Thursday, October 2, 2008

The simple Mahatma

"Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth". [Ref1]

That's what the last century's most celebrated scientist said about the century's simplest person, who gave a simple solution to all the problems - Mahatma Gandhi.

The world is celebrating his 139th birth anniversary
today.

I think Gandhiji was a modern-day
ऋषी.
ऋषीs aren't the bearded old hermits, they were the ones who created the Vedas.
They wrote the
ऋचा. So they are called ऋषी.ऋचा is the smallest unit of ऋग्वेद. [Wiki]
They gave us all the knowledge (Veda means knowledge).

Over the period of time, we started forgetting it.
Then the modern
ऋषीs came and re-established the values in the society.

Gandhiji, aptly called महात्मा (the great soul), re-established the two most sacred and most forgotten values in the Kaliyug -
सत्य and अहिंसा (truth and non-violence).

One initially thinks that the Mahatma and his ways are cowardly.
But if you really try to follow what he told, you will see that it needs the topmost level of inner strength to follow
सत्य and अहिंसा the way the Mahatma did.

Of course like every other mortal, the Mahatma had some faults.
And I also believe that the nation at large is today suffering because of some of the decisions he took decades ago.
But, I nevertheless maintain that had everyone of us followed the Mahatma's words in our daily and personal lives, things would have been much better.
Even now I think that if we make it a point to save ourselves (individually) from the Seven Social Sins, we shall have very less to complain about.

Some of my old friends reading this will be surprised today.
I have not been a pro-Gandhi person until recently.
I used to think the same way most of the Indian youth does.
Reading the Seven Social Sins changed it.
Amongst them, the second one : Wealth Without Work
The nation was historically known for श्रम - hardwork.
The majority of the populace was dependent on agriculture and related vocations.
Some other classes of the society were responsible for education and governance.
No one would sit and eat.
Everyone was working hard to earn his bread and butter, and still the country as a whole, was prosperous.
Britishers changed it all.
Their way of education has created a mentality that doing physical work is subordinate to clerical type of jobs.
There is such a massive flow of population from villages to cities - just for "easy money".
Gandhiji's Bharat is the Bharat of villages. [Look : Gram Swaraj]
If we want that Bharat, we need to understand and stay clear of this social sin.

The third social sin: Pleasure without Conscience, is leading the entire world towards the path of self-destruction today.
Some older
ऋषी said in the ईशावास्योपनिषद (Ishavasyopanishad):

ईशावास्यमिदं सर्वं यत्किं च जगत्यां जगत् ।
तेन त्यक्तेन भुञ्जीथा मा गृध कस्य स्विद् धनम् ॥

Meaning: All these is God's abode whatever place is there in this universe; Enjoy it with detached mind and do not be greedy.

And this ऋषी said : "The earth provides for everyone's need not everyone's greed "

Just like the old ऋषी s the Mahatma has given so many things to us.
We are now left with decoding it, trying to put them in today's perspective and enjoying the happiness from following them.

May we get the strength he had to stand up at every occasion in his life for सत्य and अहिंसा.

2 comments:

Nitin said...

Apt. very apt. It is considered "cool" and "radical" to criticize Gandhi.

And I also believe that the nation at large is today suffering because of some of the decisions he took decades ago.

His intentions were right. Probably, his ways were also right. The problem was that he expected the world to be as truthful as he is. (May be he did and chose to ignore it?)

TW said...

Yes, his intentions were always right. No doubt about it.
And with the set of beliefs he had, I don't think he had much choice regarding "ways".
e.g., calling off a nation-wide movement because 5 policemen are killed (chaurichaura-1922): with ahimsa as the soul of his entire thought-process, it was only obvious that he won't lead a movement with a stain of violence on it.

His intentions and ways were alright - from his point of view - but the results have proven disadvantageous to us.

The heart of the problem, of course, was what you have said : "he expected the world to be as truthful as he is", with one correction, I think - he expected all the Hindus to be like him.
And again, nothing wrong in this.
Because, Hindutva is the soul of the nation. This thinking is common with Swami Vivekananda, Gandhiji and Dr. Hedgewar (and many other great persons).
The approach towards achieving Hindu-Muslim unity differs.

Gandhiji, like a worried father (bapu i.e.) of a naughty kid, preferred to give concessions to the later, thinking that he will be pacified when he gets all he wants.

Swamiji and Doctorji believed in organizing and strengthening the Hindus so that any bully will automatically stop bullying, knowing well that he will be paid back in his own coins.

So, Gandhiji went on accepting all the demands of the Muslims - participation in Khilafat, truncating Vande Mataram, then refusal to sing it at Congress meetings, separate constituencies ... leading up to the partition of the motherland, resulting in massacre of a million innocent people.
This also had a larger, and worse side-effect:
Gandhiji himself was a proud Hindu.
And his intentions were totally different when he did all that Muslim-appeasement. But his so-called followers, graduating from Macaulay school of Hindu-bashing, started behaving as if anything that is Hindu is bad, uncivilized, and to be made fun of. It gradually became fashion to do so. This is a HUGE problem our academia is facing today. Can you imagine, Indian text-books have objectionable passages about revered figures like Shivaji and Guru Gobind Singh? They even refer to Bhagat Singh as a terrorist!!
A lot can be discussed about how the Hindu-Muslim issue, and how Gandhiji's actions have complicated it for us.

But talking of effects of his decisions, I think the most drastic one is the autocratic installation of Pt. Nehru as the first Prime Minister - something that even the staunchest of the Gandhians have not been willing to comment on.
I am sure you must be knowing the whole story of how Nehru was given the seat, although the PCCs had recommended Sardar Patel. So no need to elaborate on it.

Nehru was exact opposite of Gandhiji, regarding model of development, values of the society and the root of our identity.
And he was given almost two decades of unopposed rule - the most formative years of a just-independent nation.
Kashmir, Tibet, China, red-tapism, and beginning of Nehru-Gandhi-family-rule are among the many problems which we are still facing, that started during Nehru regime.

This, in short, was what I meant when I said I also believe that the nation at large is today suffering because of some of the decisions he took decades ago.

Nevertheless, he is among my role-models, alongside Shivaji, Swami Vivekananda and Dr. Hedgewar, and I am trying to instill in my life many of the values he did in his.