13)

MahatmaGandhi

INTRODUCTION

I believe that Gandhi's views were the most enlightened of all the political men
in our time.
Albert Einstein

M.K. Gandhi (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi) (1869-1948) - popularly known

as Mahatma Gandhi was a great Indian leader, thinker and social reformer. The
title Mahatma (the Great Soul) was confered on him by another great Indian
intellectual, Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941). Gandhi is held in high esteem by a
very large section of Indians and others. He is also addressed as 'Bapu (the Father)
and Rashtrapita(Father of the Nation).
Gandhiwas trained as a lawyer in England. He went to South Africa in 1893
in connection with a legal case where he stayed for twenty-one years
(1893-1914).
His visit toSouth Africa proved to be a turning point in his life. During his stay in
South Africa he was extremely perturbed by the widespread racial
against the vast majority of the coloured people by the white people.discrimination
He
several campaigns against this inhuman practice and developed his launched
method of Satyagraha or non-violent resistance in order to well-known
the ordinar÷ and oppressed people. He became secure justice for
well-known India and other
countries of the world for his Vigorous struggle against in
injustice. Nelson Mandela
(1918-2013), prominent statesman of South Africa, expressed
Gandhi's sojourn in South Africa in these words: "Gandhi came the significance of
as a lawyer and returned as the Mahatma (the to South Africa
Great Soul)"
On his return to India in l914,
jdeas and he playedimportant role Gandhi was widely known for his political
Parekh has significantly observed: inIndia'sstruggle for freedom. As Bhikhu
|164 )
 165
Mahatma Gandhi
He evolved a new language of political discourse, and apparently archaic but
historically evocative set of symbols, anda Simple and austere life as a way of
identitying himself with his poorest countrvmen. and mobilized them under
the leadership of the radically
transformed Congress Party.
(The Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought,
Miller; 1987)
edited by David
Gandhi launched several protest movements against the British rulersin India
and demanded fuil freedom for the Indian nation from the foreign yoke. Some o
such prominent movements include: the Non-CooperationMovement in 1920; tne
CivilDisobedience Movement in 1930: andthe Ouit India Movement in l942. India
achieved freedom in 1947 which coincided with widespread Hindu-Muslim riots
and the partition of India into India andPakistan. Gandhi,as an ardent champion
of communal unity, made a Herculean effort to restore communal harmony but he
was assassinated by a fanatic Hindu in January 1948.
Gandhiwas an activist as wellas asocial and moral philosopher. His struggle
was informed by certain nobBe principles which were enunciated in his several
writings and speeches. He did not write any treatise on his philosophy. His thought is
scattered ina large number of his notes, tracts and pamphlets, articles and booklets,
letters,speeches and editorials as wellas in his Autobiography (My Experiments
With Truth; 1929).However, his booklet Hind Swaraj(1910) is gradually gaining
recognition as a classic. He even denied the existence of Gandhism". But as the
time rolled on, it revealed the immense possibilities of application of Gandhian
principles to various social, economic and political situations, and their relevance
is steadily increasing. It proved that Gandhian way of thinking has not only its
distinct identity, butit enbodies afull-fedged worldview. That is precisely the
basis of Gandhism.
Worldview
Worldview refers to a particular system of thought which explains the present
status of world society, tries to find solution to its problems, and determines
the way to shape its future.

Gandhism is concerned with a large number of issues. However, its two key
issues may be identified as the interface between: (a) Ends and Means; and (b)
Truth and Non-violence. Other important tenets of Gandhian thought include the
concepts of Swaraj. Satvagraha, Sarvodaya and the doctrine of Trusteeship. Further
lessons from Gandhi's teachings may be derived from these basic principles.

MAIN TENETS OF GANDHIAN THOUGHT

ENDS AND MEANS

The precise issue of debate on ends and means may be framed as follows : If we
* Kiontmaon zhoud be oderd
166 Indian Political Thought
sena right end, is it imperative to adopt right means for its achievement?"
Words, if the right end can be achieved more quickly and more efficiently
by adopting dubious means (i.e. Wrong means), can we approve of it? This question
ias Temained a matter of perennial debate in the realm of moral philosophy. While
dlicient lndian sages have insisted that right means should be chosen for pursuing
Tight ends, some writers on politics have conceded that choosing a right end is
Teally important; choice of means should be guided by their efficiency, and not
solely by moral consideration.
According to Mahabharata, ancient Indian epic, in the case of an emergency
(e.g. when a King's friends have deserted him, his enemies have multiplied, his
military and financial resources have been exhausted), the King may resort to
Compulsory acquisition of the property of his subjects. This dubious methodis
justified on the ground that it is intended to serye a right cause, namely protection
of the State. Similarly, Kautilya, ancient Indian political thinker, recommended
Several methods like conciliation, concession. coercion, divide and rule (sma,
däma, danda, bheda) for strengthening the State power which was a right cause.
In early modern Europe, NiccoloMachiavelli (1469-1527) maintained that a prince
may adopt dubious means like making false promises and creating fear in the mind
of the people to keep themunited for the preservation of the State (a right cause).
He argued that a State is established by force and maintained by fraud. Machiavelli
SOught to build a wallof separation between politics and ethics. He asserted that if
aprince adopted unethical means in order to secure political stability, the people
would forgive him after seeing the results of his action.
In most of these examples, the use of dubious means has been recommended
to achieve a noble end under abnormal conditions. However, Mahatma Gandhi
does not approve of the use of unjust means underany circumstances whatsoever.
Gandhi believed in purity of means as well as ends. He argued that only right means
should be adopted for the pursuit of right ends. He strongly refuted the idea that
'end justifies the means' or that if a noble end is achieved by adopting ignoble
means, their use would be excused'. As Gandhi himself observed:
They say 'means are after all nmeans'. I would say 'means are after all everything'
As the means so the end..Realization of the goal is in exact proportion to that
of the means. This is a proposition that admits of no exception
Mor hos al Selpetions ,Gandhi by Nirmal Kumar Bose ; 1948).
Gandhi wastonvinced that if we take care of our imeans, end will take car
of itself Means and ends may be compared to the seed and the tree respectively.
The nature of tree is determined by the nature of seed. Only the right type of seed
willgrow into the right type of tree. As you sow, so shall you reap. He that soweth
vice shall not reap virtue. Again, means and end may be compared to the action *
(karma) and its consequence (phala). Man has full control over his action, and
not over its consequences. That is the famous teaching of Bhagwad-Gita -Hindu
sacred book.
Means and ends are the two sides of the same coin. They cannot be separated.
Immoralmeans cannot be used to achieve moral ends. Ifused, they will vitiate the
 Sowy broz
167
Mahatma Gandhi oestnation.
enditself. Wrong way can never lead to aright destination. The authorityfounded
onfear aand coercion cannot inspire love and respcct atamong people. Gandhi adopted
the path of Satyagraha (reliance on the force of truth) for achieving the goal of
Swaraj (independence from the foreign rule) because this path was as sacred as
its destination. Satyagraha involved the practice of Ahimsa (non-violence) which
embodied the right course ofaction, So Gandhi declared:For me, Ahimsa comes
before Swaraj."
Even if the end is right, if the means are wrong.that will vitiate the end or divert
it into a Wrong direction. Means and ends are thus intimately and inextricably
connected and cannot be separated...The great leader of my country, Mahatma
Gandhi, under whose inspiration and sheltering carelgrew up, always laid stress
on moral values and warned us never to subordinate means to ends.
Jawaharlal Nehru (1949)

Gandhian principle of close connection between ends ánd meansis further

reflected in his theory of relation between politics and ethics. As a moral
philosopher, Gandhi treated ethics as the guiding star of all human behaviour,
including politics. Gandhi's ethics was based on moralteachings of allreligions,
although he paid special attention tothe time-honoured Hindu religion (Sanatana
Dharma). He expressed his firmfaith in the spiritualizationofpolitics. This meant
that if politics was to be ablessing, and not acurse to mankind, it should be informed
by the highest ethical and spiritual principles. In other words, politics should be
guided by high moralstandards, and not by expediency. up r ded
Politics
Politics referstoanactivity concerned with handling publicissues by attaining
public power through enlisting support of the people and assuming their
leadership.

Ethics
Ethics refers toa branchof study concerned with theprinciples of good conduct.
Itinquires into moral beliefs and rulesabout rightand wrong:This term is used as
asynonym of moral philosophy as well as for aset of principles of good conduct
concerning a particular profession, such as medical ethics'

For Gandhi, the terms 'spiritual', 'religious' and 'moral or ethical' conveyed
the same idea. They taught man to abstain from vice and follow the path of virtue.
In Gandhi's view, the essence of all religions was identical, God of Hindus was
not different from God of Muslims or Godof Christians. All religions taught piety
and charity toward fellow-beings. No religion was superior or inferior to any other
religion. Religious tolerance was the keynote of social harmony. Gandhi's notion
of religion was aptly expressed in his own words :
arl
168
teutf Indian Political Thought
not meanallformal
Dy religionwhichIdounderlies religion, or customary religion, but that
religion religions, which brings us face to face with our
Maker
(The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi.
1945)
compiled byR.K. Prabhuand U.R. Rao;
of truth. This
For Gandhi, adherence to religion was the part of his pursuit
Very pursuit induced himto participate inpolitics. He believed that politics bereft
soul. So Gandhi wrote
Or religion was nothing short ofadeath trap which kills the
in his Autobiography:
politics; and Ican say
...mydevotion to Truth has drawn me into the field of that
without the slightest hesitation and yet in all humility, that those who say
religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion means.
Gandhinever took the term 'religion' ina narrow sense. In his view, teachings
compassion
of all religions urged on man to followthe path of self-restraint and
toward fellow-beings, extending toall humanity. They coincide with the universal
principles of morality.
Jo observe morality is to attain mastery over our mind and our passions...We
notice that the mind is a restless bird: the more it gets the more it wants, and
still remains unsatisfied. The more we indulge our passions the moreunbridled
they become. Our ancestors, therefore, set a limit to our indulgences.
Mahatma Gandhi Hind Swaraj (1910)

Gandhi admitted that he had learnt the principle of spiritualization of politics

from another great Indian leader, Gopal Krishna Gokhale (1866-1915) whom he
regardedt as this"potiticatgurut This principleimplied acombination ofhigh moral
character with the practice of politics - adifficult combination indeed! According
to this view, politics should not be treated as a source of material gain but as an
instrument of moral uplift; not as a source of'power over' others, but as asource of
'power to' create congenial conditions for the masses and to elevate moral character
of the elies.

Masses = The ordinary peoplein society who are found inlarge numbers.They
are neither verytalented, nor highly educated, nor highly placed.
Elites = The chosen few in society who are considered to be the best oftheir
kind. They are very talented, highly educated and highly placd.
They provide leadership to the masses and constitute the most
powerfui lot.

In short, politics and ethics were inseparable in Gandhian systemof thought.

He was hailed as a saint who had entered politics. But he defined his own position
differently:
Men say that Iam a saint losing myself in politics. The fact is that I am a
politician trying my hardest to be a saint (Quoted in Louis Fischer. The Life
of Mahatma Gandhi ; 1950).
 ody
169
TRUTH AND Mahatma Gandhi
NON-VIOLENCE
Devotionto truth Is the
esscnce Inof Gandhi's view,But God
difficultasinding GodHimselt. Gandhism, how land
to discover
truth truth?
are It is as
inseparable.t
pevotionto God can be
throughtheservice to thecarricd out through devotion to His crcation,
particularly
Irecogn1ze no God down-trodden. As Gandhi Wrotein Harijan (1939) :
millions. They do exceptthe God that is to be linthe heart of the dumb
not
recognize found
His I do. And I worship the God that
is Truth or Truth which is
God, presencc;
through
part of the pursuit ofservice
Non-violence is also of these millions.
(Ahimsa)litterally means : truth. Non-violence or non-injury
living beings. This abstention from violence in onc's behaviourtoward other
represents only the
side,itimplies love. of all. We should negative side of non-violence. On positive
Si bt also to those extend our love not only to those who love
who hate us. In Gandhi'
Itis non-violence only when we love s own words: oye Y
is to follow this grand law of love. Butthose that hate us. I know how difficult it
arenot all great and good things
todo? Love of the hater is the
most difficult of all. But by the grace of difficult
this most difficult thing
beconmes easy to accomplish if we want to oGOd1t even
(Selections from Gandhi by Nimal Kumar Bose ; 1948).
In Gandhi's view, even the intention to harm
form of violence which should be eschewed. Hatred somebody or wishing himillis
or malice to anyone is alsa
violence. Acquiring material things beyond one's immediate
Violence because thereby we deprive others of their share.need
is also a form
Even the acts of
sDreading atmospheric pollution and damaging public health amount to violence.
Thus ihe principle of non-violence embraces all rules of
human decency.
good citizenship and
When it comes to confrontation with injustice, non-violence does not
showing weakness. Non-violence is not the resort ofthe weak: it is the power imply
of the
ue
strong--of course, his moral power. This power Comes from the firm adherence
totruth. When one fights for a just cause, andshows firm faith in
truth, it results
in the change of heart of the mighty opponent and makes him bend. In
short.
non-violence is the art of gaining victory over physicalforce by spiritual force.
Non-violence is the method of self-purification.Practitioner of non-violence gains
ample moral power to defeat the forces of untruth.
Gandhi's technique of struggle against the mighty British Empire was
throughout basedon the principle of non-violence (Ahinsa). His method of civil
disobedience and Satyagraha(reliance on the force of truth) were strongly based
on non-violence. His doctrines of trusteeship and the visiOn of a classless society
are also the manifestation of his adherence to truth and non-violence.
Ahimsaisthe highest ideal. It is meant for the brave, never for the cowardly,
Mahatma Gandhi
Gandhian principle of non-violenceis the key to his philosophy of coexistence.
u Common parlance, coexistence denotes an attitude of tolerance towards cach
 170 Indian Political Thought
other. It does not mean -absence of differences of opinion, but being ready to live
Peuyin spite of our differences (andhi asserted thatdifferences of opinion
should never mean hostility. He particularly commended the principle of mutual
toleration, As he observed:
that we will never all
godenrule of conduct..is mutual toleration, seeing different angles of
nink alike and we shall see Truth in fragment and fromtherefore, 1t iSa good
VISiOn. Conscience is not the same thing for all. Whilst,
upon all will be an
gude for individual conduct, imposition of that conduct
conscience
insufferable interference with evervbody's freedom of Kumar Bose :; 1948)
(Selections from Gandhi by Nirmal
should in no way come in the
ldeally, coexistence implies that our existencenon-violence. As Gandhitried to
Way of others. That is preciselythe spirit behind
elucidate:
exist physIcally, for we
Perfect non-violence is impossible so long as we non-violence whilst you are
WOuld want some space at least to occupy. Perfect line, but we
inhabiting the body is only a theory like Euclid's point or straight
have to endeavour every moment of our lives (ibid).
If our heart is not
Non-violence is not a matter of outward behaviour only.
cannot follow the principle
Pure and our mind is not devoted to non-violence, we
fight against social
1n the real sense of the term. Non-violence gives us courage to
be actively non
Injustice wherever we find it. Gandhi believed that no man could
occurred.
Violent unless he would rise against social injustice no matter where it
Non-violence should not only be the part of our behaviour but the part of our
character. As Gandhiasserted:
Non-violence to be apotent force must begin with the mind. Non-violence
the
of the mere body without the cooperation of the mind is non-violence of
weak or the cowardly, and has therefore no potency. If we bear malice and
hatred in our bosoms and pretend not to retaliate, it must recoil upon us and
lead to our destruction. For abstention from mere bodily viotence not to be
injurious, it is at least necessary not to entertain hatred if we cannot generate
active love (ibid).
Ifa man has no pOwer or no courage to retaliate, and stillpretends to be non
violent, it would be afake non-violence. Genuine non-violence implies deliberate
abstension from retaliation. As Gandhi pointed out:
Non-violence presupposes ability to strike. It is aconscious, deliberate restraint
put upon one's desire for vengeance. But vengeance is any day superior to
passive, effeminate and helpless submission. Forgiveness is higher still.
Vengeance too is weakness. The desire for vengeance comes out of fear of
harm, imaginary or real. A man who fears no one on earth would consider
ittroublesome even tosummon up anger against one who is vainly trying to
injure him (ibid,).
In Gandhi's view, non-vjolence and cowardice go ill together. Aperson who
carries arms for his defence does so out of fear, if not out of cowardice. True non
 171
violence is Mahatma Gaundhi
impossible
for a violent man to be without lhaving fcarlessncss. There is hope
violence taught a
it quite clear: person
some day
to be unadulterated
non-violent,
brave, and not to
burTherc is nonc for a coward. Non-
from his duty. Gandhi made
It was manly
cscape
enough defend
thesword. It was to
one's honour or religion at the point of
wrong--doer. But itmanlier andproperty.
nobler to defend them without seeking to injure the
of duty and, in orderwasto
unmanly, unnatural to forsakethe post
the mercy of the save one's skin, to aand dishonourable or religion to
who knew how to wrong-doer. Icould see lcave property, honour
die, not to those my way of delivering Ahimsa to those
Gandhian who were afraid of death (ibid).
principle non-violence
and leaving dear ones
of
did not admit of away from danger
prefer violence to unprotected. Between
cowardice. violence andrunning
cowardly flight, he would
a blind man to enjoy
the superiority of beautifulPreaching non-violence
scenes. There toaIcoward was like asking
was no difficulty in demonstrating
Onthe other hand,non-violence tothose who were trained in the school of violence.
and has no power ofnon-violence could not be taught to a person who fears to die
resistance.
Finally, as a principle of coexistence,
exploitation in any form. How can a person non-violence necessitates abstension from
to love his enemy, think of who respects others, who dares even
exploiting others toserve his self-interest? Gandhian
principle of non-violence exhorts us not only to live peaceably with other
beings, but also with the human
the Gandhian principle of nature.Non-violence toward the nature is consistent
of our physical wants. When we with
minimization
from damaging the nature, this will enable the abstain
larger human population and thereby further nature tosatisfy minimum needs of
strengthen the spirit of coexistence.
In our day of space vehicles and guided
ballistic missiles, the choice is either
non-violence or non-existence.
Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-68)

GANDHI'S CONCEPT OF SWARAJ

NATURE OF THE STATE o yas)4/e ih on

Gandhiwas a champion of non-violence or Ahimsa which deprecates all types of
coercion. Hebelieved that the state was a manifestation of power and lawwhich
were based on coercion. State is inclined to impose its own will on individuals with
the help of an elaboratemachinery of police force, law-courts, prisons and military
power. It suppresses an individual's individuality as it tries to cast allindividualsinto
a uniform mould. It destroys his sense of self-reliance and stunts his personality. It
deprives him of his freedom and obstructs the progress of human society.
Gandhi observed that modern state was more powertul than ancicnt and medieval
 thist
172
Indian Political Thoughyt
Siates aS t was more organized and more centralized. Power of the stale was
Oeltratedin the hands o ihe feW who dd not hesitate to misuse it. In candhi's
view, individual is endowed with soul, but the state is a souless machine. State's
dvs are devoid of human sensitiviv State goes by rules and regulations. Those
who eniorce these rules do not feel any moralresponsibility. *
Indeed Gandhi condemned political power on moral ground, and not on
nistorical or economic grounds. He was convinced that if non-violence or Ahimsa
could be adopted as a universal principle.of human behaviour, political power as
"enlightened
well as the state would become redundant. The result would be an
anarchy'. So Gandhiwrote in Young India(1931) :
enabling people to
lome political power is not an end but one of the means of
better their condition in every department of lIife throughnational representatives.
representation
If national life becomes so perfect as to become self-regulated, no
such a State
Decomes necessary. There is then a state of enlightened anarchy. In
everyone is his own ruler. He rules himselfin sucha manner that ne iS never
a hindrance to his neighbour. In the ideal State, therefore, there is no political.
power because there is no State. But the ideal is never fully realized in life.
Hence the classical statement of Thoreau that that governnment is best which
governs the least.
Henry David Thoreau (1817-62): American writer who questions materialism and
the prevailing trend toward the exploitation of nature. He has been hailed as a
pioneer ecologist.He also showed the way to civildisobedience as he upheld the
right of the individual to refuse to pay taxes when his conscience dictates. His
technique of passive resistance was adopted by Mahatma Gandhi.

Enlightened Anarchy
Enlightened anarchy refers to a form of society which functions without the
coercive power of thestate, because individuais have ful controtover themseBves.
They areSO senstive to the needs and feelings of everyone that they tend to
adjust with each other spontaneously and without friction.
In this respect Gandhi was a follower of Count Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910),
Russian writer, who was a paciñe anarehist. Tolstoy was inspired by his faith in
Christianity; Gandhi found the basis of this philosophythroughhis faith inthe time- A
hohoured Hindu religion (Sanatana Dharma), although he taught equal respect for
all religions. Both Tolstoy and Gandhi accorded preceence tospiritual bliss over
material satisfaction. Both attacked private property as it enabled the few to lead
aTuxurious life byexploiting the labour of large numbers, Gandhi did not agree
with other anarchists Iike PJ. Proudhon (1809-65), Mikhail Bakunin (1814-16)
and Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921) who regarded religion as a hindrance to human
development.
[Pacific anarchist = one who advocates abolition of the state in a peaceful
manner
 173
Mahatma Gandhi
LIMITS OF POLITICAL
OBLIGATION
Gandhi recognized severe limits of political obligation, as his principle of 'civil
disobedience' indicates. Civil disobedience implies deliberatcly disobeying an unjust
authority and b
breaking an duty oflaw.civilTheobedience
law1sthe counterpart of theunjust duty of civil disobedience to an unjust
Oajust law. Civil disobedience
may be resorted to as a protest against an unjust policy Tf tgovernment or in order
draw attention of the government to a demand for
political reform.
Political Obligation
Politicalobligation refers to the set of conditions which
when and why an individual is obliged to obey the law determine as to how ta,
and commands of political
authority. This may be accompanied by such duties as the
payment of taxes,
participation in voting, jury service and military duty, etc. which
to be necessary for the are considered
maintenance of political institutions.
The term 'civil disobedince' was originally coined by an
Henry David Thoreau (1817-62) who published an essay in 1848American writer
to explain why he
had refused to pay taxes to the State for severaivears for which he
had tO undergo
imprisonment. Thoreau argued that people must register their protest against any
injustice perpetrated by their own government. Harold J. Laski
cited the case of 'conscientious objectors' to military service during(1893-1950) has
the period of the
First World War (1914-18), who had to undergo punishment for
refusing
military service as they believed in peaceful solution of all human disputes.render
to

Mahatma Gandhi sought to combine the principle of civil disobedience with

his principle of non-violent struggle and Satyagraha (the principle of
the force of truth) during India's struggle for independence. Gandhi setreliance
a
on
exanple of civit disobedience when he led the march to the seashore in 1930practical
to defy
the ban on making salt by the Indians. This ban was imposed by British colonial
rulers which was thought to be unjust by Gandhi and his followers. Gandhi firmly
believed thatcivil disobedience was based on aprofound respect for law in general;
only unjust law should be broken--that too when all methods of persuasion and
petition for withdrawal of such law had been tried and had failed. The act of civil
disobedience should be performed non-violently and in full public view; and
penalties entailed by this act should be accepted willingly.

Disobedience to be civil must be sincere, respectful, restrained, never defiant,

must be based upon some well-understood principle, must not be capricious and
above all, must have no ill-willor hatred behind it.
Mahatma Gandhi(Young India; 1920)
It is again important that the true object of civil obedience is 'change of heart'
of the
authorities concerned. This shoutd be resorted to only against a tyrannical
regime, foreign ruler or unjust government. If a government generally maintains
the citizens rights and can be influenced through democratic means, resort to civil
disobedience will not be necessary. Finally, civil disobedience should not be resorted
 174 Indian Political Thought
0 or pressing the demands of any particular section against thegeneral or public
interest.
NATURE OF SWARAJ idaa eutual mal i dahndony
to moral individualism,
Candni s Concept of Swarai manifests his fm.commitment
Ihe term Swaraj literallv means 'self-ule'. 'self-government', self-determination'
struggle for
Or independence. This term became popular during India's
independence. Gandhi soughtto expand its meaning and scope.

Moral Individualism
individual
Moral individualism refers to aphilosophical principle which regards
human being can be
as an end-in-itself, endowed with dignity'. Accordingly no
conscious existence;
treated as ameans to serve an end which lies beyond his
no worldly thing can be treated as more valuable than a
human being; and no
human being can accept an obligationexcept at his own free will.

Gandhi argued that Swaraj did not simply mean political independence from
the foreign rule; it also implred the idea of cultural and moralindependence. If a
o country is politically independent but culturally dependent on others for choosing
its course of action, it would be devoid of Swaraj. Swaraj does not close the doors
of learning from others, but it requires confidence in one's own potential and
decisions. Gandhi thought of Swaraj as a system in which all people will have a
natural affinity with their country and they will readily collaborate in the task of
nation-building.
ldo not want my house to be walled in on all sides and my windows to be stuffed.I
want the cultures of allthe lands to be blown about my house as freely as possible.
But Irefuse to beblown off my feet by any. Irefuse to livein otherpeople's houses
as an interloper, a beggar or a slave.
Mahatma Gandhi

Swaraj or self-government rules out people's dependence on government.

This applies even to their own government. Thus, Gandhi wrote in Young India
(1925):
Self-government means continuous effort to be independent of government
control, whether it is foreign government or whether it is national. Swaraj
government will be a sorry affair if people look up to it for the regulation
of every detail of life.
Gandhi's concept of Swaraj also exemplifies his vision of a Yrue democracy.
Under this system, people will not merely have the right to elect their
representatives, but they will become capable of checking any abuse of authority.
Ás Gandhi wrote in Young India (1925):
Real Swaraj will come not by the acquisition of authority by a few but by
the acquisition of the capacity by all to resist authority when it is abused.
 gns otien ofindiveal
Mahatma Gandhi 175

In other words, Swaraj is to be obtained byeducating the masses to a sense

of their capacity to regulate and control authority.
For Gandhi, the idea of Swargj was not confined to the political goal of
securing independence from oreign yoke. It also implied moral regeneration
of the ndividuall himselt the process of 'self-contro', 'self-disc1pline and
'self-purification which must continue even after the independence. As Gandni
himself observed:
Iam not interested in freeing India merely from the English yoke. Iam
bent upon freeing India from any yoke whatsoever. I have no desire to
exchange 'king log for king stork'. Hence for me the movement of Swaraj
is a movement of self-purification
(Selections from Gandhi by Nimal Kumar Bose: 1948).
Gandhisought to demonstrate that individualself-government, i.e. self-control
or self-mastery, was as important as poiitical self-government itself. Thus he
wrote in his Autobiography (My Experiments With Truth; 1929):
Self-government depends entirely upon our own internal strength, upon our
ability to fight against the heaviest odds. Indeed, self-government which
does not require that continuous striving to attain it and to sustain it, is
not worth the name. I have therefore endeavoured to show both in word
and deed that political self-governmentthat is self-government for a large
number of men and womenis no better than individual self-government,
and therefore, it is to be attained by precisely the same means that are
required for individual self-government or self-rule.
As a votary of purity of means as well as ends, Gandhi tried to assert that
we must rely on non-Violence or Ahinsa for the attainment of poiitical self
government as weil as individual self-government.
Servitude is of two kinds: slavery to domination from outside and to one's
own artificial needs.
Mahatma Gandhi
Gandhi elaborately dwells on the principle of non-violence or dhimsa as
the way to transform individual character and also as the guiding principle of
political struggle. He demonstrates the superiority of non-violence over vìolence
'at feast in the majority of the cases'. He asserts that the force of love and
pity is infinitely greater than the force of ams. The principle ot non-violence
(Ahimsa) is founded on soul-force (atmabal) while violence was founded on
body-force (sharirbal). The qualities of soul-force are akin to love-force (prembal),
compassion-force (dayabal), the force acquired by self-sutliering (tapoba) and
moral force (nitibal). All these forces become operative when mind is able to
control itself and overcome the passions. An individual endowed with these
forçes would be naturally inclined to adopt the technique of non-violent resistance
(Satyagraha) as his method of political struggle.
 176 Indian Political Thought

Gandhian Concept of Swaraj

Swaraf

At Political Level
At Individual Level

Self-Government or Home Rule

Self-Rule

Control of Passions (Lust, Anger, Independence from Foreign

Greed, Delusion, Arrogance) Rule

Way to Individual Regeneration Way to National Regeneration

Charactreristic of Free Individual Characteristic of Free Nation

(Only free individuals would constitute a free nation)

IV
CONCEPT OF SATYAGRAHA

Satyagraha refers to the Gandhian technique of fighting against injustice. This non
violent technique of prote_t was introduced by Gandhi during his sojourn in South
Africa (1893-1914) in the course of fighting againstinjustice perpetrated by the then
Governmnent of South Africa on the resident Indians and other non-white people. In
Hind Swaraj (1910), Gandhidefined Satyagraha as "a method of securing rights
by personal suffering : it is the reverse of resistance by arns. When I refuse to do
athing that is repugnant to my conscience, Iuse soul force. It involves sacrifice of
self." In short, Gandhi conceived Satyagraha as the method of using 'soul force'
against 'brute force' through 'self-suffering' that would secure 'changeof heart' of
the opponent who would then be forced to depart from the path of injustice.
After his return to India (1914) when Gandhi assumed leadership of Indian
national movement, he applied the technique of Satvagraha for fighting against
injustice on many fronts. Bhikhu Parekh (Gandhi ; 1997) has identified the
following three areas in which Gandhi tried to Use 'soul-force' or truth-force' (that
is Satyagraha) against various forms of brute force : (a) Racial
discrimination in
South Africa; (5) British rule in India; and (c) Ugly social practices
Indian society(such as untouchability, coMmunal prejudices and hatred,prevailing
etc.). From
in
aclose study of the history of nations, Gandhiwas
convinced that
evil would multiply evil. In other words, fighting violence with fighting evil with
violence would
 Mahatma Gandhi 177
multiplyvioSolence. Fire cannot be
with water.
I withfire; it can be extinguished only
force of evil canviolence can be extinguisContained
hed
be
contaiproveeffect ively with non-violence; and the brute
ned onlyan by an effective use of soul-force or truth-force.
Hence
in Satyagraha would
anyform. Joan Bondurant effective instrumenttoffighting againstinjustice
Conflict ; 1965) has
an emphatic `no' to (Conquest
significantly
violence.
of fViolence : The Gandhian Philosophy of
observed that Gandhi says "yes' to fighting but
The term
(the truth) and Satyagraha' was formed by
Agraha' (insistence on or joining two Sanskrit words 'Satya'
means
at insistence on truth or
adherence adherence to). So literally 'Satyagraha'
individuaB well as political level. At
uplift of the
as to truth. This principle could be applied
(that is the individual which would be
individual llevel, it would lead to moral

delusion and
self-rule gained through the synonymous with the first sense of Swaraj
control passions like lust, anger, greed,
of
of Satýagrahaarrogance, etc.). But in the context
is restricted to the use of of Gandhian
philosophy, meaning
wider scope of its this principle at political
to attrwaraj in the application. In other words, Satyagraha may be level, used
with à
not only
or independence from foreign second sense of the term (that is the
rule), but for national independence
whether it is fighting against any form of
perpetrated by a tyrannical ruler or by tyrannical social injustice
Gandhithought that while fighting for a just practices.
to Satyagraha) believes that cause, Satyagrahi (one who resorts
self-suffering is superior to
sacrifice is better than others' sacrifice. This would making others suffer; self
the wrong-doer and make him realize his have a psychological effect on
fault, He would then be
into a dialogue with the Satyagrahi in order to inclined to enter
arrive at an amicable solution. Joan
Bondurant (Conquest of Violence : The Gandhian Philosophy of
distinguished Gandhi's Satyagraha with its opposite, Duragraha. Conflict ; 1965)
implies stubborn resistance to the opponent's policyor
actions
Duragraha
ipso facto wrong. The Duragrahi (one who resorts to prejudged to be
Duragraha)
justice, righteousness to be his monopoly and does not allow the regards truth.
his opponent could also be right. The opponent is regarded an possibility that
he is blackmailed and humiliated. He is not even embodiment of evil:
allowed to explain his viewpoint.
Duragrahi forgets the distinction between the wrong and the wrong-doer, and tries
to destroy his opponent physically in order to destroy his misdeed. The
is fored to accept defeat and concede to the demands of the Duragrahi.opponent, On th
contrary, Satyagrahi enables his opponent to put forward his point of view. The
opponent is allowed to prove himself to be right. Sayagraha takes the form of a
fight between the equals whoare given a fair chance to understand cach other's
view and todiscover the truth which would be readily accepted by both the parties.
Unce they reach agreement, enemy ceases to be an enemy. He becomes a friend
and aco-worker in the pursuit of truth. Satyagrahi believes in the principles :*Let
and let liye."
Satyagraha implies apara-legal method of registeringapeacetul protest against
the laws, the customs and the practices which one finds contrary to his conscience.
Like Count LeoTolstoy (1828-1910),Gandhi believed in arousing the conscience
of the evil-doer: so he endorsed this motto :"Hate the sin, and not the sinner"
178 Indian Political Thought
Datyagrahi believes in entering into.a dialogue with his opponent forarriving at
the nutinaly acceptable solution. It also has asalutary effect on the onlookers who
learn to appreciate the merits and demerits of the respective claimsof the conflicting
parties. They also contribute to creating the climate of peaceful resolution of the
conflict.

I have ventured to place before india the ancient law of self-sacrifice. For
Satyrgraha and its offshoots, non-cooperation and civil resistance are nothing
but new names for the law of suffering...Non-violence in its dynamic conditon
means conscious suffering, It does not mean meek submission to the will of the
evil-doer, but it means pitting of one's whole soul against the will.of the tyrant.
Mahatma Gandhi (oung India,1920)

Since Satyagraha is one of the most powerful methods of direct action, a

Satyagrahi exhausts allother means before he resorts to Satyagraha. He will,
therefore, constantly and continually approach the constituted authority, he will
appeal to public opinion, educate public opinion, state his case calmly and coolly
before everybody who wants to listen to him, and only after he has exhausted all
these avenues will he resort to Satyograha. But when he has found the impelling
call ofthe innervoice within him and launches out upon Satyagraha he has burnt
his boats and there is no receding.
Mahatma Gandhi (Young India ; 1927)

The merit of Gandhian method of Sarvagraha lies in introducing a new method

of conflict-resolution which was found worth trying in manyparts of the world.
We may not accept it as the sole method of fighting against injustice, as Gandhi
claimed, but it undoubtedly offers an important alternative to the hitherto known
methods. It showed the way to oppressed people to pool their moral strength for
fighting against a mighty opponent.
The American civil rights movement of 1950s
and 1960s under the leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-68) was particularly
inspired by the Gandhian technique of Satyagraha. This movement sought to win
equal rights for the black Americans who were left with no other weapon to fight
against injustice añd iscrimination. Martin Luther King Jr. found that Gandhi's
gospel of love showed the way of applying the teachings of Christin the sphere
of political struggle. As he put it : "Christ furnished the spirit and motivation (for
non-violent resistance), while Gandhi furnished the method."

The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.
Mahatma Gandhi

Seven Reprehensible Things :Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience:

Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without
humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principles.
Mahatma Gandhi
 Mahatma Gandhi 179

CONCEPT OF SARVODAYA
MEANING OF SARVODAYA
Sarvodayarefers to the
Sarvodaya' may be goal of associal
the meanings of this rendered
term closely
reconstruction
uplift of
all,rise
in Gandhian thought. The term
of all' or 'awakening of all'. AII
the few are
numberssareendowed with knowledge,
correspond each other. In a society where only
to
in upliftoof all,languishing,
power, prestige and wealth, and a very large
it does not Sarvodaya wants them to rise above. But since it believes
therich and the envisage a conflict
convinced that
poor. As a votary of purity between
of
the high and the low, between
Violent means cannot be used to means as well as end, Gandhi was
The idea
behind achieve a non-violent end.
Gandhi came acrossSarvodaya was
this work in inspired by John Ruskin's Unto This Last (1860).
against the racist regime of South the midst of his passive resistance movement
the last man or the most Africa. This contained a message of
he published its summary in neglected lot. Gandhi was so impressed by this work uplift or,
his Gujarati articles under the that
Ruskin' s teachings
of machinery and
are very close Gandhian philosophy. Ruskin
to title of Sarvodaya.
consumerism as well as the idea of rejected the cult
economy. Instead, he advocated simple economic man and mercantile
enterprise and measurement of value in terms technology, manual labour, communal
these teachings to sharpen his own of quality of life.
thinking on various issues of Gandhi relied on
social reform.
The ideal of Sarvodaya is
concern with the welfare of the concerned with 'welfare of all', yet is implies special
down-trodden
principle should be followed in individual action or the most
disadvantaged' . This
decisions. This is evident from Gandhi's famous as well as in making public
talisman:
I willgive you a talisman.
too much with you, apply the
Whenever you are in doubt or when the selfbecomes
following test :
Recallthe face of the poorest and the weakest man
and ask yourself if the step you whom you may have seen
Will he gain anything by it? Willcontemplate
is going to be of any use to him.
it restore him to a control over his own
and destiny? In other words, will it lead to Swaraj life
for hungry and spiritually
starving millions?
Then you will find your doubts and your self melting away. E
Literally. Sarvodava aims at the good of one and all, of the high and
the strong and the weak. of the brilliant as well as the du<l. Aquestion is the low, of
sometimes
raised that concern with uplift of the low, the weak and the dull is understandable,
but why shall we show equal concern with the uplift of the high, the strong and the
brilliant? This point was adequately clarified by Vinoba Bhave (1895-1982), an
Outstanding Gandhian, in Harijan (1948). Vinoba maintained that in this unhappy
World of ours everyone needs to beuplifted, because everyone of us is fallen. The
hch are fallen long since, and the poor have never risen at al. The result is that both
180 Indian Political Thought
need to be uplifted. The rich are fallen morally and spiritually; their wealth rests
upon exploitation of others, and therefore upon untruth andviolence. By voluntarily
Surrendering their superfluous wealth they willrise spiritually. In this way Sarvodaya
In this
IS intended touplift the poor materially and to uplift the rich spiritually. largely
Sense, philosophy of Sarvodaya is different from other ideologies which
Tocus on material welfare, and that too of a specified section of' population like
greatest happiness of the greatest number','emancipation of the working class',
etc.

SARVODAYAAND UTILITARIANISM
Gandhian concept of Sarvodayarejects the utilitarian doctrine of the 'greatestgood
asserted:
of thegreatest number' in favour of the greatest good all. As Gandhi
Tdo not believe in the doctrine of the greatest good of the greatest number. It
means in its nakedness that in order to achieve the supposed good of Sl per
cent the interest of 49 per cent may be. or rather, should be sacrificed. It is a
heartless doctrine and has done harm to humanity. The only real, dignified,
human doctrine is the greatest good of all, and this can only be achieved by
uttermost self-sacrifice (Cited in The Diary of Mahadev Desai; 1953).
The theory of utilitarianism, as founded by English philosopher, Jeremy Bentham
(1748-1832), was based on the calculation of pleasure and pain to be derived from
contending policy proposals. It defined 'good or happiness' as the balance of
pleasure Over pain. Anyproposal that would ensure the greatest good or the greatest
happiness of the greatest number in this sense would be given preference over all
other proposals.Here the catcutation ofgood' was confined to the consideration of
physical pleasure and pain; there was no scope of moral or spiritual consideration
in this context. John Stuart Mill (1806-73), outstanding English utilitarian, sought
to point out qualitative differences between different. types of pleasures, Mill
maintained that man does not run after physical pleasures only, but the development
of his mÍral,intellectual and artistic faculties is also necessary. The pleasure enjoyed
by man's higher faculties is always superior to the mere sensuous pleasure.
In any case, utilitarian philosophy could not rise above the concept of material
welfare of human beings. It did not enter the sphere of spiritual welfare of those
who are materially well off. On the other hand, the principleof Sarvodaya seeks
to secure the spiritualas wellas material welfare of humanity.
SARVODAYAAND SOCIALISM
Socialism stands for an ideology which seeks to replace capitalism by placing the
major means of production under social ownership and control, Its chief goal is
to secure emancipatton of the working classes from capitalist exploitation. It is
primarily concerned with matertat wetfare of peopte. OFthe twomajor varieties of
socialism, Marxism seeks to achieve its goal through class struggle, ie., the struggle
of the working class against the capitalist class, resulting in violent, revolutionary
overthrow of capitalist system. The second variety, viz. democratic socialism seeks
toachieve its goal by mobilizing public opinion in its favour, winning electoral
majorityand then implementing socialist policy through democratic means.
 181
Mahatma Gandhi
Sarvodaya is different from socialis1m in many. respects. In the first place,
(WSarodaya is not concerned
welfare as welt.
merely with material welfare: it embraces spiritual
Secondly,
all major meanssof
it does seek to
production undernotsocial replace capitalism
ownership
forthwith by placing
and control. It neither supports
a violent:revolution nor democratic Instead,it relies
on
moral transformation by seeking propaganda to achieve its goal.land-owners and
capitalists so that they
would 'change ofheart'
treat themselves as
of the existing
bestowed
property
upon them by the
Creator of the Universe. trustecs.fthe
and use it for the service of humanity.
In thethird place,
shows the goal whereSarvodaya does not subscribe to the theory of fclass conflict.
interests of all classes would
cOoperation towards the achievement of that goal. Its converge, and seeks class
does not profess natural corollary JS
emancipation of the emancipation of the working class only.
rich and material It insists on
moral balance in society. emancipation 1of the poor in order tospiriua.
restore
by making labour Finally, whereas socialismseeks to maximize production
development,,Sarvodaya compulsorya for everyone and stepping. up technological
offers different prescription. Sarvodaya prescribes 'bread
labour' for everyone toovercome the problem of scarcity. Bread
everybody will have to do physical labour labour impl1es that
to compensate for the bread toward production for society, at least
that he consumes. In this context, 'bread is symbolic
of the articles of physical
consumption.
increase social production but also establish Adoption of this principle will not only
development of technology, Sarvodaya dignity of labour'. As regards the
so as to create work for the recommends use of simple technology
the
teeming millions, Instead of 'mass production'
machines, Sarvodaya wants 'production by the masses'. by the
Ultimate goal of socialism is expressed in the formula:
to his ability, to
cachaccording to his need.' Sarvodaya seeksFrom each according
to modify this rule. It
oes recommend
so that evcrybody'suniversalization
of labour. But it
needs could be easily satisfied. professes
Socialism
minimization of needs
does not seek to curb
the levels of consumption, in the hope that
abundance
Created in socicty. On the contrary, Sarvodaya holds that of goods and services can be
human desires can
be finally satisied; control of one's
desires and the spirit of contentment arenever the
only solution to the problem of satisfaction of
human needs.
SARVODAYA AND DEMOCRACY
In common parlance, democracy in practice means the
other hand, the spirit of Sarvodaya tends rule of majority. On the
to pay equal importance to everyone in
society. This calls for redefining the essence of democracy. Writing in
(1932) Gandhi observed: Young India
The rule of majority has anarrow application, ie., one should yield to
in matterS of detail. But it is slavery to be majority
amenable to the majority, no matter
what its decisions are. Democracy is not a state in which people act
Under democracy, individual liberty of opinion and action is jealouslylikeguarded.
sheep.
I.therefore, believe that the minority has a perfect right to act
the majority. differcntly from
Gandhi insisted that a democratic state should act strictly according to public
182 Indian Political Thought
Opinion. This is essential for maintaining democratic discipline. Democracy
it a
dIsciplined and enlightened is the finest thing in the world. On the contrary,chaos
democracy is prejudiced, ignorant and superstitious. it will land itself in
and will be on its way to self-destruction. A decadent democracy woula lend tO
emove allopposition through the suppression or extermination of the antagonists.
maintained only through
Individual freedom, which is the crux of democracy,can be
unadulterated non-violence. Tolerance is the kev to democratic discipline. As Gandhi
Wrote earlier in Young India (1921):
to be intolerant.
Ifwe want to cultivate true spirit of democracy. we cannot offord
Intolerance betrays want of faith in one's cause.
Apart from considering the procedural aspect of democracy, Gandhi also
dwelledon the substantive aspectof democracy in consonance with his philosophy
of Sarvodaya. Here again he highlights the importance of non-violence. As he wrote
in Harijan (1940):
My notion of democracy is that under it the weakest should have the same
Opportunity as the strongest. That can never happen except through non-violence.
Nocountry in the world today shows anything but patronizing regard for the
weak.
This also distinguishes Sarvodaya from the welfare state. Broadly speaking,
welfare state signifies a democratic state which crcates the network of common social
services as well as special relief for the poor by taxation of the rich. It is characterized
by what Gandhi has termed 'patronizing regard for the weak'. Sarvodaya, on the
other hand, recognizes equal dignity of the poor as well as the rich. Instead of heavy
taxation of the rich against their wishes, Sarvodaya seeks to persuade them to offer
their surplus wealth willingly and voluntarily for the service of humanity.
CONCLUSION
Commitment to the common good is the essence of Gandhian philosophy. Gandhi
saw India's independence as an opportunity 'to wipe every tear from every eye'.
He wished to transform the destiny of India at acritical juncture through moral
regeneration. It was a time when India was groaning under an oppressive foreign
rule, abject poverty, vast social and economic inequalities. Further it was also in the
grip of communal tension and hatred. Gandhi preachedthe gospel of spiritualism,
Ahimsa (non-vjolence), renunciation (non-possession), dignity of labour and moral
courage,etc. for the uplift of man as well as society. His doctrine of trusteeship,
his vision of a classless society and his concept of Sarvodaya (uplift of all) hold
the key to his idea of the common good.
Every individual must have fullest liberty to use his talents consistently withequal
use by his neighbours, but no one is entitled to the arbitrary use of the gains from
his talents. He is part of the nation or say, the social structure surroundíng him.
Therefore he can use his talents not for self. but for the social structure of which
he is but a part and on whose sufferance he lives.
Mahatma Gandhi
 183
Mahatma Gandhi

VI
DOCTRINE OF TRUSTEESHIP
Broadly speaking, Gandhi believed in simple living at the level of production as
well as consumption. He gave primacy to simple technology over heavyindustries.
Simple technology had the capacity of mass.emplevment whereas advan
technology would create vast unemployment, particularly in a country like India,
and would promote
consumerism with all its effects. Gandhipreferred'producion
by the masses to`mass production'by heavyillmachinery.
it was not feasible to However, he realized
switch over to the new system abruptly. A
Wider use of simple technology could be keptin mind in the Course of future
expansion. The eXIsting system of
necessary changes in the attitude of production may be allowed to continue with
the owners of means of production. For uo
transformation of their attitude Gandhi cnunciated his doctrine of trusteeship.
Gandhian doctrine of trusteeship is addressed to the conscience of the ich
and resourceful members of society, particularly landlords and
them not to consider themselves as the sole proprietors of capitalists. It urges
their possessions, Dut
only 'trustces of a gift bestowed upon them by God for the service of
Thisvicw 1S in consonance with the basic philosophy of Gandhi. His humanity.
principle of
non-possession (aparigraha) implies that worldly possessions make you morally
deprave. Hence one should not takemore than his immediate needs. To maintain
onc's moral strength, material things should be used with a spirit of renunciation.
Gandhian principle of non-stealing (asteya) implies that amassing of wealth,or
cven the possession of more than one's immediate needs amounts to theft because
it is meant to fulfil others' needs. Any attempt to satisfy one's greed means theft.
It reminds us of nineteenth-century French philosopher, P.J. Proudhon's famous
dictum:"Property is theft."
However, Gandhidoes not favour overthrowing the existing economic system.
This system has become oppressive because of the moral decline. If the organizers
of agriculture and industry could be persuaded to act as public servants, they will
win wide publicrespect instead of the existing hatred. The feeling of class conflict
will be replaced by the sentiment of class cooperation. Gandhi wants 'change of
heart' of the rich and resourceful persons to enable the society to have full benefit
of their talents and efforts without suffering injustice caused by the exploitation of
the poor by the rich. As Gandhiwrote in Amrita Bazar Patrika (1934) :
What is needed is not the extinction of landlords and capitalists, but a
transformation of the existing relationship between them and the masses into
something healthier and purer.
Gandhi realized that this was by no means an easy task. As he himself conceded
in The Modern Review (1935):
You may say that trusteeship is a legal fiction. But if people meditate over
itconstantly and try to act up to it, then life on earth would be govermed far
 184
Indian Political Thought
more by love than it is at present. Absolute trusteeship is an abstracition like
Duclid's definition of a point, and is equally unattainable. But if we strive for
1t, we shall be able to go further in realizing a state of equality on earth than
by any other method.
YOral regeneration at any stage is really difficult. We need a constant inspiration
from aGautam Buddha, Jesus Christ. orMahatna Gandhi to folow this path. Every
step in this direction willgives us more enlightenment, peace of mind and genuine
happiness.
Critics point out that the vision of 'change of heart' of the rich is a fascinating
idea, but it is hardly realizable in actual practice!

VII
VISION OF A
CLASSLESS SOCIETY

Gandhi's faith in human equality made hima strong votary of classless society.
He realized that the division of labour among different individuals was inevitable.
k However, class division of society was not directly related to division of labour. It
wasthe product of a conditionin which one type of labour, i.e. physical labour was
regarded as inferior to another type of labour, i.e. mental labour or mere leisure.
Gandhi soughtto create asense ofequality among people by making 'bread labour
compulsory for all.
The gospelof 'bread labour' expected everybody to do physical labour toward
production, at leasttocompensate for the bread that he consumes. Breadis symbolic
of various items of one's physical consumption. When everybody does physical
labour, apart from the performance of other functions suited to his aptitude and
qualifications, nobody will look down upon physical labour. This will create a
sense ofdignityof labour' throughout sOciety. This in turn will promote a sense of
equality among people transcending the prevailing division of labour. This would
even create asenseofequality between the rich and the poor. As Gandhi wrote in
Harijan (1935):
If all laboured for their bread and no more, then there would be enough food
and enough leisure for all. Then there would be no cry of overpopulation, no
disease and no misery as we see around. Such labour will be the highest form
of sacrifice. Men will do many other things either through their bodies or
through their minds, but all this willbe labour of love for the common good.
There willbe no rich and no poor, none high and none low, no touchable and
no untouchable...
If we did so, our wants would be minimized, our food would be simple.
We should then eat to live, not live to eat. Let anyone who doubts the accuracy
of this proposition try to sweat for his bread, he will derive the greatest relish
from the productions of his labour, improve his health, and discover that many
things he took were superfuities.
 185
Mahatma Gandhi
The entire idea
behind labour really means the recognition ofthe necessity
of some
physical exertionbread
even for mental performing
Some
workers, so thatthey may be
productive function iin aspirit of serviceto the community.
Mahatma Gandhi

In short, the
simple living principle of bread labour is designed to promotethree things:(a)
among all citzens; (b) dignity of labour; and (c) asense of eauality
franscending the
prevailing
divtsion of labour which i division of labour. Originally caste symbolized the
The principle of bread1 strayed on to division of society. into high and low ranks.
labour wouldserveto obliterate this ranking. This would even
create equality between
Mandir (1945): the rich and the poor. As Gandhi wrote in From Yeravda
There is a
the rich. If allworldwide conflict between capital and labour, and the poor envy
worked for their
the rich would still be there, butbread, distinctions of rank would be obliterated;
they would deem themselves only trustees oI
their property, and would use it
mainly in the public interest.
Gandhi alsostood against
of gender and faith. In other discrimination
words,
among human beings on the grounas
he championed equality between men
women as also between the adherents of different ana
religions.
create a classless soCiety by transforming the attitude of In short, he wiShed to
of discrimination in society. He insisted on moral people toward the sources
regeneration
adherence to truth and non-violence was indispensable. Gandhian of society for which
equality of all religions was expressed in the following statement : principle of
Temples or mosques or churches...I make no distinction between these different
abodes of God. They are what faith has made them. They are an
man's craving somehow to reach the Unseen answer to
(The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi, compiled by R.K. Prabhu and U.R.
Rao; 1945).
Gandhi strongly defended equality between man and women. As he wrote:
My opinion is that, just as fundamentally man and woman are one, their
problems must be one is essence. The soul in both is the same. The two live
the same life, have the same feelings. Each is complement of the other. The
onecannot live without the other's active help...But somehow or other man has
dominated woman from ages past, and so woman has developed an inferiority
complex...But the seers among men have recognized her equal status
(Selections fromGandhi by Nirmal Kumar Bose; 1948).
Above all, Gandhian principle of Ahimsa (non-violence) is also conducive to
the creation of a classless society. When aperson avows not to harm anybody, not
to cause injury to anybody and not to hurt anybody's feeling, what else is left for
the realization of a classless socity? Thus the vision of aclassless society runs
throughout Gandhian thought and philosopky.
 186 Indian Political Thought

VIlI
ORDER
GANDHIAN VISION OF IDEAL SOCIAL
weap0
ndla is less in need of steel weapons:it has fought with divine can win all by
still do so. Other nations have been votaries of bruteforce..India
Soul force.
and Writings
Mahatma Gandhi (Speeches 1933)
of MahatrmaGandhi;

Gandhi variously described his ideal socialorder as Swaraj (self-government),

Poorma Swaraj (complete self-govermment), Ramraiva (replica of the Kingdom of
Lord Rama), or simply as India ofthe future Obviously his vision of an 1dealsocial
Ordet waS çoncerned with the future of India. welfare of its people, and preparing
them for the service of humanity. He did not produce a full picture of this social
order at one place, butit can be constructed by gathering his views SCatered n
many.of hiswritings.
Gandhian vision does not envisage an 'ideal state because he was in principle
against the institution of the State. In his View, the State symbolized the power of
coercion in society and this would hinder the moral development ofthe individual.
That is why he sought to build the image of a 'social order' and not of the State'.
Bhikhu Parekh has aptly described this social order as an enlightened anarchy
under which socially responsible and morally disciplined men and women never
harmed one another and did not need any kind of polity" (Gandhi's Political
Philosophy ; 1989).
This was the ideal form of things; it would not be fully realized
in practice. We should constantly endeavour to achieve this goal, and develop such
institutions which approximate this image as nearly as possible. So in practice,
"Gandhi opted for 'ordered anarchy' under which citizens enjoyed maximum
freedom consistent with the minimum necessary order" (ibid Nod Oras cM
The guiding principles of Gandhiansocial order may be described as follows:
(a) It should be based on Ahimsa, that is the attitude of non-violence between
the mutualdealings of individuals as well as between individuals and the
administrators of this social order;
(b) It should recognize the dignity of individual and have full faith in his or
her moral potential:; it should help him or her to recover and develop his
or her moral and social powers which have been surrendered to the State
at present;
(c) It should dismantle the existing system of centralization of
the State, and create strong and vibrant local communities to ensure
powers in
decentralization of powers; and finally,
(d) It should facilitate the regeneration of Indian society and
its moral and spiritual traditions.
culture by reviving
It is important to note that Gandhi was against the 'centralization of powers' but
not against the provision of a central authority. He realized that unity of India had
 Mahatma Gandhi 187

suftered tor want of acentral authority in the past which should be strong enougn to
keep t umted. lt als0 lacked aspirit of nationalismtranscending the narrow etnne,
religious, Iinguistic, regional and other forms of senarate jdentities. So he envisaged
theexistence of a central government in his scheme of the future social order, that
would cultivate asense ofnationhood among thesmall. culnured and well-organized
self-governing village communities. The afairs of these communitieswere to be
managed by Panchayats (village councils) consisting of ive persons to be elected
annually. Each Panchayat would haye legislative, execuve and judicial poWers,
but it would largely rely on its moral authority and the pressure of public opinion
in order to maintain harmony and order in society. Gandhi earnestly hoped that tne
institution of Panchayat would instill the spirit of cooperation among people and
function as a nursery of civic virtues.
Gandhi, in an interview grantedin 1946 (as recorded in Gandhi : Hind Swaraj
and Other Writings, edited by Anthony Parel; 1997), expressed his political vis10n
as "The Pyramid vs. The Oceanic Circle',He held that in independent India, the
nulers would depend on the will of the people; the former would behave as servants
of the people, ready to act on their will. Independence mustbegin at the bottom.
While every village republic willthe nucleus of administration, and self-dependent
in allrespects including its defence, the whole social organization will be founded
on the principle of autonomy of the individual, adherence to truth and non-violence.
As Gandhi observed:
In this structure composed of innumerable villages, there will be ever-widening,
never-ascending circles. Life will not be apyramid with the apex sustained by
the bottom. But it will be an oceanic circle whose centre will be the individual
always ready to perish for the village, the latter ready to perish for the circle
of villages, tillat last the whole becomes one life composed of individuals,
never aggressive in their arrogance but ever humble, sharing the majesty of
the oceanic circle of which they are integral units.
In this scheme of things, the outermost circumference will not wield extraordinary
power over the inner circle, but willgive strength to the successive inner circles,
and also derive its strength from those circles. All religious communities of India
will remain united and feel perfectly safe under this arrangement. So Gandhi
asserted:

In this picture every religion has its full and equal place. We are all leaves of a
majestic tree whose trunk cannot be shaken off its roots which are deep down
inthe bowels of the earth. The mightiest wind cannot move it.
In this unique organization there is no place for big machines which displace
human labour and lead to concentration of power in a few hands. It will allow only
such machines which are particularly helpful for the individual users, such as Singer
Sewing Machine.
The expanding circles around the village community, as envisaged by Gandhi,
were defined in some of his other writings. Bhikhu Parekh (Gandhi 's Political
Philosophy ; 1989) has tried to complete this picture from other relevant sources
as under:
 188
Indian Political Thought
The villages were grouped into talukas, the latter into districts, these into
provinces, and so on, cach governed by represcntatives clected by its constituent
units. Each tier of government cnjoycd considerable autonomy and astrong
sense of community. both sustaincd and limitedthe onc above itand dealt with
matters of common interest to its constitucnt communitics. Each province was
free to draw upits own constitution to suit loal requirements and in conformity
with that of the country as a wholc...The central government wielded enough
aluthority to hold thein all together, but not enough to dominate nem.
|Taluka =asmall regional unit made up of several villages)
Each tier of this social order was to function as a community of its constituent
units. Hence the polity as a whole behaved not as a collection of isolated units, but
a unit of unities, and a community of communiies. Such a polity would not need a
Vast bureaucracy as most of the decision-making was to be decentralized. Gandhi
thought that even crime would be minimal in this societywhere no onc starved
and everyone knew each other personally. Sothere would be no need of police. If
any crime occurred, it would be controlled by the moral pressure of local public
opinion. If necessary, the members of the socjety would volunteer to do policing
by rotation. Moreover,
Gandhi thought that such a polity did not require an army and could rely on
'non-violent soldiers' trained in the method of Satvagraha. There was no danger
of civil war, and noforeign country was likely to invadea polity whose fiercely
independent-minded citizens would resist it to the death (ibid.).
Gandhi believed that the structure proposed by him would conform the to
principle of democracy. In order to distinguish its underlying principle, he
described his system as Swaraj or true democracy. He had expressed variously
about the true nature of democracy at many places. Thus he wrote in his view
(1925): Young India
By Swaaj Imean the government of India by the
consent of the
ascertained by the largest number of the adult population, male orpeople as
native-born or domiciled, who have contributed by manual labour to the female,
service
of the State and who have taken the
as voters.
trouble of having registered their names

The real test of Swaraj was the power of the

in authority in the case of any abuse of ordinary people to control those
authority. So Gandhi wrote further:
Real Swaraj will not come by the acquisition of
acquisition of the capacity by all to resist authorityauthority by a few but by the
words, Swaraj is to be obtained by educating the when it is abused. In other
capacity to regulate and control authority. masses to a sense of their
Gandhi's Swaraj ruled out domination of elites over the
in Young India (1931l): masses. As he wrote
The Swarajof my...dream recognized no race or
it to be monopoly of the lettered religious distinctions. Nor is
to be for persons
all, including the farmer, but
nor yet of moneyed men. Swaraj is
emphatically including the maimed, the