted his other famous lines in this
article: I am not a visionary. I claim to be a
practical idealist. The religion of non-violence
is not meant merely for the rishis and saints. It
is meant for the common people as well.
Non-violence is the law of our species as
violence is the law of the brute. The spirit lies
dormant in the brute and he knows no law but that
of physical might. The dignity of man requires
obedience to a higher law to the strength of the
spirit; or: I am not pleading for India to
practise non-violence because it is weak. I want
her to practise non-violence being conscious of
her strength and power. No training in arms is
required for realization of her strength. We seem
to need it because we seem to think that we are
but a lump of flesh. I want India to recognize
that she has a soul that cannot perish and that
can rise triumphant above every physical weakness
and defy the physical combination of whole world.
Perhaps the most apt quotation that could have
been used to honour Gandhi in these
conflict-ridden times would have been one of the
closing lines from the same article: Indias
acceptance of the doctrine of the sword will be
the hour of my trial.More than eighty years
later, this is precisely what is coming about: we
seem to be accepting the doctrine of the sword,
subverting Gandhis ideals to legitimate an agenda
of violence. That this is now being done even
through an official agency of the Government like
the Department of I & B, is a shame and a
tragedy. Gandhi could only have grieved if he
were alive today.

Human Right Activists
Rohit Prajapati Nandini Manjrekar
Anand Mazgaonkar Johannes Manjrekar
Trupti Shah Deeptha Achar
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Young India, 11-8-1920
VOL. 21 : 1 JULY, 1920 - 21 NOVEMBER, 1920

In this age of the rule of brute force, it is
almost impossible for anyone to believe that
anyone else could possibly reject the law of the
final supremacy of brute force. And so I receive
anonymous letters advising me that I must not
interfere with the progress of non-co-operation
even though popular violence may break out.
Others come to me and assuming that secretly I
must be plotting violence, inquire when the happy
moment for declaring open violence will arrive.
They assure me that the English will never yield
to anything but violence secret or open. Yet
others, I am informed, believe that I am the most
rascally person living in India because I never
give out my real intention and that they have not
a shadow of a doubt that I believe in violence
just as much as most people do.
Such being the hold that the doctrine of the
sword has on the majority of mankind, and as
success of non-co-operation depends principally
on absence of violence during its pendency and as
my views in this matter affect the conduct of a
large number of people, I am anxious to state
them as clearly as possible.
I do believe that where there is only a choice
between cowardice and violence I would advise
violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what
he should have done, had he been resent when I
was almost fatally assaulted in 1908,1 whether he
should have run away and seen me killed or
whether he should have used his physical force
which he could and wanted to use, and defended
me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me
even by using violence. Hence it was that I took
part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu
rebellion and the late War. Hence also do I
advocate training in arms for those who believe
in the method of violence. I would rather have
India resort to arms in order to defend her
honour than that she should in a cowardly manner
become or remain a helpless witness to her own
dishonour.
But I believe that non-violence is infinitely
superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly
than punishment. Forgiveness adorns a soldier.
But abstinence is forgiveness only when proceed
from a helpless creature. A mouse hardly forgives
a cat when it allows itself to be torn to pieces
by her. I, therefore, appreciate the sentiment of
those who cry out for the condign punishment of
General Dyer and his like. They would tear him to
pieces if they could. But I do not believe India
to be helpless. I do not believe myself to be a
helpless creature. Only I want to use Indias and
my strength for a better purpose.
Let me not be misunderstood. Strength does not
come from physical capacity. It comes from an
indomitable will. An average Zulu is any way more
than a match for an average Englishman in bodily
capacity. But he flees from an English boy,
because he fears the boys revolver or those who
will use it for him. He fears death and is
nerveless in spite of his burly figure. We in
India may in a moment realize that one hundred
thousand Englishmen need not frighten three
hundred million human beings. A definite
forgiveness would therefore mean a definite
recognition of our strength. With enlightened
forgiveness must come a mighty wave of strength
in us, which would make it impossible for a Dyer
and a Frank Johnson to heap affront upon Indias
devoted head. It matters little to me that for
the moment I do not drive my point home. We feel
too downtrodden not to be angry and revengeful.
But I must not refrain from saying that India can
gain more by waiving the right of punishment. We
have better work to do, a better mission to
deliver to the world.
I am not a visionary. I claim to be a practical
idealist. The religion of non-violence is not
meant merely for the rishis and saints. It is
meant for the common people as well. Non-violence
is the law of our species as violence is the law
of the brute. The spirit lies dormant in the
brute and he knows no law but that of physical
might. The dignity of man requires obedience to a
higher law to the strength of the spirit.
I have therefore ventured to place before India
the ancient law of self-sacrifice. For satyagraha
and its off-shoots, non-co-operation and civil
resistance, are nothing but new names for the law
of suffering. The rishis, who discovered the law
of non-violence in the midst of violence, were
greater geniuses than Newton. They were
themselves greater warriors than Wellington.
Having themselves known the use of arms, they
realized their uselessness and taught a weary
world that its salvation lay not through violence
but through non-violence.
Non-violence in its dynamic condition eans
conscious suffering. It does not mean meek
submission to the will of the evildoer, but it
means the putting of ones 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 empires fall or its
regeneration.
And so I am not pleading for India to practise
non-violence because it is weak. I want her to
practise non-violence being conscious of her
strength and power. No training in arms is
required for realization of her strength. We seem
to need it because we seem to think that we are
but a lump of flesh. I want India to recognize
that she has a soul that cannot perish and that
can rise triumphant above every physical weak-
ness and defy the physical combination of whole
world. What is the meaning of Rama, a mere human
being, with his host of monkeys, pitting himself
against the insolent strength of ten-headed
Ravana surrounded in supposed safety by the
raging waters on all sides of Lanka? Does it not
mean the conquest of physical might by spiritual
strength? However, being a practical man, I do
not wait till India recognizes the practicability
of the spiritual life in the political world.
India considers herself to be powerless and
paralysed before the machineguns, the tanks and
the aeroplanes of the English. And she takes up
non-co-operation out of her weakness. It must
still serve the same purpose, namely, bring her
delivery from the crushing weight of British
injustice if a sufficient number of people
practise it.
I isolate this non-co-operation from Sinn
Feinism, for, it is so conceived as to be
incapable of being offered side by side with
violence. But I invite even the school of
violence to give this peaceful non-co-operation a
trial. It will not fail through its inherent
weakness. It may fail because of poverty of
response. Then will be the time for real danger.
The high-souled men, who are unable to suffer
national humiliation any longer, will want to
vent their wrath. They will take to violence. So
far as I know, they must perish without
delivering themselves or their country from the
wrong. If India takes up the doctrine of the
sword, she may gain momentary victory. Then India
will cease to be pride of my heart. I am wedded
to India because I owe my all to her. I believe
absolutely that she has a mission for the world.
She is not to copy Europe blindly. Indias
acceptance of the doctrine of the sword will be
the hour of my trial. I hope I shall not be found
wanting. My religion has no geographical Limits.
If I have a living faith in it, it will transcend
my love for India herself. My life is dedicated
to service of India through the religion of
non-violence which I believe to be the root of
Hinduism.
Meanwhile I urge those who distrust me, not to
disturb the even working of the struggle that has
just commenced, by inciting to violence in the
belief that I want violence. I detest secrecy as
a sin. Let them give non-violent non-co-operation
a trial and they will find that I had no mental
reservation whatsoever.

Rohit Prajapati / Trupti Shah
37, Patrakar Colony, Tandalja Road,
Post-Akota, Vadodara - 390 020
GUJARAT, INDIA

-----------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy:Harsh Kapoor/SACW










<< October07, 2003 - [India Thinkers Net] Dr Satinath demands investigative reporting on Godhra. October07, 2003 - [India Thinkers Net] Godhra victims demand shifting of enquiry . >>
India Thinkers Net Archives Index | Subscribe | RSS
Google
 
Web http://archives.zinester.com
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management