http://epaper.navhindtimes.in/mainpage.aspx?pdate=2016-12-11
Faisal Devji is here in Goa for
the Goa Art /Lit Festival. The acclaimed author of ‘Landscapes of the Jihad’
and ‘The Terrorist In Search of Humanity’ now presents a polemical study of
Gandhi in his latest book called ‘The Impossible Indian: Gandhi and the Temptation of Violence.’ Digressing
from the hagiographic text, the clichéd arguments like ‘a spiritual man in a
breech-clout’ or aspects of his personal life, Devji dwells on ‘missed paths
and hidden possibilities’ of the lethal political thinker of the twentieth
century.
The Impossible Indian: Gandhi
and the Temptation of Violence
Faisal Devji is here in Goa for
the Goa Art /Lit Festival. The acclaimed author of ‘Landscapes of the Jihad’
and ‘The Terrorist In Search of Humanity’ now presents a polemical study of
Gandhi in his latest book called ‘The Impossible Indian: Gandhi and the Temptation of Violence.’ Digressing
from the hagiographic text, the clichéd arguments like ‘a spiritual man in a
breech-clout’ or aspects of his personal life, Devji dwells on ‘missed paths
and hidden possibilities’ of the lethal political thinker of the twentieth
century.
He begins the
text with the provocative words of the labour activist, Kanji Dwarkadas, “Gandhiji
appealed to the imagination of the world as a little, scrawny, half-starved,
self-denying man, a wizened monkey defying the terrible British lion, a
reincarnation of Hanuman, the monkey-god”. But Devji fleshes him out as a
radical force, completely enmeshed with world politics of his times. He
examines the thought behind his potent legacy of non-violence that he
bequeathed to the world. He directs the attention of the reader to Gandhi’s psycho-analytic
theory of transmuting or redirecting violence through the use of non-violence. He
writes, “Gandhi, the active
proponent of non-violence or the ‘sovereign method’, wanted not to escape violence
but to tempt and convert violence by engaging with it. He thought violence and
non-violence were so intimately linked that one could be transformed into the
other, since evil too requires goodness to
sustain itself.”
Gandhi’s “fantastic, almost
crack-brained schemes” were a series of political experiments carried out in
the strife-torn soil of South Africa and colonial India - an arena seeped in
conflict, injustice and violence where a moral compass could transform human
energies and liberate them not only from imperialism, but render to the world,
a model of freedom from violence. Therefore, his agenda was not merely
nationalistic, argues Devji. He wanted to set a precedent for human force at
large in the face of political-ills of his times. His principle of non-violence
was a moral agency and would lead to the spiritualization of politics. “Real
suffering bravely borne melts even a heart of stone. Such is the potency of
suffering or tapa. And, there lies the key to Satyagraha.”
Quoting from Gandhi’s writings, Devji
clearly indicates that ‘Bhagawad Gita’ was a way of life for Gandhi. He steadfastly emulated the teachings in his
own life and then fed it to the masses through various political non-violent
protests spearheaded during the freedom struggle of India. “He was as hard-hearted
as Hitler,” says Devji and would not think much about the sufferings and lives
of people sacrificed in the face of non-violent fights as long as the moral
remained untainted and won liberation for the larger good of man and posterity.
Gandhi often said, “Have not our saints and sages taught us that one who is a
worshipper of ahimsa should be softer than a flower and harder than a stone?” Non-violent sacrificial offerings and moral
acts went hand in hand against violence.
“History of suffering was preferable to
one of victimization,” says Devji, of Gandhi’s thoughts and politics. If non-violent
struggle was impossible, then the evil of violence was better than the
glorification of victimization which Gandhi identified with cowardice. Between
violence and cowardly flight, he preferred violence. He said that as long as he
himself was a coward, he harboured violence and could not practice
non-violence, which comes with deliberate conscious effort and thought. He also
believed that a human being was a fragile animal but when doors were opened and
a path stared you in the face, then strength of word and action came from God
who directs you in such times. “Never have I attributed my independent strength
to myself,” said Gandhi.
Devji explores the smorgasbord of
Gandhi’s political experiments ranging between his early belief in the British
Empire, the Pan-Islamic call for upholding the Caliphate, letters to Hitler, advice
to the Jews and finally imploring the British to leave India to anarchy and civil
war. The chapter titled ‘Bastard History’ situates his political experience and
grooming more as a product of western influences from Europe, South Africa and
Russia, somuchso that the ‘Gita’ that was to be his guiding light came to him
in England through an English translation. His concept of nationality was based
on the needs of the minority, for he felt that truth gets corrupted in the
hands of the majority (the basic premise because of which he was assassinated).
Gandhi’s policy of non-cooperation, Swadeshi
goods and working of a moral relationship between Hindus and Muslims is
positioned in the narrative of the warfare and the Mutiny of 1857.
Devji outlines how the Mutiny provided a
basis for Hindus and Muslims to understand each other’s faith and beliefs of
purity and pollution and unite to oppose the British hegemony that was maligning
their caste and religious sentiments. This brotherhood was appropriated by
Gandhi when he established ashrams where each Indian followed his own religion
and marriage alliances, yet they lived together and waged the non-violent
movement under his aegis.
It further led him to support the Ottoman Empire and
the Caliphate and the Pan-Islamic call of Muslims worldwide and in India.
Gandhi called the Jews ‘The Untouchables
of Christianity’ and through his letters sent them a clarion call for sovereign
movement of non-violence in the face of every atrocity by the Nazis. If they
had died as protestors rather than victims, maybe the holocaust may not have
become such a dark inerasable line in the history of mankind. He also implored
them not to take on Palestine under the protection of British bayonets and to
seek a settlement with the Arabs. Lastly, the final political undoing that Devji
highlights is Gandhi’s call in 1946 to the British to leave India to anarchy
and civil war. That partition was imperative was clear but Gandhi argued that
if the Indians were left to sort out their own differences, there was still
hope of brotherhood between Hindus and Muslims. “If the British were not here,
we would still go through the fire, no doubt, but the fire would purify us.”
After
independence, he was apalled when the army was called out in the Kashmir agitation.
He wanted the non-violent cult to
continue unabated whenever violent strife raised its ugly head.
Finally, Gandhi upheld that the right to
live stems from a duty to be a citizen of the world. Devji highlights the
paradox of life and death that Gandhi had clarified in his late writings: “The
great importance that western medicine attached to human life, prolonging its
earthly existence by drugging/injecting only to lose it carelessly in numbers
on battlefields. Only by giving up the thirst for life, the excessive desire to
live that was represented in modern war and western medicine alike, could the
urge to kill be tamed, and the art of throwing away my life for a noble cause
be mastered”.
The book presents an intensive read and
the reader must be prepared to devote time and energy to follow Devji’s argument
of Gandhi’s impossible feat as a human being. The juxtaposition of Gandhi’s own
writings and thoughts continuously alternate with his own expositions in the
book and engage readers all through the text.
We have to give it to Devji; he has very
successfully rendered to us the Mahatma as a ‘philosophical anarchist’. He not
only cut the cord between the state and the sovereign, but also showed that
freedom and sovereignty was every citizen’s natural possession as long as one
was fearless to suffer by withdrawing one’s cooperation (non-violently) from an
unjust order.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment